Thou Shall Not Share Thy Dingus ....

[Duncan]

.. without a condom .. " Airman that is a direct order . "

Airman gets 8 years in prison in HIV exposure case - Yahoo! News

 

[rambone]

I think every time you bang a stranger you should know that you are putting yourself at risk of something nasty. That said, it should not be a prison sentence if you both voluntarily put yourselves in that situation.

You can't force someone by law to be honest, clean, safe, responsible, and monogamous in their relationships. This is another good reason why intelligent people see the looming dangers of having the government in charge of all of our health records.

Are there any cases of this charge happening to a civilian? It is already pretty clear to me that soldiers have absolutely no freedom of their own when serving in the military.

 

[phylodog]

There was a man in Greenwood within the past few years who was arrested for the same thing. [STRIKE] I don't recall if it was in the news because he was convicted or just for the arrest. I also don't remember what the charge was for sure.[/STRIKE] Found it: http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-police-arrest-sexual-predator-021910,0,103656.story

Surprisingly I'll have to disagree with you Rambone. If someone knows they have a potentially lethal disease and they knowingly spread that disease I think they should absolutely be locked away so they cannot do it again. Allowing someone to do that is willingly letting them violate someone else's civil rights.

 

[TiminMishawaka]

How in the heck did he have sex with all of them and infect none of them? That guy needs to be hired as a WHO consultant or something.....

Is that something you learn in the Airforce?

 

[steveh_131]

I think every time you bang a stranger you should know that you are putting yourself at risk of something nasty. That said, it should not be a prison sentence if you both voluntarily put yourselves in that situation.

You can't force someone by law to be honest, clean, safe, responsible, and monogamous in their relationships. This is another good reason why intelligent people see the looming dangers of having the government in charge of all of our health records.

I'm not sure I agree. Even from a liberty-minded standpoint.

Compare it to driving. When you go out on the road you are putting yourself at risk. That doesn't mean that someone can be purposely irresponsible and plow into you. That's a violation of your personal rights and property, even if you knew the risks of driving.

 

[eldirector]

Yep. Felony in Indiana, too.
2006 Indiana Code - CHAPTER 16. MALICIOUS MISCHIEF - Indiana CHAPTER 16. MALICIOUS MISCHIEF :: Justia -- US Laws, Codes, Statutes & Cases -- Justia

Class D if you intentionally expose someone to HIV. Class B if they contract it.

 

[Lucas156]

This is just sad man.

 

[rambone]

If someone knows they have a potentially lethal disease and they knowingly spread that disease I think they should absolutely be locked away so they cannot do it again.

AIDS isn't the only life-threatening STD. Perhaps everyone with an STD should be ordered to remain celibate.

Why stop there? People die from Influenza every year. Should people be arrested for not covering their mouths? If they knowingly spread the flu to a person, is it the same as the voluntary "assault" performed in this case?

I think the bottom line is that if you voluntarily are screwing people you know nothing about, then you will sleep in the bed you make for yourself. She gave herself AIDS by being an idiot.



Where does the government think it gets its ability to stop the spread of disease, or meddle in health care at all? Now we are toeing the line regarding another topic; Quarantine. Does the Government have the power to forcibly detain and quarantine someone they deem as "infected" with some disease XYZ? The same dividing line always separates this country. Do you support government-derived safety measures or uninfringed rights of man?

 

[rambone]

How in the heck did he have sex with all of them and infect none of them? That guy needs to be hired as a WHO consultant or something.....

Is that something you learn in the Airforce?

AIDS is an Auto Immune disease, and if your immune system is functioning at its full potential -- then by definition you cannot also be immuno-deficient.

I'm not sure I agree. Even from a liberty-minded standpoint.

Compare it to driving. When you go out on the road you are putting yourself at risk. That doesn't mean that someone can be purposely irresponsible and plow into you. That's a violation of your personal rights and property, even if you knew the risks of driving.

Your driving analogy would fit better to a rape case.

This was more like a Demolition Derby -- consensual collision.

 

[Tactical Dave]

It is already pretty clear to me that soldiers have absolutely no freedom of their own when serving in the military.

Might want to make sure you don't look up what can happen if you get a sunburn while serving...... or what they consider it.

 

[eldirector]

You do realize there is a difference between AIDS and HIV, right?

