Patriot Mobile Ad

Gr666mer Updates

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!

    • Register Log in
    DoggyDaddy

    DoggyDaddy

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    73   0   1
    Aug 18, 2011
    103,695
    149
    Southside Indy
    XMil

    XMil

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 20, 2009
    1,521
    63
    Columbus
    BugI02 said:
    You should probably read the whole thing. The government didn't co-operate with the inquiry what data they did get comes from FOI requests. That data shows that of the cases they could identify as being trans-identifying, about half were in prison for sexual offenses. Overwhelmingly those individuals were born male and the pattern of their criminality does not align with female patterns of criminality. So, a sample of convicted sex offenders shows that about half of them are trans and though most of those are males claiming to be female, the crimes they commit are patterned like males and not females - two lies with one stone



    The information in the article was submitted to and accepted by the UK parliament

    Do you assert that where the MoJ did record information sufficient to determine biological sex vs claimed sex, that the data was recorded in such a way as to inflate or depress the number of trans sex offenders. The derived number was approximately half , are you saying 40% would be better or maybe 33%? Are you seriously claiming the number might be zero? Because that is what you would need to claim in order to support the assertion that trans people are not child molesters

    I owe you one though, most people won't just stand up and admit they have zero desire to seek the truth and are just jumping on the "who are we supposed to hate today" bandwagon. Thanks for that!
    Not jumping on a hate anybody bandwagon, if anything I might be climbing aboard the 'militant anti-Christians always seem to turn out to be gay' bandwagon with one foot still aboard the ''The lady doth protest too much, methinks" bandwagon

    Oh, and please cite ANY source that backs up your claim that trans individuals are not child molesters

    I'll wait
    Click to expand...
    I feel sorry for you. You have been radicalized and you are falling hook, line and sinker for the latest propaganda coming out of the extremist right. This is the same tired BS they came with in the 70's and 80's to demonize "the gays" to keep you scared and voting. Literally the exact same crap: they are coming for your children, destroying the American family, etc. Look it up.

    Second, if you are making decisions based obscure articles written by people who already "know" the answer and are just presenting random data to make it seem like they actually are basing their bias on evidence, you are probably beyond reaching.

    You are telling me you don't understand science (which is kind of obvious from your general outlook) but just to help get you up to speed, here is an article from Cambridge U about why you can't prove a negative (which you asked me to do).

     
    B

    buckwacker

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Mar 23, 2012
    3,085
    97
    XMil said:
    I feel sorry for you. You have been radicalized and you are falling hook, line and sinker for the latest propaganda coming out of the extremist right. This is the same tired BS they came with in the 70's and 80's to demonize "the gays" to keep you scared and voting. Literally the exact same crap: they are coming for your children, destroying the American family, etc. Look it up.

    Second, if you are making decisions based obscure articles written by people who already "know" the answer and are just presenting random data to make it seem like they actually are basing their bias on evidence, you are probably beyond reaching.

    You are telling me you don't understand science (which is kind of obvious from your general outlook) but just to help get you up to speed, here is an article from Cambridge U about why you can't prove a negative (which you asked me to do).

    Click to expand...
    I don't know whether to feel sorry for you or laugh at you. This level of delusion and obliviousness is truly spectacular to observe. That someone can be so obtuse or blind as to claim in one sentence that we should allow children to decide if they want to be boys or girls and then conduct grotesque medical experiments on them if the choice is different than their gender, then in the very next accuse anyone who claims that we shouldn't be sexually experimenting with and mutilating children of being a radicalized extremist is so remarkable that I find it truly difficult to believe. But here you are. Josef Mengele would be proud.

    Those people weren't wrong in the 70s and 80s about gays, and they aren't wrong today about these attempts to normalize pedophilia and the sexual predation of children. I've said for years that accepting and normalizing homosexuality would lead here and now we have arrived. The fact that adult human beings could be so evil as to prey on innocent, impressionable kids to satisfy their disgusting sexual proclivities or to line their pockets is abhorrent, and throwing them into the deepest part of the ocean with an anchor fixed to their neck wouldn't be punishment enough.

    With regard to science, please. We don't do science anymore, we do politics only idiots would sign on to, wrap it in a thin veneer they call science, and then use that worthless veneer to mercilessly mock anyone who would dare point out the emporor has no clothes because they can't win a debate.
     
    Last edited:
    BugI02

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,145
    149
    Columbus, OH
    XMil said:
    I feel sorry for you. You have been radicalized and you are falling hook, line and sinker for the latest propaganda coming out of the extremist right. This is the same tired BS they came with in the 70's and 80's to demonize "the gays" to keep you scared and voting. Literally the exact same crap: they are coming for your children, destroying the American family, etc. Look it up.

    Second, if you are making decisions based obscure articles written by people who already "know" the answer and are just presenting random data to make it seem like they actually are basing their bias on evidence, you are probably beyond reaching.

    You are telling me you don't understand science (which is kind of obvious from your general outlook) but just to help get you up to speed, here is an article from Cambridge U about why you can't prove a negative (which you asked me to do).

    Click to expand...
    You, sir, are the one who claimed trans people are not child molesters (#2155 in this thread, in case it slipped your memory)

    I'm only 'asking you to prove a negative' because I'm asking you to prove your statement in that post

    Are you saying you cannot?
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Site Supporter

    INGO Supporter

    Latest posts

    Staff online

    Members online

    ... and 251 more.
    Total: 1,834 (members: 301, guests: 1,533)

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    525,653
    Messages
    9,822,409
    Members
    53,897
    Latest member
    317AD
    Bear Creek Arsenal Ad
    Top Bottom