beschizza — 2013-07-11T11:56:24-04:00 — #1
Edwin Charles Tobergta, of Hamilton, Ohio, has once again been arrested after making love to a pool float. Tobergta reportedly fled with his lover after being discovered in flagrante delicto by its owner. [Norwalk Reflector via Gawker] READ THE REST
lucibub — 2013-07-11T12:16:27-04:00 — #2
Now why couldn't it have been a canoe, dammit? Then it would have been half a Monty Python joke.
awesomerobot — 2013-07-11T12:18:19-04:00 — #3
Definitely took "using a rubber" way too literally.
boundegar — 2013-07-11T13:14:55-04:00 — #4
Shocking that in the 21st century we continue to criminalize relationships like this.
blendergasket — 2013-07-11T14:13:18-04:00 — #5
I completely agree. It always blows my mind that we consider ourselves even remotely rational as a species when we go against people with different but not-nonconsensual (I personally don't think sex with an inanimate object should be deemed nonconsensual even though the inanimate object does not consent but its obviously not consensual for the same reason) sexual desires.
The only problem with me drilling a hole in, for instance, the wall of a DMV office and inserting my penis into it for gratification should be that there is now a hole in the wall. Anything more than that is the height of irrationality.
So as long as this guy didn't damage the raft I don't see a problem. If he did damage the raft his crime should've been damaging a raft and his punishment should've been having to fix/replace the raft.
thetorchpasses — 2013-07-11T15:09:06-04:00 — #6
Honest to god, this is how this article paired up in my feed reader.
lupus_yonderboy — 2013-07-11T15:11:40-04:00 — #7
I believe that the actual charges were related to his theft of the raft and the fact that he did this in public, not the act in-and-of itself. If he was prosecuted because he purchased a raft to enjoy in the privacy of his own home then I'd have an issue with it as well, but that's not the case.
Unless, of course, my sarcasm filter is off, in which case carry on...
thetorchpasses — 2013-07-11T15:15:38-04:00 — #8
If it wasn't consensual or if the raft was below the age of consent, well... Anyway, it might be less obvious next time if he has the raft give him a blow job.
"...has once again been arrested..." Sometimes it takes awhile for the lessons to sink in.
boundegar — 2013-07-11T15:47:00-04:00 — #9
Well the DMV office presents another problem in that there are probably people on the other side of the wall whose consent was not sought. Also, splinters.
halloween_jack_ — 2013-07-11T16:13:31-04:00 — #10
Another repurposed joke: "But you fuck one raft..."
leicester — 2013-07-11T19:47:43-04:00 — #11
Oh right. Like this has never happened to you...
leicester — 2013-07-11T19:48:09-04:00 — #12
May have been a simple case of mistaken identity.
brainspore — 2013-07-12T00:21:12-04:00 — #13
Was it this one?
sam — 2013-07-12T01:01:57-04:00 — #14
Cleaning fees and irreversible mentally scaring of passing by 5 year old's should factor in.
knackfloh — 2013-07-12T10:04:03-04:00 — #15
could we hang this a little lower please ?
beschizza — 2013-07-16T11:56:32-04:00 — #16
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.