An investigation into an alleged sexual assault in Hartlepool has been dropped after it was found to have been made up, police said.
Police were called to Dalton Street in Hartlepool on Monday morning.
Later on Monday, Cleveland Police said a girl had withdrawn her complaint and confirmed that no such incident occurred.
A 29-year-old man who was arrested has been released without charge, police said.
They said they had spoken to the girl involved about the impact of making false allegations.
Link:
Posts
40 comments:
Hey wait a minute, i hear all the time that women and girls would NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER lie about rape.
"They said they had spoken to the girl involved about the impact of making false allegations."
Oh no! She was "spoken too" about potentially ruining an innocent mans life by lying. They might have even been "stern" with her, the poor dear.
[cue the feminist defenders of evil women]
I sincerely doubt they were "stern" with her. Didn't the Baltimore cops that were stern with false rape accusers get into so much trouble?
By American law enforcements fostering of the now "culture of false rape accusations", they are doing a disservice to real victims.
S - "By American law enforcements fostering of the now "culture of false rape accusations""
Just when I thought we might get a real discussion without this drivel...
Again, you fail to read the story. Hints - it was in the UK, not America, and LE neither fostered this accusation, nor did they turn it into a misleading stat.
But, thank you for helping the SGI's cause. By constantly trying to refocus any and all blame onto LE, you serve the cause of making it easier to NOT blame the women who CHOSE to make FRA's.
Plus, by trying (and, I might add, repeatedly failing) to blame LE for misleading stats, you deflect the blame from the true culprits - those in the SGI.
Constantly preforming these two pro-SGI functions puts you squarely in the camp with those in the SGI in their efforts to portray only men as culpable. Since police departments are made up mostly of men, and are serving roles historically seen as "male", your continuing efforts to but the blame on "those men" (instead of the false accusers or those feminists in the SGI) serve the purpose of ensuring that men will be held primarily responsible, even for FRA's.
this fit's well with your previous efforts to try to proffer lies that LE was profiting from federal money via mechanisms like the VAWA. That distortion on your part helped to conceal the fact that, despite great fan-fare and claims that such money would be used to help LE, that the money was really going primarily (and, of course, over-overwhelmingly) to the SGI and/or SGI-back woman's victims advocacy organizations.
Your efforts to help perpetuate the illusion that LE was profiting from FRA's has helped to refocus attention away from the real culprits, and created a nice strawman for those concerned about FRA's to attack instead. You've done the job of pitting men-on-men very well.
You might have noticed that none of the gender-feminist false-rape apologist trolls who come here have ever taken issue with your rants. Have you never once stopped to wonder why that might be?
Nice work.
MR. Werner says
"You might have noticed that none of the gender-feminist false-rape apologist trolls who come here have ever taken issue with your rants. Have you never once stopped to wonder why that might be?"
I SAY...They don't take issue with me for they have no defense against what i'm saying. They can scream hysterics with most guys here and win; but threatening to undermine their real source of "Empowerment" by "Breaking the misinformation Alliance"; well then they know they are looking at their "Empowerment" taking a dose of "Humble pie".
Mr Werner, I believe there is room here for both camps,
1st camp. The Law enforcement apologists who say "Its not law enforcements responsibility to deal with the false rape crisis", its the really the cashiers at the local convenience stores job.
2nd camp. It is law enforcements duty to protect the innocent, and deter false accusations of rape that get men and boys beat to death in their sleep with baseball bats.
When their is a perversion at the level of Law enforcement, the sickness that fallows run deep.
Just to make it clear to everyone, I am in no way seeking to absolve LE (including, and perhaps, especially, male police officers) of their manifest wrong doings in regards to FRA’s.
There have been, and will continue to be those instances in which the response by police and/or prosecutors will be inappropriate, ranging from the more mundane “ball dropping” to the outrageous and completely indefensible.
But, these will be the acts of individuals within LE, for which it would also be unjust to hold all others in LE responsible for. [think of it as the equivalent of holding all men responsible for the rapes committed by a tiny percentage of men].
The erroneous acts by police and prosecutors, while some will be the deliberate and calculating acts of rogues (Nifong, for instance), it remains far more likely that those “bad acts” by LE will be the result of misguided and blind “white-knighting” (be sure and check out the new piece over at A Voice For Men).
