Home « Forum « Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

Never let real life get in the way of your story

Bondi Beach

In talking with friends about one of my stories with an incest theme, the wife, a former county social worker, asked me why I'd write about such a topic. "No such thing as happy incest,'' she said.

There's some truth to her argument, evidence this WP story, but reality is always negotiable and often a secondary concern for me.

bb

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Bondi Beach

There's some truth to her argument


On the other hand, given the legal issues and social prejudice against it, if there is such a thing as happy incest, no government agent (and that's what a social worker is) will ever hear a so much as a peep about it.

Replies:   docholladay
sunkuwan

The problem with incest is, that you can't get out of each others hair if the relationship fails. Family gatherings will be awkward.

In a story, you can write everlasting love or just ignore the social inner-family problems. Or... you could write exactly that, a story about a failed incest relationship and the familial issues.

But the real-life statement of "no such thing as happy incest" can't be right. Because happy incest is secret incest. If an incest relationship held 50 years, wasn't it happy? Sure, there were probably some issues and pitfalls, but if they were never found out, it isn't different than a normal relationship.

The unreported/not-found-out cases of incest are probably higher than any of the officials want to talk or think about.

Replies:   Joe Long
docholladay

@Dominions Son

On the other hand, given the legal issues and social prejudice against it


That probably holds true for almost any type of relationships which do not fit into the standard mold described by most religions.

Personally I think any relationship is okay as long as no form of force is used to maintain or create it. As long as the relationships are based on true caring and love between all members in it. Its none of my business. OF course that rule does not exist for the government or other social groups.

Joe Long

@sunkuwan

In a story, you can write everlasting love or just ignore the social inner-family problems. Or... you could write exactly that, a story about a failed incest relationship and the familial issues.


That's part of my story. How does Thanksgiving Dinner go after the sisters find out their kids have been hitting the sheets together?

Replies:   Bondi Beach
Bondi Beach

@Joe Long

That's part of my story. How does Thanksgiving Dinner go after the sisters find out their kids have been hitting the sheets together?


"If you can't beat 'em then join 'em." Mark Twain said that, didn't he?

bb

Replies:   Joe Long
Joe Long

@Bondi Beach

"If you can't beat 'em then join 'em." Mark Twain said that, didn't he?


I'm going to borrow a line from The Flash when Joe finds out that Barry and Iris are an item.

First they clumsily try to decide who sits next to whom at the dinner table, than afterwards her mom pulls him aside and says, "I understand that you two...are together. But that doesn't mean I've gotten used to seeing you guys make out or anything." The subtext is that his dear aunt isn't as comfortable with the situation as she lets on. Foreshadowing?

Replies:   Bondi Beach  Centaur
Bondi Beach

@Joe Long

First they clumsily try to decide who sits next to whom at the dinner table, than afterwards her mom pulls him aside and says, "I understand that you two...are together. But that doesn't mean I've gotten used to seeing you guys make out or anything." The subtext is that his dear aunt isn't as comfortable with the situation as she lets on. Foreshadowing?


Definitely promising.

bb

Replies:   Joe Long  richardshagrin
Joe Long

@Bondi Beach

Definitely promising.


Thanks.

I'm nearing 100k words in and this is one of 22 upcoming scenes that I envision.

richardshagrin
Updated:

@Bondi Beach


Fore


Called out as a warning to people in the path of a golf ball.
Maybe fore shadowing is a warning of a golf ball's shadow?

awnlee jawking

@richardshagrin

I don't think dolphins are familiar with golf balls ;)

AJ

Replies:   sejintenej
sejintenej

@awnlee jawking

I don't think dolphins are familiar with golf balls ;)

They are intelligent enough; their problem is holding a club in their flippers and then they could sort out those who pollute their seas

Replies:   Ross at Play
sunkuwan

dolphins are rapist bastards!

Ross at Play

@sejintenej

@AJ
I don't think dolphins are familiar with golf balls ;)
@sejintenej
They are intelligent enough; their problem is holding a club in their flippers

Dolphins used to be quite good golfers, holding the clubs in their mouths.
Unfortunately, they can't play anymore because of unintended consequences of a change to the rules of the game a couple of years ago.
The change was only intended to stop the use of long putters: they can no longer have a club touching, or being supported by, any part of the body above the elbows.

awnlee jawking

@sunkuwan

dolphins are rapist bastards!


Wow, so we're going to get some bestiality in Colin Barrett's story!

AJ

sejintenej

@sunkuwan

dolphins are rapist bastards

Of course they are; who has been appointed or given authority to marry dolphins? You need to remind the President that this needs to be arranged before he bothers about North Korea.

As for rape, show me one dolphiness who objects to a bit of hanky panky - the way they go after human males they seem to be nymphos. Having dropped one they are en route to the next one. Given the dangers of the sea they desperately need to keep delivering just to keep dolphin society alive

sunkuwan

Just don't get dragged into their rape caves.

Replies:   sejintenej
sejintenej

@sunkuwan

Just don't get dragged into their rape caves.

What a nightmare. I think I'll stuff a cork in before I venture there.

Diving in a narrow cleft (under one metre wide)in Gib a moray showed its head at crotch level - I got the hell out of there bl**dy quick.

Centaur

@Joe Long

I'm going to borrow a line from The Flash when Joe finds out that Barry and Iris are an item.


I personally wouldn't consider that incest as berry is an adopted son. just a hell of an awkward situation.

Replies:   Joe Long
Joe Long

@Centaur

I personally wouldn't consider that incest as berry is an adopted son. just a hell of an awkward situation.


Correct, not incest, but it was awkward. I wrote down the line when I heard it, but will have to look it up to get the exact wording.

Replies:   richardshagrin
richardshagrin

@Joe Long

Correct, not incest, but it was awkward. I wrote down the line when I heard it, but will have to look it up to get the exact wording.

Maybe "outcest"?

Crumbly Writer
Updated:

A better justification for writing incest stories (rather than "there are happy incest stories, but no one knows any") is one I use often (even though my family Hates those stories) is that it's the modern equivalent of "Romeo and Juliet". While conflict between individual families is no longer forbidden, relationships between siblings or parents/children will always be shocking and controversial. Thus it makes the perfect 'forbidden love' foil, whether it's true or not. What is more forbidden than a 'true love' incest theme, especially if it's not the "I saw my mother in the shower and just had to fuck her brains out"?

That's why the best incest stories (for me at least) are the ones which are slow-developing, where the characters are conflicted and slow to act on their very real desires because of the heavy emotional costs they'll end up paying for the relationship.

The closest 'forbidden love', short of incest, is now human/alien love, which just comes across as silly/unrealistic in most instances.

That's my rationalization anyway, and I'm stickin' with it to the bitter end.

Crumbly Writer

@richardshagrin

Called out as a warning to people in the path of a golf ball.
Maybe fore shadowing is a warning of a golf ball's shadow?

Foreshadowing: What you yell when hitting golf balls in Peter Pan's neighborhood.

robberhands

@Crumbly Writer

That's why the best incest stories (for me at least) are the ones which are slow-developing, where the characters are conflicted and slow to act on their very real desires because of the heavy emotional costs they'll end up paying for the relationship.

Will wonders never cease? I have the same view on incest stories. Sadly, my expectations are disappointed most of the times.

Joe Long

@Crumbly Writer

That's why the best incest stories (for me at least) are the ones which are slow-developing, where the characters are conflicted and slow to act on their very real desires because of the heavy emotional costs they'll end up paying for the relationship.


That's how I'm writing mine, although I'm worried that current events will make it much harder to market a romance between a 19 year old guy and a 14 year old girl, cousins or not.

I'm not defending anything an adult may have done with a 14 year old in real life, but a story in the Washington Post that headlined "more women" had only stories about those of legal age being asked out on dates.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer
Updated:

@Joe Long

That's how I'm writing mine, although I'm worried that current events will make it much harder to market a romance between a 19 year old guy and a 14 year old girl, cousins or not.

I'm not defending anything an adult may have done with a 14 year old in real life, but a story in the Washington Post that headlined "more women" had only stories about those of legal age being asked out on dates.

Having followed the trend in publishing (and watching authors getting banned as a result), I've learned a few things. A single reader complaint can kill a story with no recourse. So the key is to ensure the wrong people don't read the story.

A classic case of this is my original "Catalyst" series, which despite dealing with underaged incest, has been on the market for years with no complaints.

Along with being slow-developing (it starts with a 'near-encounter' between two teens 'too close for comfort', who then back off and avoid one another). The only actual incest occurs in the second book (where anyone virulently anti-incest wouldn't continue reading).

What will kill you every time is when you surprise readers with something shocking (i.e. they don't have time to process it ahead of time). Then offended readers will be quick to register complaints against the story.

The same is true for underaged sex stories. I've found, you CAN include kids, but they can't actively participate. They're free to comment, or tease the adults, but as long as they don't look and don't touch, you're clear. That's also how I include incest-themed stories on FS. I simply shift the actual physical connections off-screen, but allow teen-aged children to wrestle with the stories (since they're fully aware of incest happening in RL all around them).

The point is, most teens are fully capable of grasping compromising situations, but there's a clear line between what's legal and permissible, and what's not. That doesn't mean you can't write those stories, but you've got to approach them gingerly, prepared for negative responses and anticipating them (i.e. writing to avoid the negative reactions).

Replies:   Joe Long
richardshagrin

@Crumbly Writer

The closest 'forbidden love', short of incest, is now human/alien love, which just comes across as silly/unrealistic in most instances.

There is always bestiality. Thinking Horndog has some dog porn.

Replies:   Joe Long  Crumbly Writer
Joe Long

@richardshagrin

There is always bestiality. Thinking Horndog has some dog porn


A girl and her dog is always more realistic than aliens.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Crumbly Writer

@richardshagrin

There is always bestiality. Thinking Horndog has some dog porn.

Except, that's hard to create a romance story out of. Doggie porn is pretty universally plain porn rather than "Romeo and Juliet" material. (Which is why most human/alien love stories fail so miserably.)

Now, if you turned "A Boy and His Dog" into a romance between the two title characters, you'd be onto something.

Replies:   sunkuwan  Dominions Son
sunkuwan

@Crumbly Writer

It could be if the bestiality is a kink between two humans.

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

A girl and her dog is always more realistic than aliens.


What about an alien dog?

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Dominions Son
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer


Except, that's hard to create a romance story out of.



Now, if you turned "A Boy and His Dog" into a romance between the two title characters, you'd be onto something.


That kind of story is out there, you need to search for Zoophilia (under story type on SOL category search) rather than bestiality.


Zoophilia Different from bestiality, it's about relationships between humans and animals, not just sex.


ETA: there are 262 stories on SOL tagged as Zoophilia

sunkuwan

But would the author know this or make this distinction?

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

What about an alien dog?

It's the exact same problem. If it's an alien dog, then it's exactly as realistic as an alien/human romance. It can't be more effective. But notice my caveat, a telepathic dog as in "A Boy and His Dog" could work well, as your dealing with a believable human relationship between a boy and his human-thinking dog. The problem with most human/alien romances is that the aliens aren't fully fleshed out and read like a bad actor in a monkey suit. It spell 'Camp" from the get go.

Crumbly Writer

@sunkuwan

But would the author know this or make this distinction?

If he wants to succeed he will. Then again, straightforward porn is successful enough. But if so, he should simply label it as straight-up porn and be done with it.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

But if so, he should simply label it as straight-up porn and be done with it.


But if his story is more touchy feely emotional bonding between a human and an animal, then straight up bestiality, then labeling it as the latter will cause him more problems then not.

Joe Long

@Crumbly Writer

A Boy and His Dog" could work well


It might have to be "A Boy and His Sheep"

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Joe Long

It might have to be "A Boy and His Sheep"

Can Little Bo Peep solve the mystery of why her boyfriend seems strangely disinterested in having sex with her?

Replies:   Bondi Beach
Joe Long
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer


The point is, most teens are fully capable of grasping compromising situations, but there's a clear line between what's legal and permissible, and what's not. That doesn't mean you can't write those stories, but you've got to approach them gingerly, prepared for negative responses and anticipating them (i.e. writing to avoid the negative reactions).


Thanks for the thoughtful response. I have been working hard to do as you say, to write this in the manner of a mainstream novel, where sex is part of the romantic relationship, rather that erotica.

I establish in the first two chapters how the guy is shy and awkward around girls, and a peer taunts him about "doing the five knuckle shuffle...look me in the eyes and tell me you don't." So in chapter two he does, right after meeting his cousin. He's conflicted, but they spend time together. His friend has to tell him that she's looking at him too. So it takes a month of story time, the whole first act in 35k words, to get to the first kiss. Another two weeks for a joint loss of virginity.

The problem is the US public, with Harvey Weinstein as an inciting point and now focused on Roy Moore, is hypersensitive about underage. AI saw this on Twitter tonight A man 32 yrs old doesn't ask little girls out on a date which I would agree with - except that the 'little girls' she was referring to were 16 and 17 years olds of legal age. They were certainly physically mature, were almost certainly fully capable of grasping compromising situations, and were deemed by the law to be adults in sexual situations - but people still think of them like they were 8 years old and thus being molested.

The Post article from yesterday quotes 18 and 19 years olds, "He would come down to the store at the mall where I worked and ask me out. It was creepy to be hit on by a guy that age." It probably was creepy, and I do believe that part of the story, but it's not child molestation.

Sorry if I ranted. These are not things one can't say on Twitter lest you similarly be accused of being for child molestation. I think many or most of the women are telling the truth, but I still try to evaluate each one independently on the merits and not get caught up in a "Burn the witch!" mob mentality.

Crumbly Writer

@Joe Long

The problem is the US public, with Harvey Weinstein as an inciting point and now focused on Roy Moore, is hypersensitive about underage. AI saw this on Twitter tonight A man 32 yrs old doesn't ask little girls out on a date which I would agree with - except that the 'little girls' she was referring to were 16 and 17 years olds of legal age. They were certainly physically mature, were almost certainly fully capable of grasping compromising situations, and were deemed by the law to be adults in sexual situations - but people still think of them like they were 8 years old and thus being molested.

That's why I specified keeping the younger kids (definitely under 14, but many are triggered by anyone underaged with an adult (18 or older)) out of the sexual situations. You can treat them as aware of what's going on, but if you try more, you may be called on it.

However, if it's a teenage romance, say part of a high school drama, you should be okay, assuming you follow the 'go slow' approach. If it's a longer story (35K isn't that long, but you can easily break it even at that point), then you have the built in cushion I mentioned. If the incest occurs in the 2nd book, anyone freaked out by incest will have likely bailed by then, and if they haven't, you've already hooked them enough they're unlikely to register a complaint.

Replies:   Joe Long
Bondi Beach
Updated:

@Ross at Play


Can Little Bo Peep solve the mystery of why her boyfriend seems strangely disinterested in having sex with her?


Easy. They are students at the University of California, Davis, "where men are men and there are more sheep than women."

Or so we are told.

bb
(ETA: One-time grad student at UCD. Already married at the time, so I can't speak to the truth of the claim.)

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Joe Long

@Crumbly Writer

If it's a longer story (35K isn't that long, but you can easily break it even at that point),


35k is the first act. I'm at 95k now with 22 more scenes plotted out.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Dominions Son
Updated:

@Joe Long


The problem is the US public, with Harvey Weinstein as an inciting point and now focused on Roy Moore, is hypersensitive about underage. AI saw this on Twitter tonight A man 32 yrs old doesn't ask little girls out on a date which I would agree with - except that the 'little girls' she was referring to were 16 and 17 years olds of legal age. They were certainly


There has always been some degree of social stigma to so-called May-December romantic relationships. And the younger party doesn't even need to be a teen. The younger party could be 30, but if there's a 30 year difference in age, some people will still find it objectionable/creepy.

The Weinstein scandal shouldn't have much impact on teen/teen romance/erotic stories. Even if one or both of the teens is underage, it still won't draw the same level of outrage of a story involving a romance/sexual relationship with a teen/decade or more older adult.

Replies:   Joe Long  Joe Long
Joe Long

@Dominions Son

Even if one or both of the teens is underage, it still won't draw the same level of outrage of a story involving a romance/sexual relationship with a teen/decade or more older adult.


True, but in my story the guy is a 19 year old college student while the girl is a 14 year old 9th grader.

Part of my message is that in my day (late 70's, early 80's) and where I lived there was no bright line at age 18, where those under were innocent, impressionable teens while those over were fully accountable adults.

I show my experience that there was actually little difference between the kids in high school and the kids in college. We all went to school ( see, we even called college 'school', not some lofty 'uni'), lived at home (when not away at college) and had part time jobs while we were trying to figure out how to be adults out on our own.

We played sports together, we partied together, we dated each other. Moving out of your parent's house and getting a full time job was what made us adults.

PS I've been to parties with an age range of 14 to 30 that had beer, liquor and porn videos.

Mom: "Don't let her seduce you."
Son: "C'mon, she's only..."
Dad: "Old enough to bleed."

I'm not condoning girls having sex at 14, even if some readers choose to fap at the thought. Her character endures several bad experiences and is wounded in the process.

Joe Long

@Dominions Son

The Weinstein scandal shouldn't have much impact on teen/teen romance/erotic stories.


Not by itself, but it appears to have unleashed a flood of "me too's" which IMO is morphing into a near hysteria amongst the observers in the general public.

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

Not by itself, but it appears to have unleashed a flood of "me too's" which IMO is morphing into a near hysteria amongst the observers in the general public.


Yes, for older man / very young woman. The issue with Weinstein is that he is accused of going after women half his age.

True, but in my story the guy is a 19 year old college student while the girl is a 14 year old 9th grader.


I look at it this way, the public outrage factor is highly dependent on the ratio of older / younger.

as long as the younger isn't pre-teen or younger, anything under 1.5 will generate minor levels of public outrage. Which is not to say it won't be highly offensive to certain individuals, there just won't be enough of them to create a large public outrage effect.

Anything over 2.0 will generate at least some public outrage regardless of the age of the younger party. Severe public outrage is possible but not guaranted if younger is underage.

Don't forget, Lolita, involving a romantic/sexual relationship between an adult male and a 12 year old girl got dead tree published in the 1955 and was even made into a movie which has been shown on broadcast television in the US.

even if some readers choose to fap at the thought.


Some people choose to be ostriches on the issue of kids and sex and get very upset if someone comes along and pull their head out of the sand.

Anyone who think kids going through puberty aren't interested in or thinking about sex is delusional.

Onset of puberty is sometime between 10-14 for girls and 12-16 for boys. And there are documented cases of it happening much earlier.

Crumbly Writer

@Bondi Beach

(ETA: One-time grad student at UCD. Already married at the time, so I can't speak to the truth of the claim.)

So you brought your sheep to school with you, instead of trying to find one there?

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

The issue with Weinstein is that he is accused of going after women half his age.


My understanding of the Weinstein situation isn't so much the age difference as the way he forced them to do things due to his position of power and authority. That's a different issue.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Crumbly Writer

@Joe Long

If it's a longer story (35K isn't that long, but you can easily break it even at that point),

35k is the first act. I'm at 95k now with 22 more scenes plotted out.

Understood. I was suggested, if you wanted to cushion yourself from complaints, breaking it into short intro (before they commit incest) and a longer second book (once they become involved). That's obvious not necessary for SOL, but Amazon can be problematic.

That said, I've included incest between siblings, and I've never had a complaint yet. The slow development should be fine, as it establishes doubt and announces what the story is about early (i.e. it's NOT a face and abuse incest story). I was simply listing an alternate option if you wanted more protection.

Dominions Son

@Ernest Bywater

My understanding of the Weinstein situation isn't so much the age difference as the way he forced them to do things due to his position of power and authority. That's a different issue.


Ack, your right. I was confusing Weinstein with a different case, former judge and US Senate candidate Roy Moore who has been accused of sexual misconduct with girls aged 14 to 17 (at the time) when he was just an ADA in his 30s.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Crumbly Writer

@Joe Long

Not by itself, but it appears to have unleashed a flood of "me too's" which IMO is morphing into a near hysteria amongst the observers in the general public.

I don't think it's a hysteria. Instead, I think women are finally thinking people will finally listen to what happened to them, and thus feel like they can speak out without being completely castigated, humiliated and demoralized.

Face it, rape is rape and abuse is abuse, no ifs ands or buts. There are mistakes, but often, men repeat whatever they can get away with, which intimidating everyone NOT to speak out.

Maya Angolu was abused, reported it (her mother's boyfriend, if I'm not mistaken) and he died in prison that night. She didn't speak a word for the next five years she was so traumatized. You can be traumatized by the event itself, by hiding it to protect yourself (you never heal) but also by speaking up. It's NOT something that most women make up. Instead, most instances of women withdrawing complaints is because they can no longer withstand the tremendous social pressures.

I think it's about time women started speaking up. We men just have to realize we can't get away with the shit we have for so long.

Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

So you brought your sheep to school with you, instead of trying to find one there?


Ewe bastard! :)

Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

was even made into a movie which has been shown on broadcast television in the US.

Two movies, in fact, and with respected, well-known casts too. The 1962 version starred James Mason, Shelley Winters, and Peter Sellers; and the 1997 version, Jeremy Irons and Melanie Griffith.

Ross at Play

@Crumbly Writer

I don't think it's a hysteria.

I agree, but I don't think the recent outrage has been merely about women finally overcoming their reluctance to speak out, rather it's about breaking down the barriers that have continued to exist in the entertainment industry long after they'd been largely broken down in most other workplaces.

Replies:   Joe Long
Joe Long

@Crumbly Writer

I don't think it's a hysteria.


I was saying that for the general public, not the accusers, most of which I believe are true, although I'm not always sure which ones.

Normally on Twitter I like to go full pedantic and point out factual and logical errors folks make. I don't even dare touch this subject, as any hint of saying you don't believe the accusers means you must be a pedophile yourself (and I'm actually only a hebephile.)

A few months ago on Twitters someone posted pics of three now adult actresses when they were in there teens. I commented that of the three, Jennifer Lawrence was the most attractive at that age - and several people I didn't know immediately accused me of being a pervert for noticing that a fully physically mature teen was attractive.

It's a mine field.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

I agree, but I don't think the recent outrage has been merely about women finally overcoming their reluctance to speak out, rather it's about breaking down the barriers that have continued to exist in the entertainment industry long after they'd been largely broken down in most other workplaces.


I realize there are many abusers who use their positions of power to get off on humiliating others, and they also have their enabler who hang on their coat tails. It is important to out these people.

At that the same time, it's a very emotional subject where it's very difficult to offer an objective analysis. I prefer facts, not emotions.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Dominions Son

@Joe Long

A few months ago on Twitters someone posted pics of three now adult actresses when they were in there teens. I commented that of the three


There's your problem. Twitter is one of the most aptly named social media services. 90+% of it's users are twits.

Ernest Bywater

@Joe Long

A few months ago on Twitters someone posted pics of three now adult actresses when they were in there teens. I commented that of the three, Jennifer Lawrence was the most attractive at that age - and several people I didn't know immediately accused me of being a pervert for noticing that a fully physically mature teen was attractive.


Thus you have one more reason why I call that anti-social media, along with Farcebook and their other competitors. - no typos, just a statement.

helmut_meukel

@Crumbly Writer

It's NOT something that most women make up. Instead, most instances of women withdrawing complaints is because they can no longer withstand the tremendous social pressures.


