Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fla. Supremes say sex offenders on probation can have their porn

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fla. Supremes say sex offenders on probation can have their porn

    http://miamiherald.typepad.com/naked...es-yes-se.html
    June 9, 1973 - The day athletic perfection was defined.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Kva...eature=related

  • #2
    Hep breathes a sigh of relief.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by tallahassee blues fan View Post
      And your opinion, tbf?
      "I am for truth no matter who says it. I am for justice no matter who it is for or against."...Malcom X

      Comment


      • #4
        I haven't read the majority opinion yet, and hope to do so tomorrow. I'll let you know. My college roommate wrote the second disssenting opinion which is what I flipped to first.
        June 9, 1973 - The day athletic perfection was defined.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Kva...eature=related

        Comment


        • #5
          Since it's based on a state statue instead of some sort of funky constitutional right to porn it's hard to understand the problem. Unless you want to get into a theoretical debate about what words mean in Florida. The easy fix is if the folks there don't like the result they can change the legislation. No porn for perverts.

          Does TBF think the loose horse shoe caused the Belmont loss? Your breakdown of the season really helped me enjoy watching it. I also stole some of your stuff to sound like a smarter guy.

          Comment


          • #6
            I went ahead and read it tonight. Justice Cantero, who wrote the majority opinion, is, like my former roommate, quite conservative (and is also leaving the bench at the same time my former roommate is). That they wound up on opposite ends of this decision is interesting to me.

            However, I agree with the majority. The legislature screwed this up by writing and adopting a poorly worded bill that was subject to multiple interpretations. The rule of lenity is the right one to apply to resolve the debate over which interpretation applies.

            Cantero writes a good analysis on how to interpret a statute. What one is left with is an impression that there's a canon of statutory construction to justify any interpretation a judge wants to find in a statute. The fact that legislatures usually do enact poorly worded statutes invites a judge to pick and choose, which is why they frequently and unfairly are labeled activists.
            June 9, 1973 - The day athletic perfection was defined.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Kva...eature=related

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by jack jones View Post
              Since it's based on a state statue instead of some sort of funky constitutional right to porn it's hard to understand the problem. Unless you want to get into a theoretical debate about what words mean in Florida. The easy fix is if the folks there don't like the result they can change the legislation. No porn for perverts.

              Does TBF think the loose horse shoe caused the Belmont loss? Your breakdown of the season really helped me enjoy watching it. I also stole some of your stuff to sound like a smarter guy.
              It could have. Horses frequently will completely throw off a shoe, and some are discombobulated by the occurrence. Others continue to run and don't know the difference. BB didn't throw a shoe, but the looseness of that shoe on an already fragile hoof area could have made it uncomfortable for him to run.

              Any explanation (other than the race was fixed) for his poor performance seems plausible. Whatever the reason, it is the biggest choke in the Belmont since Spectacular Bid (whom you may recall had his trainer blame the loss on (a) a poor ride by the jockey and (b) the Bid stepping on a pin) But this group of horses who beat BB were so bad, that BB can only hold his head in shame at having lost to them.
              June 9, 1973 - The day athletic perfection was defined.

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Kva...eature=related

              Comment


              • #8
                By the way, I really enjoy the youtube clip on Secretariat. A while back after reading one of your treatises on ponies I spent some time looking at the times for that triple crown. Please correct me but aren't his times at Belmont and the place they run the Preakness still records, 35 years later? With the Derby time close and somewhat controversial?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Is treatise a nice word for wordy?

                  Secretariat set track records at virtually every track at which he ran that still stand. He set track records in the Derby and Belmont and set it in the Preakness but the clock malfunctioned, so they don't consider his final time as official. Racing Form clockers have gone back and timed the race and it would be the track record if allowed to stand. He was the first and only horse to run the Derby in less than two minutes, until Monarchos, who ran one tick under 2 minutes when the track superintendent made Churchill Downs a parking lot. Nobody has come remotely close to Secretariat's Belmont time. What makes his final time all the more remarkable is that he ran the early part of it at sprinter's speed. Sham tried to keep up with him and it broke him.
                  June 9, 1973 - The day athletic perfection was defined.

