NEWS: Murderabilia: Charles Manson Demos Released, Sharon Tate Turns in Grave

Okay, my fourth flipping attempt to post a reply since the freaking 11th of fucking May. Whatever "maintenance" was done recently here definitely made much easier for me to type out well-thought-out, carefully written comments, and then have them fucking disappear - or show up as blank comment fields the next day. To top it off I tried to copy the comment before attempting to post it (since the "maintenance" I have a 2 out of 13 comment posting success rate)
but now my keyboad is sticking and the copy didn't take so I'm starting over.

A-fucking-GAIN!

Okay, rant over. I I know the laws differ from place to place - I know in Florida felons have their voting rights revoked, but have the right to appeal said revocation. I believe statistically, there's many times as many Republicans who appeal that get their rights reinstated - I think last I heard it was 9:1 or something. But thank you for pointing it out - many people may think their state's laws are similar to all states.

My aim was simply to point out that one's "inalienable rights" as an american are subject to forfeiture following a felony conviction. For instance the gun thing - although musician David Crosby, a California resident, checked out of a New York hotel last year and left behind a duffel bag, in which was found a b ol' bag of weed and a loaded handgun registered in California to David Crosby, who served prison time on various charges, including drugs and handgun violations. (fucking hippies). Now, I don't understand how a felon convicted of felony handgun violations gets a gun registered to him and, even given that, how does that legality carry over transcontinentally to New York???? Obviously, it was legit, as only drug charges were filed against him, as the gun was legally registered.

Now, in Manson's case, as his product (the music) is not related to his crimes, the no-profiting-from-one's-crimes law (which I support) should not apply. I have a friend in prison whose two businesses are still thriving (one, funnily enough, involv'es legal services) and he was not told to shut them down. And he shoudlnt be. And that fact Manson's stuff was recorded before the crimes were even committed only strengthens the case that the law doesn't apply, even though, admittedly, were I to buy the album (which I'm not), II would only do so because of Manson's crimes, without which I'd probably never heard of him, and wouldn't be curious about what his songs/music are like. Getting a glimpse into the minds of any abnormal psychological cases is very interesting to me. I'd like to read the lyrics and hear the music again (it's been decades since I heard it at an underground record shop in New Hope, PA) but I won't buy it because I don't want t support Manson in any way, although how a Lifer would benefit from money outside the prison is unclear to me. How much ramen can one eat?

Well, if I was in a solitary cell all day every day in prison, I'd probably eat everything I could.

Now, if he had songs wih titles or lyrics like "I'm Gonna Send Out My Tripped-Out Flipped-Out Dippy Hippie Concubine Slaves To Mutilate That Tate Bitch And Leave No Fetus Alive," I could see a possible connection.

But he doesn't (at least that I know of). Hmm . . .

*scratches head and considers writing song with controversial title*

I agree.. It IS really murky. As far as things like autographs and belongings go, I would guess along the lines of notoriety, but artwork could go either way. Maybe there doesn't need to be a distinction? Like, once you commit a crime, that's where the money goes, regardless?

I thought this was pretty funny.. "Filmmaker John Waters owns one of Gacy's paintings, which Waters says hangs in his guest bedroom 'so people don't stay too long'."