Is this really "the lowest point in our nation’s history that they can remember"?

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 20:05
VIEWED: 20528
PAGE 16 of 22

PREV PAGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 NEXT PAGE

6IXSTRINGJACK

Friday, November 17, 2017 4:22 PM

Yup. Essentially, Sexual Assault is thoughtcrime.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

SIGNYM

Friday, November 17, 2017 6:54 PM

Quote:
And Assault does not involve touching. Assault is a threat of Battery, Battery is the touching part. Sexual Assault has been defined to include touching or contact, but continues to not require it.- JSF

Not exactly. It depends on what state you live in. In CA, threatening someone is assault, touching someone is battery. But in other states, assault requires touching.

The sex crimes categories in CA are pretty confusing, some of them seem very specific, but what is a "lewd or lascivious act"? Sometimes the info lists a specific action like "oral copulation" ... doesn't that meet the definition of rape? but most times not.

These are examples from the registered sex offender map of my neighborhood

Annoy or molest a child under 18
Sexual penetration with foreign object with force or fear
Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (there were five of these)
Attempted lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (two of these)
Continuous sexual abuse of a child
Continuous sexual abuse of a child AND Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14

Nowhere does it say ... "Thought about having sex with someone". In this sampling, there wasn't even one instance of possession of pornography, which is the lowest classification offense you can have and still get on the sex offenders list. I was surprised at the number of offenders who abused children under 14.

Sexual assault seems to more about power than sex and the number of pedophiles was truly astounding. And BTW, all of the offenders were men.

Nobody is asking you, SIX, to apologize for something that you didn't do. Just like violent political action, I localize the crime to the person who committed it - I don't generalize that person's crime to anyone else.

But when you say that you don't like being told what to do .... first of all, I assume that if you're a libertarian what you means is I don't like being told what to do as long as I;m not coercing anyone, and/or I'm only hurting myself. But it's in the nature of people living together in a functional society that there will HAVE To be rules laid out, if only so that the strong don't prey on the weak. Because if you think that the answer for sexual assault is a good kick in the balls from the intended victim, what does a child do? Or an elderly person? Or someone who is mentally or physically disabled? The idea that there shouldn't be any rules - and nobody to enforce them- is a fantasy which only benefits the predators among us.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

6IXSTRINGJACK

Friday, November 17, 2017 9:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
And Assault does not involve touching. Assault is a threat of Battery, Battery is the touching part. Sexual Assault has been defined to include touching or contact, but continues to not require it.- JSF
Not exactly. It depends on what state you live in. In CA, threatening someone is assault, touching someone is battery. But in other states, assault requires touching.

The sex crimes categories in CA are pretty confusing, some of them seem very specific, but what is a "lewd or lascivious act"? Sometimes the info lists a specific action like "oral copulation" ... doesn't that meet the definition of rape? but most times not.

These are examples from the registered sex offender map of my neighborhood

Annoy or molest a child under 18
Sexual penetration with foreign object with force or fear
Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (there were five of these)
Attempted lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (two of these)
Continuous sexual abuse of a child
Continuous sexual abuse of a child AND Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14

Depending on the mood of the officer and the mood of the judge for the day, simply urinating outdoors even at two in the morning can put you on the sex offender map. Not something that anybody who could afford a decent lawyer would have to worry about, but it's a crap shoot if you've got a public defender. But that's just another small example of how people with no power or money get screwed.

Quote:
Nowhere does it say ... "Thought about having sex with someone"
.

Maybe the law doesn't say that. But when people quote a very flawed research study like Kiki did earlier and other people buy the stats, that's exactly what those particular people are saying.

Quote:
In this sampling, there wasn't even one instance of possession of pornography, which is the lowest classification offense you can have and still get on the sex offenders list.

And no doubt the most common of offenses. Makes you wonder the validity of the study when there's no mention of that at all.

Quote:
I was surprised at the number of offenders who abused children under 14.

Sexual assault seems to more about power than sex and the number of pedophiles was truly astounding. And BTW, all of the offenders were men.

Of course they were.

Quote:
Nobody is asking you, SIX, to apologize for something that you didn't do. Just like violent political action, I localize the crime to the person who committed it - I don't generalize that person's crime to anyone else.

I'm not really accusing you of doing so. Look at Wishy though. And even, to a lesser extent, Kiki. Sure, Kiki is usually much more tactful when talking about things, but you can see it in her posts as well.

Quote:
But when you say that you don't like being told what to do .... first of all, I assume that if you're a libertarian what you means is I don't like being told what to do as long as I;m not coercing anyone, and/or I'm only hurting myself.

Yep.

Quote:
But it's in the nature of people living together in a functional society that there will HAVE To be rules laid out, if only so that the strong don't prey on the weak. Because if you think that the answer for sexual assault is a good kick in the balls from the intended victim, what does a child do? Or an elderly person? Or someone who is mentally or physically disabled? The idea that there shouldn't be any rules - and nobody to enforce them- is a fantasy which only benefits the predators among us.

