|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what, why dont we all just go over and get dna and prints done. Lets offer them up right now.
Why even wait for a murder?
Im right on it, right after the judges, cheifs of police right on down to the attornies.
Funny how we always assume their the goodguys.
Even more funny I bet they havent even considered doing the tests themselves.
Fucktard , thats been a real popular word lately. People are getting real pissy, it must be the summer heat. Dissent does not equal trolling.
BTW planting dna such as hair etc seems to be the fashionable thing lately. If you want to commit a crime all you have to do is stop by the airport, mall, library whatever and pick up some samples. We should be very careful with this and apparently our dna signatures.
Im not really big on giving Agencies more power than they deserve, we often forget that its people who run these things, not rules or regulations. They may be saying how important it is to aquire these powers for investigations, but who sais they dont have underlying issues??
My experience has told me not to trust any of them, Judges , Prosecutors, Cops, and including your own Lawyer. They will lie cheat and steal like any criminal and they have the power to get away with it.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You did notice that I said it was still ridiculous, didn't you? :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"You did notice that I said it was still ridiculous, didn't you? :)"
Yes I was supporting you, by saying "dissent does not equal trolling"
But maybe I was lightheartedly making fun of you too. : )
I really wish we had the smilie faces here
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. . .that your statements about routine male genital mutilation were wholly and completely wrong in the first place, instead of just not going 'with the flow', didn't you? ;)
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
that your statements about routine male genital mutilation were wholly and completely wrong in the first place
Well sure....except for the part where they're correct...which would be all of it. :) Circumcision removes a risk of infection from the head of the penis (and sexual partners later in life) without any drawbacks for the infant other than temporary pain.
"Well you can just peel back the foreskin and wash the area out" opponents like to say. But a guy would have to do it for HIS WHOLE LIFE. To make a comparison, say you if you removed a baby's tonsils you would also remove the need to brush and floss his teeth, for life. Would never need to worry about gingervitus or cavaties, without any drawbacks. Hmm, would I do that for my kid....hmmm let me think......hmmmmmm.......tough decision.....not.
The next couple of arguments usually thrown out contradict eachother. The first is that the boy will lose sensitivity by having the forskin removed, but also argue that the head of the penis will be too sensitive if the foreskin is removed! So which is it?
The last resort of the anti-circumcision folks is to call it "male genital mutilation" and link it to the female genital mutilation carried out by some muslim tribes in Africa and Asia. But its not really comparible because FGM has no medical benifits and completely removes the clitoris and the labia, where a woman derives most of her sexual pleasure, and can cause pain for the rest of her life, especially during menstruation. For circumcision to be the same as FGM the penis would need to be cut off right at the base and sewen up. But it doesn't get cut off and its not comparable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Oh, and if that certain someone with mod points happens to be reading this, just because a person makes a statement that doesn't go with the flow doesn't mean you need to be a fucktard and mod it as flamebait."
Since you wrote "that certain someone with mod points" as singular, I assume that was directed at me? The moderation system is distributed on MANN, and people get moderation status on a psuedorandom basis (it's psuedorandom becuase people who have submitted news stories and had their own comments modded up are more likely to get moderation status than others). For the record, I did not moderate the post you referred to.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While I agree that "male only DNA database" has a certain sensational value, I think that it's axiomatic that this process is going to lead to a....."male only DNA database". Unless I'm misunderstanding the following phrase contained in the article - "they want to voluntarily test all members of the local male population".
What bothers me about this case is that in a situation where there is no sexual motive at all, and robbery appears to be the main motive, they will DNA test every male in a town of 45,000 because male saliva was found on the bridge.
I sincerely hope that if some completely innocent guy spat on the bridge hours before this happened, that he's got a rock solid alibi for his movements that night. Especially in the light of a senior police figure on the case who stated that anyone who does not come forward will be under immediate suspicion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I sincerely hope that if some completely innocent guy spat on the bridge hours before this happened, that he's got a rock solid alibi for his movements that night. Especially in the light of a senior police figure on the case who stated that anyone who does not come forward will be under immediate suspicion. "
The constant process of the criminalization of men.
They want this for everyone, total state control. They are hammering men and demonizing them to women so that women will forfeit all of our rights both men and women. Women think they are safe from this now, but in the end it will be just as harsh to them.
btw if they had taking women's dna they would have a better chance of finding a relative and really narrowing down the search too.
If it was a guy pushed off that bridge the case would be considered cold by now.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
