It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Man burns himself to death to avoid US debtors prison.

page: 3
78
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
What folks are not mentioning is the fact if his ex wife drew any social services from the state they would pursue the back child support whether she agreed with their actions or not. Also, judges and prosecutors all benefit financially from the bonds created when people are sent to jail. These bonds are sold on the stock exchange as real estate, so yeah I can see them sending folks to jail for back child support because it put money in their pockets. The judicial system does operate according to how we all learned in high school government classes, where we were told there was no debtors prisons in the US.




posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SourGrapes
 





He just ruined these kids' lives FOREVER! Can you even imagine the guilt that will consume these two through the rest of their lives? Children have an inherent way of blaming themselves for what happens with their parents, It's called 'immaturity'.


Those kids were ruined during the divorce and will never be the same. This man hasn't helped by killing himself.
While one needs to be responsible in supporting their children, the laws seem rather draconian with jail.
If you have been paying regularly and lose your job, I see no reason for jail.
if you owe an extreme amount and haven't payed regularly, jail is appropriate.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SourGrapes
He just ruined these kids' lives FOREVER! Can you even imagine the guilt that will consume these two through the rest of their lives? Children have an inherent way of blaming themselves for what happens with their parents, It's called 'immaturity'.

With maturity, we realize (most of us) that we ARE NOT the center of the universe and the world actually DOES NOT revolve around us. Until this realization, we live in this funny realm of believing we are in control. If something very bad goes wrong, especially with a sibling or parent, the child will believe it was something they did to cause it.

Fortunately, as we grow and mature emotionally, we begin to realize we have very little, if any, control. We must protect the emotional welfare of our children the best we can.

This man destroyed his own legacy. How sad and unfortunate.



The simple path here is do not tell the kids.

Their are thousands, if not more kids, who have no idea who their father is in this country.

This is the whole premise of the white lie, to shield someone from something that hurts
more than it helps and women use this often when they break up a relationship.

Me knowing who my father is doesn't do me any good in my case.

I think ppl should have the personal freedom to leave this world on their terms
if their lives have become a train wreck, and he made that choice.

Compared to what some fathers have done, he took a milder path.

As some have mentioned the father killed the entire family and himself.

Truly horrendous when that happens.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Pikypiky- You give a lot of useful information. Thanks. I just want to say, although it's none of my business, that you should tell the kid the truth. He's going to feel betrayed the longer you wait.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by allprowolfy
Just one more Authoratarian Orwellian case that shifts and seperates the masses. Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where the Oligarchy live by the same set of rules as their fiefs do


How about seeing our elite have a little "leader ship by example?"
Federal govt=+3.7 trillion in debt=print more money"no prison"
State govt=debt= no prison
Fiefs=debt=inprisionment

Tell me their isn't something wrong with this picture


The really sad part is the derivatives are nothing more than theft by legal means.

The bankrupted entire nations and because its technically legal the new age pirate
is allowed to plunder more and buy off politicians and rig the system to print more money
to hand out theft inside the system.

Legalized monetary piracy is ongoing and systemic.

This is the age of the criminal, where they have indirectly seized control of the government.

This man killing himself is another one of the road markers on the road to
what is coming that will be much much worse.

Ppl find it hard to believe when I tell them this is the GOOD times, but wait and see.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:47 AM
link   
I won't go into great detail but his story is very similar to mine. I too can't afford child support ($419), I also can't find a job due to my arrest for a non-violent crime. I've only seen my son twice in the past 4 months. It's a crying shame the way things work.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I agree the whole child support system needs fixing. The thing is each and every case are different yet treated all the same.
My husband of 16 years was married when young for a short time, his wife became pregnant even though he was not wanting a child at that time. She found another man and left him she eventually married the guy. The baby was very young and the new husband... stepfather was a railroad engineer with very good pay. His new wife went to work soon after giving birth as she loved her career so they made very good money, they moved out of state and my husband rarely saw his son who was raised calling the new husband Dad.
At that time my husband went through a bad time and was unemployed due to the business he worked for going under. The child support plus interest piled up and when he got a basic Walmart job his wage was garnished (child support taken right from his check) this left him with not enough to live on while the ex and her husband raising and enjoying having his son lived very, very well he was never able to get ahead.
When I married him I was able to call the ex-wife and together we agreed on an amount to pay off the back child support, I paid about half of what was owned and we both had to sign letters to the state saying the support was paid in full.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
However..immolation? Oh God.... It's unthinkable. The Empathic side of my soul just screams on seeing a story like this.


