Roy Moore


I address this in my Post to PD and BJ.

That is your opinion. I disagree.


Something to consider. Criminologists will tell you that pedophiles have the very WORST recidivism record of ALL criminals…somewhere in the 90% range. IF Roy Moore WAS a pedophile as he’s been accused, WHY is there no HINT of it for the last 40 years? WHY do ALL the accusations of “alleged” pedophilia relate to his behavior ONLY around 1978? Do you believe he’s never come in contact with teen-age girls since then?


Those are excellent questions and worth consideration. The obvious answer is that I don’t know. I could speculate, but there seems to be enough of that in this thread, however, I will note you said 90% not 100%.

You accused me of wanting Roy Moore to be guilty of the charges of which he is alleged. The unspoken assertion is that somehow if he is a pedophile that I’ll claim that as some sort of proof, condemnation of those on the political right (where you sit). Wrong.

See, that’s where you and I differ. I don’t judge an entire group of people, in this case, those on the political right, by the actions of the individuals that belong to the group. Even if Moore is shown beyond the shadow of any doubt to be guilty, I won’t try to equate his immorality to the political beliefs that you and he share.

I mean, sure, you can do that sometimes when the group advocates an overt immoral position, like the KKK, but I don’t think (most people) on the political right intentionally advocate positions they believe are immoral. In other words, action and intention matter.

You probably advocate the cutting of entitlements. In some cases, I think the cutting of entitlements is immoral, however, I don’t believe that you or anyone else on this forum is immoral for supporting a cut in entitlements because I don’t think hurting people is your intention, I just think you’re wrong, but I digress. I don’t want to turn this thread into a conversation about mortality or entitlements, just making the point that the actions of a few (pedophile priests anyone?) are not always reflective of the actions of the group they belong to as a whole. As I pointed out, I can’t account for the stupid things done on the left and don’t expect you or anyone else to account for the stupid things people do on the political right.


Something ELSE to consider. I have fairly extensive experience as a police office…specifically as a “generalist” detective, meaning that I was charged with investigating everything from runaway children to murders and everything in between and later with TEACHING criminal justice courses at the “Jr. College” level. In fact, I was responsible for DESIGNING an Associate Degree program at that college, hiring instructors, selecting and buying relevant texts and teaching some of the classes myself…an AA curriculum that’s STILL in existence more than 40 years later.

During my LE “career,” I investigated dozens of accusations of sexual impropriety. EASILY half of them were bogus. Those that weren’t were appropriately dealt with by the judicial system. With those that WERE bogus usually little happened to the accuser, if anything at all. Many women KNOW that there’s no “downside” to making such claims…at least for them…and often significant “UPsides” in the form of (1) sympathetic attention which they crave, (2) “revenge” for a perceived wrong towards the man they are accusing or (3) literal PAYMENT by a third party for making that accusation. I experienced instances of all three in the course of my investigations. I know of more than one DEATH that resulted from a false accusation of molestation. In one case, a father murdered an ex-boyfriend of his daughter because she falsely accused him of rape and in another, a former teacher committed suicide because of a false accusation by a girl who’d gotten a failing grade on an important examination and destroyed his career (and eventually his LIFE) by falsely accusing the teacher of raping her. Medical examination proved she was “intact” and she tearfully admitted that she’d lied…too late for the teacher who’d been fired and lost his wife and kids.


What’s “moral” about demanding the product of someone else’s labors for your own use, which is what “entitlements” actually are?


Heh, Brown’s yogi level contortions make it abundantly clear that he thinks republicans should be held to impossibly high standards and democrats don’t have any standards :rofl: Keep talking Brown, you’ll tie yourself in a knot you can’t get out of :smiley:


I’ve already said I think that’s BS and that woman that make false accusations should be punished. If there are no laws now, I support making stricter laws for false accusations.

For what it’s worth, I was going to be a police officer. I took CJ in college, I did ride-alongs with my local police dept for almost a year and I worked with security and private detective agencies.

I was accepted to the police academy but eventually decided, after observing others, I didn’t think I had the instincts for police work. I think I made the right choice. I went on to later to teach police in the continuance of force techniques (I studied martial arts for 10 years with a military trained combat instructor and fought in mix martial arts tournaments for 6 years). LAter I used what I new teach (as an assistant instructor) open-handed, and weapon techniques (like the PR-24 and Asp) as well as the use of pepper spray.

So while I defer to your significant experience in law enforcement, I’m not your average idiot either. To this day my Uncle is Chief of Police in a town outside Richmond VA, one of the guys I grew up with and would have attended the academy with is now a 20+ year vet. I have numerous other affiliations as well.

Ok, now that we’re done reading our resumes…

We each have our own assessment based on our experience, in the end, the evidence is king and neithger of us have enough to say we know what really happened.


You want to create a new thread and hash this out, be my guest, but I can agree to disagree on this point if you can.


Lots of assertions, no specifics.


One further comment. You claim it’s somehow significant that I said “90%” recidivism of pedophiles as opposed to “100%”. That 90% figure is based on ARRESTS and RE-ARRESTS. Recidivism refers to RE-ARRESTS…not necessarily “re-offenses”. Roy Moore was never “brought to account” for any of the alleged crimes his TWO accusers claim to have happened. (The other 3 or 4 never claimed he’d “abused” them in any way. Merely asked them out–or dated them–all of them being legal ADULTS at the time.) BTW, in 1978, it was ILLEGAL for a 14-year-old to work in a restaurant that wasn’t a family-owned business. For an ACTUAL pedophile, not paying a price for their pedophilia would ENCOURAGE them to continue to offend. NOTHING in Roy Moore’s past 40 years of public service indicate that he EVER offended in any similar fashion, any more than there being the SLIGHTEST proof that he’d offended in the first place. Since the manager of that mall at the time has NO KNOWLEDGE of Moore ever being “banned” from the mall, that’s further proof that Moore had NOT suffered any “consequences” of his alleged “stalking.” The whole narrative falls apart in any, rational particular.


