5 yr Jail sentence for passing on STD's

[mark cremona]

oh dear.......



and remember its in the Daily Mail so it must be true......

[Jacques]

The Daily Mail !adolf!? Was he an immigrant by any chance?

[mrchapel]

But that`ll mean an end to such fun sites as
http://www.mymiserablelife.com/archive/herpes.shtml

[Sam Slater]

What a dumb article.

That'll mean if you've ever contracted Herpes or genital warts, you'll have to notify everyone you ever sleep with, because these viruses lay dormant in your body forever.

[Jacques]

Dumb article and a wtf?

In 2005 there were 790,443 reported STD diagnoses at GUM clinics in the UK. Add the 'Dangerous Pictures Act' and where the fuck are we going to put all these 'Criminals'?

There's no room in our Prisons, the Police Cells are full so what do we do? Build a wall around Londingham and throw the 'Criminal Underclass' outside, fence off Cornishland? All it does is create a new class of criminal, and that's only useful to the government.

The Government you see, has no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has, is the power to crack down on criminals. And when there aren't enough criminals one makes them (3000 New NuLabour Laws). One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

[Sam Slater]

It won't go through. I bet there's always been hundreds of stupid new ideas for politicians, it's just that these days the journalists have more power, so we here more about them.

What I really think is that the editor of The Daily Mail contracted chlamydia over Christmas, and he's really pissed off!

[diplodocus]

take a step back, is it really such a dumb idea

currently there is no specific law covering the deliberate in fection of a person with an STD, which makes some recent cases such as the guy who went round deliberately passing on HIV harder to prosecute.

this again is the media twisting a potentially useful law into something it isn't, no one is going to be prosecuted for passing on gonhorrea which easily treated and a person may be infected without knowledge.

this is a world away from going out and giving your wife/girlfriend herpes as an act of revenge (for whatever reason) after you have been diagnosed

Sam - if you slept with someone who gave you herpes and you found out they knew their condition and the consequences, how would you feel?

[Jacques]

Sam Slater wrote:

> What I really think is that the editor of The Daily Mail
> contracted chlamydia over Christmas, and he's really pissed
> off!


I'm not surprised it's like pissing through a bruning colander.....not that I know, but it's what I imagine......

[Sam Slater]

[quote]Sam - if you slept with someone who gave you herpes and you found out they knew their condition and the consequences, how would you feel?[/quote]

I'd be pissed off to the maximum. I'd rant !rant!, I'd rave !party! and I'd give them a right telling off! !furious!

I'd say it'd make them irresponsible, but not a criminal unless the disease you pick up is HIV or Syphilis (to a point). Of course there is danger of catching gonorrhoea or chlamydia that can be passed on to a pregnant partner, which can harm the unborn baby but I see it like this.

We all have a choice in who we sleep with.

I'm not doubting that the law was thought up to protect some people from idiots that pass around STD's, the theory sounds ok. It's just the implementation.

There's also the point that the new law may stop people being tested, because a court will need medical records to prove that a suspect knew they had an STD at the time of an offence.

It's more 'personal responsibility' I feel.

[Sam Slater]

Mailed you about a problem I'd come across, but worked it out this morning, so alls fine & dandy!

Cheers!