Nassau Cops: PTA Mom, Boy Found Half Naked In Car

[Agnapostate]

come on, puss.. don't balk NOW! if those numbers are in the fucking abstract the THEY MUST BE WITHIN YOUR FUCKING REACH TO POST.

lets see em, sicko.

Post them yourself, fucker. Or maybe you'd like to post this instead.

But hasn’t brain research advanced dramatically in recent decades? Yes. To the point that definitive pronouncements can be made about how brain physiology “makes teenagers act”? Not even nearly. Brain research is at a very primitive stage. Consider the cautions of leading scientists, which have received little attention. Public Broadcasting System, for example, did not broadcast its interviews with leading scientists in its “Inside the Teenage Brain” show (January 31, 2002), but it did post them on PBS’s website as background. These detailed interviews provided a completely different picture than the breathless broadcast.

Asked, “how much do we know about the relationship between the anatomy or biology of the brain and behavior?” Daniel Siegel of UCLA’s School of Medicine, co-investigator at UCLA's Center for Culture, Brain, and Development, and director of the Center for Human Development in Los Angeles, answered: “We are just beginning to identify how systems in the brain work together in an integrated fashion to create complex mental processes.” Kurt W. Fischer, Professor of Education and Human Development and director of the Mind, Brain, & Education Program at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, was even more emphatic. “We do not know very much!” he said, adding:

"Key to our understanding is how the brain functions as a system—for example, how neural networks grow and function across brain regions. Most of the recent advances in brain science have involved knowledge of the biology of single neurons and synapses, not knowledge of patterns of connection and other aspects of the brain as a system. In time the new imaging techniques will help scientists and educators to understand how brain and behavior work together, but we have a very long way to go.

When neuroscience connects to scientific knowledge about cognition and development, it can be helpful in a global way, supporting the cognitive developmental knowledge; but it cannot provide specific guidance on its own. With the excitement of the remarkable advances in biology and neuroscience in recent decades, people naturally want to use brain science to inform policy and practice, but our limited knowledge of the brain places extreme limits on that effort. There can be no "brain-based education" or "brain-based parenting" at this early point in the history of neuroscience! (emphasis mine)."

Note well: “our limited knowledge of the brain” at “this early point in the history of neuroscience” means it cannot be used “to inform policy and practice” or to establish “brain-based parenting.” Richard Lerner, director of Tufts University's Institute for Applied Research in Youth Development, agrees brain research is "in its infancy” and “it’s way too premature to make those specific links” between biology and behavior. These strongly-worded cautions from the leading researchers diametrically refute the reckless demagoguery flooding the news media and policy forums. As does the practical reality everyone can see: If authorities’ hyperventilations flooding the press about how dangerous teens are were valid, every adolescent in the United States would be dead five times over.

I didn't think so, fucker.

 

[Shogun]

myawwww... pooor lil pedobear.. did hims PUSS OUT AGAIN???


myawwww.. poor guy.. I'm sure you'll find a more helpless victim the next time you prowl the fucking schoolyard.

 

[Agnapostate]

myawwww... pooor lil pedobear.. did hims PUSS OUT AGAIN???


myawwww.. poor guy.. I'm sure you'll find a more helpless victim the next time you prowl the fucking schoolyard.

Look at this shit!

More failure, fucker!

 

[Shogun]

says the guy whose sole fucking defense of his sick position is "no, THEY are not valid! WHAAAAAAAAA!"


trust me, your pedobear condemnation wounds tot he core.

 

[Diuretic]

your daughter might ALSO just want me to buy her some shoes after she sucks my cock at the mall too, yo... If making a distinction that is not steeped in a rank double standard about the sexual abuse of kids is POLITICALLY CORRECT then send me my fucking patch and tshirt.

After all, your daughter with my cum in her mouth sure isn't a victim after she EARNED the shoes I bought her, eh?

Yep - reaaaallly intelligent discourse there mister.

 

[Diuretic]

I think he's putting Diuretic through shock therapy to try and get rid of his double standard about sexual assault. Personally, I won't be having sex with any more young guys until I see some I.D.












humor, people.

The humour worked, the shock treatment didn't!

