Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"Free Polanski" = Liberals gone crazy

page: 24
30
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Lillydale
The guy my sister used to get her bootleg VHS tapes from back in the late '80s was also a meth dealer at the time and is not in prison for murder. Want to give that guy your ten bucks?


Well, he was not just a bootlegger, now was he? Sounds like he was a murderer, which kinda trumps the bootlegging. Do you know the background of the owner of EVERY business you give ten bucks to? No need to answer that, i know you don't.


So, you are assuming he is the only bootlegger that was involved in other types of crime? Are you seriously typing this crap? No, I do not know the background of the owner of every business I give ten bucks to but I do not start by handing it to an obvious criminal. Whether you want to admit it or not, bootlegs hurt mostly the crew you never heard of and the crew you never saw on cribs and the movie goer who has to pay increasingly higher prices to see a film without breaking the law.

I will give you a hint where my priorities lie, I would just not watch another one of Marty's movies if I were so inclined to before. You apparently are stuck between supporting the film industry or supporting a criminal. I can stay home and read E.A.P. and I am sorry you are not given that choice.

Let me know what I can do to stop the bootlegger shakedown that is forcing you to see movies one way or another.




posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
I like the fact that she can't figure out the moral and ethical difference between a property crime and heinous oppressive criminal felony.



Murder? Drugs? Criminals commit crime. Why do you think a bootlegger is some white collar studio exec somewhere? Crime inherently involves victimization at some point in the process. That ten dollar bag of plants you buy can be tied to 1000s of deaths along the border of the coasts. I like the fact that you think some crime is just fine.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
No, I do not know the background of the owner of every business I give ten bucks to but I do not start by handing it to an obvious criminal.


But you have NO problem feverishly defending one. Oh, the irony.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


I see where youre coming from now, you only defend white collar criminals, but detest lowly working class criminals. It's all about economic class to you.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Lillydale
No, I do not know the background of the owner of every business I give ten bucks to but I do not start by handing it to an obvious criminal.


But you have NO problem feverishly defending one. Oh, the irony.


Who am I defending again? I am starting to think you are not following me at all here.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
reply to post by Lillydale
 


I see where youre coming from now, you only defend white collar criminals, but detest lowly working class criminals. It's all about economic class to you.


and where do you get that from? When did I say that white collar crime was ok? You really need to relax and take a deep breath and think for a moment before you post any more of this nonsense.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
and where do you get that from?


Only a matter of inches above where you ask....


Why do you think a bootlegger is some white collar studio exec somewhere?


What would it matter if he was a white collar studio exec? You've made your views clear for all to see.

Either way, this is SO off topic, it's not even funny. If you want to start a thread about bootlegging, let me know when it's done.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Lillydale
and where do you get that from?


Only a matter of inches above where you ask....


Why do you think a bootlegger is some white collar studio exec somewhere?


What would it matter if he was a white collar studio exec? You've made your views clear for all to see.

Either way, this is SO off topic, it's not even funny. If you want to start a thread about bootlegging, let me know when it's done.


LOL, is that what you got out of that? Let me try this slowly. I said bootleggers are criminals. You said they are not child rapists. white collar crime is not rape, abuse, direct personal victimization. I think both types of criminals are criminals, I was merely pointing out that a bootlegger is just as low a street thug as any rapist, murder, drug trafficker, whatever. If you think I said that it is ok for white collar criminals, you are going to have to supply the quote you got that out of because I sure never said it.

Yes it is off topic but it wasn't when you still thought you were getting somewhere with it.

Who bootlegs? People who love movies or criminals looking for an easy buck?
You really want to tell me these criminals looking to make an easy buck off of someone else are only hurting studio execs then you are going to have to offer some proof because statistics show otherwise.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
reply to post by Lillydale
 


I see where youre coming from now, you only defend white collar criminals, but detest lowly working class criminals. It's all about economic class to you.


Crime and punishment is really about Power and control and the ability to profit from power and control. At the founding of our republic there were three crimes, murder, theft and high crimes of treason. Even rape was not considered a crime in that day and age because it was considered a man’s responsibility to protect his own women and keep them safe from such acts. Most people were in fact married by the age of 13,14 or 15 as the life expectancy was much lower in those days and the need for a highly standardized education which centers mostly towards social conformity today to a vast network of vague and often counter productive and defeating laws and moral standards was completely unnecessary in a free and independent thinking society where people had to be free and independent thinking to carve a place in the world out of a hostile wilderness.

Today the wilderness is gone and has been replaced with a massive, layered and intricate grid of control.

Most of what is illegal today is illegal so the state can profit off of vices and impose its control through and over people’s love of vices.

What makes your arguments in the extreme so dangerous my friend as the more people foolishly advocate for and argue for blanket uniform punishments that do not take in to account the nature of the crime or the extenuating circumstances it simply invites the passing of more and more uniform laws to regulate and modify all forms of human behavior and to profit off of usurping that power over morals, free will and people’s own love of things the state denies them for the sake of profit and control.

This often affects the working or poorer class of citizen in much more demonstrative ways than it does the moneyed class and richer class of citizens who can use their money and position to better interact and interface with an all too pervasive and intruding criminal justice system.

Your advocacy for trying and convicting people on purely emotional grounds and meting out irreversible punishments aimed at soothing the savage beast only encourages the state to keep using Crime and Punishment for profit and control in an inflexible way that is always going to place more of a burden on the poor than the rich.

