If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WJHL Tri-Cities)   Girlfriend gives away fugitives location by "liking" the authorities on Facebook   (www2.wjhl.com) divider line 110
    More: Stupid, Facebook, fugitives, sex offenders, obstruction of justice, girlfriend  
•       •       •

18672 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Sep 2012 at 11:52 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



110 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-13 12:49:51 PM  
Most of these dummies have their profiles set to public with all their information visible.

I know bc I've used it to track down not only them but their momma, their boo, their BFF, and their associates with little to no effort on my part.

If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.
 
2012-09-13 12:50:24 PM  

mooseyfate: RoxtarRyan: Too bad cops who molest intoxicated women in bars don't have to register as sex offenders.

Don't forget to shame the victim for being a target!


I really can't pass judgement until I see what she was wearing to tell whether or not she was asking for it or not. Oh, and I'll also need to know her past to tell how sexually active she's been. And, I'll need to interview some of her friends to see if she's ever had a beer or smoked a doobie. Also, her race and the wealth of her family. History of government assistance or voting democrat. This is all vital to knowing if the cop did anything wrong.
 
2012-09-13 12:52:11 PM  

Ed Grubermann: HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.

It's even worse than that.
[wvva.images.worldnow.com image 600x798]


Hate to see an Amish boy go wrong like that. I don't care if he was on Rumspringa.
 
2012-09-13 12:52:13 PM  
Another day and another FB story of stupidity. FB sells their info to authorities so it woiuldn't be too difficult to get info.
No pics of the stupid chick?
 
2012-09-13 12:53:40 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.

Guys peeing in alleys are seldom referred to as "dangerous sex offenders".


According to an article published in The Economist, public urination gets you on the sex offender registry in 13 states: Link
 
2012-09-13 12:54:54 PM  

JPSimonetti: mooseyfate: RoxtarRyan: Too bad cops who molest intoxicated women in bars don't have to register as sex offenders.

Don't forget to shame the victim for being a target!

I really can't pass judgement until I see what she was wearing to tell whether or not she was asking for it or not. Oh, and I'll also need to know her past to tell how sexually active she's been. And, I'll need to interview some of her friends to see if she's ever had a beer or smoked a doobie. Also, her race and the wealth of her family. History of government assistance or voting democrat. This is all vital to knowing if the cop did anything wrong.


All you need to know is that she was out in a bar. Without a male escort. Whore.

I hear she also grocery shops alone after 10pm.
 
2012-09-13 12:55:35 PM  

JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.


Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.
 
2012-09-13 01:02:23 PM  

Great Odins Raven: I don't get it, the article says he is white, but then they call him Naecker.


Naecker please.
 
2012-09-13 01:06:16 PM  

911Jenny: Most of these dummies have their profiles set to public with all their information visible.

I know bc I've used it to track down not only them but their momma, their boo, their BFF, and their associates with little to no effort on my part.

If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.


You sound stalkerish...
 
2012-09-13 01:06:23 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.


yeah, but then you end up with a partner that gives up your location to the 5-0.
 
2012-09-13 01:09:06 PM  

Silverstaff: Old_Chief_Scott: TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.

Guys peeing in alleys are seldom referred to as "dangerous sex offenders".

According to an article published in The Economist, public urination gets you on the sex offender registry in 13 states: Link


The key word is "dangerous".
 
2012-09-13 01:12:12 PM  

Theaetetus: JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.


Whiteknight much? It is the exact thing that tens of thousands of men in the US are accused of every year. Did you offer to buy that lady a drink at the bar? Uh oh. Did she regret it the next day? Oh dear, welcome to Tier III. ... that may not always be the case, but to deny that it happens regularly is complete ignorance. Regardless, my comment was sarcasm and clarified further down.
 
2012-09-13 01:15:15 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.


I'm here to volunteer for the offensive sex...
 
2012-09-13 01:16:39 PM  

Theaetetus: JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.


Obviously he is referring to "sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act". Maybe that means someone who is retarded or handicapped, but it doesn't seem crazy to apply it to drunkeness.

What's with the over-the-top response, by the way? Did someone drug you and rape you last night?
 
2012-09-13 01:17:52 PM  
Naecker Please.
 
2012-09-13 01:23:07 PM  

TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.


