View Full Version : Vigilante's..eye for an eye and the like...
Police are hunting the killers of a former child sex offender who was found brutally stabbed to death.
The victim, whose mutilated body was found at business premises in Wandsworth, south London, also suffered non-fatal injuries to "other parts of his body".
He was found naked and covered in blood in his caravan on the site.
Scotland Yard said the gruesome discovery was made at the Windmill Business Centre in Riverside Road.
"The man, believed to be in his mid-50s, was pronounced dead at the scene. He had suffered injuries believed to be stab wounds," said a spokesman.
"The post-mortem revealed non-fatal injuries to other parts of his body but we are not discussing these further for operational reasons."
According to reports, these included wounds to his genitals
Det Chief Insp Nick Scola, leading the investigation, said: "We're currently at an early stage in our inquiries and are keeping an open mind about the circumstances of this man's death.
"I would ask anyone who was in the area last night or in the early hours of this morning and saw or heard anything suspicious to get in touch with us."
a huge part of me, and im thinking in terms of percentages about 95%, say f****ng good! got what he deserved.
but 5% of me says there's no room in civilised society for that kind of thing.
is it a case of lie with wolves, play with fire etc etc...?
plowsie
12-12-08, 10:24 AM
I tried to reply but I can't because I, like you Keith that have two views that conflict with each other.
Dappa D
12-12-08, 10:27 AM
hes called a "former" child sex offender.....
part of me yes does think got what he deserved, however no history is known, he could have spent 30 years in prison and been rehabilitated and hate himself etc etc etc
so for me its the other way round, 5 percent thinking got what he deserved, and 95 percent NO, this shouldnt of happened.
but saying that...if it was my son he'd abused..........
but saying that...if it was my son he'd abused..........
thats it isnt it? such a conflict of emotions, then if you apply the thought process to involve your loved ones...well it just doesnt bear thinking about. maybe it was the loved ones of the abused? or the abused themselves, of course all hypothetical thoughts...
"The post-mortem revealed non-fatal injuries to other parts of his body but we are not discussing these further for operational reasons."
According to reports, these included wounds to his genitals
wonder if that was a hammer to the balls, or them cut of while he was alive for what he has done to someone
Mr Speirs
12-12-08, 10:38 AM
100% is not right. No-one should take the law into their own hands.
This is why we have courts, jurys and prisons so that the person is found guilty and sentenced appropiately.
My views don't conflict with eachother.
Mob culture and community justice is disgusting as is Paedophilia.
Dangerous Dave
12-12-08, 10:42 AM
hes called a "former" child sex offender...
Just means he hasn't be caught since being put on the list...
100% is not right. No-one should take the law into their own hands.
This is why we have courts, jurys and prisons so that the person is found guilty and sentenced appropiately.
My views don't conflict with eachother.
Mob culture and community justice is disgusting as is Paedophilia.
yep, and you are absolutely 100% right in your thoughts....
of course the children abused have to take their traumas with them for the rest of their lives, effectively ending their childhood and in a (dramatic) sense ending their lives as they knew them...
DanAbnormal
12-12-08, 10:49 AM
Depends. If he had sexually assaulted my child, even if it was years ago, I would probably still want to kill him. It's easy to take the moral high ground when emotions are not involved.
This is why we have courts, jurys and prisons so that the person is found guilty and sentenced appropiately.
I'm sorry, but that's the funniest thing I've heard this week (comedy thread included!). Appropriate sentencing? Can I come live in your world please?
Without background on the murder victim, I fail to see how I can form an opinion due to internal conflicts.
Mr Speirs
12-12-08, 10:54 AM
yep, and you are absolutely 100% right in your thoughts....
of course the children abused have to take their traumas with them for the rest of their lives, effectively ending their childhood and in a (dramatic) sense ending their lives as they knew them...
Ahh okay. So what you are saying is that someone who commits crimes such premeditated murder, sex offenders etc should be sentenced to death as they have ended someone elses life?
to an extent I would agree that these people don't deserve to live but they should be sentenced to death by the authorities on beaten/tortured to death by a mob.
to an extent I would agree that these people don't deserve to live but they should be sentenced to death by the authorities on beaten/tortured to death by a mob.
