S.C.R.E.W. The Police ! (another update)

NOTE: it's not necessary to read this material.
I've merely compiled a few examples which support my claims:
The government composes irrational laws
and
the Police instinctively follow those rules.
(Please refer to the blog, entitled: S.C.R.E.W. The Police.)

So, here are many examples, which demonstrate both functions conjointly being put to use:

European countries require men to work until the age of 65, before he can collect retirement. While, a woman can begin collecting her pension at age 60.

There are "equality Ministers" in most European nations. And, not surprisingly, they create laws which are biased against men. Interestingly, the Police enforce these rules, even when the laws become utterly ridiculous. For example: Sweden's policy for Environmental Energy Reduction: which places larger restrictions upon men.

OR, cities in Spain which declare evenings which prohibit men from leaving their homes. In other words, the Government sanctions "official Ladies Night".

The oppressive laws imposed by the E.U., do NOT necessarily target against men.

You're probably aware of the political situation sweeping the European Union. They now have laws which make it a crime to even criticize a Muslim. So, a group of French Citizens are alarmed by the Militant Immigrants who are destroying their country. And they wanted to say a few words about it. And they were all arrested for doing so. If I'm not mistaken, one of those who's been jailed several times is, none other than Brigitte Bardowe. But it all stands to prove my point. There are political extremists who will certainly infiltrate ANY government. And their only goal is to harass you with imposing laws. AND THE POLICE ALWAYS follow the rules which are given to them.

Is it true? It's now become a crime in Canada, for someone to jokingly use the word, "Faggot".

-----------
The U.S.A. could very well have the worst policies. And, they don't necessarily target against men, in particular. EVERYONE Suffers.




It also seems, the police in many cities, are quite busy launching simultaneous investigations accusing teens of felony pornographic nudity.

I'm really astonished as to why our Law Enforcement would waste such time with this type of issue. It proves again, that sex is still regarded as a taboo. BUT, more importantly, it's an easy day's work for the cops. This is a main reason why they are devoting so much time toward this narrow topic. HEY, it's much easier than chasing some drug dealer, who's carrying an assault rifle. Instead, they arrest a teenage girl for sending nude pictures, to her boyfriend.

I can imagine, the police will have their hands full, if they dare try to investigate every case throughout this country. But, it's ironic how our Enforcement blindly follows bad legislation. And that's the key issue.

PLUS, THe police are taking advantage of the fact, that, parents don't want their children to even dare thinking about sex.

Rumor has it, the Castle Rock, Colorado P.D. has launched 18 simultaneous investigations into this matter.
Pardon my Bluntness: but, What a bunch of FuKK@ing losers, to waste our tax dollars.
It's rather obvious, the Police are merely seeking fanfare from the Media.

*******************************
*******************************
*******************************
*******************************
________________________
ANYWAY: HERE"S AN ACTUAL EXERT put forth by the ASSOCIATED PRESS:

Teens are sending nude photos via cell phone
By STEPHANIE REITZ Associated Press Writer

Story Created: Jun 4, 2008 at 2:18 PM EDT

Story Updated: Jun 4, 2008 at 2:18 PM EDT
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - Passing notes in study hall or getting your best friend to ask a boy if he likes you or, you know, LIKES you, is so last century. Nowadays, teenagers are snapping naked pictures of themselves on their cell phones and sending them to their boyfriends and girlfriends.


In suburban Syracuse, N.Y., several teenage girls sent naked pictures on their phones to their boyfriends, only to learn that another boy had collected them from the Web.

Some boys are photographing themselves, too. In Utah, a 16-year-old boy was charged with a felony for sending nude photos of himself over a cell phone to several girls. Four middle school students - two boys and two girls - in Daphne, Ala., took photos of themselves on their cell phones and traded the images back and forth, authorities said.


School administrators in Santa Fe, Texas, confiscated dozens of cell phones from students in May after nude photos of two junior high girls began circulating. The girls had sent the photos to their boyfriends,

several students' nude self-portraits recently spread through the wealthy New York City bedroom community. "Now a stupid adolescent mistake can take on major implications and go on their record for the rest of their lives."

_______________________________________
My brief response:

perhaps, now, you can see why the police have devoted such great effort toward this issue. It's become rather popular with the PARENTS. But, they've never stopped to consider the possible Felony charges.