Thank you I know what recidivism is.


Reading your comments will provide allbthr specifics anyone needs


But do you know what recidivists DO in response to being arrested for their offenses? A recidivist CONTINUES to offend and be arrested for it. Not having been arrested or suffering ANY consequences for his alleged "offenses"40 years ago, Roy Moore would, logically, have continued to offend throughout his career, and he DIDN’T, which would logically lead one to believe that he’d never “offended” in the first place.


Except you said yourself that 9 out of 10 people are repeat offenders, so maybe he’s the 10th person?

Or perhaps this isn’t really a case of pedophilia in the traditional sense. Maybe he just likes women that are much younger than he is. In his 30’s he liked girls in their teens and when he was in his 40’s he liked women in their 20’s. IIRC he married a woman in her 20’s and met her in her teens. I think he was 38 when he married her? Of course, there is nothing wrong with marrying a woman who’s 24 when your 38, that you met at a dance recital when you were (at least) 33 and she was 19. It’s a little weird at that age if you ask me. I met a woman when I was 32 and asked out. She was super hot and totally cute, but when I found out she had just turned 19 I decided that night not to date her because she was too young (if my 19 yo comes home with a 32-year-old man, well, let’s just say I won’t be pleased).

So maybe he just likes girls a lot younger than he is. Unfortunately in your early 30’s girls under 18 are interoperate. There is a reason they call young girls “jailbait”.

But I don’t claim to know any of this is true, just speculating.


And maybe you’re right about that…but dating older teens doesn’t make him a “pedophile.” Having SEX with young teens does…whether it’s consensual or not, if they’re below the age of consent–which in Alabama was and is 16. The only woman who claims he “raped” her claims to have been 14 at the time and working in a barbeque restaurant–which Alabama law prohibited at the time unless it was owned by her family. She has no “proof” that anything LIKE a “rape” ever occurred at the hands of Roy Moore. If he’d BEEN a pedophile rapist then and didn’t suffer any ACCUSATIONS, let alone consequences for doing so, why didn’t he “rape” ANOTHER minor? Sorry, but I don’t buy it for a minute.


You can parse this thing with semantics lingo and arguments all you want, but it boils down to you saying this: “I will admit it when I’m wrong”.

Are you related to this guy?:

Who wouldn’t say “I will admit it when I’m wrong.”?

Your long winded mental gymnastics (which is probably what qix was referring to when he said “yogi level contortions”) have carried us around the barn, only to drop us off at: “I will admit it when I’m wrong.”

Seriously, the distillation of your explanation?: The simple sentence above.

(Speaking of long winded, I’m frequently a bag of hot air myself.)

Now on your comments about “internalizing” . . . Copernicus/Galileo, for example, could have been characterized as internalizing their views on a heliocentric solar system.

The Pope certainly looked on them as internalizing their views.

But later it was recognized that they just had the courage of their convictions.

Sticking to your guns can sometimes be seen as internalizing.

Dave, to me, has the courage of his convictions. To you, he’s internalizing.

You proved . . . nothing. Your arguments are unconvincing.

So you are saying that PD will not admit it when he’s wrong. I disagree, and here’s an example why:

We just flat out disagree on that one.

Now I can’t speak for PD . . . he’s perfectly capable of speaking for himself, but your position on him internalizing is unconvincing.

The “members of this forum” are predominantly conservative, and you are not. They are unconvinced by your arguments (and so also am I), and you perceive that as internalizing. We are conservative . . . what do you expect?

It’s as if you are saying, “Geeezz, my arguments are convincing . . . they must be internalizing.”

Perhaps YOU are the one who is internalizing.

My tribe thinks you are internalizing, and your tribe thinks my tribe is internalizing.

Your tribe speaks Romulan, and my tribe speaks Klingon.

Change gears . . .

Regarding Franken: I would characterize him as an amateur perv, as opposed to an intermediate or advanced perv. But a perv is a perv.


Refut my logic rather than making some baseless generalization.

Honesly, that part was just my opinion. The fact that he has admitted he was wrong on another topic to another person does not mean he will admit when he’s wrong when discussing all topics with all people.


Star Trek references…lol…I love it.

When you say “…characterize as a …perv…”

Do you believe that you are justified to hold that belief? Do you claim to know that you have all the evidence in that situation? Do you have some special insight like PD who claims to know what RM did 30- years ago based on his (meaning PD’s) experiences as a police officer?


While my tiny tribe speaks coherent English :wink: :smiley:


I have NEVER claimed to know what Roy Moore was thinking or doing 30 years ago. (BTW, these claims are from 38 years ago.) What I DO know is how such pervs typically behave, which harkens back to my LE days (AND my classes in Abnormal Psychology in college) and Roy Moore’s behavior SINCE the alleged “incident” is starkly ATYPICAL. Remember that he’s suffered only a SINGLE accusation of pedophilial “rape.” The other “accusers” merely say he asked them out on dates while they were still in their teens. Big deal.


Yeah, if he had been pursuing teen boys, the left would be calling his accusers homophobes and defending him. Funny how that works, innit?