Posts made by raphjd

It is bullshit; pure and simple.  Do you want me to pretend that it's not?

Of course I'd be furious that the criminal got off.    HOWEVER, what good would it do to execute innocent men?  How the hell would that make me feel better?!    How would executing a soldier who was proven not to even be in the country at the time (the UK case I mentioned) benefit me in the scenario you mentioned?  How would if benefit me to execute someone like Derrick Bennett (other UK case mentioned)?

The points you brought up have nothing to do with your stance on it being a good thing to execute innocent men.

Option B is executing innocent men.

++++

I'm not saying you are arguing like a feminist.  I'm saying you are using the same arguments they use to justify their lies about rape stats, to justify their bullshit JUST BELIEVE and other things where innocent men are sent to prison.    You and feminists argue for sending innocent men to prison, JUST IN CASE.

You are deflecting by keep trying to change my words to be about HOW you argue, not WHAT you are arguing.  I'm not concerned about HOW, but about WHAT.

I bet if you were in GWB's position when he ran for President, you too would be so fucked up that you would refuse to delay the execute for 30 days to see what the DNA evidence said.    I'm also sure you would react the same way he did; "well he was guilty when he was executed".  He still maintains that he did nothing wrong by not delaying it 30 days to wait for the DNA results.  He still maintains that he never executed an innocent person.

++++

I agree, the redefining of rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment would need it's own thread.  BUT, I'm not talking about that.    I'm only talking the "all men are evil and need to be sent to prison" mentality of feminists.

++++

If you are interested, there's a movie about the Derrick Bennett case.  Christopher Eccles (former Dr Who - 2005 series) played Derrick.

There's also a movie about the other case I mentioned but I can't remember anything about it other than the story.

Again for the SJWs;

Her body, her choice, her wallet.    If we can't regulate their vaginas, then we have no business paying for their abortions.

Also, doesn't Obama-care force abortion coverage on insurers?

At least, the bullshit argument that since it was a legal right, that we should have to pay for it has been dropped.

While ZERO innocent men may be impossible, that is exactly what we should aim for.    As long as innocent men are being convicted, we need to end the death penalty.    You on the other hand are advocating for executing as many innocent men as "needed" to foster this insane "crime prevention" bullshit.

If anyone you care about is ever wrongly convicted, you had better get on TV telling the world how it's a great thing and not fight to free them. Doing otherwise would show that either you have been trolling this thread or you are a hypocrite when it comes to you and your own.  I suspect you are a hypocrite.

Keep saying I'm talking like and SJW when your argument is the same as the feminists' argument.  You both want innocent men sent to prison, just in case.

"Extreme cases" as in innocent men executed, which you support as "crime prevention".  It's not "extreme cases" if you can just wave them away with your hand in a "who gives a fuck about them" manner that you've been doing.

I already gave you a better way.  Look at the crime stats and kill the group(s) with the highest portions of violent crimes.  That would do more than executing random innocent men, for crime prevention.    It goes along with your stance on abortion.    Planned Parenthood was a way to get rid of the "weeds" as the founder called them.

Women have 100% of the say in whether we are fathers of not.    So why should I pay for her abortion?

Her body, her choice, her wallet

I have repeatedly commented on your idiotic rubbish.  You are advocating executing innocent men to prevent crimes.

As for the rest of it, stop playing up to the leftists here.

NOPE, didn't drop it because that is you point.  You believe that the state murdering innocent men prevents crime.

You are advocating "fishnet justice" in hopes that killing innocent men, further crimes will be prevented.

I don't think you are going as far as feminism with the 1,000 rapes requires 1,000 men to go to prison, because stupidly they believe that every single rape is done by a different man or they just hate men.  Who knows which, but you do seem to be going down that road, at least a bit.

Of course you aren't arguing individual cases, but you are arguing for innocent individuals to be murdered by the state.  You're like the farmer who doesn't name his cows because he's gonna kill them at the end of the year.

++++

So, I'm not paying but everyone is paying.  So none of my money is part of "everyone's money".  Yeah, ok.

Originally, I was pointing out that we don't need PP because, even the vaginalists admitted before Congress, the same services are provided elsewhere.

After that, I was talking about your reason that we NEED abortions and how that is just as fucked up as your reason for justifying murdering innocent men to prevent crime.

As I already pointed out, CIS came out of the textbooks and into the mainstream as a way of abusing normative people.

You can go back about 5 or so years and see it explode on to the scene and used a weapon against people whose identity matches their sex.

You clearly do support "fishing net justice" with your crap about executing innocent men prevents repeat offenders.

YES, any time an innocent person is wrongfully imprisoned/executed, it is wrong.  The only people needing executing are those that advocate for this shit.

How is GWB refusing to delay that execution by 30 days to wait for the DNA test a bad thing?  It's not and people like you have no problem with it.    The man was fucking proven innocent 3 weeks after he was executed by the state.    I bet you beat your dick when you think about that, based on your posts.

Your argument about tax money is not me paying for something is bullshit, again.

I never claimed that I personally own the 3rd desk to the left at the Houston branch of PP, as you walk in the door.    HOWEVER, my taxes went to help pay for it.