But just playing devils advocate for a second, where would you stand if the authorities considered it an "appropriate punishment" (sorry, still makes me laugh) for serious crime offenders to be beaten/tortured by a mob?
Biker Biggles
12-12-08, 10:56 AM
Depends. If he had sexually assaulted my child, even if it was years ago, I would probably still want to kill him. It's easy to take the moral high ground when emotions are not involved.
And that is why we have a detached judicial system.I would quite happily kill someone I found burgling my house,let alone sexually abusing my relatives,but thankfully Im not allowed to take my own revenge.The alternative is to revert to primative blood feuds and complete chaos which would be far worse than what we have now.
Just means he hasn't be caught since being put on the list...
You don't think that someone could be rehabilitated?
We don't know the reason for him being on the register so we don't know the full circumstances.
There was a case in the news of a 15 boy being put on the offenders register because he had pictures of a 15 year old girl on his PC. I think it was his girlfriend.
Also, a minor in the US had the US equivalent doled out for posting pictures of a minor on the internet - in this case herself.
My views are there is no need for a civilised society to resort to mob justice. I think, at least I hope, that a person can be rehabilitated for their crimes and lead a normal life. That goes for nonces, too. But a huge part of me thinks that I wouldn't want one living near my family etc.
As for the vigilantees, it wouldn't surprise me if they were influenced by watching Eastenders last night.
This is why we have courts, jurys and prisons so that the person is found guilty and sentenced appropiately.
Except that in this age the courts do not work properly, sentences are far too light & too many decisions have been taken away from the person handing out the sentence, even if they are put inside they live the life of reily, three square meals a day, roof over their head, colour TV, internet access etc etc, we pay a fortune for that, they get it all for free, whilst i don't initially agree with what possibly happened, i could maybe understand a parent loosing it if he was sure that person had molested their child.
But just playing devils advocate for a second, where would you stand if the authorities considered it an "appropriate punishment" (sorry, still makes me laugh) for serious crime offenders to be beaten/tortured by a mob?
I'm sure that if I thought that was appropriate punishment then I would emigrate to a middle eastern country where that type of justice takes place!
plowsie
12-12-08, 11:01 AM
Just means he hasn't be caught since being put on the list...
+1
Mr Speirs
12-12-08, 11:03 AM
[quote=Baph;1716791]I'm sorry, but that's the funniest thing I've heard this week (comedy thread included!). Appropriate sentencing? Can I come live in your world please?
[quote]
Actually thinking about it its a load of ******** really but what I was trying to emphasise that I didn't agree with Vigilante Justice. Unless its Batman then that's okay :)
wyrdness
12-12-08, 11:04 AM
Some people have got onto the sex offenders register for very minor things.
I don't know what this guy did, but someone was obviously very angry with him.
Would it make a difference if this crime was committed by someone who...
a) Had just heard rumours about him and decided to take the law into their own hands.
b) One of his victims (assuming that he did have some)
c) A relative of one of his victims.
Biker Biggles
12-12-08, 11:04 AM
Was this bloke actually a child molester?I dont think we know that yet.I heard one news report this morning that said he had been on the sex offenders register but had been taken off it.Seems we know very little about it,and I suspect those who killed him knew very little too.
Hopefully he wont turn out to have been a former paediatrician.
a former paediatrician.
I hear that those lot can't be rehabilitated....
plowsie
12-12-08, 11:08 AM
Assumption is the mother of all feck ups.
Ceri JC
12-12-08, 11:10 AM
And that is why we have a detached judicial system.I would quite happily kill someone I found burgling my house,let alone sexually abusing my relatives,but thankfully Im not allowed to take my own revenge.The alternative is to revert to primative blood feuds and complete chaos which would be far worse than what we have now.
Indeed. The idea is that generally speaking, in the heat of the moment (or even just when they are personally emotionally involved) people are prone to overreacting, making bad judgements with regards to culpability, etc.
