Mission creep takes many forms in government. In the armed forces, from sending a few special forces to train south Vietnamese.
To a full blown invasion of Laos and Cambodia involving half a million troops.
A form less talked about by historians: is mission creep in the law.
I'll illustrate an example of this...
Legislature is presented with a horrific crime, kidnap and murder of a child by a perfect stranger.
The legislature is compelled to act...but they always make the same mistake, the law is worded too vaguely...The Amber alert system is a perfect example. the u.s. Justice Dept told local police not to issue them in cases of parental abductions. Most law enforcement only briefly complied, now they simply ignore this instruction.
We actually have many cases in America now, where both parents who have been proven guilty of nothing, but who are crazy with longing for their children who have been abducted under color of law by a state bureacracy that didn't even exist a generation ago, attempts to leave the state with their own child, ironically to escape the bureaucratic tyranny of a child protective services agency that has completely run amuck.
The creators of the amber alert system never intended this...nor did the creators of the cps bureacracy. The legislature wouldn't have initially gone along with it if they'd known what was coming. This is mission creep.
sex sexual revolution feminist law rape consent mission creep legal abuse crimes witch hunt
Another example, and the reason I'm making this video...concerns the legislative response to a date rape involving heavy drugs slipped into the drink of a female college freshman, who was then gang raped. What an outrage! The boys got off because she didn't resist and she was arguably conscious, so it didn't fit the legal definition of rape. A poorly written, vaguely worded law was hastily passed.
Vaguely worded laws are paydirt for prosecutors. Remember prosecutors are just lawyers, not necessarily any more ethical than the sleaziest defense attorney in town.
Lawyers earn their reputations by trying tough cases, prosecutors are no different.
Justice and ethics take a back seat. The prosecutor wants to test the limits of that vaguely worded law therby widening it's scope far beyond what the legislature may have intended.
The bar of what constitutes a criminal action is lowered, sometimes slowly, sometimes very quickly. Because that is how reputations are made in the DA's office.
How this has played out in case law concerning rape is resulting in a situation in which the majority of sexually active heterosexual men have engaged in sex that falls under this newly expanded definition of rape...married men are not an exception, since marital rape was introduced into the law 20 years ago.
In other words, if you and your wife have too much to drink one night after dinner, stumble into bed and have sex, you sir are technically guilty of felony rape by definition.
In other words, we're all guilty of a class C felony.
Is there a married man alive who isn't guilty of rape? If so, He and his wife must be teatotallers.
We've come all the way from a law that was hastily written and passed to address a very low incidence of a specific, outrageous act, all the way to a case in which a married man who's wife may be some varying degree of intoxicated, can find himself convicted of a very serious felony and put away for twenty long years.His life destroyed, by something that wasn't even illegal just a relative few years ago. What do you call that? I call it a revolution!
All this has transpired in the law over only the last ten years or so, and all because of a crime that was as horrible as it was rare.
Now gentlemen, we are virtually all felons. All that remains is for the prosecutor to pick us off one by oneb, completely at his or her discretion.
And that's the revolution that wasn't televised.
This is the editorialist.
All the girls that i know , buy me drinks , keep calling me cute , and allways sleep with me.
Angus1966 1 year ago
@Angus1966
**
Are you sure these girls aren't raping you?
The bar on what constitutes consensual sex in a court of law is a lot higher than it is in the real world.
TheEditorialist 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So you think it's morally okay for a guy to give a woman 3 drinks while he doesn't drink anything?
Your logic is that of an infant.
And you talk like a moron. "Duuurrrr...my tiny penis matches my tiny brain, and I try to make self sound smarrrrttt." *droool*
Get over yourself old man.
keewee44 2 years ago
Aww lookie here.
Keewee44's trying to hurt my feelings, poking fun at my teeny tiny penis.
LMAO at this textbook fail.
And btw moron, anybody's welcome to buy me three drinks or more, anytime they like. I'm a big grownup now who takes responsibility for what I consume no matter who's buying or what their motives might be.
Yeah, it's morally okay by me, you dumbass.
And since they're buying, I won't turn down a plate of fajitas either. They're delicious.
TheEditorialist 2 years ago 3