The Gaming Den Forum Index The Gaming Den
Welcome to the Gaming Den.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Google
 Search WWW   Search tgdmb.com 
Immigration for Americans to other countries
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gaming Den Forum Index -> MPSIMS
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 11970

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 2:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Stahlseele wrote:
Kaelik?
A "nice guy"? Do we even have people like that here?
Isn't he the reason why we sometimes measure anger or whatever in milikaeliks?


He means "nice guy" in the popular culture sense of "I'm such a nice guy, why don't women LIKE ME! BibleThump" which to be fair, when people say that, it rarely has any connection to them actually being nice. Just entitled dickheads.

DSMatticus wrote:
Yeah, when I see anime girls with hairdrills I also think "that man's a rapist."

What.

SlyJohnny, I feel like you would give the world's most interesting answers to rorschach and word association tests.


Trump supporters did a "Trump will make Anime Great again" thing that was an offshoot of the alt-right deciding to use anime girls as their twitter avatars a few years ago as a sign to let other alt righters know.

It would be a reasonable mistake to make, if I wasn't constantly making fun of specifically SlyJohnny for being an alt-right Trump supporter all the time.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Koumei
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12732
Location: South Ausfailia

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 3:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Presumably related to (either resulting in or resulting from) the primaries where one of the other guys (Cruz? RoboRubio? A cardboard cutout of a generic rich white guy?) said Trump supporters are "the kind of people who masturbate to anime".

Admittedly, I've been waiting years for people to talk about that in the news.
_________________
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:
There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spongeknight
Master


Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 270

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Kaelik wrote:
spongeknight wrote:
DSMatticus wrote:
Society strongly downplays the notion that you can rape men.


Actually, a woman can't rape a man in America. I mean that literally: the law does not define a woman forcefully putting a man's penis into her vagina, or inserting the penis of a man unable to consent, as rape. It's just not in the rape laws. The most they can be charged with is sexual assault.

That's kind of fucked up, right?


You are a fucking idiot, and you should never ever talk about legal matters ever again.

Every state has different rape laws. Some of them have super shitty laws where when the President of Elect of the United States raped his then wife, it wasn't rape, because there is no marital rape (very few states are this bad), some states have gender in their rape statutes, or define it in terms of penetrating the victim. But those are also not all that common.

But for example, in the three most populous states, what you said is categorically false.

In New York and California, the relevant physical act is "sexual intercourse" which does not at any point say that being the woman doesn't count, and in Texas the law defines the acts separately and says "causes the sexual organ of another person, without that person's consent, to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor;" Or you know, still rape if you are the woman if you cause the act without their consent.

So you are pretty much completely wrong and full of shit, please never pretend to understand the law again.


Rape in the United States is defined by the Department of Justice as "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

Rape is defined by the FBI's Uniform Crime Report as "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

So yes, individual states can expand the definition of rape to include female on male rape, but the national definitions do not include that. And as I was obviously talking about the national definitions when I specified America instead of my individual state, why don't you fuck off?
_________________
A Man In Black wrote:
I do not want people to feel like they can never get rid of their Guisarme or else they can't cast Evard's Swarm Of Black Tentacleguisarmes.


Voss wrote:
Which is pretty classic WW bullshit, really. Suck people in and then announce that everyone was a dogfucker all along.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hyzmarca
Prince


Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 3373

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

spongeknight wrote:
Kaelik wrote:
spongeknight wrote:
DSMatticus wrote:
Society strongly downplays the notion that you can rape men.


Actually, a woman can't rape a man in America. I mean that literally: the law does not define a woman forcefully putting a man's penis into her vagina, or inserting the penis of a man unable to consent, as rape. It's just not in the rape laws. The most they can be charged with is sexual assault.

That's kind of fucked up, right?


You are a fucking idiot, and you should never ever talk about legal matters ever again.

Every state has different rape laws. Some of them have super shitty laws where when the President of Elect of the United States raped his then wife, it wasn't rape, because there is no marital rape (very few states are this bad), some states have gender in their rape statutes, or define it in terms of penetrating the victim. But those are also not all that common.

But for example, in the three most populous states, what you said is categorically false.

In New York and California, the relevant physical act is "sexual intercourse" which does not at any point say that being the woman doesn't count, and in Texas the law defines the acts separately and says "causes the sexual organ of another person, without that person's consent, to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor;" Or you know, still rape if you are the woman if you cause the act without their consent.

So you are pretty much completely wrong and full of shit, please never pretend to understand the law again.


Rape in the United States is defined by the Department of Justice as "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

Rape is defined by the FBI's Uniform Crime Report as "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

So yes, individual states can expand the definition of rape to include female on male rape, but the national definitions do not include that. And as I was obviously talking about the national definitions when I specified America instead of my individual state, why don't you fuck off?


The national definitions do include that. Because when a woman does it, her vagina is penetrated without permission of the victim.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 11970

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

spongeknight wrote:
Kaelik wrote:
spongeknight wrote:
DSMatticus wrote:
Society strongly downplays the notion that you can rape men.


Actually, a woman can't rape a man in America. I mean that literally: the law does not define a woman forcefully putting a man's penis into her vagina, or inserting the penis of a man unable to consent, as rape. It's just not in the rape laws. The most they can be charged with is sexual assault.

That's kind of fucked up, right?


You are a fucking idiot, and you should never ever talk about legal matters ever again.

Every state has different rape laws. Some of them have super shitty laws where when the President of Elect of the United States raped his then wife, it wasn't rape, because there is no marital rape (very few states are this bad), some states have gender in their rape statutes, or define it in terms of penetrating the victim. But those are also not all that common.

But for example, in the three most populous states, what you said is categorically false.