Either killing or maiming someone for something trivial, or even something someone didn't do. The courts are supposed to provide a dispassionate, more balanced degree of justice. Unfortunately, if the courts' sentences are deemed too lenient, people don't feel justice has been done, so they feel their only way of getting justice is to mete out their own punishment.
I know (generally decent, law abiding) people who've been involved in serious talks about killing someone in revenge. The primary motivator was the feeling that the guilty party (who certainly was 100% guilty) got off far, far too lightly with 6 months served for what was undeniably an attempt at killing someone. It would be preferable for the courts to of dished out a longer sentence (even a still far too short 4 years behind bars), so people's murderous desire for revenge would have abated to some degree.
Mr Speirs
12-12-08, 11:10 AM
But just playing devils advocate for a second, where would you stand if the authorities considered it an "appropriate punishment" (sorry, still makes me laugh) for serious crime offenders to be beaten/tortured by a mob?
Not really sure of the rationale behind this question. Its like saying 'Where would you stand if the Authorities decided Peadohila was not illegal anymore?'
You'd still think it was wrong but the fact is it would never happen.
Ceri JC
12-12-08, 11:24 AM
Not really sure of the rationale behind this question. Its like saying 'Where would you stand if the Authorities decided Peadohila was not illegal anymore?'
You'd still think it was wrong but the fact is it would never happen.
I think what he's saying is, "If the authorities decide the sentence for Crime x was y, would you back it, irrespective of what x or y are."
Lynching as 'y' is unlikely (although not impossible, in many countries the state are at best passive to this and at worst encourage it), but it's just one example. Imagine 'y' is the death sentence. Do you have your own views on whether or not it should ever be used (and if so, do you have feelings about which crimes it should be reserved for)? Or, are you prepared to passively accept whatever the authorities decree is suitable?
Luckypants
12-12-08, 11:27 AM
You don't think that someone could be rehabilitated?
No and this is a proven fact. Like alcoholics, sex offenders are that way for life. They are wired up wrong in the head - shrinks like to think they can change them - but for them to change they need to realise what they did is wrong. Sex offenders see nothing wrong with what they did, so to them they did no wrong.
They may appear to be rehabilitated because they know what the shrinks want to hear in order for them to be released.
Dangerous Dave
12-12-08, 11:33 AM
You don't think that someone could be rehabilitated?
Sex offenders see nothing wrong with what they did, so to them they did no wrong.
They may appear to be rehabilitated because they know what the shrinks want to hear in order for them to be released.
+ 1
No and this is a proven fact. Like alcoholics, sex offenders are that way for life. They are wired up wrong in the head - shrinks like to think they can change them - but for them to change they need to realise what they did is wrong. Sex offenders see nothing wrong with what they did, so to them they did no wrong.
They may appear to be rehabilitated because they know what the shrinks want to hear in order for them to be released.
Surely alcoholics can got to rehab & quit the booze?
I personally would like to punch every slow-walking-tourist on Oxford Street in the back of the head. I can quite easily justify it. However, I don't. I resist that urge. Surely, a sex offender has the same capabilities to resist whatever urges dwell upon them
wyrdness
12-12-08, 11:37 AM
Was this bloke actually a child molester?I dont think we know that yet.I heard one news report this morning that said he had been on the sex offenders register but had been taken off it.Seems we know very little about it,and I suspect those who killed him knew very little too.
Hopefully he wont turn out to have been a former paediatrician.
According to The Times, Mr Cunningham spent four months in jail in 2001 for raping a schoolgirl under 13 and was arrested again in 2002, although no charges were pressed.
And from The Guardian,
Donald Findlater, the director of child protection charity the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, said: "There are some 35,000 registered sex offenders in England and Wales, the majority of whom are being managed safely within our communities, but alleged mob action of this nature will make some of those offenders terrified and I fear it may drive some underground and into isolation which is when they become dangerous to children."
Luckypants
12-12-08, 11:45 AM
Surely alcoholics can got to rehab & quit the booze
They can stop the booze, but never have a drink again. They are addicted to booze forever. Sex offenders are offenders for life in the same way. Maybe some can resist their urges, but they still get those urges and that makes them dangerous.
According to The Times, Mr Cunningham spent four months in jail in 2001 for raping a schoolgirl under 13 and was arrested again in 2002, although no charges were pressed.
With that sort of history I'd want to stab him. Four months for raping a girl under 13, he's lucky he only got stabbed and not set on fire as well.
With that sort of history I'd want to stab him. Four months for raping a girl under 13, he's lucky he only got stabbed and not set on fire as well.
Surely, that's a separate issue? That's an issue of an undue lenient sentence? Blame the prosecutor or the judge.
missyburd
12-12-08, 12:02 PM
Depends. If he had sexually assaulted my child, even if it was years ago, I would probably still want to kill him.
Exactly what I was going to say, if you were the parent of that child then you probably wouldn't care how long it took before you got your revenge even if this did mean sinking to a lower level. In fact thinking about it, waiting until he'd regained his life back and thought he was being accepted in the real world maybe just made the revenge all the more sweeter...
Assumption is the mother of all feck ups.
+1, like LP says, you have to be seriously fubar'd in the head to do anything like this in the first place, leopards don't change their spots.
punyXpress
12-12-08, 12:04 PM
[quote=Mr Speirs;1716770]100% is not right. No-one should take the law into their own hands.
This is why we have courts, jurys and prisons so that the person is found guilty and sentenced appropiately.
For years now the courts have been imposing grotesquely lenient sentences for all sorts of crimes ( excluding Mr Martin? ) to the extent that most respect for the courts & government are now zero.
When a reasonable sentence IS imposed, the offender is released early, often to promptly reoffend. Those who sanction these early releases should themselves suffer sanctions when new offences take place - that would focus their minds a little!
Kate Moss
12-12-08, 12:12 PM
Perhaps he mutilated himself and comitted suicide?? I know, very unlikely!
So, if it was the abused or a relative of the abused that killed him, how should they be fairly punished for after all they did commit a crime???
MiniMatt
12-12-08, 12:31 PM
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
And not that I agree in the slightest bit with an eye for an eye stance but this wasn't even an eye for an eye - this was torture and murder for rape - in addition to the punishment imposed on him for that crime by the judicial system - which undeniably raises question of leniency but firstly that's a seperate issue and secondly we don't know the answers to those questions and the details surrounding the case.
MiniMatt
12-12-08, 12:35 PM
[quote=Mr Speirs;1716770]100% is not right. No-one should take the law into their own hands.
This is why we have courts, jurys and prisons so that the person is found guilty and sentenced appropiately.
For years now the courts have been imposing grotesquely lenient sentences for all sorts of crimes ( excluding Mr Martin? ) to the extent that most respect for the courts & government are now zero.
When a reasonable sentence IS imposed, the offender is released early, often to promptly reoffend. Those who sanction these early releases should themselves suffer sanctions when new offences take place - that would focus their minds a little!
I've been through this argument so many times already and doubtless everyone's heard it already but the point you're trying to make is that harsh penalties prevent the crime.
So if we had the death penalty would that prevent murders? Just like in the US, that crime free utopia?
How about even harsher penalties for lesser crimes, like for example, what if we were to hang draw and quarter those who steal - like we did in the middle ages? Was there no crime as a result in the middle ages? Or did those who steal then go on to murder as well (may as well settle a few scores, either way I'm dead if they catch me...)
Put it another way - if the penalty for rape is torture and death by angry mob then it is not in the rapist's interests to keep their victims alive - they stand less chance of being caught if they kill the witness for a start. This is not intended to diminish the crime of rape in the slightest which is undeniably horrific, thankfully not one myself or my immediate family have been a victim of and as such not a crime of which I will ever fully understand the impact to the victim, although I have no doubt it's utterly devastating. What I think I am reasonably safe in saying however is that on balance, after the passing of considerable time, being raped and left alive is better, if only fractionally, than being raped and murdered.
Police are hunting the killers of a former child sex offender who was found brutally stabbed to death.
The victim, whose mutilated body was found at business premises in Wandsworth, south London, also suffered non-fatal injuries to "other parts of his body".
He was found naked and covered in blood in his caravan on the site.
I'd not want to share headspace with someone capable of this. Wouldn't appreciate walking in on the aftermath either.
