|
Post by Mayonnaise on May 7, 2013 18:43:28 GMT -5
He did get his teenage son and his friends drunk, let them race in his cars inebriated where one passenger was left a vegetable and then took no responsibility saying the victim "was into bad stuff" and "had it coming." I just looked up the story and it never even mentioned Hulk being around let alone giving them alcohol and letting them race. I think the story is Hulk was gone at a restaurant or something. Nick and his friend were hanging out at the house drinking Hulk invites them to the restaurant they get in the car and Nick acts like a fool and drag races his friend causing him to crash and become a vegetable. The actual story says Nick and his friend were going to a restaurant so it's not to farfetched to think Hulk may of invited them out. As for the "had it coming" comment, you guys know what he meant by that surely. He probably meant that the guy had it coming because he was a daredevil or took a lot of risks or something. It's unsympathetic to say but he could of been telling the truth. www.realitytvworld.com/news/police-report-nick-hogan-was-driving-100-mph-hulk-bought-him-beer-6188.phpwww.sptimes.com/2007/11/28/Northpinellas/Bollea_speed_put_at_1.shtmlSo the actual story is Hulk bought them all beer, they partied, couldn't get into a bar and then drunk Nick and another drunk guy street raced to cause the wreck. Throw in Hulk pitching to turn it into a reality show and the comments about the guy he helped his son kill and he easily deserves a mention.
|
|
|
Post by Some Baritone guy IS REDEEMED! on May 7, 2013 18:45:25 GMT -5
To all this I say they were both wrong.
I think Feinstein being the adult still should have said no, regardless of how many times he was asked.
However the whole "Teenagers are not responsible for any actions of their's short of murder" thing is a complete load of Bull. That kid had to have known enough to not repeatedly egg him into it. I think that the world has recently created the whole teenagers are stupid, reckless, impulsive children thing and really it gives teenagers an excuse an excuse to do stupid bull crap they shouldn't be allowed to get away with.
And the fact that I (a 15-year-old) am saying this really takes away most room for argument otherwise.
I truly believe teenagers need to be held to a much higher standard than they are today, but even still giving in to a request like that no matter what is incredibly stupid.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 7, 2013 18:46:52 GMT -5
Not to mention the psychological damage it can cause to a minor to have intercourse with an adult. Maybe at 14 you're okay with it but you hit 16 and think "That creepy old guy completely took advantage of me and I regret what happened tremendously"
Not to mention some guys who are absolute animals when it comes to sex and would hound these poor girls into doing it again and again and again even if they didn't want it.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Socko's Brother on May 7, 2013 18:47:15 GMT -5
Rape as far as I'm concerned is what Terry Garvin did with those ring boys. That makes him a scumbag, because they didn't ask for it, they weren't comfortable with it, and that makes all the difference. Not to mention that there are places where the age of consent is 14. I remember being fourteen. I made some life-altering decisions when I was fourteen--none of them involving sexual activity, but some of them serious nonetheless. I would never dream of saying that I was somehow mentally deficient at that age and that I was not capable of making my own decisions. I reached my peak intelligence at fourteen. I had the same IQ at fourteen that I have today. That is what matters. If I had asked an adult woman on a date at fourteen--and I did find adult women attractive at that age--and she had miraculously said yes, and if I ended up losing my virginity? I would not have considered it rape, because I would have been the one who asked for it, and it would have been my decision. Oh, and I was reading an article the other day about how a fifteeen year old boy in Oregon received a life sentence for shooting up a school, years ago. He's in his thirties now, but in that case nobody was saying "Oh, he was a teenager, he didn't know what he was doing, he wasn't capable of making decisions for himself, he wasn't responsible." No, everybody thought he was responsible. Everybody thought he was smart enough to make his own decisions and be held responsible for them. Funny how there's that double standard, huh? Either teenagers are responsible for their decisions or they aren't. That's what I believe. It's either A or B. I believe they are responsible. Speaking as a high school teacher, there is a TREMENDOUS difference between the ages 14 and 15, let alone 14 and 18. Further, if we're talking sexuality, teenagers are such a powder-keg of hormones that any adult taking advantage of a confused teenager is effectively raping them. They. Don't. Know. Better. There's no place in the United States any longer where 14 is the age of consent. The gun comparison is idiotic because, from age seven onward, a kid can differentiate right from wrong and understand that harming or killing others is bad. That's pretty simple. Teenage sexuality, not so much. If you think you're the same person now as you were at 14, you need to take a long hard look at what you've done with your life. I shudder to think you would let your 14-year-old child get taken advantage of by some creepy adult. I don't have any kids and don't want any, because I'm cynical enough to believe that the world sucks too much for me to want to bring somebody else into it. Overall, I've spent more time wishing I hadn't been born than being happy that I had been. And I'm not the same person I was at fourteen exactly, primarily because some of my beliefs changed. I used to not know very much about certain subjects. By and by, I learned about them. E.g., I used to have no opinion one way or the other on what was going on in the Middle East. Then I learned more about it, and I developed an opinion. My beliefs changed, some of them. My level of intelligence did not. Now you can either use that statement to tell me that in that case I must not be very bright as an adult, or to privately think that, or you can consider the possibility that maybe back when I was a teenager, I was not constantly making horrible decisions because I was not a complete fricking idiot. I've made bad decisions, sure. I think back to the bad decisions I made in high school and compare those to the number of bad decisions I've made as an adult. My average has not gotten significantly better that I can determine. Back then I thought that it was my life and I ought to be able to do with it what I wanted to. I don't think I was wrong to feel that way at fourteen.
|
|
TGM
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,073
|
Post by TGM on May 7, 2013 18:48:21 GMT -5
And this thread will now be closed in 5.... 4.... 3....
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 7, 2013 18:51:50 GMT -5
I just looked up the story and it never even mentioned Hulk being around let alone giving them alcohol and letting them race. I think the story is Hulk was gone at a restaurant or something. Nick and his friend were hanging out at the house drinking Hulk invites them to the restaurant they get in the car and Nick acts like a fool and drag races his friend causing him to crash and become a vegetable. The actual story says Nick and his friend were going to a restaurant so it's not to farfetched to think Hulk may of invited them out. As for the "had it coming" comment, you guys know what he meant by that surely. He probably meant that the guy had it coming because he was a daredevil or took a lot of risks or something. It's unsympathetic to say but he could of been telling the truth. www.realitytvworld.com/news/police-report-nick-hogan-was-driving-100-mph-hulk-bought-him-beer-6188.phpwww.sptimes.com/2007/11/28/Northpinellas/Bollea_speed_put_at_1.shtmlSo the actual story is Hulk bought them all beer, they partied, couldn't get into a bar and then drunk Nick and another drunk guy street raced to cause the wreck. Throw in Hulk pitching to turn it into a reality show and the comments about the guy he helped his son kill and he easily deserves a mention. I think the entire issue is on Nick to be honest. Hulk bought them drinks but didn't allow them to drive or anything like that. The article states they went into a bar without Hulk. Hulk was long gone at that point. The comments are unsympathetic but that doesn't make someone a scum bag in my view. I do think Hulk probably meant "It was only a matter of time until something like this happened" and was basing it on the guy in particular being a dangerous guy but I don't know for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Socko's Brother on May 7, 2013 18:56:53 GMT -5
