Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I really wish people would stop using the term

VICTIM

here.

They werent, they arent.

SHE is the victim of the legal system, thats it.

None of the kids complained, they were having a damn good time. So how are they victims other than perhaps in the eyes of THEIR parents, who really are the ones who are the problem here.

There is no victim when its all consensual.

(i dont agree with statutory rape laws, thats so friggen dumb, RAPE is the only LAW we need on the books, I dont believe those sexual escapades to be even considered in the same realm as RAPE just because they happen to be 18 right now and she is 15 or 16)
 
Moof1904 said:
There was a case in north Dallas this week about a woman with a six month old daughter. This [insert string of expletives here] didn't bother feeding her child much more than once or twice a day and the child, at six months old, had gained only one pound since birth.

The baby had begun sucking her thumb (as many babies do) and it angered the woman. To stop the baby from sucking her thumb, scumbag mom coated the thumb with a heavy thick paste of chili powder, cayenne, and other such things. The baby was so starved that she sucked her thumb despite the slathered paste on her thumb and when her throat swelled up from the irritation, the baby suffocated and died.

Scumbag mom was sentenced to 7 years.

So, Colorado mom gets 30 years for contributing to delinquency and north Texas mom gets 7 years for killing her child.

People recover from delinquency. Dead is dead.
Words cannot express how angry I was after hearing about this story.
 
Onizuka said:
This is why I hate Colorado. Stupid, stupid people.

This has got to be one of the most hateful and ignorant things I've ever seen on this site (then again, I don't visit the political forums, so maybe it's worse there). Congratulations on your baseless, sweeping bigotry. :confused:
 
bankshot said:
This has got to be one of the most hateful and ignorant things I've ever seen on this site (then again, I don't visit the political forums, so maybe it's worse there). Congratulations on your baseless, sweeping bigotry. :confused:

Yeah, well, I live here, you don't. So, congratulations on your baseless, asinine assumption.

Jon Benet, Columbine, School riots over basketball games, cops killing their families and committing suicide, cool slutty moms. Yeah, this is a great place, not to mention the cops, politicians, laws, and weather.
 
Sdashiki said:
I really wish people would stop using the term

VICTIM

here.

They werent, they arent.

SHE is the victim of the legal system, thats it.

None of the kids complained, they were having a damn good time. So how are they victims other than perhaps in the eyes of THEIR parents, who really are the ones who are the problem here.

There is no victim when its all consensual.

(i dont agree with statutory rape laws, thats so friggen dumb, RAPE is the only LAW we need on the books, I dont believe those sexual escapades to be even considered in the same realm as RAPE just because they happen to be 18 right now and she is 15 or 16)

So providing drugs and alcohol to minors shouldn't be a crime in your opinion?


Lethal
 
It is in Texas too. And if I am not mistaken, at least in some places in Europe, its 15, but I hope one of our European members will enlighten me as to whether or not I am right...:confused:
 
Onizuka said:
Yeah, well, I live here, you don't. So, congratulations on your baseless, asinine assumption.

Baseless, asinine assumption? Again, that comes across as so hateful (based on an assumption of your own, I might add).

I spent over 15 years of my life in Colorado and still consider it "home." It's where I'm from, so I took personal offense to your comment, on behalf of myself and my friends & family who still live there. And regardless of what state or group it was, I find condemning and especially hating any large group of people based on the actions of a select few, to be quite a despicable behavior. In my opinion, your statement is equivalent to this (one word change):

This is why I hate <insert race here>s. Stupid, stupid people.

I surely hope everyone here agrees that the above statement is a horrible thing to think or say. It has no place in a civilized society. Yet it does exactly the same thing by applying sweeping prejudice against a broad group of people based on things that apply to a vast minority of individuals in that group.

Onizuka said:
Jon Benet, Columbine, School riots over basketball games, cops killing their families and committing suicide, cool slutty moms. Yeah, this is a great place, not to mention the cops, politicians, laws, and weather.

Whoopie. Regarding the state I currently live in: The Governator, OJ Simpson, Rodney King riots, Michael Jackson, celebrities getting off in their trials, smog, overcrowding, rolling blackouts, greedy movie industry turning out crap blockbuster after crap blockbuster, etc... Plenty of things to dislike about California, but I don't go around saying Californians are stupid.

