Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Similar Gay Boy Scout Ban (Score 1) 210

I might ask you the question of why you assume that a gay man is going to have sex with a child? If you are straight,, are you going to try to have sex with every feamale child you see? Do you assume Gay equals pedophile?

I do not assume that.
I am straight and I don't want to have sex with any female child.
I do not assume that gay equals pedophile.

I recognize that most pedophiles self-identify as heterosexual. I also recognize that a small subset of all people, heterosexual and homosexual, are pedophiles.

Even though I am not interested in little girls, I understand that it would be inappropriate for me to spend the weekend out in the woods with a troop of little girls. Not because of me being a threat, but because no heterosexual man should be in that position.


Comment Re:Similar Gay Boy Scout Ban (Score 1) 210

I'm not equating anything. I'm asking a simple question.

I have no sexual interest in 10 year old girls, I'm also not calling it discrimination and accusing people of bigotry for not wanting heterosexual men, like myself, to be out away from civilization in charge of young girls.

To recap. I am not a threat to 10 year old children of either gender. I'm also not naive. I understand that people who are interested in children seek out ways to get trusted access to them. Any heterosexual man would be looked at with suspicion if he were to make too much effort into gaining access to young girls. It's only normal to regard any gay man with suspicion if he's trying too hard to get access to little boys.


Comment Re:Proof it's U.S. Government owned (Score 1) 341

Silly boy, you don't understand. The government doesn't have to go after 300,000,000+ people in the country. Many will be on the side of the government. Many won't want to get involved. I know it is hard for you to understand because you are a paranoid idiot, but people who think like you are vanishingly rare.

Oh, I know what you are thinking "But, I saw V.....", but that was a movie based on a graphic novel, not reality. In reality, V would have been dead in a few days at most.

BTW, the only reason it "took the U.S. Government a trillion dollars and half a million soldiers to destroy the roughly 20,000 members of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan" was because of Iraq, embedded reporters, and an attempt to be nice because the war was televised. I know it is hard for someone as simple as you to understand, but if the U.S. had acted like it had in WWI and WWII, before televised war, the U.S. armed forces would have carpet bombed Iraq and Afghanistan. We would have dropped thousands of large, cheap, conventional bombs and daisy cutters to kill the enemy soldiers, then used bunker busters on the REMFs. They would have leveled cities and towns. They would have rounded up people in remote locations and put them in camps. They would have mined the passes they didn't want used. They would have dropped bunker busters and cluster bombs. They would have a much higher civilian casualty rate and no one would have known or cared. And, things would have been a lot different.

Comment Re:Political Correctness has no place in Kernel De (Score 1) 1501

That's precisely it.

A few years ago a friend used the term "retards" in reference to MD/MR people. I and another of our friend stopped him and started to explain why he shouldn't do that.

He got angry and started yelling "I'm not going to be all politically correct!" and I said to him "I'm not talking about being politically correct, I'm talking about not being an asshole."

Political correctness USED TO BE what we call common courtesy. There's a world of difference between the thought police and the pointless regulation of the minutiae of every day speech versus just plain not being an asshole.


Comment Re:cranial fractures and head scratches (Score 1) 1737

And, you are just assuming Zimmerman lied There is no evidence for what you imply happened but there is evidence for what Zimmerman said. You are a biased asshole who believes Zimmerman should have been assumed guilty and had to prove his innocent. You made up your mind without looking at any of the evidence and you don't give a shit about the truth.

Comment Re:Does anyone know (Score 1) 1737

So, what we have is you cherry picking my words to misrepresent them, lying about what eye witnesses said, making unsupported assumptions, resorting to insults to avoid admitting you know I'm right, and generally making an ass out of yourself. Nice to know that you think you know everything that happened that night and have basically convicted a man on that unsupported knowledge. You obviously know better than the jury and, in fact, have magical knowledge of the events of that night.

I like how you totally discount my actual experience, to the point of saying that it is in no way like what happened to Zimmerman. We were both attacked, knocked to the ground, straddled, and had our head slammed into concrete. The only difference was the races in involved and the fact I didn't have a gun. Tell us, have you ever experienced anything like it at all? Or, are you just spouting off saying what Zimmerman could and could not have done with no experience what so ever?

We also know that if Martin hadn't attacked Zimmerman, no one would have been shot.

Oh, and just so we know exactly how much you are lying, 29 year old George Zimmerman was 5'8" and weighed approximately 170 pounds at the time of his arrest while the police estimate 17 year old Trayvon Martin was 6'0" and weighed 160 pounds. Martin's own family say he was 6'2" tall. So, when did 10 pounds become barely half of 170 pounds? As, according to Martin's own family, Martin was an high school football player, would you care to bet he was quite a bit more muscular than Zimmerman?

Comment Re:Man the FL state attornies just want to fuck up (Score 1) 569

By the way, if an armed man was following you through a residential neighborhood in which you were a guest, would you approach the door of the nearest residence with lights on to knock, ask for them to call the police and provide you protection or at least a witness; or would you run to the house where you are staying to get behind a locked door from the perceived threat; or would you tell the person you are currently on the phone with and then call 911 and ask for the police yourself; or would you try to do more than one of the above; or would you, as an unarmed individual, approach and confront the man you believed to be armed and possibly dangerous?

According to prosecution testimony, we know which course Martin appeared to have chosen, which seems a very unlikely course if Martin thought Zimmerman was armed or was any real threat to Martin.

Comment Re:Does anyone know (Score 2) 1737

In what universe is someone unarmed when they are carrying a gun? It makes no difference when you believe the gun was drawn, George was undoubtedly armed

In the real world universe we live in, not the imaginary one where you try to twist my words. I said Zimmerman was "apparently unarmed", which means he wasn't obviously armed but rather he appeared unarmed. Zimmerman was armed, but didn't have a his weapon visible as he had a concealed carry permit and a concealed weapon. Martin had no way of knowing Zimmerman was armed.

We will never be able to determine for sure who attacked whom first, as one person is dead. We do know for sure that this happened only because George followed him, though. The confrontation was created by him.

That is a false statement. Perhaps you should review the witness testimony. A prosecution witness indicated that Martin approached and confronted Zimmerman. Zimmerman was following a person who behaving suspiciously and was breaking no laws. If Martin had continued on to his destination, there would have been no confrontation at all.

Only one person from the conflict was able to give a statement as to what happened, and they did not say anything under oath at the trial.

Zimmerman's wounds were consistent with his story. A witness stated he saw a light skinned man underneath a person who was either dark skinned or wearing a dark hood. You are ignoring evidence and testimony.

That has not been determined with certainty.

Are you suggesting we should assume Zimmerman is guilty and he should be required to prove his innocence?

If the other person has a gun, running from them isn't very useful as you certainly won't be able to outrun a bullet

I see you are failing at reading comprehension. According to Zimmerman, he didn't draw his gun until after Martin was on top of him. You also seem to be failing logic. If you saw a person with a gun, would you run up to him, hit him in the face, then get on top of him without disarming him? Would you even approach and/or attack him? Or, would you run away as soon as you saw the gun, especially if you thought the person was following you? If you were in a residential neighborhood, wouldn't you run to the nearest door, knock and ask them to call the police? If you were near home, wouldn't you run for home? If you had a phone, even if you were on it talking to someone, wouldn't you call the police?

If you actually believe that is how it happened, then how do you explain George being able to draw, aim, and fire his weapon? The story simply doesn't add up. Any normal person after having experienced such an event would not be able to do such a thing.

Aren't you going to address the claim and offer? No? I guess we can infer your answer from that. Zimmerman didn't have to aim. All he had to do was draw the weapon and put it in approximate contact with the person on top of him and pull the trigger. And, having been in the position Zimmerman claims to have been in and having experienced such a thing, yes such an event is possible. Granted I didn't have a gun, but I was able to grab something from the ground and hit my assailant dazing him and then buck him off me.

Slashdot Top Deals

Just go with the flow control, roll with the crunches, and, when you get a prompt, type like hell.