Tricks And Treats

Talk about both sides working against the center - check out the irony in this one.

The ACLU finds a constitutional right for sex offenders to invite children into their homes for Halloween.

Meanwhile, Mummie wants to dress up little Sally as Witch Hazel the Harlot for Halloween - also available for Brownie Troops in children's sizes 11 - 14)

So, who's going to be playing the tricks? And which one is more likely to be the treat? This a recipe for Halloween candy, or a disaster?

Comments

[MoonShadow]

man...nothing is scared anymore...not even Halloween :(

[MoonShadow]

Hmmmmm...altho I'd like one of those costumes...

*snicker*

[absynth_minded]

Ahhh, yes, the one day when little kids feel it's safe to take candy from strangers...

Seriously, WTF are these people thinking?

This would be the equivolent of having 10-year-olds deliver take-out food to the door steps of pedophiles.

[TheAlamo]

People miss the point of this...totally.
Why does the ACLU pick things like this to defend? Because they know it repulses every single one of us. If they can get us to give up the Constitutional rights of others, then the next step is something less significant than sex offenders.

Let me MAKE IT CLEAR. I am not taking up for the perverts, but I AM taking up for ALL of our Constitutional rights. Because if we let them go for one group of people then we HAVE to let them go for others--that means you and me.

These people, if they are not in jail, have either served their sentence, or were proven innocent. IF they have paid the price that WE as a society have placed upon that crime...then they are just as free as you or I. They are now innocent until proven guilty. If we want to incriminate them and persecute them further, then it is up to us to change the laws, and the punishement for the crimes.

My personal opinion is that a child sex offender, upon conviction should automatically get the death penalty...not life, not 30 years....death..preferably by hanging. But since that is not the case if we allow them to be punished BEYOND THE LAW, then you and I are WIDE OPEN for the same treatment for any other offenses.

This IS THE M.O. of the ACLU. They were founded by communists, and their agenda is the total elimination of the Bill of Rights. And if they can get you and I to sell out other members of society, then they will continue to pit "us against them" scenarios on anything we find objectionable, and the time will come when spitting on the sidewalk is repulsive enough for someone to hang someone else---it is an historically proven fact.

I AM NOT taking up for perverts. I AM taking up for you and me, and the Constitution of the United States. The ACLU is the deadly enemy of that Constitution, and they have worked incessantly since their inception to destroy it---and they are seeking your help.

Forget punishing them after they have served their sentences...work on giving them automatic death sentences, then we need not have this discussion...and the ACLU has to find another horse to ride.

[MoonShadow]

Posted by: TheAlamo | Oct 28, 2005 5:52:09 PM

Alamo - I didn't miss the point. My opinion of the ACLU is even lower tna yours. AT THAT MOMENT, I just didn't want to waste the energy to acknowledge their existence. But I get your point

[error404]

The danger in focussing too much attention on tacky halloween costumes and the risks of trick-or-treating is that it detracts attention away from the fact that most pedophiles are known to their victims.

So what are ACLU going to do next? Produce a Bill that prohibits all Fathers, Step-Fathers, Uncles, Cousins, (and their female counterparts), from having in-house contact with their children?

tards.

[absynth_minded]

I get your point too, but I hold few things higher than protecting children from sickos. Perhaps you have to have been in a position where you were trying to help these poor kids work through the abuse inflicted on them to understand.

My personal feeling is that sex is the most powerful of biological/psychological urges. A person motivated by unnatural sex fantasies is far BEYOND rehabilitation. Allowing a pedophile to hand out candy to vulnerable children on Halloween is like allowing a priest convicted of molestation to continue to teach Sunday school; and unsuprvised, at that...

[Beth]

I came out of lurking for this one.

I saw a similar line of costumes at a "big box" mega store in my town. I think the brand was "Hottie Totties" or something, and had the word "tween" right on it. The costumes were french maid, sexy devil, etc. I honestly almost complained to the management.

Our children, especially our young girls, are not allowed to be children anymore. When I was a "tween" I was a dinasaur or a cheerleader (in a very appropriate skirt) and my own young and very beautiful mother wouldn't have put one of those costumes on!