Agreed.
Sadly however there are those few making up accusations about this. Just today my local newspaper here in Germany reported the case of a model who had accused two men for raping her. She was found guilty, fined 20,000 Euro and forbidden to repeat the accusations. The decision is final.

HM.

sejintenej

@Crumbly Writer

The problem with most human/alien romances is that the aliens aren't fully fleshed out and read like a bad actor in a monkey suit. It spell 'Camp" from the get go.

Worth putting in the Author's Course 100

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Ross at Play
Updated:

@Dominions Son

I was confusing Weinstein with a different case, former judge and US Senate candidate Roy Moore

I thought the GOP could not possibly find anymore with a more contemptible character than Donald Duck to stand as a candidate for them ... but I was wrong.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@Ross at Play

I thought the GOP could not possibly find anymore with a more contemptible character than Donald Duck to stand as a candidate for them ... but I was wrong.


Ayep, they found a guy that was elected as a judge while he was a Democrat .

Crumbly Writer

@Joe Long

(and I'm actually only a hebephile

Not me, I'm a hebephobe, the heebiejeebies give me the ... heebiejeebies!

But seriously, I think the problem with the current reports is when certain people attack a single individual, or a single report, while ignoring the dozens of people who come forward against others. If it's merely he said/she said, it's often impossible to know what's real and what's not. But when there's an established pattern of abuse, or of prurient interest, then those doubts are largely absolved.

Again, no one is declaring Moore guilty of a crime, they're simply saying they don't want such a creep to serve in Congress, only in the Presidency. :(

Crumbly Writer

@Joe Long

I prefer facts, not emotions.

I prefer cuddles, though that leads to troubles of its own.

Crumbly Writer

@sejintenej

The problem with most human/alien romances is that the aliens aren't fully fleshed out and read like a bad actor in a monkey suit. It spell 'Camp" from the get go.

Worth putting in the Author's Course 100

The main point (to be included in the curriculum), is that, if you attempt a human/alien romance, is to give enough physical description (how their skin feels, how their emotions show through, how they relate to what's around them) to make the scene feel 'real'. In most cases, since they're describing something they can't 'see' in their minds, they simply rush through it, rather than giving the scene the gravity and realism they deserve.

It's relatively easy to describe a close sibling relationship, especially if there is some underlying conflict, which doesn't exist with seven foot lizardmen.

awnlee jawking

@Crumbly Writer

The problem with most human/alien romances is that the aliens aren't fully fleshed out


Similarly, the problem with most stories with significant stroke content is that the women aren't fully fleshed out - they're just there to be wet all the time and shout 'Oh yes' occasionally ;)

AJ

richardshagrin

@awnlee jawking

Oh yes

OOOOOHHHHH YEESSSSSS!!!!! (actually some of the letters may be lower case, but usually it takes a whole line of dialog for the two words. Sometimes "fuck my ass" is added.

Replies:   Geek of Ages
Geek of Ages

@richardshagrin

Sometimes "fuck my ass" is added.


I really don't get the obsession with anal sex, and why it seems like it's in every story I would otherwise be remotely interested in.

Replies:   Ross at Play
sunkuwan

- It's naaaasty.
- the ultimate domination/submission
- some authors have an ass fetish

I am not really into it but females wearing buttplugs gets me going. Especially in the "discreet vibrator" category.

awnlee jawking

@sunkuwan

- the ultimate domination/submission


It's pretty much the ultimate exercise in trust, unless you're into really dangerous stuff like breath play.

The man has to work hard and be very tender and considerate for the woman to get as much pleasure as he does, yet reported statistics indicate that women are MORE likely to orgasm through anal sex than vaginal. (I'm still not sure I believe that despite seeing it from several sources - it might be a case of telling researchers what they want to hear, like Masters & Johnson).

AJ

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ross at Play

@Geek of Ages

I really don't get the obsession with anal sex

There was a fabulous exchange in the Australian TV show Underbelly which began with a statement like that.
The very trashy wife of a career criminal was chatting with a friend in her home and said, "I don't understand mens' obsession with anal sex. My guess is it'd hurt like buggery."
The house was bugged by the police and two officers were listening in. One asked, "Did she really just say that?"

Replies:   sejintenej
Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

Again, no one is declaring Moore guilty of a crime, they're simply saying they don't want such a creep to serve in Congress, only in the Presidency.


As far as I know there are no accusations that the Idiot in Chief has pursued jailbait, though he has made some very creepy comments about his own daughter.

Trump and Roy Moore are very different kinds of creeps.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

I'm still not sure I believe that despite seeing it from several sources - it might be a case of telling researchers what they want to hear, like Masters & Johnson


It could also be a case of sample selection bias whether selection by researchers or self-selection like an internet survey.

BlacKnight

I actually dated a woman for a while who preferred it in the butt. I know, I didn't think they really existed outside porn either.

I don't get the appeal, personally. It's a lot of fuss and mess and cleanup, and it pretty much calls a halt to further festivities until after said cleanup unless she's really looking for embarrassing health problems. I don't see the point in going through all the hassle when the alpha and the omega is just a couple inches away.

Funny part is some of the guys writing these stories are probably the same ones who complain about how long it takes to put on a condom.

Dominions Son

@BlacKnight

I don't get the appeal, personally.


No pregnancy risk.

Replies:   BlacKnight  AmigaClone
sejintenej

@awnlee jawking

Similarly, the problem with most stories with significant stroke content is that the women aren't fully fleshed out - they're just there to be wet all the time and shout 'Oh yes' occasiona

For the few I tried reading the word "most" certainly didn't apply. Ergo, if you write stroke stories I will not be reading them

Replies:   awnlee jawking
sejintenej

@Ross at Play

My guess is it'd hurt like buggery."

The house was bugged by the police and two officers were listening in. One asked, "Did she really just say that?"

Given it was Australian the police officer had to be an immigrant not conversant with English street talk. In this context the speaker need not have had that experience - it merely means that it hurt like he imagines buggery would hurt.

Reminds me of the reference in Florida Friends whilst discussing double penetration that "the first time always hurts" or words to that effect.

Joe Long

@Crumbly Writer

Again, no one is declaring Moore guilty of a crime, they're simply saying they don't want such a creep to serve in Congress, only in the Presidency. :(


I believe it's the duty of the voters to decide if he is a creep and if he should serve. He's long been a controversial figure who's already won several statewide elections without these stories coming out, but now he's on a national stage.

But yes, many are declaring that Moore is a child molester. Political cartoons depict him with four foot tall girls in pig tails sitting on his lap.

BlacKnight

@Dominions Son

No pregnancy risk.


Yeah, and you can trick God into thinking you're still a virgin.

But we have reliable contraceptives now, and theology that isn't fucking retarded. Despite the right wing's efforts to prevent access to both.

Replies:   AmigaClone
awnlee jawking

@sejintenej

For the few I tried reading the word "most" certainly didn't apply. Ergo, if you write stroke stories I will not be reading them


That's just gone whoosh over my miniscule brain. Please could you elucidate. Would you substitute 'all' for 'most', for example?

AJ

Replies:   sejintenej
Crumbly Writer

@sunkuwan

- It's naaaasty.
- the ultimate domination/submission
- some authors have an ass fetish

For a long time, I assumed straight men getting excited about anal play was more about their closeted homosexual tendencies. But over the years, I've observed that some people's asses are more sensitive than others. (I learned that about the time I learned that a fair amount of gay men do not engage in anal sex.)

If your ass isn't sensitive, then it's not an erogenous zone. If anyone tried to stick something in my ass, I'd likely punch them. After learning about it, I trained myself to relax my ass (necessary for the act), though I never found the sensations any more enjoyable (though it makes rectal exams much easier).

It's the same with breastfeeding. Many women (like my daughter) didn't breastfeed simply because they found the process irritating and annoying, while those with more sensitive breasts, actually enjoy the sensations (my wife's family tends to have large but mostly insensitive nipples, so they don't enjoy prolonged breast play).

Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

Trump and Roy Moore are very different kinds of creeps.

Maybe, but they both pursued women with NO interest in them simply because they could, because of their position, which is pretty much the definition of a creep.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Crumbly Writer

@BlacKnight

I don't get the appeal, personally. It's a lot of fuss and mess and cleanup, and it pretty much calls a halt to further festivities until after said cleanup unless she's really looking for embarrassing health problems. I don't see the point in going through all the hassle when the alpha and the omega is just a couple inches away.

Anyone who's serious about butt play (like gay men) will have an enema kit as a permanent fixture in their bathrooms, so they can prepare before they engage in sex so there is little to no shit involved.

Once again, if your ass is sensitive to stimulation, the enema can actually be enjoyable in and of itself (the delicate tension of waiting until you can finally release the pressure in your bowels).

For most straight men, the only attraction is that it's 'tighter' than a pussy, which again puts them right in the 'closeted' or 'unaware' gay category.

Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

but they both pursued women with NO interest in them


No, Moore is accused of pursuing teen girls, as young as 14, when he was in his 30s.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
AmigaClone

@Dominions Son

No pregnancy risk.


Isn't that where lawyers who go into poli-ticks come from? ;)

Crumbly Writer
Updated:

@Dominions Son

No, Moore is accused of pursuing teen girls, as young as 14, when he was in his 30s.

Understood, which makes him a pedophile (of teen girls only, at this point). But that's not the point I was making in calling them both creeps. The creepy thing was Moore's frequenting malls and schools trolling for teens, along with Trumps' 'grabbing 'em by their pussies'.

Dating a teen is bad enough (for a thirty-year of DA, who should have known the illegality of his actions), but his approach was just plain creepy to the max!

Replies:   Joe Long  Not_a_ID
Bondi Beach

@sejintenej

Given it was Australian the police officer had to be an immigrant not conversant with English street talk.


Based on my relatively limited time there, the term "buggery" is pretty well known in Australia. The term, at any rate, The practice, I can't speak to.

bb

AmigaClone

@BlacKnight


Yeah, and you can trick God into thinking you're still a virgin.


The I can think only one story what gives a reason given for anal besides "she likes it".

In 'A New Past' by Charlie Foxtrot, the initial excuse for anal sex is that the MC's girlfriend's grandmother would not pay for college and cut from her will any of her three (known) granddaughters who lost their virginity before marriage.

Granted, there might be stories where the male protagonist convinces his female sex partner to try out anal since he enjoys fucking and being fucked by guys as well.

Ernest Bywater

@Bondi Beach

Based on my relatively limited time there, the term "buggery" is pretty well known in Australia. The term, at any rate, The practice, I can't speak to.


The phrase 'to hurt like buggery' is a very old term to mean something that hurts a lot, but I sincerely doubt if more than about 1 in 50 of the people know what the word buggery actually means, but they'll be familiar with the phrase usage. Thus it's very likely someone will use the phrase to mean something would hurt without understanding what buggery is.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ross at Play

@sejintenej

Given it was Australian the police officer had to be an immigrant not conversant with English street talk.

You misunderstood. Mea culpa.
The police officer was conversant with street talk. Their comment was a statement, not a question, joking about the redundancy of someone saying buggery would 'hurt like buggery'. I should have transcribed the words as, "Did she really just say that!"

Ross at Play

@Bondi Beach

Based on my relatively limited time there, the term "buggery" is pretty well known in Australia.

Bugger me! I agree with you?

Dominions Son

@Ernest Bywater


The phrase 'to hurt like buggery' is a very old term to mean something that hurts a lot, but I sincerely doubt if more than about 1 in 50 of the people know what the word buggery actually means, but they'll be familiar with the phrase usage.


I know what buggery means and I have never in my life heard or seen the phrase "hurt like buggery" before this thread.

Joe Long

@Crumbly Writer

Dating a teen is bad enough (for a thirty-year of DA, who should have known the illegality of his actions), but his approach was just plain creepy to the max!


The age of consent was 16.

I don't doubt he had a thing for young girls, but the original article in the Washington Post gives me the impression that he very well knew that line but tried to go right up to it.

They interviewed four women. One was 17 and dated him for "two or three months" and reports he kissed her twice. Another was 16 or 17 and turned down a date. The third was 14 claims he told her "call me when you're 16." The fourth, who was 14, said she went to his place, they got down to underwear, and when she said she didn't want to anymore he took her home. "At some point" she told him she was 14. That may have been the point he stopped calling her.

I don't have a problem with guys still in college and living at home asking out high school girls (leaving it to the girls and their parents) but once you're 30 and have a career it's time to at least make sure they're out of high school.

I confess to looking at high school girls, and have seen that in some places the age of consent is still 16, but even I think it's creepy to ask out anyone still in high school.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

I know what buggery means and I have never in my life heard or seen the phrase "hurt like buggery" before this thread.


I've not heard anyone outside of Australia use it, but I've not done much travel outside of Australia either. It's also not one I've heard those under about 30 use either.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Ernest Bywater

@Joe Long

The age of consent was 16.


You may have to do some historical research on that, because some of those southern states had age of consent as low as 14 for much of the 20th century - but I'm not sure which ones or when they changed.

Replies:   Joe Long
Joe Long

@Ernest Bywater

You may have to do some historical research on that, because some of those southern states had age of consent as low as 14 for much of the 20th century - but I'm not sure which ones or when they changed.


The WaPo article said it was 16 in Alabama in 1979 and I didn't have reason to doubt. Most states these days are 18 to be with someone well over that age, but some are still 16.

It gets tricky, though. Back in the early 20th century and before any sex outside of marriage was technically illegal, although it generally wasn't enforced unless the young lady became pregnant and the guy wasn't being cooperative, so she or her father hauled him into court on charges of bastardy and fornication. On the other hand, sex within a marriage was legal at any age. So it was a matter of being able to marry.

In Pennsylvania until rather recently, anyone under 21 had to get their parent's permission to marry - but the bordering state of Maryland had no parental requirement. Folks in Pa merely needed to take a day train down south of the Mason-Dixon Line, get hitched, and be back by evening to give their parents the good news.

My mom was a 19 year old college student in 1958 when she found out she was pregnant, so they went to Virginia to get married. Grandma was 15 and Grandpa 30 in 1936. I'd have to look it up, but I think she got her parents to sign. They had 15 kids and were married til death did them part.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

I know what buggery means and I have never in my life heard or seen the phrase "hurt like buggery" before this thread.

The phrase buggers my ears!

I too, have never heard the expression. While I've known what buggery is since I was a wee lad, it's fallen out of use many, many decades ago (it's mostly a derogatory semi-legal term).

Crumbly Writer

@Ernest Bywater

I've not heard anyone outside of Australia use it, but I've not done much travel outside of Australia either. It's also not one I've heard those under about 30 use either.

I'm guessing it's cause Aussies get buggered so much? Hell, I lived in Manhattan and visited San Fran fairly often, and no one there has so much trouble they use the phrase.

Replies:   Capt. Zapp
Capt. Zapp

@Crumbly Writer

Hell, I lived in Manhattan and visited San Fran fairly often, and no one there has so much trouble they use the phrase.


Maybe they have acclimated to it. ;)

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Ross at Play
Updated:

@Dominions Son

I know what buggery means and I have never in my life heard or seen the phrase "hurt like buggery" before this thread.

It's an Australian thing, and British. 'Bugger' and related words are particular favourites among the uncouth working classes of my generation - almost as popular as 'bloody'!

The idiomatic uses we have for them include:

Exclamations
You bugger! = (insulting) You rascal/fiend!
Poor bugger! = (affectionate) You poor thing!
Bugger! = (more polite than) Fuck!
Bugger off! = Get lost!
Bugger me! = I'm very surprised!

Adjectives
bugger all = nothing/very little
it's buggered = it's broken
I'm buggered = I'm tired
I'm buggered if = I don't know/understand
it's a bugger = (frustrated) it's difficult
hurts like buggery = hurts a lot

Phrasal Verbs
to play silly buggers = to behave in a stupid and annoying way
to bugger up = to mess up a task
to bugger about = to waste time

Occasionally, we will even use it with the original meaning, as in:
he's a bugger = he's a poof

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

Most states these days are 18 to be with someone well over that age, but some are still 16.


You are mistaken. Most states have general age of consent at 16 only

Here's a map showing age of consent by state. https://www.ageofconsent.net/states

Only 11 states are as high as 18. Another 8 are 17 and the remaining 31 states and DC all have general unrestricted age of consent at 16.

Replies:   Joe Long
Crumbly Writer

@Capt. Zapp

Maybe they have acclimated to it.

Or maybe they enjoy it!

Crumbly Writer

@Ross at Play

It's an Australian thing, and British. 'Bugger' and related words are particular favourites among the uncouth working classes of my generation - almost as popular as 'bloody'!

I'm familiar with each buggered phrase you mention, but the single "hurt like a bugger", so I'm guessing the others are English while the one is strictly Australian. Guess we need to hear from some Scottish Sheep herders (or sheep lovers).

sejintenej

@awnlee jawking

For the few I tried reading the word "most" certainly didn't apply. Ergo, if you write stroke stories I will not be reading them

That's just gone whoosh over my miniscule brain. Please could you elucidate. Would you substitute 'all' for 'most', for example?


I was referring to the quoted phrase

Similarly, the problem with most stories with significant stroke content is that the women aren't fully fleshed out -


and suggesting that my experience has been that all .....

sejintenej

@Ross at Play

It's an Australian thing, and British. 'Bugger' and related words are particular favourites among the uncouth working classes of my generation - almost as popular as 'bloody'!

Whilst I recognise all the quotations from my long-ago youth the word seems to be being replaced in this area at least. We would often replace it by "fuck" as in fuck off you bastard or muck as in muck about or "Oh shit!" etc

Ross at Play

@sejintenej

the word (bugger) seems to be being replaced

With what, "Gay off!"

Replies:   sejintenej
Joe Long

@Dominions Son

You are mistaken. Most states have general age of consent at 16 only


Thanks for the correction. It's been awhile since I looked it up.

So folks are calling Moore a pedophile for asking out 16 and 17 year old girls when it's legal in 31 states today. It's still creepy, but I bet they didn't know that.

However, they have more than one way of getting you. That sight references the statutory rape and sexual assault laws to determine the 'age of consent'. Even though it's 16 in Pennsylvania, they can still hit you with a misdemeanor (up to 12 months in county jail) corrupting the morals of a minor for under 18. Additionally, there's a federal law forbidding the use of electronic devices to arrange sex with someone under 18 (primarily aimed at internet.)

So you have to hang out at the mall instead of Facebook to avoid federal prosecution.

Ross at Play
Updated:

@Joe Long

Thanks for the correction. It's been awhile since I looked it up.

There are quite a lot of states where it is not an offense to have sex with someone aged 14 provided the difference in ages is less than 4 years.

Check details at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States.
A quick check suggests that is so in Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wyoming. In Hawaii and Maine the age difference may be up to 5 years.

Replies:   Joe Long
sunkuwan

they should just implement the bro code article 113

Article 113 of the Bro Code: A Bro abides by the accepted age-difference formula when pursuing a younger chick. Acceptable age-difference formula: x ≥ y/2 + 7 x= chick's age y= Bro's age

awnlee jawking

@sunkuwan

Acceptable age-difference formula: x ≥ y/2 + 7 x= chick's age y= Bro's age


I believe that originated in China because it's been quoted to me many times by friends of Chinese ethnicity.

AJ

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Ross at Play

@sunkuwan

Acceptable age-difference formula: x ≥ y/2 + 7 x= chick's age y= Bro's age

What? Surely that should be x ≥ the lesser of (y/2 + 7) and (y - 4).

Replies:   sunkuwan
sunkuwan

@Ross at Play

it basically means,

If the girl is younger than you, than you take your age, divide it by two and add 7 years

20/2 +7 = 17
18/2 +7 = 16
16/2 +7 = 15

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@sunkuwan

it basically means, if the girl is younger than you, than you take your age, divide it by two and add 7 years

I got that, but it also means guys under 14 can only date chicks who are older than them. That can't be right!

Replies:   awnlee jawking  Joe Long
awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

I got that, but it also means guys under 14 can only date chicks who are older than them. That can't be right!


That is SO right!

Someone ought to write a story or even start a universe based on that premise ;)

AJ

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

There are quite a lot of states where it is not an offense to have sex with someone aged 14 provided the difference in ages is less than 4 years.


Yes, I understand, although the context of this discussion was guys 30 and older.

The 5 year grace period would cover 19 and 14, as in my story. I started dating at 19 and met my wife when I was 24. In between I pursued and/or dated, o was pursued by, women between the ages of 13 and 30. My wife is within a few months of my age, but the last one I dated before her was 7 years younger and had just graduated high school. Anywhere from -7 to +3 I just didn't care. They all looked the same.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Joe Long

@sunkuwan

Acceptable age-difference formula: x ≥ y/2 + 7 x= chick's age y= Bro's age


This current Roy Moore controversy was the first time I'd heard of the 'half plus seven' formula, although I'm fine with 'half plus four'

Replies:   AmigaClone  sunkuwan
Joe Long

@Ross at Play

I got that, but it also means guys under 14 can only date chicks who are older than them. That can't be right!


That's why they call those women 'teachers."

Crumbly Writer

@sejintenej

Whilst I recognise all the quotations from my long-ago youth the word seems to be being replaced in this area at least. We would often replace it by "fuck" as in fuck off you bastard or muck as in muck about or "Oh shit!" etc

That's called the 'Americanization' of both English and global communications, based largely on the influence of movies and English as the universal internet language.

Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

Acceptable age-difference formula: x ≥ y/2 + 7 x= chick's age y= Bro's age

I believe that originated in China because it's been quoted to me many times by friends of Chinese ethnicity.

It sounds more like an incest code (i.e. the age ranges brothers and sisters are allowed to get together). I don't consider most of the internet creeps being accused of sexual abuse as being my 'Bro'!

AmigaClone

@Joe Long


This current Roy Moore controversy was the first time I'd heard of the 'half plus seven' formula, although I'm fine with 'half plus four'


The first time I heard of the 'half plus seven' was here on SOL with a story titled Fifty Percent Plus Seven by Richard King

http://storiesonline.net/s/72699/50-plus-7

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@AmigaClone

The first time I heard of the 'half plus seven' was here on SOL with a story titled Fifty Percent Plus Seven by Richard King

I'm pretty sure the first time I heard this calculation mentioned was in 'Gentlemen Prefer Blondes' (1953 movie) with Jane Russell and Marilyn Monroe.

sunkuwan

@Joe Long

This current Roy Moore controversy was the first time I'd heard of the 'half plus seven' formula, although I'm fine with 'half plus four'


half plus four is a little too much pedo for real life.

22m would be 15f
20m would be 14f
18m would be 13f
16m would be 12f

And let's not start with 14m and lower....
Half plus 7 is good because it bottoms out at 14m14f

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

So folks are calling Moore a pedophile for asking out 16 and 17 year old girls when it's legal in 31 states today. It's still creepy, but I bet they didn't know that.


No, one of his accusers was only 14 at the time. And allegedly, he had her stripped down to bra and panties and was groping her before he came to his senses and let her go.

Replies:   Joe Long
Dominions Son

@Joe Long

So folks are calling Moore a pedophile for asking out 16 and 17 year old girls when it's legal in 31 states today.


The general public doesn't understand what the word pedophile means anyway. The technical psychiatric definition is a sexual attraction to prepubescent children (so generally, 9 and younger).

There is a separate term for an attraction to teens, but I don't know what it is.

Joe Long

@Dominions Son

No, one of his accusers was only 14 at the time. And allegedly, he had her stripped down to bra and panties and was groping her before he came to his senses and let her go.


Allegedly, and that is the most troubling as it would be illegal.

