Ramblings of the Pueblo Native

News and views on the 719 set.

Like him or not, he’s kinda got a point

Lambert Responds To AMA Outrage: “I think it’s because I’m a gay male”

Rodriguez asked, “Do you think it’s because you’re a male or do you think it’s because you’re gay?” “Both, I think it’s a double-whammy. I think it’s because I’m a gay male and I think people haven’t seen that before.” Adam responded.

Recall the last 15 years or so and how much faux girl-on-girl action during award shows that has been crammed down our throats. And now the outrage over one guy-on-guy incident. It is hypocritical.

Now the part of the story where he says that he was surprised that his actions would generate so much controversy is enough bullshit to justify dragging out the hip-waders. You are a gay male living in America: how do you not know that your performance will generate a controversy. And given that you are an entertainer working on controversy you have to know that. But his point about the double-standard is well taken.

Advertisements

November 25, 2009 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Unfortunately?

Can Prosecutors Charge Calif. Gange Rape Witnesses for Doing Nothing? – ABC News

California is one of the few states that has a law on its books in which witnesses are required to report a sex crime against a minor or risk prosecution. However, the law, which was passed in 2000 and named for 7-year-old victim Sherrice Iverson, applies only to minor children younger than 14 years of age.

“Unfortunately California law does not allow you to arrest a person for witnessing a sex crime if the victim is over the age of 14,” Lt. Mark Gagan of the Richmond Police Department told ABC News KGO-TV.

I have to go with what Penn said on a video blog (and I’ll have to research this one to get the link): if somebody says “there otta be a law, usually there shouldn’t.” And this applies doubly here.

Let’s get this out of the way: the people that stood out there and watched this and did nothing have nothing to be proud of. I may not want them to go to jail, but that doesn’t make them good people. Far from it. A good person would have at least called to make the report. So they are not good people, at least in that particular incident.

But not being a good Samaritan should not be grounds for jail time, nor should it be a requirement that citizens make the police’s job easier by coming forward. And attaching a jail sentence wouldn’t do any wonders. In fact, it would create a 5th Amendment situation. Say somebody didn’t want to say anything at the time, but later built up the courage to do the right thing. By doing that, they would be admitting that they violated the law and becoming a witness against themselves.

Plus there is an alternative scenario. I hate to break it to you, but child predators sometimes mix in a bad crowd. I know, it’s shocking. If somebody happened to be doing something unseemly themselves (say drugs or whatnot), they are in a classic Catch 22. Don’t report it and run afoul of the law. Do report it and they incriminate themselves. I’m only surprised that this law hasn’t been struck down as unconstitutional.

November 18, 2009 Posted by | California, witnesses | Leave a comment