By Silhouette & SFJeff's request-ideology of 'gay bashings.'

With violence against gays/lesbians, almost all of them both assault&battery & murder are domestic violence which get less news coverage because it’s not interesting. When a straight man bashes or kills a gay, it’s natl. news because it’s strange, odd & interesting. But I’ve found is that most of these cases are men reacting or overreacting to criminal abuse that the gay did. If a gay is going to harass a man in a public restroom (Larry Craig style) or repeatedly propose after a man has said no, then it’s criminal harassment. If a gay is going to grab a man’s butt or groin against his will, then it’s assault&battery if intent isn’t sexual (unless it’s self-defense, it’s a crime to grab some1’s butt or groin against will) to something more serious such as sex abuse. In most cases, the man bashed or killed the gay after the gay harassed them or the gay committed assault&battery such as gay grabs man’s butt or groin against will after which the man reacts or overreacts by bashing or killing him. Now yes, killing a gay in those circumstances maybe excessive, but the man reacted to criminal abuse the gay did.

If a man were to grab a woman’s butt or boobs against will, the man would probably be in jail & more men are in jail for this than rape. there are many cases where a man got hit in the face by a woman, her husband or boyfriend esp. in a pub after the man (often drunk) grabbed the woman’s butt or boobs against will after which the woman slaps the man or tells her husband or boyfriend who beats up the man. As I see it, the man committed a crime for which he got bashed-many wouldn’t sympathize with the man as they’d say he got beaten up after he did something he had no right to.There have been cases where a woman has accused a man of sex abuse, rape, etc. & the man ended up being beaten up only to later be learned the woman made it up. In the 2006 Duke rape case, there were people prepared to beat up the accused men only to later be learned the woman lied about being raped. In 2011, there was a riot against a Gypsy neighborhood in Italy after a teenage girl said that 2 Gypsy men raped her. After the riots, the girl admitted she lied about being raped because she didn’t want her parents to know she was having sex with her boyfriend.

So if a gay is going to be anti-social such as harass or do abuse described her, then a man has a right to use any just force to end the abuse. Whether the man reacted with just or excessive force is a jury topic, but the man did react to a crime the gay did. If it's a murder trial, the jury will decide if the man's reaction to killing the gay was self-defend & if it's not, then what degree to convict on. Gay/lesbian groups call it 'gay panic' but I call it man reacting to criminal abuse the gay did. Again, if a defense lawyer in a gay bashing case wants to bring up criminal harassment or assault&battery the gay did before the man reacted by bashing or killing the gay, then go ahead & do so with a jury deciding if reaction is just, excessive & if excessive, then what degree.

Silhouette (& others), when you get a chance, please reply because the Sean Patrick Hannity forum banned me on March 5, when I wrote the politically incorrect facts on Milk & Shepard. But here's something more. From December 2011 to Feb. 2012, I posted on Tiffany Edwards Hunt blog regarding Matthew Shepard. For those who don't know Tiffany Edwards Hunt was a Wyoming reporter who covered the Matthew Shepard killing, trial & she now works for Big Island Chronicle in Hawaii. When I 1st wrote on her blog about Matthew Wayne Shepard committing assault & battery on Cody bartender & then the next day making up homosexual gang rape story, Tiffany Edwards Hunt became hostile, not because I wrote anything disputable but because I said facts about him. My posts on Big Island Chronicle www.bigislandchronicle.com surrounding Matthew (Methew) Wayne Shepard can be found & read the 1s with 55 posts, 11 posts & 8 posts.

It's repeat but the main point I told her was that MW Shepard's killing is of minor interest but main interest is who he was & I can not accept Matthew (Methew) Wayne Shepard committing assault and battery & falsely reporting crime. Though I gave minor talk to this, MW Shepard during the last months of his life feared he had AIDS, yet he still would go to bars for casual encounters. Do the people esp. gays & lesbians who mourn Matthew Shepard see anything wrong with MW Shepard endangering the lives of other gays with casual encounters If a straight man who fears he has a Venereal Disease (VD) continues having sex with other women with or w/o condoms, many people would say the man is a reckless pig. Matthew Wayne Shepard was reckless, yet his recklessness is usually ignored. Please share your view to my posts. Thanks.