In this case I'm not really even talking about sexual crimes or the laws and punishments against them. I'm a Libertarian, not an Anarchist. Anarchy wouldn't work, simply because there are too many bad people for it to ever work. We need police and a prison system because we need for most people to have that though

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Saturday, November 18, 2017 1:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
And Assault does not involve touching. Assault is a threat of Battery, Battery is the touching part. Sexual Assault has been defined to include touching or contact, but continues to not require it.- JSF
Not exactly. It depends on what state you live in. In CA, threatening someone is assault, touching someone is battery. But in other states, assault requires touching.

The sex crimes categories in CA are pretty confusing, some of them seem very specific, but what is a "lewd or lascivious act"? Sometimes the info lists a specific action like "oral copulation" ... doesn't that meet the definition of rape? but most times not.

These are examples from the registered sex offender map of my neighborhood

Annoy or molest a child under 18
Sexual penetration with foreign object with force or fear
Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (there were five of these)
Attempted lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 (two of these)
Continuous sexual abuse of a child
Continuous sexual abuse of a child AND Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14

Depending on the mood of the officer and the mood of the judge for the day, simply urinating outdoors even at two in the morning can put you on the sex offender map. Not something that anybody who could afford a decent lawyer would have to worry about, but it's a crap shoot if you've got a public defender. But that's just another small example of how people with no power or money get screwed.
Quote:
Nowhere does it say ... "Thought about having sex with someone"
.
Maybe the law doesn't say that. But when people quote a very flawed research study like Kiki did earlier and other people buy the stats, that's exactly what those particular people are saying.
Quote:
In this sampling, there wasn't even one instance of possession of pornography, which is the lowest classification offense you can have and still get on the sex offenders list.

And no doubt the most common of offenses. Makes you wonder the validity of the study when there's no mention of that at all.
Quote:
I was surprised at the number of offenders who abused children under 14.

Sexual assault seems to more about power than sex and the number of pedophiles was truly astounding. And BTW, all of the offenders were men.

Of course they were.
Quote:
Nobody is asking you, SIX, to apologize for something that you didn't do. Just like violent political action, I localize the crime to the person who committed it - I don't generalize that person's crime to anyone else.

I'm not really accusing you of doing so. Look at Wishy though. And even, to a lesser extent, Kiki. Sure, Kiki is usually much more tactful when talking about things, but you can see it in her posts as well.
Quote:
But when you say that you don't like being told what to do .... first of all, I assume that if you're a libertarian what you means is I don't like being told what to do as long as I;m not coercing anyone, and/or I'm only hurting myself.

Yep.
Quote:
But it's in the nature of people living together in a functional society that there will HAVE To be rules laid out, if only so that the strong don't prey on the weak. Because if you think that the answer for sexual assault is a good kick in the balls from the intended victim, what does a child do? Or an elderly person? Or someone who is mentally or physically disabled? The idea that there shouldn't be any rules - and nobody to enforce them- is a fantasy which only benefits the predators among us.

In this case I'm not really even talking about sexual crimes or the laws and punishments against them. I'm a Libertarian, not an Anarchist. Anarchy wouldn't work, simply because there are too many bad people for it to ever work. We need police and a prison system because we need for most people

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

1KIKI

Sunday, November 19, 2017 6:28 AM

Federal surveys use federal definitions.

https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=317

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

1KIKI

Sunday, November 19, 2017 6:31 AM

"But when people quote a very flawed research study"

What makes it flawed, jack? BE SPECIFIC. Quote quotes. Link cites.

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

1KIKI

Sunday, November 19, 2017 1:54 PM

I see you can't be bothered to back up your assertions with anything related to the actual in the real world.

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

1KIKI

Sunday, November 19, 2017 2:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Let's say that a woman silently removes a man's hand from her breast several times, but it keeps creeping back. Is that OK? What about if he keeps touching her crotch and she says "No"? What about if he grabs hard enough to leave bruises? Repeatedly rubs his crotch against her on the bus or in the subway? How about catcalls? Following her partway down the sidewalk making kissy noises?

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I have never, ever, EVER in my life seen any of these things happen.
I'm fairly certain that in most cases if this were to happen in public, you'd have more than one man in the vicinity getting in the middle of it.

Woman catcalled 108 times while walking in New York

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

6IXSTRINGJACK

Sunday, November 19, 2017 5:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
I see you can't be bothered to back up your assertions with anything related to the actual in the real world.

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

I already was specific.

You can't survey 14,000+ men and then only choose 4,000 of them to base your study on with no explanation why. Over 2/3rds of the men surveyed didn't count. I can think of plenty of reasons why somebody would choose to do it, but I can't think of a single reason that doesn't involve getting the desired results.

On top of that, they only surveyed 2 colleges in the entire country. I think a study of all demographics is necessary here, and to say that 13.2% of all men in college in the US are rapey based off of what rigged stats they got by picking and choosing their results at only two colleges is disingenuous at best.

I cited your study. Don't ask me to go back and figure out what page that was all on. I'm not going to bother sifting through that pile of crap again.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

6IXSTRINGJACK

Sunday, November 19, 2017 5:43 PM

As to your videos, Kiki. you don't want me to start posting videos of Feminists at college. I will, if you want to keep posting vids and we can see who's dick is bigger.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

PREV PAGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 NEXT PAGE