However, in addition to that, people are also calling him a pedophile for asking out girls who worked at the mall. They're conflating.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ross at Play

@Joe Long

The 5 year grace period would cover 19 and 14, as in my story.

I was thinking it might be helpful for your story. If you're prepared to adjust the ages to get the age difference below 4 years you could find a suitable state in most regions of the country.

Replies:   Joe Long
Geek of Ages
Updated:

@Dominions Son

Technically speaking, pedophilia is attraction to prepubescent people; hebephilia is attraction to pubescent people; ephebophilia is attraction to post pubescent pre-adults.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronophilia has more, if the sources are at all accurate.

Practically speaking, "pedophilia" to most people means attraction to pre-adults.

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

They're conflating.


Yes, they are.

Ernest Bywater

As someone else said before, the timing on the allegation against Roy Moore is of a concern, because he's been in the public eye for decades, yet only now is anything being said. I did see a report about most of the allegation are from when he was in public offices he was elected to as a Democrat, but I'm not sure on the timing of things, because I've not read all the reports or checked into it enough.

It's also interesting he's now standing as a Republican after decades as a Democrat.

Dominions Son

@Ernest Bywater

As someone else said before, the timing on the allegation against Roy Moore is of a concern, because he's been in the public eye for decades, yet only now is anything being said. I did see a report about most of the allegation are from when he was in public offices he was elected to as a Democrat, but I'm not sure on the timing of things, because I've not read all the reports or checked into it enough.


You are off on the timing. At the time he was supposedly dating teenagers as young as 14, he was and ADA (Assistant District Attorney). While the DA is elected, ADAs are not. It's a civil service position.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

You are off on the timing. At the time he was supposedly dating teenagers as young as 14, he was and ADA (Assistant District Attorney). While the DA is elected, ADAs are not. It's a civil service position.


Was that before or after he was a judge?

However, it is odd it's taken right up to the last minute before an important election for these allegation to get public notice. The timing of them is damn suspicious as to the motivation behind them. Mind you, that doesn't affect the validity or not of the allegation, just seems odd timing.

robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

It's also interesting he's now standing as a Republican after decades as a Democrat.

Maybe it's the chosen atonement for his sins.

Replies:   Bondi Beach
Joe Long

@Ross at Play

I was thinking it might be helpful for your story. If you're prepared to adjust the ages to get the age difference below 4 years you could find a suitable state in most regions of the country.


That character was inspired by a girl I knew who was 13 when I was 19. Real life didn't as far as fiction. In the book I made her 14 to get her into 9th grade and the high school. Having her be that young is important to the resolution of the story.

Replies:   Ross at Play
helmut_meukel

@Joe Long

It gets even more complicated for marriages.

If one partner (usually the girl) is under 16, they now have a problem when going to Germany. On arrival the underage wife will be taken in custody by the social wellfare office and the husband arrested for sex with a minor. Their marriage is null and void according to a new german law.

HM.

Ernest Bywater

On the age of consent issue there are two ages:

1. Age of consent to engage in sexual activity,

2. Age of consent to get married.

They are rarely the same, although many jurisdictions to allow variations with with judicial or parental approval.

Joe Long

@Ernest Bywater

Was that before or after he was a judge?


From what I recall reading, Moore's ADA position was his first job.

He went to West Point, served in Vietnam, then went to law school which led to the position in the county prosecutor's office. While there he led some high profile corruption cases against politicians higher than him.

He then left the DA's office, learned kick boxing in a year at age 35, and went to ranch in the Outback of Australia. After a year he was back in Alabama, went into private law practice, and at age 38 married a 24 year old woman who is still his wife 33 years later.

In the early 1990's he became a Republican and was elected a county judge. In 2001 (or so) he was elected to the state Supreme Court, from which he was later removed over refusing to take down a statue of the Ten Commandments. In 2012 he was again elected to the state Supreme Court, and was again removed a few years later for telling a county official it wasn't required to issue same-sex marriage licenses, despite what the US Supreme Court said. Now he's won the primary for US Senator.

This is the third time he's running for statewide office in the last 15 years, and he's been making political enemies for 35 years. Yet this is the first time these allegations came up publicly.

I think he likes teen girls. I don't think he's a sexual abuser. Neither of those are absolute positions, depending on further evidence. The original WaPo piece quoted a then 17 year old as saying that she dated Moore for 2 or 3 months and he kissed her twice. In the same piece a then 14 year old said they got down to their underwear at his place and when she said "stop" he took her home. She said she told Moore how old she was "at some point." It may not have been before the alleged incident.

Even if you believe he got undressed with the girl, neither of those sounds like the later accuser who said when in a car, after having just met, he forced her face into his groin.

I'm giving more credence to the earlier reporting. As it goes on, the stories are less credible or of no circumstance ("I was working at the mall and he asked me out")

Replies:   Dominions Son  Not_a_ID
robberhands

@helmut_meukel

Their marriage is null and void according to a new german law.

Which new law? A legal marriage contracted in a foreign country is legal in Germany as well. Germany can't nullify a legally contracted marriage from another country.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
Ross at Play

@Joe Long

In the book I made her 14 to get her into 9th grade and the high school. Having her be that young is important to the resolution of the story.

I'm just brainstorming here - it is your story - but how important is it for the age difference to more than 4 years?
I cannot see what difference it would make to your story if he started college in the same year as she started high school. That would allow, depending on the state you chose (with many suitable options), for your story to have parents checking the law after their relationship starts and becoming terrified by the significance of her birthday being a bit before his.

Dominions Son

@Ernest Bywater

Was that before or after he was a judge?


Before.

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

She said she told Moore how old she was "at some point." It may not have been before the alleged incident.


Assuming for the sake of argument the accusation is true, even if she lied to him and told him at the time that she was older, it wouln't matter for a criminal prosecution.

The way most states statutory rape laws are written, even deliberate fraud about age by the minor wouldn't be a valid defense against a statutory rape charge.

It's stupid in my opinion, but that's the way the law is. As a wise man once said, "The law is an ass."

What's protecting Moore from a criminal prosecution over that particular accusation is that it is well past the statute of limitations.

Replies:   Joe Long  awnlee jawking
Bondi Beach

@robberhands

It's also interesting he's now standing as a Republican after decades as a Democrat.
Maybe it's the chosen atonement for his sins.


No, it was to continue sinning.

If you refer to the position of most politicians elected as Democrats in the South, there wasn't any difficulty in switching parties. When LBJ pointed out that civil rights legislation would lose the South to the Democrats "for a generation," he may have been optimistic.

The Republicans have been quite clear in transmitting their support for anti-black policies since then. What was a dog whistle is now a squad of trumpets backed up by seventy-six trombones.

So moving from Democrat to Republican after LBJ was no great jump for any Southern politician.

bb

Ross at Play

@helmut_meukel

Their marriage is null and void according to a new german law.

FYI. You'd have the right to feel insulted if I wrote that sentence without a capital for 'German'.

The relevant rule is that a capital is still required when a word is not being used as a noun, but is directly referring to a proper noun.

Some examples ...

Swiss cheese means cheese made in Switzerland: the word Swiss needs a capital because it refers to the proper noun Switzerland.
In contrast, swiss cheese, a type of cheese with holes in it, has a lowercase because the reference is indirect. The word swiss is referring to a style of cheese which was derived from a proper noun.

Similarly with french toast, but Waldorf salad and Napoleon brandy require capitals because the directly refer to a hotel and a person.

Note that some words have lost their direct connection when they were misused by many over time. Examples include xerox, hoover, and radar, which at one time would have required capitals, but it's generally accepted these may now be written with a lowercase.

A somewhat contentious issue arises when people being using a trademarked name as a verb, for example to google something. The company which owns the trademark for 'Google' works hard telling others that the word, and all words derived from it, must have a capital. They are frightened the value of their trademark may be eroded if it ends up going the same way the Xerox and Hoover trademarks went.

Dictionaries and style guides do not agree. They consider the rules of grammar rather than the value of others' property. They maintain that a capital is required whenever 'Google' is used as a noun, and also as an adjective as in 'a Google search'. However, they (well, CMOS and the Oxford Dictionary, at least) maintain that lowercase should be used for the verb 'to google'. I presume their rationale is that the trademark is no longer being used when a verb is created from a (proper) noun but will then be frequently modified with '-s', '-ed', and '-ing' endings.

I hope you find this informative - that is my intention - and you don't feel like I'm picking on you. :-)

Replies:   helmut_meukel
helmut_meukel

@robberhands

became effective 22.July 2017
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinderheirat#Deutschland

HM.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands
Updated:

@helmut_meukel

That just means, you can't marry a German citizen younger than sixteen in Germany. A marriage legally contracted under another country's law is still legal in Germany, too, and a German court can't void it. They didn't change Art. 13 EGBGB, the relevant norm for foreign marriages.

ETA: For everyone's reading pleasure:

Art. 13
Marriage

(1) The conditions for the conclusion of marriage are, as regards each person engaged to be married, governed by the law of the country of which he or she is a national.

(2) If under this law, a requirement is not fulfilled, German law shall apply to that extent, if:

1. the habitual residence of one of the persons engaged to be married is within the country or one of them is a German national;

2. the persons engaged to be married have taken reasonable steps to fulfill the requirement; and

3. it is incompatible with the freedom of marriage to refuse the conclusion of the marriage; in particular, the previous marriage of a person engaged to be married shall not be held against him or her if it is nullified by a decision issued or recognized here or the spouse of the person engaged to be married has been declared dead.

(3) A marriage within the country may only be celebrated subject to the form provided for here. A marriage between two persons engaged to be married, neither of whom is a German national, may however be celebrated before a person properly authorized by the government of the country of which one of the persons engaged to be married is a national, according to the formalities prescribed by the law of that country; a certified copy of the registration of the marriage in the Register of Births, Deaths and Marriages, kept by the person properly authorized therefore, furnishes conclusive evidence of the marriage celebrated in that manner.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

no picking feeled. :-)

HM.

Replies:   Ross at Play
helmut_meukel

@robberhands

No, you can't marry anyone younger than 18 in Germany.
These changes in German law were made to go against the many existing child marriages between refugees.

No german court is needed to void these marriages. For marriages above 16 but below 18 there is a court order necessary to void it.

Diese Regelungen gelten auch für Ehen, die im Ausland geschlossen wurden.


As far as I understand their logic, the foreign marriage still exists – outside of Germany – but in Germany it's treated as non-existing. "If you don't like it, don't come to Germany, go elsewhere!"

HM.

Replies:   robberhands  Joe Long
Ross at Play

@helmut_meukel

no picking feeled. :-)

Did your smiley face actually mean [sic]?

Replies:   helmut_meukel
helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

I meant to express that even if it would have been intended as picking, I appreciate the information.

Your question made it clear that using smileys can also cause misunderstandings.

HM.

Replies:   Ross at Play
robberhands
Updated:

@helmut_meukel

No. A German citizen can still legally marry at 16 but he/she will need a special permission to do so.

Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB)

§ 1303 Ehemündigkeit

Eine Ehe darf nicht vor Eintritt der Volljährigkeit eingegangen werden. Mit einer Person, die das 16. Lebensjahr nicht vollendet hat, kann eine Ehe nicht wirksam eingegangen werden.

The bold text means nothing else than there are exeptions from the general requisite to be eighteen. That aside, Art. 13, 1 par. EGBGB didnt change and its the only relevant norm for legal foreign marriages.

Diese Regelungen gelten auch für Ehen, die im Ausland geschlossen wurden.

And this means, as a German national you can't legally marry - no matter where - without being eighteen or a special permission.

Ross at Play

@helmut_meukel

Your question made it clear that using smileys can also cause misunderstandings.

Not really. I wanted to be certain I had not misunderstood before this very pedantic picking on you. :-)

Re your:

no picking feeled. :-)


FYI, never 'feeled', always 'felt'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_irregular_verbs

Replies:   helmut_meukel
Joe Long

@Dominions Son

Assuming for the sake of argument the accusation is true, even if she lied to him and told him at the time that she was older, it wouln't matter for a criminal prosecution.


That is true.

As I said, I believe Moore was attracted to teen girls, knew the age of consent was 16, and skirted right up to it. However, many 14's can look 16 and you'd be relying on their word to keep yourself out of jail. Risky business.

Joe Long

@helmut_meukel

No, you can't marry anyone younger than 18 in Germany.


In California, it's illegal for anyone under 18 to have sex. Period. No Romeo & Juliet exceptions for being close in age.

Millions do it anyway.

Replies:   Wheezer  sharkjcw
helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

FYI, never 'feeled', always 'felt'.

Oops, it 'feeled' right to me, so I didn't look it up.

Languages are messy. I'll never understand why two irregular verbs like feel and kneel aren't treated the same.
feel, felt, felt
kneel, knelt, knelt; but also kneel, kneeled, kneeled.

Same problem in German, there is a tendency towards usage of irregular verbs as regular verbs.

HM.

awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

The way most states statutory rape laws are written, even deliberate fraud about age by the minor wouldn't be a valid defense against a statutory rape charge.


In a recent UK case, a judge accepted a man's claim that the 12yo he had sex with looked a lot older. But then our judiciary is of very low quality :(

AJ

Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

In a recent UK case, a judge accepted


In the US, it has nothing to do with the quality of the judges.

The law is explicitly written as a strict liability offense. It's irrelevant whether or not the defendant intended to have sex with someone under age or whether or not the defendant knew their partner was under age.

Yeah, the case you mentioned with the 12 year old is kind of extreme to be claiming a mistake of age.

But what about a 15 year old? Or 15 years 11 months? 15 years, 11 months, and 29days?

Under US law, you are expected to be able to tell the difference by sight between someone legal and someone one day shy of the birthday that would make them legal. And if you make a mistake, too bad.

Centaur

@Dominions Son

But what about a 15 year old? Or 15 years 11 months? 15 years, 11 months, and 29days?

means you have to ask to ID and go by the don't open until date.

Replies:   Dominions Son  Joe Long
Dominions Son

@Centaur

means you have to ask to ID and go by the don't open until date.


Evan if she has a quality fake ID, that won't matter under US law.

Replies:   Centaur
Centaur

@Dominions Son

don't open until date.


i think you missed the humor :)

Joe Long

@Centaur

means you have to ask to ID and go by the don't open until date.


and get a signed consent form

Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

Under US law, you are expected to be able to tell the difference by sight between someone legal and someone one day shy of the birthday that would make them legal.

That's not a problem in Australia. Someone there can apply for a photo-ID, a drivers learning permit, on the same day they reach the age of consent, their 16th birthday.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

That's not a problem in Australia. Someone there can apply for a photo-ID, a drivers learning permit, on the same day they reach the age of consent, their 16th birthday.


The problem with the US law, is that if a 15 year old shows you a fake ID, good enough to fool a cop, that says she is 18, that's still no defense against a statutory rape charge.

robberhands

@awnlee jawking

In a recent UK case, a judge accepted a man's claim that the 12yo he had sex with looked a lot older. But then our judiciary is of very low quality :(

In my opinion, the felony 'rape' shouldn't be treated the same as a traffic accident, i.e. a crime of negligence. Therefore the intent to have sex with an underage is required and the defense "I didn't and couldn't know" is allowed. Whether the allegation is true is a matter of the state of the evidence.

I'd be careful with judging from the distance without to truly know the specific circumstances of a trial. A look at the fashion runways and the twelve-year-old models walking on them tells me it can be difficult to guess a girls age.

Replies:   Joe Long
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

The problem with the US law

There appears to be a 'one of the innumerable' missing from that statement. :-)

Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son


The problem with the US law, is that if a 15 year old shows you a fake ID, good enough to fool a cop, that says she is 18, that's still no defense against a statutory rape charge.


Which makes it impossible to defend against anyone using deception. If you pick up someone in a bar drinking alcohol that should be reasonable grounds of legal age, due to them having to show ID to the barman, but they could be a mature looking 15 y/o with fake ID and you're stuffed.

Replies:   sejintenej
robberhands

@Dominions Son

The problem with the US law, is that if a 15 year old shows you a fake ID, good enough to fool a cop, that says she is 18, that's still no defense against a statutory rape charge.

I've read, in some states, the courts accept the defense pleading a 'mistake as to the wrongful nature of the act' in cases of statutory rape.

Joe Long

@robberhands

A look at the fashion runways and the twelve-year-old models walking on them tells me it can be difficult to guess a girls age.


I reckon 12 is an exception but by 14 or 15 it's tough to tell

Ross at Play

@Joe Long

by 14 or 15 it's tough to tell

... and there are no double-D cup sizes on fashion runways to guide you either.

robberhands

@Joe Long

I reckon 12 is an exception but by 14 or 15 it's tough to tell.

Given that the age of consent is fourteen in Germany, do you think it would be easy to make such a distinction depending on visual clues? Luckily German laws don't treat sexual crimes as a negligence offense, so the intention to engage a minor is a necessity for a criminal conviction.

awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

The law is explicitly written as a strict liability offense.


I believe it's the same in the UK - 13 and under and it's statutory rape.

The law and what UK judges dispense are only distantly related :(

AJ

Wheezer

@Joe Long

In California, it's illegal for anyone under 18 to have sex. Period. No Romeo & Juliet exceptions for being close in age.

Illegal for unmarried teens/preteens, that is. California is one of a number of states that allow marriage at almost any age with parental permission and the approval of a judge. There is actually no minimum age. Yes, that means it is legal to marry a 9 year old if you can get her custodial parent(s) and a judge to go along with it. Then it's legal to fuck her bowlegged as the consent laws all have exemptions for married couples.

sharkjcw

@Joe Long

California
The age of consent is eighteen. With parental consent, there are no age limits regarding the minimum age for a couple to marry. (Other statutory laws apply.) California offers some spousal rights for registered same-sex domestic partners. this if from findlaw website

sejintenej

@Ross at Play

the word (bugger) seems to be being replaced

With what, "Gay off!"


R T F P

Read the Fucking Post (and fuck off ;-) )

sejintenej

@Ernest Bywater

If you pick up someone in a bar drinking alcohol that should be reasonable grounds of legal age, due to them having to show ID to the barman, but they could be a mature looking 15 y/o with fake ID and you're stuffed.

Depends on circumstances. There was a case ,many years ago of a 14 year old obtaining a driving licence from her state and using it as evidence of age before shooting porn.
They considered a rape type charge against the film makers but I understand that it was dropped because the state itself had acted on false information, perhaps forged information

Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

There is a separate term for an attraction to teens, but I don't know what it is.

"Men", or more specifically, "middle-aged men".

Crumbly Writer

@Ernest Bywater

However, it is odd it's taken right up to the last minute before an important election for these allegation to get public notice. The timing of them is damn suspicious as to the motivation behind them. Mind you, that doesn't affect the validity or not of the allegation, just seems odd timing.

It was a newspaper, The Washington Post, I believe, who launched an investigation into old rumors about him, and they documented each instance with substantial back-up so it's wouldn't boil down to "he said"/"she said". It looks like a solid piece of investigation concerning something that was swept under the rug for decades.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@Crumbly Writer

It was a newspaper, The Washington Post, I believe, who launched an investigation into old rumors about him, and they documented each instance with substantial back-up so it's wouldn't boil down to "he said"/"she said". It looks like a solid piece of investigation concerning something that was swept under the rug for decades.


CW, the events are claimed to have happened years ago. Now, I've not seen everything on this, but nothing I've seen even hint at any actual claims being made or an investigation all those years ago. If there was they were either proven or dis-proven. Because the Washington Post isn't mentioning any charges, I'd say there were no claims or charges back then. So that brings up the possibility of the claims being made now, and regardless of who the reporters spoke to, and how credible the claimants are, you have to wonder why they're saying something now, and not months or years ago.

It's possible Moore did what they claim, but why hasn't anything been done or said about it until right now. The timing is just too perfect to disrupt his campaign for anyone to not be suspicious of it.

Dominions Son

@Ernest Bywater

It's possible Moore did what they claim, but why hasn't anything been done or said about it until right now.


Yes, the timing is a bit suspicious.

However:
This all happened well before the internet, and even if it was talked about, at the time, it wouldn't have gotten national coverage. And given when it happened, you'd probably have to go through the local paper's off-line archives to find any coverage it may or may not have received at the time.

As for doing anything about it, they only accusation that would have warranted a criminal investigation back then was the one who claimed to have been 14 at the time. However, it would have been the local DA that would handle any prosecution, and he worked in the DA's office as an ADA.

Until now, the highest elected office he has campaigned for is State Supreme Court. This is his first time running for Federal Office (US Senate).

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ross at Play

@Ernest Bywater

The timing is just too perfect to disrupt his campaign for anyone to not be suspicious of it.

I see nothing suspicious in the timing. As DS noted:

Until now, the highest elected office he has campaigned for is State Supreme Court. This is his first time running for Federal Office (US Senate).

It is entirely understandable that a highly respected national newspaper like the Washington Post - which, BTW, is renowned for its general bias towards conservative causes - could not justify the effort required for a detailed investigation of rumours about him as long as he was only running for statewide offices, but that changed once he became a candidate for the US Senate.
Your professed suspicions of the Washington Post's integrity seem unfathomable to me. You regularly relay comments here on political topics - as if they were facts - from much less trustworthy sources.
I am confident that before running the story, the senior editors at the Post would have insisted their journalists collected a substantial body of corroborating evidence from various independent sources. Do you think Bob Woodward, who still works there as an associate editor, would remain silent if his newspaper was publishing a story on such a contentious issue if it didn't have evidence to substantiate its claims?
As to the likelihood he never committed a criminal offense, so what? If the Post's report has any credibility at all he is at best an opportunistic, amoral sleazebag, seeking to exploit the immaturity of young women up to the greatest extent the law does not prohibit. If the Post was aware of such serious allegations, once he stood as a candidate for such a high office, is it not duty-bound as a responsible newspaper to seek to validate those claims, and then make voters aware of the evidence regarding his truly despicable character - before they have the opportunity to elect him?

Replies:   Joe Long
Joe Long

@Ross at Play

Washington Post - which, BTW, is renowned for its general bias towards conservative causes - could not justify the effort required for a detailed investigation of rumours about him as long as he was only running for statewide offices, but that changed once he became a candidate for the US Senate.


The Post is DC's liberal rag.

This is the first time Moore has sought federal office, but the third time he's run in a state-wide election.

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

This is the first time Moore has sought federal office, but the third time he's run in a state-wide election.


State judicial elections, which usually don't get national news coverage.

Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

Until now, the highest elected office he has campaigned for is State Supreme Court. This is his first time running for Federal Office (US Senate).


So you're saying the Washington Post knew about the claims for years, and have only just decided to look into them because he's running for the Senate?

I've no doubt the Washington Post have done their due diligence in seeking out the people to talk to and getting what they had to say put in the paper the way they said it. I can't comment on the validity, or otherwise, of the claims. What I'm suspicious of is the timing of who brought this to the attention of the Washington Post at this time - was it the claimant who contacted them or was it someone else for another reason.

Replies:   robberhands
Ross at Play
Updated:

@Joe Long

The Post is DC's liberal rag.

Hmm. After a few minutes research I've concluded it probably is. I trust you'll understand that a foreigner who mostly reads the NY Times, because print versions are available in SE Asia, could gain the impression that the Post was considered the conservative alternative.

Replies:   PotomacBob
robberhands
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater

You think 'it's also interesting he's now standing as a Republican after decades as a Democrat' and you are 'suspicious of the timing of who brought this to the attention of the Washington Post at this time'. If you believe in a democratic conspiracy to influence the election, why not just say so? Your insinuations weren't very subtle, anyway.