 

'Maybe excessive'? Sorry- not buying it. Lets review what happened in Matthew Shepperds case:

Shortly after midnight on October 6, 1998, Shepard met Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson for the first time at the Fireside Lounge in Laramie, Wyoming.[7] It was decided that McKinney and Henderson would give Shepard a ride home.[8] McKinney and Henderson subsequently drove the car to a remote, rural area and proceeded to rob, pistol-whip, and torture Shepard, tying him to a fence and leaving him to die. According to their court testimony, McKinney and Henderson also discovered his address and intended to steal from his home. Still tied to the fence, Shepard, who was still alive but in a coma, was discovered 18 hours later by Aaron Kreifels, a cyclist who initially mistook Shepard for a scarecrow.

That you call this 'maybe excessive' just disgusts me.

Why should we care what went on at Sean Hannity's forum? You sound very obsessive.

You sound like an apologists for killers of gays. That you want us to go read your posts in other forums sounds obsessive.

Let me make it simple for you- if someone sexually harasses you, killing them is not justified.

Trying to justify killing of gays, by blaming them for what they may or may not have done just disgusts me.

 

SFJeff, Matthew Shepard's killing is to me a minor topic-why he was killed only he & his killers know-a jury has decided the case. The reason I mentioned him was to discuss who he was. If the Cody Wyoming police in August 1998 had arrested Matthew Shepard for assault & battery + falsely reporting crime when they had the proof instead of letting him go, then his Oct. 1998 killing by 2 men may have been avoided. People who make false accusations are almost as bad as people who commit real crimes. Even if MW Shepard believed his story about being sexually abused, the fact is that he chose to worsen his PTSD by being a drunkard, using Meth (why I call him Methew Wayne Shepard) which is his doing. Matthew Shepard being a crime victim in October 1998 does not change the fact that he was a bad person. Put aside Matthew Shepard's killing-do you see anything wrong with Matthew Wayne Shepard committing assault & battery on a Cody bartender in August 1998 2 months before he was killed & making up a story of being homosexually gang raped

Did not say that sexual harassment justifies killing some1, only that if a defense lawyer wants to bring up sexual harassment that the gay did before he was bashed or killed, a jury must consider this in determining what degree to convict on if it's let's say a murder trial such as manslaughter instead of 2nd Degree Murder. A case would be the Lawrence King killing in Oxnard. Lawrence Fobes King was a 15 year old student who was shot twice in the head in a classroom in 2008 by a student he was harassing-it was a hung jury & case has been pleaded. But here are things Lawrence King did. Lawrence King repeatedly proposed to others after he was told no. Lawrence King on 1 occasion masturbated in front of others (touched himself) & he would propose to other boys in the bathroom. When complaints were made to the teachers, the lesbian VP Joy Epstein overrode the teachers & refused to expel him. 1 boy who had enough of his harassment shot & killed him. I agree that it's excessive but that it was Manslaughter, not 2nd Degree Murder. Had the school done it's job & expelled Lawrence King when the complaints were made, his killing may not have been avoided. SFJeff, on another thread, you looked the other way when facts were made about Harvey Bernard Milk committing homosexual statutory rape. Not all murders are the same & murder has different degrees 1st, 2nd & Manslaughter. Going into a store & killing the clerk during a robbery is worse than killing some1 who is harassing you because the clerk did nothing to provoke their death while with Lawrence King, he was being anti-social, his conduct was not punished & some1 who had enough of it killed him. But those are topics for juries to decide. With the 2 cases mentioned here-MW Shepard & Lawrence King-do you see anything wrong with both of these victims anti-social conduct

 

It's possible to say that a man kills a gay after a gay grabs the man's butt or groin against will acted in self-defense because these situations are unpredictable. If some1 (except in self-defense) is grabbing butt (both male or female), groin or boobs against will, their crime is @least assault&battery, but they may have other intent such as to commit rape. So if a man kills a gay after the gay grabbed the man's butt or groin against will, it's possible for a man to credibly say that he was defending himself against homosexual rape, esp. if the gay has a past history of violent crimes. It's not so simple & if some1 is sexually harassing you, harassment may not be the only crime because he may have other intent. It would again be a jury topic. If a jury decides a man is guilty of killing a gay who is sexually harassing him, then a jury can decide the man is guilty of manslaughter rather than 2nd Degree murder as again, murder has different degrees. Does SFJeff, etc. believe as I do that these cases are for juries to decide after hearing both the prosecutor & defense lawyer ? Also something that SFJEFF may not have thought of if he cares to surrounding those who bash or kill gays in reaction to sexual harassment the gay did.If a man was once a victim of homosexual rape, he may not take sexual harassment very well. If a homo is going to harass this man Larry Craig style & the man reacts by bashing or killing the gay, OK, it maybe excessive. But does SFJeff understand or care why the man did it ? The gay had no right to do what he did & he harassed some1 who was once a victim of homosexual rape who was not going to take it well. If some1 is harassing you & you don't do anything to try to end the abuse, then some would say that maybe you deserve the abuse. To suggest that if a man is being sexually harassed by a gay, that he just take the abuse is evil. Yes, the reaction must be just but there is no need for a man to accept a gay committing criminal harassment or assault & battery.