 

[Agnapostate]

says the guy whose sole fucking defense of his sick position is "no, THEY are not valid! WHAAAAAAAAA!"


trust me, your pedobear condemnation wounds tot he core.

What a moron you are. You flail away, like a rodent trying to keep itself from being flushed down the toilet, even though the evidence piles on more and more...until you can't hold on.

 

[tigerbob]

Double standard? Yes I suppose it is. But at least I'm honest about it. Seriously, this isn't just arguing for it's own sake, I really do think that there's a big difference between the situations being discussed. The point has been made that this woman has problems. I'd agree with that and she needs to work them out. Was her behaviour inappropriate? Yes, it was. Did she take advantage of a perpetually horny 13 year old lad? Yes she did. Did she do him permanent psychological damage? I doubt it. What will fuck this kid up is the public hoo-hah. If he got laid by her and no-one knew about it (well until he put it on his Facebook page) there would have been far less harm than is being done to him now.

Agree with every word.

 

[Angel Heart]

You are obviously unaware of the distinction between legal and ethical dimensions of this issue. It matters not if I would "loose" in court; that reveals the fact that the legal system is not on my side, but says nothing to the ethical aspect of infantilizing adolescents. Nor does the fact that such restrictive laws have existed in full force for about 50 years, (and laws prohibiting sexual relations between adolescent males and older females are only about 20 to 30 years old, because there was no conception that females could sexually abuse males in consensual relationships prior to that), do much for your case. Slavery was opposed on moral grounds by many Founding Fathers, yet remained in existence for almost a century after they recognized its brutal and unjust nature. Hence, recognizing the ethical wrongness of a practice or state of affairs does not mean that legal action will be taken to remedy this ethical wrongness.

Slavery wasn't ended at the time of the Revolution due to it not being worth loosing the States that supported it. We needed all of the States to beat the king. They stated that the issue would be readdressed in the future. Boy was it ever.

Now, your assertions regarding legal contracts are false; I have fully addressed this by noting that I am in favor of granting youth the right to economic power, namely through right-to-work laws, in addition to their reception of the rights to make valid legal contracts and own property. I have said that their current legal inability to engage in any of those activities. This essentially constitutes a state of forced dependency for them.

I know what ever I say you will not hear. I understand that you feel teens should be allowed all the same rights I do. I don't agree. I'm not going to spin my wheels trying to argue with someone who's going by only studies and not actual experence of dealing with teens.

I am unsure as to why that "doubt" exists, though I strongly suspect that it's related to some misconception you may have of anarchists supporting "chaos," "disorder," or a "law of the jungle."

Oh I don't know... How most anarchist act might have something to do with it.

Firstly, the abolition of capitalism will also result in the elimination of poverty, homelessness, and the subsequent crimes that are committed because of an impoverished state. So we can expect to reduce a significant amount of crime by taking that action.

And what drive would people have to better themselves? When you take away the drive of making more, you loose the biggest incentive to improve oneself. Why when the government will provide all we need. Fuck that. If I want more I must work for it.

As for specific anti-social actions committed against individuals that continued to exist, there would be several options for handling such a situation. If their victim was still alive, the suspect and the victim would agree on a third party to adjudicate their dispute, and make whatever "court" arrangements they felt they needed to. If they could not agree on this matter, or the victim was dead, a court would be appointed through direct democratic means by a community assembly. The judge would be an elected official, rather than one selected through executive appointment, and the jurors would be picked by lot to ensure impartiality. Whatever forms of justice would be dispensed would then follow from there, and it is important to note that anarchists reject "punitive" theories of "justice," and favor rehabilitative ones.
Reply With Quote

As a survivor of abuse, the agreeing wouldn't work. He had power over me when he would of been busted for it. He could get me to lie very easy just by looking at me. I feared my father. Let's not even get into my grandfather's touching me. There's no compromising with that. They threaten they twist and they lie to get away with it.

Rehabilitation has been tried. There are some out there that are never going to be rehabilitated. There is such a thing as evil with in people. Do you honestly think Jeffery Dahmer could of been rehabilitated?

 

[Angel Heart]

If my son got an older woman pregnant then we'd have to deal with it. I'd be cranky he didn't use a condom when he was banging her though.

