This is how the UK handles domestic abuse that leads to brutal murder

a reply to: stumason

You take a 100 men and put them up against 100 women bench pressing the women will be weaker. Your problem is you're confusing idealistic views with rational logical views.


Thank God you didn't pick on the children.

a reply to: Greathouse

Not necessarily. It entirely depends on what 100 men you pick and what 100 women you pick. In the same vein, you could pick 100 men for one group and 100 men for the next and, depending on how you selected your groups, one could easily overpower the other.

A piss poor example.

Besides, physical strength alone is not a deciding factor in any confrontation and merely being physically stronger does not make the other person "defenceless" or "weaker".

All you're doing is perpetuating the notion that women need to be "protected", as if they are incapable of doing so themselves. A very old fashioned view, but then I get the impression you're from an older set yourself - 50+, maybe?

a reply to: stumason

By your repeated excuses and need to make exceptions to the well-established and known facts of physical prowess.

I can only assume you approve of men beating on women?

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: stumason

By your repeated excuses and need to make exceptions to the well-established and known facts of physical prowess.

"Physical prowess"? No I know you're an old timer... All you're doing is repeating the tired old idea that men are better than women, that women need protecting and can't possibly defend themselves.

Physical strength alone is no guarantee you can overpower someone. I've taken on blokes much larger than myself and come out without so much as a bruise. It is down to other factors such as speed, dexterity, application of force and situational awareness as much as it is "I have bigger muscles - me stronger"...

originally posted by: Greathouse
I can only assume you approve of men beating on women?

And where the hell did you get that from? Talk about a strawman - one can tell you're losing the argument when you try to pull that one.

The only reason I am arguing with you on this is because you said "men who beat on women are as bad as paedophiles", when I said that in actual fact, anyone who beats on anyone else should be condemned equally. Unprovoked physical violence against anyone should not be allowed, but by you trying to hold one to a higher standard than the other, because you view women as "weaker" is simply sexist on your behalf. You'd be right at home in somewhere like Saudi Arabia....

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: stormcell
The UK prison service has a basic problem - they have run out of prison cells to put people. Prisons are now overflowing with prisoners. So the authorities have to reduce sentences by 50% for good behavior. Many times, a car driver will kill someone through negligent driving, and all they will get is a three year suspended sentence because it was their first offense, even if the driver was drunk, talking on cellphone and speeding at night.

I'm sure we will be seeing a number of new prisons being built from money invested by the Private sector. No doubt they will be paid handsomely for the service they provide and will be reimbursed the cost of the build within a short timeframe. They will also have access to lucrative contracts to deliver the running of the prisons and as we all know, there is no corruption within Government, so chillax dude, it's for the good of the economy.

They can't - there's nowhere to build new prisons. What usually happens is that the prisoners families move to those homes that are as close as possible to the prison. That tends to depreciate house prices in the local area. They even tried having prison ships but those are considered primitive. Imagine having something the size of the Queen Mary 2 and filled full of prisoners at the end of your harbor.

a reply to: stumason

And where the hell did you get that from? Talk about a strawman - one can tell you're losing the argument when you try to pull that one.

But that has been your stance from the beginning. You took issue over the meaning of a whole post because of one adjective. The gist of your post was that all manner women are equal. Yeah I'll freely tell you I'm over 50. My wife was a victim of domestic violence before she met me, my daughter was a victim of domestic violence and I damn near went to prison over it.

I regularly at my establishment see assholes pushing women around and I step right up. Apparently unlike you most of the world and the women in it agree with me because of domestic violence laws.

And I'll tell you when it's obvious someone is losing an argument. It is when they fail to address your actual statements make excuses or exceptions to the rule and try continually to put someone on the defensive.

If you punched your wife in the mouth you would see that most of the world is in agreement with me.

originally posted by: Greathouse
But that has been your stance from the beginning. You took issue over the meaning of a whole post because of one adjective. The gist of your post was that all manner women are equal.

Indeed it has - unlike some dinosaurs and sexists, I don't believe women are inferior and incapable of looking after themselves. You seem to be of the opposing view, that big strong men are needed to keep women safe. How is it, back there in the dark ages by the way?

originally posted by: Greathouse
Yeah I'll freely tell you I'm over 50.

I knew it..

originally posted by: Greathouse
My wife was a victim of domestic violence before she met me, my daughter was a victim of domestic violence and I damn near went to prison over it.

I'm sorry to hear that, but what relevance does that have?

originally posted by: Greathouse
I regularly at my establishment see assholes pushing women around and I step right up. Apparently unlike you most of the world and the women in it agree with me because of domestic violence laws.

As I have repeatedly said - which you seem to want to ignore to blather on about what a stand up gentleman you are protecting those poor, defenceless little ladies - all attacks on anyone should be condemned. I've waded in to stand up for blokes being attacked as much as I have for women.

originally posted by: Greathouse
And I'll tell you when it's obvious someone is losing an argument. It is when they fail to address your actual statements make excuses or exceptions to the rule and try continually to put someone on the defensive.

I fail to address what you said, but I am also putting you on the defensive? How can both be true? Surely, if I was putting you on the "defensive" I am actually addressing what you said, ergo your need to defend it?

originally posted by: Greathouse
If you punched your wife in the mouth you would see that most of the world is in agreement with me.