It's a diverse world with lots of good and intelligent people among the bad and stupid. Painting an entire group as bad is just the sort of intolerance that ultimately leads entire countries to go to war against each other instead of doing the civilized thing and seeking a peaceful compromise. I am in no way saying your statement is even close to that, just that similar types of thoughts and statements are the first stepping stones towards it.

Growing up in Colorado, I remember there was kind of an undercurrent of hatred towards Texas. I don't know why, but Texans were portrayed as big, loudmouthed jackasses who should secede from the union. Then I actually visited there and was absolutely blown away at how friendly everyone was, including complete strangers. Totally changed my outlook on that state and made me realize that such prejudice is absolutely never a good thing. Even if you feel you have the "right" to say it because you live there or something like that.

I apologize for dragging this off topic and I certainly did not want to start a flame war. I just felt that the original statement was inappropriate and unfair to the people you accuse, and wanted to call it out as such.

As for the story here, yes, the mom is a stupid person. Stupid and extremely irresponsible. The kids may have been old enough that they enjoyed whatever went on and as such were not really "victims." But this woman had no right to provide them with illegal substances or do sexual things with them when their parents almost certainly would have disapproved.
 
velocityg4 said:
I'd have been stoked if my buddies MILF gave me booze and drugs (well weed, I would have refused hard core stuff) then took me to her bedroom...
To help complete the fantasy, here's the mug shot of your object of desire. Enjoy. :rolleyes:
 
bankshot said:
Baseless, asinine assumption? Again, that comes across as so hateful (based on an assumption of your own, I might add).

I spent over 15 years of my life in Colorado and still consider it "home." It's where I'm from, so I took personal offense to your comment, on behalf of myself and my friends & family who still live there. And regardless of what state or group it was, I find condemning and especially hating any large group of people based on the actions of a select few, to be quite a despicable behavior. In my opinion, your statement is equivalent to this (one word change):



I surely hope everyone here agrees that the above statement is a horrible thing to think or say. It has no place in a civilized society. Yet it does exactly the same thing by applying sweeping prejudice against a broad group of people based on things that apply to a vast minority of individuals in that group.



Whoopie. Regarding the state I currently live in: The Governator, OJ Simpson, Rodney King riots, Michael Jackson, celebrities getting off in their trials, smog, overcrowding, rolling blackouts, greedy movie industry turning out crap blockbuster after crap blockbuster, etc... Plenty of things to dislike about California, but I don't go around saying Californians are stupid.

It's a diverse world with lots of good and intelligent people among the bad and stupid. Painting an entire group as bad is just the sort of intolerance that ultimately leads entire countries to go to war against each other instead of doing the civilized thing and seeking a peaceful compromise. I am in no way saying your statement is even close to that, just that similar types of thoughts and statements are the first stepping stones towards it.

Growing up in Colorado, I remember there was kind of an undercurrent of hatred towards Texas. I don't know why, but Texans were portrayed as big, loudmouthed jackasses who should secede from the union. Then I actually visited there and was absolutely blown away at how friendly everyone was, including complete strangers. Totally changed my outlook on that state and made me realize that such prejudice is absolutely never a good thing. Even if you feel you have the "right" to say it because you live there or something like that.

I apologize for dragging this off topic and I certainly did not want to start a flame war. I just felt that the original statement was inappropriate and unfair to the people you accuse, and wanted to call it out as such.

As for the story here, yes, the mom is a stupid person. Stupid and extremely irresponsible. The kids may have been old enough that they enjoyed whatever went on and as such were not really "victims." But this woman had no right to provide them with illegal substances or do sexual things with them when their parents almost certainly would have disapproved.

And you really think I care what ties you have here? Well, sorry, I don't. And Colorado is chock full of morons. Of course, the rest of the world is too, but I live here and HERE impacts me more than over THERE.

So before you go off on your high and mighty diatribe to try and put me down before the public eye, maybe you should think twice about what your statement to me. You win the award for TROLL with that.

I didn't ask for your opinion, I don't care about your opinion, and further more, you should stay on topic so this thread doesn't becoem another crapfest.






