Printable View
Now you're just being silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowsworn
Honestly I think rehabilitation is great, but I see it as a secondary function to separating those who refuse to respect the liberty of others.
I should really expand upon this, but I'm currently eating a sandwich and can't be arsed.
I don't know man, 5 year olds seem pretty tight to me.
Not that I would know or anything.
Apparently it worked, he hasn't molested any children lately.Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowsworn
He's obviously still going to think about it, you can't cure a ********* just like you can't "cure" a homosexual or a heterosexual, I would rather have him writing books about it than acting on it.
wasnt there a prison in america where people are locked up for the rest of their lives? (people like the one in the video lol) it had a living room and things to do to keep their mind of bad things,
i think i saw a documentation of that before :p he would fit just perfect there... together with that stupid reporter xD
edit: but yeah he might be a bit old for it lol, and aslong he doesnt DO anything and keep him on a leash (or just keep trying to talk some sense into him) it should be ok :P
It didn't work, he said he wasn't sorry for what he did. If he had the chance, he would do it again I'm sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by hobosexual
Obviously, we should just build a city with a giant wall around it, that does not have internet or any other means of communication, where all *********s can live in seclusion.
This way they can go on about their lives without harming anyone. And then, when a child acts up or don't do like we tell them, we can scare them by saying "If you don't behave we'll ship you off to pedoville and THEN you'll be sorry you didn't eat your vegetables!".
*sigh*Quote:
Originally Posted by hian
I really don't know how to respond to this video, I really don't.
Pretty sure some hillbilly is going to come to him with a shot gun and kill him.
If not eventually someone will do something.
Don't believe people in australia would take actions into their own hands, after all a man in Europe was arrested for exercising self-defense.
Sounds like a hearty claim... source to article please?Quote:
Originally Posted by SR-71
http://www.onrpg.com/boards/148013.html
Hefty Hefty
As long as he hasn't acted on it again, he is rehabilitated.Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowsworn
Sure, he is ****ed up in the head...but at least hes not still doing what he did before.
If he does again, his sentence should be doubled IMO. He didn't learn the first time, so a double sentence might teach him better. Or, in his case, last the rest of his miserable life.
@SR-71:
So you pull the rabbit out of the hat:
The trauma made them insane.
This ploy is only effective after an admission of guilt.
IMO, the past is irrelevant for this decision, aside from the effects that it might have on the future.Quote:
Nobody will ever come up with a good excuse for killing someone who hasn't killed anyone.
Killing to prove a point is not an option.
Killing to avert great danger can be.
That guy is a completely MORON! XD He did not know what he said..
I live in Australia ==''. They should do something about this fool.
The "ploy" can be effective to take out premeditation, premeditation in attempted murder, assault, or the charges placed against the man who was sentenced. If the fact that he had beat the man was used against him. For Example: He had not known how hard he was hitting the man, only that this man had violated their home and compromised their families safety. He was not willing to let anything happen to his family, now or in the future. This is only brought up if there is no other evidence in the case to support the defense, and is up to the defendants testimony to carry through.
With the subject of killing to prove a point and killing to avoid a greater danger. phycologically we all as human beings handle mental trauma differently. We cannot account for ones circumstances and genetic makeup that regulate biological changes within the body (working or not). If he were to be killed, by those suffering from trauma, depending on how you define death (biological or not), it could be justified as self-defense (not in the court of law). Inadvertent murder happening to one that excercise control over one's emotions up to the breaking point, to suicide. Killing to prevent that and enable closure. Killing becomes a point through the killing to prevent greater danger to 2 over the 1, the point becoming the closure and a message of how pain is recapitulated over time. how dramatic.
"Would you like to say sorry?"
"NO@@@@"