Ah, the abuses of Megan's law.

What I don't understand is why we have to register people who pee in the alley or--okay--commit rape, and then tell all the neighbors, and they can't live near a school (no joke, you piss on tree, you can't live near school) or work with children...

... but if you shoot someone in the face in anger, you get second degree murder, not pre-meditated, go to jail for 5 years, then can go back to teaching vicious asshole school children that EVERYBODY wants to throttle to death, and you don't have to tell anyone you murdered people.

What?

Had a 20-ish year old guy go to jail for raping a 39-year-old woman once, moved somewhere, the guy down the block got the notice that a "sex offender" moved in and went out two days later and killed the dude. Told police, "I was just protecting my 9 year old daughter." Meanwhile there's like 2 or 3 murderers on your block, right dude?
 
2012-09-13 01:23:27 PM  

hitmanric: I don't understand how the girlfriend gets an obstruction of justice charge. She's the one who led them to him.


I was thinking "Charge her with "enablement of justice" and sentence her to one free ice cream cone".
 
2012-09-13 01:26:14 PM  

JPSimonetti: Theaetetus: JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.

Whiteknight much? It is the exact thing that tens of thousands of men in the US are accused of every year.


[Citation needed]

Did you offer to buy that lady a drink at the bar? Uh oh. Did she regret it the next day? Oh dear, welcome to Tier III. ... that may not always be the case, but to deny that it happens regularly is complete ignorance. Regardless, my comment was sarcasm and clarified further down.

No, your statement is complete ignorance, and appears to be based on some mythical number you pulled out of your ass. In 2009, there were 88,100 reported rapes or attempted rapes, and you're saying that at least a quarter of those were "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence"? Go ahead, pull the other one. It's got bells on.
 
2012-09-13 01:28:30 PM  

keypusher: Theaetetus: JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.

Obviously he is referring to "sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act". Maybe that means someone who is retarded or handicapped, but it doesn't seem crazy to apply it to drunkeness.


If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape.

What's with the over-the-top response, by the way? Did someone drug you and rape you last night?

No, I'm just sick and tired of the bullshiat "there's violent rape and there's lying women" dichotomy that assholes like him persist in spreading.
 
2012-09-13 01:30:57 PM  

poison_amy: HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.

I'm here to volunteer for the offensive sex...


That whirring sound you hear is your profile view counter.

/yeah, I know
 
2012-09-13 01:32:13 PM  

fappomatic: We probably won't see why he's a sex offender because many of those records will be sealed. However, he is a Tier 3 Registered Sex Offender. Under the Adam Walsh Law, this is the breakdown:

Tier III Offenses require lifetime registration and quarterly verification, involve:

sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242
sexual contact with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2244(c)

non-parental kidnapping or false imprisonment of minors,
any attempt or conspiracy to commit of any of the above, and
any new offense committed by a Tier II offender.


So he could be a lesser offender who peed behind a tree, and got Tier 3.

He could also have raped some older woman, but he's listed under the Child Under the Age of 12.

Also, as Maryland law states, it's illegal to have sex with a retarded person because they are mentally incapable of etc etc.

Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly (I've been told repeatedly--as serious advice--to just show up at the bars after 11 or 12, because the girls are already drunk and you can get a fast hook-up). According to this law the actor must "cause" intoxication, by buying a drink i Guess? What if she's out at a bar and gets drunk on her own and decides to hook up?

This is a bad law. It labels people who have done Bad Things(TM) as Child Molesters(TM), and that's very bad. There should be modifiers, like Tier II(r) for Tier II (at worst) Repeat offender. You shouldn't suddenly get the "I had sex with a 12 year old" tag because you pissed behind a tree A THIRD TIME.
 
2012-09-13 01:34:45 PM  

911Jenny:
If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.


If people wanted me that bad, they could come to me. biatch can't find me on facebook? Don't got time for that biatch, her cousin wants to jump in my lap tonight anyway.

Seriously, Facebook is for people who have no social life and can't figure out how to escape their basement; or whose home life is so bad they need to be with their friends even when they're not with their friends. If the whole god damn town worships the ground you walk on, you don't need Facebook.
 
2012-09-13 01:37:26 PM  

bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly


That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.


See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.
 
