Donate SIGN UP

Answers

61 to 80 of 180rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Right on both counts, imo, db.
Did say earlier but it disappeared. Taking half of a post and using it out of context is pretty contemptible. And jumping on it to get some kind of bandwagon started, what can one say.
I cannot differentiate.
A footballer who has a sexual encounter with a girl he knows to be 15 years old, and a *** taxi driver who does the same. What is the difference. Both vile loathsome creatires who deaerve everything they get.
I just cannot understand why anyone is making limp excuses for Johnson.
Some interesting opinions being offered by the usual suspects

Db are you really suggesting that thirty or forty years ago if your colleagues were kissing 14 or 15 y olds - you would have shrugged your shoulders and said effecttively: 'oh sid it they will be of age soon ? '

I think that in the Johnson case the girl handed it to him on a plate and he was foolish enough to take the bait, for which he will pay.
gaol bait

was ever thus - but havent we in the past had a lot about the girl 'asking for it' and there being as a result - acres of print of 'silly old judge' ?
Jackdaw33,
The girls in the Rochdale case were not kidnapped. They were supposed to be in the care of the local childrens home but they absconded to be with their abusers. Exactly the same.
If your 15 year old daughter was sneaking off to be abused by a wealthy football star, are you really saying that you would be fine with that?
Is AB going down hill?
^

It is now!
Not kidnapped, not complicit, not thought worthy of support and protection? Dear oh dear.

We protect rapists in the interests of social cohesion do we?

Can't you recognise the difference between the offences? And the differences betweens the victims and perpetrators in both cases? And possible reasons for the imbalance?

At what point, if any, do you acknowledge that excusing rape on "preserving social cohesion" grounds become complicity in sexual crime?

Hope moderators don't interpret the post as hate crime. But, these days, who knows?
VE,

I am not excusing the vile criminals in either crime. I am saying they are THE SAME. Johnson is guilty and likely to be sent down for 5+ years.
Why are you and your cronies not accepting his guilt and trying to make him into some kind of martyr. He isn't, he is just just a wealthy pervert who ought yo have known better.
If you cared about black girls you wouldn't be inviting the Klan in, would you?

Extrapolate from my question if you can.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Web007rzSOI
I shall pray for your soul EV.
II see tyhat the post of 1;36 was misunderstood.. Possibly my fault.
They're not very quick on the uptake, are they?
Are there some here in AB who feel the Victorians set the bar too high when they raised the age of consent to 16?
Question Author
divebuddy

/// I expect that is what AOG means. Seems sensible enough to me. ///

Some don't do sensible on here.

They much rather take certain wording completely out of context, so that they can all run around together, like children in a playground.
Question Author
Gromit

/// I cannot differentiate.
A footballer who has a sexual encounter with a girl he knows to be 15 years old, and a *** taxi driver who does the same. What is the difference. Both vile loathsome creatires who deaerve everything they get.
I just cannot understand why anyone is making limp excuses for Johnson. ///

Can't differentiate, Can't understand????

Yes you do seem to have trouble with both of these, but that is nothing I can do for you at this moment, perhaps you should seek help elsewhere?

But since you have come down vastly from nationwide Asian grooming gangs to mere single taxi drivers I will address the difference for you, in balance from the footballers case.

The women who innocently climb into a taxi and are later seriously sexually insulted, by the driver, is a vastly difference from an advanced teenager who purposely goes out of her way to strike up a relationship with an adult, even to climb into the back seat of the car with him, for a little consensual fiddling.

Stop digging Gromit.
-- answer removed --
AOG,
It is not I who should seek help.
It is your ilk who think it is OK to shag underaged girls if they are gagging for it.

61 to 80 of 180rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Maybe Footballer Adam Johnson Won't Get Such A Harsh Jail Sentence After All?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.