i beat up a gay loser today

[MindOverMatter]

First you say this:

Not wannabe cops... just doing what needs to be done.

Now you say this:

Now, if one of my friends beat up some pervert in the men's room for some legitimate reason, then my sense of loyalty toward a friend might override any instinct to turn him in. But h2o isn't one of my good buddies, he's just some guy on the Internet bragging about thrashing a "homo". I don't owe him any loyalty.

Which is it gio? If you were so intent on doing the right thing, or doing what "needs to be done", you'd follow the law without bias and turn both people in whether or not it's a friend, or a stranger on an internet forum. If you were so intent on doing the right thing, you'd show no leniance just because you're friends with one person and not the other. So the whole "doing what needs to be done" thing is obviously a lie, and you're being a hypocrite. You're not doing this because it's the right thing, you're doing it because you get a kick out of scaring some guy on an internet forum and looking like a harda*s.

And that's another reason why I am defending h2o. When one woman is violated and defends herself, all women, regardless of whether or not they are her friends, relatives, or whatever will stand by their side. They have gender loyalty.

Yet when guys are in the similar situation, they get a cold shoulder and threats. Then you see people on this forum b!tching about how feminism is making men feminine wusses, and elevating women. No it's not, we are.

 

[SELF-MASTERY]

going back was the dumbest thing. I would've cursed the guy out, called security and joked about it with my friends. The same laws?

Prosecutors and even cops have DISCRETION (DAMN WHAT AN APPROPRIATE WORD) over who they arrest and prosecute. If I a 260lb man beat a 120 man because he was threatening me, the law would be more likely to come down on me. Now if that guy were of avg man height and weight I might have a lil justification. Laws are not set in stone. When you talk about the elements for certain crimes there are all kinds of caveats and qualifiers... He doesnt deserve respect nor support. He did a very bonehead silly thing that silly DJ nerd alphas do...

 

[MindOverMatter]

The law does not condone vigilantism in women, either. Although most women would be smart enough not to go back.

Bullsh!t. If this happened to a woman and she got charged for it, you'd have a city uproar, and there'd be hundreds of people with picket signs outside of the courthouse / city hall. And she'd get off the hook.

 

[SELF-MASTERY]

men and women are different and society has different expectations and rules for both.

How hard is this to understand. Sweet innocent woman is peeing on toilet, notices strange weird man jerking off to her, OH NO, what could be next; rape, a nice beating, a kidnapping. Non of this sh** would go through any reasonable man faced with the same circumstance. That is why the woman would gain supporters: she has a diferent set of emotions and reality. H2o didnt feel like fagboy was going to hurt him.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Originally posted by SELF-MASTERY
men and women are different and society has different expectations and rules for both.

How hard is this to understand. Sweet innocent woman is peeing on toilet, notices strange weird man jerking off to her, OH NO, what could be next; rape, a nice beating, a kidnapping. Non of this sh** would go through any reasonable man faced with the same circumstance. That is why the woman would gain supporters: she has a diferent set of emotions and reality. H2o didnt feel like fagboy was going to hurt him.

Society may have different expectations, but the rules and laws are the same! They apply to everyone. Men or woman, white or black, christian or muslim. If you decide to create exceptions within laws, then there is no purpose for having them in the first place. How hard is this to understand?

If a woman gets off the hook for commiting a crime that would land a guy in jail, if a Christian gets off the hook for commiting a crime that would land a Muslim in jail, then obviously the law is being misused and needs to be changed.

 

[SELF-MASTERY]

Dude like let go of your hate towards ho's.

We don't have one set of rules, nor should we. Self defense aint always self defense, sometimes its murder.