To all this I say they were both wrong. I think Feinstein being the adult still should have said no, regardless of how many times he was asked. However the whole "Teenagers are not responsible for any actions of their's short of murder" thing is a complete load of Bull. That kid had to have known enough to not repeatedly egg him into it. I think that the world has recently created the whole teenagers are stupid, reckless, impulsive children thing and really it gives teenagers an excuse an excuse to do stupid bull crap they shouldn't be allowed to get away with. And the fact that I (a 15-year-old) am saying this really takes away most room for argument otherwise. I truly believe teenagers need to be held to a much higher standard than they are today, but even still giving in to a request like that no matter what is incredibly stupid. There wasn't actually a real teenager involved in the Feinstein thing. Feinstein was in a chatroom where people hooked up. It wasn't, I'm pretty sure, a chat room for young boys, although I think that this vigilante group set up shop in there because a wide age-range of people were chatting in there and some of the ones who were there were below the age of consent. So Feinstein starts talking to this adult member of the vigilante group Perverted Justice. Feinstein, IIRC, is told that the person he's talking to is gay and is horny and wants to get together with him and so on and so forth. After this goes on for a while, age comes up. Feinstein's told that the guy he's talking to is 14. Feinstein's initial response was one of surprise. Something like "Fourteen...damn" We can infer, although we cannot be positive about this since we can't retroactively read his mind, that he's wondering whether this is really a good idea. Because as he knows, 14 is below the age of consent where he is. Feinstein then types something else, the infamous "lol I'll pretend you said 18". At that point, it's reasonable to assume he was rationalizing. He was probably thinking "Well, this guy is asking me to come over. It's not like I'm forcing myself on him. It's not like he's drunk, because he doesn't seem drunk. Teenagers have sex all the time anyway. I'm not picky, I just want to get laid, and I don't see how this is going to hurt him." So then he went over to the house, he was met by a camera crew, and realizing he was gonna get caught on tape as somebody who "tried to rape a little boy", he ran away. That's what happened.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on May 7, 2013 18:59:07 GMT -5
I think the entire issue is on Nick to be honest. Hulk bought them drinks but didn't allow them to drive or anything like that. The article states they went into a bar without Hulk. Hulk was long gone at that point. The comments are unsympathetic but that doesn't make someone a scum bag in my view. I do think Hulk probably meant "It was only a matter of time until something like this happened" and was basing it on the guy in particular being a dangerous guy but I don't know for sure. How were they not with Hulk when the official story says they were parting with Hulk on his boat and denied entry to the bar the boat pulled up at when some of them could not prove how old they were? Even if you excuse Hulk saying he didn't know Nick would drive, he still got his minor daredevil son shitfaced and left him unattended with a race car.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 7, 2013 19:05:55 GMT -5
I think the entire issue is on Nick to be honest. Hulk bought them drinks but didn't allow them to drive or anything like that. The article states they went into a bar without Hulk. Hulk was long gone at that point. The comments are unsympathetic but that doesn't make someone a scum bag in my view. I do think Hulk probably meant "It was only a matter of time until something like this happened" and was basing it on the guy in particular being a dangerous guy but I don't know for sure. How were they not with Hulk when the official story says they were parting with Hulk on his boat and denied entry to the bar the boat pulled up at when some of them could not prove how old they were? Even if you excuse Hulk saying he didn't know Nick would drive, he still got his minor daredevil son shitfaced and left him unattended with a race car. It says they got off of Hulk's boat. The Head of security makes no mention of Hogan being at the bar. I assume Hogan probably dropped them off and went home. Then everything happened. It would of been a lot more tamer with Hulk there I think. EDIT: The only wrong doing of Hulk was leaving alcohol alone for his son to drink. He supplied a minor with alcohol but you can't say he's responsible for anything that followed except what he said in the interviews.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 19:11:36 GMT -5
EDIT: Wrong thread. Ignore.
