billsfan1959

Those articles address forfeitures different than assets seized pusuant to RICO convictions. When it comes to RICO convictions they are

Not in criminal RICO cases. The burden is still on the government to prove the assets were obtained with proceeds of criminal activity. If the direct proceeds/assets are not available, then equal assets can be substituted. Even though the forfeitures, for the most part, happen on the civil side of those cases, there is still a burden that has to be met by the government. BTW: This has nothing to do with your argument regarding the presumption of innocence, which is something I wholeheartedly agree with.

That is not even remotely close to the basis for RICO laws - and most seized assets are not returned because they are either assets obtained from criminal activity or substitute assets - as determined through our legal process.

I'm sure she feels the same

The one thing I try never to be in a discussion is intellectually dishonest. I never said anything about an "enforceable standard," nor did I say anything about establishing standards that disadvantage men who engage in normal sexual behaviors - those are all your words. I have been completely upfront from the beginning that (1) the behaviors I am talking about are those that go beyond those "normal behaviors" men engage in when trying to engage in a sexual relationship with a woman and (2) that, as a man, you should know when you have crossed those boundaries. If you want to have a discussion, then, please, tell me what your definitions of "normal male sexual behaviors" are and how my views are infringing upon them.

My posts haven't changed in the least. I began my posts with my belief that it is reasonable to assume you should be able to determine what is appropriate or inappropriate behavior in any given situation - and that it shouldn't be that difficult. My belief is still the same. Feel free to believe otherwise. Nobody is stopping you.

Sometimes you need the light of divine intervention to show you the way

So according to your theory, individual learnings are based on predisposed beliefs and lifestyles that create a set of feelings void of any fact. In which case, your post is simply your set of feelings that hold no facts and, I am sorry, I am going to have to dismiss it accordingly.

Not really a shift at all. I happen to believe that what constitutes acceptable or appropriate behavior in any given situation should come pretty easily to you - and we shouldn't have to have a comprehensive list to go by. If you need a list, then, by all means, develop one and pin it to your shirt.

So far from matter2003's posts, I've gathered that teachers are freaks who want to have sex with anyone in a public restroom at Bills' games, lawyers are wound tight and like to snort cocaine, he's looking for that woman who will be on her knees in a bathroom stall (he seems to have a thing for public restrooms) within five minutes of hitting on her, and, here's the real shocker: women lie in order to not go out with him. Did I miss anything?

You are correct, we are who we are 100% of the time. What we do not do is manifest, behaviorally, 100% of who we are 100% of the time. Which is not really a nuanced distinction.

It certainly seems there are posters that want to confuse the real issues

Such sweeping generalizations. Please be more specific as to what social institutions run afoul of normal human behavior and in what way? I am certainly willing to have a conversation. I am not trying to impose my viewpoint, merely expressing it - with no more aggressiveness that you show in yours.

Novel concept, right?

Very impressive. Did you do that all on your own?

None of which have ever involved inappropriate sexual behavior, thank you.

That is not what the issue is about - that is what you want the issue to be about. You can talk all you want about the biological imperatives of male sexual behavior. What separates you from animals is the ability to reason - to understand what is appropriate or inappropriate in any give situation - and moderate your own behaviors accordingly

I think this post provides all the insight one needs into your thought processes. Not particularly what we might call a "higher level of consciousness."

No, appropriate or inappropriate rests entirely on your behavior...

Precisely my point. I am not talking about hitting on a woman for a date, or any other legitimate advances for sexual or other reasons that do not cross the line into inappropriate behaviors. And, if we really have to define what is appropriate or inappropriate, then I don't know what else to say....

Because what we are talking about is not "basic human nature." Many posters in this thread want to conflate the frivolous accusations that arise out of harmless behaviors designed to do nothing more than show a sexual interest in a woman with legitimate issues women have faced in regard to sexual assault and sexual harassment

Well let me see, my undergraduate and graduate degrees are in psychology, I have over 10,000 or so research articles (that I have actually read over the years) on human behavior in my library, and I have conducted training nationally and internationally for mental health professionals, attorneys, and investigators regarding offender behaviors from evolutionary and personality perspectives. So, a little more than just training in enforcement...

Actually, my views on this topic are driven by experience, education, and training - not feelings. I am well aware of the biological underpinnings of human behavior and it does not justify or excuse real sexual assault or sexual harassment. If you cannot distinguish those behaviors from normal male sexual behaviors, then we will have to agree to disagree.

It is difficult to determine what you are trying to argue when, from your posts, it is clear that you don't even know what you are trying to argue

You seem to have a somewhat superficial understanding of biology from an evolutionary perspective, and a troubling inability to distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate behavior