« Previous | Main | Next »

January 18, 2013


Convicted condom-piercer taking appeal to Supreme Court of Canada

(Thanks to The Perts)


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

What a prick.

The judgees clearly saw the hole in his argument.

When I was in high school, the usual gang of suspects was sitting around philosophizing as usual, and for some reason that I no longer recall, one of the group gave another one a condom. The recipient, who had learned to question just about anything he got from any of the rest of us, started out to ask, you didn't put a a pinhole in this, did you? But what came out of his mouth was, "Did you shove a prick through this?"

"...with his father as a surety."
Now, I would read this as, "If you take off for Florida (which this writer is always apt to do), we'll lock up your Daddy."
Oh, Canada, why?
Hmmm. "Oh, Canada..." That's catchy. They ought to make up a song like that or something.

Old joke - A guy goes in to buy condoms and the clerk says, "4.99 plus tax." The guy says, "Forget the tacks I'll just tape it on."

What a pinhead.

That dude's defense is full of holes. I doubt he'll get off. (Again,)

Buggy rubber baby bumpers.

Convicted condom-piercer taking appeal to Supreme Court

slippery guy - must be a banana peal

Pop goes the weasel.

Eh! ligirl -- rejoice that my smackin' hand is still hors de combat.

I have read that this offence is more common among women. Men should always use their own rubbers and flush them themselves unless they want to pay 18 years of child support.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Copyright | About The Miami Herald | Advertise