 

Let's cut to the chase: Do you have any credible sources for the things you've asserted here about Sheperd and King - evidence that we can objectively review for ourselves?

If not, then I submit that this thread may be closed. See the forum rules for starting threads.

I have been assaulted several times in my life, and many of those were cases where people merely suspected that I was gay. Not a single one of them involved me inappropriately touching the perpetrator or even suggesting an interest in them.

So I take great offense at the apparent premise of this thread - that gay men commonly go around sexually assaulting/attempting to rape straight men, and that they deserve to die, preferably in a horrible manner, at the hands of the alleged "victim" of their "crimes".

 

Judy Shepard does not deny the fact that 2 months before his death, her son made up a story of being homosexually raped by 3. What she does is makes excuses for her son such as him having PTSD, was drunk, etc. Read the link I posted to Tiffany Edwards Hunt's Big Island Chronicle Website-she was the reporter who covered the MW Shepard murder trial. When I mentioned these things about MW Shepard she 1st got hostile, not because I said anything she disputed but because I said it. Matthew Wayne Shepard who I call Methew Wayne Shepard treated people poorly. Michael E. Glatze knew the Shepard family & used to be editor of Young Gay America. Michael E. Glatze who has since become a Christian who says his earlier views were wrong & I praise him for realizing this-that homosexuality is bad. He says that it's a fact that Matthew Shepard was a false accuser with what he did to the Cody bartender 2 months before his death.

Many gays have anti-social personalities. I knew a gay bashing case. What had happened was that this man was in a park with 2 friends. A gay who was alot bigger than the man grabbed the man's butt. The man then told his 2 friends (1 who was a martial arts expert)-that '(*)(*)(*) grabbed my ***). After this, his 2 friends grabbed the gay, who brought him to the man who then beat up the gay. OK, it probably was not self-defense. But the gay committed assault & battery on the man by grabbing his butt & the man reacted to criminal abuse that the gay did. It would not surprise me if that gay had a history of committing assault & battery on weaker men, possibly homosexual rape but this time, he did his abuse to some1 who was not going to take it.

But Judy Shepard as I've seen sides with gays in gay bashings regardless. She sided with Lawrence Fobes King & did not speak against Lawrence King harassing other boys Larry Craig style in the bathroom, Lawrence King masturbating in front of others & Lawrence King repeatedly proposing after he was told no, before he got killed by 1 of those who could no longer take Lawrence King's harassment. Lawrence King had become so brazen that when a teacher talked to him of his conduct of harassing others in the bathroom had to stop, Lawrence King told the teacher Jill Ekman that he liked to make the boys squirm because he knew the lesbian VP Joy Epstien would override him.

Judy Shepard also took the side of Satendar Singh, the homosexual killed in California in 2007. In that case, Satendar Singh had been drunk & dirty dancing in a park-exposing his genitals to others. A Russian who had been there with his family told him to stop it & punched Satendar Singh who fell & hit his head dying. Yes, the Russian should've called the cops, but he did not intend to kill Satendar Singh. Satendar Singh was anti-social. He had no right to expose his genitals in a public park where kids could see it. Jury convicted the man of lesser charge rejecting hate crime. But these cases are in the news because it's odd & strange. If Matthew Shepard had been killed by a gay in a domestic quarrel, it probably would only have been local news. His & the other eg. given here are national news because they're odd & strange. The vast majority of violence against gays/lesbians are domestic violence. Too many gays/lesbians are anti-social as gay/lesbian activities are anti-social. On another thread, you saw no wrong with Harvey B. Milk committing homosexual statutory rape & public indecency.

 

So on the issue of do you have evidence that we can objectively evaluate, the answer appears to be clearly not.

