Current Events > Man who violently raped 60 women to be released despite history of reoffending.

(+) Yeah! (+)

dontIoseyourway posted...

TheDogfather posted...

*polishes sig*

If you don't want to see UR posts, don't click on UR topics. It's that simple.

I have 15 minutes to kill.
---

dontIoseyourway posted...

TheDogfather posted...

*polishes sig*

If you don't want to see UR posts, don't click on UR topics. It's that simple.

You're notice the people who claim to hate me are both

1. The people who lost an argument to me.

2. The ones who religiously enter my topics and reply to my posts for attention.

Which says it all really
---

DarkTransient posted...

asagi_mode_gone posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

I responded to the only one you had a link for and the link was full of misinformation.

I'll rephrase for you since you're an immensely dishonest human being.

Show me a single case in the west of someone who spent 30 years behind bars for stealing less than $100.

Ah, going straight to the ad hominems. Nice form.

Says the guy going straight to the fallacy fallacy.

Acknowledging the opposition is refusing to actually participate in discussion in lieu of actually debating is not itself a fallacy. The post was him changing the requirements from "somebody sentenced to 30 years" to "somebody who served 30 years". As he moved the goalposts and went full ad hominem, it demonstrated he had zero actual intention of a fair or even reasonable discussion.

Which is to say, I could watch paint dry and not waste as much time as trying to convince somebody who refuses to even bother with basic debate etiquette.

hockeybub89 posted...

It happened in the past. We can't judge him by the past.

We absolutely can judge him by his past. If he didn't want us to judge him harshly, he wouldn't have raped people.
---

KStateKing17 posted...

When your rape counts can be multiplied by 10 there's no way you should be able to see the outside of a prison.

---

Ok when you were complaining "Black people get this punishment for merely stealing small change" actually meant "No one gets this gets this punishment for merely stealing small change"

Its not an ad homien, you are just a really dishonest person.

Fine then, show me someone sentenced to 30 years for stealing less than $100.

And he was never seen again
---

DarkTransient posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

DarkTransient posted...

asagi_mode_gone posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

I responded to the only one you had a link for and the link was full of misinformation.

I'll rephrase for you since you're an immensely dishonest human being.

Show me a single case in the west of someone who spent 30 years behind bars for stealing less than $100.

Ah, going straight to the ad hominems. Nice form.

Says the guy going straight to the fallacy fallacy.

He's doing everything he can to distract from the fact no one has been behind bars for 30 years for stealing under $100.

He was just lying and refuses to admit it

Oh, I know.

He'll eventually find an example where "theft under $100" was one of dozens of charges and claim that's his counterexample or something, too.

Sequence of events
Sentenced to 30+ years
Behind bars for that prison sentence for the crime
At a later point, appeals got a reduced sentence

Step 2 happened so yeah, some people were behind bars and at that given point in time facing 30+ years.

But what you're actually asking for is somebody who served 30+ years for it and you're dancing around acknowledging that despite it being tacitly implied.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Ok when you were complaining "Black people get this punishment for merely stealing small change" actually meant "No one gets this gets this punishment for merely stealing small change"

Its not an ad homien, you are just a really dishonest person.

Fine then, show me someone sentenced to 30 years for stealing less than $100.

And he was never seen again

Changing what I'm saying. That's not debating. Saying "and they were never heard from again" isn't either and is totally pointless except to demonstrate you have zero intention of actually debating.

You keep saying "YOU'RE CHANGING WHAT I AM SAYING!" but then not actually saying anything.

Literally the only thing you did was post a dishonest article, lie about it, refuse to admit fault and then scream everyone is changing what you're saying...

It's Trump levels of childish delusion.

I'll ask again.

Show me a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.

We'll wait. It has never occured and never will. The proof is in the fact you're cowardly unable to admit it
---

women use sex to get into mens wallets. so i cant ever feel bad for them

White privilege in action
---

nn-DMT posted...

women use sex to get into mens wallets. so i cant ever feel bad for them

Sigess user logic
---

nn-DMT posted...

women use sex to get into mens wallets. so i cant ever feel bad for them

whose alt
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

You keep saying "YOU'RE CHANGING WHAT I AM SAYING!" but then not actually saying anything.