Another aspect, of which I’ve only recently become aware through discussion with a couple of police detectives (I am, however slowly, trying to get together the information to help elucidate the role of LE in the broader FRA issue), is that of the liability police departments might face if fail to demonstrate a proper level of “concern” regarding claims made to them, or if they fail to take “preventative actions” so as to ensure that additional crimes are eliminated. I’m sure that it doesn’t take too much imagination to see how that latter could be easily abused, especially where a rape allegation has been made.
I had (politely) inquired of one detective why it was that it seemed that questionable cases (which, BTW way, are far more likely to be non-sexual related crimes) to the DA’s office rather than just ending the cases when they felt that there wasn’t sufficient evidence, only to have the issue of liability come up as the reason – along with some verbal tap-dancing about the greater ability of those more knowledgeable in the law to be able to determine if there was still any possible way to charge a case. (He and I both knew it was simply a matter of passing he buck to an agency which would not face the same liability and ramifications if they were the ones to decide not to prosecute the case).
One might wonder about the arrest alluded to in the lead story above (I know that I sure did), and why that arrest would have ever been made as it seems that there was never anything beyond the “girls” claim against him. I could have been basically white-knighting, or it could simply have been the police wishing to “cover their asses” just in case the allegations against him were true. [imagine the ramifications for them if it turned out the girl was telling the truth, and while they knew his name and location, they failed to act “accordingly” and he had escaped, and possibly committed subsequent crimes]
S - ”Mr Werner, I believe there is room here for both camps,
1st camp. The Law enforcement apologists who say "Its not law enforcements responsibility to deal with the false rape crisis", its the really the cashiers at the local convenience stores job.
2nd camp. It is law enforcements duty to protect the innocent, and deter false accusations of rape that get men and boys beat to death in their sleep with baseball bats.
When their is a perversion at the level of Law enforcement, the sickness that fallows run deep.”
What a completely disingenuous misrepresentation of my position. (a.k.a. A LIE)
I have never said anything of the sort that anyone other than LE should be the ones to handle allegations of rape. I have always said that they need to investigate before arresting, that they should keep the identities of the accused confidential until charges are filed, that they need to be open-minded towards evidence against the allegation, and need to be tougher on those making false allegations.
You have become either dishonest about my position, or you are too illiterate to understand the meaning of the plain language I’ve used to make those points.
And, as to the duty to protect, what you seem to be unable to comprehend is that this protect will also extend to rape victims. In that members of LE are not mind readers (or they’d be making a financial “killing” in some other endeavor), they are also duty-bound to act in ways to protect those claiming to be victims of crimes, including rape.
It would be (well, there’s really no other way to put it) stupid to think that LE is going to prevent all crimes from happening (which your “definition” of protect seems to be based upon). To put it more specifically to you, LE has no means of ensuring that some women will not make false rape allegations. You have continually failed to even suggest how you believe that they could.
If you’d care to consider an example of proper police protection of the innocent, you might actually take the time to read the short lead story above. The innocent man, although initially arrested (which BTW, could have also served to protect him from vigilante violence by the girls friends and family), he was ultimately “protected” by the fact that the case was properly investigated, the accuser was forced to recant (which was likely the result of the investigator turning the investigation and inquiries back onto her), and that he was released without his name ever being revealed.
That’s precisely what should always happen. Thankfully we are seeing it more and more, even if you are unable or simply unwilling to recognize the facts.
One of the best proactive steps we can take is to educate LE about the issue, and to encourage them to act appropriately (including calling out the instance wherein they fail to do so). Getting them to better understand both that women and girls DO lie about rape, and the potential harms which can befall innocent men and boys can only help to make LE more likely to do so. What isn’t going to be of any help is to actively seek to alienate all of LE (as a class), which will make them even less sympathetic to out cause.
S - "I SAY...They don't take issue with me for they have no defense against what i'm saying. They can scream hysterics with most guys here and win;"
WOW! Over-estimate yourself much?
You seriously think that they are so afraid of your great intellect and the the undeniable "truth" of the things you've imagined (without an evidentiary basis) that they cower before your greatness and would never dare to try to engage you?
Sorry, dude, but from everything you posted on this forum, I doubt anyone takes you that seriously.
I liken the real reason to that taken by men who read the most outlandish and egregious posts on feminists site don't bother addressing them - that very outrageous nature clearly points out the lie that they are. Just letting them stand does more to show the irrational nature of gender-feminism that would pointing out the obvious weakness of their arguments. It's not like things like truth or facts are going to change their minds, so, the better course of action is simply to point to their BS, and declare, "see what feminists have to say".