Under the law in my state a man can not be a victim of rape. Why?? Because the elements for the crime of rape state; that rape is a forced act between a man and a women. In the context of your silly beliefs the law is the law and applies equally.NOT

rape is rape, but not when it is sexual assault. Rape is rape, but not when it is statutory. Murder is murder, but not when it is manslaughter. Murder is murder, but not when it is genericly a homicide. Murder is murder, but not when it is justified or excusable.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by MindOverMatter
Which is it gio? If you were so intent on doing the right thing, or doing what "needs to be done", you'd follow the law without bias and turn both people in whether or not it's a friend, or a stranger on an internet forum. If you were so intent on doing the right thing, you'd show no leniance just because you're friends with one person and not the other. So the whole "doing what needs to be done" thing is obviously a lie, and you're being a hypocrite. You're not doing this because it's the right thing, you're doing it because you get a kick out of scaring some guy on an internet forum and looking like a harda*s.

Nope, I'm doing this because it needs to be done. Read my answer again. If a friend of mine did what h2o did and acted like h2o is acting, I would turn him in, too.

There is a difference between the two scenarios. Therefore, there is a difference in my response. Furthermore, I don't have to treat h2o like a friend. He's not a friend, he's a stranger on the Internet. With a friend, I would have some idea of his state of mind and his motivations. Lacking that information from h2o, I have to deduce these things from what he has said. And from that, I have decided to do what needs to be done.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by MindOverMatter
Bullsh!t. If this happened to a woman and she got charged for it, you'd have a city uproar, and there'd be hundreds of people with picket signs outside of the courthouse / city hall. And she'd get off the hook.

It all depends on the circumstances. If a woman just got up out of an exam to go beat the f*ck out of a "faggot", you'd have some people going against her and some people supporting her.

And it would make someone like you have his head explode -- not sure who to hate worse... the woman, or the "homo".

 

[SELF-MASTERY]

Dude, like get like a good lawyer. Your looking at a hate cime

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by SELF-MASTERY
Dude, like get like a good lawyer. Your looking at a hate cime

Not in the beautiful state of North Carolina. But that's okay because he's got enough on his plate without worrying about hate crime status. You've got assault, battery and vandalism for starters. Could be more problems depending on if it's a state school or a private school.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Originally posted by SELF-MASTERY
Dude like let go of your hate towards ho's.

We don't have one set of rules, nor should we. Self defense aint always self defense, sometimes its murder.

Under the law in my state a man can not be a victim of rape. Why?? Because the elements for the crime of rape state; that rape is a forced act between a man and a women. In the context of your silly beliefs the law is the law and applies equally.NOT

rape is rape, but not when it is sexual assault. Rape is rape, but not when it is statutory. Murder is murder, but not when it is manslaughter. Murder is murder, but not when it is genericly a homicide. Murder is murder, but not when it is justified or excusable.

First of all, I have no hate towards hos. In fact I applaud them on their ability to make the law work for them in a way that men cannot emulate.

In the context of my silly beliefs what?! If you read my post, I say that a law that does not apply equally to everyone is flawed and needs to be changed. So yes, your rape law is flawed and needs to be changed. Most of the states (and countries) have redefined rape to not be gender specific, and to exclude the sexual aspect of it. It's an assault law now that if enforced without bias (as it should be) protects both men and women equally.

Yes, murder is different from manslaughter, and sexual assault is different from sexual harassement.

That is ok, because they are different laws dealing with different crimes! Even tho in both murder and manslaughter someone gets killed, they are two totally different crimes.

However, a manslaughter done by a man, and a manslaughter done by a woman are two SAME crimes, and should get the SAME punishment. Each law should apply equally to both genders, all races, all religions, and if it doesn't, it's a flawed law and needs to be changed.

If a woman was to be thrown in jail for what h2o did, I'd support you 100%. But she wouldn't and that's why I'm not with you. It's a flawed law, and I don't agree.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by MindOverMatter
If a woman was to be thrown in jail for what h2o did, I'd support you 100%. But she wouldn't and that's why I'm not with you. It's a flawed law, and I don't agree.

Is it wrong, or isn't it? If you agree that it's wrong, then you should concern yourself with ensuring that the punishment gets enforced against both men and women who commit the same crime, not trying to excuse and exonerate h2o for doing something wrong simply because you feel that a woman's punishment would be different.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
Nope, I'm doing this because it needs to be done. Read my answer again. If a friend of mine did what h2o did and acted like h2o is acting, I would turn him in, too.