2012-09-13 01:47:30 PM  

fappomatic: We probably won't see why he's a sex offender because many of those records will be sealed. However, he is a Tier 3 Registered Sex Offender. Under the Adam Walsh Law, this is the breakdown:

Tier III Offenses require lifetime registration and quarterly verification, involve:

sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242
sexual contact with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2244(c)

non-parental kidnapping or false imprisonment of minors,
any attempt or conspiracy to commit of any of the above, and
any new offense committed by a Tier II offender.


So he raped an 11 year old retarded cripple?

/aisle seat please.
 
2012-09-13 01:50:54 PM  

Theaetetus:
If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape.


The problem is it's not that simple.

Let's start with peoples' internal motivations. Girls like to have sex. Take it at face value, it's true. In fact, most of the girls you meet would probably like to have sex with YOU.

Unfortunately for you, there's other things people think about. Morals, social pressure (parents, friends, etc), obligations (boyfriend etc). There's also just bare emotions: how do they feel about you? How do they feel about being used? Girls want sex to be kind of mutual, or at least they want to feel like they're important and valuable--they might want to get drilled, but if that's ALL they think they're worth it's kind of depressing.

There's a lot of crap on top, but it all comes down to somehow the built-in, undeniable, absolutely real id "I want to have sex with you!" being covered up by a lot of ego and superego that does NOT want to have sex with you. What makes a person more than a base, instinctual animal is their ego and how it interacts with their id and superego: for all intents and purposes, SHE doesn't want to have sex with you. QED.

Now, add alcohol.

Alcohol starts to change peoples' behavior. It's not just that it makes them "irrational," but rather it weakens the ego and superego. A girl you'll NEVER get in bed might just smile and shrug and go for it after even two or three drinks, barely buzzed or tipsy. The mood change is huge. The more emotional and impulsive they are, the easier this is; the more critical and thoughtful they are, the more they're prone to continue to refuse. You can tell because it goes from "I'm not interested" to an array of excuses--"I don't know you," "I'm not like that," etc. When a girl says, "I don't know you," what she means is "I'd totally let you pound it but I'm uncomfortable banging random guys."

So what now?

Totally, completely, I-can't-remember-last-night drunk isn't the beginning. One or two beers is already leaning on the pussy wrench. You'll pry those legs open easy enough on just that, sometimes, depending on how loose the bolt is.

I tend to say one or two normal drinks (not long island iced teas), and I reserve the right to decline anyway if I think the girl's out of character that night. I mean if there's a girl that I can't get with, and she's had a couple ciders and she's like, aww hell why not? I'm like, huh. Where'd that come from? It could happen but I'm suspicious. There's only two exceptions: pre-existing active/semi-active sexual relationship (i.e. reason to believe she'd be fine with it) or if she just upfront says go for it when she's sober (I've had that happen, girls that I'll never get with have flat out told me if they get drunk and jump me, go for it; not my fault). Beyond that, it's just not cool with me; if it doesn't feel right, I'd rather not do it.
 
2012-09-13 01:58:00 PM  

Theaetetus:
See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.


SHE is DRUNK. It didn't strike you that, maybe, possibly, potentially, she could make some "bad decisions"?

I live near a BAR named "Bad Decisions" because this is what drunk people do!

How are you going to argue that you didn't have a belief that the person's judgment may reasonably have been impaired? Reasonably means that there's a reason for it, not "well anyone's judgment can be impaired" or "she always turned me down before but tonight she's frisky." If she's emotionally distraught, high, or drunk, she might suddenly start doing things she wouldn't normally do--this is known. That she does something she wouldn't normally do isn't unreasonable; that she does such things when there's obvious signs of a widely understood cause-effect relationship makes it considerably likely that she may not be currently capable of making reasonable decisions.

Drunk chick. Cause-effect: she does stupid crap, pukes, or has sex with people. Well-known.

She's drunk. Unless you have a reasonable argument (we screw all the time, we came here together and she kept groping me through my pants before she started drinking, etc), it's reasonable to assume she's trying to bang you 'cause she's drunk.
 
2012-09-13 02:00:33 PM  
1) Holy fark, you're creepy, bluefoxicy. You apparently take repeated refusals as an invitation to continue. You talk about "prying" some girl's legs open. I sure as fark wouldn't want any woman to be drunk around you.