|
|
|
Post by Some Baritone guy IS REDEEMED! on May 7, 2013 19:42:48 GMT -5
To all this I say they were both wrong. I think Feinstein being the adult still should have said no, regardless of how many times he was asked. However the whole "Teenagers are not responsible for any actions of their's short of murder" thing is a complete load of Bull. That kid had to have known enough to not repeatedly egg him into it. I think that the world has recently created the whole teenagers are stupid, reckless, impulsive children thing and really it gives teenagers an excuse an excuse to do stupid bull crap they shouldn't be allowed to get away with. And the fact that I (a 15-year-old) am saying this really takes away most room for argument otherwise. I truly believe teenagers need to be held to a much higher standard than they are today, but even still giving in to a request like that no matter what is incredibly stupid. There wasn't actually a real teenager involved in the Feinstein thing. Feinstein was in a chatroom where people hooked up. It wasn't, I'm pretty sure, a chat room for young boys, although I think that this vigilante group set up shop in there because a wide age-range of people were chatting in there and some of the ones who were there were below the age of consent. So Feinstein starts talking to this adult member of the vigilante group Perverted Justice. Feinstein, IIRC, is told that the person he's talking to is gay and is horny and wants to get together with him and so on and so forth. After this goes on for a while, age comes up. Feinstein's told that the guy he's talking to is 14. Feinstein's initial response was one of surprise. Something like "Fourteen...damn" We can infer, although we cannot be positive about this since we can't retroactively read his mind, that he's wondering whether this is really a good idea. Because as he knows, 14 is below the age of consent where he is. Feinstein then types something else, the infamous "lol I'll pretend you said 18". At that point, it's reasonable to assume he was rationalizing. He was probably thinking "Well, this guy is asking me to come over. It's not like I'm forcing myself on him. It's not like he's drunk, because he doesn't seem drunk. Teenagers have sex all the time anyway. I'm not picky, I just want to get laid, and I don't see how this is going to hurt him." So then he went over to the house, he was met by a camera crew, and realizing he was gonna get caught on tape as somebody who "tried to rape a little boy", he ran away. That's what happened. I see..... My points still remain valid. Feinstein still should have said no, but After he'd refused a few times it became entrapment.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on May 7, 2013 20:39:57 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is exactly defending Feinstein, as much as they're condemning Perverted Justice for entrapment, there's no other way to look at it, no matter how f***ed up it is. It IS entrapment. Besides, to my knowledge Feinstein didn't have a record of this, so to run a sting operation on someone who doesn't have a rap sheet is quite ridiculous. The better thing to do is the gather information and to watch him. Instead, they're only out to make a spectacle of everything and pat themselves on the back.
Now I'm not saying that they didn't keep future children from being endangered by Feinstein, but if they wanted to do any good, they might want to start at the source and to get the help for the people they set out to destroy. Again, I hate pedos as much as the next person, but sniffing them out with this fearmongering only makes them tunnel even further down, and most importantly DOESN'T stop child molesters.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,976
|
Post by chazraps on May 7, 2013 22:58:10 GMT -5
To all this I say they were both wrong. I think Feinstein being the adult still should have said no, regardless of how many times he was asked. However the whole "Teenagers are not responsible for any actions of their's short of murder" thing is a complete load of Bull. That kid had to have known enough to not repeatedly egg him into it. I think that the world has recently created the whole teenagers are stupid, reckless, impulsive children thing and really it gives teenagers an excuse an excuse to do stupid bull crap they shouldn't be allowed to get away with. And the fact that I (a 15-year-old) am saying this really takes away most room for argument otherwise. I truly believe teenagers need to be held to a much higher standard than they are today, but even still giving in to a request like that no matter what is incredibly stupid. No, the fact that you're 15 kind of makes your entire point about the perception of teenage sexual activity invalid. No disrespect, but you have no real frame of reference or hindsight on the subject or the topic. Being 15, you're in the thick of one of the most volatile, confusing, exciting, times of your life. As it should be. I assure you that within three years, you're going to look back at a lot or at least some of your opinions, actions and world views right now (no matter what they are) with a bit of a cringe. It's human nature and part of the fun of growing up. You may have your head on straight enough to know that any adult trying to establish that type of relationship with you is bad news, but you shouldn't condemn those who may not be so fortunate.