There is a difference between the two scenarios. Therefore, there is a difference in my response. Furthermore, I don't have to treat h2o like a friend. He's not a friend, he's a stranger on the Internet. With a friend, I would have some idea of his state of mind and his motivations. Lacking that information from h2o, I have to deduce these things from what he has said. And from that, I have decided to do what needs to be done. [/B]

Ok Gio. I've re-read what you said. You've stated that if your friend acted with legitimate (if misguided) reason, you'd support him.

To me, h2o reacted with a misguided, but legitimate (through his experiance) reason.

If you would protect your friend because you know how he thinks, and condemn h2o because you've made a few assumptions from his thread don't know sh!t about it, you are still not doing the right thing. You don't know his actual character, you don't know the guy, you don't know his personality like you know a friend's. Right?

That's still not the right thing. If you were doing the right thing, you'd ignore the knowledge you have of your friend, and focus on the offence, the law, and the evidence.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
Is it wrong, or isn't it? If you agree that it's wrong, then you should concern yourself with ensuring that the punishment gets enforced against both men and women who commit the same crime, not trying to excuse and exonerate h2o for doing something wrong simply because you feel that a woman's punishment would be different.

As for right now, I don't see anything he has done to be wrong, because he'd be charged with a FLAWED, gender biased law.

If women got thrown in jail for the same act, I'd agree with you for it would be a crime commited under a proper law. Since it's not, I will not support it.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by MindOverMatter
To me, h2o reacted with a misguided, but legitimate (through his experiance) reason.

And that's the disagreement. I do not believe h2o reacted legitimately. And since it is my opinion that's in question here, that settles that.

If you would protect your friend because you know how he thinks, and condemn h2o because you've made a few assumptions from his thread don't know sh!t about it, you are still not doing the right thing. You don't know his actual character, you don't know the guy, you don't know his personality like you know a friend's. Right?

Right, so in this case I can only go on my limited information. H2o violated the law. He bragged about it. He was very proud of himself. That's all I need to know. And furthermore, if a friend of mine did the same, I'd turn him in. There is no unfair bias in play here.

That's still not the right thing. If you were doing the right thing, you'd ignore the knowledge you have of your friend, and focus on the offence, the law, and the evidence.

If the offense, the law and the evidence was the same as in this case, I would turn my friend in. You have very effectively confirmed for me that I have made the correct decision. Thanks.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by MindOverMatter
As for right now, I don't see anything he has done to be wrong, because he'd be charged with a FLAWED, gender biased law.

If women got thrown in jail for the same act, I'd agree with you for it would be a crime commited under a proper law. Since it's not, I will not support it.

Therefore, in your opinion, the law is only legitimate if a woman is charged with it. Maybe women don't go into bathrooms with premeditation and intent to assault "homos" and beat their faces in. Maybe.

In any event, it doesn't matter, because if you have a problem with it, then don't turn him in. Meanwhile, since I don't have a problem with it, I will turn him in.

That way, both of us can feel entirely justified and secure in our own opinions and actions.

 

[Centaurion]

Originally posted by TyTe`EyEs
I beat a kid up in the 2nd grade. I also beat a kid up last year. Not sure if he was gay, but he got it good.

ooh no, watch out, Gio might run to the feds with this one!!!!!

 

[MindOverMatter]

And for the record, I don't hate women, I love women. I just don't think they should get away with sh!t that would get me thrown in jail. It's got nothing to do with hate, and everything to do with exercising my democratic rights.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by Centaurion
ooh no, watch out, Gio might run to the feds with this one!!!!!

No, I'll give him a free pass just to confirm everyone's suspicions of bias and malice.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
Therefore, in your opinion, the law is only legitimate if a woman is charged with it. Maybe women don't go into bathrooms with premeditation and intent to assault "homos" and beat their faces in. Maybe.

In any event, it doesn't matter, because if you have a problem with it, then don't turn him in. Meanwhile, since I don't have a problem with it, I will turn him in.

That way, both of us can feel entirely justified and secure in our own opinions and actions.

No, the law is legitimate if it APPLIES to both. If it applied only to women, it would be flawed. It has to apply to both.