If no one paid taxes, then PP wouldn't exist in its current form, if at all.

I'll give you a little hint, tax money comes from people paying taxes, which is money.  Taxes aren't cheese or the odd socks that are left over every time you do laundry.  It's actually money that people are forced to give to the government.

Your examples are bullshit on their very face because no one made that claim; direct ownership.    If you want to continue this line of blatant crap, you will have to show me where I said I personally own the front door or any other physical item at PP.

And AGAIN, why do we have to pay for their stuff?!    They don't pay for my rights, but I have to pay for theirs.    I noticed you dropped this bit from your previous argument.

Your argument to justify PP is that some kids might have a bad upbringing, so kill a fuck ton of them to prevent it.    Besides being insane, don't you realize that a fuck ton of kids have horrendous lives anyway?    So let's have a realistic look at your argument.  Use abortion to prevent kids from having a horrendous life,  but there are billions of kids with horrendous lives.    So, your logic says we aren't killing enough of them to prevent this.

If we look at your other argument from the other thread, we need to kill a bunch of them anyway to keep repeat offending down.  Who gives a fuck if they ever committed a crime or not, we need to kill.

It's not murder though because the state is doing it.

If we don't execute everyone, except the last human on earth, then how are we to be sure that a crime won't be committed.

Stop trying to blow smoke up our asses.

You justified killing innocent men to prevent crimes.  While my statement quoted above might be extreme, it's firmly grounded in the crap you are advocating here.

It is a slippery slope where we start executing innocent people to POSSIBLY prevent repeat offenses.

Tree of Logic, on YouTube, is a former Texas cop and a black woman, oh and a conservative too and she's not afraid to show crime stats.    If you are so worried about repeat offenders and being a victim of violent crimes, then maybe you should advocate killing people based on those stats.  When you look closely at it,  3% to 5% of the US population commit 50% of the murders and violent crimes.    It's odd how fond you are of Planned Parenthood, but butthurt when I mention this idea.  Unlike the founder of PP, this concept doesn't kill an entire race in the US, just the main problem ones.

I was just watching a documentary about a serial killer.  According to your argument, you'd be happy with executing up to 10 innocent men for his crimes, to make sure he's executed too.  Sadly, you are delusional to think that killing all those innocent men for his crimes would stop him from killing the others.  NO, he'd still be out there killing while the state kills innocent men.

Your idiotic way of solving the problem of "repeat offenders" is to kill innocent men, because let's get real, we rarely kill women for their crimes due to the pussy pass.  You haven't mentioned criminalizing bad behavior by DAs, police, and whatnot like I have.    NO, you want to kill innocent men because somehow that might prevent serial killers from repeating their crimes.

It's like how feminists claim that every single rape is a different rapist and that they all must be thrown in prison.  They don't care about the fact that most rapes are part of a group of rapes by a single person.  I don't think you are as evil as they are because you aren't as demanding that we wrongfully lock up innocent men.

I didn't call you a cuck unless you feel yourself to be a feminist cuck.    I was talking about you and feminists, including their cucks. If you feel you are a feminist cuck, then oh well.

HOWEVER, I do feel that you should get some of the wonderful justice you are willing to dole out onto other people and their families.    If this shit you are willing to throw on other families is so good, then you should wish that it happened to you and your loved ones too.

Your idea is shit and it takes a morally fucked up person to even suggest that.

If you are butt hurt about repeat offenders, then execute everyone who commits any sort of crime.

Maybe you should look at crime stats and advocate executing the worst of the worst, like they do with dogs.  A few dogs do a few bad things, so we kill the entire breeds.

Now I really do hope you get your wish and you wrongly get executed.  Then again, NO.  I hope it happens to someone you care about, so you can be around to tell us how wonderful it was that your loved one was wrongly executed.

If we don't execute everyone, except the last human on earth, then how are we to be sure that a crime won't be committed.

Al Jolson was the fist "trans-racial" hero.

Talcum X and Rachel Dolezal are just worthless copycats.

If all the murderers in Illinois (Chicago) were executed, the moonbats would be complaining that it was racist.

NOPE!!!

Blacks are innocent of everything and when they are guilty, it's whitey's fault.

I wouldn't doubt if Don Lemon and Simone Sanders haven't claimed that all the crimes committed by black people are false flags.  You know, honkeys in black face committing violent crimes in crazy amounts to make poor innocent, victimized blacks look bad.

Simone Sanders said that the DNC shouldn't have white people in any positions of power, cuz "diversity".

Of course she's also butt hurt about the Hispanics that vote GOP, so they really shouldn't have power in the DNC either.  Asians tend to vote GOP, so same thing with them.

That means that (according to Fact-Check figures) 8% of the US population should run the DNC.

According to Fact-Check, 28% of blacks vote GOP in the last few elections.  That means that of the 13% of blacks in the US, only 8% are DNC supporter.

Property and/or sales tax states don't get to write off their state tax burdens.

Northern New England states get subsidized heating, but the Midwest states don't.

Southern states don't get any subsidized A/C.

