Transgender child rapist denied hormones in prison

[Conservative65]

I'm sure it wasn't very nice if you were a white male either.

It sucked, but they were the top dogs at least.

Sounds like survival of the fittest to me.

Nothing like it. What does "fit" mean?

To use your words, "they were the top dogs". They didn't get to the top for no reason.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'm sure it wasn't very nice if you were a white male either.

It sucked, but they were the top dogs at least.

Sounds like survival of the fittest to me.

Nothing like it. What does "fit" mean?

To use your words, "they were the top dogs". They didn't get to the top for no reason.

Rape, murder, torture, abuse, violence, etc. What does "fit" mean?

 

[Conservative65]

I'm sure it wasn't very nice if you were a white male either.

It sucked, but they were the top dogs at least.

Sounds like survival of the fittest to me.

Nothing like it. What does "fit" mean?

To use your words, "they were the top dogs". They didn't get to the top for no reason.

Rape, murder, torture, abuse, violence, etc. What does "fit" mean?

Oh, the assumption that all white males made it were they were because of those things. That's the only way you can make yourself feel better for being a born loser.

 

[koshergrl]

It sucked, but they were the top dogs at least.

Sounds like survival of the fittest to me.

Nothing like it. What does "fit" mean?

To use your words, "they were the top dogs". They didn't get to the top for no reason.

Rape, murder, torture, abuse, violence, etc. What does "fit" mean?

Oh, the assumption that all white males made it were they were because of those things. That's the only way you can make yourself feel better for being a born loser.

Exactly.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It sucked, but they were the top dogs at least.

Sounds like survival of the fittest to me.

Nothing like it. What does "fit" mean?

To use your words, "they were the top dogs". They didn't get to the top for no reason.

Rape, murder, torture, abuse, violence, etc. What does "fit" mean?

Oh, the assumption that all white males made it were they were because of those things. That's the only way you can make yourself feel better for being a born loser.

I bill by the minute, no worries. And what does "fit" mean?

 

[Conservative65]

Sounds like survival of the fittest to me.

Nothing like it. What does "fit" mean?

To use your words, "they were the top dogs". They didn't get to the top for no reason.

Rape, murder, torture, abuse, violence, etc. What does "fit" mean?

Oh, the assumption that all white males made it were they were because of those things. That's the only way you can make yourself feel better for being a born loser.

I bill by the minute, no worries. And what does "fit" mean?

You already defined fit when you said top dogs.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The vast majority of violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders. Most of them are black. If we could just get rid of them, Things would be a lot better. Forget the three strikes law, which isn't even enforced, to the best of my knowledge. If someone commits a violent crime, it should be a very stiff mandatory sentence. No plea bargains. If they do it again, life without parole. If a fatality is involved, it should be the death penalty. Does that sound too harsh? Well. Compare it to the high crime rate, loss of life and human suffering we have now. I'd make that trade in a heart beat.

There are lots of countries that have harsh penalties for such crimes. The interesting thing is that the crime rate in those countries is very low. When the consequences of committing a crime aren't as bad as the benefits, anyone that thinks people will stop is just a simple minded dumbass.

Child rape in some states in this country USED to be a capital offense. If you raped a kid and got convicted, you got the juice or the noose.

In many areas, child molesters never made it to court. The local folks had a way of dealing with them and it worked.

My dad grew up in a small coal mining town in the north. When a husband abused his wife or his kids, the police weren't called. A group of men from the mine paid him a visit and "explained" to him that it wasn't the thing to do. If the explanation didn't get through, the next time it happened the "explanation" was more in-depth. If that didn't work, there likely wasn't an explanation if you catch my drift.

Unfortunately, public intervention in a child molestation case is rare. A stranger who buggered a kid could juice up the vigilante spirit, but far more often it was a father, grandfather, uncle, etc. And there was a code in society that meddling in family affairs is wrong, so people looked the other way and the abuse would happen for years. Generations even.

I don't pine for the good old days. It's better today.

There are a few things that are better today.

Medical care is (potentially) better.

Ok well that's about it.

