There’s an old saying. I think it’s Italian. “If one person tells you you’re insane, ignore him. If three people tell you you’re drunk, go home and sleep it off. If ten people tell you you’re a donkey, go buy a bridle and a blanket.”
Seriously, Sevencl, you’re well into donkey territory here. Your insistence on pursuing the topic of personal privacy in a thread by a man who’d lost his family and was trying to find a healthy way to grieve was, at best, completely tone deaf and, at worst, sadistic and cruel.
Just so you understand: there are certain circumstances in which a person loses their right to privacy. From a legal standing, if a person is convicted of a crime that falls within the category of “sex crime”, and the state the crime occurred in has a sex offenders’ registry, that person will be listed with the information required by the registry - usually name, age, picture, crime, and address.
It can certainly be argued that the law is poorly written, poorly applied, or that many people on the sex offenders’ registry really shouldn’t be there. In fact, it has been argued on these boards many times.
But the man who killed Frosty Camel’s family, for right or wrong, no longer has a right to privacy. He is a convict, and he is in the custody of the state. His entire life is under scrutiny, and much of it is now public record.
Morally, the rest of us find that the need of a grieving husband and father to make sense of his loss completely eclipses any claim to privacy a convicted killer might make. The man who killed a woman and her three children loses nothing more, as he’s already lost his freedom and privacy.
But even if you had held the logical high ground on this subject, insisting on writing post after post in a thread that was supposed to be for a man to cope with his incalculable loss puts you on the moral low ground, digging yourself even deeper.
At the very least, you owe Frosty Camel an abject apology.