quibble with Greg

["Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam@hotmail.com>]

I have to argue with Greg Dickison's statement that the 'miscreants who 
recently got into so much hot water for pilfering the gay-pride flag' were 
'prosecuted to the full extent of the law.'  From my understanding of the 
facts, which I got out of the LMT and the Daily News, it seems to me that 
the students could have been charged under I.C. 18-1401 with Burglary.  I 
have pasted the statute below:

18-1401. BURGLARY DEFINED. Every person who enters any house, room, 
apartment, tenement, shop, warehouse, store, mill, barn, stable, outhouse, 
or other building, tent, vessel, vehicle, trailer, airplane or railroad car, 
with intent to commit any theft or any felony, is guilty of burglary.

Since they broke in to steal the flag they so strangely found offensive, in 
order to patrioticly destroy it, I'd have to say that was a theft.

I'm not saying they should have been charged with felonies, or that the 
prosecutor's office should have handled these cases differently; however, 
since they were charged with misdemeanors instead, I don't agree that they 
were 'prosecuted to the full extent of the law.'

Sunil "My Cars are Filthy" Ramalingam

>From: Daniel Kronemann <kron4155@uidaho.edu>
>To: Gregory Dickison <gdickison@moscow.com>
>CC: <vision2020@moscow.com>
>Subject: Re: rumor control
>Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 08:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
> > My thanks to the Douglases et alia who have once again made this forum
> > interesting. The lively debates inspired me to once again subscribe, 
>after a
> > several-year haitus. And no sooner do I get back on the mailing list 
>than
> > what do I find? My name being loosely bantied about. I am thus compelled 
>by
> > strong family pride, if not a want of good sense, to throw in my two or 
>so
> > bits. You have no one to blame but Miss Huskey.
>
>I don't blame Dr. Huskey (is this your correct title Melynda, I seem to
>remember a PhD attached to your name somewhere, forgive the mistake if
>there is one).  On the contrary I congradulate her for prompting yet
>another contributor to the discussion.
>
> > The point made very clear by the observer was that the biblical
> > paradigm was in conflict with current moral standards. If I said that
> > Muslim fundamentalist whackos who fly airplanes into skyscrapers and
> > kill thousands of innocent civilians should be shot; or that perverts
> > who kidnap, torture, rape and kill 9-year-old girls should be strung
> > up, it would pass almost without comment. But when I express even mild
> > disagreement with homosexuality as a legitmate lifestyle, let alone
> > call for any sanction, the arbiters of the morals of modernity call
> > for my head. It is not the idea of punishment that bothers you, it is
> > what gets punished. And, I would chime in with Mr. Wilson, who gets to
> > decide?
>
>OH!!  But I would comment.  And you'd see me their protesting the
>executions just as vehemently as I would protest your execution (I hope
>that never happens by the way).
>
> > Miss Huskey is only correct in theory that you can be convicted of a 
>felony.
> > While homosexuality is against the law, the current morality police are
> > willing to give the felons a pass in order to pursue the misdemeanants 
>whose
> > causes have not yet merited federal protection. If the miscreants who
> > recently got into so much hot water for pilfering the gay-pride flag 
>only
> > had the presence of mind to plead that they were part of the Frat Boys
> > Drinking and Thieving Alliance, and that they were merely trying to 
>overturn
> > archaic moral codes against taking other people's stuff while three 
>sheets
> > to the wind and to increase awareness of their alternative lifestyle, 
>and
> > that they had chosen the flag in question as a target because they knew
> > their fellow oppressed peoples would understand, the whole little
> > misunderstanding could have been cleared up with much less fuss. But, 
>alas,
> > they were merely drunken frat boys with a vague sense of patriotism 
>fueled
> > by too much Jack Daniels, and since they picked the wrong lifestyle 
>group to
> > mess with, they were prosecuted to the full extent of the law. And while 
>all
> > the community was apparently shocked at their misdemeanors, no one 
>seemed to
> > notice that the university-sanctioned victim club was promoting high 
>crimes.
> > Curiouser and curiouser.
>
>So as a lawyer it doesn't bother you that they stole private property and
>attempted to destroy that?  How does that make the Gay Straight Alliance a
>victim club?  How do you know what the GSA adovocates and what it doesn't?
>Have you ever been to a meeting?  Seems you are apporating under a lot of
>assumptions and some misconceptions.  By the way, what is a "high crime?"
>I'm unfamiliar with that term.
>
>Love
>
>Daniel




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.