The general decline in standards today

[sheeplady]

Failing a sudden sinkhole, and aside from all warranted criminal prosecution, the very least that ought to happen is that:

1. The coach should be summarily fired. If he is protected by a union, the union should expel him from membership.

2. All members of the team should be suspended from athletic programs for the rest of their school careers.

3. The football program should be expelled from its conference and its record during the season in question stricken from the books.

If none of these things happen, I think it's safe to say we've fallen to rock bottom as a society. A community that *tolerates* such crimes is every bit as culpable for them as the individuals who commit the act.

They didn't even tolerate those crimes, they justified them. When I was in college, you could get benched for getting caught underage drinking to excess.... apparently the entire high school football team (who is underage by years and years) can go out an get drunk on a regular basis when they have a win and there's no punishment? Yet alone they rape or watch a rape and there's no punishment? Apparently they were driving from party to party dragging this girl with them... I'm sure they had a designated driver.

Just think about everyone who turned a blind eye for years to this behavior... No wonder these kids thought rape was no big deal.

I fail to understand why we make such heroes out of athletes and coaches... but it even has to sink down to teenagers being treated like heroes for throwing around a ball? Think about how sad it is that you have an entire community of adults whose lives center around a high school football team to such an extreme extent. Do these people not have jobs?


Thanks for your explanation AF.

 

[vintageTink]

When I was in school you were unable to participate in sports, band, or choir if your grades were poor. No participation, no letter, nada.
I can not imagine anyone in the town I graduated in condoning or excusing that behavior. Those boys would have been stripped naked and tied to a tree with a hungry baby calf.

 

[Edward]

A cultre which places such a high value on sport can only ever be on a downward trajectory. I don't think sport being so popular is the reason for it, but it is certainly symptomatic.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

On the other hand, we have an octogenarian, name of Stuart Hall, a one time television presenter, sports commentator and all round British celebrity. He recently pleaded guilty to child molestation, albeit 40 years ago. He admitted assaulting girls as young as nine years old, up to their late teens. He got.........Would you believe? Fifteen months jail term. Now doesn't that make me sleep easy in my bed?

I recently saw a documentary about the postmortem revelations that the late Jimmy Savile, a well-known British TV personality, had been a serial sexual predator for several decades and that everyone from the BBC to the National Health Service (he was a major fundraiser for hospital charities) had known but kept quiet about it. And also that the authorities had a number of opportunities to bring Savile to justice when he was alive but had dropped the ball.


[video=youtube;z21D83hPvRg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=z21D83hPvRg[/video]

 

[Edward]

Ah, so good to see that American justice isn't exempt from the malaise that we experience here in the UK. Today I read in my newspaper, that Kristian Holmes, a surveyor, on a £60K plus salary, was sentenced to three and a half years in prison........... For being a secret graffiti artist. According to the report, his handywork cost in excess of a quarter million pounds to clean up.
On the other hand, we have an octogenarian, name of Stuart Hall, a one time television presenter, sports commentator and all round British celebrity. He recently pleaded guilty to child molestation, albeit 40 years ago. He admitted assaulting girls as young as nine years old, up to their late teens. He got.........Would you believe? Fifteen months jail term. Now doesn't that make me sleep easy in my bed?

The judge in this case will no doubt take a lot of flack from crusading tabloid "journalists", but he was operating existing sentencing rules which dictate that the appropriate prison term must be set by the penalties which were in place at the time of commission of the offence. In Hall's case, that would have been two years. Personally, I would be keen for this policy to be reformed to make the maximum sentence of that time mandatory in such cases, but that is for authorities other than the individual judge to decide. The maximum since the mid Eighties has been, from memory, upped to about ten years and so when we are talking about cases where the abuse took place more recently (as opposed to many of the current pending cases which surround allegations that date back thirty plus years) sentences will be much more severe. That being the case, while much of the media will stir up notions that Hall's sentence is typical, it really isn't. Sadly, so much of the media outrage is not even genuine: it's a simple matter of paedophiles selling red tops.