[TheAlamo]

I get your point too, but I hold few things higher than protecting children from sickos. Perhaps you have to have been in a position where you were trying to help these poor kids work through the abuse inflicted on them to understand.

My personal feeling is that sex is the most powerful of biological/psychological urges. A person motivated by unnatural sex fantasies is far BEYOND rehabilitation. Allowing a pedophile to hand out candy to vulnerable children on Halloween is like allowing a priest convicted of molestation to continue to teach Sunday school; and unsuprvised, at that...

Posted by: absynth_minded | Oct 28, 2005 6:50:07 PM

I am not picking on you here, so please don't take it that way. But your reaction is exactly what the ACLU wants.
I realize it is an emotional issue---and so do they. Instead of all of us being too lazy to do anything until AFTER these things happen, we need to instigate the states to increase the penalties for these perverts to PERMANENTLY remove them---then this discussion would not even happen. But, if we continue to prosecute beyond the judgement rendered, then we open all of us up to double or triple jeoprody.

You make my point with your reply....this is what they (ACLU) do this for...the exact reaction you give.
So, instead of prosecuting after the sentence, then if you believe they are beyond rehabilitation, then lobby for death, or life in prison with no parole, but don't sell yourself out along with them...because that is the agenda here.

[absynth_minded]

I am not picking on you here, so please don't take it that way. But your reaction is exactly what the ACLU wants.
I realize it is an emotional issue---and so do they. Instead of all of us being too lazy to do anything until AFTER these things happen, we need to instigate the states to increase the penalties for these perverts to PERMANENTLY remove them---then this discussion would not even happen. But, if we continue to prosecute beyond the judgement rendered, then we open all of us up to double or triple jeoprody.

You make my point with your reply....this is what they (ACLU) do this for...the exact reaction you give.
So, instead of prosecuting after the sentence, then if you believe they are beyond rehabilitation, then lobby for death, or life in prison with no parole, but don't sell yourself out along with them...because that is the agenda here.

Posted by: TheAlamo | Oct 28, 2005 8:54:57 PM

Sorry, but the second an ADULT decides to molest a CHILD, they cease to have constitutional "RIGHTS."

The ACLU's "agenda" isn't the issue here. The issue is protecting our children from walking time bombs. I am not worried about my rights being effected, because some sick individual is being deprived of his "rights" to hand out candy, oggle at little kids in their costumes, and who knows what else.....

A child has the right to a normal healthy productive childhood, without fear of some PREDATOR robbing them of both their childhood and their innocence, not to mention screwing both them and their family up for life.

As for the law, don't even get me started on the bullshit, half-assed, backwards, and inadequate "sex offender" laws we have in place today.

I'll tell you what... Go look at your town's sex-offender registry and then go send your kids trick or treating to the home of some level 3 "reformed" sexual predator..

Maybe then I'll back off of my stance....

Do that and then maybe I'll consider what you are saying.....

[New Creature]

A-Minded:

You wrote:

Sorry, but the second an ADULT decides to molest a CHILD, they cease to have constitutional "RIGHTS."

AMEN to that!!!!

[nonews]

Interesting that they have "Fairy-licious" as part of the name on all those costumes. Why does that make me assume we are NOT talking carmel apples here. In reality, most 14 and under are going to be pretty well covered by those costumes if you really look at them and imagine a child's body instead of a hookers, ahem, busty adults. The whole advertising blub on these looks like it was written as a pedeophile's dream. What's really disturbing is on the same page came up "extra large fish nets", are we talking man-sized here or what? Check out the "Fairy-Licious Purrrfect Kitty Pre-Teen" it's got all the facination of a car wreck. Funny, my black cat costume actually looked like a cat. Are there really enough depraved parents who buy these things?

If you are a convicted felon pedeophile you are not allowed to be around children, period. It's a law. So, does that mean the ACLU puts itself above the law? They can't (legally) go to the circus or any where that is a gathering spot for children. They cannot work where they will come into contact with children. So somehow I think handing out candy on Halloween is kind of a no-no.

I must be getting old. I can remember when the biggest fear on Halloween was a bigger kid beating you up and stealing your candy.

[absynth_minded]

I stopped trick or treating @ 9-years-old, when the daughter of one of my mom's co-workers got a peice of candy that was laced with pcp. She went into a permanent "trip," and never came back..