I'd rather have the occasionally incestuous family (and they do still exist) than have the state sticking their nose into everybody's family every time a kid says something objectionable. Because at the end of the day, the state is going to do a lot more damage than the occasional incestuous family is going to do. For one thing, the state redistributes the damaged kids into other homes, where they happily abuse the other kids. Or they mistakenly place kids who have never been abused in foster homes where they are abused.

Let the communities take care of it the best they can...generally that means catching the perpetrators and putting them in jail, or occasionally feeding them to the gators. Either way is fine by me.

You are truly something. You clamor for a government so powerful it can determine who is attracted to children and lock them up for life whether they act on those impulses or not but then lament a government that can intervene when a child is being sexually abused. Aside from the more obvious conflict, the first makes you appear you care for the welfare of children but the second dissolves such a notion.

I'm not a big fan of social services and certainly demonstrated that in my praise of the mother who gunned down the social worker who took her kids. I hope that happens more often. But when you're aware of a child being abused, clearly abused, then it's good to have someone to call because vigilante justice backfires more often than not.

I don't think ANY incest should be tolerated. Clearly you do.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nothing like it. What does "fit" mean?

To use your words, "they were the top dogs". They didn't get to the top for no reason.

Rape, murder, torture, abuse, violence, etc. What does "fit" mean?

Oh, the assumption that all white males made it were they were because of those things. That's the only way you can make yourself feel better for being a born loser.

I bill by the minute, no worries. And what does "fit" mean?

You already defined fit when you said top dogs.

Not what it means. What does "fit" mean?

 

[Conservative65]

To use your words, "they were the top dogs". They didn't get to the top for no reason.

Rape, murder, torture, abuse, violence, etc. What does "fit" mean?

Oh, the assumption that all white males made it were they were because of those things. That's the only way you can make yourself feel better for being a born loser.

I bill by the minute, no worries. And what does "fit" mean?

You already defined fit when you said top dogs.

Not what it means. What does "fit" mean?

It's what you said it meant earlier. Since you don't know, your best bet is to STFU.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The vast majority of violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders. Most of them are black. If we could just get rid of them, Things would be a lot better. Forget the three strikes law, which isn't even enforced, to the best of my knowledge. If someone commits a violent crime, it should be a very stiff mandatory sentence. No plea bargains. If they do it again, life without parole. If a fatality is involved, it should be the death penalty. Does that sound too harsh? Well. Compare it to the high crime rate, loss of life and human suffering we have now. I'd make that trade in a heart beat.

There are lots of countries that have harsh penalties for such crimes. The interesting thing is that the crime rate in those countries is very low. When the consequences of committing a crime aren't as bad as the benefits, anyone that thinks people will stop is just a simple minded dumbass.

Child rape in some states in this country USED to be a capital offense. If you raped a kid and got convicted, you got the juice or the noose.

In many areas, child molesters never made it to court. The local folks had a way of dealing with them and it worked.

My dad grew up in a small coal mining town in the north. When a husband abused his wife or his kids, the police weren't called. A group of men from the mine paid him a visit and "explained" to him that it wasn't the thing to do. If the explanation didn't get through, the next time it happened the "explanation" was more in-depth. If that didn't work, there likely wasn't an explanation if you catch my drift.

Unfortunately, public intervention in a child molestation case is rare. A stranger who buggered a kid could juice up the vigilante spirit, but far more often it was a father, grandfather, uncle, etc. And there was a code in society that meddling in family affairs is wrong, so people looked the other way and the abuse would happen for years. Generations even.

I don't pine for the good old days. It's better today.

Not where my dad grew up.

It would be better today if people who needed to be dealt with the way those in his town dealt with them would do it.

Where your dad grew up, where my dad grew up, it's all the same. Incestuous child abuse goes on for years in families because people don't meddle in the affairs of their neighbors. Nobody investigates, nobody pries, nobody intervenes on behalf of the child. Abuse is protected by the family, each member serving a different role in the dysfunction that allows the abuse to persist, and they all defend their secret from outsiders.

So yes we need somebody with a badge to step in or these things don't stop. You and Kosher are living in the same fantasy world where pedophiles get lynched by their angry neighbors. In truth, this was rarely the case.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Rape, murder, torture, abuse, violence, etc. What does "fit" mean?

