Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:the law is heavily stacked against men (Score 1) 453

It's as simple at this one fact.

Divorce radically changes the power dynamic of the relationship. It shifts drastically into the womans favor. Court ordered alimony and child-support is collected from the man. The woman now has complete control over how that money is spent. She also has majority shareholder type authority over what is going on with the kids.

It's not right. It's not fair. It shouldn't be allowed to continue. Some women are wretched things with no souls and do all this out of selfishness.

With that said, when my wife and I divorced (no kids) we were pretty amicable. I made more money, but she didn't want alimony. I pulled some money together out of my pocket and paid for a new vehicle (nothing extravagant but she picked it out) and set her up in a rental, paying the deposit and 6 months rent. After some healing/recalibration time, we are still friends today and our kids (from later relationships) play together on occasion. I am also lucky enough to have a good relationship with my kids' mom (we never married). We never went to court over custody and support. We share 50% custody and no substantial amounts of money have ever changed hands.

Not all women are harpies but the ones who are seem to have no depth to which they will sink. (just like not all men are ogres.. but the ones who are....)

Comment Re:Yep there goes our civilization (Score 1) 143

They don't get paid if they don't have any gray area to litigate with. IANAL and only read the linked article, but that indicates the fuss is over protecting the manufacturing, parts, and supply chain as well as the operator of the space flight.

If a contract is made with the operator to launch a satellite there must be a defined responsibile party if the rocket blows up destroying the payload and perhaps raining death and destruction onto the ground.

Failing parts or operational failures are not "acts of God" and someone should will have to pay. I am guessing they should refer to how the BP oil spill liability shook out in the end. Good and Bad.

Comment Re:This will obviously help. (Score 1) 511

I do disagree on the status of the question being relevant or not. Quantity is entirely relevant. Just as type of offense is entirely relevant.

I think there is common ground between us on the idea that some offenses should not automatically require registration. I also agree that pursuing producers of child porn should also be a focus for law enforcement. However, it sounds like you are advocating the decriminalizaion of possesion of child porn. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) I totally disagree with that idea.
Just browsing posts here on /. is not an accurate data pool to represent the entire real world population.

To expand on the quantity point above why would anyone want or need to possess multiple drives full of child porn? Why would someone need kilos of cocaine?

Comment Re:This will obviously help. (Score 1) 511

Possession of such imagery is not always an indication of more severe problems. It should always be a case by case consideration. Maybe not on the first offense, but what if the first time someone is caught they are caught with drives full of child porn?

I don't disagree with your post. Yet possession of some material is illegal and that includes child porn. Any adult knows this and also knows the penalty exists.

Slashdot Top Deals

The brain is a wonderful organ; it starts working the moment you get up in the morning, and does not stop until you get to work.

Working...