Don't call me "inmate!"

[screamingflea]

The family of a gentleman (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/inmate_that_offensive_W1xV1hqxwe64hudW6sSooK) serving 25 years to life for shooting someone in the head at point blank range is suing to have the word removed from his records.

Acting as her [brothers] own lawyer, Marie insists: The label "implies that our brother is locked up for the purpose of mating with other men," [ ... ] "The suggestive nature of the word is disgraceful. This cruel psychological programming has weighed heavily on our emotional and psychological well-being."
"It's something that's bothered me for a long time," Marie told The Post. "I couldn't understand why no one recognized that somebody being labeled an inmate, why they wouldn't recognize that. To me it just sounded very wrong."


The suit asks for $50 million for mental anguish. >8)

[Kathy WI]

Don't call him "incarcerated" either because that implies that he's in a car.

[screamingflea]

Or "murderer" because that implies that he murdered somebody.

On one level I can understand (without sympathizing) why inmates (or, "persons of in") file all these frivolous suits. They have nothing but time on their hands, and many of them have nothing to lose. It's a shame that this one is such a slap to the victim's family though. What about their feelings? And would the switch from the term "victim" to something else magically bring him back?

[creaker]

Kind of silly - although one could have, sort of, drawn that kind of reference in the 1600's ("one allowed to live in a house rented by another" (usually for a consideration)), it hasn't been used that way in a very long time. They are really twisting the word to mean what they need it to mean to file this case.

[iris lily]

Don't call him "incarcerated" either because that implies that he's in a car.
ha ha ha, I laughed.>8):D