Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
He threw furniture from a ****ing building and nearly hit a young child. Are you this retarded on purpose or what? Rape lover.
Originally Posted by rabblerouser:
So, you think that a drunk driver injuring someone or killing them in a car crash isn't that bad because the driver didn't aim to actually crash?
Only a Rapetriot fan or a Raider fan could be so morally bankrupt...
When did I say it's not that bad? More like someone getting a DUI is not evidence that they're guilty of 1st degree murder later on. Negligence is not the same as malicious intent, and the act in question does not show he's the kind of person capable of raping someone.
Again the guy is far from a saint. If he had hit the kid I'd want him in jail for life, and his actions have readily shown him to be a terrible person. But I'm not the one trying to trivialize rape here, instead I seem to be the only one recognizing it for the heinous act that it is. It takes a special kind of evil to do that to another human, and negligence and petty douschebaggery are not evidence of that evil.
If he's guilty I want him in jail till his dick falls off at a minimum, I think I've been very clear on that. All I'm saying is that his previous actions are in no way evidence of his guilt because they don't display the same kind of malicious evil involved in rape. Find evidence he killed someone, or was previously accused of sexual assault, or anything which shows the same kind of evil and I'm right there with you. Throwing something out a window without looking to make sure the street is clear first is not it. Looking out the window first, seeing a kid there, then throwing something at him in an attempt to kill him would be. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Giant Octopodes:
When did I say it's not that bad? More like someone getting a DUI is not evidence that they're guilty of 1st degree murder later on. Negligence is not the same as malicious intent, and the act in question does not show he's the kind of person capable of raping someone.
Again the guy is far from a saint. If he had hit the kid I'd want him in jail for life, and his actions have readily shown him to be a terrible person. But I'm not the one trying to trivialize rape here, instead I seem to be the only one recognizing it for the heinous act that it is. It takes a special kind of evil to do that to another human, and negligence and petty douschebaggery are not evidence of that evil.
If he's guilty I want him in jail till his dick falls off at a minimum, I think I've been very clear on that. All I'm saying is that his previous actions are in no way evidence of his guilt because they don't display the same kind of malicious evil involved in rape. Find evidence he killed someone, or was previously accused of sexual assault, or anything which shows the same kind of evil and I'm right there with you. Throwing something out a window without looking to make sure the street is clear first is not it. Looking out the window first, seeing a kid there, then throwing something at him in an attempt to kill him would be.
That's a lot of words to say that you condone child endangerment. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Giant Octopodes:
"If he had hit the kid I would want him in jail for life". Yeah, clear endorsement of child endangerment there :-)
You don't have to hit the kid with a couch to endanger the child. [Reply]
Originally Posted by rabblerouser:
You don't have to hit the kid with a couch to endanger the child.
Correct, and when did I say he was not guilty of reckless endangerment, or that reckless endangerment should not be punished, or in any way shape or form condone that behaviour?
All I said is that reckless endangerment is not the same as rape. How is that a difficult or controversial concept for you? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Giant Octopodes:
Correct, and when did I say he was not guilty of reckless endangerment, or that reckless endangerment should not be punished, or in any way shape or form condone that behaviour?
All I said is that reckless endangerment is not the same as rape. How is that a difficult or controversial concept for you?
Why do think I'm comparing them?
You're the one who cimparted them, and tried to minimize them.