Oh, the assumption that all white males made it were they were because of those things. That's the only way you can make yourself feel better for being a born loser.

I bill by the minute, no worries. And what does "fit" mean?

You already defined fit when you said top dogs.

Not what it means. What does "fit" mean?

It's what you said it meant earlier. Since you don't know, your best bet is to STFU.

What does "fit" mean?

 

[DarkFury]

There are lots of countries that have harsh penalties for such crimes. The interesting thing is that the crime rate in those countries is very low. When the consequences of committing a crime aren't as bad as the benefits, anyone that thinks people will stop is just a simple minded dumbass.

Child rape in some states in this country USED to be a capital offense. If you raped a kid and got convicted, you got the juice or the noose.

In many areas, child molesters never made it to court. The local folks had a way of dealing with them and it worked.

My dad grew up in a small coal mining town in the north. When a husband abused his wife or his kids, the police weren't called. A group of men from the mine paid him a visit and "explained" to him that it wasn't the thing to do. If the explanation didn't get through, the next time it happened the "explanation" was more in-depth. If that didn't work, there likely wasn't an explanation if you catch my drift.

Unfortunately, public intervention in a child molestation case is rare. A stranger who buggered a kid could juice up the vigilante spirit, but far more often it was a father, grandfather, uncle, etc. And there was a code in society that meddling in family affairs is wrong, so people looked the other way and the abuse would happen for years. Generations even.

I don't pine for the good old days. It's better today.

There are a few things that are better today.

Medical care is (potentially) better.

Ok well that's about it.

I'd rather have the occasionally incestuous family (and they do still exist) than have the state sticking their nose into everybody's family every time a kid says something objectionable. Because at the end of the day, the state is going to do a lot more damage than the occasional incestuous family is going to do. For one thing, the state redistributes the damaged kids into other homes, where they happily abuse the other kids. Or they mistakenly place kids who have never been abused in foster homes where they are abused.

Let the communities take care of it the best they can...generally that means catching the perpetrators and putting them in jail, or occasionally feeding them to the gators. Either way is fine by me.

You are truly something. You clamor for a government so powerful it can determine who is attracted to children and lock them up for life whether they act on those impulses or not but then lament a government that can intervene when a child is being sexually abused. Aside from the more obvious conflict, the first makes you appear you care for the welfare of children but the second dissolves such a notion.

I'm not a big fan of social services and certainly demonstrated that in my praise of the mother who gunned down the social worker who took her kids. I hope that happens more often. But when you're aware of a child being abused, clearly abused, then it's good to have someone to call because vigilante justice backfires more often than not.

I don't think ANY incest should be tolerated. Clearly you do.

A child should NEVER be placed under a CONVICTED pedophile. As hard as adoption maybe that most likely would be the safest way to go for that child.

 

[Conservative65]

There are lots of countries that have harsh penalties for such crimes. The interesting thing is that the crime rate in those countries is very low. When the consequences of committing a crime aren't as bad as the benefits, anyone that thinks people will stop is just a simple minded dumbass.

Child rape in some states in this country USED to be a capital offense. If you raped a kid and got convicted, you got the juice or the noose.

In many areas, child molesters never made it to court. The local folks had a way of dealing with them and it worked.

My dad grew up in a small coal mining town in the north. When a husband abused his wife or his kids, the police weren't called. A group of men from the mine paid him a visit and "explained" to him that it wasn't the thing to do. If the explanation didn't get through, the next time it happened the "explanation" was more in-depth. If that didn't work, there likely wasn't an explanation if you catch my drift.

Unfortunately, public intervention in a child molestation case is rare. A stranger who buggered a kid could juice up the vigilante spirit, but far more often it was a father, grandfather, uncle, etc. And there was a code in society that meddling in family affairs is wrong, so people looked the other way and the abuse would happen for years. Generations even.

I don't pine for the good old days. It's better today.

Not where my dad grew up.

It would be better today if people who needed to be dealt with the way those in his town dealt with them would do it.

Where your dad grew up, where my dad grew up, it's all the same. Incestuous child abuse goes on for years in families because people don't meddle in the affairs of their neighbors. Nobody investigates, nobody pries, nobody intervenes on behalf of the child. Abuse is protected by the family, each member serving a different role in the dysfunction that allows the abuse to persist, and they all defend their secret from outsiders.