Inflicting death is a punishment that far exceeds any crime you've alleged to have been committed in these instances, and it is most definitely not one to be exacted outside the laws. Moreover, even a person acting in self defense cannot act with force that exceeds what is necessary to defend themselves in the moment, must stop once the threat has passed, and cannot use the offense as an excuse to exact personal vengeance by perpetrating an even greater assault.

Regardless of your denials, you are advocating death to any gay man who misbehaves or offends the sensibilities of some people (which in my experience requires no more than our suspected existence). And you're doing so in a manner that aims to demonize gay people as a group.

As someone who has been gay-bashed (and had friends both murdered and permanently disabled by more severe attacks), I find this incredibly offensive.

One last thing:

Nowhere did I state that I saw no wrong in Harvey Milk's alleged actions. My points in Silhouette's thread have been 1) That there is no evidence that Harvey Milk was a pedophile - a term that was being misused to habitually and purposely distort; and 2) that Milk was not prosecuted or convicted of any crime Silhouette alleges him to have committed.

In other words, I have stuck to the facts.

 

Perriquine, can't comment on your case or your friends because we only know what you're telling us while those who did it may have another story. Maybe Matthew Shepard believed his Aug. 1998 made up story of being homosexually gang raped-only he knows his intent but we don't know & will never know how the drugs & his drunkeness mixed with the medicines he was taking damaged his thinking.

But I do not disagree that with self-defense, you may only use just force & that if it's excessive, then you're guilty. What I have said is that these are jury topics. To repeat, if a defense lawyer in a gay bashing case wants to bring up criminal abuse such as harassment or assault&battery the gay did before the man reacted by bashing or killing the gay, then a jury must consider this in deciding the degree to convict on if it's excessive. Like in the Lawrence King killing, I agree with the 7 jurors who voted for manslaughter. Do you see something wrong with Lawrence Fobes King asking other boys for sex in the bathroom & then laughing @ his teacher Jill Ekman when she told him his anti-social conduct had to end Lawrence King's conduct worsened because he knew that the lesbian VP Joy Epstein would override her (Mrs. Jill Ekman) & allow Lawrence Fobes King to continue his anti-social conduct.

But murder Perriquine, has different degrees-1st, 2nd & Manslaughter. In any murder trial, a defense lawyer can bring up criminal abuse the victim did before the killing happened & the jury must consider this in deciding degree. Gay/lesbian groups may decry it as 'putting the victim on trial' but again, it's the homosexual's anti-social conduct which must be considered by the jury in determining the degree to convict on if it's a murder trial. Whether you're convicted of 1st Degree, 2nd Degree or Manslaughter, you're still a convicted felon spending many years in prison so it's not worth to do this.

In 2010, singer KatyE. Perry's ex husband Russell Brand was arrested after he beat up a paparazzi photographer who was upskirting his ex-wife. I don't sympathize with the paparazzi photographer because he committed a criminal act & got a beating for it. Maybe Russell Brand was guilty of assault & battery, but the punishment would be less than if he had attacked the photographer w/o provocation. What I'll say with gay bashings is this. If a gay is minding his own business & not bothering any1, then leave him alone though I see something wrong with homo/lesbian activities. But if a gay is going to be anti-social in the ways described, then again, use any just force to end the abuse-if it's excessive then have a jury decide what to convict on. I don't know what else we can say but asking/saying the same things to me will get you the same answers. If you can think of something new, then say it, but if you can't, then thanks for taking the time to write. Again, I don't know what more we can say.

 

this seems like more of an opinion piece but I feel it belongs here , do post here if you do not like the OP

 

If Matthew Shepard carried a gun he might be alive today.

 

MW Shepard's killer used a gun to beat MW Shepard into a coma & then with a friend tied his body to a fence where he later died of hypthermia. You imply sympathy for MW Shepard, but my reason for talking about Matthew W. Shepard was not to talk per se about his murder case, but who he was. Do you see anything wrong with Matthew Wayne Shepard or as I call him Methew Wayne Shepard committing assault & battery on a Cody bartender & MW Shepard making up a story of being homosexually gang raped 2 months before his death If the Cody police had arrested him for these 2 crimes & not let him go, his killing in Oct. 1998 may have been avoided. If Matthew Wayne Shepard had been a straight man with a history of sexually harassing women who 1 day got beaten & killed in an unrelated robbery, many would say that his killing was karma because of how he poorly treated women & most strangers would not mourn him or hold vigils for him. Matthew Wayne Shepard was a homosexual who victimized others, yet he has been mourned by people who did not know him & had vigils held. 1 could say that MW Shepard's death was his karma for what he did to the Cody bartender 2 months before his death & with him gone we don't know & will never know how much worse he would've become. Matthew (Methew) Wayne Shepard treated people poorly-he was a Meth junky, drunkard, who commits assault & battery & makes up stories. Yes, his killing is unrelated to what he did 2 months earlier, but to repeat, if the Cody cops had pursued charges against MW Shepard when they had the proof, his Oct. 1998 death may have been avoided.