I have no interest in US party policies and would think the validity of the accusations is more important. As a voter I'd prefer to know it before, rather than to hear about it after the election.

Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

If you believe in a democratic conspiracy to influence the election, why not just say so?


I don't have enough information to claim any party conspiracy. I just think the timing is very suspicious. It could be an individual, or it could even be the main claimant acting because he wouldn't pay shut-up money. There's not enough facts out there to say who did what or why, but there is enough information to be concerned about the timing of it all.

Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

As a voter I'd prefer to know it before, rather than to hear about it after the election.


In this situation, if I was voting in that election, I'd want the whole thing mentioned and answered before the election took place, even if that meant delaying the election until after it's resolved. Way too often we see these sort of claims, against people from many parties, being made at the 11 th hour when there's no time to have them resolve before the election. Many times they're found to have influenced voters, and then later found out to me not worth having mentioned in the first place.

robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

Let's just assume it is an accusation brought forth by Democrats at precisely this time to influence the outcome of the election and they have known of this for decades; would that change your vote if the accusation proves to be valid?

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ross at Play

@Ernest Bywater

There's not enough facts out there to say who did what or why

THAT IS A COMPLETE LOAD OF CRAP!

Mitch McConnell, the Republican Majority Leader in the Senate, thinks he knows enough of the facts and this is what he had to say about Moore:

"He's obviously not fit to be in the United States Senate ... And we've looked at all the options to try to prevent that from happening."
- USA Today, Nov. 14, 2017

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/11/14/mcconnell-says-roy-moore-not-fit-serve-senate-wont-rule-out-expulsion-option/863619001/

Replies:   Capt. Zapp  Joe Long
JohnBobMead

@Ernest Bywater

I just think the timing is very suspicious.


If it were occcuring on it's own, without all the others coming forward concerning people with power and sexual predation, one might find the timing obviously political, yes.

But it's not happening in a vacumm.

It's just one of many revelations of sexual predation that are occuring at this time.

In Moore's defense, I don't get the impression that he was using his political position at the time to coerce the women he approached. And as has already been discussed, except for the 14-year-old, all the women he approached were of legal age; in that case, the question is did he stop at the time he found out she was 14, or did he persist for a while afterwards? If he stopped as soon as he found out her age, cool.

I have to admit that in this particular case I'm of split opinion. Personally, I don't want him in office. But that has to do with his previous actions in office. The age differential between Moore and those he was seeking out to hopefully get involved with doesn't really bother me thst much, since they were of legal age. This does presume that once they informed him they weren't interested in him, he left them alone.

If he persisted after being told they weren't interested, that's a problem. If he was actually banned from certain shopping malls because of how he was going about approaching the women involved, that's a problem.

But the age differential?

While society frowns on it, it's legal. If it's legal, it's not grounds for disqualifying him from office. And it's the age differential that seems to be getting a lot of people upset.

And a lot of people on social media are slinging around terms that clearly aren't acccurate. He's not a pedophile; while he focused on young women, he focused on physically mature young women, which would make a true pedophile throw up.

Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

Let's just assume it is an accusation brought forth by Democrats at precisely this time to influence the outcome of the election and they have known of this for decades; would that change your vote if the accusation proves to be valid?


It would show that neither party candidate is worth voting for. A lot will depend on what actually took place, and when, and why nothing was said or done before now. However, if a 3rd party had known about it for years, and not doing something until now makes the actions of the 3rd party worse, because their previous failure to act shows they condoned it, and now they can get some mileage from it it's suddenly wrong - which makes them a huge hypocrite. and worse than Moore.

Ross at Play
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater

You are going on and on about how "suspicious" the timing of revelations about his past are. It NOT SUSPICIOUS. It's ABSOLUTELY ROUTINE!
EVERY TIME someone stands as a candidate for a much higher office than they've ever sought before, the opposing party will look into their past for whatever skeletons they can find, as it should be. This time there were some so egregious that senior members do not want to have anything to do with him.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater  Joe Long
robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

It would show that neither party candidate is worth voting for.

To discredit your opponent is a time honored method to win elections. If it generally bothers you that much, who do you vote for?

Replies:   Ernest Bywater  madnige
Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

To discredit your opponent is a time honored method to win elections. If it generally bothers you that much, who do you vote for?


depends on the election, but it's usually independents. I go by voting agin people.

Replies:   robberhands
Ernest Bywater

@Ross at Play

You are going on and on about how "suspicious" the timing of revelations about his past are. It NOT SUSPICIOUS. It's ABSOLUTELY ROUTINE!


It suspicious because the reports indicate people have known about them for years, but only NOW is it a problem to be made public. And if you can't see that's an issue, I can suggest a good eye doctor for you.

robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

I go by voting agin people.

'Agin' as in 'the whole world seemed agin him'?

robberhands

@robberhands

It suspicious because the reports indicate people have known about them for years, but only NOW is it a problem to be made public.

For this part I'd agree with JohnBobMead. As long as he didn't cross legal bounderies why would anyone care about his habbit to chase young girls? When he applies for a high official position, the rules change. I would assume he's either too careless or, which is worse, too stupid to be elected for the office.

Capt. Zapp

@Ross at Play

"He's obviously not fit to be in the United States Senate ... And we've looked at all the options to try to prevent that from happening."


As far as I am concerned, that comment could have been made about most politicians, including the ones already elected.

richardshagrin

We get the best government the country can afford. Office seekers spend millions to get jobs that pay thousands. Are you surprised the people and organizations with the millions influence the office seekers? Or that the office seekers may have flaws?

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@richardshagrin

We get the best government the country can afford.


LSHIAPOFLO (Laughing so hard I almost passed out from lack of oxygen)

Any suggestion that we can afford the government we currently have is absurd. Go look up the National Debt some time. (this is not the current budget deficit, but the accumulation of rolled over debt from past budget deficits).

Replies:   sunkuwan  Ross at Play
sunkuwan

@Dominions Son

Just simmer down 80% of the military spending and come to a level with the rest of the world.

Ross at Play

@Ernest Bywater

It suspicious because the reports indicate people have known about them for years, but only NOW is it a problem to be made public. And if you can't see that's an issue, I can suggest a good eye doctor for you.

You suggest others decided to keep these facts hidden for many years.
Have you ever heard of libel laws? They make it far to risky for anyone to publish such details without an extensive investigation sufficient to defend whatever claims are made in the courts. How many organisations in Alabama have the skills and resources to do that? How many would risk pissing off their readers in a very "red state" by doing so? Who could justify the risks just to take down a lowly state official?
However, once he was standing for election to the US Senate it became an issue of national importance, one that a national newspaper was willing to take the associated risks, and had the skills and resources to do the job properly.
Not for the first time, you've become too tiresome to be bothered with. For my sake, I'm going to resist any temptation to respond to anything you post for about a week, and I'll hope for the best after that.

Dominions Son

@sunkuwan

Just simmer down 80% of the military spending and come to a level with the rest of the world.


Which still wouldn't be affordable.

Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

Go look up the National Debt some time.

The relevant figure is the debt-to-GDP ratio.
http://learn.stashinvest.com/10-countries-with-largest-national-debt-to-gdp
America's ratio is not at dangerous levels - yet - but it will get there very quickly if the majority party in Congress gets their act together sufficiently to pass some laws they're currently debating.
The national debt the entire world should be terrified of is not America's, it's Japan's! Their ratio is 220% is already way beyond unsustainable levels - and the trends are all awful. They have a demographic nightmare too, the ratio the working-age to elderly will be very much below that of every other country in the world by mid-century, and the roller-coaster is only just beginning to pick up speed.
It may be some time before the Japanese government is forced to admit they are bankrupt. As I recall, the ratio for Greece was only about 140% at the time international lenders pulled the plug on it. The result of the "medicine" inflicted by the IMF, etc. has been a fall in their real GDP of over 20%. Japan's predicament could go on being ignored for some time. Unlike Greece, their debt is overwhelmingly held by local banks and individuals' retirement savings.
It's all very much like the fable of The Emperor's New Clothes - but it can't go on forever. When the reality is eventually acknowledged, the aftermath will make Lehman Brothers will look like a limited-scale training exercise.

Replies:   sunkuwan  Dominions Son
Ross at Play
Updated:

@sunkuwan

Just simmer down 80% of the military spending and come to a level with the rest of the world.

US Defense spending is not enough to make a significant difference, even if cut to a level with the rest of the world.

Comparative graph

What they need to go after is health spending. Obamacare did not go anywhere near far enough. They need something similar to Britain's NHS or Australia's Medicare. The population would be much healthier too. The life expectancy of US compared to other industrialised countries is a disgrace, even though they're spending about twice as much per person.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

Mitch McConnell, the Republican Majority Leader in the Senate, thinks he knows enough of the facts and this is what he had to say about Moore:


Mitch McConnell, despite being of the same party as Moore, is not an unbiased source. In the primary Moore defeated the candidate that McConnell funneled millions of dollars in support of, and Moore has stated his intention to help unseat McConnell as Majority Leader.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

EVERY TIME someone stands as a candidate for a much higher office than they've ever sought before, the opposing party will look into their past for whatever skeletons they can find, as it should be. This time there were some so egregious that senior members do not want to have anything to do with him.


I agree, and that's why people have asked about the timing of these accusations. Moore has been a polarizing politician running in state wide elections for over fifteen years, and this is the first time this subject has come up. The difference now is that DC politicians are affected by the outcome.

Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

'Agin' as in 'the whole world seemed agin him'?


ayep - when i was writing that response I remembered the scene from the movie Sergeant York where they were drinking and couldn't think of who to drink to, so one of them suggests drinking a toast 'agin' something; as in against something.

sunkuwan

@Ross at Play

Japan is a special case. Most of their debt is to their own population and not to international banks.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

America's ratio is not at dangerous levels - yet


Just because a few others (the US is 8th on the list you cited) are even worse off, doesn't mean our debt to GDP isn't already dangerous.

Dominions Son
Updated:

@Ross at Play


US Defense spending is not enough to make a significant difference, even if cut to a level with the rest of the world.


As a second perspective to support the above, While US defense spending is the bulk of the discretionary budget, once you add in non-discretionary spending (such as Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, and Medicaid, interest payments on the long term national debt), the US military budget shrinks to just 16% of federal expenditures.

Edited to add source. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/

Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

The life expectancy of US compared to other industrialised countries is a disgrace, even though they're spending about twice as much per person.


This is not accurate. Once violent deaths (murder, suicide, auto accidents) which impact overall live expectancy, but have no relationship to the quality of our health care system, then US life expectancy jumps to the top of the list.

Replies:   Ross at Play  Wheezer
Ross at Play

@sunkuwan

Japan is a special case. Most of their debt is to their own population and not to international banks.

Yes, and I gave the fact its debt was "overwhelmingly held by local(s)" as the reason nobody dares mention the "Emperor's new clothes". Japan is a special in that they could continue deluding themselves for quite some time: because there are no external pressures forcing them to accept the reality of their situation.
The governments keeps on trying to spend enough to get growth restarted, but their falling and rapidly aging population is making sustained growth virtually impossible.
One crucial factor affecting long-term growth rates is productivity. That fluctuates wildly during economic cycles, it plummets during recessions and rebounds during recoveries, but for advanced economies the upper limit over periods of a decade or more is about 2%.
For example, growth rates in the US during the latter decades of last century were remarkably consistent. The decade-on-decade averages from 1960-2000 were all close to 3.5%, consisting of 1% population growth, 0.5% participation rates, and 2% productivity growth.
The positive trend from participation rates was the result of an increasing share of women in the workforce, enough to overcome small increases in the share of over-65s and slight reductions in hours worked. The increasing share of women in the workforce finally plateaud about the year 2000. For the first half of this century you can anticipate participation rates to "contribute" about minus, instead of plus, half a percent, driven by the growth in the number of retirees. You may anticipate the long-term growth rates in the US for the first half of this century will be pretty close to 2.5%.
The difference in Japan is it has entered a period when the population will be falling by about 0.5% per year. The absolute maximum growth rate they could sustain is thus about -0.5% total population, - 0.5% participation rates, plus 2% productivity = 1%. A maximum average growth rate that low means their economy will be continually slipping in and out of recessions, which result in deflationary spirals of falling prices and decisions on consumption and investment being deferred. That's exactly what they've been going through for a couple of decades, but their spiraling debt is making it increasing difficult to overcome. And their total population was still rising during that period, but will soon be falling quite rapidly. Note that regular bouts of deflation tends to strongly suppress investment - so from now on it will be impossible for them to achieve anything like their potential long-term increases in productivity.
Japan has managed to back themselves into a situation where their economy is in a nosedive with nothing available that even has the potential the reverse that! Not quite - there is one thing with that potential - but the public will never accept it. The could start accepting net immigration levels of about a million a year, enough so the total population starts growing instead of falling. They have never allowed any more than handfuls of permanent immigrants, and they're not going to do that.
But, the guillotine cannot remain suspended mid-air by the force of wishful thinking alone forever!

Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

This is not accurate. Once violent deaths (murder, suicide, auto accidents) which impact overall live expectancy, but have no relationship to the quality of our health care system, then US life expectancy jumps to the top of the list.

That seems highly plausible. I'll look into it. :-)
Would you agree the 'bang for your buck' the US achieves from its level of spending on health is a disgrace?

Just because a few others (the US is 8th on the list you cited) are even worse off, doesn't mean our debt to GDP isn't already dangerous.

I agree that "dangerous" was a poor word choice ... but I did qualify that with "- yet".
It's not at unsustainable levels yet, but the danger it will get there unless some drastic changes are made is real. In fact, as the likelihood of drastic changes being made anytime soon is so remote I think that is almost inevitable.
Two questions ... Can you tell me whether the ratio of debt to GDP over 100% include the Social Security Trust Fund, and if so what percentage of GDP that is?
I suspect the answer is no, it does not include promises it has made to itself (Treasury bonds), then the current trends are indeed scary.

Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

Would you agree the 'bang for your buck' the US achieves from its level of spending on health is a disgrace?


Yes. We spend way too much, but that's mostly due to Federal Government mismanagement of Medicare and Medicaid.

Dominions Son
Updated:

@Ross at Play


It's not at unsustainable levels yet


I disagree, it's unsustainable now. In an economic crash, that could double or triple almost overnight and there wouldn't be anything the federal government could do to "stimulate" the economy.

Keynesian economists who say that kind of long term national debt are actually ignoring half of what Keynes said.

Yes, he said the government could stimulate the economy in down times through deficit spending, but he also said they needed to pay back that debt in the good times. There is nothing Keynes him self said that approves of deficit spending through economic boom times or the maintenance of ANY level of long term national debt.

ETA: US levels of national debt vs GDP, might be sustainable if the US were actually paying it down, but we aren't. The national debt in absolute dollars continues to increase year after year and that is NOT sustainable regardless of current debt to GDP levels.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@Dominions Son

I have some quibbles around the margins of your comments.

The national debt in absolute dollars continues to increase year after year and that is NOT sustainable regardless of current debt to GDP levels.

I totally disagree. I think the absolute level of national debt is irrelevant: it's only the ratio of that debt to GDP that matters.

There is nothing Keynes him self said that approves of deficit spending through economic boom times or the maintenance of ANY level of long term national debt.

I've never heard that, and I'm not doubting it is true, however, if so that would be one of the major mistakes which Keynes, like Einstein, made in an otherwise inspired body of work. I see no evidence that advanced economies cannot comfortably and indefinitely maintain debt to GDP ratios up to about 50%, and if the economy is not being severely mismanaged, probably up as high as 70%.
The main question is what purposes that debt is put to. If the US had been devoting its deficits to things like adequately upgrading its transport infrastructure, even at current levels it would not entirely be a bad thing. It did nothing like that. The net effect of its debt has been to rob future retirees and welfare recipients, Peters, to fund excessive consumption by those in the past and current day, Pauls. :-(

There can be no doubt, as it currently functions, the "third rail" of US politics, its Social Security system, is unsustainable. And this IS NOT because its "Trust Fund" is on course to run out in a few decades time. That fund is significant to the political debate, but it has NEVER had any tangible effect in the real economy (beyond modifying the effective rates of income tax individuals must pay). It is a complete fiction. AFAIK, everything paid into it comes straight back to the government as the fund is obliged to invest all of its "assets" in Treasury bonds. Nothing would change if it was legislated out of existence and the Federal government began paying retirees itself from its general coffers!

Germany has a similar fund, but they bit the bullet when it became obvious the fund was on course to run out. The fund cut the rates of benefit payments to retirees to maintain its viability. I don't know if their fund has the freedom to invest contributions it received as they see fit. I presume they do. Without that, if such funds can only invest in government bonds, they may as well not even exist.

In contrast, the benefits the US Social System are currently paying out are effectively "tied to train tracks" at the moment - just waiting for the "locomotive", intractable gridlock within Congress, to smash into them. Unless ways are found to cut those payments, reducing the maximum level of payments or increasing retirement ages, budget deficits will blow out to an extent that the US will follow Japan down the path they are on.

sejintenej

@Ernest Bywater

It suspicious because the reports indicate people have known about them for years, but only NOW is it a problem to be made public. And if you can't see that's an issue, I can suggest a good eye doctor for you.


This is simply a reminder (and info to those who didn't see it first, second and third time round that the publisher reckons he is unfit for office (and may have been "persuaded" to issue the reminder)

Wheezer

@Dominions Son

This is not accurate. Once violent deaths (murder, suicide, auto accidents) which impact overall live expectancy, but have no relationship to the quality of our health care system, then US life expectancy jumps to the top of the list.


One would need to factor in those same things for other countries for the results to be meaningful. If you are not comparing the same things, the comparison is invalid.

Replies:   Ross at Play  sejintenej
Ross at Play

@Wheezer

@DS
This is not accurate. Once violent deaths (murder, suicide, auto accidents) which impact overall live expectancy, but have no relationship to the quality of our health care system, then US life expectancy jumps to the top of the list.
@Wheezer
One would need to factor in those same things for other countries for the results to be meaningful. If you are not comparing the same things, the comparison is invalid.

You're right, but I'm pretty sure those factors are much higher in the US than comparable countries. Certainly murder and auto deaths are. For suicides, as I recall, the French and especially the Japanese are "doing us a favour" at higher rates than the US ... and let's not forget accidental deaths in the workplace and by drug overdoes.
The figure I would want to see to convince myself that life expectancy in the US is not appalling low, given the vaster greater amounts it spends on health care, is that the life expectancy of females is similar to other comparable countries, but for males it is not. The factors DS mentioned are all killing off males at far greater rates than females.

AN UPDATE:
That is NOT SO. See this link Compare Male vs Female Life Expectancy
For males the US ranked 32nd in the world, but for females it was 33rd.

For auto deaths, America comparatively high now, but that is quite recent. Road deaths have been falling all over the world because of safer cars, but the rate of improvement in the US is much lower. See the graph at this link.
Changes 1990 to 2015
In 1990, US was about equal with the UK and Sweden in 1990; but their rates are no less than half of the US. Those figures are based on total miles traveled. I expect Americans average more miles than most other countries, so the death rates per head of population are probably higher.

PotomacBob

@Ross at Play

Its the NEW YORK Post, not the Washington Post, that is the conservative alternative to the New YOrk Times.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

I totally disagree. I think the absolute level of national debt is irrelevant: it's only the ratio of that debt to GDP that matters.


You are somewhat correct the problem is not strictly the absolute level of the national debt, but the fact that it increases year over year every year, bad time or good. Constantly increasing debt can not be sustained indefinitely under any conditions. Eventually it will reach immediately catastrophic levels.

Replies:   Ross at Play
PotomacBob

@Ernest Bywater

Is Ernest Bywater a real person or a Russian bot stirring up trouble to interfere in U.S. elections?

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ross at Play

@PotomacBob

Its the NEW YORK Post, not the Washington Post, that is the conservative alternative to the New York Times.

THANKS for explaining the likely source of my misunderstanding.
I will cancel that test for dementia I just scheduled. :-)

Replies:   Capt. Zapp
Ernest Bywater

@PotomacBob

Is Ernest Bywater a real person or a Russian bot stirring up trouble to interfere in U.S. elections?


If I was a Russian bit I'd be paid more, than I get now!

Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

You are somewhat correct the problem is not strictly the absolute level of the national debt, but the fact that it increases year over year every year, bad time or good.

As I said, it was a "quibble" whether the absolute level or ratio is the relevant measure. That's a moot point when they are both headed in the same direction - which makes me wonder - why were you not an enthusiastic Clinton supporter during the last election given the amazing success Bill had in achieving significant budget surpluses. See this graph.
He was the first to do so since Truman who was - no surprises here - another Democrat.
Correction. I just spotted one more year. There was a tiny surplus in the first year of Nixon's presidency, handed over to him by Johnson, who was - surely you can see the trend by now - another Democrat.

That graph really is worth examining closely. It's easy to see a clear pattern of responsible Democrat presidents working hard to bring deficits down to sustainable levels - only to have Republicans to come along and every time they smash open the piggy bank and blow everyone's saving on their latest guerre d'année or welfare-for-the-wealthy scheme. When will the voters ever learn?

But, DS, you're still in your forties and you should be worried about what level Social Security benefits will be at the time you start receiving them. There's this bunch of ruthless, red, raving raiders of everybody else's piggy banks doing their utmost so your benefits will be much lower than you're told you may anticipate.

Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

why were you not an enthusiastic Clinton supporter during the last election given the amazing success Bill had in achieving significant budget surpluses.


Because Hillary is not Bill.

Dominions Son

@Dominions Son

But, DS, you're still in your forties and you should be worried about what level Social Security benefits will be at the time you start receiving them.


Yeah, I expect they will be nil.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

Because Hillary is not Bill.

It's a fair cop, guv'na.

Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

given the amazing success Bill had in achieving significant budget surpluses.


Bill Clinton had to deal with a Republican controlled Congress.

See this graph. He was the first to do so since Truman who was - no surprises here - another Democrat.


You are comparing the wrong factor to the graph. The president doesn't control the budget, Congress does.

Who controls Congress matters far more than who sits in the White House.

As I already said, Bill Clinton faced a Republican controlled congress and was willing to work with them. I do not believe that Hillary would have been able to do so had she become president.

In general, budget wise, the US tends to run lower deficits and/or surpluses when Congress and the White House are opposed. Full control by the Democrats will lead to higher deficits, but full control by the Republicans (see GW Bush) is even worse.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

Yeah, I expect they will be nil.

Damn! Is that all you have to say? I just worked really hard polishing my incendiary rhetoric (e.g. responsible Democrat presidents, guerre d'année, and welfare-for-the-wealthy), and I can't even get a bite?

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

responsible Democrat presidents


A set of one (Bill Clinton).

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

Bill Clinton faced a Republican controlled congress and was willing to work with them. I do not believe that Hillary would have been able to do so had she become president.

In general, budget wise, the US tends to run lower deficits and/or surpluses when Congress and the White House are opposed. Full control by the Democrats will lead to higher deficits, but full control by the Republicans (see GW Bush) is even worse.

I cannot argue with any of that.

