A Houston man may be charged with ‘assault with a deadly weapon’ for having unprotected sex when he may be HIV positive. In some states, it is already illegal to expose someone to HIV without telling them, but in those cases the people are charged with a law specific to that, not with “Assault with a deadly weapon”. \r\n\r\nOf course do I think that what Sellars did is disgusting and sick and he should be held criminally liable for having sex with a minor. But ‘assault with a deadly weapon’? Chances are, they had nothing more than oral sex. The chances of HIV transmission from oral are so low they can’t be quantified. What kind of a ‘deadly weapon’ only hits its target less than 1/500000 times? \r\nWhat this case would do, rather, would set a precedent, that cold possibly give the government grounds for holding all people who harbor contagious disease as possessing a ‘deadly weapon’. It’s not the same as charging someone with a law specific t o HIV status non-disclosure. In my opinion, anyway, and especiallygiven the larger context of us being under a tyrannical rule of a system that revolves around technology and the medial/pharmaceutical establishment. Especially given that the ultimate goal of this tyranny is to have us all microchipped. I’m justlooking at the big picture.\r\n\r\nStory:\r\nhttp://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6915492.html\r\nHIV risk from unprotected sexual encounters with infected persons:\r\nhttp://aids.about.com/od/hivaidsstats/f/infectionrisk.htm\r\nRFID to detect disease, courtesy of VeriChip:\r\nhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/21416080/VeriChip-RFID-Bio-Sensor-Chip-White-Paper-May-07\r\nDiscussion of HIV and other diseases with Dr Maniotis on ‘On The Edge” VERY INTERESTING VIDEO\r\nhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM4ESA7ftz0