breast milk attack?

[hugo]

Unless she has an infectious disease the intention, of spraying someone with a liquid we feed to babies was to annoy. Not deserving of a felony charge. It's a misdemeanor, that is the appropriate punishment for her folly.

[eddo]

Unless she has an infectious disease the intention, of spraying someone with a liquid we feed to babies was to annoy. Not deserving of a felony charge. It's a misdemeanor, that is the appropriate punishment for her folly.

 

what if she ended up having an infectious disease that she didn't know she had?

[timesjoke]

Unless she has an infectious disease the intention, of spraying someone with a liquid we feed to babies was to annoy. Not deserving of a felony charge. It's a misdemeanor, that is the appropriate punishment for her folly.

 

The same exact thing can be said about urine, or fecal matter mixed with urine (a very common thing in prison), or even blood if you know your clean from disease, all of these things would be seen to the attacker as a way of annoying the officer, not killing him. So if your basis of making the decision of simply annoyance is rooted in the ability of the substance used as a weapn is capable of passing disease, then that covers just about anything right?

 

 

Surely you do not think urine can kill an officer right? Is it okay to toss that on officers too without penalty?

 

 

Body fluids are body fluids, the law should treat all of these fluids the same in my opinion. eddo makes a good point too, how does the person know if their body fluids are infected or not? The type of person who would do something like this most likely has been living an 'interesting' life and I would think a good chance of being exposed to all sorts of diseases.

 

 

 

Why not require all people to keep their body fluids to themselves unless the other party agrees to the exposures? Why not make it clear to all people that if you choose to force your body fluids on another person against their will, that is a serious crime hugo?

 

 

Seems to me like you are making excuses to protect people from their own folly any time it involves their being disrespectful or assaulting of police officers hugo, strange how that works.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You mentioned intent earlier hugo.

 

What if the person 'thought' they were infected but it turned out they were not infected.........would that change the fact that they "wanted" to infect the officer with HIV? If I pull a trigger on a gun trying to kill a person but the bullet does not go off, did that failure to work as intended change my desire to try and kill that person?

[snafu]

I wouldn't take her rights to owning a gun away just for spilt milk. I would chalk it up to an assult like spitting. Now if you contract some kind of a dieses that she knew she had then we should up the anti and make it a felony.

[emkay64]

I'd go def con 3 if anyone spit on me or threw anything else on me. I'd be one of those officers shown on tape, curb stomping my perp..lol.

[timesjoke]

I wouldn't take her rights to owning a gun away just for spilt milk. I would chalk it up to an assult like spitting. Now if you contract some kind of a dieses that she knew she had then we should up the anti and make it a felony.

 

If someone is so incredibly stupid that they attack an officer with anything including their breast milk (remember she had to spray it out of her breast, not just toss something already in a glass) then I don't know if I want them possessing a firearm.

[snafu]

I'd go def con 3 if anyone spit on me or threw anything else on me. I'd be one of those officers shown on tape, curb stomping my perp..lol.

 

Hay have I told you I love you lately?

[eddo]

If someone is so incredibly stupid that they attack an officer with anything including their breast milk (remember she had to spray it out of her breast, not just toss something already in a glass) then I don't know if I want them possessing a firearm.

I agree with this.

[hugo]

As usual TJ is trying to put words in peoples mouths. No one says it is OK to piss on an officer; the only debate is should it be a misdemeanor or a felony.

 

Ok, I have been playing devil's advocate. I actually believe the bitch should have her breasts amputated so she will never be able to commit such a crime again and then given life at hard labor.

 

Anyone that stupid does not need tits or freedom.

 

I am actually leaning toward having her flayed alive and then burned at the stake except I know the pansy, soft on crime, liberals will never allow it.

[timesjoke]

First you say let her go with a slap on the wrist then you say to come down hard on her, no you spent too much time making up excuses to protect her from her own folly hugo to believe you were just kidding.

 

 

Especially considering how you tend to be a little anti-cop in most of your possitions. Cops are not the Government hugo, they are not there to be a punching bag for those who do not like the Government. Law enforcement are here to provide a measure of security and reaction to crime (notice I did not say a prevention of crime because police cannot protect us, they can only react to issues already happening).

[hugo]

The fact is we don't have enough money to imprison everyone for 20 years for doing something you don't like, TJ.

[timesjoke]

The fact is we don't have enough money to imprison evreyone for 20 years for doing something you don't like, TJ.

 

Where did I say I wanted her to go to prison? Do you think every or even most people convicted of a felony go to prison? Well that just is not the case, the vast majority of all people who get found guilty or admit guilt for a felony never see the inside of a State prison. Most end up with at most very short local jail time and some probation.

 

 

Almost every person in a State prison is there either for one very big crime or lots of small crimes that piled up against the person.

 

 

Hell, 20 years.......you can kill someone and actually do less than 20 years hugo, I don't think you really understand how the legal system works.

 

 

 

 

 

Either you believe in protecting people from the results of their own folly or you don't hugo.

[emkay64]

Where did I say I wanted her to go to prison? Do you think every or even most people convicted of a felony go to prison? Well that just is not the case, the vast majority of all people who get found guilty or admit guilt for a felony never see the inside of a State prison. Most end up with at most very short local jail time and some probation.

 

 

Almost every person in a State prison is there either for one very big crime or lots of small crimes that piled up against the person.

 

 

Hell, 20 years.......you can kill someone and actually do less than 20 years hugo, I don't think you really understand how the legal system works.

 

 

 

 

Either you believe in protecting people from the results of their own folly or you don't hugo.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Is "folly" the word of the day?

 

blah dee dee blah blah blah for length.

[timesjoke]

 

Is "folly" the word of the day?

 

blah dee dee blah blah blah for length.

 

No, just playing up on a quote from Herbert Spencer that hugo has in his signature. If hugo really believed in that concept, he should not be trying to shield people from the result of their bad actions. They decided to behave poorly, and should have to face the results of what they have done instead of having people trying to manipulate things so certain kinds of folly are not punnished.

[emkay64]

Hugo is right. We can't afford to house so many misdemeanors.

 

I personally think we should bring caning into North America....a nice public spanking. We can charge admission and make money on these fools. All for the cost of a nice hickory switch! Yeah I like my idea.......

[RegisteredAndEducated]

Hugo is right. We can't afford to house so many misdemeanors.

 

I personally think we should bring caning into North America....a nice public spanking. We can charge admission and make money on these fools. All for the cost of a nice hickory switch! Yeah I like my idea.......

 

Caning and public executions. Just bring back the gladiator arenas and make people pay to come watch it. Just make sure that both fighters die before they leave the arena. Cruel and unusual is bullsh!t.

[timesjoke]

 

I personally think we should bring caning into North America....a nice public spanking. We can charge admission and make money on these fools. All for the cost of a nice hickory switch! Yeah I like my idea.......

 

Reminds me of this story:

Michael P. Fay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

I have no problem at all with public caning or even public hangings to be honest. The problem with punnishments is that society as a whole does not connect punnishments with crimes, everything is mostly hidden from view. A person sentenced to death will take at least 15 years before it can be carried out. By that time nobody even remembers the crime.

[RegisteredAndEducated]

I think that the sentence "life in prison" is bullsh!t too... and once you're sentenced to death, there should be a 3 year maximum before your execution. Life in prison should equal hard labor benefitting society or automatic death sentence. There's no reason for them to be a drain on the populace.

[emkay64]

i think that the sentence "life in prison" is bullsh!t too... And once you're sentenced to death, there should be a 3 year maximum before your execution. Life in prison should equal hard labor benefitting society or automatic death sentence. There's no reason for them to be a drain on the populace.

 

grab your torch and pitchforks!!!

[hugo]

Spencer was a classical liberal. The quote on my signature was in reference to poor laws, what we now call welfare. Spencer was arguing that government should not redistribute wealth to the poor. Read the second quote in my signature. The quote has nothing to do with this debate. The fact is we have a class of crimes called misdemeanors for a reason. I think one year in jail would certainly be more than enough time for squirting milk, providing the gal is disease free.

[timesjoke]

But the concept of personal responsibility is the same hugo. Times have changed and the ways people are shielded from having to take responsibility for their own actions have mulitplied far beyond basic welfare and as he predicted, we are turning into a nation of fools.

 

 

Do you think in his day the average person thought it was acceptable to toss body fluids on a cop?

 

 

Or if there was any doubt that a serious penalty would result if you did?

 

 

 

But today you want people to be shielded from the results of their actions. Somehow I doubt you would be so understanding if a mixture of piss and sh!t was tossed on you at your job. But you feel it is a small matter if done to a police officer..........

 

 

 

 

I still stand by the idea that a person should keep their body fluids to themselves unless they get permission to share them with someone else, and there to be a severe penalty should someone force their body fluids on another person against their will no matter what their disease status happens to be at the time, or the current employment status of their intended victim.

[emkay64]

TJ--He never said it was a small deal. He said a year is enough time served for throwing bodily fluids. Let's not go re-hash the past, regarding police officers. It's irrelevant to the discussion. You hate delving into past arguments so let's leave it behind no?

[timesjoke]

TJ--He never said it was a small deal. He said a year is enough time served for throwing bodily fluids. Let's not go re-hash the past, regarding police officers. It's irrelevant to the discussion. You hate delving into past arguments so let's leave it behind no?

 

A year??????

 

Where did he ever say that????? I think your confused about something with that em, hugo's possition has always been that throwing body fluids on cops should only be a felony if the person has a disease, and if they are not infected, then they should only be charged with a misdemeanor.

 

 

 

Consider for a second how worried the officer and their families will be until medical tests are done to find out if they were infected with a disease or not. That would be a horrible time and to me deserving of a felony charge. A felony charge will still not end up with prison time unless the person has other charges or a big criminal hisotry. This is another point I think hugo is missing. People do not automatically go to prison just because they get a felony conviction, very few people with felony convictions ever go to prison.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am sorry for mentioning hugo's past with police discussions, I was wrong. Forgive me please hugo.

[Ahhlee]

Unless she has an infectious disease the intention, of spraying someone with a liquid we feed to babies was to annoy. Not deserving of a felony charge. It's a misdemeanor, that is the appropriate punishment for her folly.

 

Absolutely. I doubt her intention was to cause harm, it was just to be gross. Very low class....bleh!

 

As usual TJ is trying to put words in peoples mouths. No one says it is OK to piss on an officer; the only debate is should it be a misdemeanor or a felony.

 

Ok, I have been playing devil's advocate. I actually believe the bitch should have her breasts amputated so she will never be able to commit such a crime again and then given life at hard labor.

 

Anyone that stupid does not need tits or freedom.

 

I am actually leaning toward having her flayed alive and then burned at the stake except I know the pansy, soft on crime, liberals will never allow it.

 

LMAO! Giving you rep for that one.

 

Spencer was a classical liberal. The quote on my signature was in reference to poor laws, what we now call welfare. Spencer was arguing that government should not redistribute wealth to the poor. Read the second quote in my signature. The quote has nothing to do with this debate. The fact is we have a class of crimes called misdemeanors for a reason. I think one year in jail would certainly be more than enough time for squirting milk, providing the gal is disease free.

 

Yep. Still in agreement.

[emkay64]

Spencer was a classical liberal. The quote on my signature was in reference to poor laws, what we now call welfare. Spencer was arguing that government should not redistribute wealth to the poor. Read the second quote in my signature. The quote has nothing to do with this debate. The fact is we have a class of crimes called misdemeanors for a reason. I think one year in jail would certainly be more than enough time for squirting milk, providing the gal is disease free.

 

Here is where he said a year is enough. I was starting to doubt myself there, but I knew I read that.