Thoughts on Polanski's arrest?

Unfortunately it's going to be a circus. When all they need to do is get his ass back in the U.S. and make him serve the time for what he pleaded guilty too and any extra time for the crime of fleeing, if applicable.

Ironic that he is arrested right after Susan Atkins dies

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Ironic that he is arrested right after Susan Atkins dies

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Look I can't f*king take this shit anymore because ive been holding this shit back for awhile.

It seems that some or maybe one person is arguing that even if he didn't rape the girl that its ok if the 13yr old gave consent. If thats the case you can **** off and go to hell.

Please dont give me any of the Greeks had sex with boys and they ended up alright bullshit that don't make it alright im pretty sure that women in ancient greece had their rights oppressed and they ended up 'alright' as well.

The fact of the matter is it was wrong and people can actually be convinced that something is wrong is right just because its the norm. We all ****ing know why its wrong for an adult to have sex with a 13yr old its a no-brainer and its not up for debate.

Furthermore you know why kids are so obessesed about sex, its because sex gets shoved down your throat all the time. Im clearly not saying that sex is wrong and its en evil thing but as it stands in socitey people are more interesting in exploiting people than having compassion what the hell do you expect?

Anyway heres the bottom line ask Hitler what he thinks about genocide he'll tell you its ok, ask a scumbag what he thinks about having sex with 13 yrs olds and he'll say its ok.

Get that its-ok-if-she-gave-consent shit the f*k out of here, find the nearest skyscraper and jump the f*k off.

Clearly someone's daddy or uncle had boundary issues.

Originally posted by Robtard
You should read the court transcript, especially the second part. You'd be better informed on the situation.

He plea bargained all the charges down to 'unlawful sex with a person under 14', which would have been a couple years in jail, probably less for good behavior. I.E., he got lucky with his connections and I suspect the Manson-thing helped him in the sympathy department some.

I was being factious in giving him an extra year of jail-time for each year he was a fugitive. He should get whatever time added to his sentence for that crime though, be it 1 or 30 years, I don't know the legalities if it; he'll probably use his notoriety and his Hollywood connections to reduce that too, the pedo.

Edit: As to your question about him doing it again. It's hard to find anything online now other than his current arrest. But iirc, he was quoted in saying something like "I can't help it if all the little-girls love me", years after he fled to France.

Originally posted by Bardock42
My question is really not that hard. Did he plead guilty to the original charges and it was suggested to be reduced or did he plead guilty to the reduced charges and it was agreed not to pursue the original charges.

I thought it was evident, with the mentioning of "plea bargain".

He agreed (and did) to plead guilty to "unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor", in return the prosecutor would drop the other charges; the presecution did.

So he was found guilty on that charge. This is what he owes for and any time added for fleeing, if applicable.

Originally posted by Robtard
I thought it was evident, with the mentioning of "plea bargain".

He agreed (and did) to plead guilty to "unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor", in return the prosecutor would drop the other charges; the presecution did.

So he was found guilty on that charge. This is what he owes for and any time added for fleeing, if applicable.

Originally posted by Bardock42
But don't you just assume then that the rest is true?

I do. I don't think the girl was lying and the way he set it up is very telling.

But that's irrelevant, as I'm saying he needs to serve the time for the crimes he was found guilty of and for the crime of fleeing. I'm not saying he needs to be raped and killed.

Originally posted by Robtard
I do. I don't think the girl was lying and the way he set it up is very telling.

But that's irrelevant, as I'm saying he needs to serve the time for the crimes he was found guilty of and for the crime of fleeing. I'm not saying he needs to be raped and killed.

I think he should do the time for the crime. The only question now is does he get charged with running away? I think he should.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Look I can't f*king take this shit anymore because ive been holding this shit back for awhile.

It seems that some or maybe one person is arguing that even if he didn't rape the girl that its ok if the 13yr old gave consent. If thats the case you can **** off and go to hell.