                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Kva...eature=related

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by tallahassee blues fan View Post
                    The fact that legislatures usually do enact poorly worded statutes invites a judge to pick and choose, which is why they frequently and unfairly are labeled activists.
                    That's dead on. I had a brief stint working in that arena. Legislative staff lawyers are underpaid and their bosses typically idiots. The ones I worked with were competent and thrilled to have help but so overwhelmed with other things that they couldn't manage. Plus so much gets written last moment that there isn't a focus on whether it makes sense.

                    The solution? Enshrine Jack King. Good things to follow.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by tallahassee blues fan View Post
                      Is treatise a nice word for wordy?
                      No. A respectful word for informative.

                      Beethoven wrote a piano sonata, his last, that couldn't be played on the pianos available then. The first performance was 35 years after his death. That was Secretariat at the Belmont in 1973.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by tallahassee blues fan View Post
                        I went ahead and read it tonight. Justice Cantero, who wrote the majority opinion, is, like my former roommate, quite conservative (and is also leaving the bench at the same time my former roommate is). That they wound up on opposite ends of this decision is interesting to me.

                        However, I agree with the majority. The legislature screwed this up by writing and adopting a poorly worded bill that was subject to multiple interpretations. The rule of lenity is the right one to apply to resolve the debate over which interpretation applies.

                        Cantero writes a good analysis on how to interpret a statute. What one is left with is an impression that there's a canon of statutory construction to justify any interpretation a judge wants to find in a statute. The fact that legislatures usually do enact poorly worded statutes invites a judge to pick and choose, which is why they frequently and unfairly are labeled activists.
                        So the Wise Men decided that it was the clear intent of the Florida legislature to insure sex offenders have access to porn.

                        "I am for truth no matter who says it. I am for justice no matter who it is for or against."...Malcom X

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Jaws View Post
                          So the Wise Men decided that it was the clear intent of the Florida legislature to insure sex offenders have access to porn.

                          Hardly. If it was their intent to insure that sex offenders had no access to it, they needed to say that (and it wouldn't have been hard to do). Surely you do not disagree with the idea that where multiple meanings can reasonably be affixed to a criminal statute, and a defendant's liberty is at stake based upon which meaning is adopted, tie goes to the defendant.
                          June 9, 1973 - The day athletic perfection was defined.

                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Kva...eature=related

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by tallahassee blues fan View Post
                            Hardly. If it was their intent to insure that sex offenders had no access to it, they needed to say that (and it wouldn't have been hard to do). Surely you do not disagree with the idea that where multiple meanings can reasonably be affixed to a criminal statute, and a defendant's liberty is at stake based upon which meaning is adopted, tie goes to the defendant.
                            I do disagree.

                            While the legislative branch often passes poorly worded statutes, it is the responsibility of the judicial branch to decipher the intent of the law, not interpret it in the most lenient manner possible.

                            And no, I don't consider denying sex offenders access to porn materials a dangerous infringement on personal liberty.
                            "I am for truth no matter who says it. I am for justice no matter who it is for or against."...Malcom X

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by tallahassee blues fan View Post
                              I went ahead and read it tonight. Justice Cantero, who wrote the majority opinion, is, like my former roommate, quite conservative (and is also leaving the bench at the same time my former roommate is). That they wound up on opposite ends of this decision is interesting to me.

                              However, I agree with the majority. The legislature screwed this up by writing and adopting a poorly worded bill that was subject to multiple interpretations. The rule of lenity is the right one to apply to resolve the debate over which interpretation applies.

                              Cantero writes a good analysis on how to interpret a statute. What one is left with is an impression that there's a canon of statutory construction to justify any interpretation a judge wants to find in a statute. The fact that legislatures usually do enact poorly worded statutes invites a judge to pick and choose, which is why they frequently and unfairly are labeled activists.
                              Cantero should invoke the 5th 'cuz his own words incriminate him.
                              "I am for truth no matter who says it. I am for justice no matter who it is for or against."...Malcom X

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X