Literally the only thing you did was post a dishonest article, lie about it, refuse to admit fault and then scream everyone is changing what you're saying...

It's Trump levels of childish delusion.

I'll ask again.

Show me a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.

We'll wait. It has never occured and never will. The proof is in the fact you're cowardly unable to admit it

Never occurred and never will?

You understand that "never" means not once, ever. And that "ever" would include the 1800s and earlier where people in fact were sentenced to death for theft of less than $100 depending on who exactly they stole it from. Granted, $100 was considerably more but you never stated it as a disqualifier.

As expected you still can't post a single example, yet still can't admit fault.

Sigless user logic to the end.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

dontIoseyourway posted...

TheDogfather posted...

*polishes sig*

If you don't want to see UR posts, don't click on UR topics. It's that simple.

You're notice the people who claim to hate me are both

1. The people who lost an argument to me.

2. The ones who religiously enter my topics and reply to my posts for attention.

Which says it all really

Seems both groups are one and the same.

UnfairRepresent posted...

As expected you still can't post a single example, yet still can't admit fault.

Sigless user logic to the end.

You really expect me to go through a bunch of 1800s newspaper articles just to pull one up?

Okay but you'll have to recoup my research costs ahead of time because microfiche isn't the easiest thing to acquire.

Also the wife of the man who kidnapped Elizabeth Smart got released the other day. She helped her husband rape her

asagi_mode_gone posted...

You really expect me to go through a bunch of 1800s newspaper articles just to pull one up?

You're the one who brought that up just now.

I'm just asking for the very first thing you claimed.

A single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.

Something you claimed in confidence to not only occur but implied to be common and accepted practice, even though it never occurs.

So far all you have done is lied and then failed to back yourself up.

All this dishonesty just to avoid going "I was wrong, You were right. I will try to do better in future."
---

Wtf, this guy hasn't even served 1 year PER rape. I figured MN was better than this.
---

Makes it extra creepy that its all teenagers...

UnfairRepresent posted...

asagi_mode_gone posted...

You really expect me to go through a bunch of 1800s newspaper articles just to pull one up?

You're the one who brought that up just now.

I'm just asking for the very first thing you claimed.

A single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.

Something you claimed in confidence to not only occur but implied to be common and accepted practice, even though it never occurs.

So far all you have done is lied and then failed to back yourself up.

All this dishonesty just to avoid going "I was wrong, You were right. I will try to do better in future."

I didn't imply anything, I pointed out the disparity in severity of sentencing for nonviolent crimes black men are convicted of and how comparably tame the sentencing for violent crimes committed by white men are. You really can't argue without shoving words in others mouths or attacking them, can you? Not a rhetorical question btw, I'm asking because what I think you'll say and what is the case probably won't align but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt which is infinitely more than you've afforded me.

asagi_mode_gone posted...

I didn't imply anything, I pointed out the disparity in severity of sentencing for nonviolent crimes black men are convicted of and how comparably tame the sentencing for violent crimes committed by white men are.

asagi_mode_gone posted...

There's black people and homeless people who stole under $100 and got harsher prison sentences than this guy for that single conviction

Then I responded for you to elaborate if you literally meant that, and you responded that you did by posting a dishonest article and then refusing to back down when it was revealed that you were lying....

You complain that everyone is changing what you are saying... When the only person who has changed what you said is you. Who has now backed down from "Black men get 30+ year sentences for stealing under $100!" to "Hey come on guys, black guys can sometimes get harsher sentences than whites for the same crime maybe..."

Which is comical.

asagi_mode_gone posted...

You really can't argue without shoving words in others mouths or attacking them, can you? Not a rhetorical question btw, I'm asking because what I think you'll say and what is the case probably won't align but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt which is infinitely more than you've afforded me.

I've given you like 17 oppotunites, 18 now following this post to back up anything you're saying and all you have done is not back yourself up, not admit fault, and lie. So how is that not giving you the benefit of the doubt?

I'll continue to give you the benefit of the doubt by once again asking:



Show me a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.


In your next post give an example of that, or admit you were wrong and apologize. If you simply go "You're changing what I am saying" like a coward, then I won't respond to you anymore because you're not saying anything at all and there is nothing else I can say other than:

Show me a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.