***************************
***************************
***************************
Here's another idiotic story.
Lincoln, RI
Two Teen Girls Face Child Porn Charges ... For Their Own Pictures.

(and, the police pursued this case, complete with arrests, and a full-scale investigation.)
(footnote: It almost seems as though, our Law Enforcement is grossly influenced by the media. And, in simple terms: they're afraid of getting 'bad press'.)

It's difficult to believe, these average girls were charged with Major Felonies, punishable to 15 years in prison, if convicted. This depends upon how they interpret the law.


------
But, as usual, the Hippies use a typical argument: "The Law is the Law" "and we must follow it".


and A writer from Greensboro, N.C. argued against the position of Law Enforcement:
-----
"you say that sixteen is immature, but you can find immaturity at all ages. i think if you are sixteen and you want to do something like this it is your choice to be stupid, and your right as a HUMAN BEING to choose. i dont think people give teenagers the respect they deserve. , but that doesnt mean they cannot make a simple descision for themselves. if a sixteen year old posts pornographic pictures, they know what they are doing". (my response: actually, her actions weren't exactly stupid. Just sexy. But, the writer from Greensboro probably agrees with me. The truth is, his article was carefully meant to gain acceptance from concerned parents).
-------
another post was heavily criticized by adults:

"Am I the only person on Earth who notices that our government has become too invasive?"
-------

The following post was also condemned by fathers of teenage girls:

"This is NOT an issue of whether or not I approve of these girls. Actually, my views on sexuality are somewhat reserved. So, you're missing the point of this whole conversation. The issue here is: Why is our government hunting everyone down? Pretty soon, every teenager who's either had sex, or taken nude pictures of themselves will be locked away and jailed. That's the point to my whole complaint. I'm not approving of these girls, or anything like that. That shouldn't be the issue. It's a question of big government judging morality through force. What do you think?
also, needless to say, concerned parents supported this hysteria. Afterall, most parents would prefer their children to become Asexaul beings. THis is why such outlandish rules are welcomed by the public."

--------

Our parents would easily support harsh legislation against any male, if his partner was under the age of 25. Parents will always be parents. And, this mentality allows the Feminists to bring felony charges against any man who's sexually active.

--------
Interestingly, these 16 year-old girls were photographed without a partner. Which means that, all teenagers who "wank" are subject to severe penalties as well.


This is a classic example where both Liberals and conservatives embrace an outlandish law, without considering: there will be more severe laws, in the future.

---------
Let's not forget, some community standards prohibit adults from engaging in this activity, as well. Most people probably wouldn't learn of these rules, until it was too late to avoid prosecution.

Hey, our police force is so goddamn smart. They follow the Activists, like drones.



--- a 12 year-old boy was playing D.A.R.E. with his 14 year-old girlfriend. And she dared him to touch her busoms. Several weeks later, people at school began to gossip about their experience (as most people do). And eventually, the boy was arrested for LEWD conduct with a 14-year old. I should remind you: they were NOT in public, plus, they didn't even go very far. But that's irrelevant, anyway. Upon his arrest, THE POLICE admitted that it was totally preposteruos. But in their exact words, "What can we do". The law says, anyone committing Lewd contact with a 14 year-old female minor. It doesn't specify a specific age of her partner. Anyway, there was outcry from the boy's parents. Then eventually, the GIRL was arrested because she was older, plus, she had also initiated the "Lewd" encounter. But that's certainly NOT what the boy's parents wanted. LUCKILY, all charges were eventually dropped. BUT, this all shows a distinct BLIND mentality to 'FOLLOW THE LAW' by our police force. And, needless to say, the ACTIVISTS LOVE to make UNJUST LAWS.

This is a true story...
SO, once again, I declare: F. U. K. K. THE POLICE








*********************************************
*********************************************
*********************************************

Here's a post relating to the Dead Broke Dads.

SUPPLIED BY a Myspace site called:

FATHERS UNITE TO FIGHT FOR KIDS RIGHTS

Dead-Broke Dads and the Challenges to Parenting

Jeffery M.
Leving


2008-09-24 at 8:46 am · Filed under Analysis, Child Support & Custody, Family, Fatherhood, Mating, Marriage & Divorce, Men's Rights Activism, OP/ED, Oppression, Vox Populi

"Deadbeat Dads" has been the headliner of multiple stories in multiple newspapers for decades. Cook County launched "Operation Father's Pay"; Butler County in Ohio put faces of these so called deadbeats on pizza boxes; and the Los Angeles County District Attorney announced their "Most Wanted Delinquent Parent" list. Several other states have begun similar campaigns to collect on un-paid child support. All of these humiliating campaigns launched against these fathers would have us believe that the men targeted are insensitive deadbeats who are selfishly stiffing their children; however, research contradicts this.


