Saturday, September 25, 2010
Now she is a victim with a philosophy
Lynda Martin is obviously introverted this am and eludes to the social commentary about "people refusing to acknowledge other points of views" she is surprised that others would admonish her article (Interviews with Four sexual predators) and lumps Conservatives, Gay bashers,Obama dissenters and forgot who else and uses the term "Lunatic fringe" in the same paragraph. She sprinkles a few memorable quotes from Martin Luther King, Albert Camus and Aesop to validate her post for good measure.(I always love when they do that) It looks like they want to appear more enlightened than they actually are and whats better to insert in one's opinion but famous quotes from famous dead people??? I am sure Lynda M. Martin is not a bad person and some of her writings have some very valid opinions and observations that one would be hard pressed to disagree with. Many others, I doubt.. and when those public writings have an impact on people looking for "truths" and or information on a very real very dangerous social issue? Then admonishment is called for.The fact she doesn't respond well to dissent on her views is as obvious as it gets by this latest version of her "There are two sides to every question" piece. Where She and I differ is I would have titled "there are two sides to every argument and the truth most likely is in the middle"..MMartin is a liberal who lives in a world in which she wants it to be" and thinks policy should reflect that perception. ""liberals have a pesky habit of that" "I live in a world in which it is and am very speculative of policies that don't reflect that" MMartin is very disturbed and makes mention of it that her e-mail box has been on fire since her Predator article "some even threatening" OH MY!!! well Ms. Lynda I sent you one e-mail and that was a reply to your article that you refused to post and there was nothing threatening in it. Try living as one of the "in the trenches" real child advocates (without fancy credentials) who attempts to clean up their neighborhoods as you precious LE "sources" keeps dumping them in and hopes the neighbors don't notice or make noise about it so they don't have to do more paperwork. Try violating a violent offender who was dropped in your neighborhood again because the PO didn't check the "residency restrictions" before she gave the ok and the rent was doable. Try calling down police chief's in your city because they couldn't be bothered to notify the surrounding neighbors that a convicted Predator with a horrendous history just moved in (as they are required to do by law).Try understanding how a guy who served less than 2/3 of his original sentence for kidnapping and rape can be free to walk the streets and be "released from supervision" Try walking in those shoes for one lousy day when a person like myself has to position herself between the bad guys and the cops who resent you when you demand they enforce the most basic of Laws that have already been written with the Blood of our kids. Yea, my heart bleeds for your disturbing e-mails and your morning epiphany that people are so narrow minded..PS here is a very enlightening quote for you: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and is on the sex offender registry 9 out 10 times "its a duck"
For Ms. Lynda M. Martin
"What gives you the right to say, it appears she was saying... or I felt she was saying"
Why write a piece on any subject unless you want the reader to infer something from it??? You had no problem making a general statement then interjecting your opinion as if it were fact. You might want to dissect your writing skills in that area, just a thought..
"Skewed agenda"? There is absolutely nothing "skewed about it" I resent persons as yourself who write on a piece that is obviously a draw for parents seeking some semblance of understanding on this issue then downplay the very "real dangers" of what these people perpetrate on our families everyday. You titled your series "Interviews with four convicted sexual predators", then prefaced it with a resume' that attempted imply some sort of higher education in the field of "credentialed abuse expert" (That was skewed), then you proceeded to use less than accurate statistics that didn't encompass the full scope of sexual crimes, (that was skewed).
Your quote " I wrote this article to express my concerns over the back-firing of the laws that may have started with good intentions. I meant it as an education for those who've never been involved".