2) It is that simple. If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape. Not "gosh, I don't know, and she just seems tipsy or buzzed," but "I explicitly know she's incapable of declining." If you know that, and you have sex with her, you are a rapist. It's very, very simple.
 
2012-09-13 02:00:36 PM  

Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.


So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.
 
2012-09-13 02:02:45 PM  

bluefoxicy: Theaetetus:
See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

SHE is DRUNK. It didn't strike you that, maybe, possibly, potentially, she could make some "bad decisions"?

I live near a BAR named "Bad Decisions" because this is what drunk people do!

How are you going to argue that you didn't have a belief that the person's judgment may reasonably have been impaired? Reasonably means that there's a reason for it, not "well anyone's judgment can be impaired" or "she always turned me down before but tonight she's frisky." If she's emotionally distraught, high, or drunk, she might suddenly start doing things she wouldn't normally do--this is known. That she does something she wouldn't normally do isn't unreasonable; that she does such things when there's obvious signs of a widely understood cause-effect relationship makes it considerably likely that she may not be currently capable of making reasonable decisions.

Drunk chick. Cause-effect: she does stupid crap, pukes, or has sex with people. Well-known.

She's drunk. Unless you have a reasonable argument (we screw all the time, we came here together and she kept groping me through my pants before she started drinking, etc), it's reasonable to assume she's trying to bang you 'cause she's drunk.


You're seriously arguing that if a chick is drunk, it's okay to rape her because you can reasonably assume that's what she wants.

I want nothing more to do with you. Goodbye.
 
2012-09-13 02:05:14 PM  

stonicus: Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.


What actions did the drunk girl take? "Not declining" is not an action. It's a lack of action. Why do you think a girl should be held "legally responsible" for things that other people do to her while she's unconscious?
 
2012-09-13 02:05:59 PM  

bluefoxicy: Theaetetus:
See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

SHE is DRUNK. It didn't strike you that, maybe, possibly, potentially, she could make some "bad decisions"?

I live near a BAR named "Bad Decisions" because this is what drunk people do!

How are you going to argue that you didn't have a belief that the person's judgment may reasonably have been impaired? Reasonably means that there's a reason for it, not "well anyone's judgment can be impaired" or "she always turned me down before but tonight she's frisky." If she's emotionally distraught, high, or drunk, she might suddenly start doing things she wouldn't normally do--this is known. That she does something she wouldn't normally do isn't unreasonable; that she does such things when there's obvious signs of a widely understood cause-effect relationship makes it considerably likely that she may not be currently capable of making reasonable decisions.

Drunk chick. Cause-effect: she does stupid crap, pukes, or has sex with people. Well-known.

She's drunk. Unless you have a reasonable argument (we screw all the time, we came here together and she kept groping me through my pants before she started drinking, etc), it's reasonable to assume she's trying to bang you 'cause she's drunk.


Did she willingingly and knowingly consume the alcohol? I dunno about her, but when I drink, I *know* that it changes my behavior. By still choosing to drink, I am accepting that. Why does it not work for chicks?
 
2012-09-13 02:07:19 PM  

Theaetetus: stonicus: Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.

What actions did the drunk girl take? "Not declining" is not an action. It's a lack of action. Why do you think a girl should be held "legally responsible" for things that other people do to her while she's unconscious?


Ah... doing it to a girl who is passed out, we're on the same page on that one. That's a no no. I was referring to the cases of next morning regret...
 
2012-09-13 02:09:46 PM  
www2.wjhl.com
"I can't go to juvie. They use guys like me as currency." 
 
2012-09-13 02:12:53 PM  

stonicus: Theaetetus: stonicus: Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.

What actions did the drunk girl take? "Not declining" is not an action. It's a lack of action. Why do you think a girl should be held "legally responsible" for things that other people do to her while she's unconscious?

Ah... doing it to a girl who is passed out, we're on the same page on that one. That's a no no. I was referring to the cases of next morning regret...


You mean those hypothetical cases of next morning regret with a frequency that is so widely overblown that the one guy who brought it up left this thread when called on it? Those cases of next morning regret that are a red herring you brought up to imply that women are liar, even though you're replying to a post about the above statute that explicitly requires that the guy know he's raping someone who can't decline? Those cases?
 
