If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
"Furious George" > wrote in message ups.com... > > The stuff going on in Iraq -- is that war or is it violent forcible > war? Apparently neither. If it were war, we would have to observe the Geneva Convention. Do you have an issue with my making the distinction between rape and forcible rape? I do so because the word rape has been diluted by including "sex with someone who has had a few drinks" and "sex between a doctor and a patient", or "sex between any two people where the male has more authority or social status than the female". Do you not recognize a distinction between statutory rape and forcible rape? If a 21 year old male has sex with a 17 year old female, do you truly think that it makes no difference whether she was willing or forced? > > I'm not gonna argue that it's OK for a cop to have sex with > > someone he/she has in custody. > > But you believe it is OK, right? Come on and admit it. Kiss my ass. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
"Harry K" > wrote in message oups.com... > > Michael Snyder wrote: > > "Dark Magus" > wrote in message > > ... > > > On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:18:25 -0700, "Michael Snyder" > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >> Next thing you will be telling us is there's "half pregnant" and "full > > > >> pregnant". > > > > > > >Congratulations, Dingus. I only met you three posts ago, > > > >and already I'm on the verge of deciding that you're not > > > >worth my attention. > > > > > > Go ahead and run off if you can't handle my criticisms. That tells us > > > you are 13 years old. > > > > ... by "us", I presume you are referring to all the lurkers who support you. > > > > > > > Don't forget to plonk on your way out. > > > > <plonk> > > You seem to have some strange (to say the least) definition of "rape" Why do you say so? I don't believe I have said anything in this discussion to suggest a non-standard definition of rape. I *have* suggested a distinction between FORCIBLE rape, and what we might call "the extended definition of rape", which includes situations in which both parties give every indication of consent at the time, but for one reason or another someone believes that one party is incapable of giving consent. > How about giving us your understanding of what constitutes rape. The > DNA in the underwear bit is a good example. You do not need to have > penetration by penis to have "rape". No -- but you do have to have LACK OF CONSENT. How do you figure that DNA in the underwear proves that? Even assuming that DNA equals semen, it says nothing about whether she consented. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
On Mon, 03 Jul 2006 02:45:34 GMT, B1ackWater > wrote:
>laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote: > >>> >>>turdwater, one of the sickest damn reichwing ****s on the Internet. >>>Asshole, there are cases of 80 year old women being raped. But of >>>course, you know from your own sexual deviancies, sex for some is about >>>power, not desire. >> >>Oh blow it out your legwarmers. We don't want to hear that feminist >>crapola. > > Well, they kept repeating that femminist crapola over and over > and over again until it kinda became the official "truth". > It's not official truth to me. Learn how to think for yourself. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
Michael Snyder wrote: > "Furious George" > wrote in message > ups.com... > > > > The stuff going on in Iraq -- is that war or is it violent forcible > > war? > > Apparently neither. If it were war, we would have to observe > the Geneva Convention. That explains a lot. If it were rape, you would have to go to jail...so let's call it something else. > > Do you have an issue with my making the distinction between > rape and forcible rape? I do so because the word rape has > been diluted by including "sex with someone who has had > a few drinks" and "sex between a doctor and a patient", or > "sex between any two people where the male has more > authority or social status than the female". Whatever. Keep your fantasies to yourself and keep it zipped up, perv. > > Do you not recognize a distinction between statutory rape > and forcible rape? If a 21 year old male has sex with a > 17 year old female, do you truly think that it makes no > difference whether she was willing or forced? > > > > > I'm not gonna argue that it's OK for a cop to have sex with > > > someone he/she has in custody. > > > > But you believe it is OK, right? Come on and admit it. > > Kiss my ass. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