Over and over again
---

If someone can just hold him down, ill severe his genitalia myself

Ffs forget the fucking dog, how is this monster not fixed?
---

asagi_mode_gone posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

You keep saying "YOU'RE CHANGING WHAT I AM SAYING!" but then not actually saying anything.

Literally the only thing you did was post a dishonest article, lie about it, refuse to admit fault and then scream everyone is changing what you're saying...

It's Trump levels of childish delusion.

I'll ask again.

Show me a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.

We'll wait. It has never occured and never will. The proof is in the fact you're cowardly unable to admit it

Never occurred and never will?

You understand that "never" means not once, ever. And that "ever" would include the 1800s and earlier where people in fact were sentenced to death for theft of less than $100 depending on who exactly they stole it from. Granted, $100 was considerably more but you never stated it as a disqualifier.

The fact that you need to bring up technicalities like that is a good indicator that you know you're beat.
---

asagi_mode_gone posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

You keep saying "YOU'RE CHANGING WHAT I AM SAYING!" but then not actually saying anything.

Literally the only thing you did was post a dishonest article, lie about it, refuse to admit fault and then scream everyone is changing what you're saying...

It's Trump levels of childish delusion.

I'll ask again.

Show me a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.

We'll wait. It has never occured and never will. The proof is in the fact you're cowardly unable to admit it

Never occurred and never will?

You understand that "never" means not once, ever. And that "ever" would include the 1800s and earlier where people in fact were sentenced to death for theft of less than $100 depending on who exactly they stole it from. Granted, $100 was considerably more but you never stated it as a disqualifier.

Your arm must be sore from stretching that far.
---

Look everyone this is my imitation of UR:
"PROVE IT REEEE BUT NOT LIKE THAT ACTUALLY ANY EXAMPLES YOU PROVIDE DON'T HOLD UP TO SCRUTINY AND NOT BECAUSE THEY DON'T BUT BECAUSE I SAY THEY DON'T REEEEEEE PROVE IT BUT ALSO EVEN WHEN THERE'S A TECHNICALITY I WON'T ACTUALLY BOTHER TO RECANT MY ORIGINAL WORDING SO AS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TECHNICALLY I'M WRONG AND INSTEAD I'LL CONTINUE BANGING MY HEAD AGAINST MY KEYBOARD WHICH IS PROBABLY GOING TO MAKE ME LIKE HANDSOME SQUIDWARD"

On a scale of |1-10| how good is that imitation, |1| being "you're an amazing method performer worthy of an Oscar nomination" and |10| being "I was moved to tears, you'll literally end up filling every role in every movie made from here on out, even those crappy b-movies that are beneath you but you're doing it for the fans"

asagi_mode_gone posted...

Look everyone this is my imitation of UR:
"PROVE IT REEEE BUT NOT LIKE THAT ACTUALLY ANY EXAMPLES YOU PROVIDE DON'T HOLD UP TO SCRUTINY AND NOT BECAUSE THEY DON'T BUT BECAUSE I SAY THEY DON'T REEEEEEE PROVE IT BUT ALSO EVEN WHEN THERE'S A TECHNICALITY I WON'T ACTUALLY BOTHER TO RECANT MY ORIGINAL WORDING SO AS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TECHNICALLY I'M WRONG AND INSTEAD I'LL CONTINUE BANGING MY HEAD AGAINST MY KEYBOARD WHICH IS PROBABLY GOING TO MAKE ME LIKE HANDSOME SQUIDWARD"

On a scale of |1-10| how good is that imitation, |1| being "you're an amazing method performer worthy of an Oscar nomination" and |10| being "I was moved to tears, you'll literally end up filling every role in every movie made from here on out, even those crappy b-movies that are beneath you but you're doing it for the fans"

Given the limitation of the scale... NaN.
---

DarkTransient posted...

asagi_mode_gone posted...