Good luck, BTW, for the next few years with GOP control in the White House and both Houses of Congress.
It's a tough ask for the Democrats to win either House next year.
In the Senate, the Democrats need 3 seats to gain control, but only 8 Republicans are up for re-election, versus 24 Democrats plus two Independents who caucus with them.
In the House, with the effectiveness of the GOP's latest gerrymanders, a landslide to the Democrats in the popular vote may still not be enough to win control - as has just happened in Virginia.
People should probably stop referring to America as a (lowercase) "democratic" countries. At many levels that is certainly no longer so. I don't consider it undemocratic that Trump won the electoral college with a much lower popular vote, and the Senate is effectively immune to any shenanigans, but the House and many state legislatures are effectively oligarchies where citizens have the right to cast a vote - and to have it ignored!

Replies:   Joe Long
helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

Dominion's Son:
This is not accurate. Once violent deaths (murder, suicide, auto accidents) which impact overall live expectancy, but have no relationship to the quality of our health care system, then US life expectancy jumps to the top of the list.

Ross at Play:
That seems highly plausible. I'll look into it. :-)


Hmm, if you exclude those deaths, you have to exclude those numbers for all countries.
I doubt it's correct to exclude suicides, they're part of the – mental – health of the population.

HM.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

responsible Democrat presidents
A set of one (Bill Clinton).

Have a closer look at the graph I provided a link to.
The data suggests Kennedy/Johnson, Carter, Clinton, and Obama all left the While House with lower deficits that they inherited.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ross at Play
Updated:

@helmut_meukel

I doubt it's correct to exclude suicides, they're part of the – mental – health of the population.

I agree and would include accidental drug overdoses as mental health problem too. Those have soared in the US recently to alarming levels.

We all know the real reason - but confirm your suspicions by looking at this graph showing why American suicide rates are so high.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

The data suggests Kennedy/Johnson, Carter, Clinton, and Obama all left the While House with lower deficits that they inherited.


It take more than merely lower deficits to make for a responsible President. Particularly because Congress holds primary responsibility for the budgets.

As to Obama, not for lack of trying, but he followed a Republican President with a Republican controlled Congress (I did say full control by Republicans was worse for the budget than full control by democrats) and Obama was faced with a split congress for most of his time in office with with the House of Representatives in Republican hands and the Senate controlled by the Democrats. The Democrats had full control only during Obama's first two years in office.

Note: the US constitution requires that all spending bills originate in the House of Representatives.

Replies:   Ross at Play
sejintenej
Updated:

@Wheezer


This is not accurate. Once violent deaths (murder, suicide, auto accidents) which impact overall live expectancy, but have no relationship to the quality of our health care system, then US life expectancy jumps to the top of the list.

One would need to factor in those same things for other countries for the results to be meaningful. If you are not comparing the same things, the comparison is invalid.

I don't have recent figures but at one time Finland had by far the highest suicide rate.

Then you have to consider those unusual situations which can lead to untimely deaths. A statistic which has not (so far as I know) been published is that when I was there over 2% of children were born with serious hip deformities in Norway. I think Babill Valen-Sendstad Stray-Pedersen's(what a name!) one-person work will have reduced that somewhat

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@sejintenej

Here is a chart listing life expectancy by nation with and without fatal injuries.

https://b-i.forbesimg.com/theapothecary/files/2013/11/National-Life-Expectancy12.png

And the article the chart was taken from:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2011/11/23/the-myth-of-americans-poor-life-expectancy/#14b347f52b98

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

It take more than merely lower deficits to make for a responsible President. Particularly because Congress holds primary responsibility for the budgets.

I concede that my last post, after you'd made that highly relevant point, was nothing more than an abuse of statistics, and made with the only intention of doing some 'shit-stirring' hoping to irritate some Americans.

For those unfamiliar with the British slang expression 'shit-stirring', the Oxford Dictionary definition of it is:

the activity of trying to make a situation in which people disagree even worse

Replies:   Joe Long
Joe Long

@Ross at Play

why were you not an enthusiastic Clinton supporter during the last election given the amazing success Bill had in achieving significant budget surpluses.


the amazing success Bill had in claiming credit for significant budget surpluses.

FTFY

The budget surplus caught DC, and especially Clinton, by surprise. I remember the day it was mentioned on the news. Up to then Bill kept promising that sometime in the next 5, 10, 15 years it might be possible to balance the budget - and then one day, without warning, they had a surplus.

I'd argue the economic growth that produced the surge in revenues came about after the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994. But, Republican or Democrat, they are still politicians and upon seeing a seeing a surplus said "Holy shit, look at all this money! How can we spend it?"

It's like getting an unexpected performance bonus at work and then buying a new car and taking out a mortgage on a winter home in Florida. The bills will still be there even when the revenue drops.

It's baseline budgeting combined with inevitable recessions that create the huge deficits.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

But, DS, you're still in your forties and you should be worried about what level Social Security benefits will be at the time you start receiving them.


That's why 35 years ago many of us starting planning supplements and alternatives to Social Security, so that it's a fall-back plan when all else fails.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

In the Senate, the Democrats need 3 seats to gain control, but only 8 Republicans are up for re-election, versus 24 Democrats plus two Independents who caucus with them.
In the House, with the effectiveness of the GOP's latest gerrymanders, a landslide to the Democrats in the popular vote may still not be enough to win control - as has just happened in Virginia.


With so many seats to defend in the Senate, even if incumbents of both parties get reelected at the same rate (something over 90%) the Republicans will gain 2 or 3 seats.

Also, it's common to blame gerrymandering on Republicans, but it's a non-partisan activity. Whomever is in power does what they can to increase their power. Check out Maryland's Democrat draw congressional map, especially in the Baltimore/DC area.

PS Gerrymander was named after a politician Gerry who died in 1812. It's been around as long as the republic, and the percent of seats held being more than the total proportion of votes is a function of election by district.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

For those unfamiliar with the British slang expression 'shit-stirring'


I'm quite familiar with the term, but my Dad grew up around his Yorkshire born grandfather.

helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

Germany has a similar fund, but they bit the bullet when it became obvious the fund was on course to run out. The fund cut the rates of benefit payments to retirees to maintain its viability. I don't know if their fund has the freedom to invest contributions it received as they see fit. I presume they do.


Germany doesn't have a similar fund, didn't have one at least since WWII.
Our "Rentensystem" and our "gesetzliche Krankenkassen" are organized for sharing the costs. The working people have to pay a percentage of their income and this money is immediately used to pay the retirees and medical bills respectively.
They have a small fund to cover the expenses for some months, in case of the retirement funds for less than one year.

The whole system was created after WWII, because the funds had lost nearly all their assets: Treasury bonds had no value, real estate was lost or destroyed, same for debenture bonds, either the real estate was lost/destroyed or the issuing bank didn't exist any longer because it's seat was in eastern Germany or in those parts of the 'Reich' given to Poland or Russia.

Rumor is, the first Chancellor of Western Germany – Adenauer – when confronted with the liabilities of the system has said: "People will always have children."
But then nobody imagined birth control pills.

HM.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

Here is a chart listing life expectancy by nation with and without fatal injuries.
https://b-i.forbesimg.com/theapothecary/files/2013/11/National-Life-Expectancy12.png

Thanks. I'm prepared to admit that if a country is prepared to spend exorbitant sums funds via private health insurance systems, it probably can achieve fractionally better outcomes.
Evidence that a government-funded scheme can be just effective but very much cheaper is Norway. Their outcomes are almost identical to the US, but they spend roughly one-third less. Their system is entirely funded by the government, except for an approximate USD$250 deductible for all adults.

Replies:   Dominions Son  Not_a_ID
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

Thanks. I'm prepared to admit that if a country is prepared to spend exorbitant sums funds via private health insurance systems


The bulk of the exorbitant funds the US spends on health care is not via private health insurance, but through Medicare and Medicaid, both of which a riddled with fraud.

Unlike private insurers, Medicare and Medicaid officials have zero incentive to put any upfront effort into fraud prevention.

That plus the fact that Medicare handles the vast bulk of end of life care issues, which are much more costly than normal health care, puts the bulk of the cost issues on the Federal Government.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@helmut_meukel

Germany doesn't have a similar fund ... working people have to pay a percentage of their income and this money is immediately used to pay the retirees and medical bills respectively.

Thanks. So, they have a similar system of compulsory contributions, right?
The difference, which I noted, is that in Germany the contributions actually determine the level of benefits paid out.
I would say you have a fund that is real, and designed to keep its balance as near as possible to zero.
In contrast, in America all contributions received end up going straight in the government's coffers, and are then used to fund current spending. The "fund" consists of nothing more than promises that at some time in the future the government will transfer funds from its left hand to its right hand!?

Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

In contrast, in America all contributions received end up going straight in the government's coffers, and are then used to fund current spending.


Actually no. US Social Security benefits are paid primarily from current Social Security taxes from Current workers. The trust fund was not originally ever intended to hold a large balance, and by law benefits are limited to Current payroll tax receipts + the trust fund balance.

The problem is that back in the 1980s Congress realized that the coming retirement of the Baby Boomers was going to crash the Social Security system. They jacked up the SS Payroll tax rates to a level much higher then needed for paying current benefits to build up the trust fund before the baby boomers retired.

However, by law every dollar in the trust fund has to be invested in a security instrument as least as safe as US treasury bonds (which of course means only treasury bonds qualify), so all the actual money went to the general fund.

The Trust Fund has become nothing more than a legal smoke screen allowing higher benefits than the law allows by funding the benefits with current debt. Because the only way for the US Treasury to redeem the SS Trust Fund bonds is to issue new debt against the general fund.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

The bulk of the exorbitant funds the US spends on health care is not via private health insurance, but through Medicare and Medicaid, both of which a riddled with fraud.

I've looked pretty carefully and I think the rounded figures, as a percentage of GDP, are currently about Medicare 4%, Medicaid 2%, Other 12%.
Those schemes may well be mismanaged and riddled with fraud, but your statement still does not compute. Spending in the US by others is substantially greater than total spending by every other country in the world except for Switzerland, Norway, and Luxembourg.

Replies:   Dominions Son
helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

We all know the real reason - but confirm your suspicions by looking at this graph showing why American suicide rates are so high.


Most suicidal persons want a quick and certain death. This goal is easier attainable with a gun. Try to get a poison with high letality that works quick and painless. Jump from a bridge or a house, can you be certain it's a quick death? Can you even get in position to jump?
How many traffic accidents are in fact suicide attempts?

As a suicide candidate why should I write a farewell letter? Because it's ecpected? Why should I care about expectations?

I bet many suicides are not recognized as suicides, the exception are suicides by gun. It's either suicide or homicide arranged to look like suicide.

HM.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Joe Long
Updated:

There are so many similar threads unrelated to their titles right now that I have no idea where the post is that I am replying to.

But anyway - Ross - you asked about he ages of my characters. Beyond any pruriency of he being 19 and she 14, their respective ages have quite a bit to do with the plots and character arcs for each.

He gets into the middle of his junior year of college, having turned 20 right before classes began. Graduation looming a bit over a year from the end of the story means he's forced to confront the reality of being on his own, out of the parental house and in search of a career.

Spoiler: That's part of her justification for breaking up with him. "When you graduate I'll still have two more years of high school. Are you going to stick around this 'shit town' and wait for me?"

Both of those touch back on the opening paragraphs of chapter one.

Then at the climax during which they get to discuss what led to her abortion. "I'm in ninth grade. What could I do?" and then she shoots down every scenario he offers for how they could have worked it out, much of it dependent on her age.

BTW - Dylan Schmid & Kaitlyn Bernard co-star in Netflix's adaptation of Stephen King's "1922" Just saw some pictures of the two actors getting very close with these captions

So lucky to be filming in such a beautiful place and to be spending time with the most beautiful person this long weekend

love you two 💕 i'm so glad you guys were not just a movie couple


He's 18 and she's 14.

Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

I think we are saying the same thing.
The fund only exists in the minds of politicians and the public. The law states payments can only come from the fund, but there is nothing with any real value in the fund. Nothing would happen if it was simply legislated out of existence, except some Treasury bonds the government only ever sold to itself would disappear.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@helmut_meukel

Most suicidal persons want a quick and certain death. This goal is easier attainable with a gun.


If access to guns is such a big factor in suicide, please explain how the suicide rate in Japan where civilian gun ownership is practically non-existent is significantly higher than the US suicide rate.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

Nothing would happen if it was simply legislated out of existence, except some Treasury bonds the government only ever sold to itself would disappear.


Not quite true, without other corresponding changes, SS benefits would immediately be cut by about 1/3rd.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

Spending in the US by others is substantially greater than total spending by every other country in the world except for Switzerland, Norway, and Luxembourg.


Does that include things like cosmetic surgery? In the US, that's not covered by any government program or private insurance.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

If access to guns is such a big factor in suicide, please explain how the suicide rate in Japan where civilian gun ownership is practically non-existent is significantly higher than the US suicide rate.

Japan is an extreme "outlier" with its suicide rates due to cultural differences.
There are other ways of committing suicide. In the US the suicide rates in states with the highest gun ownership rates (over 50%) are about double those of states with the lowest gun ownership rates (less than 10%).

Replies:   helmut_meukel  Joe Long
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

Not quite true, without other corresponding changes, SS benefits would immediately be cut by about 1/3rd.

WHAT "changes"? Obviously I meant legislating so payments would remain at existing levels. No actual money would then end up anywhere different.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

Does that include things like cosmetic surgery? In the US, that's not covered by any government program or private insurance.

Minuscule and irrelevant, I think.
I'll consider answering that if you provide any evidence that total spending on cosmetic surgery is more than a percent or so of total health spending.

Dominions Son
Updated:

@Ross at Play


WHAT "changes"?


By law from back when SS was first created in the 1930s, total benefits payed out can not exceed current SS tax receipts + trust fund.

Simply eliminating the trust fund leaves benefits restricted to current payroll tax revenue.

Obviously I meant legislating so payments would remain at existing levels. No actual money would then end up anywhere different.


Then obviously you should have said that, rather than:

if it was simply legislated out of existence


It being the Trust Fund.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

By law from back when SS was first created in the 1930s, total benefits payed out can not exceed current SS tax receipts + trust fund.

If that restriction, "cannot exceed", was removed at the same time as the fund was legislated out of existence, the system could continue functioning as if nothing had changed.
I can't be bothered continuing this exchange. There is nothing tangible in the fund and there never has been.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

was removed at the same time as the fund was legislated out of existence, the system could continue functioning as if nothing had changed.


True, but it's in a different section of the Social Security act than the section that created the trust fund in the first place, so simply repealing the section that created the trust fund to eliminate the trust fund wouldn't by itself be enough.

There is nothing tangible in the fund and there never has been.


And there never will be and that is as designed from the original Social Security Act passed during the FDR administration.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

There is nothing tangible in the fund and there never has been.
And there never will be

Good night. :-)

helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

The difference, which I noted, is that in Germany the contributions actually determine the level of benefits paid out.


It's the other way round. The level of benefits is determined by law and the contribution gets adjusted to raise enough money.

HM.

helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

In the US the suicide rates in states with the highest gun ownership rates (over 50%) are about double those of states with the lowest gun ownership rates (less than 10%).


To me those suicide rates are suspect. As I already wrote, suicides committed by other ways may not be recognized as suicides or a suicide may be possible cause but not conclusively proven. Those cases don't show in the statistic as suicides. OTOH, homicides may show up as gun suicides.

I admit easy availability of guns will increase suicide rates, just because it's a nearly foolproof way for sucessfully committing suicide.

HM.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Capt. Zapp

@Ross at Play

I will cancel that test for dementia I just scheduled. :-)


Why pay for a test? Anyone who reads you posts will probably be willing to certify your dementia. :-)

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@helmut_meukel

To me those suicide rates are suspect.

Yes, it's impossible to know whether some deaths were suicides or not, but wouldn't the level of errors due to those uncertainties tend to be similar across various states?
If God gave you real figures, the graph would probably look very similar, but the numbers on the scale may be different.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
Ross at Play

@Capt. Zapp

Anyone who reads you posts will probably be willing to certify your dementia. :-)

Thanks? I led with my chin and you obliged me.
But really, they could, and some happily would, certify me as 'certifiable', but I haven't been here long enough for any to know whether my condition is a progressive illness or I've always been this way.

Replies:   richardshagrin
richardshagrin

@Ross at Play

progressive illness

Do we want to bring up politics?

Dominions Son

@richardshagrin

Do we want to bring up politics?


Somehow, we always bring up politics sooner or later.

Ross at Play

@richardshagrin

Do we want to bring up politics?

No! It's difficult enough to swallow already.

Replies:   Joe Long
helmut_meukel
Updated:

@Ross at Play


Yes, it's impossible to know whether some deaths were suicides or not, but wouldn't the level of errors due to those uncertainties tend to be similar across various states?


No.

In states where guns are easy to get, a far higher percentage of the suicide candidates will use guns for their suicide.

With many other methods of suicide especially traffic accidents it's often problematic to determine if it was really an accident or suicide. The errors cause lower figures.

Suicides by gun shots however usually can't decared as accidents. OTOH, homicides may probably be counted as suicides, causing higher figures.

I bet the percentage of suicides by gun shots (of all suicides) is significant higher in states with easy access to guns. So the level of errors is lower in those states.

HM.

BTW, easy access to guns increase the cases of successful suicides and – because it makes it easier to commit suicide – increase the total number of suicides.

Replies:   Ross at Play  Capt. Zapp
Ross at Play
Updated:

@helmut_meukel

BTW, easy access to guns increase the cases of successful suicides and – because it makes it easier to commit suicide – increase the total number of suicides.

I'm inclined to think that is the overwhelming reason for the trend apparent in that graph I identified, probably by enough to make other influences you mentioned on the accuracy of the data pretty much insignificant. Does it matter whether the ratio from top to bottom is 2:1 or 1.5:1? I think not: the impossible dream that the US would introduce strict limits on gun ownership is the obvious choice the society would make if the majority of its citizens gave a damn about reducing the rate of violent deaths and injuries.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
Joe Long

@Ross at Play

Japan is an extreme "outlier" with its suicide rates due to cultural differences.
There are other ways of committing suicide. In the US the suicide rates in states with the highest gun ownership rates (over 50%) are about double those of states with the lowest gun ownership rates (less than 10%).


I would submit that nearly all differences in various death rates are cultural.

In the US, the availability of guns does correlate to suicide rates, but that is not true between countries.

The US is not uniform, with a large majority of criminal homicides taking place in a few urban centers. The rate that whites commit murders in the US is comparable to Europe, while the rates at which blacks commit murders is comparable to Puerto Rico and the rest of the Caribbean, while less than Brazil or Africa. Murder is virtually non-existent in Japan, Korea and China.

Austria has IIRC 5x as many guns per capita as the UK, but the UK has 2x the murder rate as Austria. With few guns the UK has few gun murders, but others ways are found.

Replies:   sejintenej
Joe Long

@Ross at Play

No! It's difficult enough to swallow already.


TWSS.

Been awhile since we descended into puns.

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

Been awhile since we descended into puns.


Well, if you don't want to descend into puns, don't skydive over a bakery. :)

Ross at Play
Updated:

@Joe Long

TWSS.

Very bunny.

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

we descended into puns.


And on the third dough we rose again. :)

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@Dominions Son

And on the third dough we rose again. :)

That one takes the cake, and swallows too.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

That one takes the cake, and swallows too.


Mmmm, the cake was delicious. :P

Capt. Zapp

@helmut_meukel

easy access to guns increase the cases of successful suicides and – because it makes it easier to commit suicide


I met a guy once that attempted suicide with a 12ga. He put the barrel in his mouth but due to the difficulty in pulling the trigger, he missed.

helmut_meukel

@Capt. Zapp

I met a guy once that attempted suicide with a 12ga. He put the barrel in his mouth but due to the difficulty in pulling the trigger, he missed.


That's especially a problem with guns intended for hunting due to the usually long barrel. Those weapons are easier to come by even in countries with strict gun laws. They are useful for homicide but less so for suicide.

HM.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@helmut_meukel

They are useful for homicide but less so for suicide.

What a delightful morbid statement.

Replies:   Ross at Play
helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

Violent deaths are a problem for any society, however I beg to differ.

Has the society the righ to hinder suicides? It's my life and no other should interfere if I want to end it.

How is the ratio of death by traffic accidents to those caused by guns?

Here in Germany not only guns are restricted, the blade length of knives is restricted too. Knuckledusters and some other weapons are illegal, even slingshots.
Back when I was a youngster, teenagers could by slingshots, I had one then.

But those weapons are still bought in Czechia and other countries or the darknet and then used in Germany.

Weapon control laws won't stop the bad guys but make the good ones helpless. For the police it's impossible to protect people at all times.

Want to injure or kill people? No weapon needed:
Throw heavy stones or logs from bridges on the cars below.
In railway or subway stations wait until a train comes and then push one of the waiting on the rails.

HM.

robberhands

@helmut_meukel

Weapon control laws won't stop the bad guys but make the good ones helpless.

Because you don't need a weapon to attack, whereas you need one to defend yourself? That hardly makes much sense.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
awnlee jawking

@helmut_meukel

Has the society the righ to hinder suicides? It's my life and no other should interfere if I want to end it.


Yes and no. Japan is a special situation because of the historical obsession with ritual and honour. Is it right that valuable and productive members of society should kill themselves, sometimes when no fault can be attributed to them, because of how they've been indoctrinated?

AJ

Ross at Play

@robberhands

What a delightful morbid statement.

Does the German language have one of those delightfully morbid words it's so fond of for precisely that meaning?

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Ross at Play

'Morbide' is used in German as an adjective with the same meaning as 'morbid' is defined in English. But I don't know any special German term for a 'morbid statement'.

Replies:   Ross at Play
helmut_meukel

@robberhands

Because you don't need a weapon to attack, whereas you need one to defend yourself? That hardly makes much sense.


If I just want to randomly injure or kill people, I need no weapon.
It's another cattle of fish if I want to kill someone particular or a particular group of people, then I need a weapon – not necessarily a gun, a machete will do as proved some month ago in Baden-Württemberg. If some of the attacked or bystanders carry, they can stop me.

HM.

Ross at Play
Updated:

@robberhands

I was asking if there was any special, delightfully morbid German term for 'delightfully morbid', i.e. something meaning 'amused by the discomfort of others', as opposed to schadenfreude meaning 'taking pleasure from the discomfort of others'.

Replies:   robberhands
Ross at Play
Updated:

@helmut_meukel

It's another cattle of fish ...

FYI, you got the context just right, but the expression is "kettle of fish". A kettle is a container used for boiling water. :-)
The same word is used in 'the pot calling the kettle black' meaning 'that is hypocritical'.

robberhands
Updated:

@helmut_meukel

If some of the attacked or bystanders carry, they can stop me.

Sure, and with some bad luck, one of the helpful and armed bystanders will shoot the victim, some other onlookers, and maybe even the attacker.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
robberhands
Updated:

@Ross at Play

I was asking if there was any special, delightfully morbid German term for 'delightfully morbid'...

Nope, not that I know of. There is a German adjektive 'todessehnsüchtig' which translates to 'longing for death' but it's usually used to discribe a depressive emotional state, rather than a delighted one.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@robberhands

There is a German adjektive 'todessehnsüchtig' which translates to 'longing for death'

I must remember that one. It may be useful during our inevitable future extended exchanges with DS. :-)

How does that popular German song go again?
wenn ich mich fühle todessehnsüchtig
Ich möchte blitzehnkreigößfüchten du


Excuse me! My first experience with the German language was not a pleasant one. I arrived in Berlin in 2006 with tickets to see some World Cup games. On my first day of sightseeing I went on a guided walking tour of the city. Interesting, but along the way I stepped on the edge of a curb and ended up with a hairline fracture of my ankle. My ankle didn't hurt all that much going into the medical clinic, but wow, my pocket hurt like buggery on the way out! Still, I learned one new word of German while I was there: unterarmgehstützen.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Ross at Play

blitzehnkreigößfüchten

Wow, looks like 'Blitzkrieg' is a part of it but it's so severely mangled I have no idea what it means.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@robberhands

it's so severely mangled I have no idea what it means.