So yes we need somebody with a badge to step in or these things don't stop. You and Kosher are living in the same fantasy world where pedophiles get lynched by their angry neighbors. In truth, this was rarely the case.

Apparently not since where my dad grew up, they made a distinction when things that affected the community as a whole, and abuse does, because the communities place to deal with. Seems the difference is when we believe it becomes a community problem and not just a family issue.

According to my dad, those with a badge didn't get involved. Those in the community handled it and those with a bad didn't have a problem with them doing it. From what my dad says, after a couple of times of abuse, the person no longer had the ability to abuse.

The only rarity was that it didn't occur a lot because most were smart enough to know not to be stupid. I'm also not talking about lynching in the sense you portray it. From the stories I've heard, while a small group in the community dealt with, that it happened wasn't widely known. The people of the neighborhood didn't go down the streets with pitchforks and burning sticks.

 

[Conservative65]

Oh, the assumption that all white males made it were they were because of those things. That's the only way you can make yourself feel better for being a born loser.

I bill by the minute, no worries. And what does "fit" mean?

You already defined fit when you said top dogs.

Not what it means. What does "fit" mean?

It's what you said it meant earlier. Since you don't know, your best bet is to STFU.

What does "fit" mean?

You're not even willing to hold up your own definition. You are that fucking stupid.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Child rape in some states in this country USED to be a capital offense. If you raped a kid and got convicted, you got the juice or the noose.

In many areas, child molesters never made it to court. The local folks had a way of dealing with them and it worked.

My dad grew up in a small coal mining town in the north. When a husband abused his wife or his kids, the police weren't called. A group of men from the mine paid him a visit and "explained" to him that it wasn't the thing to do. If the explanation didn't get through, the next time it happened the "explanation" was more in-depth. If that didn't work, there likely wasn't an explanation if you catch my drift.

Unfortunately, public intervention in a child molestation case is rare. A stranger who buggered a kid could juice up the vigilante spirit, but far more often it was a father, grandfather, uncle, etc. And there was a code in society that meddling in family affairs is wrong, so people looked the other way and the abuse would happen for years. Generations even.

I don't pine for the good old days. It's better today.

There are a few things that are better today.

Medical care is (potentially) better.

Ok well that's about it.

I'd rather have the occasionally incestuous family (and they do still exist) than have the state sticking their nose into everybody's family every time a kid says something objectionable. Because at the end of the day, the state is going to do a lot more damage than the occasional incestuous family is going to do. For one thing, the state redistributes the damaged kids into other homes, where they happily abuse the other kids. Or they mistakenly place kids who have never been abused in foster homes where they are abused.

Let the communities take care of it the best they can...generally that means catching the perpetrators and putting them in jail, or occasionally feeding them to the gators. Either way is fine by me.

You are truly something. You clamor for a government so powerful it can determine who is attracted to children and lock them up for life whether they act on those impulses or not but then lament a government that can intervene when a child is being sexually abused. Aside from the more obvious conflict, the first makes you appear you care for the welfare of children but the second dissolves such a notion.

I'm not a big fan of social services and certainly demonstrated that in my praise of the mother who gunned down the social worker who took her kids. I hope that happens more often. But when you're aware of a child being abused, clearly abused, then it's good to have someone to call because vigilante justice backfires more often than not.

I don't think ANY incest should be tolerated. Clearly you do.

A child should NEVER be placed under a CONVICTED pedophile. As hard as adoption maybe that most likely would be the safest way to go for that child.

Who's saying that?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I bill by the minute, no worries. And what does "fit" mean?

You already defined fit when you said top dogs.

Not what it means. What does "fit" mean?

It's what you said it meant earlier. Since you don't know, your best bet is to STFU.

What does "fit" mean?

You're not even willing to hold up your own definition. You are that fucking stupid.

Which is why I keep him on ignore. He's a troll, nothing more.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I bill by the minute, no worries. And what does "fit" mean?

You already defined fit when you said top dogs.

Not what it means. What does "fit" mean?

It's what you said it meant earlier. Since you don't know, your best bet is to STFU.

What does "fit" mean?