 

In Claremont Calif., there was an incident where a homo Nativity scene was allegedly damaged by 'homophobes.' This case was in national news but nobody was arrested as of Jan. 2012. The more time that passes w/o an arrest, the less likely they'll catch who did this. It may have been done by 'homophobes' but what is also possible is that the incident was staged by gays & lesbians to try to get sympathy. Gay groups know that these cases will get national news because they're odd & strange & interesting for news. News accounts of 'gay bashings' tends to often be biased in favor of gays because it's a touchy topic. When I read about a 'gay bashing' case, I wonder what the reporter's bias is & how honestly are they reporting this such as did the gay commit criminal assault & battery or harassment before he was bashed or killed.

If a media were to try to bring out criminal acts the gay did before the bashing, then it'll get controversy as gay groups will complain to the sponsors & the newspaper could lose advertisers if there are complaints. To repeat, when I posted on Tiffany Edwards Hunt's blog, she got offended when I gave facts about Matthew Shepard which she disliked. Other than 1 edition, she did not delete my posts because it's factl. Tiffany Edwards Hunt who is pro-gay knows that with the Internet, we can raise things the media gives little talk to such as the bad facts of MW Shepard. If you want to read what I mean about the journalist writing about MW Shepard’s false homosexual gang rape accusation mildly, here’s the article http://www.deseretnews.com/article/657462/Wyoming-student-had-reported-previous-attacks.html I don’t know the journalist who wrote it this about about MW Shepard’s false homosexual gang rape accusation, but it was written mildly. The journalist rather than saying MW Shepard made up false homosexual gang rape accusation wrote it mildly so as not to offend as MW Shepard’s death was getting so much national & later global attention that if the journalist had said MW Shepard made false homosexual gang rape accusation, the newspaper would’ve gotten controversy, lost advertisers because gay groups complain among other things. The article is mild & 1/2 true. The police is the 1 who brings/drops charge. The journalist only gave some facts. Matthew W. Shepard committed assault & battery when he grabbed the Cody bartender's arm & jacket after the bartender told him no. Since the article was written in Oct. 1998 right after his death which was getting national publicity, the news about Matthew (Methew) Wayne Shepard committing assault & battery & making up story was mildly written to avoid controversy of gay groups complaining to advertisers as attacking the dead.

 

It also may have been done by rabid mutant dogs created by our Martian overlords. Why do you feel compelled to speculate without any evidence whatsover?

Why on earth did you bring this incident up?

Why do you wonder that?

When a woman has been raped, and killed, do you wonder whether she had done something to deserve it? I really, really don't get what your point is.

Why do you keep bringing up what you have posted on other forums and blogs?


Here is a little exercise for you:

Write a one sentence statement about what your concern is.

Follow that up with no more than 3 sentences of supporting statements and facts to elaborate your thesis.

See if you can make a point in 4 sentences or less.

 

SFJeff, I can not take you seriously given the fact that you were an apologist for Harvey Milk the homosexual statutory rapist who also had sex in parks . As to the Claremont nativity scene, it's a good possibility that gays/lesbians staged the incident for sympathy. The cops have not arrested any1, so the motive for gays & lesbians to do this would be there. You have not disproved the theory. But to repeat SFJeff, what you say can't be taken seriously. I don't know if you're straight but no matter who you are, it's best to distrust gays & lesbians.