False-rape apologists can simply do the same thing with your collection of ill-thought out, and even worse-placed, unhinged rants
BTW, my snarky remark about "[cue the feminist defenders of evil women]" was intended to call out those who would try to argue the standard feminist lines about "something must have happened" or "it was a cry for help".
I didn't mean for it to be a call for those who would instead try to take the focus off of the culpability of the girl by trying to blame the whole thing on the cops.
"Another aspect, of which I’ve only recently become aware through discussion with a couple of police detectives (I am, however slowly, trying to get together the information to help elucidate the role of LE in the broader FRA issue), is that of the liability police departments might face if fail to demonstrate a proper level of “concern” regarding claims made to them, or if they fail to take “preventative actions” so as to ensure that additional crimes are eliminated."
Not sure why your awareness would be recent, as I've posted about that many times in the past.
While what you are saying is generally true, the situation with rape is different than other crimes in two significant ways. Firstly, the evidence required to take a case forward is much less. Secondly, the reaction to failing to do something is much more. Contrary to what the feminists claim, we do not live in a "rape culture", we live in an "anti-rape culture" where rape is considered worse than murder. The press and the public are batshit hysterical when it comes to rape.
As you can see by your repeated attempts to talk some sense into one particularly crazy commenter, there is no reasoning with people who are batshit hysterical. Trying to explain to them that they are only hurting their cause (by demanding the system wastes its time and money on rapes that didn't happen, like they did in Baltimore) is never going to get through to them.
I don't just blame the institutionalized perversion of American law enforcement on the foot soldiers of the department.
The root of the perversion lies in the new "American Gender / raunch feminists" misinformation Alliance, and manufactured statistics for dollars Alliance with American law enforcement.
Mr werner, at one point in history, wasn't there a philosopher who was stoned to death for saying the world is not flat??, and now we take for granted that yes, the world is not flat.
Dec 27, 2010 8:01:00 PM
That this troll hasn't been banned already is simply unbelievable.
S - ”Mr werner, at one point in history, wasn't there a philosopher who was stoned to death for saying the world is not flat??”
No! No, there wasn’t a philosopher who was stoned for saying the world was not flat.
A quick time-line of the “Round Earth” idea will easily demonstrate this:
The Greek philosopher Aristotle was amongst the early adoptees of the view that the Earth was not flat. He was not stoned, and died of natural causes (perhaps you were thinking of a contemporary of his, Socrates, who was sentenced to die by poison for “corrupting the youth” and for “impiety” (not honoring the Gods).
Centuries later, Nicolaus Copernicus was a mathematician and astronomer, who was essentially excommunicated from the church for declaring the Earth rotated around the Sun (the Earth was not eh center of the universe).
Later Galileo Galilei, himself a mathematician and physicist (although some considered him a bit of an amateur philosopher), would also get himself into trouble with the church for reintroducing the discoveries of Copernicus. But, as with Copernicus before him, he WAS NOT STONED for his beliefs.
This stuff would be very easy to look up and verify before you post inaccurate info and make a bigger fool of yourself.
The thing that differentiates the likes of Aristotle, Copernicus, and Galileo for someone like yourself was that they did their damned research. They didn’t just make stuff up to try to explain what they believed was happening. They checked into it with an open mind, and let the evidence take them were it would, rather than trying to fit stuff together to justify a preconceived outcome.
The lack of an open mind, the failure do any research and to consider evidence (or even read about it), and having an immutable “conclusion” in mind before (not) doing any research is why you get so things so thoroughly and so consistently wrong.
Ah MR. werner, again you have humbled me (Well not really).
You understood the analogy i was alluding too did you not???, so i was as effective as i was seeking to be.
Throughout American history there were times when America interpreted the constitution by the "Letter of the law", rather than the "philosophy of the law".
The letter of the law can be perverted, the philosophy of the law cannot.
This is like you picking on me cause of my grammar, its like yer beating the "letter of the law" into me. you don't understand Im a "philosophy of the law" Kinda guy and yer attacks on my grammar fall on deaf ears, its the "content" or (philosphy of the law) that is important to me.
And by the way steve, the initial American constitution was crafted to be interpreted in the "philosophy of the law", and not the letter of the law.
S - "You understood the analogy i was alluding too did you not???, so i was as effective as i was seeking to be."
Of course I understood what you were alluding to, even if it didn't "stand" as an analogy.
The large point I was making is that, as is so often the case, your close, but since you refuse to take an objective look at the evidence (or do a simple search) you end up being misguided.
No one was stoned over stating the belief that the Earth was not flat. You had a vague idea that something bad had happen to someone who did, you made up your mind that they must have been stoned, and you “ran” with it.