You're not even willing to hold up your own definition. You are that fucking stupid.

I never defined it, dumbass. What does "fit" mean?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Child rape in some states in this country USED to be a capital offense. If you raped a kid and got convicted, you got the juice or the noose.

In many areas, child molesters never made it to court. The local folks had a way of dealing with them and it worked.

My dad grew up in a small coal mining town in the north. When a husband abused his wife or his kids, the police weren't called. A group of men from the mine paid him a visit and "explained" to him that it wasn't the thing to do. If the explanation didn't get through, the next time it happened the "explanation" was more in-depth. If that didn't work, there likely wasn't an explanation if you catch my drift.

Unfortunately, public intervention in a child molestation case is rare. A stranger who buggered a kid could juice up the vigilante spirit, but far more often it was a father, grandfather, uncle, etc. And there was a code in society that meddling in family affairs is wrong, so people looked the other way and the abuse would happen for years. Generations even.

I don't pine for the good old days. It's better today.

Not where my dad grew up.

It would be better today if people who needed to be dealt with the way those in his town dealt with them would do it.

Where your dad grew up, where my dad grew up, it's all the same. Incestuous child abuse goes on for years in families because people don't meddle in the affairs of their neighbors. Nobody investigates, nobody pries, nobody intervenes on behalf of the child. Abuse is protected by the family, each member serving a different role in the dysfunction that allows the abuse to persist, and they all defend their secret from outsiders.

So yes we need somebody with a badge to step in or these things don't stop. You and Kosher are living in the same fantasy world where pedophiles get lynched by their angry neighbors. In truth, this was rarely the case.

Apparently not since where my dad grew up, they made a distinction when things that affected the community as a whole, and abuse does, because the communities place to deal with. Seems the difference is when we believe it becomes a community problem and not just a family issue.

According to my dad, those with a badge didn't get involved. Those in the community handled it and those with a bad didn't have a problem with them doing it. From what my dad says, after a couple of times of abuse, the person no longer had the ability to abuse.

The only rarity was that it didn't occur a lot because most were smart enough to know not to be stupid. I'm also not talking about lynching in the sense you portray it. From the stories I've heard, while a small group in the community dealt with, that it happened wasn't widely known. The people of the neighborhood didn't go down the streets with pitchforks and burning sticks.

All the stories of people in their 50's that detail horrific abuse that was not stopped by police or by community have one common thread, that you're simply wrong about communities policing themselves. Ideally, sure, but in reality it rarely occurred. Children being sexually abused need someone with a badge to step in and protect them, not the hope that someone might notice and do something about it themselves. Pedophiles thrive in your system, but in my system, when a cop is involved they are stopped.

 

[Conservative65]

In many areas, child molesters never made it to court. The local folks had a way of dealing with them and it worked.

My dad grew up in a small coal mining town in the north. When a husband abused his wife or his kids, the police weren't called. A group of men from the mine paid him a visit and "explained" to him that it wasn't the thing to do. If the explanation didn't get through, the next time it happened the "explanation" was more in-depth. If that didn't work, there likely wasn't an explanation if you catch my drift.

Unfortunately, public intervention in a child molestation case is rare. A stranger who buggered a kid could juice up the vigilante spirit, but far more often it was a father, grandfather, uncle, etc. And there was a code in society that meddling in family affairs is wrong, so people looked the other way and the abuse would happen for years. Generations even.

I don't pine for the good old days. It's better today.

Not where my dad grew up.

It would be better today if people who needed to be dealt with the way those in his town dealt with them would do it.

Where your dad grew up, where my dad grew up, it's all the same. Incestuous child abuse goes on for years in families because people don't meddle in the affairs of their neighbors. Nobody investigates, nobody pries, nobody intervenes on behalf of the child. Abuse is protected by the family, each member serving a different role in the dysfunction that allows the abuse to persist, and they all defend their secret from outsiders.

So yes we need somebody with a badge to step in or these things don't stop. You and Kosher are living in the same fantasy world where pedophiles get lynched by their angry neighbors. In truth, this was rarely the case.

Apparently not since where my dad grew up, they made a distinction when things that affected the community as a whole, and abuse does, because the communities place to deal with. Seems the difference is when we believe it becomes a community problem and not just a family issue.