2012-09-13 02:16:56 PM  

Theaetetus:
2) It is that simple. If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape. Not "gosh, I don't know, and she just seems tipsy or buzzed," but "I explicitly know she's incapable of declining." If you know that, and you have sex with her, you are a rapist. It's very, very simple.


"Gosh, I don't know, so I'm going to do it anyway, it's not rape" Wow your morals are warped. The very real possibility that someone's ability to make clear decisions is placed in front of you, and you want to hum and say "I DON'T SEE PROOF!" and go and continue your predatory behavior and call it consent.

Theaetetus: You're seriously arguing that if a chick is drunk, it's okay to rape her because you can reasonably assume that's what she wants.


See, this is why we need better schools. Reading comprehension is a skill you should acquire. Though your critical thinking skills seem to be terrible in general so maybe that's your problem.

Find a brain. Yours seems to be missing.
 
2012-09-13 02:18:33 PM  

Theaetetus:
You mean those hypothetical cases of next morning regret with a frequency that is so widely overblown that the one guy who brought it up left this thread when called on it? Those cases of next morning regret that are a red herring you brought up to imply that women are liar, even though you're replying to a post about the above statute that explicitly requires that the guy know he's raping someone who can't decline ...


Oh I get it. This guy is a bar hopper that routinely brings home drunk girls, and sends them off with cab fare at 2 in the morning. He needs to feel good about all the half-drunk girls he's nailing because they're still conscious so it's "not rape".
 
2012-09-13 02:19:43 PM  

Sock Ruh Tease: [www2.wjhl.com image 472x354]
"I can't go to juvie. They use guys like me as currency."


There was an article in the local paper about an older woman who had her teen aged son sent to juvie so he would learn a lesson about his doing some stupid little prank that got him in trouble with the cops.

It turns out juvie was full of gangs and he was skin and bones and stupid. He ended up having to give a blowjob every morning to a gangbanger who wouldn't give him his pants until he blew him off.

The woman has since changed her mind about putting your kid in the system to teach him a lesson.
 
2012-09-13 02:26:05 PM  

Boudica's War Tampon: Sock Ruh Tease: [www2.wjhl.com image 472x354]
"I can't go to juvie. They use guys like me as currency."

There was an article in the local paper about an older woman who had her teen aged son sent to juvie so he would learn a lesson about his doing some stupid little prank that got him in trouble with the cops.

It turns out juvie was full of gangs and he was skin and bones and stupid. He ended up having to give a blowjob every morning to a gangbanger who wouldn't give him his pants until he blew him off.

The woman has since changed her mind about putting your kid in the system to teach him a lesson.


That's ... inappropriately hilarious.

/TVTropes used to have a 'rape as comedy' page--there are still references to sub-pages of RapeAsComedy--but it seems to have been removed in a recent clean-up of the endless stream of pages about rape.
 
2012-09-13 02:34:40 PM  

stonicus: So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.


No, you can file fake rape charges too.

Only problem is, men generally don't get raped by women. It's far more likely that a man raped a woman. And that is why the law leans that way.

Life is not fair, sugar.
 
2012-09-13 02:34:50 PM  

Ed Grubermann: HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.

It's even worse than that.
[wvva.images.worldnow.com image 600x798]


Due, your fro is on upside-down.
 
2012-09-13 02:37:03 PM  

bluefoxicy: 911Jenny:
If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.

If people wanted me that bad, they could come to me. biatch can't find me on facebook? Don't got time for that biatch, her cousin wants to jump in my lap tonight anyway.

Seriously, Facebook is for people who have no social life and can't figure out how to escape their basement; or whose home life is so bad they need to be with their friends even when they're not with their friends. If the whole god damn town worships the ground you walk on, you don't need Facebook.


Because no one ever, say, goes away to college, or moves away from home for work. Facebook is only ever used for people who live in the same town as you.
 
2012-09-13 02:38:57 PM  

JPSimonetti: HideMonkey: JPSimonetti: twiztedjustin: wat
[i.imgur.com image 203x360]



No, the article mentions both Maryland and Virginia but no one by his name is in either registry.

Didn't the article say something about his being in trouble for failing to register?

