Private Message

Knowing one's rights is NOT gaming the system. In fact, no one in my house has ever "gamed the system". There is not a thing wrong with standing up for one's self in court, and demanding a jury trial, and that is what the defendant did. He also won. If you had graduated from a school that teaches the basics and employs decent teachers, you would know that.

Teachers and county attorneys who sit on the internet all day and collect paychecks for surfing social media sites actually do game the system. Their jobs do not include recreational internet play and games. If you are so upset about the disposition in the above mentioned case, why not take the county attorney to task for gaming the system by spending all of the taxpayers' time online, rather than doing her job? Or if you are angry that you don't understand your rights when faced with injustice or false accusations, why not insist upon public schools staffed by teachers who teach, rather than gaming the system by doing things other than teaching. Outside of Northeast Kansas, most children understand the judicial system by third grade.

Update On The Man With The Tacky Chair

On Tuesday, the FBI asked for help identifying the owner of the ugly chair, or John Doe 27, as he is called by law enforcement. His work, specifically child pornography, has been identified online. Now, thanks to the general public, social networking, neighborhood gossips, and the first amendment, the FBI thinks the information given generously to them may have actually helped. They think this guy, with his horrid taste in home décor and his criminal taste in entertainment, may be somewhere in the Midwest, hiding out among republicans, fundamentalist christians, and the like. Until more definitive developments arise in the investigation, there will probably be no more updates or comments from the FBI.

How long should it take to expose this man to furniture inside jail cells, instead of tacky checkered chairs? Quite a few of us are interested in the answer to that question.

 

Dylan Redwine's Aunt Makes Interesting Comment

Someone claiming to be Dylan Redwine's aunt recently made a very interesting comment on a website called Gather concerning Dylan's relationships with family members. Thirteen year old Dylan disppeared shortly after arriving at his father's house in Colorado for a court ordered visit. I will run the comment here:

"My brother would not withhold information that would help to find his son. He has been just as upset as everyone else that his son is missing. His ex-wife Elaine and his other son Cory have been in the media, but he is himself just as distraught as they are over the disappearance of Dylan. As far as the custody dispute, a lot of couples go through bitter and angry divorces, and as I have said before, children sometimes hear things that they were not meant to hear and interpret them as something entirely different than what it was meant to be. I do know that Dylan loved both his parents and his brother and his brothers from a prior marriage. Unfortunately, in situations like this, they are going to look at my brother as having something to do with this, but they should be looking at both parents and or anyone involved or related to their divorce proceedings. As mothers and siblings have in the past had involvement in cases like this to get back at the other parent or parents if it is a sibling. Sad, but true. In any case, that is all I have to say at the time. As now it is going on the 8th day of Dylan’s disappearance, and I am just praying to hear some news soon. Hopefully we will hear something from my brother soon hear on our end. Until then, all I have is hope that Dylan will be found." ....Bridget Redwine-Simmers; Gather.com   While Redwine-Simmers describes her brother, Dylan's father, as "distraught", her own statements do not appear to have been made by a distraught aunt. Believe me; if any niece or nephew of mine had been missing for eight days, as Dylan had on the day this comment appeared, I would not have been on the internet defending my brother on social networking websites. I would have been helping my brother pass out flyers with my nephew's picture, and searching everywhere I could possibly search. Any post or comment I made anywhere would have contained, at the very least, a phone number where authorities could be reached in the event that Dylan was sighted by someone. I think I speak for most aunts, here. And what's up with the statement, "I do know that Dylan LOVED both his parents......"? Loved? As in, no longer? What, exactly, are you trying to say, Redwine-Simmers?

Horny Sex Offenders Want Facebook

Is maintaining a Facebook profile a privilege, like driving a car or shopping at Walmart, or is it an inalienable right? It seems we have a bunch of sex offenders who have already been caught abusing their rights, and caught abusing children, who feel that we, as a population, owe them the right to a better range of opportunities to reoffend after hunting down more victims. They want to get on Facebook and try to make friends with your children and mine. These creeps feel that we have discriminated against them with all the restrictions we have placed on them, and they are going to court in a few states to try to win the right to "friend" children online.

We tell people who have been convicted of violent crimes, such as domestic violence, that they cannot carry guns, even though the Second Amendment gives us the right to bear arms, and it's perfectly legal to place that restriction on such individuals. We also tell people who repeatedly drink and drive that they can no longer drive. While driving is a privilege, rather than a right, the anology still stands. The abuse of a privilege or certain rights in such a manner that that the safety and welfare of others is put at stake can and should result in the cessation of the abused privilege to the offender. Sex offenders almost always reoffend. There is no known cure for being a sex offender. Why should they have internet privileges? Here's a post about one, named Robert Neil Boyd, who blew off court in Maryland in 2006 and was caught in Tennessee in 2010, and is now in jail in Maryland. His problem was internet crime, and his computer was loaded with kiddie porn when he was caught in Tennessee. He was charged in both Tennessee and Maryland. Should we just let him hop back on a computer? Here's a post about a sex offender whose sentence was commuted by a judge in New Mexico because he had found Jesus in prison. Immediately after getting out, the offender began texting one of his victims. They never stop. They don't need Facebook, or any other social media, and the internet is not an inalienable right. What's next? Releasing Charles Manson and putting him in charge of a group home for troubled teens? Possibly giving snail mail privileges to the Unabomber?     

Lets try to keep these people off of online social networking.