454697819
12-12-08, 01:16 PM
**** happens to bad ppl, I will not loose sleep over it tonight... although it is upleasant.
wyrdness
12-12-08, 01:17 PM
people like that are not peolple, they are animals.
Who are 'animals'? The guy who was killed, the baying mob that killed him, or both?
No question got what was coming to him, maybe a little harsh but people like that are not peolple, they are animals.
Its a long winded debate but the justice system in this country is crap.
It's the attitude that some people are less than human, or less worthy of life that gets us into this situation in the first place.
i.e. whether it's a racial thing, a religious intolerance, a paedo thinking that his victim is not human OR a mob dispensing mob justice.
plowsie
12-12-08, 01:52 PM
The child molestor is the animal, not the mob.
My opinion is that there is any way a child molester can be made to pay for his crime, there is not torture method on earth that will make up for what they have done. Death is not a punishment for people like this.
Castration and removing their hands could be though...
Disclaimer - This is a joke!
MiniMatt
12-12-08, 02:08 PM
The child molestor is the animal, not the mob.
My opinion is that there is any way a child molester can be made to pay for his crime, there is not torture method on earth that will make up for what they have done. Death is not a punishment for people like this.
And when the baying mob get the wrong person? Or a paediatrician? Is that an acceptable loss? What if it's your son, your brother, your father who has his knackers cut off with a rusty knife before being set on fire and stabbed to death - what would you do to those who did this to your son/brother/father? And what would their relatives then do to you and your mob?
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
If it were my daughter he had done it too. I think I could very likely bring myself to do this to him.
It wasn't so I couldn't. But can totally understand someone that could.
Sympathy, I have none.
Sorry.
Flamin_Squirrel
12-12-08, 03:04 PM
I'm sorry, but that's the funniest thing I've heard this week (comedy thread included!). Appropriate sentencing? Can I come live in your world please?
Without background on the murder victim, I fail to see how I can form an opinion due to internal conflicts.
Except that in this age the courts do not work properly, sentences are far too light & too many decisions have been taken away from the person handing out the sentence, even if they are put inside they live the life of reily, three square meals a day, roof over their head, colour TV, internet access etc etc, we pay a fortune for that, they get it all for free, whilst i don't initially agree with what possibly happened, i could maybe understand a parent loosing it if he was sure that person had molested their child.
[quote=Mr Speirs;1716770]100% is not right. No-one should take the law into their own hands.
This is why we have courts, jurys and prisons so that the person is found guilty and sentenced appropiately.
For years now the courts have been imposing grotesquely lenient sentences for all sorts of crimes ( excluding Mr Martin? ) to the extent that most respect for the courts & government are now zero.
When a reasonable sentence IS imposed, the offender is released early, often to promptly reoffend. Those who sanction these early releases should themselves suffer sanctions when new offences take place - that would focus their minds a little!
Uhuh. Right, so other than believing everything you read in The Sun, what are you basing this idea of lenient sentencing on? :?
F**k all, I'm guessing.
Uhuh. Right, so other than believing everything you read in The Sun, what are you basing this idea of lenient sentencing on? :?
F**k all, I'm guessing.
You want examples? OK. 30 seconds in google brings this (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/crown-protests-at-lenient-sentence-for-vicars-killer-641737.html), this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2647222/More-than-70-criminals-given-unduly-lenient-sentences-last-year.html), this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1168883.stm) and these examples taken from the CPS themselves:
At the Old Bailey, a defendant was convicted of causing death by dangerous driving and ordered to do community service. The CPS referred the case to the Attorney General, who referred it to the Court of Appeal. The sentence was increased to a prison sentence of three and a half years.
A defendant at the Crown Court in Newcastle was found guilty of two serious sexual assaults and was sentenced to five years. The CPS referred the case to the Attorney, who referred it to the Court of Appeal. The sentence was increased to eight years imprisonment.
