-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms April Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
Another Scuzz Ball
- Thread starter JonJ
- Start date
I still don't understand why they let Level 3 offenders out of jail.
It shouldn't surprise anyone. The definition of level 3 is likey to offend again. [roll]
It shouldn't surprise anyone. The definition of level 3 is likey to offend again. [roll]
Chris
NES Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 14,176
- Likes
- 9,929
Oh that's easy...
Because the liberals all think he's reformed. Isn't that what prison is for? To allow dangerous preditors to turn their life around and do good for society?
Afterall, we keep track of all the dangerous law abiding gun owners and require them to send in letters when they move, but Sex offenders don't have to do do anything unless they are taken to court and ordered to register.
Only in MA.
Some days, the bleeting of the sheep is louder than others.
Because the liberals all think he's reformed. Isn't that what prison is for? To allow dangerous preditors to turn their life around and do good for society?
Afterall, we keep track of all the dangerous law abiding gun owners and require them to send in letters when they move, but Sex offenders don't have to do do anything unless they are taken to court and ordered to register.
Only in MA.
Some days, the bleeting of the sheep is louder than others.
SnakeEye
Banned
i think all level three sex offenders should be required by law upon release to sleep at a liberal politicians home in the bedroom of their youngest child for their transition back to society... [twisted]
I saw that on the news this morning,and don't understand why they don't keep them in jail where they belong. Definately not out on the streets. And a leopard does not change its spot. [evil] Reformed my ass.
dwarven1
Lonely Mountain Arms
OK, I must have missed something. What law makes it illegal for him to take a picture of a clothed (I'm assuming that she was clothed since she was in a public library) underage girl?
I understand why he's busted and what for... I just don't understand what he did that got police to search his phone and computer.
Does this mean that I need to be careful in public that no underage children are my field of view when I snap a photo?
I understand why he's busted and what for... I just don't understand what he did that got police to search his phone and computer.
Does this mean that I need to be careful in public that no underage children are my field of view when I snap a photo?
Only if you're a level 3 sex offender and have been recognized. ![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
dwarven1
Lonely Mountain Arms
derek said:
Library officials alerted police after a young girl complained to librarians that Janosko took her picture with his cell phone Monday afternoon.
Was she in a nude/lascivious pose IN THE PUBLIC LIBRARY??
dwarven1
Lonely Mountain Arms
So taking a picture of a CLOTHED underage female is illegal for him?
I'm just trying to understand here. I know that what they FOUND is illegal - but what did the cops say to him when they went to his house? "You looked at a girl so we're going to search the place?" If he didn't give his consent to the search, was possibly taking the picture of her CLOTHED enough to issue a search warrant?
Or is the fact that he's a level 3 offender enough to give them "probable cause"? I'm guessing that this is what triggered it, but I'm just trying to understand why the cops said "OK, let's search for the pictures of a clothed underage girl." Were they concerned that by taking a pic, he was setting her up for something more at some future time?
I'm just trying to understand here. I know that what they FOUND is illegal - but what did the cops say to him when they went to his house? "You looked at a girl so we're going to search the place?" If he didn't give his consent to the search, was possibly taking the picture of her CLOTHED enough to issue a search warrant?
Or is the fact that he's a level 3 offender enough to give them "probable cause"? I'm guessing that this is what triggered it, but I'm just trying to understand why the cops said "OK, let's search for the pictures of a clothed underage girl." Were they concerned that by taking a pic, he was setting her up for something more at some future time?
dwarven1 said:
If he was under requirements to avoid association with children, YES.
dwarven1 said:
Same as above. Also, if he was on parole, he has NO right to refuse any search, according to most state's laws. No warrant would be required.