I'd feel very different if a gay man was trying to fuck my under-age son, I'd be furious and I'd want the bastard in prison ASAFP.

And what if your son was gay? It shouldn't make a difference.

 

[Angel Heart]

Care, in my opinion an older man having sex with an under-age girl is different from an older woman having sex with an under-age boy. It's qualitatively different and that's the point I keep trying to make. They are not equivalent situations.

When girls develop mentally and physically younger than boys you feel this way? Double standard much.

My parents felt the same way... My brother became a father at 14. He was being arrest regularly at 15. Myself... I have yet to wear handcuffs for anything other than training (and fun ). I didn't have my oldest until I had a 2 year college degree and had served 2 yrs in the Army. I could of handled the freedom they gave my brother better than he did.

 

[chrismac]

I don't care how horny I was at 13, I doubt I could get it up on her face alone. She looks like that dude who was on Dr. Phil a few months ago who was taking hormones to become a woman. I bet she was giving him something other than poon, too. This is a thirteen year old boy we're talking about...if you're putting the blocks to a grown woman, I mean, if she would be willing to sleep with you, wouldn't you ask for an iPod or the new Halo or something? I would.

Shoot, I still would.

 

[Diuretic]

And what if your son was gay? It shouldn't make a difference.

I was responding to Shogun's mind experiments, everything has to be seen in context.

 

[Diuretic]

When girls develop mentally and physically younger than boys you feel this way? Double standard much.

My parents felt the same way... My brother became a father at 14. He was being arrest regularly at 15. Myself... I have yet to wear handcuffs for anything other than training (and fun ). I didn't have my oldest until I had a 2 year college degree and had served 2 yrs in the Army. I could of handled the freedom they gave my brother better than he did.

Of course it's a double standard, I've been repeatedly saying that in just about every post I've made. When an older male goes after an underage female he's proposing to do her. When an older woman goes after an underage male she's proposing he do her. That's the difference, crudely stated I know, but that's what I keep saying. Sometimes a double standard is valid and I reckon this one is.

 

[Angel Heart]

Of course it's a double standard, I've been repeatedly saying that in just about every post I've made. When an older male goes after an underage female he's proposing to do her. When an older woman goes after an underage male she's proposing he do her. That's the difference, crudely stated I know, but that's what I keep saying. Sometimes a double standard is valid and I reckon this one is.

As a mom of 4 boys, I'm just as protective over my boys as I am my girl.

 

[Ravi]

Of course it's a double standard, I've been repeatedly saying that in just about every post I've made. When an older male goes after an underage female he's proposing to do her. When an older woman goes after an underage male she's proposing he do her. That's the difference, crudely stated I know, but that's what I keep saying. Sometimes a double standard is valid and I reckon this one is.

I understand what you are saying and agree...but it's that way because that's how society tells us it is. But describing it that way makes the male always the giver and the female always the taker. In a good relationship, both are really both the givers and takers.

 

[Anguille]

I could of handled the freedom they gave my brother better than he did.

I believe you. No kids are alike.

 

[Diuretic]

As a mom of 4 boys, I'm just as protective over my boys as I am my girl.

And rightly so, but my point has been not about protection of the lad, it's been the fuss over this whole thing. If they had sex then this woman's going to be charged with a Class E felony and she may go to prison. That's if the lad gives evidence, I suppose. How many years in prison does anyone think she deserves? The max is 4 years.

 

[Anguille]

I understand what you are saying and agree...but it's that way because that's how society tells us it is. But describing it that way makes the male always the giver and the female always the taker. In a good relationship, both are really both the givers and takers.

I agree. I think it's also that way because in the past, when birth control and abortion were not so readily available, pregnancy was a real possibility and a danger for girls not fully grown. Also now, the law is much more severe with the fathers of children born out of wedlock. Society and cultural values have not caught up to present day reality.

 

[Anguille]

And rightly so, but my point has been not about protection of the lad, it's been the fuss over this whole thing. If they had sex then this woman's going to be charged with a Class E felony and she may go to prison. That's if the lad gives evidence, I suppose. How many years in prison does anyone think she deserves? The max is 4 years.

And she'll have a record as a sex offender her entire life.