Not a hint of The Sun in sight. :rolleyes:
Flamin_Squirrel
12-12-08, 03:21 PM
You want examples? OK. 30 seconds in google brings this (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/crown-protests-at-lenient-sentence-for-vicars-killer-641737.html), this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2647222/More-than-70-criminals-given-unduly-lenient-sentences-last-year.html), this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1168883.stm) and these examples taken from the CPS themselves:
Not a hint of The Sun in sight. :rolleyes:
See if you can find something that indicates there's an systematic problem with lenient sentences. Otherwise, I'm not interested in sensationalist media articles.
Sex attackers - ugh
But being the woolly liberal that I am on social issues, I'm entirely with MiniMatt:D
Rather than let the public hand out possibility miss informed justice, how about a justice system that reflects what the public (with an IQ over 130 anyway otherwise it will be whatever the Sun decides) wish. That way you will not have the public attacking men (usually) who are on some obituary list and all they have done is taken pictures of there kid at a school footy match.
Or have a system that kills anyone who has ever committed any crime. 1 strike and your out. The world would have a much smaller population so the environment would benefit and the oil would last longer.........I'm not sure everyone will agree with me on this one.
Flamin_Squirrel
12-12-08, 03:30 PM
Rather than let the public hand out possibility miss informed justice, how about a justice system that reflects what the public (with an IQ over 130 anyway otherwise it will be whatever the Sun decides) wish. That way you will not have the public attacking men (usually) who are on some obituary list and all they have done is taken pictures of there kid at a school footy match.
We have a justice system that's been refined over hundreds of years and for the most part works well. There is no point changing it for something that won't work any better, or indeed worse, just because what we have now isn't perfect, because a perfect justice system is impossible to achieve.
Flamin_Squirrel
12-12-08, 03:43 PM
This is true for sure, but maybe they should have a mandatory sentence of life without release if you rape or molest.
:rolleyes:
We have a justice system that's been refined over hundreds of years and for the most part works well. There is no point changing it for something that won't work any better, or indeed worse, just because what we have now isn't perfect, because a perfect justice system is impossible to achieve.
Are you then saying that because it works well mostly, we should not touch it and try and make it better? That's what is sounds like you are saying. Don't change anything in case we make it worse. Bit of a daft thing to think assuming that is what you are saying.
Flamin_Squirrel
12-12-08, 03:53 PM
Are you then saying that because it works well mostly, we should not touch it and try and make it better? That's what is sounds like you are saying. Don't change anything in case we make it worse. Bit of a daft thing to think assuming that is what you are saying.
Nope. I'm saying it HAS been touched and it HAS been improved. Perhaps small improvements can still be made, but making sweeping changes would be foolish.
1 down 1000's to go
but its a start
yorkie_chris
12-12-08, 05:42 PM
Surely, that's a separate issue? That's an issue of an undue lenient sentence? Blame the prosecutor or the judge.
Or you could just shoot him in the back of the head with a 9mm.
For raping a young girl like that I have no sympathy, the more nonces like that get brutally murdered the better, it's a good deterrent for anyone else who's tempted.
If it were my kid, I probably would have used a gallon of petrol instead.
MiniMatt
12-12-08, 05:49 PM
Or you could just shoot him in the back of the head with a 9mm.
For raping a young girl like that I have no sympathy, the more nonces like that get brutally murdered the better, it's a good deterrent for anyone else who's tempted.
If it were my kid, I probably would have used a gallon of petrol instead.
I find myself repeating the same argument over and over again. If the punishment for rape is death then it is not in a rapist's interest to leave their victims alive. If the punishment for rape is death then unfortunately this will not prevent rape (the punishment for murder in much of the US is death but murders still happen - far more than they do here coincidentally). What you are suggesting as an improvement to criminal justice is for every rape victim to be murdered.
svdemon
12-12-08, 05:50 PM
The perpetrators deserve a Knighthood for this, its what the courts should be doing in the first place.
MiniMatt
12-12-08, 05:53 PM
1 down 1000's to go
but its a start
Tell me, in this utopian vision of criminal justice, what would the mob dispense to those, hmmm.... lets say, arrested for assaulting a police officer. Or drink driving perhaps (http://forums.sv650.org/showpost.php?p=1311302&postcount=6)? Doesn't matter if they did it or not - mobs don't work like that, they were arrested so they must be guilty.