 

What I wonder is did the media leave out this main fact so as not to offend gay/lesbian groups as to avoid losing advertisers. Do you SFJeff see something wrong with a gay harassing a man in the bathroom or committing assault&battery on a man such as grab the man's butt or groin against will SFJeff if a gay is bashed or killed by man in these situations, then it happened because the man reacted to a crime the gay did-a jury decides if the man reacted justly or excessively & if it's excessive, then what degree. SFJeff, given that you saw nothing wrong with what Harvey Bernard Milk did, I repeat that you can't be taken seriously. I don't want gays committing harassment or assault&battery. In fact, I don't want harassment or assault&battery done by men against women as I don't want men grabbing a woman's butt or boobs against her will. Unless you're being attacked, it's a crime to grab some1's butt, groin or boobs against will. If a gay is going to grab a man's butt or groin against will, then there's no need for a man to take this assault&battery & he has a right to use any just force to end it.

 

You clearly have a reading comprehension problem.

I am no apologist for Harvey Milks.

I just despise it when people make things up- and when confronted about it, just keep repeating the falsehood.

][/QUOTE]

the homosexual statutory rapist who also had sex in parks . ][/QUOTE]

][/QUOTE]

And as I said to you when you said it last time- show me the evidence that shows that Milk was a statutory rapist

Do you know what a person is called who judges a whole class of people just because of their race, religion or sexual orientation- a bigot.

You can make up whatever theories you want about who did something to a nativity scene in Claremont....its just like your Milk story- your theory for what appears to be nothing other than your anti-homosexual agenda.

 

You just can't write a succinct, clear post.

Write away...I am just not going to try to decipher what you are trying to say.

 

SFJeff to repeat, it's good to be bigoted against gay/lesbian activities by consenting adults just as it's good to be bigoted against drug use by consenting adults because gay/lesbian activities are useless & anti-social. No matter why people take part in homo/lesbian activities, it's best to find a cure for this. It's not worth debating the fact that Harvey Bernard Milk was a homosexual statutory rapist who had sex with 16 year old boy just as it's not worth debating 3+2=5. I believe you know HB Milk did this.

With 'gay bashings' this will offend but I would rather have a case where a jury decides if a man's reaction to bashing or killing a gay who has harassed or done assault&battery on him is just or excessive force, vs. the man not doing enough. Repeat-if a gay is being anti-social such as harassing you in the bathroom or committing assault&battery on you & you're not going to try to stop the abuse, then some say that maybe you deserve the abuse. Also the abuse can worsen. If a gay thinks he can get away with harassment or assault&battery, then he can get more violent as he may start thinking that he can get away with homosexual rape. So no sympathy for a gay who gets bashed or killed after he committed assault&battery or other crime on a man who would not take it.

 

Even bigots are allowed to express their opinions. I think your comments are pretty useless and anti-social, but I would not advocate that you be prevented from saying them.

In other words, you don't care about the facts- just accept what you say. I prefer to go with the facts.

 

SFJeff, said no such thing other than that murder to repeat has different degrees. But these cases are unpredictable because if a gay is doing what's described, he may have intent to commit other crimes. If a man grabbed a woman's butt or boobs against her will, then it's a good possibility the man may have intent to do something else such as rape. So if a gay is killed after he grabbed a man's butt against will, a jury decides if the man reacted justly or excessively, as it's possible to say the man was protecting himself against homosexual rape. If it's excessive, then what degree & if I were a juror in a murder case where a man kills a gay after the gay grabbed a man's butt against will, I would likely convict the man of a lesser charge such as manslaughter if I don't think the gay had any other intent. Could I acquit the man on self-defense grounds Possibly, if the defense lawyer can show that the gay had other bad intent such as to commit homosexual rape, esp. if the gay had past incidents of assault&battery. The gay was anti-social, but again it's a jury topic.

With Matthew (Methew) Wayne Shepard, again not interested in discuss his murder per se, only that 1 can say that MW Shepard being murdered by 2 men in Oct. 1998 was MW Shepard's 'karma' for the Cody police pursuing assault&battery + falsely reporting crime charge in Aug. 1998 when they had the proof. Yes, MW Shepard's killers committed murder-but if Matthew Shepard's murder prevented MW Shepard from making up any stories about being homosexually gang raped which can send innocents to jail, then yes, Matthew Shepard being murdered may in the end prove to be the lesser of 2 evils. Finally, I used to be neutral on gay/lesbian activities but after thinking about it, have decided that it's anti-social just as drug use is anti-social.