/don't care enough to re-read it

You're right. I figured they were referring to how you have to let them know where you are, though. I thought the authorities were the one that actually entered you into the database ... that's a little sloppy, isn't it? I wish I had more info of how that worked, but I haven't gotten caught getting the mail in my underwear, yet.

On a related note, I check the the entire US database and he wasn't in there.


Remember, in many cases the police will use the term "sex offender" to refer to anyone accused of a sex crime, even when he has not yet been convicted. The information is only placed on a registry after such conviction. Tainting the jury pool has never been easier.
 
2012-09-13 02:41:02 PM  
FTFA: "Deputies were able to determine Naecker's girlfriends identity after she "liked" the Tazewell County Sheriff's Office Facebook page, police report. This information provided deputies with critical information such as Naecker's girlfriend's residence and her name."

I don't get this. If they didn't know the woman's name and location, how did they know that she was the girlfriend of the man they were looking for? Or did they investigate every one of the millions of Facebookers who liked them until they found shacked up with Mr Naughty?
 
2012-09-13 02:43:46 PM  

treesloth: [i1095.photobucket.com image 631x346]

Hello, Tazewell PD? Hey, it's treesloth. Oh, hi, Linda! Oh, you know that notice to call you if we have information about where that Naecher guy is? Yeah... HE'S IN YOUR JAIL. You can stop asking for help finding him.


It's coming... from INSIDE THE JAIL.

www.grouchoreviews.com
 
2012-09-13 02:44:06 PM  

Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.


Of course, the prosecution must prove intent. If they can't prove intent, they usually nolle prosequi. You guys need to stop looking at the black & white of a law. Don't take the text literally. The text is up for interpretation of what the law is meant to do.

Case in point: In tenant law, does the phrase "the tenant shall maintain the right to quiet enjoyment..." mean I'm not to be disturbed? Nope...it means you can't be put out of your lawfully leased property just because the owner sells it.

Reality can be so boring.
 
2012-09-13 02:45:23 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.

Guys peeing in alleys are seldom referred to as "dangerous sex offenders".


Except by those who are trying to make the sex offender problem seem bigger than it really is.

bluefoxicy: This is a bad law. It labels people who have done Bad Things(TM) as Child Molesters(TM), and that's very bad. There should be modifiers, like Tier II(r) for Tier II (at worst) Repeat offender. You shouldn't suddenly get the "I had sex ...


Yeah. If they are going to publish the registry they should give a short summary of the events, not just the charges. As it is very minor things can end up looking very bad.
 
2012-09-13 02:52:24 PM  
See, Facebook isn't completely worthless. Apparently, it is making it quite a bit easier for the authorities to apprehend stupid criminals. LOL
 
2012-09-13 02:53:54 PM  
I wonder if the cops tase well in Tazewell.

Sorry if someone has already noted this.
 
2012-09-13 02:58:50 PM  

Theaetetus: You mean those hypothetical cases of next morning regret with a frequency that is so widely overblown that the one guy who brought it up left this thread when called on it? Those cases of next morning regret that are a red herring you brought up to imply that women are liar, even though you're replying to a post about the above statute that explicitly requires that the guy know he's raping someone who can't decline? Those cases?


Now you're just being weird. That last post started to get crazy eyes.
 
2012-09-13 02:59:51 PM  

orbister: FTFA: "Deputies were able to determine Naecker's girlfriends identity after she "liked" the Tazewell County Sheriff's Office Facebook page, police report. This information provided deputies with critical information such as Naecker's girlfriend's residence and her name."

I don't get this. If they didn't know the woman's name and location, how did they know that she was the girlfriend of the man they were looking for? Or did they investigate every one of the millions of Facebookers who liked them until they found shacked up with Mr Naughty?


I don't have Fb, so I could be wrong here, but isn't there a whole whohaa about Fb's facial recognition feature, and autotagging? So if she had a pic of this guy on her page, he'd be clearly labled. So some cop who threw out his back or gave the mayor's kid a speeding ticket or pissed someone off somehow is stuck on desk duty with the shiat job of checking the Fb page wonders why someone "liked" them (who knows, maybe this thing happens often, using the "like" to snitch or to subtly request help) and he, bored, runs her name and the others on her page and bingo, there he is.
 
Displayed 50 of 110 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report