| Author | Post |
|---|
yungin
Member
| Joined: | Sat Apr 5th, 2008 |
| Location: | The Hill |
| Posts: | 126 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 08:40 pm |
|
HAHAHAHA!!!!!! GREAT, AIN'T IT!!?? YOU ARE DEFINITLY A GUY! LMAO!!!
Playing the Game wrote:
Love the topic, sex and food..................................
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 5408 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 8th, 2009 12:42 am |
|
| Love the topic, sex and food..................................
|
fuzzy
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 597 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 7th, 2009 03:47 pm |
|
Oh my! wrote: cottoncandy wrote:
The only "idiots" are those who comment in this forum without having attended the Council Meeting where these points were discussed, and the Solicitor and Chief gave their guidance as to what the ordinance should contain.
Barbara. Believe me. I am in attendance. It doesn't change the fact that most are idiots. This ordinance has been an on going disaster for years. Council pussy foots around it and it is still ineffective. Do some research for a change.
Ruby (and your many avatars).......first you think cottoncandy is the mayor, now you think cc is barbara......how wrong you are. Stop trying to stir up trouble. You are so predictable........as soon as the forum is quiet for a while, you and your many incarnations of yourself try to stir up the pot.
|
Tracker
Member
| Joined: | Tue Mar 10th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 52 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 6th, 2009 06:19 pm |
|
Oh my! wrote: cottoncandy wrote: Oh my! wrote: What do I think? I think council and mayor are idiots. 1,000 feet? On the walk home from school most children will pass a sex offenders home if the offender is only 1,000 feet away. The only "idiots" are those who comment in this forum without having attended the Council Meeting where these points were discussed, and the Solicitor and Chief gave their guidance as to what the ordinance should contain.
Barbara. Believe me. I am in attendance. It doesn't change the fact that most are idiots. This ordinance has been an on going disaster for years. Council pussy foots around it and it is still ineffective. Do some research for a change.
Who's Barbara? I was at the meeting also, and your posts don't make any sense to me.
|
Oh my!
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 6th, 2009 05:51 pm |
|
cottoncandy wrote: Old Smyrna wrote: Oh my! wrote: What do I think? I think council and mayor are idiots. 1,000 feet? On the walk home from school most children will pass a sex offenders home if the offender is only 1,000 feet away.
What about day care centers & homes? 1,000' from schools is a start, but this needs another look to beef it up!
The only "idiots" are those who comment in this forum without having attended the Council Meeting where these points were discussed, and the Solicitor and Chief gave their guidance as to what the ordinance should contain.
Barbara. Believe me. I am in attendance. It doesn't change the fact that most are idiots. This ordinance has been an on going disaster for years. Council pussy foots around it and it is still ineffective. Do some research for a change.
|
Hartlyboy
Member
|
Posted: Thu Aug 6th, 2009 04:39 pm |
|
Old Smyrna wrote:
That's true, but until the law is changed to cull the herd, all of them will be painted with the same brush. Law makers should also take a look at making a list of violent offenders to go with the sex offenders list. A dirtbag is a dirtbag regardless of the crime, and I truly do not believe time in jail rehabilitates any of them. The only positive rehabilitation is being strapped to that table with an IV cocktail, a very affirmitative retroactive birth control method that works every time.
That's my big hang-up with this so-called sex offender list. We are up in arms about people who have committed offenses with their genitals and there is no corresponding watch list for people who have offended with weapons, drug distribution, assault, drunk driving, etc. They are more likely to be the ones who will cause serious harm to the population if they re-offend.
|
cottoncandy
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 291 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 6th, 2009 04:10 pm |
|
Old Smyrna wrote: Oh my! wrote: What do I think? I think council and mayor are idiots. 1,000 feet? On the walk home from school most children will pass a sex offenders home if the offender is only 1,000 feet away.
What about day care centers & homes? 1,000' from schools is a start, but this needs another look to beef it up!
The only "idiots" are those who comment in this forum without having attended the Council Meeting where these points were discussed, and the Solicitor and Chief gave their guidance as to what the ordinance should contain.
|
Old Smyrna
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 5th, 2009 11:56 pm |
|
yungin wrote: The problem with the laws governing sex offenders is that it is a blanket law covering ALL sex offenders. Some (not to go as far as most) are only sex offenders because of a technicality, not because they are child predators. Did they break the law? Yes. Are they a danger to society? Not all of them. You can be charged with a sex offence that will require you to adhere to this law by just doing something as silly as mooning people. As unacceptable as mooning is, it's still not a child predator or rapist. Those are the people that shouldn't have to be required to adhere to residence restrictions. They showed poor judgement and did a ridiculous manuver, but still aren't dangerous members of society, nor are they a threat to your children.
