1. Is the "sex offeder" getting a kickback from the 17 folks he is keeping employed? I sense an opportunity here!

Posted by: Fed UP on September 1, 2005 08:48 AM

2. What, is he Hannibal freaking Lecter? Wouldn't good old solitary confinement on McNeill Isl. do the trick?

Posted by: Brian Crouch on September 1, 2005 09:16 AM

3. What's wrong with putting him in the general population? Talk about 'payback'.

Posted by: swatter on September 1, 2005 10:14 AM

4. This is (almost) delightful! The libs (high concentration in Seattle) are so concerned with these wonderful citizens that, even though they cannot be cured, need to be out in society. I guess they all thought that Seattle was to crowded to actually place them there, so they were safe to wave the lib flag. They thought they would go in those nasty suburbs, or in Eastern WA. Then Prentice's wonderful quote (below)! What a backwards way of saying it is a good idea, but not in my backyard! And this Dem is now so concerned with the cost of the program. If they were as concerned with the cost of all their other union giveaway programs I might (and emphasize might) have some sympathy for her.

Sen. Margarita Prentice, D-Seattle, chairwoman of the Senate budget-writing committee, said the cost and the controversy of the Special Commitment Center are growing.

"If you talk about the McNeil Island facility, you feel in your gut that it's unconstitutional," Prentice said. "You can't continue to isolate them forever. Unfortunately, there's too much demagoguery and too many outraged speeches. What we need to do is evaluate the cost and effectiveness of this program."

Posted by: fred on September 1, 2005 10:26 AM

5. I agree....... they need to evaluate it's effectivness to the cost and then never build anymore. Washington doesn't need these places. We need these perverts in jail for the rest of their lives.

Duncan is a prime example of Washington's failure to "deal" with these people.

We need Jessica's law here at a minimum!

Castration works for me too!

Posted by: sgmmac on September 1, 2005 10:47 AM

6. Swatter,
The problem is that they have “done their time”, so you can’t put them in the general population. A further complexity is that they are highly likely to re-offend. I have no sympathy for these sub-humans and there appears to be no effective means for correcting their behavior. I think when it comes to these kinds of crimes, one strike and you are out!

BTW, the folks at DSHS tried to build this facility less than a mile from my house in Auburn. They are exempt from any zoning laws. If they wanted to buy a home in your neighborhood to house these animals, there is nothing you can do about it. You and I couldn’t put up a strip club or an adult book store, but they can bring these bastards right to your door.

Posted by: ronin on September 1, 2005 10:53 AM

7. I can solve this problem for 12¢.

And I'll even donate it. I'll bet they get more then that from me in taxes for this pathetic excuse for "justice".

Posted by: Jeremy on September 1, 2005 10:57 AM

8. "This building has got to be secure in all senses — fire safe, earthquake safe, escape safe, and safe from external risks," Richards said.

Like... wow.

Most of the emphasis here is on keeping the rapist inside safe from the outside world! Is anyone else reminded of that scene in Monty Python's Holy Grail where, after several minutes of painstakingly clear instructions given by the king to the two guards, they finally understand that it is not each other that they are supposed to be guarding?

Instead of trying to figure out safe ways to store the lit matches next to the gasoline, why don't we change the law to say that in the future, these matches will simply be extinguished?

Posted by: TB on September 1, 2005 11:10 AM

9. Someone recently told me that the "treatment" these guys receive includes being shown photo after photo of porn, in order to 'desensitize' them to all that stuff. I was horrified. No wonder this 'treatment' never seems to really work. It's a farce. Has anyone else heard about this?

Posted by: Michele on September 1, 2005 11:24 AM

10. Here is a perfect example of the liberal solution to a problem. They spend $1.6 million when a 25 cent bullet will do just fine.

Ooops. I guess that isn't so politically correct now is it? TOO BAD!

Posted by: pbj on September 1, 2005 12:18 PM

11. I think justice (and public dollars) would be best served by providing Sen. Prentice a roommate....perhaps even five roommates! I'm sure she'd like that. As a taxpayer, I sure would!

Posted by: Saltherring on September 1, 2005 01:28 PM

12. Jeremy & pbj-

Aside from the calibre and bullet type (note cost difference) you guys have the right idea.

I'd opt for slowly beating these guys to death with a club at no charge to the tax payer. In fact I bet you could charge per swing and enhance revenues.

Sorry, there is no PC with these perverts.

Posted by: Jeffro on September 1, 2005 04:10 PM

13. Why not just neuter him and put him in a cage? He can have a handler to feed him daily and to make sure he's clean.

It's works for rabbits and it's a lot cheaper! (and humane....at least for the taxpayers!))

Posted by: Deborah on September 1, 2005 10:06 PM

14. put these guys in Sims' and other legislators' & liberal judges' neighborhoods; problem solved overnight; they would be locked down tighter than a bologna sandwich truck near a homeless camp;

liberals who are so eager to 'mainstream' these criminals are the first to bring out the medeival hot probes when their families are on the line; how many more times do citizens have to be repeat victims before perps are locked away?

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on September 5, 2005 09:47 AM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:

Remember info?