Back on topic,

Yes, she's an ugly, cool, slutty mom. But you know what they say: "Beauty is only a light switch away." :D
 
30 YEARS???!?!?!?!?!?!?!!???!?!?!?!?!?!?! WHAT THE F*#& IS WRONG WITH THIS DAMN COUNTRY.
I've said it before and i'll say it again.. I have no faith in the US court system. If i ever get arrested I'm getting the best lawyer i can afford. i would also recommend subtle witness tampering.
 
Sdashiki said:
There is no victim when its all consensual.

(i dont agree with statutory rape laws, thats so friggen dumb, RAPE is the only LAW we need on the books, I dont believe those sexual escapades to be even considered in the same realm as RAPE just because they happen to be 18 right now and she is 15 or 16)


so if a 7 year old "consents" then its not rape because there is no statuatory rape? at some point you will have to make it statuatory rape. just the age may be lower than now.
 
hookahco said:
30 YEARS???!?!?!?!?!?!?!!???!?!?!?!?!?!?! WHAT THE F*#& IS WRONG WITH THIS DAMN COUNTRY.
I've said it before and i'll say it again.. I have no faith in the US court system. If i ever get arrested I'm getting the best lawyer i can afford. i would also recommend subtle witness tampering.

So, what do you think is the proper sentence for a woman who habitually provided drugs (including meth) and alcohol to underage boys as well as had sex w/them? This happened dozens of times over the course of a year (it's not like it was a one time event). I can only imagine how many counts of individual misdemeanors and felonies she racked up.

Take a gander at The Smoking Gunl.

I can only imagine the outrage that would be taking place if this was a 40yr old guy who had sex w/a bunch of underage girls he got drunk and stoned...


Lethal
 
velocityg4 said:
They were in high school. From what I remember this would have been a dream come true to most any high school boy. I'd have been stoked if my buddies MILF gave me booze and drugs (well weed, I would have refused hard core stuff) then took me to her bedroom. By high school guys who would not be interested in this would not hang out there in the first place. This nation is still in the control of prudes.

Agreed. I don't understand why it would be legal if the girl was 16, but not if shes 41. I doubt those boys were taken advantage of.

The US is astonishingly prudish when compared to other developed countries. Hopefully when my generation grows up, we'll lose this paternalistic mindset and eventually change our policies to something sensible.

An article today in USA Today about college kids drinking, doing drugs, and -gasp- having sex. So much debate about what causes it and how to curtail it. Isn't the answer simple? Its all lots of fun...why not just allow kids to experiment in a safer environment? Nobody in my frat ever got alcohol poisoning, but I can name 5 other people who did because they never had a drink or puff of smoke in their lives before the first week of freshman year and they were completely overwhelmed.
 
savar said:
Agreed. I don't understand why it would be legal if the girl was 16, but not if shes 41. I doubt those boys were taken advantage of.

The US is astonishingly prudish when compared to other developed countries.

It wouldn't have been legal if she was 16, it would ahve been penalized differently under the law. What she was doing was providing controlled substances to minors, which is a felony, and she did it many, many times, not once, twice or three times. Not to mention letting them screw her (which is still considered statutory rape). If she were 16, she would have been charged as a minor for posession, distribution, and maybe being a slut (not in court, just by the public).

Is the sentance justifiable? Mmmmm. I would say yes, but at the same time I would say the penalties for true rape, murder, child molestation, should all be death, but its not because America is a weak country when it comes to penalizing people for their crimes..
 
Let me just comment on this... it is not child molestation unless the victim is immature in physical form. this would include prepubescent children, but not post. after that point it becomes satutory rape, which is more of an issue of politics than anything else.

if you look back in history this modern age of consent really date back very far. the reason being was that it was required for our survival that breeding occured much earlier in the mothers life.

So, at this point really her crimes are mis-use of authority, providing illegal substances, and being a terrible role model. And for that, I think the sentence is very harsh. Most likely she suffered a much higher sentence because of the publicity, and in that respect the equal application of the law has failed. I doubt she is a danger to society. so, imprisonment seems excessive. She isn't a fit parent and child protective services should step in, and she could use a good amount of thereapy.

i am not a bit fan of our legal system.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.