Education Lynda? Surely you jest, educating people would to have included that while some offenders "romeos" have an almost 0% of reoffense rate, other offenders with child preferences of certain ages have a 100% reoffense rate (multiple victims Lynda) It was if you downplayed that very real and dangerous aspect of who these people are and what they are capable of. That was skewed! Your article wanted to infer most abuse was an "all in the family" sitcom and as long as we didn't leave our kids in "strange Uncle Harry's care" we didn't have that much to worry about! That was skewed Lynda! Then your entire site degenerated into a bitch session for sex offender groups who want to try and convince the average reader "they really aren't bad guys" and got wrangled by a dysfunctional legal system! Talk about skewed! For those of us who have been bantering on this issue for years, we can spot those groups in 3 post or less, they gravitate towards forums as yours and try and pass themselves off as " soccermother1934" c'mon,yea,she is just an average mother who appreciates your depth of understanding to sex offenders and the trails and tribulations they endure, while bashing the laws that pertain to them. Then..and here is the icing on the cake..your quote "But here's a thought: has it not occurred to you, seeing as 90% of sex abuse goes on within the family, and that 95% of new sex offenses are committed by persons not registered, that this HARD LINE only guarantees that more victims will remain silent? Only 20% or less sex abuse cases are reported now -- you can bet your bottom dollar that will decline even further, and more victims will go without the help they deserve".So what your saying LYNDA M.MARTIN is if we don't back off on the punishments of these guys, those who suffer in silence is the fault of people like me and others who have no tolerance for these crimes? Now that is the definition of skewed Lynda!You give too much credit to those who have no qualms about using our children as sexual vessels. Most of these freaks (especially those who would use a family member)given an open door and 5 minutes think no further ahead than the opportunity to "get off" as harsh as it may be to hear, that's what it boils down to. For someone like you to try and make a "rats back look like a mink coat" then infer the blame goes to people like me for taking a tougher stand ? That is the height of audacity. You sound like the sex offenders who tout the "if the laws get tougher, whats the incentive to keeping the child alive" mentality. Lynda Martin, you may want to subscribe to the majority of Parents philosophies, "we need to make the repercussions for child sexual abuse so restrictive and so punishing even the "thought" of perpetrating such a crime would be a deterrent in itself". My Agenda as you call it is not skewed, yes its harsh no doubt, but I do pride myself by adding a dose of common sense where its needed. I have watched the system "condition" the public to let these men live among us and throw the citizens a bone by giving us a registry to take the financial heat off themselves.You and I are on opposite sides of the issue due to the fact you want to "condition" the public that their fear is overblown so therefore they need not have as much cause for concern as they do. Lets leave it at this, I have four offenders "allowed" to live on my street, one convicted years ago for having consensual sex with his underage girlfriend who is now his wife, #2 offender has two rape convictions for blitzing a 12 year old girl at a bus stop and almost beating her to death while raping her, the other charge for breaking into his girlfriends mother house and raping her. A third rape charge was dismissed due to lost DNA evidence and a victim afraid to testify.#3 is a Cuban national who floated onto our shores who kidnapped an adult woman, raped and robbed her, but cant be deported due to "no formal extridition treaties with Cuba and since his victim wasnt a minor has no residency restrictions.#4 committed his crime of sexually molesting his 10 year old nephew in Missouri but liked the beaches better in Florida and ends up in my neighborhood I am suppose to accomadate his choice to live here. Now if the system cant see its way clear to keep offender #2 locked up and away from my family,Deport #3 to Guitmo, refuse #4 offenders request to set up residence in Florida, how much credence do you want me to place in that system while you jump up and down for more lenient individual compassions for "certain offenders"? When and only when the system quits throwing the offenders to a wall and watches to see what sticks and what falls, will I have a diplomatic view of these crimes and those who commits them.
Why write a piece on any subject unless you want the reader to infer something from it??? You had no problem making a general statement then interjecting your opinion as if it were fact. You might want to dissect your writing skills in that area, just a thought..
"Skewed agenda"? There is absolutely nothing "skewed about it" I resent persons as yourself who write on a piece that is obviously a draw for parents seeking some semblance of understanding on this issue then downplay the very "real dangers" of what these people perpetrate on our families everyday. You titled your series "Interviews with four convicted sexual predators", then prefaced it with a resume' that attempted imply some sort of higher education in the field of "credentialed abuse expert" (That was skewed), then you proceeded to use less than accurate statistics that didn't encompass the full scope of sexual crimes, (that was skewed).
