Wanted to say the same thing. Had a teacher in junior high, we all just knew he was growing pot at home. No one had ever been to his house, and he and his wife were seemingly outstanding citizens, but we just knew he had been growing and using.
Wanted to say the same thing. Had a teacher in junior high, we all just knew he was growing pot at home. No one had ever been to his house, and he and his wife were seemingly outstanding citizens, but we just knew he had been growing and using.
Nothing against Ms. Minaj, but in the same frame: does anyone actually like or listen to motivational speakers?
Why are you in the greys? Don't I remember you being one of the goods ones? Or is that something else?
....
First, thank you Jessica Coen for making this site great for so long. I really can't say much more than that, it'd take to long and you probably have something to do other than reading me gush.
Of course it wouldn't be "easy." Why is it that if something isn't easy, it isn't worth doing in America? It would be extremely hard and require a lot of time and energy. The path of least resistance, though, is (in the long run) even worse.
How am I the psycho here? You are the one saying that "expanding services for convicts" is the same as saying "take away services for others." You are deliberately misreading what I am saying.
Personal story: I like working out late at night. Especially in the summer when it is 90 degrees in the sun, I prefer walking along this lit path and doing laps by walking off the trail and onto some sidewalks in an area of Kansas City.
I dare all of you to google,
You do realize that your posts are making less sense as you go on, correct? Where did I say we should remove these services from people who need them? I said we should EXPAND these services. To also include others. Which is the opposite of removing them.
I concede. What is it?
I imagine at the end she is saying "fuck it allllllll!!!"
I'm of this same sentiment. I'm horrified.
49. TIE: Celery and Croissants
Your first stat is a bit misleading. Murderers who re-commit murder are a fraction of the size of murderers who re-commit crimes in general, and first time murderers as a whole only re-commit a crime at a 25% rate, lower than the general rate of re-commiting than the national average.
Forgive me, but your pasts posts were nothing if not absolutely insufferable. You seemed to be saying nothing with them, and your "what if they had only one murder to commit?" is just dreadful. It came off as you insinuating that someone actually had to commit a murder, as if it was a directive or a proper course of…
There is no jury trial in South Africa.
Psychological analysis really. Still, when 1/4 of first time murderers re-offend and when less than a tenth of those murderers who do re-offend commit a another murder, it's pretty clear that treating all murderers as if they would re-offend is painting a very broad stroke.