In New York and California, the relevant physical act is "sexual intercourse" which does not at any point say that being the woman doesn't count, and in Texas the law defines the acts separately and says "causes the sexual organ of another person, without that person's consent, to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor;" Or you know, still rape if you are the woman if you cause the act without their consent.

So you are pretty much completely wrong and full of shit, please never pretend to understand the law again.


Rape in the United States is defined by the Department of Justice as "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

Rape is defined by the FBI's Uniform Crime Report as "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."

So yes, individual states can expand the definition of rape to include female on male rape, but the national definitions do not include that. And as I was obviously talking about the national definitions when I specified America instead of my individual state, why don't you fuck off?


Are you competing in a contest to be the dumbest person in the universe? Because you are fucking winning.

1) Let's start with your colossal stupidity and work back to your regular stupidity.

If you walked up to a person right now, and they were not a federal employee (and you are not in the District of Columbia, or perhaps currently inside a Post Office or Courthouse) and raped them, the federal government would not and LITERALLY COULD NOT prosecute you for rape. Like, the FBI could watch it happen, and they might stop it in the moment, but they totally could not prosecute you for it because it is not a federal crime. It is a state crime, that violates the laws of whatever state you are in. States are literally incapable of expanding the FBI's definition of rape, because States do not have the right to change anything about federal law, or in this case federal organizational policy, but they can and totally do in all cases define state crimes that are against the law in that state, that are actual things you can be prosecuted for, because that's how the criminal law actually works in reality.

2) Second, the FBI's Uniform Crime Report is, unsurprisingly for people able to read, a REPORT on crime, not a prosecution of crime, because the Federal Government does not in fact have the authority to define what is a state crime. It is a fucking REPORT where the FBI is classifying state crimes, and it has a definition for how to classify crimes that does not in any way even remotely, determine whether or not you can be prosecuted for a crime.

The Department of Justice definition may be the same, or it may be part of federal laws governing the rape of federal employees, or the District of Columbia. But in no case does it have any fucking government over what happens when a person in any fucking state rapes any other person in that state (excepting possibly, if they are federal employees).

3) NEITHER OF THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE GENDERED!!!!!!!!!!!! Your entire point is undermined by your own stupid citations to not laws that don't govern rape in the United States, because both of those laws say "Penetration of the Vagina by a sex organ of another person without the consent of the victim" which means that if you are a woman, and you penetrate your own vagina with the sex organ of another person, a man, without his consent, then YOU COMMITTED RAPE UNDER THE FBI AND DOJ DEFINITIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TL;DR: You are wrong in literally every way it is possible to be wrong, and in addition to never being allowed to talk about legal matters, you are never allowed to talk about the federal or state governments, since your understanding of their relationship is so bad it basically consists of anti-knowledge that would explode if it came into contact with actual knowledge.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Leress
Prince


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 2519

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Sponge, what are your qualifications on interpreting law? Because from what I understand Kaliek is a lawyer, or at least went to school for law, and I would think his knowledge about it would be greater than yours. Now if you have the same or more qualifications then please give a counter-argument.
_________________
"Excuse me. You got your penis in my woman. Correct yourself."
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
erik
Prince


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 4836

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Sponge, as entertaining as it would be, I urge you to resist the urge to triple down on this. You were stupid; we've all been stupid. If you stop digging then it may fade in time.

P.S. shame leress. Argument from authority? Sponge could be a Supreme Court justice (Thomas?) and he would still be as wrong as he was stupid. Kaelik could be a stupid ten year old and he'd still be right. The arguments live independent of the source.


Last edited by erik on Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 11970

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

erik wrote:
Sponge, as entertaining as it would be, I urge you to resist the urge to triple down on this. You were stupid; we've all been stupid. If you stop digging then it may fade in time.

P.S. shame leress. Argument from authority? Sponge could be a Supreme Court justice (Thomas?) and he would still be as wrong as he was stupid. Kaelik could be a stupid ten year old and he'd still be right. The arguments live independent of the source.


To be fair to Justice Thomas (something I never really want to do) Thomas would never claim the FBI can prosecute any state crimes, because he takes an exceptionally crazy stance of no federal power to do all kinds of things we totally have federal power to do.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Leress
Prince


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 2519

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

erik wrote:


P.S. shame leress. Argument from authority? Sponge could be a Supreme Court justice (Thomas?) and he would still be as wrong as he was stupid. Kaelik could be a stupid ten year old and he'd still be right. The arguments live independent of the source.


Sorry, you are right, I was thinking more on the lines of expert opinion on something.
_________________
"Excuse me. You got your penis in my woman. Correct yourself."
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DSMatticus
Prince


Joined: 14 Apr 2011
Posts: 4898

PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 6:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

I don't think I need to say it, because it has already been said by an actual lawyer, but the U.S. is a multi-leveled government. The federal government writes its own laws. State governments write their own laws. County governments write their own laws. You've also got townships, municipalities, and special districts. For the most part; any subject not explicitly governed by federal law is left to the states, and states explicitly defer power to their various subdivisions; so in the end it's a sort of top-down-but-stop-at-the-middle approach to governance.

Rape is not, barring certain exceptions, a federal crime. That does not mean rape is legal; rape is illegal in all 50 states, and when you rape someone you are violating a state law and a state prosecutor will charge you in a state court. The U.S. does not actually have a universal definition of rape for you to talk about it. The states wrote their own laws on rape, and they all wrote them a little differently. That's a little weird, but the EU is basically the exact same way. I believe the EU has the power to set minimum definitions for certain crimes (so individual member states probably couldn't outright legalize rape), but they have no power to impose a specific definition for those crimes (so, for example, the question of "affirmative consent" might be left up to individual member states).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gaming Den Forum Index -> MPSIMS All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group