Your quote " I wrote this article to express my concerns over the back-firing of the laws that may have started with good intentions. I meant it as an education for those who've never been involved".
Education Lynda? Surely you jest, educating people would to have included that while some offenders "romeos" have an almost 0% of reoffense rate, other offenders with child preferences of certain ages have a 100% reoffense rate (multiple victims Lynda) It was if you downplayed that very real and dangerous aspect of who these people are and what they are capable of. That was skewed! Your article wanted to infer most abuse was an "all in the family" sitcom and as long as we didn't leave our kids in "strange Uncle Harry's care" we didn't have that much to worry about! That was skewed Lynda! Then your entire site degenerated into a bitch session for sex offender groups who want to try and convince the average reader "they really aren't bad guys" and got wrangled by a dysfunctional legal system! Talk about skewed! For those of us who have been bantering on this issue for years, we can spot those groups in 3 post or less, they gravitate towards forums as yours and try and pass themselves off as " soccermother1934" c'mon,yea,she is just an average mother who appreciates your depth of understanding to sex offenders and the trails and tribulations they endure, while bashing the laws that pertain to them. Then..and here is the icing on the cake..your quote "But here's a thought: has it not occurred to you, seeing as 90% of sex abuse goes on within the family, and that 95% of new sex offenses are committed by persons not registered, that this HARD LINE only guarantees that more victims will remain silent? Only 20% or less sex abuse cases are reported now -- you can bet your bottom dollar that will decline even further, and more victims will go without the help they deserve".So what your saying LYNDA M.MARTIN is if we don't back off on the punishments of these guys, those who suffer in silence is the fault of people like me and others who have no tolerance for these crimes? Now that is the definition of skewed Lynda!You give too much credit to those who have no qualms about using our children as sexual vessels. Most of these freaks (especially those who would use a family member)given an open door and 5 minutes think no further ahead than the opportunity to "get off" as harsh as it may be to hear, that's what it boils down to. For someone like you to try and make a "rats back look like a mink coat" then infer the blame goes to people like me for taking a tougher stand ? That is the height of audacity. You sound like the sex offenders who tout the "if the laws get tougher, whats the incentive to keeping the child alive" mentality. Lynda Martin, you may want to subscribe to the majority of Parents philosophies, "we need to make the repercussions for child sexual abuse so restrictive and so punishing even the "thought" of perpetrating such a crime would be a deterrent in itself". My Agenda as you call it is not skewed, yes its harsh no doubt, but I do pride myself by adding a dose of common sense where its needed. I have watched the system "condition" the public to let these men live among us and throw the citizens a bone by giving us a registry to take the financial heat off themselves.You and I are on opposite sides of the issue due to the fact you want to "condition" the public that their fear is overblown so therefore they need not have as much cause for concern as they do. Lets leave it at this, I have four offenders "allowed" to live on my street, one convicted years ago for having consensual sex with his underage girlfriend who is now his wife, #2 offender has two rape convictions for blitzing a 12 year old girl at a bus stop and almost beating her to death while raping her, the other charge for breaking into his girlfriends mother house and raping her. A third rape charge was dismissed due to lost DNA evidence and a victim afraid to testify.#3 is a Cuban national who floated onto our shores who kidnapped an adult woman, raped and robbed her, but cant be deported due to "no formal extridition treaties with Cuba and since his victim wasnt a minor has no residency restrictions.#4 committed his crime of sexually molesting his 10 year old nephew in Missouri but liked the beaches better in Florida and ends up in my neighborhood I am suppose to accomadate his choice to live here. Now if the system cant see its way clear to keep offender #2 locked up and away from my family,Deport #3 to Guitmo, refuse #4 offenders request to set up residence in Florida, how much credence do you want me to place in that system while you jump up and down for more lenient individual compassions for "certain offenders"? When and only when the system quits throwing the offenders to a wall and watches to see what sticks and what falls, will I have a diplomatic view of these crimes and those who commits them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