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on May 7, 2013 23:07:25 GMT -5
Sure, if the first post doesn't count.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,976
|
Post by chazraps on May 7, 2013 23:08:42 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is exactly defending Feinstein, as much as they're condemning Perverted Justice for entrapment, there's no other way to look at it, no matter how f***ed up it is. It IS entrapment. Besides, to my knowledge Feinstein didn't have a record of this, so to run a sting operation on someone who doesn't have a rap sheet is quite ridiculous. The better thing to do is the gather information and to watch him. Instead, they're only out to make a spectacle of everything and pat themselves on the back. Now I'm not saying that they didn't keep future children from being endangered by Feinstein, but if they wanted to do any good, they might want to start at the source and to get the help for the people they set out to destroy. Again, I hate pedos as much as the next person, but sniffing them out with this fearmongering only makes them tunnel even further down, and most importantly DOESN'T stop child molesters. I personally don't think it's entrapment. I see where you're coming from, but for such a black-and-white crime as child molestation is, I think for anybody to say yes at any point to it shows the type of willingness to break the law that would have happened whether the scenario was set-up or not. Here's the uncut Feinstein transcripts for anybody who hasn't seen them - inyourheadonline.com/board/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=21772Perverted justice operates MUCH differently today, and I really believe they're keeping kids from being sexually abused.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 7, 2013 23:14:34 GMT -5
To all this I say they were both wrong. I think Feinstein being the adult still should have said no, regardless of how many times he was asked. However the whole "Teenagers are not responsible for any actions of their's short of murder" thing is a complete load of Bull. That kid had to have known enough to not repeatedly egg him into it. I think that the world has recently created the whole teenagers are stupid, reckless, impulsive children thing and really it gives teenagers an excuse an excuse to do stupid bull crap they shouldn't be allowed to get away with. And the fact that I (a 15-year-old) am saying this really takes away most room for argument otherwise. I truly believe teenagers need to be held to a much higher standard than they are today, but even still giving in to a request like that no matter what is incredibly stupid. No, the fact that you're 15 kind of makes your entire point about the perception of teenage sexual activity invalid. No disrespect, but you have no real frame of reference or hindsight on the subject or the topic. Being 15, you're in the thick of one of the most volatile, confusing, exciting, times of your life. As it should be. I assure you that within three years, you're going to look back at a lot or at least some of your opinions, actions and world views right now (no matter what they are) with a bit of a cringe. It's human nature and part of the fun of growing up. You may have your head on straight enough to know that any adult trying to establish that type of relationship with you is bad news, but you shouldn't condemn those who may not be so fortunate. I have to back you on this one. I think back to when I was 15 and I just cringe at the entirety of it all. I was no way ready for a sexual relationship at that point. I don't think anyone is at 15 I think you start to get mature enough for it around 16-17 and that's when most people start. Some people wait until 18-19 though which is probably even wiser. Another thing to bring up is the fact at 13-14 you might not even know what you are sexually yet. Feinstein would of been confusing someone or influencing their decision if something had indeed happened. At the end of the day though Feinstein was caught trying to have sex with a 14 year old boy. Regardless of what spin anyone tries to put on it that's wrong. As for Perverted Justice. They've got something like 50-60 convictions of people who were trying to solicit children for sex. They're actually keeping kids safe so kudos to them.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 7, 2013 23:19:09 GMT -5
Also if you read the transcript Feinstein didn't even back off a little when he found out the kid was 14. Other than a "Damn 14" he was right back to grooming the child again.
It's not like the Perverted Justice people were making him hot either they were sending fully clothed photos of a young boy (Anything else would be illegal) Feinstein is the one who chased the minor.
Not to mention Feinstein knew the kid was young because he lied about his age.
|
|
|
Post by Father Dougal McGuire on May 7, 2013 23:42:00 GMT -5
Sure, if the first post doesn't count. To play devil's advocate, I do wonder if Benoit acted in the heinous way he did due to head trauma.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2013 23:44:12 GMT -5
That nothing was ever able to happen to Feinstein legally as a result of any of it says it all about Perverted Justice's tactics. It did greatly harm his business as a result of it, but because of the way they go about things, nothing could be done legally.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 7, 2013 23:52:04 GMT -5
That nothing was ever able to happen to Feinstein legally as a result of any of it says it all about Perverted Justice's tactics. It did greatly harm his business as a result of it, but because of the way they go about things, nothing could be done legally. Explain how they have lots of other convictions then. Perverted Justice back then wanted to shame these guys and that was it. Later on they begin working with law enforcement. Feinstein would be a registered sex offender if this had happened today.
|
|