"I ripped the condom. Burn. I got you." -- gay man on HIV rampage taunted victims

GOATER said:


Im Mexican...My balls/dick are totally darker than my skin tone but I don't think that much...until that podcast, I just assume everybody is darker in the nutsack region, but idk.....Are people's dick/ballsack really the same color as their skin?

Next time ill analyze this when I watch porn.


BTW Im a regular Mestizo Mexican, so fiddy fiddy or 60/40 Euro/Native genetics.
Click to expand...


I'm very white and my cock is the same. Back of the balls/taint you see some tint.

I don't like the look of vaginas of black or Asian gals. It's all pink or red on the inside but the surrounding dark pigmentation doesn't do it for me.

That said I have had sex with several black ladies and I have loved every bit of it.
 
bushman505 said:
You can’t get hiv you aren’t gay.


Seriously though This shit of fucking disgusting. Purposely ruining the rest of somebody else’s life because you fucked up your own life by going and getting he hiv.
Click to expand...


Don't forget all the bi's.
 
Rod1 said:
They still tan well, they still have dark eyes and hair.

Pinkness seems to be a trait almost exclusively of caucasians.
Click to expand...
Oh I thought you were just talking about paleness

Yeah I can’t think of a pink chinaman lol
 
PainIsLIfe said:
Don't forget all the bi's.
Click to expand...

Bisexuals creep me out, it’s like they don’t care what they fuck as long as they fuck something. No chicks around???? Well then I’ll just fuck this dude....
 
GOATER said:
Look, its fucked up....but why should the law get involved?


If a person chooses to have unprotected sex, deal with it....end of story.....Everybody knows the consequences....



I don't see how a person knowing they have HIV before fucking a willing person that agreed to unprotected sex, suddenly requires the law........but if somebody got HIV from unprotected sex and the infected didn't know before hand, its ok....No Law required in this situation tho, and everybody agrees, that person dun goof for having unprotected sex.



Now if a person thought they were having protected sex and the other guy took off the condom for example...then yes, the law should be involved....otherwise no.


Personal responsibility, ladies and gentlemen.
Click to expand...
Are you missing the part of the OP were the guy ripped the condom? The victims thought they were having protected sex...
 
GOATER said:
It's a great argument.


Everybody who fucks without protection, knows its risky, very risky....Everybody....Now, yes condom sex is risky too, technically but the risk are massively different.


Regardless if the guy with HIV knew or not.....the actual act is exactly the same.....The law shouldn't get involved.
Click to expand...
Naw its a stupid argument.

Potential risk =/= actual known risk.

We all accept the potential of risk every day in many activities and that is ok.

But if you absolutely KNOW that you have HIV or some other deadly disease or you KNOW a part on a airplane was faulty and the plane is likely to crash you should not be able to hide behind 'they know the risk when they fly or have sex". Especially if you are the one specifically putting them at that extra risk.
 
Trotsky said:
"Liberalism is a mental disease dur hurr"

The legislation you are daftly citing was actually just a leveling of the crime onto the same ground as all other knowing-exposure-of-disease criminal codes. It did not make it not a crime: it adjusted it to a level that was (a) empirically consistent with deterrence and addressing spread of the disease per the DOJ, and (b) consistent with other disease-spreading statutes for ailments like SARS and TB.



In actuality, the code as it stood was just used to pass draconian sentences against prostitutes with a considerably lower burden of proof.



But don't let me get in the way of your fanning the reductive partisan flames. Your coalition with posters like James Russler, DevoutPessimist, and Patrick Carey is certainly one to blush at.
Click to expand...
Revising the law certainly had no deterrent affect on this guy from intentionally spreading HIV.
 
bushman505 said:
Bisexuals creep me out, it’s like they don’t care what they fuck as long as they fuck something. No chicks around???? Well then I’ll just fuck this dude....
Click to expand...

I agree, but to me the problem is spreading the disease into the hetero populous.
 
Kframe said:
Revising the law certainly had no deterrent affect on this guy from intentionally spreading HIV.
Click to expand...

Neither would keeping it the way it was, so....

The fact is that studies showed, or at least allowed lawmakers to reasonably conclude, that the current disparate policies had a negative impact on the whole and that the issue would be better addressed by amending the laws to their current form, consistent with other statutes on similar issues.
 
Black Helicopters said:
Oh I thought you were just talking about paleness

Yeah I can’t think of a pink chinaman lol
Click to expand...

It was in jest though, but i think there is a cultural divide in here.

Pink women are considered "better" in the region where i live.
 
GOATER said:
Look, its fucked up....but why should the law get involved?


If a person chooses to have unprotected sex, deal with it....end of story.....Everybody knows the consequences....



I don't see how a person knowing they have HIV before fucking a willing person that agreed to unprotected sex, suddenly requires the law........but if somebody got HIV from unprotected sex and the infected didn't know before hand, its ok....No Law required in this situation tho, and everybody agrees, that person dun goof for having unprotected sex.



Now if a person thought they were having protected sex and the other guy took off the condom for example...then yes, the law should be involved....otherwise no.


Personal responsibility, ladies and gentlemen.
Click to expand...

In this case the guy ripped the condom to deliberately infect the other one.
 
Trotsky said:
"Liberalism is a mental disease dur hurr"

The legislation you are daftly citing was actually just a leveling of the crime onto the same ground as all other knowing-exposure-of-disease criminal codes. It did not make it not a crime: it adjusted it to a level that was (a) empirically consistent with deterrence and addressing spread of the disease per the DOJ, and (b) consistent with other disease-spreading statutes for ailments like SARS and TB.



In actuality, the code as it stood was just used to pass draconian sentences against prostitutes with a considerably lower burden of proof.



But don't let me get in the way of your fanning the reductive partisan flames. Your coalition with posters like James Russler, DevoutPessimist, and Patrick Carey is certainly one to blush at.
Click to expand...

Who intentionally transmits Ebola or TB? The last person charged with attempting to spread TB was the dude that flew somewhere when he was supposed to be quarantined.

HIV is basically spread by 1 method so it isn't nearly the same thing as the others you listed.
 
Gregolian said:
Know what's fucked? Friend of mine is gay and at least according to what he has said (he's since married now so completely out of the dating scene) there's a portion of gay men that view having HIV as like some badge of honor they need to give to people.
Click to expand...
[edit]
Never mind, too vile.
 
Last edited:
Gregolian said:
Know what's fucked? Friend of mine is gay and at least according to what he has said (he's since married now so completely out of the dating scene) there's a portion of gay men that view having HIV as like some badge of honor they need to give to people.
Click to expand...

One of the more disturbing things I have heard people do in gay subculture is 'bug chasing'

<{clintugh}>

Maybe some of them want to share their high score with others
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LeonardoBjj
Social OxyContin maker’s settlement plan divides victims of opioid crisis. Now it’s up to the Supreme Court
2 3
Replies
59
Views
2K
HunterAcosta
HunterAcosta

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,238,053
Messages
55,535,579
Members
174,820
Latest member
Víctor Hugo Teco

Share this page

Back
Top