 

[Edward]

I recently saw a documentary about the postmortem revelations that the late Jimmy Savile, a well-known British TV personality, had been a serial sexual predator for several decades and that everyone from the BBC to the National Health Service (he was a major fundraiser for hospital charities) had known but kept quiet about it. And also that the authorities had a number of opportunities to bring Savile to justice when he was alive but had dropped the ball.

The shocking thing about Saville's case (aside from the apparent extent of his abuse) is that there did seem to be some people who really did know and did nothing - as opposed to the usual difficulty where people might suspect, but with no evidence are powerless to act (often a good thing - a system of justice must stand or fall on the notion of evidence - but any system will throw up hard cases). Saville's cunning also helped him hide from authorities: many of his victims (such as those in secure hospitals and borstals) were targetted specifically because even if they did say anything, they were highly unlikely to be believed.

 

[Atticus Finch]

The judge in this case...was operating existing sentencing rules which dictate that the appropriate prison term must be set by the penalties which were in place at the time of commission of the offence. In Hall's case, that would have been two years. The maximum since the mid Eighties has been...upped to about ten years

Interesting. So the current penalty for this sort of crime is now roughly quadruple the amount that it was when Hall was active? Perhaps this is at least some evidence that society isn't in total decline. Maybe there are some bright spots.

BTY...in North Carolina, most of Hall's offences would be classified as B1 felonies. The current maximum sentence for a B1 felony...for a person with no criminal history...is 300 to 372 months, for each offense. And there is no parole or early release until the convict has served at least the minimum number of months in his sentence.

AF

 

[Edward]

Interesting. So the current penalty for this sort of crime is now roughly quadruple the amount that it was when Hall was active? Perhaps this is at least some evidence that society isn't in total decline. Maybe there are some bright spots.

BTY...in North Carolina, most of Hall's offences would be classified as B1 felonies. The current maximum sentence for a B1 felony...for a person with no criminal history...is 300 to 372 months, for each offense. And there is no parole or early release until the convict has served at least the minimum number of months in his sentence.

AF

Pretty much. Paedophilia (or, technically in many of these cases currently being exposed, hebephilia) has come to be viewed very differently in the UK. We've seen laws changed - sentences made stiffer for offenders, and an evolution of successively stricter laws on child pornography, from offences involving making and distributing it in 1978, through criminalisation of mere possession in 1988, digitised child porn becoming treated equally to 'real' such material in 1994, and even stricter laws beyond that for non-real images of children. In 2003, the law was altered such that while a person can still consent to sexual behaviour at sixteen, they must be eighteen before sexualised imaged of them can be distributed. In part this is all to do with the law platying catch up with technological innovation, but it also reflects a significant cultural shift to greater condemnation of such things. Personally I believe a lot of this has to do with a shift in other normalised trends. When my grandmother got married in the immediate aftermath of the War, she was eighteen. That was still relatively common in the UK by the early Seventies. Nowadays, it would be considered freakish, or at best a bad idea. The average marrying age is now over 30 for both men and women. While the media is full of wall to wall horror stories about premature sexualisation of children, it seems our perception of what is a child has indeed changed: sixteen is, culturally speaking, "younger" than it used to be. Where once a girl of fifteen might have been viewed as a short few years away from marriage and family (a couple of generations ago she would already have left school, if not one of those rare children who went on to university at the time), she is now very much seen as a child. In this cultural context, I do think people in general will regard any form of sexual contact much more severely than was the case several decades ago.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

The shocking thing about Saville's case (aside from the apparent extent of his abuse) is that there did seem to be some people who really did know and did nothing - as opposed to the usual difficulty where people might suspect, but with no evidence are powerless to act (often a good thing - a system of justice must stand or fall on the notion of evidence - but any system will throw up hard cases). Saville's cunning also helped him hide from authorities: many of his victims (such as those in secure hospitals and borstals) were targetted specifically because even if they did say anything, they were highly unlikely to be believed.

According to the documentary, Savile had such friends in high places (including the Royal Family) that when there were allegations of financial irregularities at a mental hospital and the British government appointed a commission to investigate, they picked Savile to head the commission! While investigating the mental hospital he had an office and living quarters on the grounds and unsupervised access to the entire facility as he did at another hospital. As a young man Savile worked as a hospital porter in his native Leeds. The documentary also showed a pic of him in the uniform of a Royal Navy admiral posing with high-ranking naval officers.