It would have been a quite simply matter to verify what the real story was, but you were quite satisfied with your own imagine version.
This runs parallel to the way in which you had a vague idea that LE has been complicit in the on-going scourge of FRA’s, so you simply imagined that it must be some back-room cloak-and-dagger conspiracy between feminists and LE to manufacture statistics and promote women making FRA’s so as to profit, and quite satisfied that you (single-handedly) had solved the great mystery of what causes FRA’s, you’ve been running with it ever since. All the evidence shown to you cannot persuade you otherwise.
In that regard, you arr NOT at all like Aristotle, Copernicus, and Galileo, but rather you are like a member of the Flat Earth Society. No matter what evidence there is to refute your notions, you cling to them a surely as anyone who was ever afraid to admit that the Earth might be round, and not the center of the Universe.
That, you have effective demonstrated.
Mr Werner we could subpoena a whole cities law enforcement and all the administration involved who crunch their numbers; and have them explain "in depth and under oath," the way they come up with the statistics that they hand out.
Or now rather, the statistics that they cash in for federal VAWA dollars.
Wr Werner u say that "all the evidence that you have shown me that this theory is incorrect still has not convinced me that my theory is incorrect."
with all due respect sir, where is yer evidence???
S - "with all due respect sir, where is yer evidence???"
Surely you haven't forgotten all those links I provided to you so that you go and read for yourself about how VAWA grant money is actually awarded? How about those links to the DOJ so that you could read about how the data is gathered and processed?
I suspect that all you are doing here is hoping that I will not bother to resubmit those many links here in a (desperately) effort to convince others that I have not had and present that evidence to you before.
But, here's the thing, I don't care if the casual passer-by believes me or not, and I'm sure that there are plenty of long-time readers who will recall that I did supply you with more than enough; And, further, I have good reason to believe that even if I did repost those links, you would not bother to make use of them anyway; so, no, I will not bother to make the effort to retrieve and post all those links again (they are all still in the archives here, BTW, and YOU could go find them if you were actually at all interested in reviewing that evidence).
Instead, what I'm going to do is ask you to show some evidence that LE is manufacturing statistics and cashing them in for Federal money (and, please, don't give me that weak-assed cop-out about needing to subpoena all of LE because they are in a big conspiracy to hide the truth). I'm looking for you to provide links to information demonstrating your claims.
It's an industry.
As a falsely accused male expect to be imprisoned until such time as you can prove your innocence via a well paid officer of the court,who pays the court to file motions on your behalf.
After you have been raped, yes raped, by this misandrist system your accuser then gets a sweet little talking too about how to better set up her evidence the next time.
Just pay the money and you may have a chance at freedom.
Nothing personal right?
Mr Werner. You ask for studies that show proof of this theory; when American universities who have historically done such academic studies; are now dominated by an "Empowered Gender / Raunch community" who gain "Empowerment" by the staus quo of attacking heterosexual men/boys with these faulty and inflammatory statistics. They will not study this (they will not bite the hand that feeds them).
My theory is more reality based, as i have met at least 7 guys who were (in effect) forced to plead guilty to a domestic violence charge, even when the attacker was his drunk, bi-polar violent girlfriend. And then when i discovered that law enforcement could cash in domestic violence statistics via VAWA dollars,then "Any simpleton (who is not willfully ignorant), could then connect the dots" as to why American law enforcement were systematically getting men to plead guilty to domestic violence charges (when no male domestic violence occurred).
Looks like Blogger is just going to keep eating my response, even if I do break it up.
Pierce & Steven,
Have you guys given any though to moving the FRS to WordPress.
Blogger just seems to be getting worse and worse. It's to the point where I cannot even use my Google Account to post (I get an "Error in Form" message every time now.
S - ”You ask for studies that show proof of this theory; when American universities who have historically done such academic studies”
*** News Flash ***
American Universities ARE NOT PART of Law Enforcement.
And, I still don’t see any links.
S - ”And then when i discovered that law enforcement could cash in domestic violence statistics via VAWA dollars,then "Any simpleton (who is not willfully ignorant), could then connect the dots" as to why American law enforcement were systematically getting men to plead guilty to domestic violence charges”
Imagine that YOU, of all people trying to call me stupid. One way in which I’ve tried to be nice to use was to NOT point out the obvious fact that you are not a particularly intelligent person. But, now you try insinuate that I’m the ignorant one? Laughable!
