DjDan Posted November 29, 2007 Share Posted November 29, 2007 yes.. you most probably have. First off... we don't believe in a "hell"... nor even a "hell of fire". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casino Crazy Posted November 29, 2007 Share Posted November 29, 2007 http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/Loner-subje...l-to.3530664.jp 2 years and six months - what a joke, this b*st*rd should be locked away for life, he's used a knife and has sexually assaulted a child. The fact that he will actually be let loose is distasteful in the extreme and IMHO his picture should be posted to warn vulnerable children of the dangers he poses to them. A lot of store is placed on his inability to integrate with society, the answer surely therefore should be to remove him from it. Have you tried his Facebook or MySpace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 yes.. you most probably have. First off... we don't believe in a "hell"... nor even a "hell of fire". Wrong mob then. Apologies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 DjDan' date='Nov 29 2007, 10:56 PM' post='284047']As I explained in my earlier post... she may have been asking for it yes - the sex - not the violence. I'm merely pointing out the possibilities, given that we do not fully know the other side to the argument. If I'm a "total prick" for being open minded... then so be it. Yes you are a prick because only somebody totally stupid would think something like that. You seem to be confusing a violent sexual attack by thinking in your own warped little mind that here is some sad courtship ritual between a school girl and some 47 year old loser. I can't even see how any right minded person could make the comment you did. Its just wrong, uninformed and totally sick. Oh yes... 16 year old girls are innocent and childlike. Probably she just wanted a friend to play childlike games with. ..heh. A mouthful of White Lightening?? It'd be nice if that was the limit to the national expectation at that age. You really are a sick person. Is this the view you have of all 16 year old girls. If so you want to book yourself in for counselling as you views are sick and reprehensible. Remember... she was drunk. Its the drinking isn't it? You just can't stop thinking that people who drink are evil and asking for it. Its very clear that this is the perspective you start from. You lack the impartiality to make a valid comment once drink is mentioned. Your views are both wrong and pathetic and I really worry that someone who can make the comments you do can attempt to claim any moral or religious high ground or offer anything to society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumble Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 hboy - calm down - you're reacting like a Daily Mail reader in a Brass Eye special! For once I'm with the Daniels. The girl was foolish at best, and complicit in proceedings to a point. At 16 she was above the age of consent, and according to the Government is mature enough to vote in elections as an adult. And yes, I've raised my own kids to 16 and beyond, and never had ANY worries that they would have got into that situation in the first place. One in a hundred 16-year old girls these days is naive and childlike. This bloke hardly abducted her from Sunday School. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjDan Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Yes you are a prick because only somebody totally stupid would think something like that. your own warped little mind Its just wrong, uninformed and totally sick. You really are a sick person. your views are sick and reprehensible. Your views are both wrong and pathetic It's beginning to sound like you don't like me hboy. That's not true is it? In any case, I've made my point. You can rant on, but I'm not the only person here to disagree with you. You might want to be more inviting of others in your insults. I don't think I really need to explain my views any further at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Take Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 One in a hundred 16-year old girls these days is naive and childlike. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The lack of empathy on this board is, quite frankly, astonishing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragmatopian Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 One in a hundred 16-year old girls these days is naive and childlike. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The lack of empathy on this board is, quite frankly, astonishing. Not sure about the 1% statistic, but anyone who thinks this girl was some kind of Pollyanna character needs to wake up to the world that we live in. This seems to be an unpleasant incident between a teenage pisshead and a middle-aged pisshead - not a child catcher luring a doe-eyed bambi into his wagon with hypnosis and promises of candy. Is he guilty of reprehensible sexual violence against a young woman? Yes. Is he a child abuser? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*daniel* Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Yes you are a prick because only somebody totally stupid would think something like that. your own warped little mind Its just wrong, uninformed and totally sick. You really are a sick person. your views are sick and reprehensible. Your views are both wrong and pathetic It's beginning to sound like you don't like me hboy. That's not true is it? In any case, I've made my point. You can rant on, but I'm not the only person here to disagree with you. You might want to be more inviting of others in your insults. I don't think I really need to explain my views any further at this time. Second his post. Hboy, you make yourself sound "really stupid" by calling other people childish names because they have a different point of view. What you want to be doing is explaining your view in an orderly manner, making a more convincing point of view from the other person. Then maybe you can get a proper debate going on. Not, "X" is stupid, everything who thinks "X" is true, is stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Take Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Not sure about the 1% statistic, but anyone who thinks this girl was some kind of Pollyanna character needs to wake up to the world that we live in.This seems to be an unpleasant incident between a teenage pisshead and a middle-aged pisshead - not a child catcher luring a doe-eyed bambi into his wagon with hypnosis and promises of candy. Is he guilty of reprehensible sexual violence against a young woman? Yes. Is he a child abuser? No. Oh, I forgot - this is an internet forum, therefore if I make a post that says that the majority of 16 year olds are not sexually aware, confident individuals then I must be stating that the girl in question is a little angel... I must remember to write in absolutes to avoid confusion. I think your second statement is more on the mark though than some of the other posters, who seem to be bordering on saying that she deserved it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartacus Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Um, just to clear up the earlier posts, it appears that the girl returned to the accused's flat to "clean herself up". According to the news article, her and a friend were "self harming" - at this point probably, even in an inebriated state, she'd of thought "what have I done?" and retraced her steps to her er, friend's place. That is the only reason she'd have gone back. Him being a bloke probably thought otherwise. Now, of course, even a completely sozzled average bloke may have thought "Oh, hello.." but only for a minute or so, before common decency kicked in. Sadly this obviously isn't what happened. And yes, the sentence is pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iomrob Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 edited by iomrob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 In any case, I've made my point. You can rant on, but I'm not the only person here to disagree with you. You might want to be more inviting of others in your insults. I don't think I really need to explain my views any further at this time. Yes you have made your point - which was purile, self righteous, claptrap. To claim that a girl is "asking for it" because she had a drink and was on her own just demonstrates your total naiviety, lack of understanding and lack of compassion. As misstake said The lack of empathy on this board is, quite frankly, astonishing. I only hope that you are never, ever, appointed to a jury if you believe that by having a few drinks a woman is "asking" to be viciously sexually assaulted. That is what you said and that is why your views disgust me. What you said is just so crass and so naive. Your typical post actually. I would rather use and repeat insults than, as you have done, demonstrate my total ignorance by repeatedly claiming that someone was "asking" for anything by getting into such a situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjDan Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 I only hope that you are never, ever, appointed to a jury if you believe that by having a few drinks a woman is "asking" to be viciously sexually assaulted. That is what you said and that is why your views disgust me. What you said is just so crass and so naive. Your typical post actually. mate, please spare me your ignorance. Go back and read what I said. I have never said that 'by having a few drinks a woman is "asking" to be sexually assaulted'. If you are angry at me for something I never said.. I think you need to take a moment and rethink what you are saying here. Let me be totally clear: I do not believe - nor have I said - that this girl in any way deserved to be attacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxamillion Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Fair enough he should be locked away, but we don't know the other side of the story, she did go back to get drunk alone with him did she not? Pretty poor lack of judgement on her part. No offense to any 15 or 16 year old reading this but kids that age are not known for their excellent judgement. Faulting her for a lack in judgement would be the same is faulting the maker of the wine she drank. He is 47 and she is a child. What ever else needs to be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.