‘GRABHER’ License Plate Revoked, Deemed ‘Offensive’ with Picture Inside!

[thatguymarco]

specialk said:

thatguymarco said:
We live in a world where licence plates can be considered harmful to people, fuck this planet.

We live in a world in which someone in a government office made a judgement call and the net result is that some crybaby can't get his name on a vanity license plate any more, but still finds himself entitled to plenty of free media attention and a Constitutional Law non-profit speaking on his behalf as he takes this petty fight to court where he'll presumably get the benefit of due process. 

This is still the same world in which a man who advises treating women "like shit" and is on the record bragging about grabbing women's pussies can rise to leader of the free world. To head of a country that had 90,000 rapes in 2015 and $100b in unpaid child support due to custodians, 82% of whom are women. And this is a country that is considered pretty progressive in its treatment of women.

The license plate thing is the real crime though.

So the one dude/dudette who jumped at conclusions and assumed that they guy had bad intentions with his plate shouldn't be criticized because...? Acting on so flimsy pretenses is a bad thing to do too. Also, funny that you call this guy a crybaby for refusing to comply at a bigger crybaby's wishes but pay no mind to that person's prettyness. This whole situation shouldn't have existed in the first place, but the guy is not the one who started it, he's just trying to have the same rights of people who have "normal", "unharmful" last names, wow, what an asshole, right?

Also, why are talking about the US and its problems? I mean, yeah, I agree with stuff you said, but what does that have to do with anything? That it's reality and that it sucks? Well, no shit. 

Also, yeah, the US it's pretty progressive in regards to women, to deny it, as far as I'm aware, would be completely idiotic. We're talking about a country with a population of more than 300,000,000 people, the fact that there were 90,000 rapes (something I'd like to question, were these cases proved truthful? Were these rapes as in sex without concent? Or had the definition been manipulated enough at that time to fit cases that are questionable at best?) in 2015 while terrible it's not an indication of it being socially acceptable in the US or a mass phenomenom a critical number of people support, I think.