That pretty much ruined trick or treating for me.

[TheAlamo]

Sorry, but the second an ADULT decides to molest a CHILD, they cease to have constitutional "RIGHTS."

The ACLU's "agenda" isn't the issue here. The issue is protecting our children from walking time bombs. I am not worried about my rights being effected, because some sick individual is being deprived of his "rights" to hand out candy, oggle at little kids in their costumes, and who knows what else.....
Posted by: absynth_minded | Oct 28, 2005 9:36:42 PM

You are trying so hard to "win the argument" here that you are twisting what I said above. Let's calm down a bit.

I am for the death penalty for these scum.
But look at what you wrote above. Your EMOTIONAL reaction is to defend the very same group that is defending them...the ACLU.
The ACLU is very much the issue here---you just want to dodge it.

How much study have you given to the ACLU, their founding,...their record?
If your answer is what I think it is, then you have no reason to comment on whether it is their agenda or not.

The ACLU is a communist group...bent on destroying YOUR bill of Rights, and they will use these scum to get to you....and your emotional reaction will help them. While you might be willing to toss your rights in the trash, what gives you the right to toss everyone else's out with yours? You do not have that right, no matter how you "feel." When you decide to hang sombody because of how you "feel" then you have just sold yourself out, as well as the rest of your friends and neighbors.

Here is what I am trying to get you to realize.
Let's say you were walking one evening, just for the exercise, and you were seen walking by the park. Next morning, there is a dead child in that park.
The witnesses finger you, and you are arrested. Do you want a trial? Or do you want to be convicted because we "feel" like you did it?

Don't try to twist my argument around to make it look I am taking up for a sex offender, or any criminal for that matter. What I am saying here is you do not have the right to be judge, jury and executioner based on how you "feel"--that is what trials, judges and juries are for.

I stated twice above, I am for the death penalty for CONVICTED perverts.
But your reaction here is just hang anybody, for the sake of your feelings. That is very, very dangerous for the rest of us.

Get some logic about you and quit thinking with your emotions, because if we all do that, just as I said above, maybe I don't like what you did yesterday---death sentence. When you, or I try to go above the law, instead of CHANGING it, then you and I become just as much a criminal as they are, and if you can't get that one, well....we can't help you.

[absynth_minded]

How much study have you given to the ACLU, their founding,...their record?
If your answer is what I think it is, then you have no reason to comment on whether it is their agenda or not.

**I obviously know enough to make that comment....

Here is what I am trying to get you to realize.
Let's say you were walking one evening, just for the exercise, and you were seen walking by the park. Next morning, there is a dead child in that park.
The witnesses finger you, and you are arrested. Do you want a trial? Or do you want to be convicted because we "feel" like you did it?

**obviously I'd want a trial, but you would have to be paranoid to even equate this with pedophiles and Halloween... I'm not worried about anyone taking my rights. well, not until the Right Wing assholes decide it's time.

Don't try to twist my argument around to make it look I am taking up for a sex offender, or any criminal for that matter. What I am saying here is you do not have the right to be judge, jury and executioner based on how you "feel"--that is what trials, judges and juries are for.

the point that YOU are MISSING is that these people have already been found GUILTY.

If you have been found guilty, that's that. It's nothing about emotions. It's the fucking LAW.

Allow me to quote the words of, nonews.

"If you are a convicted felon pedeophile you are not allowed to be around children, period. It's a law. So, does that mean the ACLU puts itself above the law? They can't (legally) go to the circus or any where that is a gathering spot for children. They cannot work where they will come into contact with children. So somehow I think handing out candy on Halloween is kind of a no-no."

See, not going ABOVE the LAW, just making sure that the LAW is ENFORCED for the benefit and saftey of children.

[TheAlamo]

"If you are a convicted felon pedeophile you are not allowed to be around children, period. It's a law. So, does that mean the ACLU puts itself above the law? They can't (legally) go to the circus or any where that is a gathering spot for children. They cannot work where they will come into contact with children. So somehow I think handing out candy on Halloween is kind of a no-no."

See, not going ABOVE the LAW, just making sure that the LAW is ENFORCED for the benefit and saftey of children.

