• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Lance Armstrong

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Most Lance followers were like a cult..whenever You told them 'you know he cheated' it was just like Franco and his legions ..in the cult Hall of Fame right next to the Joe Pa cutout is a LA cutout. He cheated, lied about it, slandered his accusers what more needs to be said? Many people have beat Cancer and raised money for charity without all the Lance garbage.
 
Upvote 0
Bucky Katt;2292900; said:
Wrong. I never, ever compared what he did to what a rapist did. You can replace that with murder or jaywalking, I don't really care.
Click to expand...


And I quote from you:

So, if somebody gets raped by somebody else and reports it to the police, but the police are not able to prosecute the rapist because of a lack of evidence, the rapist would be justified in suing the victim for libel? Even though the rapist did commit the crime?
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
SEREbuckeye;2293104; said:
And I quote from you:
Click to expand...

I didn't equate the two - I asked about suing somebody who accurately accuses you of something. It was hyperbole - an extrapolation for effect - I never once said that cheating in sports is as bad as raping somebody. Replace it with murder or jaywalking, it doesn't really make a difference.

(And I don't believe you have ever answered the question as to whether it is okay for a rapist to sue a victim after he is acquitted.)

Either way, he was accurately accused of doing something and his response was to sue the person because he knew they couldn't prove it.
 
Upvote 0
Bucky Katt;2293108; said:
I didn't equate the two - I asked about suing somebody who accurately accuses you of something. It was hyperbole - an extrapolation for effect - I never once said that cheating in sports is as bad as raping somebody. Replace it with murder or jaywalking, it doesn't really make a difference.

(And I don't believe you have ever answered the question as to whether it is okay for a rapist to sue a victim after he is acquitted.)

Either way, he was accurately accused of doing something and his response was to sue the person because he knew they couldn't prove it.
Click to expand...

You used a rapist for the comparison. lol. But whatever you say.

And to answer your question, yes I do believe (from a third party view) that if a person is defamed and claimed to be a rapist without credible evidence to sue. Look at the Duke Lacrosse case. The girl had no evidence but damn sure claimed she was a "victim". Then it came out it wasnt true and the the boys names were drug through the mud. Without evidence of wrong doing, all you have are accusations. I can accuse anyone of anything, but it doesnt make it true, does it?

Hindsight is 20/20. Let me ask you this. At the time, without his confessions and what we know today, was it is a justified accusation to say he was cheating? Was hearsay enough to convict him of cheating at that time?
 
Upvote 0
SEREbuckeye;2293118; said:
You used a rapist for the comparison. lol. But whatever you say.
Click to expand...

I used a rapist for an example, not to imply that cheating at sports is like rape. Cheating at sports is much less serious than rape. Happy, now? :p

And to answer your question, yes I do believe (from a third party view) that if a person is defamed and claimed to be a rapist without credible evidence to sue. Look at the Duke Lacrosse case. The girl had no evidence but damn sure claimed she was a "victim". Then it came out it wasnt true and the the boys names were drug through the mud. Without evidence of wrong doing, all you have are accusations. I can accuse anyone of anything, but it doesnt make it true, does it?
Click to expand...

Of course, it doesn't make it true. But, let's play hypothetical again. Let's say the Duke lacrosse team HAD raped her but got away with it because there wasn't enough evidence to prove their guilt, suing the girl wouldn't make them bad people? (Of course, they are already bad people for raping her - would it make them worse people?)

Hindsight is 20/20. Let me ask you this. At the time, without his confessions and what we know today, was it is a justified accusation to say he was cheating? Was hearsay enough to convict him of cheating at that time?
Click to expand...

No clue. But, in my IMO, its not about whether there was enough evidence to convict. I'm disappointed to find out he cheated, but don't really care that much about the cheating. Everyone was doing it. He's no worse than the rest. For me, it's about about the fact that he sued people for telling the truth about him. They weren't lying, but he sued them because he knew he could win.

(Agreed that hindsight is 20/20, but I'm allowed to use that to convict him of being a douchenozzle in the courtroom of my soul. :biggrin:)
 
Upvote 0
Bucky Katt;2293132; said:
I used a rapist for an example, not to imply that cheating at sports is like rape. Cheating at sports is much less serious than rape. Happy, now? :p



Of course, it doesn't make it true. But, let's play hypothetical again. Let's say the Duke lacrosse team HAD raped her but got away with it because there wasn't enough evidence to prove their guilt, suing the girl wouldn't make them bad people? (Of course, they are already bad people for raping her - would it make them worse people?)



No clue. But, in my IMO, its not about whether there was enough evidence to convict. I'm disappointed to find out he cheated, but don't really care that much about the cheating. Everyone was doing it. He's no worse than the rest. For me, it's about about the fact that he sued people for telling the truth about him. They weren't lying, but he sued them because he knew he could win.

(Agreed that hindsight is 20/20, but I'm allowed to use that to convict him of being a douchenozzle in the courtroom of my soul. :biggrin:)
Click to expand...


I think we both can agree on this. Lance was once a "god" among athletes, but now we all know he is a douchey cheater. :biggrin:
 
Upvote 0
SEREbuckeye;2293136; said:
I think we both can agree on this. Lance was once a "god" among athletes, but now we all know he is a douchey cheater. :biggrin:
Click to expand...

Preach on, brother man! :cheers:

Without the lawsuit stuff, he would just be a cheater to me, which is no big deal in cycling. Throw in the lawsuit stuff and it takes him to "asshole cheater", which is a lot worse.

And really, none of this changes the fact that he did a lot of good for charity. The bad stuff doesn't entirely wipe that out by my count.

(Shit, it's not like he was JoePa, allowing a pedophile to wander around molesting children.)
 
Upvote 0
SEREbuckeye;2293136; said:
I think we both can agree on this. Lance was once a "god" among athletes, but now we all know he is a douchey cheater. :biggrin:
Click to expand...

At least you are coming around slightly. Now increase this from douchy to slanderous excrement who should probably be sued and lose much of his fortune and have his future career derailed like he derailed others and you are getting close. He was an incredible athlete; and a real loser away from the road. H could gain back a measure of respect if he not only apologized but made some of these people whole. But don't hold your breath for that.
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye;2293154; said:
Was Sheryl Crow imaginary?
Click to expand...

I don't think so....I mean we have fossils of her relatives in museums...

dromaeosaurus-skeleton.jpg
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top