May the immolation flames of his martyrdom illuminate the modern injustice of the de facto debtors prison slavery system, so we as a society may advance and overcome this barbarism.


Sri Oracle



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Revolution9
reply to post by civilchallenger
 


Wow! That greedy they could jail a man for owing just that much:



$2,200. to $3,000


Shame on them all! Bet his wifey is feeling a bit different about it all, now, kmowing that her children are gonna be scarred emotionally, knowing their daddy came to this unforunate end.

Was it worth it???

Nah! But too late for regrets in this instance.

May be the moral of this story is to stop dragging families through hell when things go wrong. When split ups happen don't let the courts get involved. They make a right mess of things.

When a man loses his family with all that stress, depression and loss, why put him through that hell???



It makes no sense from a government standpoint because it will cost infinitely more to pay for him to be in jail.. food, guards, water, electricity..etc.

I think his wife didn't need the money, if she did she wouldn't want him to be in jail where paying it back would either not happen, or if he got into a work program where they pay less than minimum wage it would take a long time. I think she was being a vicious mean ex-wife.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Thank you so much for bringing this subject to light .. . . Brilliant thread!
edit on 18-6-2011 by mps3119 because: giving the OP "civilchallenger" props!



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Why did Socrates drink the hemlock?

The Romans left the gate open, and provided a drink of deadly poison. The choice given anyone is "leave and never come back," or "drink the poison and die."

Prior to Socrates this was just a valued and traditional method of banishing someone found guilty in court.

Socrates was found guilty of "corrupting the young" and sentenced to banishment.

OR SO HIS CORRUPT JUDGES THOUGHT.


For centuries afterwards Socrates is held up as a paragon of civic virtue. Total submission to the rules while simultaneously not compromising one's own principals. In otherwords, those who studied his philosophy, trial, and the eye witness testimony of his death; concluded that he was basically saying "If teaching people the truth is a crime ... then I am guilty."



Now here is the real question.

Did James Ball buy his own accelerant or was it provided by the state.


Other than that question,
I find his actions to be in accordance with Socrates philosophy
that we all must submit to the judges, particularly when we feel them to be injust.


Notice in his note;
no avoidance of blame
full admission of his mistakes and crimes,
but the clear indication he is out of options or places to go.


According to the prdictive programing stuff I've been reading the most dangerous person on the planet is someone who is short 2 cents, and cant aford something to eat. I find it interesting that someone who supposedly is a criminal, according to the justice system, and driven to the edge; chose to self immolate rather than be a threat or danger to anyone. Like the Judge, or his Wife. And further he isn't going to cost the Tax payers of his state 30k a year to house in prison. But at the same instance the justice system didn't find him to be righteous in any of his previous cases.

This sentence represents a removed paragraph full of profanity and words like law, laws, and lawyers.






So why did he lose his job in 2009


David Grouchy



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
just one obervation - why is almost everyone falling over themselves to believe a suidices rant ?



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
just one obervation - why is almost everyone falling over themselves to believe a suidices rant ?


Define rant.


David Grouchy



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chai_An
What folks are not mentioning is the fact if his ex wife drew any social services from the state they would pursue the back child support whether she agreed with their actions or not. Also, judges and prosecutors all benefit financially from the bonds created when people are sent to jail. These bonds are sold on the stock exchange as real estate, so yeah I can see them sending folks to jail for back child support because it put money in their pockets. The judicial system does operate according to how we all learned in high school government classes, where we were told there was no debtors prisons in the US.


This has been my experience as well.
The ex went to jail twice for child support that he owed to welfare - but never for what he owed me - I always stood up for him in court, and they listened.