Posted by: absynth_minded | Oct 28, 2005 10:56:58 PM

Okay, I am understanding you a little better now. I mis-interpreted what you were saying.
Except the ACLU :)
They are just as much scumbags as those they defend...and more dangerous because what they do affects the entire nation....but we can disagree about them!

[Muirnin]

Hmmm.......

I'm lost on this one.

I'm still trying to figure out why sex offenders are out on the street at all.

Hell, what difference does Halloween make? I don't think they need a special occasion to molest. If they are considered "safe" enough to be allowed into our communities, than why can't they give out candy.....

Are they safe or not....?

[error404]

What happened to the 'good ole days' when parents inherently wanted to look out for their children and escorted them (even if from an inconspicuous distance from the car), on trick or treating expeditions or while they were selling Girl Guide cookies door to door?

If parents looked after their freaking kids properly we wouldn't need Laws to keep perverts and pedophiles away from their kids, but yeah... It's unrealistic to expect many parents to take the time out of their busy schedules.

Yeah, I know, dysfunctional families have become accepted as the norm.

Most of us came from one.

[error404]

Why is okay to point the finger at the sex offenders and ACLU and NOT the parents?

What parent in their right mind would let their kids go trick or treating, knocking on the doors of strangers unsupervised, OR, let their kids go out onto the streets dressed up like hookers?

Probably the same parents who'd turn a blind eye while their partners screw their daughters...

[absynth_minded]

Alamo:

I may have lost some clarity in the emotion of my post, but I think you see what I'm trying to say. Yes, the ACLU is the scum of the earth. No doubts about that. I think my issue is with the increasing failure of the legal system to protect society from sexual predators and the fact that more of the "rehabilitated" predators will re-offend than won't.

Error:

I agree, parents should become more involved. Still, knowing how these predators work, if they see something they want, no parent is going to stand in their way.

Look no further than Duncan.....

[nonews]

error404,

I think most of us agree with you on that, a number of posts (including mine) ask why a parent would let their kid go out like that. I was a kid in a small backward town in the sixties. By the mid 60's, parents were already curtailing trick or treat because of razor blades and drugs. My daughter never got to go trick or treating, except to people we knew personally. Most communities have a Halloween event to keep the kids off the street and safe.

Yes, I totally agree that parents should keep a better eye on their children. Any parent allowing a 14 or under to wear an inappropriately sexy costume ought to have their heads and probably morals examined. If I had my way, those costumes would be pulled off the market. It worries me there might actually be a market for that kind of (insert obscentity here).

Sadly, even children who are looked after disappear right out of their bedrooms. You can't watch a pre-teen every second of her/his day. Laws DON'T keep perverts away from our kids, not until after they are caught. Obviously, not even after they are caught. But to say that it's violating their rights not to interact with the very population they prey upon, that's pretty sick as far as I'm concerned. I have no agenda with the ACLU, I don't know enough about them. But on this particular issue, I'm going to stand up and yell "WRONG!"

Dan, thanks for pointing those costumes out. At first I laughed, then got to reading the whole thing and it wasn't funny. Think I'll go find out who the manufacturer is. I might as well rant at the right people.

[error404]

absynth minded: Duncan still had a particular victim in mind... nuff said about that though.

My post was keeping in context with the whole halloween trick or treating and dress-up tradition.

[Muirnin]

Why is okay to point the finger at the sex offenders and ACLU and NOT the parents?

What parent in their right mind would let their kids go trick or treating, knocking on the doors of strangers unsupervised, OR, let their kids go out onto the streets dressed up like hookers?

Probably the same parents who'd turn a blind eye while their partners screw their daughters...

Posted by: error404 | Oct 28, 2005 11:33:09 PM

JMO..........

I think the responsibility lies with our criminal justice system. Sex offenders should not be on the street....period.

Yes, parents need to take responsibility for their children. However, if sex offenders were treated as the dangerous criminals they truly are, and locked up, maybe we all wouldn't have to worry so much about Halloween....or any other day.

[error404]

Muirin - I agree. A combination of both would go a long way towards keeping kids safer, but it's a faster solution for parents to supervise their kids dress code and whereabouts on the street, than it is to wait for any change in Law.