Posted on 04/03/2019 8:00:46 AM PDT by daniel1212
Constitutional? You think that means what the Founders meant to these? This is MA, The same state that infamously first legalized homosexual marriage.
And politically speaking, Suffolk County supports the Democratic Party overwhelmingly. No Republican presidential candidate has won there since Calvin Coolidge in 1924. In 2012 Barack Obama received 77.4% of the vote, compared to 20.8% for Mitt Romney. In the 2014 gubernatorial election, Martha Coakley carried the county by a 32.4% margin, while losing the election statewide by 48.4 to 46.5%.
This is Current Policy in Los Angeles, but the monetary limit for theft is $950, if you steal less than $900m worth of stuff, they won’t even write you a Ticket!!
There is a sale on Slippery Slopes."
“Why have the laws if they are not going to be enforced?”
Because Democrats actually believe that just the act of passing a law, solves the problem. It’s a “mental” thing.
Barney Fife would use his one bullet on himself.
Furthermore, capricious enforcement of the law is grounds for appeal. And elevates the prosecutor to the level of judge.
It is the owner that likely would be considered vicious if political correct.
Id rather have total anarchy. Since these arent crimes anymore, i guess everyday Joe can do it too!
Above all, tis is in direct contravention of Biblical policy This will not end well for Boston, which anyone here already knew. What happens is an increase in crime, resulting in more government, which then can be used against those who are not politically correct.
Those who are not sufficiently controlled from within, by God and a sound conscience, must sooner or later be controlled from without, necessitating the growth of civil government.
Robert Winthrop (May 12, 1809 – November 16, 1894), and Speaker of the House from 1838 to 1840, and later president of the Massachusetts Bible Society, explained that, “All societies of men must be governed in some way or other. The less they may have of stringent State Government, the more they must have of individual self-government. The less they rely on public law or physical force, the more they must rely on private moral restraint. Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled, either by a power within them, or by a power without them; either by the Word of God, or by the strong arm of man; either by the Bible, or by the bayonet. It may do for other countries and other governments to talk about the State supporting religion. Here, under our own free institutions, it is Religion which must support the State." (Speech to the Massachusetts Bible Society (1849-05-28), quoted in Robert Winthrop, Addresses and Speeches on Various Occasions, Little, Brown & Co., 1852, p. 172)
Well, they no longer enforce most of these:
Massachusetts General Laws:
CRIMES, PUNISHMENTS AND PROCEEDINGS IN CRIMINAL CASES
TITLE I.
CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
CHAPTER 272.
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY, MORALITY, DECENCY AND GOOD ORDER
Section 36: Blasphemy
Whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeliously [without respect; in a disdainful manner] reproaching God, His creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.
Section 38: Disturbance of assembly for worship
Whoever wilfully interrupts or disturbs an assembly of people met for worship of God shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars.
Section 14: Adultery
A married person who has sexual intercourse with a person not his spouse or an unmarried person who has sexual intercourse with a married person shall be guilty of adultery and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than three years or in jail for not more than two years or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars.
Section 15: Polygamy
Whoever, having a former husband or wife living, marries another person or continues to cohabit with a second husband or wife in the commonwealth shall be guilty of polygamy, and be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or in jail for not more than two and one half years or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars; but this section shall not apply to a person whose husband or wife has continually remained beyond sea, or has voluntarily withdrawn from the other and remained absent, for seven consecutive years, the party marrying again not knowing the other to be living within that time, nor to a person who has been legally divorced from the bonds of matrimony.
PART IV.
Section 17: Incestuous marriage or sexual activities
Persons within degrees of consanguinity [related by blood] within which marriages are prohibited or declared by law to be incestuous and void, who intermarry or have sexual intercourse with each other, or who engage in sexual activities with each other, including but not limited to, oral or anal intercourse, fellatio, cunnilingus, or other penetration of a part of a person's body, or insertion of an object into the genital or anal opening of another person's body, or the manual manipulation of the genitalia of another person's body, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 20 years or in the house of correction for not more than 21/2 years.
Section 18: Fornication
Section 18. Whoever commits fornication shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three months or by a fine of not more than thirty dollars.
Section 34: Crime against nature
Whoever commits the abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with a beast, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than twenty years.
Section 35: Unnatural and lascivious acts
Whoever commits any unnatural and lascivious act with another person shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred nor more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or in jail or the house of correction for not more than two and one half years.
Section 16: Open and gross lewdness and lascivious behavior A man or woman, married or unmarried, who is guilty of open and gross lewdness and lascivious behavior, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than three years or in jail for not more than two years or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars.
" Tax-a-chussets " gave the US -> Governor Romney, and the beginnings of Obunglercare.
The State liberal mentality is beginning to spill over the neighboring Vermont and New Hampshire
since the liberals who once lived in Mass. can't stand the taxes and cost of living for which they voted and endorsed.
That ought to tell you enough as to why I consider Massachusetts as only a 'drive through ' State
since they contaminate all their bordering States.
A long way from "Banned in Boston."
I was arrested when I was 18 for possession of Marijuana(2 joints) and contributing to delinquency of minor,(beer in car friend was 17. Spent 3 days in jail. Straightened my butt right out. Graduated from college Magna Cum Laude 4 years later.
Taking crap like that seriously early on CAN do a lot of good. Idiots like this mayor have no clue.
Anarchy is preferable, because it is unstable. What would happen, if "official" law enforcement disappeared, is that neighborhood associations would form to deal with the issue.
Lynching any criminals caught robbing in the area would quiet things down very quickly.
“Better yet, call it what it is going to create : “Free Crime”,
.. please don’t tell the criminals.”
Don’t worry...ferals probably already have this thing figured out. The evidence will be seeing how many will now become attracted to the area.
“Individuals are smart, the masses are asses”
Kalifornicatia, and the Democrat Party, have masses OF masses
“Id rather have total anarchy. Since these arent crimes anymore, i guess everyday Joe can do it too!”
This really would be preferrable, because the 3% of the citizens who cause 95% of crime would be eliminated fairly quickly.
Vacay plans
Destination Boston
Rental car and gas? On someone else’s borrowed Visa
Food? Dine n dash
Hotel? Empty house
Cash? Stealing items for resale and drug dealing
Thanks Rachael
What a difference 160 years makes (sigh)
“Trespassing / Shoplifting / Larceny under $250”
And they wonder why “food deserts” form in previously flourishing areas.
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.