Context is key - Of course, if I hit her for no reason it would and should be condemned, but if my wife was beating me with a frying pan, or coming at me with a knife I am well within my rights to smack her back and no, the "world" wouldn't judge me for it. Only a few, bigoted little men would who think a poor little woman could never be in a position to threaten a man would try and judge me.

a reply to: stumason

It cracks me up that you took all that time to say nothing and only repeat yourself.

I'm done humiliating you I knew what you were from the get go.

When I was young I worked in the circus so I know a clown when I talk to one.



BTW i'll let you know when your opinion matters to me. Lol ( wait with tumescent anticipation by your mailbox for a u2u) rotf

a reply to: Greathouse

Righto, old man, keep patting yourself on the back for a job badly done, after all, your generation are the experts on that front!

At the end of the day, you failed quite spectacularly to explain why women need "defending", why you think they are "weaker" or how you seem to have this weird dichotomy that attacks on women are reprehensible but you don't hold the same view for attacks on men! All you have done is prove yourself a sexist and misogynist.

originally posted by: chuck258

You are right. I did make this thread, to point out the blatant hypocrisy of people like you who like to tar the American legal system ---- while not calling out your own SIGNIFICANT shortcomings.

Can I ask you to point out at which point in my post I tarred the American legal system?

I simply pointed out that the UK classes more things as violent crimes, if anything I was putting down our own system for not catagorising things correctly and making Britain sound more violent than it is.

a reply to: stumason

I'm going to bed. I just figured I'd stop back by and remind everybody how foolish you are. After all you're the man that claims pound for pound women are just as strong as men. Rotf !!!!!!


The main reason I stopped by was I had a Epiphany. I just realized if I was as dumb as you or a liar I could've been your brother.





Wait a minute your immaturity shows with your position that means I could've been your dad.

originally posted by: Greathouse

Wait a minute your immaturity shows with your position that means I could've been your dad.

Not sure if irony or hypocrisy......

Also, Stumason is correct, pound for pound women almost ARE just as strong as men (assuming he actually wrote that), a quick Google search would have shown you that, might have saved you looking like a twit.

a reply to: woogleuk

Then the link me to that Google search.


Because here's my link to actual physical data twit.

I never realized people were so ill informed. But by all means don't let any actual facts discourage you from your delusional opinion.

a reply to: Greathouse

Muscular Strength in Women Compared to Men

Pound for pound, there is a much smaller difference in strength between genders than most would assume.

Men vs. Women - Muscle, Strength, Exercise and Results - Training Women and Men - What are the differences?

Consider the results of a comparative study with an average adult male and an average adult female who followed similar strength training programs using the bench press exercise (Westcott 1995). Both the male subject (who weighed 160 pounds) and the female subject (who weighed 95 pounds) increased their bench press strength by about 18 percent in a five-week training period. Once again, on a pound-for-pound basis with respect to both their body weight and their starting loads, there were no differences between the male and female responses to the strength exercise.

Plenty more where they came from....

Your move good sir....

Domestic violence against men has very little to do with physical strength. It is to do with one person imparting their will on another.

Often the man will be considerably larger than the woman and would be capable of overpowering them. However it is often this difference in size that precludes them from defending themselves. Many men are of the belief that physical violence against women can never be condoned, even in self defense. They will take any sort of beating rather than strike back. This can create a skewed belief that the victim is in the wrong. Over time this becomes the norm.

Men are less likely to report this due to the stigma attached. It receives mixed reactions when reported to the police and looks of skepticism from others. This can be demonstrated by the old fashioned views of some posters here.

Domestic violence is more about mental abuse than a physical act.

a reply to: woogleuk

Your first quote proved you wrong.

Pound for pound, there is a much smaller difference in strength between genders than most would assume.

Read your quote six or seven times it will sink in eventually. You do see that even in your "quote they state there is a difference so you are wrong.

There is a difference and men are stronger than women. I'd like to ask you a question. Did you bother to go back and see where the debate between the two of us started before you butted in a halfway through?


Edit;
Just read your last insult.

If you understood the real world you would know what was going on Nancy boy.





The following is the first paragraph from your first source..........

It is widely known that, on average, men are stronger than women. A big part of the difference is based on the amount of muscle each gender has in their bodies.

You really aren't very good at this are you?

a reply to: Greathouse

How did it prove me wrong? Women are almost as strong as men pound for pound, that is what it states right there.

Lol, nancy boy, very creative, but the wife has called me worse, so no harm done.

a reply to: woogleuk

Seriously??????

I would suggest you actually read your sources or referred to my post again.

How did it prove me wrong? Women are almost as strong as men pound for pound, that is what it states right there.

The immaturity of people like you that cannot admit when they're wrong never ceases to amaze me on this site. You went from the position of women are as strong as men too. Not double check your quote again. You're now saying Women are almost as strong as men. Yet in your mind you probably actually believe with your compromise that you are defending your original statement.

a reply to: Greathouse

If you are going to call anyone who argues a case with you immature, you aren't going to last very long.

I have posted links to prove my case, how you interpret them is your business.

I don't want a T&C violation or off topic sticker plastered on me.

I'm going to work, good day.

a reply to: woogleuk

You posted links to opinions. I posted a link stating the differences by percentages in a study by doctors on muscle mass.


I apologize for calling you immature. But it was the only description I could come to when I confronted you with actual facts and and you denied them. ( I will acknowledge that facts and logic really irritate some people)

I even quoted statements from your links back to you and you still deny the truth.