The fact that many of these types of campaigns struggle to come up with alleged "deadbeats" who have an education or a middle-class job might give less zealous public officials cause to stop and pause. Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement data shows that two-thirds of those behind on child support nationwide earn poverty level wages; less than four percent of the national child support debt is owed by those earning $40,000 or more a year. According to the largest federally-funded study of divorced dads ever conducted, unemployment, not willful neglect, is the largest cause of failure to pay child support.


The "Most Wanted Deadbeat Parents" lists that are put out clearly illustrate this problem. Far from being lists of well-heeled businessmen, lawyers, and accountants, the vast majority of the men on these lists do low wage and often seasonal work, and owe large sums of money which they could never hope to pay off. Even a person with a college degree is a rare find on these lists. Nevertheless, the powers that be who create these lists say that the men on the lists are singled out for their "ability to pay".


Virginia's "Most Wanted" list was topped by a laborer, a carnival hired hand, and a construction worker. These men collectively somehow owed over a quarter of a million dollars in child support. A plumber topped the Texas "most wanted" list as the highest wage earner. Kentucky's list sported only one obligor with an education, and the most common designation for occupation was "laborer." Near the top of Arizona's list was a maintenance man who owed $90,223 and, best of all, a roofer who owed $240,581. One wonders what the financial condition of those who weren't "singled out" for their ability to pay is.


How did men of such humble means end up owing so much money? The arrearages are likely created in large part because the child support system is often mulishly impervious to the economic realities working people face, such as layoffs, wage cuts, unemployment, and work-related injuries. According to the Urban Institute, less than one in 20 non-custodial parents who suffers a substantial drop in income is able to get courts to reduce his or her child support payments.


Some of the fathers on Illinois' Department of Healthcare and Family Services'

"Wanted" list got there in the following manner—the wife or girlfriend ended the relationship, left with the kids, and then went to the state to get public assistance. Illinois DHFS then went after the father for child support to repay the cost of the assistance. The father–against whom no wrongdoing has been charged—has likely been deprived of custody of his kids and may not even have any visitation rights, and might not even know where his kids are.


While paying the state, the father also has to hire an attorney and fight his way through the courts just to attempt to see his children. Even if he is awarded visitation rights, recalcitrant mothers often flout these orders with impunity. Low and moderate income fathers frequently must choose between paying for legal action to obtain contact with their children and risk jail time for not paying child support- or paying child support and losing the ability to have contact with their children. These men are hardly "walking away" from their "families and responsibilities.
"

Sometimes a father in this situation has been paying the teenage children directly because the mother has been using the child support for everything but the children. Nevertheless, the father is saddled with arrearages and declared a "deadbeat." When he presents his stack of cancelled checks, the state says, "Sorry that money you paid is a gift—you still owe us child support to reimburse the cost of the public assistance." It is irrelevant that the money was used by the children to buy food, clothing and the necessities of life.


Even though dads are often the only ones targeted and criticized, according to US Census data, noncustodial mothers are actually 20% more likely to default on their child support obligations than noncustodial fathers. This is despite the fact that noncustodial mothers are less likely to be required to pay child support, and those with support obligations are asked to pay a lower percentage of their income in child support than noncustodial fathers.


While each of these "deadbeat" lists undoubtedly has men on them who willfully dodge their responsibility of child support, the larger problem lies not with non-custodial parents, but instead with the child support system. Arresting low-income parents or parading their names and faces in highly publicized media blitzes is neither fair nor useful. What's needed instead is an overhaul of the system, so that blue-collar workers aren't turned into criminals because they've failed to pay obligations which are beyond their reach.


Jeffery M. Leving is a nationally renowned attorney and fathers' rights advocate.
He is the author of "Fathers' Rights" and "Divorce Wars" and the founder of dadsrights. com.
Mr. Leving is also the Governor appointed Chairman of the Illinois Council on Responsible Fatherhood.