Look everyone this is my imitation of UR:
"PROVE IT REEEE BUT NOT LIKE THAT ACTUALLY ANY EXAMPLES YOU PROVIDE DON'T HOLD UP TO SCRUTINY AND NOT BECAUSE THEY DON'T BUT BECAUSE I SAY THEY DON'T REEEEEEE PROVE IT BUT ALSO EVEN WHEN THERE'S A TECHNICALITY I WON'T ACTUALLY BOTHER TO RECANT MY ORIGINAL WORDING SO AS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TECHNICALLY I'M WRONG AND INSTEAD I'LL CONTINUE BANGING MY HEAD AGAINST MY KEYBOARD WHICH IS PROBABLY GOING TO MAKE ME LIKE HANDSOME SQUIDWARD"

On a scale of |1-10| how good is that imitation, |1| being "you're an amazing method performer worthy of an Oscar nomination" and |10| being "I was moved to tears, you'll literally end up filling every role in every movie made from here on out, even those crappy b-movies that are beneath you but you're doing it for the fans"

Given the limitation of the scale... NaN.

Does not compute.

That's a joke. I know what it means.

asagi_mode_gone posted...

NOT LIKE THAT ACTUALLY ANY EXAMPLES YOU PROVIDE DON'T HOLD UP TO SCRUTINY AND NOT BECAUSE THEY DON'T BUT BECAUSE I SAY THEY DON'T

Wut

You literally posted an article that lied and said a dude got a life sentence when the dude got 5 years and became a public speaker.

That's the only "example" you provided and you failed to admit you lied about it or apologize.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDQbpZfCOgU" data-time="

How is that holding up to scrutiny?
How is it possibly me "just saying they don't." the guy is right there. The facts are on record...

You really are just as bad as Donald Trump. Lying about his crowd size.

I also have repeatedly quoted your original wording (which by the way, YOU keep changing what you said, not anyone else)

So that post was just more dishonesty.

I'll repeat:


Show me a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.
---

Except I have two examples, you really couldn't be arsed to Google them yet you can go back and count every post I've made.

And you still haven't addressed the gaping flaw with your "never" wording which inherently is going to make you be wrong because it includes all previous history in the West which would basically be most of Europe and North America through all of their history. If you don't think that anyone's been sentenced to death for petty theft in all of European history then you're probably not versed in history.

asagi_mode_gone posted...

Except I have two examples, you really couldn't be arsed to Google them yet you can go back and count every post I've made.

So instead of going "Yeah my example was a lie, I lied. I'm sorry"

You're going "Well why don't you go provide examples FOR me?"

I can't because they don't exist dude, same reason you can't.

So I will repeat:

Show me a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.

You can't do it
---

I'd say that was a 10/10. Not on the scale of "Was that a good impression?" but more of the "Complete meltdown" scale.
---

specialists at the MSOP have been more willing to support offenders petitions and state judges have been less likely to override them.

How much "more willing" would they be if he moved in next door to their families?
---

Master_Bass posted...

This guy should never see the light of day and never should have had the opportunity to abuse that many women.

---

DiScOrD tHe LuNaTiC posted...

specialists at the MSOP have been more willing to support offenders petitions and state judges have been less likely to override them.

How much "more willing" would they be if he moved in next door to their families?

Probably about the same as they are rich and next door is like a street away
---

Still waiting on a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Still waiting on a single example of someone who got the same sentence this rapist did because they stole under $100 in the west.

You'll be waiting a while, methinks.

Or you'll get another, "Well, technically you said ever, so I'll assume you meant in the entire history of the West and not just from recent recorded history."
---

asagi_mode_gone posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

As expected you still can't post a single example, yet still can't admit fault.

Sigless user logic to the end.

You really expect me to go through a bunch of 1800s newspaper articles just to pull one up?

Okay but you'll have to recoup my research costs ahead of time because microfiche isn't the easiest thing to acquire.

I don't get this research cost thing that you communists keep using. It this supposed to satirize capitalism? Or just being hypocritical?

Briefly skimmed it cuz me so lazy, but did the article state that he has a lot of money? That could play a role why he hasn't gotten a harsher punishment yet.
---

Uggh, I can't believe I'm saying this, but... Donald's America.

Edit: So... any other news on this rapist?
---

Something legitimately awful is happening, and you fucking losers can't pretend to be decent people for one fucking topic. Fucking pathetic.
---

omega cookie posted...

Something legitimately awful is happening, and you fucking losers can't pretend to be decent people for one fucking topic. Fucking pathetic.

Damn

-Unowninator- posted...

Edit: So... any other news on this rapist?

What other news? This only just happened
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

-Unowninator- posted...

Edit: So... any other news on this rapist?

What other news? This only just happened

I meant did he strike again?
---