Haha, did you care enough to dismiss my original reply?

I didn’t think you could top “I don’t have an opinion” in terms of fascinating, non-trite posts, but “I don’t care” just did it. Those Dos Equis commercials are about you, aren’t they?

AAHAHAHA!

No, I understood your point. “I don’t have an opinion” is simply a fascinating thing. Really interesting to consider.

Thanks for the update.

Noob Salad indeed. It cannot possibly be this hard.

She’s involved because she may have relevant information about the facts at issue in this particular case. That’s what this is about.

There’s a pretty wide gulf between being “100% lighthearted and gracious” and the horseshit she’s spewing. I don’t think anyone’s asking her not to be upset. I think what people are saying is to publicly say this was an “injustice” that threw her into “grieving” is over the top. She wasn’t denied anything she had…

If you graduated high school in the early-2000s, you are now in or near your 30s, and may very well be a dad. If you were in college, even worse!

I’m not arguing against arbitrary age restrictions. I fully understand their nature. I was just as irresponsible with alcohol at 20 364 as I was at 21 1, but I know the line has to be drawn somewhere. My only point is, just because it is not legally abuse because of that arbitrariness doesn’t mean we can’t reasonably…

It is a bit of semantics. He won’t be charged with any crime, and he shouldn’t be because he didn’t commit one. What I am calling abuse is because of the combination of the age difference AND that she was asking for a job. The age difference isn’t an “ew” for me, it is more that at her specific age, combined with the…

Well, yeah, with those ages, my post doesn’t make much sense. It was a hypothetical though, she didn’t receive any messages at 16 and 364. My point was that whether something is abusive (in our minds as reasonable people) may not always line up with what’s abusive by a necessarily arbitrary legal standard. What I was…

Fuck. I meeean....that was my point. I meeeean. Goddamnit you know what I mean!!!!!!

Well, since the British police, who presumably know British law, said he hadn’t broken any law, I’m going to assume it doesn’t. Probably applies to people like teachers.

He didn’t break the law. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s not abuse or close to it. I mean, if she was 16 years 364 days for one of the messages, and then 17 for the next, one of those is abuse in your mind and one is not just because in the eyes of an arbitrary law there is a difference? He’s a middle aged man…

Agreed. Before giving them another weapon to attack people with, how about reminding them their real job is always one of deescalation and defusion. So often cops end up needlessly creating or escalating a confrontation, and then using force. Force should be a last resort when necessary for safety, not the default…

What in the hell are you going on about?

There is no legal recognition of innocence. How was OJ Simpson after his trial?

Holy shit you just keep getting dumber. What a piece of human garbage you are. Yeah, let’s compare some dumb horsing around to a brutal rape.

God, you are such a pathetic, sniveling little shit. You understand you are defending brutal rapists who could have killed someone?