This man has HIV, but has not yet developed AIDS. His partners may not have contracted HIV by some miracle, or may simply not yet test positive for it. The article also does not mention the use of condoms, so we can only guess.

Rambone, your binary view of the world is what I find most disturbing. Either we are for no government, or for socialism. Your polarizing viewpoint leaves no room for debate.

 

[phylodog]

This was more like a Demolition Derby -- consensual collision.

So the women he exposed consented to being exposed to HIV? Somehow I doubt that. If you can show that they knowingly slept with someone infected sans condom I'll agree with you that he is innocent.

 

[rambone]

Rambone, your binary view of the world is what I find most disturbing. Either we are for no government, or for socialism. Your polarizing viewpoint leaves no room for debate.

Debate away -- we can disagree. I think I raised a lot of good questions about government's role in health care, and where the line is regarding their intervention. My personal belief is that I want the government no where near my health care, and out of the bedroom as well. It simply is not their job to keep me healthy and disease free. Its not their job to lock up sick people either. If you desire their involvement in these places then you are allowed to have your opinion. I'm going to be very irritated by my taxdollars going towards your programs though. IMO, America seems way too far in debt to be enforcing safe sex laws on free American citizens.

Again, she wants to have orgies, its her problem -- not the tax payers.

 

[rambone]

So the women he exposed consented to being exposed to HIV? Somehow I doubt that. If you can show that they knowingly slept with someone infected sans condom I'll agree with you that he is innocent.

With a condom, without a condom.

Not my problem. She should be more choosy with her partners. Maybe do the unheard of thing -- take her & her new friend to go get tested.

AIDS was invented decades ago. We should all be well aware of what promiscuity entails.

I don't see any real distinction between this man and millions of other skanks running around with STDs. Its not my job to lock them up or heal them.

 

[phylodog]

Knowingly and intentionally spreading a potentially deadly disease is attempted murder. It would be illegal if he were using a knife, gun or chainsaw, it should be illegal if he uses his disease.

There is a difference between someone who knows they're infected and goes on spreading it and someone who doesn't know they're infected. Only one is a criminal.

 

[steveh_131]

Your driving analogy would fit better to a rape case.

This was more like a Demolition Derby -- consensual collision.

Let's try another analogy. A cook is infected with Ebola and is well aware that he is infected and contagious.

He continues to serve food at his restaurant anyways without informing customers that he is infected.

Should this be criminal or should we let the free market handle this one? I bet he loses his 4-star rating for that!

I mean as a customer you know that you could be exposing yourself to germs in any restaurant, right?

 

[rambone]

Knowingly and intentionally spreading a potentially deadly disease is attempted murder. It would be illegal if he were using a knife, gun or chainsaw, it should be illegal if he uses his disease.

There is a difference between someone who knows they're infected and goes on spreading it and someone who doesn't know they're infected. Only one is a criminal.

Something like 30,000 people per year die naturally from the flu.

Where is the line? Draw it for me.

I will never ever criminalize disease. They voluntarily shacked up and agreed to swap bodily fluids. Sucks for them. Try forming a relationship with the person next time and getting to know them.

 

[rambone]

Let's try another analogy. A cook is infected with Ebola and is well aware that he is infected and contagious.

He continues to serve food at his restaurant anyways without informing customers that he is infected.

Should this be criminal or should we let the free market handle this one? I bet he loses his 4-star rating for that!

I mean as a customer you know that you could be exposing yourself to germs in any restaurant, right?

Simple solution. Just pass another law! Make a law that requires you inform your customers you have Ebola. Additionally, make it illegal to contract Ebola. Have health inspectors come around annually to check the restaurant for Ebola.

Problem solved.

Actually, in the event of that really happening, the same amount of people are going to die either way, with or without the constitutional infringements. I'd rather keep my government as far away from being the Disease Police as possible. I'm dead against their mandatory medicine too.

Feel free to give me your take on how regulations would save us from the infected cook.

 

[phylodog]

You're right Rambone. Calling anything a "crime" and punishing anyone for anything is wrong because it requires some form or level of government involvement. Maybe siding with criminals feels good, perhaps I'll try it for a while.

 

[rambone]

You're right Rambone. Calling anything a "crime" and punishing anyone for anything is wrong because it requires some form or level of government involvement. Maybe siding with criminals feels good, perhaps I'll try it for a while.

One more time, where do we draw the line? I know someone with an STD and I want to know if they are in danger of being arrested.