As I have repeated shown you/given you links to the conclusive evidence, there IS NO MECHANISM by which LE can be directly compensated/rewarded.
Yes, LE agency can and do apply for grant monies. Yet, they are in direct competition, not only with other LE agencies for the very small piece of the pie available to them, but also with a host of non-LE interests who are (by design) the preferred beneficiaries of the federal pork in VAWA and other such laws and programs.
You’ve somehow managed to miss the plainly obvious – A lot of “noise” was made about “funding Law Enforcement” in order to get support for passage and subsequent renewal of VAWA, etc. But, there never was any intention to actually give more than a pittance to LE (just enough for some photo ops, and some news stories). LE is still by-n-large men doing “A Man’s Work”. Feminists weren’t going to willing pass on the bulk of any pork to a male-dominated interest. As I’ve demonstrated by linking the actual awards (by county), concerns like getting bi-lingual translators for women’s shelters are more likely to receive those grants, and in larger dollar amounts as well.
Bottom line, in your belief that LE cashes in on violence against women, YOU’VE BEEN HAD!
And what of those “statistics” you keep imagining that LE is somehow inventing and profiting from? Are you not aware (I have also linked to RAINN’s propaganda, and AfOR has posted comparable info from the UK) that SGI agencies routinely use those statistics based on LE accounting of cases to BASH Law Enforcement. They will continue to point to low report-to-arrest, report-to-charging, report-to-prosecution, and report-to-conviction ratio’s to declare that LE is NOT doing their jobs “adequately”.
Now, if you can stay focused on just that matter, do try to explain not only how LE makes themselves “look good” by releasing that data, but also how they are financially rewarded?
Did you happen to catch the item someone linked in the WSJ yesterday. Once again, the agents of the SGI were bashing the police in NYC for not doing a good job WRT sexual assaults. They had their list of demands, but no money to help pay for any extra efforts to be made. That’s really quite typical – demands without financial backing. This sort of thing used to be termed “Unfunded Mandates”. And, that’s really all laws like VAWA are to LE.
slwerner
{Okay, I'll try again, in smaller parts]
S - ”You ask for studies that show proof of this theory; when American universities who have historically done such academic studies”
*** News Flash ***
American Universities ARE NOT PART of Law Enforcement.
And, I still don’t see any links.
S - ”And then when i discovered that law enforcement could cash in domestic violence statistics via VAWA dollars,then "Any simpleton (who is not willfully ignorant), could then connect the dots" as to why American law enforcement were systematically getting men to plead guilty to domestic violence charges”
Imagine that YOU, of all people trying to call me stupid. One way in which I’ve tried to be nice to use was to NOT point out the obvious fact that you are not a particularly intelligent person. But, now you try insinuate that I’m the ignorant one? Laughable!
As I have repeated shown you/given you links to the conclusive evidence, there IS NO MECHANISM by which LE can be directly compensated/rewarded.
Yes, LE agency can and do apply for grant monies. Yet, they are in direct competition, not only with other LE agencies for the very small piece of the pie available to them, but also with a host of non-LE interests who are (by design) the preferred beneficiaries of the federal pork in VAWA and other such laws and programs.
You’ve somehow managed to miss the plainly obvious – A lot of “noise” was made about “funding Law Enforcement” in order to get support for passage and subsequent renewal of VAWA, etc. But, there never was any intention to actually give more than a pittance to LE (just enough for some photo ops, and some news stories). LE is still by-n-large men doing “A Man’s Work”. Feminists weren’t going to willing pass on the bulk of any pork to a male-dominated interest. As I’ve demonstrated by linking the actual awards (by county), concerns like getting bi-lingual translators for women’s shelters are more likely to receive those grants, and in larger dollar amounts as well.
Bottom line, in your belief that LE cashes in on violence against women, YOU’VE BEEN HAD!
And what of those “statistics” you keep imagining that LE is somehow inventing and profiting from? Are you not aware (I have also linked to RAINN’s propaganda, and AfOR has posted comparable info from the UK) that SGI agencies routinely use those statistics based on LE accounting of cases to BASH Law Enforcement. They will continue to point to low report-to-arrest, report-to-charging, report-to-prosecution, and report-to-conviction ratio’s to declare that LE is NOT doing their jobs “adequately”.
Now, if you can stay focused on just that matter, do try to explain not only how LE makes themselves “look good” by releasing that data, but also how they are financially rewarded?