Ultimately as with all similar related things where ever the State can divide the people on fundamental issues the State can conquer the people on those issues and impose draconian rule in increasingly restrictive and unfair ways to the poorer citizens but to all citizens.

When you advocate for not allowing the true nature or actual circumstances and extenuating circumstances to fit in to how people will be punished then you are holding the door wide up for the state to eventually legislate every last thought, word and action and rule by that means and it practically does already.

Extreme and highly emotional issues like this are what is used to set the people up to rush to that conclusion that the State should have absolute power over life and death and the more you advocate for that type of uniform and blanket power the more it will be used against us all and especially the poor which the state considers to be its more expendable and least profitable segment of society.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   
What is the "true nature" of running down a young teenager you drugged to force her over and rape her in the butt?

Exactly?

[edit on 2009/9/30 by Aeons]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Would that be the young teenager who ran over to his house and asked for a glass of champagne or is their some other teen ager that got run down?

Once again an intelligent and thought provoking argument is put to all on a much deeper and important level to us all and your reply is an exagerated one designed for emotional appeal and a closed mind.

Once again it just illustrates the exact danger to everyone that I am trying to point out to people in their rush to think in such emotional, narrow minded and self validating ways.

Why not just say "I want my pound of flesh and I want it now, I don't care the real costs of my selfish desire and wanton need".

That would at least be an honest position I could respect you for.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   
He is nothing more than a criminal who escaped sentencing.

He raped a child.

You defend a man who raped a child.

He is no different than anyone else. Rape anyone go to jail.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
I think both types of criminals are criminals, I was merely pointing out that a bootlegger is just as low a street thug as any rapist, murder, drug trafficker, whatever.


Whoa. Just as low? As a muderer, or rapist? Honestly, i have no desire to continue this back and forth, waste of both our energy any longer. As much as i detest politicians, something that Barney Frank recently said comes to mind when reading your posts.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


It automatically becomes Statuatory Rape when the child is under 16 or 18 depending on the state.

Even if the child lies about their age and initiates the sexual conduct.

Dozens of people ended up raping Tracy Lords because it was a Statuatory violation of the Criminal Code even though NONE of them knew she was under 18 because she LIED to all of them.

These people who were LIED to by a willful young WOMAN are also convicted rapists because a willful young woman not only LIED to them but produced FRAUDELENT idendification to get away with her lie.

She did that because she like money, drugs and sex and getting paid for sex so she could buy drugs.

So let me ask you in your mind was really she really raped?

Yes or no?



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
Whoa. Just as low? As a muderer, or rapist? Honestly, i have no desire to continue this back and forth, waste of both our energy any longer. As much as i detest politicians, something that Barney Frank recently said comes to mind when reading your posts.


I spend most of my time on the planet where the type of people that will steal just to make a buck are no always above violent crime. Just because you think that bootleggers have moral standards does not make it so. Tell you what, go find the nearest bootlegger and let him babysit your kids for four hours. Get back to me and let me know how it went.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   
You continually lie. I find this amazing.

Even if you weren't lying, what he did would STILL be rape even if it wasn't a child.

Since you aren't so stupid you don't understand that, it figures that you have an agenda.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
Tell you what, go find the nearest bootlegger and let him babysit your kids for four hours. Get back to me and let me know how it went.


Why would i do that? I have my mother to watch my kids whenever i need her to. I'll tell YOU what, how about you not suggest that i put my children in danger, and wish harm on them in order to prove some ridiculous point. What kind of person are you? I don't even want to know, kindly i ask you to piss off. I'm done responding to you, have a nice one.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
You continually lie. I find this amazing.

Even if you weren't lying, what he did would STILL be rape even if it wasn't a child.

Since you aren't so stupid you don't understand that, it figures that you have an agenda.


Who is lying and what lies are being told?



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Lillydale
Tell you what, go find the nearest bootlegger and let him babysit your kids for four hours. Get back to me and let me know how it went.


Why would i do that? I have my mother to watch my kids whenever i need her to. I'll tell YOU what, how about you not suggest that i put my children in danger, and wish harm on them in order to prove some ridiculous point. What kind of person are you? I don't even want to know, kindly i ask you to piss off. I'm done responding to you, have a nice one.


Whoa whoa whoa whoa. YOU are the one extolling the virtues of the bootlegger. You just got done saying that they are superior to street thugs. How could I possibly be wishing you children harm unless you have some doubts about your wonderfully well behaved neighborhood bootlegger?


Which is it? Are bootleggers good people the deserve your financial support or are you just as weary about leaving your kids with them as you would with Polanski? You are going to have to pick just one.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Lillydale]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


So in other words you would prefer not to answer hard hitting and intelligent questions to keep trying to win an argument based on base emotional appeals and manipulation and to deflect away from tough questions that honest answers to might undermine your position and dishonest answers to would show the unreasonable and illogical nature of your arguments?

If you keep appealing to the lowest possible common denominator long enough and get them emotionally unballanced enough you feel that your points can be validated and to simply ignore the questions that don't suit you and to villify the person asking them?

Justice has been served in this case according to the victim perhaps you can tell me how you feel you were victimized by Roman Polanski to where you feel you are entitled to seek additional justice the victim does not want, condone or desire?

Let me guess the Excorcist gave you nightmares and now you want revenge?





new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join