 

[jamespowers]

A cultre which places such a high value on sport can only ever be on a downward trajectory. I don't think sport being so popular is the reason for it, but it is certainly symptomatic.

Shades of Rome and the Coliseum. Bread and Circuses while they steal your rights and property.

 

[vintageTink]

Shades of Rome and the Coliseum. Bread and Circuses while they steal your rights and property.

I'm amongst the bunch of Son worshipers.

 

[Edward]

According to the documentary, Savile had such friends in high places (including the Royal Family) that when there were allegations of financial irregularities at a mental hospital and the British government appointed a commission to investigate, they picked Savile to head the commission! While investigating the mental hospital he had an office and living quarters on the grounds and unsupervised access to the entire facility as he did at another hospital. As a young man Savile worked as a hospital porter in his native Leeds. The documentary also showed a pic of him in the uniform of a Royal Navy admiral posing with high-ranking naval officers.

Absolutely, he got around. An allegation that circulated for many years in showbiz and media circles was that he was a necrophiliac, and had used his access to the hospital morgue to satisfy himself in much the same way as he would later target children in institutional care. He was Very Close Indeed to People in Very High Places; one theory as to why he was never brought to justice was that there was a conspiracy to cover up his misdeeds lest it reflect on some of those folks, particular those very well equipped in the audio department.... Of course, I have no idea how much credence to give that. Like all good lawyers, I must suspend belief one way or the other until sufficient evidence is raised. Or, to put it another way, the cat is both dead and alive...

Shades of Rome and the Coliseum. Bread and Circuses while they steal your rights and property.

Indeed - "Give me convenience or give me death." Jello Biafra, 1987.

 

[jamespowers]

I'm amongst the bunch of Son worshipers.

A member of the Blues or the Greens?

 

[Maj.Nick Danger]

Here's a chap with some profound insight into the matter I think.
[video]http://www.upworthy.com/watch-a-talk-show-host-get-remarkably-profound-seriously-just-watch-him-for-3-minutes-2?c=upw1[/video]

 

[Zombie_61]

Here's a chap with some profound insight into the matter I think.
[video]http://www.upworthy.com/watch-a-talk-show-host-get-remarkably-profound-seriously-just-watch-him-for-3-minutes-2?c=upw1[/video]

An epiphany thinly veiled in humor. :eusa_clap

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

The original poster of this video had originally installed security cams around his house so he could keep an eye on his disabled mother while he was at work. In this instance, however, he was expecting a package but what he didn't expect was the "special" delivery by this letter carrier. :doh:

[video=youtube;hs_9s31Je7Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs_9s31Je7Y[/video]

 

[jamespowers]

The original poster of this video had originally installed security cams around his house so he could keep an eye on his disabled mother while he was at work. In this instance, however, he was expecting a package but what he didn't expect was the "special" delivery by this letter carrier. :doh:

[video=youtube;hs_9s31Je7Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs_9s31Je7Y[/video]

Great. Drive up on my lawn and throw the package on my porch. Why am I not surprised?!

 

[Zombie_61]

Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night, nor lawns or walkways, stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.

 

[Widebrim]

Here's a chap with some profound insight into the matter I think.
[video]http://www.upworthy.com/watch-a-talk-show-host-get-remarkably-profound-seriously-just-watch-him-for-3-minutes-2?c=upw1[/video]

He actually does have insight into all this deification of youth stupidity.

 

[Gregg Axley]

Great. Drive up on my lawn and throw the package on my porch. Why am I not surprised?!

I was just about to say "if he did that at my house he'd be in my front yard, but this delivery driver IS in the front yard.
I don't often purchase fragile items, but on occasion I purchase shaving supplies such as aftershave from D.R. Harris of London, or
Royall Lyme of Bermuda, via whatever the cheapest shop on Amazon has it for.
If my online purchases turned out that way, I do have a whole box of roofing tacks in case they tried it again...