I thought the smiley was not needed for that one.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Ross at Play

I thought the smiley was not needed for that one.

I understood everything but this clusterfuck: 'blitzehnkreigößfüchten'. I don't want a smiley, I want the code to decipher it.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@robberhands

I don't want a smiley, I want the code to decipher it.

It was intentional nonsense, poking fun at the many extremely long words in German.

Replies:   robberhands
Dominions Son

@Capt. Zapp

I met a guy once that attempted suicide with a 12ga. He put the barrel in his mouth but due to the difficulty in pulling the trigger, he missed.


Even with a pistol, fatally shooting yourself is not as easy as most people think. It's fairly awkward to point a pistol at your self. The only method that works reliably is to put the muzzle in your mouth, what they call eating a bullet.

Replies:   Capt. Zapp
robberhands

@Ross at Play

It was intention nonsense, poking fun at the many extremely long words in German.

Long words have to be taken seriously, especially in German, and that's no laughing matter at all.

Now someone can once again cite the old Mark Twain joke. That'll easily balance missing out on your ruined joke.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Capt. Zapp

@Dominions Son

He put the barrel in his mouth but due to the difficulty in pulling the trigger, he missed.

The only method that works reliably is to put the muzzle in your mouth, what they call eating a bullet.


That was what I said. I assume his aim was off since all he managed to do was blow out the right side of his face.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Capt. Zapp

That was what I said.


Even eating a bullet is only reliable with a pistol. Due as you said to the difficulty in pulling the trigger on a long gun with the muzzle in your mouth.

I've read of cases of people who tried to shoot themselves in the side of the head or in the heart, with pistols, and missed, leaving themselves with survivable injuries.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

Now someone can once again cite the old Mark Twain joke. That'll easily balance missing out on your ruined joke.


Will this joke do instead?

A German tourist walked into a pub near the Quay in Sydney Harbour, and walks up to the bar. The barman does his usual act of holding up a glass while asking, "Want a beer mate?"

The tourist simply says, "Nine!"

The barman shrugs, starts pulling beers, and says"You must be real thirsty to want so many beers at once!"

Replies:   robberhands
Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

I've read of cases of people who tried to shoot themselves in the side of the head or in the heart, with pistols, and missed, leaving themselves with survivable injuries.


I've heard biting hard on blasting caps can do a good fatal lobotomy if it's not too old.

robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

Yep!

helmut_meukel
Updated:

@robberhands


Sure, and with some bad luck, one of the helpful and armed bystanders will shoot the victim, some other onlookers, and maybe even the attacker.


I'm no gun fanatic, but I believe we shouldn't ban guns.

I can live with a licence system like a driver's licence.

Some hours of gun safety and shooting training required, followed by a theoretical and practical test, then you get your carry permit. Like a driver's licence it can be revoked.

For purchasing a gun you have to show your carry permit and the serial number is added to your file in the new federal gun owner database.

When your carry permit is revoked, you lose your right to own guns.

OK, I recognize that there will be people who will have guns without carry permit, but that's exactly the same problem as people driving cars without driver licence. And don't tell me a gun is deadlier than a car, it isn't.

HM.

richardshagrin

I apologize if I have already posted my idea here before. Since guns are constitutionally protected, don't ban them. Instead, control ammunition. If you need a license to buy what guns shoot, and control how many "bullets" a licensed person can buy at once, mass killings become much harder to arrange. The concept follows how pharmacies dispense dangerous drugs. I am not sure how the "prescription" phase would work, perhaps law enforcement would be authorized to fill that role, but the druggist merchant would also need a licence and training to dispense varying types of ammunition. I suppose 22s would be somewhat easier to buy than 50 caliber machine gun ammunition. And Howitzer ammunition would be almost impossible to purchase. Somewhat similar controls exist on explosives, in many jurisdictions. Blasting caps are not freely available, as far as I know. They shouldn't be, if they are.

Replies:   Dominions Son
robberhands

@helmut_meukel

As long as no one can prove that guns in the hand of private citizens significantly lower the number of crimes, I'm more worried by the increase in the number of guns. Brave vigilantes and freedom-fighters, sitting in their basements and polishing their beloved weapons, dreaming of the day they finally can shoot someone in self-defense, is no happy image for me, either.

Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

As long as no one can prove that guns in the hand of private citizens significantly lower the number of crimes, I'm more worried by the increase in the number of guns.


For an armed citizen to assist in dealing with an armed criminal you need certain factors to be present:

1. A citizen with a gun, and knows how to use it,

2. The citizen has to be on the scene at the right moment,

3. The armed citizen has to sure of what's happening and feels he should intervene,

4. Said citizen needs to know he won't be persecuted or prosecuted for intervening after the event.

To get all that in line is hard, unless every citizen is armed and trained in the use of firearms.

Here in Australia the great majority of the population are unarmed, even those who have a legitimate reason to have guns have a huge problem getting approval to have a gun for their legal reason - farmers have to go through hell to get a basic rifle to keep vermin down. It's now so hard and so costly that many farmers no longer try to control the vermin, and you can guess what that's doing to crops and the environment in general. However, we still have people being shot with fully automatic weapons that have always been unlawful to own. The reason for that is the criminals don't give a stuff about the laws and they just smuggle in whatever it is they want. Taking guns away from the people simply makes them easier targets for the criminals.

robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

Such long and detailed post and in the final sentence you come to a conclusion not supported by anything you wrote before.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

Such long and detailed post and in the final sentence you come to a conclusion not supported by anything you wrote before.


You may want to re-read the post.

First section is why not all armed criminals are stopped by an armed citizenry.

Second section is about a place where there is the very tight gun control that some people are pushing for, followed by issues related to the tight gun control. Then a statement how the gun control hasn't stopped the criminals at all. With a final sentence about how vulnerable people are now because the best equaliser has been taken away from them.

40 years ago I survived a home invasion because the group breaking down my flat door turned and ran when I pumped a round into the 12 gauge Remington 870 shotgun I had at home. I saw 5 people running away when I looked out the window of my flat on the second floor. It was legal for me to own that gun then, but in the late 1990s I was forced to hand it in for a fifth of what it's real worth was because the government bowed to the gun control freaks. If that was to happen today the best I could hope for would be to take the first one down with a cricket bat before they bashed the crap out of me. We always had tight control of handguns, but civilian grade shotguns and rifles were legal, now they aren't legal for the majority of the population. 25 years ago an invader would have been met with armed resistance in every street, today anyone can walk in and take over with a team of boy scouts armed with BB guns because no one has anything to defend themselves with.

Replies:   robberhands
awnlee jawking

@helmut_meukel

And don't tell me a gun is deadlier than a car, it isn't.


I'm surprised it's taken terrorists so long to realise that vehicles can be used as instruments of terror.

I think people wanting driving licences should undergo the same sort of psychological and character assessment as those wanting gun licences are supposed to in the UK.

AJ

Replies:   REP
robberhands
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater

No, I don't need to re-read. In the end, it boils down to different belief systems. You believe the world would be a better place if everyone had a gun in his pocket, and I don't.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater
Updated:

@robberhands


No, I don't need to re-read. In the end, it boils down to different belief systems. You believe the world would be a better place if everyone had a gun in his pocket, and I don't.


I don't believe everyone should have a gun, and I never said that. I do believe everyone should have the choice about having a gun. When the only people who have guns are the criminals the honest citizens just become target. There's a reason why the first thing a dictator does is go around disarming the general population, and why the socialist want the general population disarmed before they stage their armed revolution - in both cases it's to remove the ability of the general citizenry from being able to defend themselves.

edit to add: Here in Australia we've always had tight controls on handguns, but people could have rifles. It's only in the last 25 years it hasn't been possible for the general population to put meat on the table by hunting rabbits and roos, which are still classed as pests in most parts of the country. Until the disarmament most rural people supplemented their larders with hunting, now they can't.

Replies:   robberhands
Ross at Play

@robberhands

Brave vigilantes and freedom-fighters, sitting in their basements and polishing their beloved weapons

For that lot, the person they should be most worried about is themselves!

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

The rate per 100,000 of "Unintentional" deaths in the US by firearms in the US is 0.18.
Rates of "Unintentional" plus "Homicides" include Australia 0.18, Germany 0.08, and United Kingdom 0.06.
A lot of them must be trying to shoot themselves in the foot but accidentally blowing their brains out instead.

robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

I don't believe everyone should have a gun, and I never said that.

Since your choice evidently would be to carry a gun, and it's of course the right choice, it's simply logical that everyone should make this choice.

awnlee jawking

@robberhands

Similarly, should every country have nuclear weapons? For self-defence purposes, obviously :(

AJ

robberhands

@awnlee jawking

Obviously.

Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

Since your choice evidently would be to carry a gun, and it's of course the right choice, it's simply logical that everyone should make this choice.


I strongly suggest you go back and actually read what I've said. I never suggested everyone should be walking around the street with shotgun in the hand. But I did say we should have a choice, and until the anti-gun idiots got the government to steal all our guns the average citizen used to be able to own a bolt action, pump action, or semi-automatic rifle or shotgun which could be used for hunting for edible animals and for home defence. Now everyone except the criminals are unarmed and vulnerable. The rabbits and roos love the anti-gun lobby because almost no one hunts them now.

Replies:   robberhands
REP

@awnlee jawking

vehicles can be used as instruments of terror.


It is sometimes difficult to differentiate the results of a terrorist intentionally killing with a car and inattentive drivers losing control of the car.

Ernest Bywater

@awnlee jawking

Similarly, should every country have nuclear weapons? For self-defence purposes, obviously :(


sure, if they can use them in their cities without doing any serious damage when used for self-defence at home.

robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

Yeah, I get it. Not walking around but a gun at home to defend against the socialist revolution .. and all the critters, of course. I understand. In Germany we also live in constant fear of a socialist revoluition. I'm mostly worried they might conspire with the Martians.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
REP

@robberhands

it's simply logical that everyone should make this choice.


You obviously overlooked the fact that a number of people are afraid of handling a gun. Then add in the people who want guns, but don't know how to handle them safely and don't want to take the time to learn how to do so. You also have to consider the idiot who have guns and treat them like toys, instead of deadly weapons.

I recall an idiot who was making a U-Tube video; I think he was trying to show how macho he was. He put the muzzle of a loaded gun to his head, and somehow he discharged it and killed himself.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@REP

You got me, I totally overlooked those facts.

Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

Yeah, I get it. Not walking around but a gun at home to defend against the socialist revolution .. and all the critters, of course. I understand. In Germany we also live in constant fear of a socialist revoluition.


So you're saying there's never a home invasion by criminals where you live - lucky you. Having suffered through such events I would prefer to be able to have a gun on hand to equalise the odds, because those who invade homes to rob them never come by themselves, it's usually three or more of them.

As to the socialist revolutionaries have a word with the people who supported Tzar Nicholas, and the Emporer of China, and the people living in the countries that have suffered a socialist revolution. None of them expected it and thought it fantasy, until it happened to them.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

have a word with the people who supported Tzar Nicholas, and the Emporer of China

I'll talk to the spirits of the late supporters of Tzar Nicholas and the Emperor of China right after I finished my discussion with the Martians.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@robberhands

I'll talk to the spirits of the late supporters of Tzar Nicholas and the Emperor of China right after I finished my discussion with the Martians.

I feel todessehnsüchtig too.

Dominions Son

@richardshagrin

Since guns are constitutionally protected, don't ban them. Instead, control ammunition.


The second amendment protects consumable supplies needed to actually use arms effectively as much as it protects the arms themselves. Arguments to the contrary are absurd.

Replies:   richardshagrin
Dominions Son

@robberhands

As long as no one can prove that guns in the hand of private citizens significantly lower the number of crimes, I'm more worried by the increase in the number of guns.


There's not exactly solid evidence that they increase crimes all that much, particularly long guns.

Long guns are involved in only a fraction of a percent of all gun related crimes in the US. The number of murders committed with long guns is so low as to be statistically insignificant.

About 0.5% of all the guns that exist in private hands in the US will end up being used to commit a crime.

Replies:   robberhands
Dominions Son

@Ernest Bywater

For an armed citizen to assist in dealing with an armed criminal you need certain factors to be present:


Exactly this happened with the recent church shooting in Texas. The shooter was shot by an armed neighbor of the church as he took off in his car.

Dominions Son

@helmut_meukel

And don't tell me a gun is deadlier than a car, it isn't.


Of course not. A car deliberately used as a weapon will be far deadlier than any gun available on the civilian market in the US.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

Of course not. A car deliberately used as a weapon will be far deadlier than any gun available on the civilian market in the US.


True they proved that in France about a year ago when that guy drove a truck through the crowd at the festival.

robberhands

@Dominions Son

There's not exactly solid evidence that they increase crimes all that much, particularly long guns.

I read this article about gun laws in relation to gun crimes: 'Gun Laws, Deaths and Crimes'
I regard it as a quite unbiased survey.

The author concludes a direct correlation between the laws and the crimes isn't discernible.

Replies:   Joe Long
Joe Long

@robberhands

I read this article about gun laws in relation to gun crimes:


I'm more concerned with gun laws and all crimes. If there are more guns then it's likely there will be more guns used in crimes. Of concern to a society is the overall level of crime. Does the presence of guns in private hands increase, decrease or have no effect on crime, violent crime and homicides, of all types?

Replies:   REP  Dominions Son
REP

@Joe Long

If there are more guns then it's likely there will be more guns used in crimes.


The real question is, if all guns were banned and removed from the hands of both honest and dishonest people, what weapon would the criminal use to threaten the law abiding citizens in the course of committing a crime.

I recall an old joke about a man threatening the owner of a convenience store with a length of 2x4 lumber if the owner failed to hand over the contents of the till. The owner complied but told the thief that he should use the money to buy a gun because otherwise the man might hurt someone with the 2x4.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater  Joe Long
Dominions Son

@Joe Long

Of concern to a society is the overall level of crime. Does the presence of guns in private hands increase, decrease or have no effect on crime, violent crime and homicides, of all types?


Despite many decades of trying, neither side of the gun debate in the US has been able to come up with definitive evidence either way.

My guess would be that there is some effect, but it's so small that it is easily overwhelmed by other factors.

Ernest Bywater

@REP

The real question is, if all guns were banned and removed from the hands of both honest and dishonest people, what weapon would the criminal use to threaten the law abiding citizens in the course of committing a crime.


knives would be a major one.

back in the 1990s there was a shooting at the Strathfield Plaza where the guy killed 8 and wounded 6 before the police arrived and he killed himself. He started with a knife stabbing two girls, and killing 1 before he switched to the SKS semi-automatic rifle he had.

At the time that happened I was living in Meadowbank in Sydney. At a Saturday night party in an block of flats near me a man went nuts with a knife where he killed several people and sent over a dozen to hospital with various wounds.

Both incidents took about 10 minutes, and they occurred close in time to each other, the shooting made the news and a wikipedia article while the knife attack only got mentioned in the local papers. The guy with the knife hurt more people than the guy with the gun, but knife attacks weren't as important to the anti-gun lobby at the time, so the knife attack is a nothing in the news. No guns at all, and we'll see knife related crime on the rise.

Come to think about it, there must have been a rise in knife related crimes because about a decade after the government disarmed the honest population in NSW they introduced a swag of new laws that makes it a crime to carry a knife in public. The boy scouts had to stop carrying pocket knives and a chef taking his tools to work needs to get a special case and a special licence to do so. The laws were aimed at reducing criminal attacks with knives, but like all such bans they've had no effect on the criminals.

Replies:   REP
REP
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater


a chef taking his tools to work needs to get a special case and a special licence to do so.


I agree knives would be a common substitute - lethal and easily concealed. A baseball bat was one of the weapons that came to my mind or possibly cricket bats for the UK.

The law and special licenses sounds more like a way to tax Australian citizens. My question is knives are used by many professions, such as construction, and the people in those profession need to carry their knives to and on the job sites.

Does Australia's law differentiate between belt knives, folding knives, and box knives? Box knives are so common in our society that almost everyone uses one in some part of their life, and here in the US, it is common for a person to carry one for use in their trade.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
sejintenej

@Joe Long

Austria has IIRC 5x as many guns per capita as the UK, but the UK has 2x the murder rate as Austria. With few guns the UK has few gun murders, but others ways are found.

It's a question of weapon types - handguns are totally illegal here and many / most are for target work

Replies:   REP
madnige

@robberhands

To discredit your opponent is a time honored method to win elections.


I would say it's a tried-and-true method to win elections; I don't consider there to be any honour in it at all.

REP

@sejintenej

handguns are totally illegal here and many / most are for target work


Then they are not Totally Illegal. :)

Replies:   sejintenej
richardshagrin

@Dominions Son

Arguments to the contrary are absurd.

"The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Is ammunition "Arms"? Not clear to me. Since its is "bear" arms, the right to short sleeved shirts is not constitutionally protected, they result in bare arms.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son
Updated:

@richardshagrin


Is ammunition "Arms"? Not clear to me.


Yes it is, and this has already been covered by SCOTUS, so whether it is clear to you or not is irrelevant.

ETA: If you want a specific line of reasoning, a firearm is not "arms" without ammunition.

Ernest Bywater

@REP

Does Australia's law differentiate between belt knives, folding knives, and box knives? Box knives are so common in our society that almost everyone uses one in some part of their life, and here in the US, it is common for a person to carry one for use in their trade.


It varies between the states, and they look only at if it has a cutting edge. If it has a cutting edge it's illegal. The crazy thing is if you have to buy a new knife in a shop, you have to leave it in the packaging until you get home, or they can arrest you,. I know of one person who got charged for having a cheese knife with him when he took the family out for a picnic. Damned if I know how you go with a BBQ at a public place now, I suppose it's burgers and steak sandwiches only now.

Replies:   REP  sejintenej
REP

@Ernest Bywater

You have to do all of the 'cutting edge' work first. :)

sejintenej

@REP

handguns are totally illegal here and many / most are for target work

Then they are not Totally Illegal. :)

OK so the police and some military have hand guns. I was referring more to the overall number of legal weapons not in police and military hands - the remainder being rifles and guns of various target and sporting designs. (Of course, like elsewhere, criminals have such weapons illegally)

There is a very active target shooting fraternity with ranges in the most unusual places including one about 50 metres from the old London Police headquarters in Victoria, Central London. Long time since I used them but I think that Lee Enfield 303s are still shot at Bisley with ranges close to 1500 yards.
An aside, what I found crazy was that an Englishman came fourth in the .22 in the Mexico Olympics yet he had never won our club championship!
Getting a licence for a weapon is still a difficult long and careful procedure - not like that alleged to occur in many parts of the USA

sejintenej
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater


It varies between the states, and they look only at if it has a cutting edge. If it has a cutting edge it's illegal. The crazy thing is if you have to buy a new knife in a shop, you have to leave it in the packaging until you get home, or they can arrest you,.


Here the police seem to have plenty if discretion but it seems that if the cutting edge is under 3" long and you are an adult you will be OK. Box knives (I am guessing at what you mean) here have retractable blades which can have the end broken off and my blades are three inches long when fitted. Longer than that you need a very good reason to have them outside the house. My younger teenage sons worked weekends in a greengrocer's and had to use their own knives which, because of the nature of the work had longer blades; we were always slightly concerned about them being stopped going to work but OTOH they are white, in an area without much knife crime and few police patrols.

There is an outright ban on all flick knives (which can be opened by the press of a button or similar). The family I was brought up with had a few genuine Gurka kukris and eastern stilettos, the former being used occasionally in the garden - I'm sure those are now illegal

The whole question here is open to ridicule - I had legal felling and splitting axes and hatchets for undergrowth which 1) had longer cutting edges and 2) were potentially far more fatal if misused. What about bow saws - 80 centimetres of serrated cutting edge kept sharp?

Ross at Play
Updated:

Perhaps a better solution for reducing America's horrendous rate of suicides would be banning ... iPhones!

From The Economist:

(From) 2007, when Apple released the first iPhone, (until 2015) the suicide rate for 15-to-19-year-olds shot up, ... increasing by 31% for boys and more than doubling for girls.

sejintenej

Perhaps a better solution for reducing America's horrendous rate of suicides would be banning ... iPhones!

From The Economist:

(From) 2007, when Apple released the first iPhone, (until 2015) the suicide rate for 15-to-19-year-olds shot up, ... increasing by 31% for boys and more than doubling for girls.


Ban iPhones (or Apple)?
Cars are used for suicide; ban them?
Guns are used for suicides; ban them?
Suicides attack groups using weapons knowing that the police will shoot them; ban them?

Where do you stop?

Replies:   Ross at Play  Capt. Zapp  REP
Ross at Play

@sejintenej

Where do you stop?

I suggest, at the point you realise a suggestion to ban something was tongue-in-cheek.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

But it's such fun thinking up things to ban :(

Tall buildings and motorway bridges, obviously.
Trains and train tracks.
Planes (Japanese kamikazi pilots & 11/9)
Electricity, except where provided by low-power batteries.
Oceans, rivers, lakes and ponds.
Cold places (Captain Oates)

AJ

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@awnlee jawking

But it's such fun thinking up things to ban

Police paddy wagons. WTF?

True story ... A very good friend of mine managed to commit suicide while locked inside the back of a police paddy wagon. She'd refused to leave after being told a relationship was over, the police were called, and they dragged her off. I've never wanted to find out how she managed it.

awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

How awful for everyone involved, including you :(

I've never wanted to find out how she managed it.


I don't think I'd be able to restrain my curiosity.

Suicide by cop is a well-known phenomenon (so obviously the police should be banned), but that doesn't seem to have been the case in this instance. However she managed it, I hope it was quick and painless.

AJ

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@awnlee jawking

Suicide by cop is a well-known phenomenon (so obviously the police should be banned)

WE HAVE FOUND OUR WINNER!

Capt. Zapp

@sejintenej

Where do you stop?


If they want to kill themselves, let them. It's when they start taking others with them that it becomes a problem.

Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

A very good friend of mine managed to commit suicide while locked inside the back of a police paddy wagon.


I would suggest that you should be highly skeptical of deaths in police custody being declared suicides.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

I would suggest that you should be highly skeptical of deaths in police custody being declared suicides.

Normally I would be. In this case the police simply broke up a 'domestic' and she dead by the time the police wagon got back to the station.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

Normally I would be. In this case the police simply broke up a 'domestic' and she dead by the time the police wagon got back to the station.


And given that, it's more likely that the police got rough with her and she died as a result of police action than that she managed to commit suicide while in police custody.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

it's more likely that the police got rough with her

NO!
More likely you are just mouthing off about something you know absolutely nothing about - AGAIN!
It was, in fact, a case of negligence by the police, not brutality.
ABC News report
Bugger off, you pest. I said I did not want to know the precise details of what happened, and I've already learned than I wanted to just because your ego cannot resist showing off what a know-it-all, NOT!, you are.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

ABC News report


The poor woman.

Police in the UK are similarly uneducated and untrained to deal with cases of mental illness :(

AJ

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@awnlee jawking

The poor woman.