Did you happen to catch the item someone linked in the WSJ yesterday. Once again, the agents of the SGI were bashing the police in NYC for not doing a good job WRT sexual assaults. They had their list of demands, but no money to help pay for any extra efforts to be made. That’s really quite typical – demands without financial backing. This sort of thing used to be termed “Unfunded Mandates”. And, that’s really all laws like VAWA are to LE.
Mr Werner, i hate to get too far away from the point here...
I said my theory is based on "simple linear thinking" vis a vis the events i have witnessed unfold. I have 7 friends (acquaintances) who were (In effect forced by ????corrections????) to plead guilty to a domestic violence charge, when in reality the women/girl was the violent party.
S - "I said my theory is based on "simple linear thinking" vis a vis the events i have witnessed unfold"
By this, all you can really conclude is that some members of LE will pressure men into confessing and/or taking plea deals.
The crap about manufacturing stats and cashing in is no where in evidence in you observations, so it simply your invention.
Lots of feminists "just know, with all their hearts" that police don't do any thing about rape claims and that men (as a class) use rape to keep women down. Their most sincerely held beliefs do not make it true.
I've encountered a number of women (on-line) who claim that they were raped and the police would do nothing about it. Even if (unlikely as it seems) any one of them was telling the truth, I'd still say to them that they are NOT the center of the universe and any injustice WRT their personal situations DOES NOT mean that it happens that way in every other case.
I think you can see where I'm going with this.....
Mr Werner, Im open to a different theory (even if its just a little), but you have not given my one that passes the "fishy smelling" test.
S - "Im open to a different theory (even if its just a little), but you have not given my one that passes the "fishy smelling" test."
The only "theory" you'd consider is one in which the police are at the center of all false rape allegations, manufacturing phony statics to help encourage women to make them, and those false rape allegations are the secret weapon of raunch feminists and LE to bring down society on behalf of the gays.
Oh Wait! That is the theory you've been blathering about for months now.
Well, it IS still the only theory you'd consider.
You know what? There's really no point in bothering with you any more.
You just go on with your ridiculous rants about your asinine theory, and I'll just keep my opinions about it to myself.
If you manage to make a laughing-stock out of the FRS, and harm it's credibility with the general public, so be it. I tried, but I'm done!
"If you manage to make a laughing-stock out of the FRS, and harm it's credibility with the general public, so be it. I tried, but I'm done!"
Most unfortunately, he has already succeeded in doing that. And it seems he's been at it for years, not months.
Yes, I completely agree that there is no point in trying to argue with someone who has proven himself to be completely incapable of reason. Even if what he was saying were true, it would be insane by sheer repetition alone.
A number of people said a long time ago that his comments should be deleted. For some bizarre reason, perhaps only because he claims he is a false rape survivor, the owners of this blog went so far as to defend his loony conspiracy theory, and embarrassed themselves in the process. Those comments were deleted, but his remained. It made no sense at all.
Then it was decided, and announced, that such comments making unsubstantiated claims against law enforcement would be deleted. Some of them were, but many of them are allowed to continue. If a commenter on almost any other forum acted in such a way, or incessantly violated a policy, never mind a policy created to address a problem created by that one person, that person would have been banned a long time ago. Why he is given such special treatment, even though he repeatedly undermines the mission of this blog, is simply incomprehensible.
Mr werner, google "gordian knot".
And Pierce, I appreciate yer bold tolerance for my "cutting the knot" perspective, and i assume that if you Ever have a Huge, huge, problem with me, you will first erase my comments, and over time i will just go away.
Sometimes in order to find a middle ground, both extremes have to be understood and my "cutting the knot" perspective has established the one side of the goal post that is the hardest to reach, and i wish you all luck finding the middle way.
If American law enforcement were to hold women equally accountable under the law, the biggest effect it would have on society is womens prisons would immediately swell, but over 10 years crime in America would drop by 50%.
By intercepting violent women, you intercept a generation of violence!!
I don't post too often here but i've noticed there is somebody who constantly tries to uproot the conversation and go out of his way to blame the cops.
This same poster used to comment on the Glenn Sacks blog . /
\
He used a different name back then, and that name was MCA (Men's College Advocate).
Don't any of you people find it disgusting that *Scott* or *MCA* can get away with posting the same repetitive stuff day after day after day after day?
His comments have no impact, but for some reason, they keep appearing.
Even more disgusting is that Archivist knowingly pits Scott against SLW, one of our most knowledgeable readers.
Nobody seems to Get it.
Teach a women to read and you teach a whole family to read.
Intercept a violent women, and you've intercepted a family of violence.
Nobody seems to get it!!
Post a Comment