Please dont give me any of the Greeks had sex with boys and they ended up alright bullshit that don't make it alright im pretty sure that women in ancient greece had their rights oppressed and they ended up 'alright' as well.

The fact of the matter is it was wrong and people can actually be convinced that something is wrong is right just because its the norm. We all ****ing know why its wrong for an adult to have sex with a 13yr old its a no-brainer and its not up for debate.

Furthermore you know why kids are so obessesed about sex, its because sex gets shoved down your throat all the time. Im clearly not saying that sex is wrong and its en evil thing but as it stands in socitey people are more interesting in exploiting people than having compassion what the hell do you expect?

Anyway heres the bottom line ask Hitler what he thinks about genocide he'll tell you its ok, ask a scumbag what he thinks about having sex with 13 yrs olds and he'll say its ok.

Get that its-ok-if-she-gave-consent shit the f*k out of here, find the nearest skyscraper and jump the f*k off.

This post has all of the forum argument elements in them:

1. Rage.

2. Logical Fallacies.

3. Moral Relativism being passed off as fact.

4. A Hitler analogy.

5. and insults towards the person you disagree with.

Cool.

Now, from a more scientific perspective, what's wrong with mating with pubescent humans?

Now, what he did was wrong because he drugged her up first.

I just don't get the huge moral dilemma with mating with pubescent humans.

Edit - Pubescent may not be the term I'm looking for. "Fully sexually mature" may be more accurate. Though, that can be hard to tell when the person is only 13.

Originally posted by dadudemon
This post has all of the forum argument elements in them:

1. Rage.

2. Logical Fallacies.

3. Moral Relativism being passed off as fact.

4. A Hitler analogy.

5. and insults towards the person you disagree with.

Cool.

Yes thank you.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Now, from a more scientific perspective, what's wrong with mating with pubescent humans?

Now, what he did was wrong because he drugged her up first.

I just don't get the huge moral dilemma with mating with pubescent humans.

Edit - Pubescent may not be the term I'm looking for. "Fully sexually mature" may be more accurate. Though, that can be hard to tell when the person is only 13.

Use some common sense.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Use some common sense.

If it's obvious then there should be no problem in providing a point by point argument of your case.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
If it's obvious then there should be no problem in providing a point by point argument of your case.

Or its so obvious I shouldn't have to. To an extent I already have anyway.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Yes thank you.

It was an underhanded compliment, but it was a compliment. It's hard to pull that type of post off. 😄

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Use some common sense.

No thanks. I'll stick with calling it what it is: a moral relativistic fallacy.

"Common sense" used to dictate that African slaves were stupider than humans and even sub-human. You can keep your common sense when it is fallacious.

When I get home, I'll post more details into why this is a problem for me....even if I don't personally hold the belief, I can still justify it.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Edit - Pubescent may not be the term I'm looking for. "Fully sexually mature" may be more accurate. Though, that can be hard to tell when the person is only 13.

And we all agree this goes beyond physical development, right fellas?

Originally posted by dadudemon

No thanks. I'll stick with calling it what it is: a moral relativistic fallacy.

"Common sense" used to dictate that African slaves were stupider than humans and even sub-human. You can keep your common sense when it is fallacious.

When I get home, I'll post more details into why this is a problem for me....even if I don't personally hold the belief, I can still justify it.

Listen mate dont give me any of that relativity crap, if you go down that route you can justify anything. Yes anything, you take from that what you will.

Its not common sense that African slaves were stupider because there are actually accounts of African slaves being very intelligent ( and some from particular tribes as well) so I think you had better think of another example.

edit: and to further elaborate people WANTED to believe that African slaves were sub-human so they could continue opressing them. Terrible example.

Don't post any details, not interested, got it?

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Its not common sense that African slaves were stupider because there are actually accounts of African slaves being very intelligent ( and some from particular tribes as well) so I think you had better think of another example.

Originally posted by Ha Son
I think you missed his point. ermm

No I didn't. As I pointed out thats a bad examples I get his point however.

Jiffy Pop time.