According to my dad, those with a badge didn't get involved. Those in the community handled it and those with a bad didn't have a problem with them doing it. From what my dad says, after a couple of times of abuse, the person no longer had the ability to abuse.

The only rarity was that it didn't occur a lot because most were smart enough to know not to be stupid. I'm also not talking about lynching in the sense you portray it. From the stories I've heard, while a small group in the community dealt with, that it happened wasn't widely known. The people of the neighborhood didn't go down the streets with pitchforks and burning sticks.

All the stories of people in their 50's that detail horrific abuse that was not stopped by police or by community have one common thread, that you're simply wrong about communities policing themselves. Ideally, sure, but in reality it rarely occurred. Children being sexually abused need someone with a badge to step in and protect them, not the hope that someone might notice and do something about it themselves. Pedophiles thrive in your system, but in my system, when a cop is involved they are stopped.

As for where my dad grew up, were you there? My dad is almost 80. Since he was there, I'll take his word over someone that wasn't that thinks he knows.

If cops being involved stop pedophiles, why do so many still exist and haven't learned that the cops will stop them if they do such things? While where my dad grew up it wasn't a daily occurrence and you seem to have the impression it was, it was rare than people did such things. Far more rare than today when the police you say stop it are doing the job.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Unfortunately, public intervention in a child molestation case is rare. A stranger who buggered a kid could juice up the vigilante spirit, but far more often it was a father, grandfather, uncle, etc. And there was a code in society that meddling in family affairs is wrong, so people looked the other way and the abuse would happen for years. Generations even.

I don't pine for the good old days. It's better today.

Not where my dad grew up.

It would be better today if people who needed to be dealt with the way those in his town dealt with them would do it.

Where your dad grew up, where my dad grew up, it's all the same. Incestuous child abuse goes on for years in families because people don't meddle in the affairs of their neighbors. Nobody investigates, nobody pries, nobody intervenes on behalf of the child. Abuse is protected by the family, each member serving a different role in the dysfunction that allows the abuse to persist, and they all defend their secret from outsiders.

So yes we need somebody with a badge to step in or these things don't stop. You and Kosher are living in the same fantasy world where pedophiles get lynched by their angry neighbors. In truth, this was rarely the case.

Apparently not since where my dad grew up, they made a distinction when things that affected the community as a whole, and abuse does, because the communities place to deal with. Seems the difference is when we believe it becomes a community problem and not just a family issue.

According to my dad, those with a badge didn't get involved. Those in the community handled it and those with a bad didn't have a problem with them doing it. From what my dad says, after a couple of times of abuse, the person no longer had the ability to abuse.

The only rarity was that it didn't occur a lot because most were smart enough to know not to be stupid. I'm also not talking about lynching in the sense you portray it. From the stories I've heard, while a small group in the community dealt with, that it happened wasn't widely known. The people of the neighborhood didn't go down the streets with pitchforks and burning sticks.

All the stories of people in their 50's that detail horrific abuse that was not stopped by police or by community have one common thread, that you're simply wrong about communities policing themselves. Ideally, sure, but in reality it rarely occurred. Children being sexually abused need someone with a badge to step in and protect them, not the hope that someone might notice and do something about it themselves. Pedophiles thrive in your system, but in my system, when a cop is involved they are stopped.

As for where my dad grew up, were you there? My dad is almost 80. Since he was there, I'll take his word over someone that wasn't that thinks he knows.

If cops being involved stop pedophiles, why do so many still exist and haven't learned that the cops will stop them if they do such things? While where my dad grew up it wasn't a daily occurrence and you seem to have the impression it was, it was rare than people did such things. Far more rare than today when the police you say stop it are doing the job.

You're romanticizing the past. Sexual child abuse wasn't rare, it was hidden; it wasn't spoken of, it was the family secret. I'll match your dad with hundreds of testimonies I've heard from people who were children in that era and were abused all their growing years and NOBODY protected them. Hundreds! I've been a Dr. Laura listener for 17 years.

What you don't seem to consider is just because someone lived in an era doesn't mean they fully understood it. If your dad thought people took care of these things themselves, then he wasn't aware of his own surroundings as you think he was. Many people aren't.