On the other hand... both times he went to jail he was released within a few months by paying $2,000 in arrears - all of that money was directed towards his children, and welfare didn't get any of it - so maybe I was wrong, maybe he should've gone to jail.


On the third hand, currently I'm whats considered "bankrupt" - I contacted a lawyer (within the last few months) to ask about filing and he basically told me that filing is pointless because I don't own a house, a car, or anything else with a deed. Bankruptcy is designed to protect your assets, and there's no such thing as debtors prison.

This thread prompted me to ask, "Whats the difference?" S&F for that BTW

I think people immediately get in an uproar when you include the word "child".
And I think its another sign of how deeply the goverment is trying to tell us what to do.

Is it a morality issue? Men should take care of their kids?
eh... then I say women should pick better men to sleep with.
Or men should pick females who can handle raising a kid on their own

Or vice versa where genders reverse


And while pondering this I come to the fourth hand.
This same man who went to jail for not paying child support has never had, nor attempted, a real relationship with his child. In fact, the court order would not even be there if welfare hadn't made me file in the early days - I knew he didn't want to be around, I knew he couldn't be counted on, and I accepted that gladly cause anyone with that attitude, I really don't want him to be around - and I can live without his measly $31 a week (obviously, cause I have)

Therefore, it almost seems spiteful to me, to charge him $31 as a weekly reminder (at least while the kid is a kid) that he was once a sperm donor...

So I guess it brings me to the conclusions of... pick a better partner..... if you fail to pick a good partner, you might get screwed.... no matter which side you're on.... unless you get rid of child support altogether - which could be a good thing - it might force people to pick better partners, take responsibility before child support even becomes an issue. Until then, speak up in court.

As far as it being a "debtors prison"? I think it falls through the cracks of that definition - they'll call it anything else just to avoid it being that - a true debtor's prison doesn't really exist as far as I can tell and have been told

and from experience, no ones arrested me yet...


Oh and finally, in case anyone was wondering - I left the support order in tact out of spite
(at least at first, many many reasons, but in the end I just got lazy - who can be bothered to go sit at the courthouse half a day to tell them you don't want money..)
and of cousre the hope that I might get lucky and get some more bonus money out of him
no sense in lying about it - but I don't want him to go to jail for it either



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Revolution9
 


least she wont be getting any of his insurance money or life insurance out of him as they dont pay out for suicides maby that was his point make the ex have to get off her butt and do work her self to get money instead of feeling intitled to his wallet

the guy wanted to make a statement and this is how he chose to for better or worse there will be more of this kinda stuff until the laws are changed



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   
Socrates himself admitted he was wise only because he knew nothing. He had no idea what his suicide would mean and he was also wrong for doing it. He left his family over something that was important to him. He was selfish.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Socrates himself admitted he was wise only because he knew nothing. He had no idea what his suicide would mean and he was also wrong for doing it. [color=gold] He left his family over something that was important to him. He was selfish.



I'm sorry,
maybe I missunderstood what you wrote,
but where in

"leave and never come back," or "drink the poison and die."

does the option to NOT leave one's family come in?


David Grouchy



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by civilchallenger
 


NEVER GET MARRIED!!!!!!!!!!!



It is a bad deal for men. There is nothing positive to it. It's all risk, no benefit.
edit on 18-6-2011 by LHP666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by davidgrouchy
 


what do you call 15 pages - blaming everyone but himself ?



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by davidgrouchy

Originally posted by kro32
Socrates himself admitted he was wise only because he knew nothing. He had no idea what his suicide would mean and he was also wrong for doing it. [color=gold] He left his family over something that was important to him. He was selfish.



I'm sorry,
maybe I missunderstood what you wrote,
but where in

"leave and never come back," or "drink the poison and die."

does the option to NOT leave one's family come in?


Sorry if my post was confusing but we apparantly are on the same side on this. Yes he had the option to leave and was even being persuaded to do so but he chose suicide instead which in my opinion was a selfish thing to do.

I understand that he was too old to start over in a new city but that's no excuse to kill one's self.

David Grouchy



new topics

top topics



 
78
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join