That's true, but until the law is changed to cull the herd, all of them will be painted with the same brush. Law makers should also take a look at making a list of violent offenders to go with the sex offenders list. A dirtbag is a dirtbag regardless of the crime, and I truly do not believe time in jail rehabilitates any of them. The only positive rehabilitation is being strapped to that table with an IV cocktail, a very affirmitative retroactive birth control method that works every time.
|
yungin
Member
| Joined: | Sat Apr 5th, 2008 |
| Location: | The Hill |
| Posts: | 126 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 5th, 2009 09:23 pm |
|
| The problem with the laws governing sex offenders is that it is a blanket law covering ALL sex offenders. Some (not to go as far as most) are only sex offenders because of a technicality, not because they are child predators. Did they break the law? Yes. Are they a danger to society? Not all of them. You can be charged with a sex offence that will require you to adhere to this law by just doing something as silly as mooning people. As unacceptable as mooning is, it's still not a child predator or rapist. Those are the people that shouldn't have to be required to adhere to residence restrictions. They showed poor judgement and did a ridiculous manuver, but still aren't dangerous members of society, nor are they a threat to your children.
|
Two Cents
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1464 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 5th, 2009 05:45 pm |
|
Oh my! wrote: What do I think? I think council and mayor are idiots.
That has been confirmed many times over.
|
shi12
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 9 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 5th, 2009 04:48 pm |
|
| I agree 100% with what about the day care centers. We had an offender move in across the street from a home day care center and the owner reported it to the police and she was told the law doen't cover day care centers.....On a positve note thank god he was 500 ft from a school so he had to go..
|
Old Smyrna
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 5th, 2009 04:29 am |
|
Oh my! wrote: What do I think? I think council and mayor are idiots. 1,000 feet? On the walk home from school most children will pass a sex offenders home if the offender is only 1,000 feet away.
What about day care centers & homes? 1,000' from schools is a start, but this needs another look to beef it up!
|
Barney Rubble
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jul 4th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 301 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 4th, 2009 06:06 pm |
|
Oh my! wrote: What do I think? I think council and mayor are idiots.
That has been confirmed many times over.
|
Oh my!
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 4th, 2009 05:46 pm |
|
| What do I think? I think council and mayor are idiots. 1,000 feet? On the walk home from school most children will pass a sex offenders home if the offender is only 1,000 feet away.
|
tspong
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3357 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 4th, 2009 04:48 pm |
|
What do you think?
From the Delaware State News:
Smyrna toughens offender prohibitions
By Al Kemp
Delaware State News
SMYRNA — Town Council on Monday voted unanimously to amend the town code to create stricter prohibitions for registered sex offenders.
The new ordinance reads, in part: "The Town of Smyrna believes that the [state] system of notification of the residence of sex offenders is not adequate ... ."
The town’s new ordinance mirrors the state’s in all but one respect: The distance a registered sex offender must stay away from any school, which the town doubled from 500 feet to 1,000 feet.
"’I’m not sure the council wants to create a place where there is no place for a registered sex offender to live. That would probably be unconstitutional," said Police Chief Richard Baldwin. "But we’re trying to protect the children."
The ordinance "sounds more onerous than it really is," said Town Manager David S. Hugg III.
"Part of what may have triggered this is a property out on East Commerce Street," Mr. Hugg said.
The Smyrna Web site lists 34 registered sex offenders who live in town limits, some of them on East Commerce Street. Those residents are designated tier-two and tier-three offenders, meaning moderate and high risk.
There are 2,500 moderate and high risk sex offenders registered in Delaware, according to the state Sex Offender Registry.
Of that number, more than 300 reside in the 19977 ZIP code that includes the greater Smyrna region as well as the James Vaughn Correctional Center.
Det. Sgt. Thomas Burris showed council a map with enlarged "red" zones where registered sex offenders are now prohibited.
The new law will only prohibit new offenders from moving into red zones. People who already live there don’t have to leave, he said.
Smyrna Police will notify any violators of the ordinance, who will have 60 days to comply. Violation is punishable by imprisonment for up to 30 days and a fine of up to $1,000.
Staff writer Al Kemp may be reached at 741-8296 or akemp@newszap.com.
|
Hartlyboy
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 22nd, 2009 11:00 pm |
|
| Yeah, now maybe she can look up some of the drug dealers that have been released back into society so we can work on putting them in the spotlight.
|
eastbounder
Member
| Joined: | Thu Sep 29th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 230 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 22nd, 2009 09:59 pm |
|
| When this was posted the information of the state police database said that he was employed at this establishment. Now it says that he is unemployed. Considering that the original post is 6 weeks old the information was either accurate or the offender was non-compliant in not giving the state his employment status. I would like to thank the orginal poster, Lady with a tramp for providing the valuable information in her orginal post.
|
action
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jul 22nd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 22nd, 2009 05:15 pm |
|
| The pervert does not work at the restaurant any longer. He quit. He never informed the employer he was a registered sex offender. It is ashame that the owners suffer because of lies by another. The owners are good people who work hard and have a good reputation of being honest. Making comments on a blog without confirming if the info is accurate and up to date is in itself an attack on good people. SHAME ON YOU
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20th, 2009 03:56 pm |
|
And the beat goes on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|
Hartlyboy
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 9th, 2009 04:36 am |
|
SmyrnaGuy wrote: look at the address of the restaurant. It's the one in Dover.
Thank heavens. Smyrna pizzas are safe....
|
SmyrnaGuy
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 450 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 9th, 2009 03:38 am |
|
look at the address of the restaurant. It's the one in Dover.
|
Lady with a Tramp
Member
| Joined: | Thu May 21st, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 33 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 8th, 2009 08:36 pm |
|
FARON MARSHALL JR.
Delaware Sex Offender Central Registry
|
Current time is 08:35 am | |
|