Skip to comments.
POLICE SCAN ALLEGED INTERNET SEX CANNIBAL'S VIDEOS
Reuters ^
| 12/12/02
| David Crossland
Posted on 12/12/2002 9:50:27 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
EEE
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Contacted for an interview, Armin M. issued only this statement:
"I oppose George Bush and his racist war on Iraq. You Americans are sick."
2
posted on
12/12/2002 9:57:48 AM PST
by
wideawake
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
EEE
Can't you just respect other people's differences??? I mean, that's why they make chocolate and vanilla... and flambed penis...
Owl_Eagle
Guns Before Butter.
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
What's the Libertarian stance on this consensual relationship? I'm not being flippant. It's a serious question.
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
What a dicksgusting topic.
5
posted on
12/12/2002 10:24:41 AM PST
by
Slyfox
"...and then he said 'EAT ME!', so I did."
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Hold on here. A man actually let another man cut off his penis, and then helped eat it??????? How was the blood loss and pain handled? The suspect actually thinks people are going to believe that this was consentual? Yikes....
To: TheSpottedOwl
consentual=consensual. Damn still looks wrong :(
To: TheSpottedOwl
The suspect actually thinks people are going to believe that this was consentual? Yikes.... Read the story -- it was on tape. They tried it flambeed, and then decided to fry it up instead. Sounds like it really was consensual -- which makes it even more ghastly.
9
posted on
12/12/2002 11:39:52 AM PST
by
r9etb
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Hold muh...forget it.
To: ModelBreaker
What's the Libertarian stance on this consensual relationship? I'm not being flippant. It's a serious question. Get real. The guy would have been prosecuted and punished just like anyone else who committed a heinous crime such as this, even under a Libertarian administration.
As far as the homosexual consensual relationship is concerned, who cares? As long as it doesn't develop into criminal activity as eating people and such....
To: ModelBreaker
"What's the Libertarian stance on this consensual relationship?"
Yeah, I'd like to know the answer to that as well...
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
The dead man apparently replied to an ad posted on the Internet, prosecutors said. One newspaper said it read: "Seeking young, well-built 18- to 30-year-old for slaughter." I almost replied to that ad! Whew! I'm always open for a good slaughter. Sounded like fun. Boy am I glad now I passed it up.
13
posted on
12/12/2002 12:54:52 PM PST
by
mc5cents
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
The guy would have been prosecuted and punished just like anyone else who committed a heinous crime such as this But that's just the point: what is it that makes this a heinous crime? The "victim" was apparently willing to be slaughtered, and the "last meal" would appear to be proof of that. Where in Libertarian doctrine is this wrong?
14
posted on
12/12/2002 1:19:12 PM PST
by
r9etb
To: mc5cents; Extremely Extreme Extremist
A man and a woman were driving down the road and arguing about his deplorable infidelity. Suddenly the woman reaches over and slices the man's penis off. Angrily the woman tosses it out the car window.
Driving behind the couple is a man and his 12 year old daughter. The little girl is just chatting away at her father when all of a sudden the penis smacks the pickup on the windshield, sticks for a moment, then flies off.
Surprised, the daughter asks her father, "Daddy, what the heck was that?
Not wanting to expose his twelve year old daughter to anything sexual at such a young age, the father replies "It was only a bug, honey."
The daughter sits with a confused look on her face, and after a few minutes she says, "Sure had a big dick, didn't it?
15
posted on
12/12/2002 1:57:01 PM PST
by
B4Ranch
To: B4Ranch
LMAO!
16
posted on
12/12/2002 2:00:55 PM PST
by
cmsgop
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Get real. The guy would have been prosecuted and punished just like anyone else who committed a heinous crime such as this, even under a Libertarian administration. I was being real. This was apparently consensual behavior between two adults. Assuming it was consensual (which the article strongly suggests), why would Libertarians regard it being different than prostitution. What am I missing?
I understand that you think it is different. What I would like to know is why.
I think this case is interesting in this regard just because it pushes the Libertarian principle of no state interference in consensual behavior between two adults to its extreme.
I think that the principled Libertarian answer is that the state has no business criminalizing this private consensual behavior. If that is not your answer--and if you are a Libertarian--I am really curious to know why you (or any other Libertarians lurking) would make an exception to the general principle in this case.
To: TheSpottedOwl
How was the blood loss and pain handled? Very well, apparently. At least for a little while.
To: ModelBreaker
I think when it escalates to the point of dismemberment for nonnecessary food (things are totally different if they're trapped somewhere and on the brink of starvation) it's clear that at least one person in the relationship is far too nuckingfuts to consider it truly consentual. Part of mutual consent implies being relatively close to all there.
19
posted on
12/12/2002 3:18:33 PM PST
by
discostu
To: discostu
Jeffrey Dahmer!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson