+- Sinisterly (https://sinister.ly)
+-- Forum: General (https://sinister.ly/Forum-General)
+--- Forum: The Lounge (https://sinister.ly/Forum-The-Lounge)
+---- Forum: Serious Discussion (https://sinister.ly/Forum-Serious-Discussion)
+---- Thread: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate (/Thread-Strict-Laws-USA-Serious-Debate)
Pages:
1
2
Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - Box - 02-22-2013
This is may seem like a weird topic, but just hear me out.
Laws in the US have accumulated to an abundance of unnecessary laws that really affect how people act. It's good to have laws, and we all understand why they're necessary. Here are a few of my optinions:
• Prostitution - The US has some of the highest rape rates in all of the developed (non third-world) countries. Most developed countries that have a lower rate of rape do not have a law against prostitution.
• Gun Control - Although not in affect, this is completely outrageous. Look at all the countries without much gun control at all. They have lower murder / crime rates than us. The US has some of the highest. If everyone is permitted to carry a firearm (think "2nd Amendment"), people might think twice before assaulting.
• Television Censorship - This fits right with our rape rates. Name a European / Asian country, and they will probably allow nudity and "offensive" language on television. Sheltering children and young adults with only make them more susceptible to curiosity, hence the rates in which I mentioned.
So follow a similar pattern I did. Discuss these 3 things I mentioned or bring up relevant topics.
/discuss
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - Flashdrive - 02-22-2013
I agree with Gun Control laws as i've posted a thread about my feelings with them.
Prostitution could be legalized as long as monitored and you require to have a license to be able to offer sex with STI checks or other transmittable illnesses.
Television Censorship I don't really see a problem with this as you have access to the internet and litteraly ANYTHING.
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - Box - 02-22-2013
(02-22-2013, 01:31 AM)Flashdrive Wrote: Television Censorship I don't really see a problem with this as you have access to the internet and litteraly ANYTHING.
You know that less people in the US have access to the internet than those that do? Television is actually more prosperous. You also have to remember the parents not allowing children to use the internet, or at least monitor what they do / add family filters.
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - Flashdrive - 02-22-2013
(02-22-2013, 01:33 AM)Box Wrote: You know that less people in the US have access to the internet than those that do? Television is actually more prosperous. You also have to remember the parents not allowing children to use the internet, or at least monitor what they do / add family filters.
I suppose you are right with the parenting guard and censorship blocks. But even if they do have less demanding laws regarding the filtering of television you would still have the problem that you stated with self input filters to guard children from what parents deem "inappropriate"
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - Box - 02-22-2013
(02-22-2013, 01:34 AM)Flashdrive Wrote: I suppose you are right with the parenting guard and censorship blocks. But even if they do have less demanding laws regarding the filtering of television you would still have the problem that you stated with self input filters to guard children from what parents deem "inappropriate"
That's perfectly okay if the parents shelter them when they're of that young age. It's the fact that once they're out of the house, they won't do the things they could do on the internet because they were sheltered. However, TV is available anywhere; cheap apartments, stores, restaurants, hotels, and wherever else you can name. If they don't have access to the internet, they will eventually have a TV whether they own it or not.
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - Flashdrive - 02-22-2013
(02-22-2013, 01:37 AM)Box Wrote: That's perfectly okay if the parents shelter them when they're of that young age. It's the fact that once they're out of the house, they won't do the things they could do on the internet because they were sheltered. However, TV is available anywhere; cheap apartments, stores, restaurants, hotels, and wherever else you can name. If they don't have access to the internet, they will eventually have a TV whether they own it or not.
I have to admit you've out played me.
I suppose it wouldn't matter anyway because they'd do it when they left. In that case i'd have to agree with your point.
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - E. Westen - 02-27-2013
Prostitution will never be legalized on a federal level because it would be impossible to ensure all of the prostitutes are clean after every client.
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - Box - 02-27-2013
(02-27-2013, 09:07 AM)PaNiK Wrote: Prostitution will never be legalized on a federal level because it would be impossible to ensure all of the prostitutes are clean after every client.
That's a good point. However it would be on the "company" or "organization" of prostitutes that would get in trouble for the prostitute. Being a job title, the prostitute would not be in legal trouble for not being clean. That would be the company's job to assure that they are.
Unorganized prostitution is where you would be correct. As weird as it may sound, an organized "process" would be the way to go.
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - E. Westen - 02-28-2013
(02-27-2013, 11:16 PM)Box Wrote: That's a good point. However it would be on the "company" or "organization" of prostitutes that would get in trouble for the prostitute. Being a job title, the prostitute would not be in legal trouble for not being clean. That would be the company's job to assure that they are.
Unorganized prostitution is where you would be correct. As weird as it may sound, an organized "process" would be the way to go.
I agree but it seems like it would just be too hard to regulate. I can't ever see the government promoting something like that. I'm sure they'd want to tax the hell out of it.
RE: Strict Laws (USA) - Serious Debate - Google - 02-28-2013
I do not like the us laws at all, atleast some like ACTA for example.