 

Something more-what SFJeff again overlooks is that the gay is committing @least 1 crime assault&battery & his post implies that's the only crime the gay will do. If SFJeff is suggesting the man just take the abuse & do nothing, then it's evil-SFJeff to repeat was a Harvey Milk apologist. But I'll repeat with my last post that if a gay is grabbing a man's butt against will (patting butt as SFJeff puts it), then it's possible the gay maybe intending to commit homosexual rape as homosexual rapes often happen after a gay 1st 'patted' him on the butt. If the man reacts by killing the gay who 'patted' his butt, then it's possible to argue he was defending himself from a 'homosexual rape. Whether the jury believes it was self-defense or excessive is another matter. IMO if a man breaks a gay's hand(s) after the gay 'patted' him on the butt, then IMO, that's reasonable force. Deadly force is harder to justify, but the jury can convict the man of lesser charge such as Manslaughter. SFJeff is dishonest in that he is implying the only crime the gay is doing is 'patting' him on the butt when to repeat, the gay may have an intent to commit homosexual rape. Whatever the jury decides, to repeat I support the right of defense lawyers to bring up anti-social conduct the gay did before the man bashed or killed the homo & then have a jury decide if the man used reasonable or excessive force.

 

Your post reeks of homophobia and ignorance.

A man who has his 'butt grabbed against his will' has the same recourse a woman does who has her breasts grabbed against her will- she can use reasonable force to extricate herself from the situation.

But to discuss this in context of the torture and killing of Matthew Sheppherd just disgusts me. Regardless of what Mr. Sheppherd may or may not have done- there is no rational excuse for what his murderers did.

Your posts are just an argument for gay bashing. You are arguing that any straight man can argue that it was okay for him to murder some gay if he claims he was fondled by him- because that 250 lb biker feared being 'raped'.

Just disgusts me.

 

With 1st part, agree with reasonable force, only that it's possible for a jury to believe a man was defending himself from homosexual rape if he killed a gay after the gay grabbed his butt against will, though it's hard to justify. You can deny it, but it's possible that if a gay is grabbing a man's butt or groin against will, that he may have the intent to commit homosexual rape esp. if the gay has past convictions. If a gay is harassing a man in the bathroom, then it's possible the gay may commit homosexual rape if he doesn't get his way as homosexual rapes sometimes happen in the restrooms You can call me ignorant & homphobic but those are facts as gays often have these anti-social personalities. But to repeat that is a jury topic.

With Matthew or Methew Shepard, in none of my posts did I say his murderers were justified in what they did only that Matthew W. Shepard was a bad person in what he did to the Cody bartender 2 months before his death. My guess is that you don't see anything wrong with MW Shepard committing assault & battery on the Cody bartender & then making up story he was homosexually gang raped by 3. If I'm not sympathetic to MW Shepard, it's because his made up story 2 months before could've sent innocents to prison. Yes, MW Shepard's killers must be punished for murder, but only that his murderers may have saved the next man from being attacked by MW Shepard or being accused of something they didn't do.

With your last part, again, that's a jury topic. If a defense lawyer wants to say that the man bashed or killed the gay after a crime the gay did such as assault&battery which you call patting or fondling, then a jury will decide if the man used reasonable or excessive force when he killed the gay. To repeat, murder has degrees. If a man kills a gay after the gay committed assault&battery or fondled or pat butt as you call it, if a jury decides the man reacted excessively, then the man should be convicted of lesser charge-manslaughter rather than 2nd Degree Murder. That disgusts you but to repeat, a jury will decide what the right verdict is after hearing both the prosecutor & defense lawyer.

 

Frankly I find your comments and justifications of murderers more and more disgusting.

 

Where in my post(s) did was Matthew Shepard's murder justified Believe you're saying what you know is false just as you know Harvey Milk was a homosexual statutory rapist but still deny it. To repeat, had it been a straight man with a history of sexually harassing women who 1 day got killed in an unrelated robbery & had said that no more women will be sexually abused by him, you may not care. Of course the murderers should go to prison but that doesn't change the fact the victim was a bad person. Matthew W. Shepard was a crime victim. If it had justifying his murder, then it would have been said that his killers be freed-but no such thing was written. What's known is that MW Shepard's death prevented the possibiliity of MW Shepard repeating what he did to the Cody bartender 2 months earlier to the next man-that's what was said. People who commit murder should be punished for their crimes be it 1st, 2nd or Manslaughter, only that sometimes murderers kill bad people. That's the point. Anyhow thanks for taking the time to post but we're repeating ourselves & unsure what else we can say.