"A few notable case" is just bullshit.

There were more cases, but those 2 really hit home why the death penalty sucks ass and needed to go.

Illinois stopped the death penalty due to the shear number of innocent men on death row.

Your "logic" is WHO GIVES A FUCK HOW MANY INNOCENT PEOPLE WE EXECUTE, KILL 'EM ALL, GOD DAMNED IT.  KILL 'EM ALL.

The more you say, the more I'm leaning toward the thought (cringe) of hoping you and your ilk get what you are willing to do to others, wrongful imprisonment and/or execution.  You'd sing a different tune if it happened to you.

You believe in "net fishing" justice or the "kill them all, god will know his own" crap.    Maybe I should start wishing people like you get the justice you demand others suffer.

Tax money is used to fund PP, I pay taxes, therefore I pay to fund PP.

Kim Davis has nothing to do with this.  She was an office holder who violated her oath of office.  NOT THE SAME THING.

No one is denying anyone services, as the vaginalists who testified before Congress admitted that these services are available through various means and PP isn't NEEDED for this to continue to be the case.

Abortion is a right, sure, I agree.  You have not shown why I need to pay for it.

The USSC said I have the right to get married in the US.  Using your logic, why do I have to pay to get married, you loonies need to pay for it so I don't have to.

The USSC said I have the right to have gay sex.  Where's my fucking rent boy?  You people need to pay for my rent boys, god damned it.

The USSC said many things are a right, so you bitches need to get to paying for my rights.  NOW, GOD DAMNED IT!!  NOW!!!

BTW, I'm still waiting for my cute rent boys!!!!!

Not just federal taxes, but any tax money.

I'm not against women having these services, but why should I pay for it?  I'm mostly "pro choice".

Why PP?  As we saw in the previously mentioned video, vaginalists admit that these services are available elsewhere.  So why do we specifically need PP?

Why is it ok for the founder of PP to be anti-black racist (paraphrase;  blacks are weeds that need to be eradicated), because that's "historical", but a celeb can't say "nice tits" in a historical case?    Hypocrite much?!  NOTE:  not directed at anyone specific, just something I've seen when discussing PP.

OK, so you are pro death in all cases.  You support abortion and executing innocent people.  At least you are consistent, you believe in killing those who have done nothing wrong.

For clarity;  4th of July 1976, not 76 rapes on the 4th of July.

++++

DAs, police, etc, etc are just as corrupt as always.  That is why I would rather side against them than side with them.

The US government has severely limited the number of appeals there are, especially in the death penalty cases.

++++

The UK got rid of the death penalty, in a major part, by the execution of Derrick Bennett.    A 16yo friend of his and he were out and about, when the 16you decided to break'n'enter a shop.    The police were called and Derrick gave up peacefully.  His friend didn't and killed a cop.  Derrick was 21'ish but due to an accident when he was young, was mentally 7yo.    Since the friend was too young to execute, they pined the murder on Derrick in a "joint enterprise" thing.      If Derrick was convicted, the judge had to sentence him to death because he was part of killing "a person with/of standing" (aristocrats, politicians, police, doctors, council workers, etc).    Anyhoo.  Because he was mentally disabled, the Home Secretary was legally required to commute the sentence from death to life in prison.  Even still, Derrick was mentally too young to be sent to prison as his mental age was too young for the UK's then "legal age of responsibility" of 8yo.    HOWEVER, the Home Secretary refused to do this and Derrick was executed.

There were a couple of other cases that caused upset and the final nail in the UK's coffin was the case of the Army soldier convicted of murder and sentenced to death.  The reason this became a problem was that legally the crime didn't fit the definition of murder, but manslaughter, so no death penalty.  The real kick in the cunt was that Army records proved he was not even in the UK at the time of the "murder".

Oddly, the UK banned all executions, but allowed those already sentenced to death to be executed.    As the UK banned executions, those already sentenced were stuck in a CATCH 22.  They were going to be executed, but legally NO they weren't because it was banned.  This meant they had no right to appeal something that legally was not happening.

++++

Unlike you, I hope you (nor anyone) never, ever wrongfully get sent to prison.

People who have never faced the possibility have no fucking idea what it's like to sit in a jail cell for something you never did, but knowing how easy it is to falsely convict someone, especially on crimes against women.

Her "honesty" is intact, despite the police proving she lied.  If I say her name in a public manner, I go to prison.  My name and the fact that I was accused of rape (not that it was proven to be a lie) is out there in the public domain.

Even before all this, I was against wrongful convictions against people.

It disgust me when I hear people like you and feminists saying there's nothing wrong with sending innocent people to prison.

Since abortions are such a tiny part of what PP does (feminist narrative), then we can get rid of it and not make a difference.

The truth is, feminist don't protest about losing "the pill" if PP is defunded.  They only protest about losing the ability to have abortion on demand.

There's a video of Congressman Trey Gowdy questioning some vaginalist about PP and defunding it.  She admits that birth control is done through countless venues; clinics, PP, and whatnot.  In the end, she admits we only need PP to provide abortions, since all the other bits are done, and done well, in other venues.