Thanks. I suspect, like a lot of the best mental health professionals, the one person's demons she could not help with were her own. :(

REP

@sejintenej

Where do you stop?


You stop when you finally realize that the solutions you are imposing don't address the issue(s) causing the problem.

Replies:   Joe Long  helmut_meukel
Joe Long

@REP

The real question is, if all guns were banned and removed from the hands of both honest and dishonest people, what weapon would the criminal use to threaten the law abiding citizens in the course of committing a crime.


Even just fists.

I realize that crime reporting standards aren't the same from country to country, but the reported assault rates in the UK are much higher than in the US. When the perp doesn't have to fear a mark retaliating, a big guy can simply threaten to beat up a woman or a smaller man

Joe Long

@REP

You stop when you finally realize that the solutions you are imposing don't address the issue(s) causing the problem.


At that point a Democrat claims they just haven't spent enough money on the solution yet.

Replies:   REP
helmut_meukel
Updated:

@REP


You stop when you finally realize that the solutions you are imposing don't address the issue(s) causing the problem.


Not done this way.

You don't suspend or repeal the ineffective solutions, you add more – also ineffective - solutions!

BTW, forcing the people who have to deal with the problem to document every step in greatest detail will give you enough information to create more solutions.

HM.

REP
Updated:

@Joe Long

Not really. At that point a Democrat points to Trump's Wall as a perfect example of wasting an immense about of money on a solution that didn't fix the problem.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@REP

Need to wait for it to be built first, don't they?

Replies:   REP
REP
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater

Nope. Even the concept is ludicrous. Especially, when the people involved in designing this impregnable wall have acknowledged that there are areas of rough mountainous terrain where it is not feasible to build the wall. So periodically, there will be large gaps wide open for any illegals that want to enter the US.

ETA: I forgot one other thing. Two very long ladders and a cherry picker to position the ladders will defeat the wall anywhere along its length. A cherry picker and a rope will do the same thing if you don't want to waste time with the ladders.

Ross at Play

@REP

A cherry picker and a rope will do the same thing if you don't want to waste time with the ladders.

... or a light-weight grappling-hook launcher and a rope will do the same thing if you don't want to waste time with the cherry picker.

If he's serious, Trump should pay the Chinese to build it. As I recall they managed to build a wall through some rugged terrain that kept out the unwanted hordes pretty well.
Hey, why not ask them to pay for it as well? :-)

Capt. Zapp

@REP

So periodically, there will be large gaps wide open for any illegals that want to enter the US.

ETA: I forgot one other thing. Two very long ladders and a cherry picker to position the ladders will defeat the wall anywhere along its length. A cherry picker and a rope will do the same thing if you don't want to waste time with the ladders.


That's why you can't just depend on the wall. You have to have personnel as well to intercept, preferably with a bit of lead, those that still try to gain access.

Replies:   Joe Long  REP
Ross at Play

@Ross at Play

If he's serious, Trump should pay the Chinese to build it.

... or former East Germans when the tide turns and Trumplandians become desperate to escape to Mexico.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
Ernest Bywater

@REP

ETA: I forgot one other thing. Two very long ladders and a cherry picker to position the ladders will defeat the wall anywhere along its length. A cherry picker and a rope will do the same thing if you don't want to waste time with the ladders.


No wall is invincible, the Berlin Wall proved that. However, any wall with sensors is a lot harder to get over than no wall at all, and that means the Border Patrol have more time to detect and interdict, and it also means those crossing can't carry as much.

Mind you, the smugglers aren't going to be really impacted by it, unless they use the project to also install sensors to detect tunnels and such things.

The very best option for the USA would be to invade Mexico, eliminate the cartels and establish a solid boarder down on the southern Mexico border.

Replies:   robberhands  AmigaClone  REP
robberhands

@Ernest Bywater

The very best option for the USA would be to invade Mexico, eliminate the cartels and establish a solid boarder down on the southern Mexico border.

That sounds very reasonable; I wonder why no one thought of it before.

Ernest Bywater

@robberhands

That sounds very reasonable; I wonder why no one thought of it before.


I'm sure many have, but are concerned about what the political results would be.

awnlee jawking

@robberhands

That sounds very reasonable; I wonder why no one thought of it before.


I suggested a merger, although that probably predated this forum. For the average Mexican citizen, it would be as transformational as it was for the East Germans when they merged with West Germany.

AJ

helmut_meukel

@Ross at Play

... or former East Germans when the tide turns and Trumplandians become desperate to escape to Mexico.


You don't need a real wall, two high fences with a 20 yard deep minefield between the fences and watch towers with machine guns will do quite well, as proved by the Inner German border with smaller minefields and one fence.

Most of the refugees coming over this border to West Germany were insiders, members of the NVA (Nationale Volksarmee = National Peoples Army) or border police.

Border length 866 miles, patrolled by 50,000 armed East German guards. Add to this some thousand dogs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_German_border#Outer_fence.2C_walls_and_minefields

HM.

BTW, there were places where the mines got dislocated by floods quite often, they just replaced the mines. West German complaints over mines drifted to West German territory were shrugged off.

Replies:   REP
richardshagrin

@Ross at Play

When I visited the great wall I was told it didn't keep the barbarians out, it slowed them leaving with their loot (stolen from Chinese by raiders) long enough so Chinese armies could be mobilized to defeat them or speed their retreat, without the booty they came to get. And so made it impractical for large raiding parties to make a profit from their raid. Small groups could cross both ways, but most of the time local forces could defeat the small groups. So the wall was not designed to end raids, just to make them unprofitable.

richardshagrin

@robberhands

why no one thought of it before

Sounds like the Mexican War, 1846-1848, how we got several states, like Arizona and New Mexico. Our Manifest Destiny, if we can't steal it from Indians take it from Mexico.

AmigaClone
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater


The very best option for the USA would be to invade Mexico


The US has invaded Mexico several times.

The Mexican-American war [1846-1848], is memorialized in the first line of the US Marine Corps Hymn "From the halls of Montezuma..." While in high school in Brazil, during a world history class when that war was mentioned, the teacher said something like.

"Most Mexicans didn't like the fact that after the war over half of the Mexican territory at the time of independence was ceded to the USA. Some thought that Mexico should have ceded a lot less, if any territory. Others thought that more territory should have been ceded - in some cases even thinking that Mexico should have been annexed completely by the USA".

This class was taught in Brazil by a Brazilian teacher thirty-two years ago. I don't recall him showing any bias for or against the USA in any other class.

Edit due to previous comment.

Replies:   Joe Long  Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Ross at Play

As I recall they managed to build a wall through some rugged terrain that kept out the unwanted hordes pretty well.


In the end, the unwanted hordes went around the end of the wall.

Joe Long

@Capt. Zapp

That's why you can't just depend on the wall. You have to have personnel as well to intercept, preferably with a bit of lead, those that still try to gain access.


Last year I got to see the border fence between Israel and Jordan. (If you zoom in on Google Earth, you can also see fences along the entire Syria/Lebanon and Syria/Turkey borders).

The fence itself isn't massive, but consists of a set of parallel barbed wire topped chain link fences, equipped with sensors, with an access road between them. Once anyone has been detected breaching the first fence the border guards have time to arrive before the intruders get past the second. There was a wall through parts of Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Joe Long

@AmigaClone

Most Mexicans didn't like the fact that after the war over half of the Mexican territory at the time of independence was ceded to the USA. Some thought that Mexico should have ceded a lot less, if any territory.


Throughout history it's quite common to lose territory when one loses a war.

Dominions Son
Updated:

@AmigaClone


I don't recall him showing any bias for or against the USA in any other class.


I don't see much if any bias in the quoted statement.

The statement describes three groups of Mexicans.

1. Ceded too much territory.

2. Should have Ceded more

3. We should have become part of the USA.

The order makes some implications about the popularity of each, but the statement makes no direct claims about the relative popularity of each.

REP

@Capt. Zapp

My personal view of the matter (i.e. people being in the country illegally) is that it is a political and enforcement problem.

We currently have laws in the US that should stop people who entered the country illegally from earning a living. Unfortunately, private individuals, businessmen, and commercial/political organizations violate the laws and the political groups fail to support enforcement of the laws. A few examples: the individual who goes down to Home Depot and hires a day laborer who does not have a Social Security Number, the businesses that hire undocumented laborers and pay them under the table, companies that hire illegals who have obtained Social Security Numbers illegally, and even worse are the Sanctuary Cities that openly refuse to enforce Federal Laws.

There have been numerous instances of a person being arrested for being in the country illegally and deported. In many of those instances, the deported person is back in the US within a month. It is a revolving door that will not be shut until the consequences of being caught in the country illegally are more severe than what the 'illegal' gains by being here.

If the consequence of being in the US was to be executed (never happen) and the sentence were carried out (never happen), then the revolving door would be closed and there would be far fewer new people entering the country illegally.

The main problems with implementing the above solution are 1) too many people are opposed to the death penalty even when there is no question that the accused is guilty of the crime, and 2) the politicians would have to endure the controversy of imposing the death penalty on a person who is tried and proven to have illegally entered the country.

Replies:   robberhands  Capt. Zapp
REP

@Ernest Bywater

No wall is invincible, ... any wall with sensors ...

... invade Mexico, ... establish a solid boarder down on the southern Mexico border.


1. Trump's wall does not incorporate sensors, it is only a barrier. The only place the Government plans to use sensors is where there is a gap in the wall.

The US currently uses sensors to detect illegals who are entering the country by walking across the border. The only thing Trump's Wall would do is result in the illegals having to go over, under, around, or through a barrier. Aiding illegals in getting over or under Trump's Wall could become a big business in Mexico. Considering the way Trump has treated the Mexican Government, their Government would probably be more than happy to support any Mexican business that embarrasses Trump.

2. Then we would have the same problem with people invading the US territory of Mexico from Central America. :)

robberhands

@REP

If the consequence of being in the US was to be executed (never happen) and the sentence were carried out (never happen), then the revolving door would be closed and there would be far fewer new people entering the country illegally.

Your statement is based on the dissuasive effect of punishments, an effect which is hardly more than wishful thinking.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
REP

@helmut_meukel

Border length 866 miles, patrolled by 50,000 armed East German guards. Add to this some thousand dogs.


That wall was very expensive to maintain.

Scale 866 miles up to 1,800+ miles and you get an annual support cost that the politicians do not want to mention to the American public. There are also several additional problems that are not being made know to the American public.

Not_a_ID

@Crumbly Writer


Again, no one is declaring Moore guilty of a crime, they're simply saying they don't want such a creep to serve in Congress, only in the Presidency. :(


And only if they're named Clinton.

Not_a_ID

@Crumbly Writer

Understood, which makes him a pedophile (of teen girls only, at this point). But that's not the point I was making in calling them both creeps. The creepy thing was Moore's frequenting malls and schools trolling for teens, along with Trumps' 'grabbing 'em by their pussies'.

Dating a teen is bad enough (for a thirty-year of DA, who should have known the illegality of his actions), but his approach was just plain creepy to the max!


From discussions elsewhere, it seems nobody knows of has brought forward(rightfully so!) any evidence as to how "developed" the 14YO actually was. Also, age of consent where he was at the time was 16.

His "established pattern" was dating 16/17 year olds where it was legal for him to do so. The 14 year old seems to be an outlier(particularly since they only found one), suggesting she probably "looked older" and he wasn't verifying age very closely.

Still creepy, but he probably isn't in the "league" a lot of people are trying to place him in. Also, he stopped working "the shallow end of the dating pool" shortly thereafter, and no evidence has come to light suggesting his return to it, decades later at this point.

Which makes efforts to compare him to Weinstein rather odd.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Not_a_ID

From discussions elsewhere, it seems nobody knows of has brought forward(rightfully so!) any evidence as to how "developed" the 14YO actually was.


From legal and social mores perspectives, how developed the 14 yo was is irrelevant.

Replies:   Joe Long
Not_a_ID

@sunkuwan


Article 113 of the Bro Code: A Bro abides by the accepted age-difference formula when pursuing a younger chick. Acceptable age-difference formula: x ≥ y/2 + 7 x= chick's age y= Bro's age


Don't know if someone else brought it up, but sometimes around the late 19th century, that one "flipped." Previously, the reverse of that formula was possibly being used to determine selection criteria for men seeking wives.

Also in more current times, longevity/mortality studies also reflect that men in particular seem to reap a longevity bonus from having a younger spouse, while women seem not to. It's been awhile since I looked at the numbers, but I think a 12 year spread was the point of diminishing returns for the male.

What was in it for the female? Nothing, the same studies indicated it shortened their life expectancy, with more pronounced effects noted in the wider age gaps.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Not_a_ID

What was in it for the female? Nothing,...

What a crushing statement. I feel my self-worth rapidly diminishing.

Not_a_ID

@Joe Long

I think he likes teen girls. I don't think he's a sexual abuser. Neither of those are absolute positions, depending on further evidence. The original WaPo piece quoted a then 17 year old as saying that she dated Moore for 2 or 3 months and he kissed her twice. In the same piece a then 14 year old said they got down to their underwear at his place and when she said "stop" he took her home. She said she told Moore how old she was "at some point." It may not have been before the alleged incident.

Even if you believe he got undressed with the girl, neither of those sounds like the later accuser who said when in a car, after having just met, he forced her face into his groin.


Further, the Post tracked the girls down, not the other way around. Not sure how exactly the Washington Post found them, but still. As to Ms Groin, her yearbook claim that was used as evidence to back her claim might be a forged signature from one Moore's former assistants(who often signed papers on his behalf), not himself.

Not_a_ID

@Ross at Play

Evidence that a government-funded scheme can be just effective but very much cheaper is Norway. Their outcomes are almost identical to the US, but they spend roughly one-third less. Their system is entirely funded by the government, except for an approximate USD$250 deductible for all adults.


Thing that frequently gets missed in all of this is access. Norway is comparatively small, and virtually all of it is within 200 miles of a major waterway. The only nations comparable to the U.S. In terms of sheer scale are Australia and Canada.

Do not underestimate the impact centralization can have on cost management(or lack thereof).

Replies:   Ross at Play
helmut_meukel

@robberhands


@REP
If the consequence of being in the US was to be executed (never happen) and the sentence were carried out (never happen), then the revolving door would be closed and there would be far fewer new people entering the country illegally.

Your statement is based on the dissuasive effect of punishments, an effect which is hardly more than wishful thinking.


I beg to differ. Robberhands you are right as far as hardcore ciminals are concerned, but most of these people aren't criminals in the normal sense.
And even with hardcore criminals it would be effective, because once caught and executed they will not come back again and again.
However execution is a final solution and probably not deterrent enough.
Isn't the first wave mostly men? Then castration of the males may work better. Then send them back.

HM.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands
Updated:

@helmut_meukel

I beg to differ.

I don't know any US researches but German criminological researchers are claiming the clear-up rate of crimes is far more dissuasive than the expected punishment, and that's in regards to offences against property, where rational thought might be of significance. If people act impulsively, neither clear-up rate nor punishment have any singnificant effect on an offenders 'decision' to commit a crime. When people leave their homelands in dire peril and purely to survive, no threat of punishment will stop them.

ETA: My only comment on suggestions like the death penalty or castration as punishment for the crime of the illegal entry of US territory is that such a law will luckily never get passed.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
helmut_meukel

@robberhands

criminological researchers are claiming the clear-up rate of crimes is far more dissuasive than the expected punishment


But this implies there is some punishment.
If there would be no punishment at all, even 100% clear-up won't dissuade any offender!

HM.

BTW, look at the case rates of larceny in countries using a harsh Sharia (cutting off hands) in comparison to western countries.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@helmut_meukel

BTW, look at the case rates of larceny in countries using a harsh Sharia (cutting off hands) in comparison to western countries.

I'm envious enough on the inhabitants of such countries as it is and don't need any further reason to feel jealous.

Ross at Play
Updated:

@Not_a_ID

Thing that frequently gets missed in all of this is access. Norway is comparatively small, and virtually all of it is within 200 miles of a major waterway. The only nations comparable to the U.S. In terms of sheer scale are Australia and Canada.

Australia and Canada are comparable to the US? For sheer size, definitely, but for concentrations of their populations within small areas they may be closer to Norway.

In Australia, over 70% of the population live in just five cities or adjacent satellite cities along the coast.

In Canada, there's an astonishingly high percentage of the population living very close to the 49th parallel, or below it to the east.

Joe Long

@Dominions Son

From legal and social mores perspectives, how developed the 14 yo was is irrelevant.


True, but she may have looked older and says in the interview that "at some point" she told him she was 14. That leaves open the possibility that as soon as she told him her real age he left her alone.

There's still people on Twitter today claiming that asking out girls of legal age who work at the mall is pedophilia and child abuse.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Joe Long

There's still people on Twitter today claiming that asking out girls of legal age who work at the mall is pedophilia and child abuse.


Yep and that's a problem, but it doesn't have that much to do with the Roy Moore case. The Washington Post found 5 girls that say they dated him when they were teens and he was in his 30's and was an ADA.

Three of them don't have anything bad to say about him.

The one who was 14.

That leaves open the possibility that as soon as she told him her real age he left her alone.

Except by her account, he was stripped down to just his underpants and had her stripped down to just bra and panties and was fondling her before she said she was uncomfortable and he took her home.

The bra & panty heavy petting (if true) is probably enough to make a statutory rape charge stick in most states and when she told him her age wouldn't be relevant.

The final accuser claim that he sexually assaulted her in his car.

The only think keeping him from facing criminal charges for the 14 YO and the one who is claiming she was assaulted is the statute of limitations.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Joe Long
Not_a_ID

@Dominions Son

The final accuser claim that he sexually assaulted her in his car.


And that one, from my understanding is the person with a yearbook signature from Moore that looks suspiciously like the signature a legal clerk working for Moore used a couple decades later, where those extra (extraneous) initials actually belonged to the clerk, signifying it was "signed for"(and by whom) rather than "signed by."

So it's probably a false claim somebody thought they could bolster their case with by copying Moore's signature off of one of the legions of legal documents his offices have produced over the years... They just happened to choose the wrong document to copy off of.

Capt. Zapp

@REP

If the consequence of being in the US was to be executed (never happen) and the sentence were carried out (never happen), then the revolving door would be closed and there would be far fewer new people entering the country illegally.


I agree with this solution for those who choose to return after being deported. So many times I see in the news of "had already been deported xx times' where xx is actually a two-digit number! It's quite obvious that deportation does no good. It's like sending them home for a family visit.

Another solution would be to start calling them what they are - an invasion force - and treat them accordingly.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  REP
Not_a_ID

@Capt. Zapp


I agree with this solution for those who choose to return after being deported. So many times I see in the news of "had already been deported xx times' where xx is actually a two-digit number! It's quite obvious that deportation does no good. It's like sending them home for a family visit.


How about we simply start castrating the males after so many deportations? "Hope you've already ensured your posterity, because you won't be having any more."

Replies:   Capt. Zapp
Capt. Zapp

@Not_a_ID

How about we simply start castrating the males after so many deportations?


Because that wouldn't keep them from coming back, only from cumming again.

Replies:   helmut_meukel
REP

@Capt. Zapp

Another solution would be to start calling them what they are -


I agree. We call them illegal immigrants. Use of the term immigrant seems to imply they have gone through some form of immigration procedure.

Use of the term immigrant also makes it sound like they haven't committed a crime. Drop the term and we could call them illegals which is a bit more accurate.

I don't know about Robberhands' and Helmut_Meukel's childhood, but when I was a child the threat of having my dad take a razor strop to my ass kept me on the straight and narrow. Adults need a more severe threat than a spanking to keep honest citizens honest. Most of us honest people have been tempted to do something illegal, but the threat of prison stopped us.

Severe deterrents do work for the majority of the population. The threat of punishment for career criminals doesn't work because they think they will beat the odds and get away with the crime - a stupid, egotistical attitude when you consider many of them spend more than half their lives in prison. I recall reading an article in which a career criminal said he commits a crime knowing he will be caught because he needs the structure in his life that prison gives him.

Replies:   Dominions Son  Joe Long
Dominions Son

@REP

Drop the term and we could call them illegals which is a bit more accurate.


Actually, that's even worse. That makes it sound like their mere existence is illegal, that the thing they did that was illegal was to be born.

Replies:   JohnBobMead  REP
JohnBobMead

@Dominions Son

Trespassers? Trespass to land is an actionable offence.

From the Wikipedia articls: "If a trespass is actionable and no action is taken within reasonable or prescribed time limits, the land owner may forever lose the right to seek a remedy, and may even forfeit certain property rights."

So as soon as it is verified that they are not within the country legally, they are charged with trespass to land.

Again from the Wikipedia article:"Trespass ab initio is when a person is granted access to land but then abuses that access. The entry to the land is considered to have been a trespass from the beginning. This only applies to access given by law, not to access given by a person"

So if legally within the country, but then breaks a law, trespass is dated back to the date of entry. If they are here on a visa, and do not leave when the visa expires, trespass is dated from the date of arrival, not the date the visa expired.

helmut_meukel

@Capt. Zapp

Not_a_ID:
How about we simply start castrating the males after so many deportations?
Capt Zapp:
Because that wouldn't keep them from coming back, only from cumming again.


Given their mindset – machismo – the thread of castration the next time will cause many to not risk this. And sending them back after castration will probably scare off others.

HM.

Joe Long

@Dominions Son

That leaves open the possibility that as soon as she told him her real age he left her alone.

Except by her account, he was stripped down to just his underpants and had her stripped down to just bra and panties and was fondling her before she said she was uncomfortable and he took her home.


The first doesn't contradict the second. He may not have know she was 14 when they allegedly got down to their underwear. That wouldn't have shielded him from legal consequences, but ti could be used to refute a notion that he was targeting underage girls.

The one girl interviewed by WaPo says that she dated Moore for 2 or 3 months and during that time he kissed her twice. That's a different pattern of behavior from the woman Gloria Allred brought out later who claimed that she was assaulted by Moore as soon as they met.

Joe Long

@REP

I agree. We call them illegal immigrants. Use of the term immigrant seems to imply they have gone through some form of immigration procedure.


We used to call them illegal aliens.

Replies:   richardshagrin  REP
richardshagrin

@Joe Long

illegal aliens

Then what do you call entities from other planets, solar systems, galaxies or universes? Just plain aliens?

There are citizens, tourists (with visa or other legal status if visa is not required), green card holders, and what is left over (maybe illegal non-residents?). Aliens mean to this science fiction reader something from another planet. Or at least, not from Earth.

Not_a_ID
Updated:

@richardshagrin

There are citizens, tourists (with visa or other legal status if visa is not required), green card holders, and what is left over (maybe illegal non-residents?). Aliens mean to this science fiction reader something from another planet. Or at least, not from Earth.


"The word came from somewhere" and in this case, the older usage for "alien" seems to predate the concept of, well, alien life on other worlds. So in the right context "alien" and "foreign" are synonymous with each other.

It just happens to have fallen out of favor, much like "annoy" and "molest" used to by synonyms as well, but outside of a sexual context it is best avoided these days. As one of the two words has taken on a more specialized meaning over time.

Edit: To demonstrate here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts

Now unless the U.S. Congress of 1798 was concerned about aliens from outer space, it looks like it was often used to mean "foreigner." Although arguably, you can't get much more foreign than a non-human sentient life form from another planet.

awnlee jawking

@richardshagrin

Aliens mean to this science fiction reader something from another planet.