Michael Snyder wrote: > "Harry K" > wrote in message > oups.com... > > > > Michael Snyder wrote: > > > "Dark Magus" > wrote in message > > > ... > > > > On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:18:25 -0700, "Michael Snyder" > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> Next thing you will be telling us is there's "half pregnant" and > "full > > > > >> pregnant". > > > > > > > > >Congratulations, Dingus. I only met you three posts ago, > > > > >and already I'm on the verge of deciding that you're not > > > > >worth my attention. > > > > > > > > Go ahead and run off if you can't handle my criticisms. That tells us > > > > you are 13 years old. > > > > > > ... by "us", I presume you are referring to all the lurkers who support > you. > > > > > > > > > > Don't forget to plonk on your way out. > > > > > > <plonk> > > > > You seem to have some strange (to say the least) definition of "rape" > > Why do you say so? I don't believe I have said anything in > this discussion to suggest a non-standard definition of rape. > > I *have* suggested a distinction between FORCIBLE rape, > and what we might call "the extended definition of rape", > which includes situations in which both parties give every > indication of consent at the time, but for one reason or another > someone believes that one party is incapable of giving consent. In the eyes of the law, rape is rape. There is some consideration given during prosecution and sentencing. In the case under discussion, it is a clear case of rape even if she consented out of fear. Look at some court decisions on the subject of "compelled consent" where a person is in a position of authority. Cops fall in that category. > > How about giving us your understanding of what constitutes rape. The > > DNA in the underwear bit is a good example. You do not need to have > > penetration by penis to have "rape". > > No -- but you do have to have LACK OF CONSENT. How do you > figure that DNA in the underwear proves that? Even assuming that > DNA equals semen, it says nothing about whether she consented. No one has said it does prove it. Your posts on the subject suggest that it isn't proof of rape. It for sure is proof that sexual contact took place. Investigation will determine if that contact was rape. For two civilians in this case you would have a "he said, she said" case. Here it is way beyond that due to being a cop on duty. Even had it been consensual, he was still up for being charged with a felony or gross misdemeanor (not sure in this jurisdiction) for having sex while on duty in his office (the squad car). Harry K |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
"Harry K" > wrote in message oups.com... > > Michael Snyder wrote: > > "Harry K" > wrote in message > > oups.com... > > > > > > Michael Snyder wrote: > > > > "Dark Magus" > wrote in message > > > > ... > > > > > On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:18:25 -0700, "Michael Snyder" > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> Next thing you will be telling us is there's "half pregnant" and > > "full > > > > > >> pregnant". > > > > > > > > > > >Congratulations, Dingus. I only met you three posts ago, > > > > > >and already I'm on the verge of deciding that you're not > > > > > >worth my attention. > > > > > > > > > > Go ahead and run off if you can't handle my criticisms. That tells us > > > > > you are 13 years old. > > > > > > > > ... by "us", I presume you are referring to all the lurkers who support > > you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't forget to plonk on your way out. > > > > > > > > <plonk> > > > > > > You seem to have some strange (to say the least) definition of "rape" > > > > Why do you say so? I don't believe I have said anything in > > this discussion to suggest a non-standard definition of rape. > > > > I *have* suggested a distinction between FORCIBLE rape, > > and what we might call "the extended definition of rape", > > which includes situations in which both parties give every > > indication of consent at the time, but for one reason or another > > someone believes that one party is incapable of giving consent. > > In the eyes of the law, rape is rape. There is some consideration > given during prosecution and sentencing. Nope! The law recognizes a distinction between statutory rape and forcible rape. That is precisely the distinction I am talking about. > In the case under discussion, it is a clear case of rape even if she > consented out of fear. Nope! That is precisely the question under discussion. Her being in a STATE OF FEAR does not prove that HE did anything to CAUSE HER TO FEAR. > Look at some court decisions on the subject of "compelled consent" > where a person is in a position of authority. Cops fall in that > category. Yeah, I don't care what anybody says -- if she were to say "Please don't arrest me, I'll suck your cock if you let me go" -- he would not be guilty of rape. > > > > How about giving us your understanding of what constitutes rape. The > > > DNA in the underwear bit is a good example. You do not need to have > > > penetration by penis to have "rape". > > > > No -- but you do have to have LACK OF CONSENT. How do you > > figure that DNA in the underwear proves that? Even assuming that > > DNA equals semen, it says nothing about whether she consented. > > No one has said it does prove it. Your posts on the subject suggest > that it isn't proof of rape. It isn't proof of rape. Rape requires LACK OF CONSENT. > It for sure is proof that sexual contact > took place. Investigation will determine if that contact was rape. Exactly so. But the DNA in the pants, in and of itself, does not prove anything. Whether there was sexual contact, and whether it was rape, remains to be determined by investigation. > > For two civilians in this case you would have a "he said, she said" > case. Here it is way beyond that due to being a cop on duty. Even had > it been consensual, he was still up for being charged with a felony or > gross misdemeanor (not sure in this jurisdiction) for having sex while > on duty in his office (the squad car). Exactly! WHICH IS NOT THE SAME AS FORCIBLE RAPE. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