Mobs don't require proof to get the pitchforks out. Before you start throwing stones it's time for you to move out from that greenhouse.
yorkie_chris
12-12-08, 05:55 PM
No it's not, I'm saying if someone had raped my child or my girlfriend or anyone dear to me. I would go to any length to remove them from this planet.
I suggest you read "dead or alive" by Geoff Thompson for a closer look into the psyche of rapists and other undesireables. As in reality, many of these dangerous animals are not as logical as you give them credit for.
And there's a term for you, "dangerous animal", yes that's correct, these people see themselves, and behave like predators. The term "sexual predator" is rather popular, so in my eyes there's nothing wrong with treating them as dangerous soft skinned game.
But anyway, hippiness aside. If it were your kid, your wife, your sister ... YOU would be down the pub buying a gun.
MiniMatt
12-12-08, 05:59 PM
The perpetrators deserve a Knighthood for this, its what the courts should be doing in the first place.
People capable of mutilating torturing and stabbing to death another living creature, human or otherwise, deserve nothing other than to be kept away from society as long as possible. It's one thing to think about it, it's another thing entirely to actually plan and do something like that up close and personal to another human being. Anyone capable of that level of cruelty is a real threat to society. And yep, the exact same thing can be said for the rapist - the rapist is no better than the torturing murderous mob and the torturing murderous mob is no better than the rapist.
MiniMatt
12-12-08, 06:14 PM
I suggest you read "dead or alive" by Geoff Thompson for a closer look into the psyche of rapists and other undesireables. As in reality, many of these dangerous animals are not as logical as you give them credit for.
Ok so they're not logical enough to figure out they may as well murder their victims to eliminate any witnesses given that the punishment for rape and murder is the same but they are logical enough to see a death sentence as a deterrent? Will a death sentence for rape (and I'm assuming if we're going down this line the sentence for murder is also death) result in more rape victims being killed after they're raped?
And there's a term for you, "dangerous animal", yes that's correct, these people see themselves, and behave like predators. The term "sexual predator" is rather popular, so in my eyes there's nothing wrong with treating them as dangerous soft skinned game.
Assuming I agree with you on the animal thing (which I don't), how would you feel about anyone who has the capacity to mutilate, torture and then stab to death a game animal? Shoot it for meat or hell, even sport is one thing. But how would you feel about anyone capable of torturing a stag before stabbing it to death for example?
But anyway, hippiness aside. If it were your kid, your wife, your sister ... YOU would be down the pub buying a gun.
I can't tell how I'd act in that situation. And I hope to god I never will. And I hope to god you're in the same boat as me. I'm pretty damn sure I'd want to but there's a world of difference between wanting to kill someone and doing it, and there's a further world of difference between killing someone and torturing before killing. But this is precisely why the victims of crime, direct or indirect, are not Judge, Jury and Executioner. I can guarantee you'll have wronged somebody in your life, we all have one way or another - who gets to decide if dumping someone is worthy of the death penalty, my ex certainly thought it was (at least she said as much, thankfully she didn't act upon that), but luckily for me she doesn't get to decide.
Dangerous Dave
12-12-08, 06:15 PM
If it were your kid, your wife, your sister ... YOU would be down the pub buying a gun.
If it were to happen to either my miss', sister, or daughter I would use everything at my disposal and not one person on this planet would prevent me from hunting that animal down.
Preying on the physically weaker for pleasure and power, that is pathetic.
yorkie_chris
12-12-08, 06:16 PM
Assuming I agree with you on the animal thing (which I don't), how would you feel about anyone who has the capacity to mutilate, torture and then stab to death a game animal? Shoot it for meat or hell, even sport is one thing. But how would you feel about anyone capable of torturing a stag before stabbing it to death for example
What like the people who hunt with dogs? :-P
Nah it should be humane. Long range rifle is a good start.
Dangerous Dave
12-12-08, 06:19 PM
there's a world of difference between wanting to kill someone and doing it
Aye, and it something that you will never forget and it will haunt you for a long time if you have any decency in you.
