Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Debra Lafave arrested today
www.tampabays10.com ^ | 12/04/07 | tampabays10

Posted on 12/04/2007 12:41:39 PM PST by TornadoAlley3

Edited on 12/04/2007 3:13:26 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last
To: MrB
Are you opposed to zero tolerance policies in ALL CASES?

I'm not against zero tolerance as much as I'm for common sense. And common sense tells me that this one is probably a waste of taxpayer money.
41 posted on 12/04/2007 1:02:08 PM PST by JamesP81 ("I am against "zero tolerance" policies. It is a crutch for idiots." --FReeper Tenacious 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: TornadoAlley3

She’s found her 15 minutes; http://hormonehigh.blogspot.com/


42 posted on 12/04/2007 1:03:16 PM PST by printhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: day10

That’s right. She and Pamela Rogers Turner (the hotter of the two, IMO) both had similar incidents about the same time, and that sort of spawned the whole “not guilty” meme we’re still stuck on here.

}:-)4


43 posted on 12/04/2007 1:03:30 PM PST by Moose4 (Wasting away again in Michaelnifongville.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TornadoAlley3
The violation listed says she talked to a female coworker who was 17 years old on various occasions.

This is hardly violates the intent of the condition. Whatever happened to common sense?

44 posted on 12/04/2007 1:04:42 PM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

Oh, I was just playing with the idea of “zero tolerance for zero tolerance policies”...

yeah, I’m with you - and I blame lawyers. Anyone that makes an independent discretionary decision can be sued by some ambulance chaser.


45 posted on 12/04/2007 1:04:50 PM PST by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

“Condition 69?” Now even 69 has a stigma.


46 posted on 12/04/2007 1:06:48 PM PST by Bruinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: hunter112
On the other occasions, the coworker was 18, perhaps? ;)

I noticed that myself.

A better wording might have been

The violation listed says she talked to a 17-year-old coworker on several occasions.

47 posted on 12/04/2007 1:08:11 PM PST by murdoog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Moose4

It’s funny stuff, though. I can’t say exactly why, but it’s funny...........


48 posted on 12/04/2007 1:08:52 PM PST by day10 (Rules cannot substitute for character.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Oh, I was just playing with the idea of “zero tolerance for zero tolerance policies”...

I completely missed that, sorry. Man, it's just been a bad month. I've been stressed at work and whenever I do get on FR lately I've either missed the obvious humor and snapped at someone over it, posted without reading the article fully, or posted without thinking. I've just been making a general ass of myself for about a month now. It's starting to get pretty ridiculous.
49 posted on 12/04/2007 1:10:04 PM PST by JamesP81 ("I am against "zero tolerance" policies. It is a crutch for idiots." --FReeper Tenacious 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: TornadoAlley3

This is pretty ridiculous. If she’s going to be allowed to work in a place where she HAS underage co-workers, it’s pretty unreasonable to expect her not to talk to them at all. This was a 17 year old girl (Lafave’s problematic history is with a male minor), and there’s no allegation of anything inappropriate in the conversation. It’s not clear, but sounds like the conversation occurred in the workplace.

There probably aren’t a lot of jobs open to her where the employer could guarantee there would never be any minors working there, and it’s completely unreasonable to expect an employer to schedule her around any minors’ schedules. Maybe certain factory jobs involving machinery that minors aren’t legally allowed to operate would be an option, but the court needs to require that if they’re going to arrest her for any communication at all with someone under 18.


50 posted on 12/04/2007 1:12:28 PM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker

Did you actually read the description of the violation?


51 posted on 12/04/2007 1:15:37 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: day10

BTW...I’d hit it. But I’d move and change my phone number afterward, because she looks like the creepy stalker type.

}:-)4


52 posted on 12/04/2007 1:16:19 PM PST by Moose4 (Wasting away again in Michaelnifongville.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan

“Whatever happened to common sense?”

I take it you don’t have much contact with government workers, do you.

Just wait, though, under Hillary or Mitt these people would be in charge of your health care.


53 posted on 12/04/2007 1:19:04 PM PST by TheThirdRuffian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

Only the excerpt on the thread. Sounds like she participated in ordinary social conversation around the meal-break table. No allegation of anything outside the workplace, or anything going beyond the bounds of what restaurant co-workers would normally gab about. Is there any allegation that the girl complained about it? Doesn’t sound like it from the manager’s reaction.


54 posted on 12/04/2007 1:21:35 PM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian
I take it you don’t have much contact with government workers, do you.

I actually do, and it is not friendly. I am known by the most powerful state employees in my state by the mere mention of my first name.

55 posted on 12/04/2007 1:21:44 PM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
I am known by the most powerful state employees in my state by the mere mention of my first name.

Hm. I've never met anybody named "A$$hole" before..... ;-)

Well, you don't expect us to let that opening go by unused, do you....?

56 posted on 12/04/2007 1:30:21 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
Sounds like she participated in ordinary social conversation around the meal-break table.

And what are the conditions of her parole?

57 posted on 12/04/2007 1:31:07 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

That’s close. It’s actaully Wise A$$.


58 posted on 12/04/2007 1:37:16 PM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

That’s what I was thinking.


59 posted on 12/04/2007 1:37:43 PM PST by sierrahome (Hillary Clinton "America's Ex-Wife")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: TornadoAlley3

The United States...
Pretty much the only place in this hemisphere
where a 17yr old would be considered under the
age of consent.

Take our neighbors to the north and south.

Canada = 14
Mexico - 12

Of course we all know how morally bankrupt and depraved folks are in both Canada And Mexico /sarc

Age of consent used to be much lower across the US...just a few short years ago it ranged from 12-16 in most states. Not sure what happened to cause the change.

I think it was 13 in Ark when Clinton was the Gov... he must have had a good time.

In some states it is legal to marry someone far under their age of consent with parental approval.... now that is odd since it gives legal sanction for violating the law based solely on the consent of the parents.

How strange we have become in this country....
No wonder we have the largest prison population compared to any other nation per capita.

Land of the perpetually offended moral busybody.


60 posted on 12/04/2007 1:37:55 PM PST by Bobalu (I guess I done see'd that varmint for the last time....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson