WDSmart

In my opinion, these forums, and, in fact, all social media, are all about sharing thoughts.

There is no difference in my perception of reality between the rape of a child and the rape of an adult. I am not a legal expert, and I couldn't find an absolute answer online about whether the laws differ in these different cases, so I am not ignoring anything. Both child and adult rape are serious crimes and should be punished. Whether one would result in more punishment than the other, I don't know. I would not be surprised that most people think the same way you do about this, so a jury might well recommend a more severe penalty for child rape than the rape of an adult. Whether a judge would is more uncertain. I can only say that I think both are serious crimes and that they should be punished.

Your thoughts are highly offensive. You must not have kids I consider the rape of or any unprovocked assault on anyone a very serious crime regardless of the victim's age or physical capacity. My "thoughts" (comments) only offend you because you either misunderstand or disagree with them. I have eight children (four natural, three adopted, and one foster child), but they are all adults now. I now have 12 grandkids (most are now adults), and three great-grandchildren.

I consider the rape of or any unprovocked assault on anyone a very serious crime regardless of the victim's age or physical capacity.

The problem with all this is there are two different legal authorities implied. One is federal (ICE) and one is local (DA). I'll respond to you in the order of your comments: If someone in the USA is accused of a crime committed in the USA, the DA should handle the case in accordance with the law. If the person is not a citizen of the USA, they should not be automatically extradited. A decision on that should be made after the outcome of their trial, and that decision would be made by ICE. If, during their investigation of a non-citizen, ICE discovers they have an outstanding warrant in another country or even a conviction, this would be presented and considered as part of the person's application for US residency. If a non-citizen is denied residency, then they can be deported. Any person charged with a crime, whether it be jaywalking, rape, or serial murders, committed in the USA the DA should handle the case in accordance with the law. If the judge at the preliminary hearing, after hearing the details of the case, decides to grant the accused bail, then that is the judge's prerogative. The judge, however, does not have the prerogative to order them to be deported. Any person charged with a crime, whether it be jaywalking, rape, or serial murders, committed before they came to the USA, ICE would be present and consider that as part of the person's application for US residency. If a non-citizen is denied residency, then they can be deported. I don't want to run for any office in the USA or anywhere else. I want to live the rest of my life in Thailand. I don't want anyone CONVICTED of rape to go unpunished. However, I also don't want anyone only ACCUSED of rape to automatically be punished. They should be assumed to be innocent and have a right to a trial.

I don't consider rape (or murder) of a child any less of a crime than that of an adult. Do you? And if so, why?

I did read the whole thing. I didn't interpret what I read the way you did. I'll answer your questions above and comment in the order you listed them. I do think EVERYONE, no matter what the charges are against them, should be assumed to be innocent and are eligible for a bond. That bond should be set according to the charges and the proof presented to the judge by the prosecuting attorney. IMO, the bond for people charged with rape of a child should be very high. But, as far as I can tell, these people are NOT accused of rape by a local community but are being charged with something else. ICE is the only agency accusing them with rape. Yes, these people MAY HAVE broken the law by coming into the USA illegally, UNLESS they are REFUGEES. That is what they must do: go to court and present their case so a judge (or jury?) can decide if they are here illegally. I had to look up "MS13" and "TDA," and now see they are criminal gangs in the USA (MS13) and other countries. I'm sure they are very nasty gangs, and anyone associated with them should be investigated. BUT, I don't think any agency can just assume someone is a member of one of those gangs without proof - and I don't believe tattoos are proof. A person could be a refugee fleeing a country that used to be a member of one of these gangs but is no longer. In my view, as in all matters, the law should be followed when investigating, detaining, and ESPECIALLY in these cases, before deporting anyone.

@safarimike11, What I am referring to in my previous comment could be found in just the first sentence of the article above: "Massachusetts has come under scrutiny for its handling of illegal migrants accused of serious crimes, including child rape, as state policies prevent authorities from holding individuals on ICE detainers alone. " Who is accusing these migrants of crimes? I think in these cases, it is ICE alone, based on some information they received from the migrant's former country. It is not an accusation of crimes committed in the USA, nor anything that has been proven in a court in the USA. That's what I assume is true throughout the article.

Questions and remarks I have about these cases are: 1. Were the accusations for rapes done in the USA or the country they came from? 2. Have they been charged here in the USA for rape? 3. Almost everyone, no matter what the charge, even murder, is entitled to consideration of a bond. The bond increases with the severity of the charges. This is why I think in these cases of low bond, that these individuals were not charged with rape in the USA, but ICE is saying they have in the country they came from. 4. All of them, I assume, are only CHARGED with rape (either in the USA or their former country), but have not been tried so, in the USA, they are assumed to be innocent. 5. Like a lot of Trump's deportees, these people may have been suspected of something or even charged with it, but they have not been convicted of anything yet.

Wow! ❤️

I don't think the child should be punished for the incident by treating him for "everything." Nothing in the article indicated the child had done anything to provoke the dog, although, of course, that might be the case. I think there is still time for the child to learn how to treat and live compatibly with animals and other people. As far as the dog is concerned, a small amount of pentobarbital could be given as a sedative, but too much would be dangerous, so I think that is uncalled for.

and an injection I agree both the child and the dog might need an injection if it is determined that the dog has rabies.

4 a.m. What is anyone doing out at that hour?

Arrest him, try him, put him in jail for 30 days or so, and then deport him.

Assuming the child did nothing to provoke the dog, I agree with quarantining the dog for observation.

I agree with the idea behind this cancellation, but I'd rather see the celebration of ALL religions' holidays than none at all.

Yes, I am worried Trump will do something that will reduce or stop my Social Security payments. An example would be stopping paying people who now live outside the USA.

Why is any country allowed to drill in the Arctic?

I'm not sure what conditions you're talking about, but in Thailand (or any country with right-hand drive), the car turning left always has the right-of-way.

I'm sure anyone "prancing down a public street with their dangly bits hanging out" would love a little "pushback." 😉

I vehemently disagree with the jury's verdict but will reluctantly accept it.

Although I think anyone exercising their First Amendment right to Free Speech should not be hesitant to reveal their identity, until the courts are clearer on what issues are covered under Free Speech (like anti-Isreal), I think this "No Mask" rule/law suggested above is uncalled for.

Just capture him, tie him up, and put him outside for the night. Job done!

I'm against any attack on LGBTQ+ people, but I agree with the proposed ban on dual citizenship.

Ha! Ha! Ha! 😁