Anthony Weiner, is it worth jailing him?

[Baxter49]

I get he encouraged a minor to undress or perform sexual acts, and it's even worse with his son on a bed next to him so it's as bad as it gets.

The man has a sickness, and problems that he has tried to rehab for.

There are parents who abuse their children.

Would this be the norm for anyone who did this stuff on-line or because it's about as controversial figure as you can get who played a part in a presidential election defeat?

His past on-line antics were not illegal, they were not with minors, one of the women joined porn.

Weiner is many sad things, but he is not violent or someone who a threat to the public safety, and this hurts his family. Spitzer was governor and had to resign because of his scandals with prostitutes, and did not go to jail.

There was stuff written to put Weiner in jail for a decade or longer.

He's a registered sex offender, he lost his voting rights, and now the taxpayers are stuck funding him, he never left his house and did all this stuff, it's horrible but not a violent crime.

[BondJmsBond]

Are you actually defending his actions?

'horrible but not violent', so he should be excused?

Are you kidding me? Is this a troll post?

[Arturo2nd]

Hopefully being in the prison system as a sex offender will cure Weiner of inappropriate heterosexual activities. He may have his perspectives opened so to speak.

BTW, one of the women did not "join porn." Ginger Lee was an established porn star who was really disappointed that Mr. Weiner got busted before they could meet in person.

http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...52&postcount=1

[LadyLuck]

Yes. He should go to jail. For a lot longer than he was sentenced.

http://people.com/crime/why-anthony-...ederal-prison/


At the sentencing, prosecutor Amanda Kramer of the U.S. Attorney’s office asked for 21 to 27 months behind bars, noting that on “three occasions in 2016, he asked the 15-year-old to get naked and asked her to perform.”

Now, let me ask you. Suppose he was texting your 15 year old daughter. Would it be "worth" jailing him then?

[Baxter49]

Originally Posted by BondJmsBond

Are you actually defending his actions?

'horrible but not violent', so he should be excused?

Are you kidding me? Is this a troll post?

I did not write he should be excused, that's impossible.

I'm not defending his actions at all and used the word horrible to describe his conduct. I'm asking does he belong in jail when the taxpayers get stuck paying for him? I would agree if someone knowingly texted a minor and asked them to perform any kind sexual act, they should be arrested immediately.

This is a man who got sentenced to federal prison, went home, and then left his apartment and got on a subway and is walking around free for the next 40 plus days, no it does not make a lot of sense to me so I started a topic and asked a question.


I saw an image of him in a newspaper this summer with a phone still in his hands walking the streets.

[Baxter49]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

Hopefully being in the prison system as a sex offender will cure Weiner of inappropriate heterosexual activities. He may have his perspectives opened so to speak.

BTW, one of the women did not "join porn." Ginger Lee was an established porn star who was really disappointed that Mr. Weiner got busted before they could meet in person.

http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...52&postcount=1

I think that was the women in his movie called Sydney Leathers joined porn.

[BustyWomenLovr]

Yes - he had a chance to get help on his own, so now maybe he'll get help in the joint.

[rlg118]

Yes, I'm sure that "Bubba" will be glad to give him the help he needs. He will no doubt learn the error of his ways.

[Jack Tripper]

I think the broader question your asking is: Should non-violent offenders, who are not a danger to society at large, be punished at tax payer expense.

Is that what you are asking, or are you only asking this in reference to Weiner?

[Baxter49]

Originally Posted by Jack Tripper

I think the broader question your asking is: Should non-violent offenders, who are not a danger to society at large, be punished at tax payer expense.

He absolutely should be severely punished and been arrested, there was a minor involved, but the taxpayer expense is a big part of my question. Maybe he should have been held without bail until his trial at our expense and he should have been cuffed and hauled off when he got his sentence, I don't know?

This now federally convicted man is walking around completely free for another 40 days, taking subways, still living with his family, a local paper followed him yesterday walking around before he lost them in the subway.

Which is why I raised the topic, it does not make sense to me.

I read OJ Simpson cost Nevada taxpayers $200.000 for his 9 years, and last week on an A&E documentary the cops met with him at his hotel, did not arrest him, gathered evidence, then finally did at a later time.

Then the same man who did not surrender in 1994 until he created a nightmare for all time where he put a gun to his head was not held in Vegas for a crime that involved, armed robbery, kidnapping?

In 2007-08 Simpson made bail....flew home to Florida.....violated bail, and the bondsman had to go get him and bring him back to Nevada, the judge doubled his bail, he flew home again, and finally stood trial only because he turned down his plea deal from prosecutors which was for only a few years and then he got the book, and the bookcase thrown at him and we pay with our taxes.

Weiner jokes aside, your broader issue are my questions.