Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Religion and Philosophy / Re: Christian News Network fundies
« Last post by Ambulance Chaser on May 26, 2017, 05:16:08 pm »
Someone commented that it isn't fair to Grace Kim Kwon that we discuss her without giving her a chance to defend herself.  Do we care?  Asking for a friend.

Considering how she routinely insults huge segments of the American population, I feel absolutely no obligation to be nice to her in any way. 

It would be amusing to see her show up here or in a FSTDT comment section though....just to see her get torn a new one.
I actually do kind of feel sorry for her. She seems mentally ill, like she suffers from some kind of disconnect with reality.

I don't see her trying to control any conversations; it's more like she's so far out in the weeds that she doesn't know or care what the conversation is about.
92
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Askold on May 26, 2017, 05:15:29 pm »
https://twitter.com/pacelattin/status/867949635028959232/video/1

...If Clinton had acted like this how many seconds would it have taken before the GOP would have screamed that she must be removed from office due to medical reasons?
93
Entertainment and Television / Re: Video Game Thread 2.0
« Last post by ironbite on May 26, 2017, 04:17:16 pm »
I honestly can't wait.

Ironbite-killing rednecks?  AWESOME!
94
Also, bear in mind that in 1956 (when this law was written) the UK still had the death penalty.

Rape was a capital crime.

That only men could be found guilty of.  By definition.
95
Quote
Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.

Ahem?

Quote
No extradition proceedings were instituted by Britain, and the English court sentenced McKinney in absentia to a year in jail.[15] Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.[16]

Ahem? Why did you leave out the part where the courts said that she did commit a crime and sentenced her of indecent assault?

She was declared guilty of assault. So even if this was not technically "rape" as defined in the law it is still what is commonly known as rape even if the law that she was sentenced for violation of is different.

Just as is explained in the reply to this petition:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124524

The laws of Britain state that for a crime to be "rape" it has to have "penile penetration" but there are other sexual assault crimes that can be committed by women and the sentences for those can also be heavy.

Kinda like how in Finland a "murha" (murder) is a specific type of homicide which fills 3 qualifications: a) It is premeditated. b) It is "exceptionally brutal."  c) It has been committed by a person who is in their right mind.

So killing someone with one bullet to the head is not technically a "murder" but it is still illegal and carries a heavy punishment. (I think the term would be Tappo / manslaughter.)

Sentenced to a year in jail in absentia, shrugged and didn't give a fuck about extradition and applying said sentence. 

Can you imagine the outcry if you reversed the genders and set it in the modern day?

"So what if it's basically rape except we've conveniently got an asterisk so that people of your demographic have legal immunity to that charge.  We can give you a sentence equivalent to someone found guilty of driving without due care and attention and call it equality.  It's not like the world's most famous 'equality movement' is going to give a shit since it favours them XD"
96
Quote
Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.

Ahem?

Quote
No extradition proceedings were instituted by Britain, and the English court sentenced McKinney in absentia to a year in jail.[15] Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.[16]

Ahem? Why did you leave out the part where the courts said that she did commit a crime and sentenced her of indecent assault?

She was declared guilty of assault. So even if this was not technically "rape" as defined in the law it is still what is commonly known as rape even if the law that she was sentenced for violation of is different.

Just as is explained in the reply to this petition:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124524

The laws of Britain state that for a crime to be "rape" it has to have "penile penetration" but there are other sexual assault crimes that can be committed by women and the sentences for those can also be heavy.

Kinda like how in Finland a "murha" (murder) is a specific type of homicide which fills 3 qualifications: a) It is premeditated. b) It is "exceptionally brutal."  c) It has been committed by a person who is in their right mind.

So killing someone with one bullet to the head is not technically a "murder" but it is still illegal and carries a heavy punishment. (I think the term would be Tappo / manslaughter.)
97
Drive-in movies are still a thing?

I think this may rank alongside a blood moon and the birth of a two-headed albino calf as signs of the impending apocalypse, you said something I was thinking...
98
Politics and Government / Re: Alt-Right
« Last post by TheContrarian on May 26, 2017, 02:56:52 pm »
Note that Garrison was quick to call his lawyers when 4chan were messing with *his* art.  Now he's been seduced by the alt-right, he has no problem with messing with other people's.

Yeah this is amazingly hypocritical of Garrison.

You mean Ben "6 million more" Garrison?  Ben "let's get this shoah on the road" Garrison?  I'd say it's entirely in line with his established character :3
99
That's what's in statutory law, but England has a long tradition of having crimes that are only at common law and nowhere in statutory law. For instance, I don't think murder was explicitly a crime at statutory law until relatively recently.

So while the statutory definition of rape may require that the perpetrator have a penis, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the common-law definition was more expansive.


You got me curious. A quick search on the internet revealed that women have been convicted of raping men or other women in Britain. And the Wikipedia article also mentions that the first time a man was sentenced for raping another man is actually quite recent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_males#United_Kingdom

You need more wikiception.  One link deeper in the one you posted leads to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_sex_in_chains_case

And one quotes

Quote
Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.

Ahem?

100
Science and Technology / Re: Reddit CEO Admits to Editing Posts
« Last post by Askold on May 26, 2017, 01:56:16 pm »
And one more Doxxing thread except this time most of it happens on Voat and they are merely recruiting more people on Reddit to join the Doxxing/harassment operation: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/6d4hqa/clarification_of_rule_iv_and_our_personal/dhzsb6l/

Oh and just for "fun" how about promoting domestic terrorism: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/6dgzqi/ramadan_bombathon_isis_recruitment_edition/di2khee/
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]