MiniMatt
12-12-08, 06:22 PM
But anyway, hippiness aside. If it were your kid, your wife, your sister ... YOU would be down the pub buying a gun.
Thought of another one... As stated, thankfully I'm not in that position, but unfortunately there are a hell of a lot of people out there who are. Victims, direct or indirect of this sort of crime - now, there's far far more of these people than there are dead rapists. So whilst undoubtedly most of these people feel like going down the pub and buying a gun the fact of the matter is that the massively vast majority of them don't.
Except the particular bunch involved in todays act (and I'm very much guessing here, but we haven't got any idea as yet if these people were victims or just a mindless riled mob with no connection to their victim other than reading about a "paedo on their patch").
So, horrible thought, but going on the evidence of previous victims, the odds are heavily stacked that I WOULDN'T be down the pub buying a gun. Not claiming that I wouldn't want to by any stretch.
It's one thing to think about it, it's another thing entirely to actually plan and do something like that up close and personal to another human being. Anyone capable of that level of cruelty is a real threat to society. And yep, the exact same thing can be said for the rapist - the rapist is no better than the torturing murderous mob and the torturing murderous mob is no better than the rapist.
You're only half right IMO there MiniMatt. YC on the other hand, I fully agree with unreservedly, having been in a similar position to one he details.
I did type out a full explanation, but thought better of it TBH.
Flamin_Squirrel
12-12-08, 07:17 PM
I find myself repeating the same argument over and over again. If the punishment for rape is death then it is not in a rapist's interest to leave their victims alive. If the punishment for rape is death then unfortunately this will not prevent rape (the punishment for murder in much of the US is death but murders still happen - far more than they do here coincidentally). What you are suggesting as an improvement to criminal justice is for every rape victim to be murdered.
I don't think anyone is listening to your sage advice.
May I offer you a wall to bang your head against? ](*,)
Seems people are far more interested in revenge than justice, or even maintaining a civilised society.
Biker Biggles
12-12-08, 07:23 PM
If you look at how many of our inner city gangs operate you will find a blueprint for how it goes when you debunk the civilised process of law and order.Tempting though it may be(superficially) to go down that route a short consultation with ones brain cells soon shows the folly of it.Thats assuming "one" has any brain cells.
wyrdness
12-12-08, 07:38 PM
The perpetrators deserve a Knighthood for this, its what the courts should be doing in the first place.
I suppose that these people deserve a knighthood too:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society
No, what they actually deserve is to be locked up for a long time. Which is what is likely to happen to them once they're caught.
'a bunch of flowers was laid by a 15-year-old called Lucy. She said: 'I used to go round his caravan instead of going to school. He never laid a finger on me. He told me to go back to school.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1094055/Convicted-paedophile-struck-stabbed-death-stripped-mutilated-suspected-vigilante-attack.html
phil24_7
13-12-08, 09:15 PM
100% is not right. No-one should take the law into their own hands.
This is why we have courts, jurys and prisons so that the person is found guilty and sentenced appropiately.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!:D
Do you have any idea how many things I may/or may not have gotten away with in my 30 years??:confused: I wasn't a very nice person 10 years ago and would've thrown someone off a bridge for looking at me the wrong way.:(
I happen to be a well adjusted human being now (well, reasonably!!:D) but the law, police or legal system did f all to protect the people I inflicted myself upon.:(
The police have also never managed to catch anybody who has stolen from me, I however have caught up with EVERY one of them!:D
I'm not saying that vigilantism is right or wrong, just that the law and legal system as well as the prison system can't deal with the society we live in!
I'm not gonna voice my opinion of what should be done to Pedophiles as this is a U rated forum and I may also sicken a few of you as my views can be a bit extreme sometimes!
Regards
No and this is a proven fact. Like alcoholics, sex offenders are that way for life. They are wired up wrong in the head - shrinks like to think they can change them - but for them to change they need to realise what they did is wrong. Sex offenders see nothing wrong with what they did, so to them they did no wrong.
They may appear to be rehabilitated because they know what the shrinks want to hear in order for them to be released.
Yet again Mike speaks the truth.
I could see qwack after qwack ,and they could do their worst...but Id still be a hetrosexual
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.