Town saw wife change when husband vanished

AP ^ | October 26, 2003 | Mike Wilson

[Protagoras]

She chose to flee not to murder, good choice. Sounds like the first one she has made.

[biblewonk]

That's good progress though! We need to take her and Randy shooting somewhere's soon.

[jonboy]

Do the math, her youngest child was 9 months in the womb and 8 months out of the womb. I don't think that it proves that she was "having fun."

[jonboy]

At this point is it a given that she did not merely kill in self defense and hide the body due to panic? Murder in the first degree is not necessarily the only thing that could have happened (although he deserved what he got in my opinion).

[hotpotato]

Missed it, too, did you?

[ArrogantBustard]

Any man who strikes a woman is not a man. Period.

As you leave the ATM, a woman walks up to you, pulls a kife, and demands all your money. Whatchagonnado?

[AppyPappy]

Shoot the hell out of her.

[ArrogantBustard]

You're a scholar and a gentleman.

[aShepard]

"Mommy, what's that smell upstairs?"

"And how come there's so many flies?"

[an amused spectator]

Dixie Shanahan has since been ordered held on a charge of first-degree murder, and her children - ages 7, 5 and 8 months - have been placed in state custody.

Nothing bolder than a prosecutor after a "vicious felon". ;-)

[witnesstothefall]

Run like hell or submit. Cowards are always looking to rationlize their behavior, aren't they?

[ArrogantBustard]

Run like hell or submit.
I'll put flowers on your grave.

Cowards
Fascinating choice of words...

[witnesstothefall]

That's right pal. Why don't you contort yourself in more ways to explain the many situations in which it's advisable to hit women? That's what you're getting at right? Well go right ahead.

[ArrogantBustard]

You're funny. Really.

You posted an unsupportable absolute statement. I replied with an unlikely, but possible, situation in which your ideas are really stupid. Assault with a deadly weapon and armed robbery are as much violent crimes when committed by Bonnie as when committed by Clyde. Bonnie deserves no more consideration during her crimes than Clyde (or after, for that matter), the extra "X" chromosome notwithstanding.

In other words, they both deserve two in the chest and one in the head.

Deal with it.

And consider what sort of creature inhabits womens' prisons. That should clarify the matter somewhat.

Now if you'd said "Any man who strikes a lady is not a man", I'd agree with you. There is a difference.

Go ahead, Mr. Toad, and puff yourself up and bloviate. It should be amusing...

[witnesstothefall]

I'm bloviating now. Is it funny? I'm aware of the distinctions you draw; I've heard them drawn by knuckle-draggers before.

Don't let me distract you from constructing more violence-on-women fantasies.

If it's so important for you, then yes, extreme situations do occur when the physical submission of a female by a male is called for, even to the extent you fantasize about - 2 in the chest and 1 in the head. What wonderful imagery your fantasy provides.

You know what they call folks who like to deal in extremes? Extremists.

[dirtboy]

Don't let me distract you from constructing more violence-on-women fantasies.

So a woman can threaten lethal harm to a man, in the form of a knifepoint robbery, but men cannot respond with lethal force? Funny, I've read the self-defense statutes from several states, and I've never seen a gender differentiation in those statutes.

[witnesstothefall]

Well the mysogynists (sic?) are coming out of the woodwork. To appease those who feel adamant about the necessity to make it clear that violence against women is sometimes highly commendable, let me amend my patently offensive statement made earlier.

Any man who strikes a woman who is not committing a violent felony against his defenseless person, is not a man. Period.

Is that modern enough for you?

[dirtboy]

Well the mysogynists (sic?) are coming out of the woodwork. To appease those who feel adamant about the necessity to make it clear that violence against women is sometimes highly commendable, let me amend my patently offensive statement made earlier. Any man who strikes a woman who is not committing a violent felony against his defenseless person, is not a man. Period. Is that modern enough for you?

Let me ask you - if a female pulled a knife on you, was threatening to kill you and was making active attempts to stab you and you were blocked off from getting away from her, and you were carrying a gun, would you use it? How is a response to a self-defense situation a "violence on women" fantasy?

FWIW, not all women are the weak defenseless types. My wife could probably kick the rump of half the men on the planet.

[ArrogantBustard]

Bwahahahaha!!!!!! Are you trying to flame me, sonny-boy? You'll have to do better than that.

You posted an idiotic statement; I called you on it. It's no big deal. Or it shouldn't be. A gentleman would graciously admit it, and go on with life.

But nooooooo, that's not good enough! Instead, you have to regurgitate a steaming heap of hardcore feminist drivel. I almost feel sorry for you. Did you marry Katherine MacKinnon?

OBTW, Bustards don't have knuckles.

[witnesstothefall]

Knuckle-draggers think misogyny was invented in 1968 as part and parcel of feminism. It wasn't.

If you're an old timer with real world experience, you ought to know that.

I don't follow feminism Marxist crap, so I have no idea who Katherine MacKinnon is. And I'm not that curious to learn, thanks.