Author Topic: FBI 10 most wanted down to 9. Warren Jeffs arrested in Las Vegas (Read 1127 times)

Maverick · « **Reply #15 on:** August 29, 2006, 09:10:07 PM »

Be interesting to see how it plays out. I'm curious given the control claims in the article who in the community will testify and in which jurisdiction.

Viking, Seem you have trouble understanding the situation as to whjy he was considered so dangerous. Perhaps if you read the article you would understand why. It was fairly well explained there, including why it was a federal case to begin with.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #16 on:** August 29, 2006, 11:03:55 PM »

Good read on the topic: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385509510

Squire · « **Reply #17 on:** August 29, 2006, 11:19:18 PM »

He is also wanted in Canada for the same thing. Arranging for what ammounts to child rape is not legal here, or in the US, from what I understand. He's going to get his overdue day in court.

rpm · « **Reply #18 on:** August 30, 2006, 01:37:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by BTW
I'm sure he coulda worked out a deal with Michael Jackson...

I'm sorry. Child molestation is no joke, but that was funny.

TracerX · « **Reply #19 on:** August 30, 2006, 03:16:25 AM »

Could it be that part of the reason these groups have been allowed to exist for so long is because putting the father in jail puts more than one household in chaos? Sounds like a poor excuse for leinency, but it seems that if the offense is more than just poligamy, the foot comes down pretty hard as it did on Jeffs. I wonder how this group in particular will survive in the comming months/years. I have to hope many of them look a little harder at what they are doing.

lazs2 · « **Reply #20 on:** August 30, 2006, 08:33:28 AM »

again... agree with sandie on this one... If the guy wants to be married to a couple more wives then he is simply breaking the membership rules... the marriages after the first should simply not be recognized by the state.

He has every right to live with as many women as he wants and call them wives if he wants. The state has the right to recognize only the first.

As for being on the 10 most wanted list.... I think that should say a lot more about our secret police than most of my posts on the matter..

We are getting screwed on the whole secret police thing.... probly close to 100,000 various secret police in the U.S, and they are worthless except to terrorize the citizens and to arrest the most harmless person on the "tne most wanted list"

The BATF is called "F troop" the FBI is called "Famous But Incompetent" and I think we all get a good laugh when we hear the CIA mentioned.... DEA? sheesh... drugs are more plentiful and cheaper with every hard earned dollar we give em.

lazs

Sandman · « **Reply #21 on:** August 30, 2006, 09:45:50 AM »

I'd take it even further than that Lasz.

Why does the state care about marital status? Other than issues of ownership, it really shouldn't be any of their business.

x0847Marine · « **Reply #22 on:** August 30, 2006, 10:25:54 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
A polygamist is one of the 10 most wanted criminals in America? Ummmm

Jail the sinners, I feel safer now don't you?

Good for him if he found more than 1 chick to service him, who decided that was a crime anyway?

He hasn't been on a killing spree, bought cell phones for Hezbollah or taken pictures of any homeland security guards... he might deserve a trip to the big house for being a wacko banana, where he'll be summarily murdered, but man... this little wienie being characterized as some top 10 threat where the Govt has four press conferences at the same time breaking their arms patting each-other on the back?

Funny thing is the Feds had no idea where this guy was until he fell into their lap, it was dumb luck they caught him... he was stopped for a traffic infraction by some super trooper looking to scratch out a ticket.

Chairboy · « **Reply #23 on:** August 30, 2006, 10:38:54 AM »

Laws against polygamy seem pretty dang dumb. Just another example of government intrusiveness, but I suppose it's the kind of intrusiveness the usual suspects seem to find acceptable. Funny that.

TracerX · « **Reply #24 on:** August 30, 2006, 10:56:47 AM »

Polygamy was not the offense that landed Jeffs on the Most wanted list. It was underage sex charges, and the organizing of a network that preyed on the young women of the community. The State has every right to protect their citizens, most especially the young and defenceless children. How does a young 14 year old girl defend herself in a community like the one Jeffs created? They would have to run away from home, and the State does not see that as a solution.

lazs2 · « **Reply #25 on:** August 30, 2006, 02:15:50 PM »

sandie...you will have to explain a little further on that. At this point I believe that marriage is a contract between a man and a woman and that it is used by the state to assighn certain legal benifiets. I also believe the the religious community has a stake in legitamizing the union too.

lazs

Sandman · « **Reply #26 on:** August 30, 2006, 02:54:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
sandie...you will have to explain a little further on that. At this point I believe that marriage is a contract between a man and a woman and that it is used by the state to assighn certain legal benifiets. I also believe the the religious community has a stake in legitamizing the union too.

lazs

I'm saying that there's no reason why that contract can't be extended further. The legal benefits whatever they may be can simply be extended from one partner to two or three or more and also for same sex partnerships. Just to be clear though... I do not believe that there should be any tax benefit or penalty assigned because of marital status. It's none of the governments business.

I also do not want to get wrapped around the axle on a semantic argument. The terms domestic partnership, civil union, and marriage are for all intents and purposes the same thing.

Gunslinger · « **Reply #27 on:** August 30, 2006, 03:09:01 PM »

For those wondering WTF is so bad about this guy......

It's alledged like previously claimed that alot of the young boys in the group where outcasted where as many of the girls, as young as 13 where partnered up with 50-60 year old men. These young girls were brainwashed and abused beyond all fasion of the mind. When they didn't tow the "family line" they got the crap beat out of them and would be locked up and starved for days, yet they were constantly beraded with psycological torture that consitantly made them want to stay with the family. My wife and I where watching Dr. Phil one boring afternoon (gawd too many of my stupid stories start this way) and he had 2 teenagers that escaped from there and they where TOTALLY screwed up in the head. As much as they where abused and disgusted by the fact of arranged marraige that young they still had a deep fealing that they needed to go back to their familys to fit in. It was really sad.

moot · « **Reply #28 on:** August 31, 2006, 02:34:18 AM »

Stockholm syndrome?

lazs2 · « **Reply #29 on:** August 31, 2006, 08:29:31 AM »

sandie... that makes no sense to me. What you are asking for is a disolution of the conventional marriage except in religious circles.

I believe that marrigage is something that has evolved as far as the state is concerned because we (the people) felt that a religious ceremony was also benifical to us as a people because of the way it paired people and raised the children (future)... all the (state) benifiets were based on that. the people for right or wrong felt that there was some benifiet to conventional marriage and rewarded it.

There is nothing wrong with that... everyone has the same right to participate. Those who do not wish to may have some other kind of contract in order to fit their needs.

I don't think that we need to recognize this guys wives after the first as legit but he has the right to call em whatever he wants and, if they are of age and menataly fit... to consentualy have any relationship he wishes.

Anyone who wishes to have the benifiets of a marriage outside of the conventional rules needs to fight to get people to believe that they are worth the effort (expense) and make it happen. Not piggyback in on an established institution that had specific goals and rules.

If marrigage becomes meaningless so far as male and female couples are concerned then you have a point... what difference does it make what you call what you do?

lazs