"Furious George" > wrote in message oups.com... > > Michael Snyder wrote: > > "Furious George" > wrote in message > > ups.com... > > > > > > The stuff going on in Iraq -- is that war or is it violent forcible > > > war? > > > > Apparently neither. If it were war, we would have to observe > > the Geneva Convention. > > That explains a lot. If it were rape, you would have to go to > jail...so let's call it something else. You persist in acting as if there was no question that it was rape. > > > > > Do you have an issue with my making the distinction between > > rape and forcible rape? I do so because the word rape has > > been diluted by including "sex with someone who has had > > a few drinks" and "sex between a doctor and a patient", or > > "sex between any two people where the male has more > > authority or social status than the female". > > Whatever. Keep your fantasies to yourself and keep it zipped up, perv. Kiss my ass, net cop. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
"Harry K" > wrote in message oups.com... > > Michael Snyder wrote: > > "Harry K" > wrote in message > > oups.com... > > > > > > Michael Snyder wrote: > > > > "Dark Magus" > wrote in message > > > > ... > > > > > On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:18:25 -0700, "Michael Snyder" > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> Next thing you will be telling us is there's "half pregnant" and > > "full > > > > > >> pregnant". > > > > > > > > > > >Congratulations, Dingus. I only met you three posts ago, > > > > > >and already I'm on the verge of deciding that you're not > > > > > >worth my attention. > > > > > > > > > > Go ahead and run off if you can't handle my criticisms. That tells us > > > > > you are 13 years old. > > > > > > > > ... by "us", I presume you are referring to all the lurkers who support > > you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't forget to plonk on your way out. > > > > > > > > <plonk> > > > > > > You seem to have some strange (to say the least) definition of "rape" > > > > Why do you say so? I don't believe I have said anything in > > this discussion to suggest a non-standard definition of rape. > > > > I *have* suggested a distinction between FORCIBLE rape, > > and what we might call "the extended definition of rape", > > which includes situations in which both parties give every > > indication of consent at the time, but for one reason or another > > someone believes that one party is incapable of giving consent. > > In the eyes of the law, rape is rape. There is some consideration > given during prosecution and sentencing. > > In the case under discussion, it is a clear case of rape even if she > consented out of fear. > > Look at some court decisions on the subject of "compelled consent" > where a person is in a position of authority. Cops fall in that > category. > > > > How about giving us your understanding of what constitutes rape. The > > > DNA in the underwear bit is a good example. You do not need to have > > > penetration by penis to have "rape". > > > > No -- but you do have to have LACK OF CONSENT. How do you > > figure that DNA in the underwear proves that? Even assuming that > > DNA equals semen, it says nothing about whether she consented. > > No one has said it does prove it. Your posts on the subject suggest > that it isn't proof of rape. It for sure is proof that sexual contact > took place. Investigation will determine if that contact was rape. > > For two civilians in this case you would have a "he said, she said" > case. Here it is way beyond that due to being a cop on duty. Even had > it been consensual, he was still up for being charged with a felony or > gross misdemeanor (not sure in this jurisdiction) for having sex while > on duty in his office (the squad car). > > Harry K You are arguing with our resident rape apologist. Short of a female ending up dead or half dead, everything else is a case of 'he said/she said'. And even then, 'it was most likely *rough sex* that occurred.' I'm guessing he'd even argue a case of gang rape against mother theresa. td > |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Cop charged with raping woman during traffic stop
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:14:48 -0400, "tiny dancer"
> wrote: >he'd even argue a case of gang rape against mother theresa. If she consented, it is not rape. There is something very fishy about that story. Things do not add up. -- Stop Repeat Offenders! Don't Re-elect Them! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sloth Kills Another One | Brent P | Driving | 17 | March 29th 06 03:47 AM |
LA County: You're Stuck in a Traffic Jam Until AT LEAST 2016 | Scott en Aztlán | Driving | 72 | December 4th 05 11:59 PM |
YOU CAN'T DRIVE TOO SLOW | Laura Bush murdered her boy friend | Driving | 93 | April 21st 05 10:34 AM |
NYT: If You Think You've Heard It All, Take a Left and HitTraffic Court | Biwah | Driving | 0 | February 23rd 05 09:56 AM |
Where to get Official Speed Limit Info | [email protected] | Driving | 40 | January 3rd 05 07:10 AM |