London lesbians beaten for not kissing

[carlitos]

That's insane. They should've just kissed.

[IMGw=350]https://i.imgur.com/pGll0hz.png[/IMGw]

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I think he is blaming you for not understanding his posting style.

Yeah, the comment should have been, "This is not the thread for that crap."

"Yes he took a dump in the salad bar. But he does that every time we eat at this restaurant. Why are you still angry about it?"

See, now that would have been a more precise reply.

This:

There's more to satire and parody then just being an inappropriate troll and declaring victory when people are annoyed by it.

 

[Puppycow]

London has more cameras than the tourist area of Chicago.

In other words, they know exactly who got on and off that bus at certain times.

We can be sure of this because of the Jussie Smollett case.

Odds are they have the right suspects. I think the "central park five" happened before surveillance cameras were ubiquitous. They just picked some poor boys who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

At the risk of seeming to take "should've just kissed" seriously, it doesn't seem likely to me that complying would have defused the intimidation and prevented them getting beaten up and robbed.

 

[Crossbow]

Don't put that challange out there because some people can and will pick it up. I've been through some **** but have no problem joking about it, I follow the Jewish logic of "if you don't laugh you cry".

If you want the poster to be more sensitive just ask,because if they are anything like me they very well could get beaten and robed and be joking about it hours later. I was cracking " the score is now 1 to 10 billion" to a mildly racist friend of a friend who tried to use the fact I hit mugged by poc as evidence of the criminal nature of those types.

Excuse me, but there is a very real difference between making light of a bad experience that happened in a first person context as opposed to a bad experience that happened to someone else.

As for myself, I have been beaten up plenty of times and I have been robbed a few times.

And while I feel quite at liberty to be facetious about my own experiences, it would be very wrong of me to do the same thing about someone else.

 

[3point14]

OK then.

Thanks much for the clarification.

Perhaps if you and/or 'Cain' were badly beaten and robbed, then you would find that to be most amusing as well.

Probably not. I'm afraid that's the classic difference between tragedy and comedy for you.

 

[kookbreaker]

Some suspects have been arrested.



If the ones arrested are the ones who did it, send them to prison.

They should be forced to kiss each other before they get sent off to jail

 

[3point14]

At the risk of seeming to take "should've just kissed" seriously, it doesn't seem likely to me that complying would have defused the intimidation and prevented them getting beaten up and robbed.

You might want to think about the logical extension of that line of thought then hurry back here to retract the above.

 

[kookbreaker]

You might want to think about the logical extension of that line of thought then hurry back here to retract the above.

Why?

 

[3point14]

Why?

"If you had just done as they asked then there would have been no negative consequenses" can also be applied to giving someone your wallet, having sex with them, letting them take the items they want from your shop without paying and a very large number of other criminal acts. where the argument given is self-evidently invalid.

If this complusion is materially different from any of the others then it may be valid, but I really can't see how it is.

 

[carlitos]

I thought as much.

3point14, you missed a negative in your reading.

it doesn't seem likely to me that complying would have defused the intimidation

 

[Jack by the hedge]

You might want to think about the logical extension of that line of thought then hurry back here to retract the above.

I don't get it.

<edit> Oh. Okay, it looks like you missed the "doesn't seem likely" part. Yikes. No wonder you reacted.

 

[TragicMonkey]

They should be forced to kiss each other before they get sent off to jail

An irony here is that young British lower class criminally-inclined lads are themselves a not unpopular object of fetish.

Eta: or so I've heard. From a friend.

 

[3point14]

I thought as much.

3point14, you missed a negative in your reading.

THANK YOU!!!

Apologies to all, particularly Jack. Really sorry.

I shall leave the offending posts as they are as a lesson in the necessity of reading things properly.

(sorry)

 

[Jack by the hedge]

An irony here is that young British lower class criminally-inclined lads are themselves a not unpopular object of fetish.

Eta: or so I've heard. From a friend.

Well, now they'll have plenty of time to think about that while detained at her majesty's pleasure, as the saying goes.

And no, there's nothing remotely suggestive about that and I certainly don't know what you lot are smirking about.

 

[sadhatter]

Excuse me, but there is a very real difference between making light of a bad experience that happened in a first person context as opposed to a bad experience that happened to someone else.

As for myself, I have been beaten up plenty of times and I have been robbed a few times.

And while I feel quite at liberty to be facetious about my own experiences, it would be very wrong of me to do the same thing about someone else.

Did you miss the last half of my post?

My issue was with the challange "maybe if you got beat and robbed it you wouldn't find it funny. ". It's simply not effective argumentation as a decent portion of the population can and would laugh.

If you want someone to not be so edgy ask,they don't have to say yes of course, but no one is going to be convinced by a challange they can gladly accept.

It would be like me threatening the rock that if he didn't stop doing something id fight him. My challange would literally have zero impact.

 

[Elagabalus]

Yeah, the comment should have been, "This is not the thread for that crap."


See, now that would have been a more precise reply.

This:

There was also that unfortunate descent into seriousness which had overtones which could be applied to this thread.

 

[Crossbow]

Did you miss the last half of my post?

Sorry, but I had a lot of trouble following the last half of your post.

My issue was with the challange "maybe if you got beat and robbed it you wouldn't find it funny. ". It's simply not effective argumentation as a decent portion of the population can and would laugh.

If you want someone to not be so edgy ask,they don't have to say yes of course, but no one is going to be convinced by a challange they can gladly accept.

It would be like me threatening the rock that if he didn't stop doing something id fight him. My challange would literally have zero impact.

Sorry, but I am having a lot of trouble following this part of your post as well.

 

[William Parcher]

The initial description of the Smollett attack sounded like a hoax right away. This one does not. The only somewhat questionable element is the claim that the guys threw coins. Presumably this was some childish form of "payment" to get them to kiss. It's somewhat odd because it wouldn't be typical for robbers to throw money at a person that they plan to steal from. Maybe the decision to rob wasn't the initial intent and instead it was just to harass and verbally torment.

 

[Checkmite]

I concur; based on the information currently available I think a hate attack was the first priority and the robbery afterwards was more an opportunistic afterthought.