Does that mean your inalienable rights are those that cannot be given to visitors from other planets? ;)

AJ

robberhands

@Not_a_ID

"The word came from somewhere" and in this case, the older usage for "alien" seems to predate the concept of, well, alien life on other worlds. So in the right context "alien" and "foreign" are synonymous with each other.

I guess you're right:

8 U.S. Code § 1325 - Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts

Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) Improper time or place; civil penaltiesAny alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of—
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.

Astonishingly, there is no mentioning of castration nor a death penalty.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Not_a_ID

It just happens to have fallen out of favor, much like "annoy" and "molest" used to by synonyms as well, but outside of a sexual context it is best avoided these days. As one of the two words has taken on a more specialized meaning over time.

It was not that long ago that mothers would be delighted if their teenage daughters engaged in vigorous intercourse with a wealthy eligible bachelor. :-)
'Intercourse' used to be a synonym of 'debate'.

Not_a_ID
Updated:

@robberhands


Astonishingly, there is no mentioning of castration nor a death penalty.


I was making a bad joke on the castration suggestion. I am pretty sure "cruel and unusual" would describe that particular corrective measure as it relates to immigration.

As to death, well. If their presence was construed as being part of a foreign invasion, prosecution under the rules of war pursuant to non-uniformed troops may be relevant. In which case, the death penalty is on the table.

Replies:   robberhands
awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

"Well, imagine that!" he ejaculated. ;)

As an aside, I think intercourse was more general than 'debate', covering normal conversation as well.

AJ

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@robberhands

I guess you're right:
8 U.S. Code § 1325 - Improper entry by alien

For most senses, alien has a strong negative connotation, in addition to meaning foreign or different.

An alien environment would be in some way dangerous, e.g. extreme heat or cold.
An idea alien to a religion would be unacceptable to that religion.
A resident of one country who is a citizen of another could be called an alien if they are unwanted, but a foreigner if they are wanted.

Replies:   Joe Long  PotomacBob
Ross at Play

@awnlee jawking

As an aside, I think intercourse was more general than 'debate', covering normal conversation as well.

Agreed. 'Exchange' (of ideas) would have been closer to a synonym back then.

robberhands

@Not_a_ID

I was making a bad joke on the castration suggestion.

I feel relieved to hear that. When I read some of the corresponding responses to your joke, it didn't look very funny to me.

Not_a_ID
Updated:


I feel relieved to hear that. When I read some of the corresponding responses to your joke, it didn't look very funny to me.


It is one of "Sad, but true" things out there. It probably would be an effective deterrence measure all the same, for reasons given. For Many of the male illegals, most probably wouldn't put the family jewels on the line, for their family or anything else.

Dominions Son

@richardshagrin

Then what do you call entities from other planets, solar systems, galaxies or universes? Just plain aliens?


The word alien long predates the notion that life might exist on other worlds. In very general and probably over simplified terms, it means "not from here".

Note: Extraterrestrials would be as much illegal aliens as Mexicans if they come here without going through the proper legal channels. :)

robberhands
Updated:

@Not_a_ID

It is one of "Sad, but true" things out there. It probably would be an effective deterrence measure all the same, for reasons given. For Many of the male illegals, most probably wouldn't put the family jewels on the line, for their family or anything else.

If castration is such an effective measure why not use it generally as punishment for every illegal activity? No longer any DUI's or drivers exceeding the speed limits, even parking violations could be eliminated.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Ross at Play
Not_a_ID

@robberhands

If castration is such an effective measure why not use it generally as punishment for every illegal activity? No longer any DUI's or drivers exceeding the speed limits, even parking violations could be eliminated


Part of the basis of immigration controls existing in the first place is to retain some control over the general population demographics. Whichever demographic factor they happen to put emphasis on. Someone who cannot reproduce is thus rendered incapable of leaving a lasting (biological) "legacy" behind them.

Parking tickets don't meaningfully translate into population shaping. Neither does speeding or DUI(except when they kill). As such, castration/sterilization "isn't relevant" to their situation.

Even if in some quarters people may take that as demonstrating they're "too dumb to breed" so providing them a court awarded Darwin is justified. That's still moving into an entirely different sphere, related? Sure, but still different.

But getting back to "If you have to explain the joke, it failed.."

Ross at Play

@Not_a_ID

It probably would be an effective deterrence measure all the same

Severe punishments can be effective deterrents but they need to be applied - consistently - across a country's entire legal system.

I visit Singapore and Malaysia quite often. Given their differences in attitudes to the law, it's hard to imagine they were one country for a long time. They split into two countries a couple of years after the British granted Malaysia independence in 1963.

Both have very strict laws. In Singapore even minor infractions are punished consistently. Malaysia has well-deserved reputation for widespread corruption and cronyism.

I think it's not a coincidence that from 1970 to the current day, using figures from Wiki, the rate of population growth in both is almost identical, but the nominal GDP of Singapore (with about 20% of the population) has gone from about half to almost equal that of Malaysia - despite the windfall it got from exploiting substantial deposits of oil and gas.

If the US was to introduce castration of repeat offenders of illegal entry into the country, I don't think it would help the country unless they reviewed all punishments to include things like, say, confiscation of the vehicles being driven by anyone caught for a second offense of not wearing a seat belt.

Ross at Play

@robberhands

If castration is such an effective measure why not use it generally as punishment for every illegal activity? No longer any DUI's

So Tiger Woods would have lost his first testicle for sexual addiction and his second for DUI. Sounds fair. :-)

richardshagrin

@Ross at Play

'Intercourse' used to be a synonym of 'debate'.


There is a town in Pennsylvania named "Intercourse". What we think intercourse means now used to be "sexual intercourse."

Replies:   Joe Long
Joe Long

@richardshagrin

Then what do you call entities from other planets, solar systems, galaxies or universes? Just plain aliens?


Depends on their visa status.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

'Intercourse' used to be a synonym of 'debate'.


A back and forth between two parties.

Joe Long

@Ross at Play

A resident of one country who is a citizen of another could be called an alien if they are unwanted, but a foreigner if they are wanted.


Not really, as resident aliens are expected to keep current on their taxes.

Joe Long

@richardshagrin

There is a town in Pennsylvania named "Intercourse".


It's not that far from Blue Ball, somewhat down the road from Bird-in-Hand.

In western Pennsylvania, if you go past Anita, you'll find yourself somewhere between Panic and Desire.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Joe Long

t's not that far from Blue Ball, somewhat down the road from Bird-in-Hand.

In western Pennsylvania, if you go past Anita, you'll find yourself somewhere between Panic and Desire.


And of course, Hell is in Michigan. https://www.gotohellmi.com/

Not_a_ID

Even more impressive given Hell's Canyon is between Idaho and Oregon. And a National Recreation Area to boot, I hear it's a fun place to go motor-boating. 😈

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hells_Canyon_National_Recreation_Area

sejintenej

@Ross at Play

True story ... A very good friend of mine managed to commit suicide while locked inside the back of a police paddy wagon.

There was a case related on TV news in the last two days where a man died in the court dock moments after being found guilty. The tone of the report suggested suicide.
Awnlee; in reply to one of your posts at least some police authorities are trying to educate peelers how to deal with mental cases but that is recent and after some judges' criticism

REP

@Dominions Son

That makes it sound like their mere existence is illegal,


As you well know, the term 'illegal immigrant' is used here in the US to refer to a person who is in the US illegally.

You can twist and interpret the use of 'illegal' in any way you wish.

richardshagrin

@REP

'illegal'


A sick bird.

REP

@Joe Long

We used to call them illegal aliens.


Yes I know. I find it very interesting to observe the evolution of terms used to refer to groups of people.

What I've noticed is the original term gains a highly negative connotation and the group it is applied to tries to change their image by creating a new term. When people start using that new term, the group fails to change its behavior patterns/attitudes and the new term acquires the same negative connotation.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@REP

Yes I know. I find it very interesting to observe the evolution of terms used to refer to groups of people.
What I've noticed is the original term gains a highly negative connotation...

I know what you mean. Lately the group of 'honest the law abiding citizens' gained a highly negative connotation to my ears, especially when someone refers in such terms to himself.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Not_a_ID

@REP

As you well know, the term 'illegal immigrant' is used here in the US to refer to a person who is in the US illegally.


Well, I seem to recall at one point illegals were referred to being "without papers" aka "wops" but that eventually came to mean Itallian "for some reason." Although I do have to somewhat enjoy the historical cycle running on that one, given what " undocumented worker" implies in regards to their own paperwork.

Replies:   REP
Dominions Son

@REP

As you well know, the term 'illegal immigrant' is used here in the US to refer to a person who is in the US illegally.


Yes, I am well aware of that and I have no particular objections to the term "illegal immigrant".

I was responding to a suggestion that it would be more accurate to drop "immigrant" and just call them "illegals"

You can twist and interpret the use of 'illegal' in any way you wish.


I don't think it takes much if any twisting when you refer to a person as "illegal" with no qualifiers at all.

Replies:   Joe Long  Ross at Play  REP
Joe Long

@Dominions Son

I don't think it takes much if any twisting when you refer to a person as "illegal" with no qualifiers at all.


But then one side drops any qualifiers to "immigrant", conflating any opposition to those who enter the country illegally with immigration in general.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Ross at Play

@robberhands

'honest the law abiding citizens'

If you'll forgive a correction ... what you heard should be written as 'honest, law-abiding citizens' - definitely without 'the'.
See this ngrams query.
A lot would miss out the comma and/or hyphen, but I think they are both technically required, even for informal writing.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Ross at Play

It's a quote.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

I was responding to a suggestion that it would be more accurate to drop "immigrant" and just call them "illegals"

I agree. I can't be bothered with any discussion about what is PC enough to use after the 'illegal', but as a writer I want something there.

Ross at Play

@robberhands

It's a quote.

Really? If so, then (a) sorry to you, and (b) whoever originally wrote it that way has a credibility issue over their poor English, in addition to any hypocrisy issue you may have detected. :-)

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

But then one side drops any qualifiers to "immigrant", conflating any opposition to those who enter the country illegally with immigration in general.


True, but if both sides do it, each dropping a different word, that only makes thing worse.

Pointing to someone else's wrong doing does not justify yours.

A large part of our current political problems are due to the fact that neither the Red team nor the Blue team can remember that, assuming they would even care if they did.

Both sides with vilify someone from the other team for doing X, then turn around and in the same breath excuse members of their own team that do X.

A pox on both their houses.

Replies:   JohnBobMead  Joe Long
REP

@Not_a_ID

that eventually came to mean Itallian "for some reason.


The explanation given to me was the acronym WOP became popular after WW II, and at the time the majority of the immigrants were coming from Italy.

Replies:   Ross at Play
REP

@Dominions Son

I don't think it takes much if any twisting


You are right, all you do is take the term out of the context in which it is being used and you put it in a totally different context. You then say the original person was using it in your context.

Replies:   Dominions Son
JohnBobMead

@Dominions Son

Both sides with vilify someone from the other team for doing X, then turn around and in the same breath excuse members of their own team that do X.

A pox on both their houses.


Total agreement on this. It's something I've started pointing out when some of my FB friends share things without thinking. Especially when what is being vilified is legal.

Dominions Son

@REP

all you do is take the term out of the context in which it is being used and you put it in a totally different context.


I did not in any way put the term out of the context in which it was used in the comment to which I was replying.

Replies:   REP
PotomacBob

@Ross at Play

They may call themselves "liberators."

Joe Long

@Dominions Son

Pointing to someone else's wrong doing does not justify yours.


Not justifying, pointing out that both sides are guilty.

Ross at Play

@REP

The explanation given to me was the acronym WOP became popular after WW II, and at the time the majority of the immigrants were coming from Italy.

"... after WW II ... majority of immigrants from Italy" has a very familiar ring to it as an Australian baby-boomer.

Australia was traumatised by how close Japan to it during WW II. The first, of over thirty, air raids on Darwin was the largest raid Japan had made since 'the Pearl Harbor attack'.

We've always had a huge racist streak - born out of fear - with a huge land mass to defend; isolated a world away from any allies; tiny population; wealthy, white, and Christian; sitting there just waiting to be plundered by billions of Asians who are so frighteningly different from us!

Then after WW II there was the "Red Menace". McCarthy wasn't the only one "spotting" a communist under every other bed because it suited their political agenda. Robert Menzies exploited that myth cleverly enough to hold on to power for seventeen years, with his successors lasted another six. It has been reduced to a "lunatic fringe" - but there's still some out there today - spotting "communist conspiracies" and trying to warn others in every statement by anyone to the left of Genghis Khan. [Name redacted to protect the guilty.]

It's an oldie, but a goodie. John Howard won four more consecutive elections simply by recycling it with one variation: substituting "refugees coming by boat" for "communists". He never said "Muslim" but about 51% of voters could hear it loud enough, often enough.

The populist war cry in Australia immediately after WW II was "Populate or Perish!" There was a massive program to increase the population by bringing in more European migrants, mostly from Italy and Greece. They were white, enough, to be tolerated. At least they were Christians.

The locals hated them! They were the real Australians, the ones whose families had been here for generations. They didn't want hordes of foreigners coming in and taking their jobs - and their food stinks too! Okay, if pressed these locals would concede their families had themselves only been here for a couple of generations, but they were born here, so any jobs on offer should naturally go to them.

REP, my point is that I recall in my youth that Italian and Greek immigrants were often referred to as "wops" and "wogs", respectively and disrespectfully. "Without papers" does not explain why Australians were using the term "wop" too.

Replies:   Not_a_ID
Dominions Son

RE: Origin of wop as an anti-Italian slur

I found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wop

According to Merriam-Webster, its first known use was in the United States in 1908.[2] The dictionary is unambiguous that it originates from the Southern Italian dialectal term guappo, roughly meaning thug, pimp, or swaggerer, derived from the Spanish term guapo, meaning handsome, via dialectal French, meaning ruffian or pimp.[3] It also has roots in the Latin vappa, meaning wine gone flat.[2]

In Neapolitan language and other Southern Italian languages, guappo is pronounced as wah-po.[4][5] As Southern Italian dialects often feature unaspirated stops or "swallow" the final vowels in a word, guappo would often sound closer to wahpp to American or Anglo ears.

Not_a_ID

@Ross at Play

REP, my point is that I recall in my youth that Italian and Greek immigrants were often referred to as "wops" and "wogs", respectively and disrespectfully. "Without papers" does not explain why Australians were using the term "wop" too.


"Wog" has a nautical connotation that may or may not be derived from the larger usage, and given Australia's history being tied back to nautical roots, its other use may come from that.

Looks like wop is a backronym on the w/out papers thing, not surprising, kind of curious as to when that linkage happened now. Not too concerned either way.

Ernest Bywater

@Not_a_ID

The Collins Dictionary has some interesting entries on both wog and wop that show both have been in use since the 1700s.

www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/wog

www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/wop

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Ernest Bywater

@Not_a_ID

Looks like wop is a backronym on the w/out papers thing, not surprising, kind of curious as to when that linkage happened now. Not too concerned either way.


one dictionary entry points at that as being 1920s / 1930s USA

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater

Ngrams suggests consistent* low-level use throughout the 19th century.
Then it took off from 1910 until the 1930s. That's consistent with a new backronym invented in the US about 1910.
ngrams chart

* I disregard the sudden spike starting about 1810. That was for 'Wop' but lowercase 'wop' remained steady. I assume it was a brand name.

awnlee jawking
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater

www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/wog


I've encountered the claim that it stood for 'wily oriental gentleman', which supports the asiatic connection, but most/all actual usage I've encountered in real life was towards blacks. In the 1930s the UK had a large influx of immigrants from the Caribbean and integration and the lessening of resentment took several decades.

AJ

sejintenej

It seems clear that there is no certain origin. The story I heard blamed a Frenchman called Ferdinand de Lesseps (he of the Eiffel Tower).
When building the Suez Canal in the 1860s the engineers were a crew apart and treated as they deserved. Everyone else would line up be paid at desks set up for "Workers Other Grades".

True? unknown but it fits

Replies:   Ernest Bywater  REP
Ernest Bywater

@sejintenej

Everyone else would line up be paid at desks set up for "Workers Other Grades".


I doubt it's true, because he would have said it in French, not English.

REP

@Dominions Son

I commented on dropping immigrant and just referring to people in the US as illegals. You responded by applying the use illegals to people from the time of their birth. I consider that to be you using the term out of the context in which I used it.

Replies:   Dominions Son
REP

@sejintenej

It seems clear that there is no certain origin.


According to Wikipedia, it is used by people in England and Australia for anyone who is not white. The article says the term was first noted by lexicographer F.C. Bowen in 1929, but the words etymology is unclear, and that the origins being an acronym for "wily Oriental gentleman", "working on government service", or similar, are examples of false etymology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wog

Replies:   awnlee jawking  Not_a_ID
Dominions Son

@REP

ropping immigrant and just referring to people in the US as illegals. You responded by applying the use illegals to people from the time of their birth. I consider that to be you using the term out of the context in which I used it.


In my opinion, by dropping immigrants any just calling them illegals, YOU remove all context from it.

REP

@Dominions Son

Changing topics doesn't get you off the hook regarding changing context.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son
Updated:

@REP


Changing topics doesn't get you off the hook regarding changing context.


That is the topic, by changing "illegal immigrants" to "illegals" you changed the context, not me. That was the point of my original comment. If you can't comprehend that, that's your malfunction.

Replies:   Joe Long  REP
awnlee jawking

@REP

And, as we all know, Wikipedia (spit) is 100% accurate :(

AJ

Ernest Bywater
Updated:

@Dominions Son


In my opinion, by dropping immigrants any just calling them illegals, YOU remove all context from it.


The terminology is what sells things to the dear people.

Illegal migrants sounds nicer people than such legal terms like Proscribed non-citizen, or criminal border crosser.

Here is Australia some people get upset about boat loads of people arriving unlawfully on our shores being called anything but refugees, when they do not meet the legal definition of refugee under Australian or International law. The nicest thing they can be called under International law is Displaced person.

Under International Law a person is a refugee when they have to flee their home under threat of physical harm, but once they reach a safe harbour they must stay there until their situation can be properly evaluated. Thus someone can flee Afghanistan into Pakistan as a refugee, but once they leave the UN Refugee Camp they lose that status and become a Displaced person because they reached a safe harbour and are no longer under a threat of physical harm.

Australia did have some legitimate refugees arrive on our shores by boat during and after the Vietnam war, due to Vietnamese people escaping Vietnam by boat. We've had a few other refugees from some of the islands to the north. But over 99% of the boat people are displaced persons set on breaking our laws before they even get here.

typo edit

Replies:   Dominions Son  Joe Long
Not_a_ID
Updated:

@REP

According to Wikipedia, it is used by people in England and Australia for anyone who is not white. The article says the term was first noted by lexicographer F.C. Bowen in 1929, but the words etymology is unclear, and that the origins being an acronym for "wily Oriental gentleman", "working on government service", or similar, are examples of false etymology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wog


Or if you're an ocean going sailor, it can also mean a person who has only sailed in one hemisphere and never "Crossed the line" for either the Equator, the Prime Meridian, or the International Date Line.

Ah, any excuse for a "good old fashioned" initiation. ;)

Of course, that's where it gets weird applying it back to the shore-side, because anybody going from Asia to Australia would have to cross the Equator(which is the more important of the 3). Anybody going from England to Australia would have crossed the Equator(possibly multiple times, depending on route/era) and traveled in both the Eastern and Western Hemisphere. (given that the prime Meridian passes through England and France among others, you have to sail into the Western Hemisphere to get around Spain at the very least.

From the looks of it, the origins are lost either way, but it would be interesting to learn if the US Navy picked up the term from elsewhere(during the 20th century), or if it was an older expression that passengers picked up on from some of the ship's crew(in (a derogatory) reference to said passengers) during their own respective transits.

Edit: And as the Wiki notes, someone who has been in multiple hemisphere becomes a "pollywog" which wiki notes would have been a reference to a tadpole--something "native to water" as would befit "a proper sailor."

Dominions Son
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater


The terminology is what sells things to the dear people.


Yes, and in the US, one side of the debate wants to scrub any mention of the fact those people entered the US in contravention of the law, while the other side wants to scrub any mention of how they violated the law (making it sound like their mere existence is illegal).

If either side wins, any possibility of rational discussion of the issue will be completely destroyed.

Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

In my opinion, by dropping immigrants any just calling them illegals, YOU remove all context from it.

That was my opinion too when I read REP's post.
It's quite legitimate to use just an adjective alone as a noun phrase, i.e. dropping the noun, but then it is assumed the noun covers all possibilities under discussion.
If a document has already established the class under discussion is people living in the country but citizens of another, then 'illegals' will be sufficient to identify those being referring to. Without an established context, then 'illegals' is assumed to includes all who are inherently illegal, and as you point out, presumably were made so by their birth.

Joe Long

@Dominions Son

That is the topic, by changing "illegal immigrants" to "illegals" you changed the context,


But as even just "illegals" has a specific usage, I think the vast majority know what he'd be referring to and understand the context.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Joe Long

@Ernest Bywater

The terminology is what sells things to the dear people.


Now the preferred term in "undocumented." It's simply a paperwork issue.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
richardshagrin

ill egals.

If they are ill, they must be sick. egals must be gals delivered by the internet. Like email. To be in a story on SOL the egals have to be 14 or older, if they engage in any sex or don't wear clothing.

Or maybe eagles with unusual spelling.

Dominions Son

@Joe Long

But as even just "illegals" has a specific usage


In my experience, the usage of just "illegals" is rare and the people who do use it, use it like they mean those people shouldn't exist at all.

Replies:   Joe Long
Ernest Bywater

@Joe Long


Now the preferred term in "undocumented." It's simply a paperwork issue.


Actually, the term undocumented has a very specific meaning in regards to people moving about the world. Undocumented is used only for people who have no valid or verifiable identification documents on them. Thus they make up a subset of the Proscribed Non-citizens (PNc). here in Australia we have two major groups of PNcs - visa over stayers and displaced persons. Many are fully documented, while the majority of the people arriving by boat are undocumented because they destroyed all their identity documents before reaching our waters. The Australian government uses all these terms in the same way the International law and the UN Convention on Refugees defines them.

Replies:   Joe Long
REP

@Dominions Son

you changed the context


Changing a label does not change the topic being discussed. Of course your issue is to create arguments, so since I've made my point repeatedly, I'm going to drop the matter.

Joe Long

@Dominions Son

In my experience, the usage of just "illegals" is rare and the people who do use it, use it like they mean those people shouldn't exist at all.


I have other experiences. Those against illegal immigration (which I believe is the correct term found in law) tend to use it as a shorthand for those in the country illegally, while others concerned with the plight of those in the country illegally cast it as a slur meaning as you say. But almost without fail when someone claims that the person who said it responds, "No, that is not what I meant!"

Joe Long

@Ernest Bywater

Actually, the term undocumented has a very specific meaning in regards to people moving about the world.


But those in the US who support illegal immigrants use "undocumented" as a euphenism. "They're not illegal, they're undocumented." "We'll, not have documents is against the law"

It's also used a lot in the media to help frame the message.

Replies:   robberhands
robberhands

@Joe Long

But those in the US who support illegal immigrants use "undocumented" as a euphenism. "They're not illegal, they're undocumented."

I'd agree that 'undocumented' is as much a euphemism for the offense of illegal immigration as labeling a person or a group of persons by a term like 'illegal' is a derogatory slight.

Back to Top