|
those dumb fucks could've actually, you know, used some common sense. But basically they knew. Most people stay away from those situations, predatory people don't. Harsher punishment feels better and sends a clear message. Don't gently caress a drugged up girl or you will get 1x years in prison
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 11:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 15:22 |
|
|
Beeswax posted:Despite often being painted as some sort of omnipotent manipulative cabal which controlled Sweden for most of the 20th century, Socialdemokraterna are complete bumbling idiots in most regards when it comes to playing the media and seizing any sort of narrative initiative. It also doesn't help that the party executive has been controlled by former SSU inter-city kids since the last economic crash. The same people who nodded without question at Persson, ran Sahlin's awful 2010 campaign and that ousted Juholt are still in control.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 11:30
|
|
|
Wild Horses posted:those dumb fucks could've actually, you know, used some common sense. But basically they knew.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 11:33
|
|
|
well you sound like an rear end in a top hat if your knee jerk reaction is to claim the rapists did not know what they were doing. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 11:43
|
|
|
Wild Horses posted:well you sound like an rear end in a top hat if your knee jerk reaction is to claim the rapists did not know what they were doing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 11:54
|
|
|
Wild Horses posted:well you sound like an rear end in a top hat if your knee jerk reaction is to claim the rapists did not know what they were doing. You sound like an rear end in a top hat if your knee jerk reaction is to mindlessly dismiss informed analysis in favour of your other knee jerk reaction. Like, the entire point is that some super lovely guys have a super lovely view of women and therefore don't see anything wrong with livestreaming rape, so you're basically raging against somebody who is basically saying that same thing as you here. The question is, how is harsher punishments reasonably going to deter someone who doesn't think what they're doing is wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 11:58
|
|
|
Beeswax posted:Despite often being painted as some sort of omnipotent manipulative cabal which controlled Sweden for most of the 20th century, Socialdemokraterna are complete bumbling idiots in most regards when it comes to playing the media and seizing any sort of narrative initiative.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 12:14
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:You sound like an rear end in a top hat if your knee jerk reaction is to mindlessly dismiss informed analysis in favour of your other knee jerk reaction. Yeah sure, might be applicable in this specific case but if you believe that all rapists are convinced they're not doing anything wrong, you're a god drat moron.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 12:17
|
|
so that means I can be a cheapskate and post about posting instead of having some wit or spending any more on comedy avs for people. Which I'm also incapable of. Comedy.
|
Cerebral Bore posted:You sound like an rear end in a top hat if your knee jerk reaction is to mindlessly dismiss informed analysis in favour of your other knee jerk reaction. You stick them in a prison cell for a long rear end time, then try to rehabilitate them by teaching them to act like human beings. That sends the message that rape is unacceptable, and that we actually consider it a serious offense, while trying to make the shitstains realise why they're being shitstains and how not to be shitstains. This isn't rocket science. But I find it fascinating that you apparently think ignorance of the law means they should get less jail time. "Oh sorry officer, I didn't know drugging someone then raping them was a crime" is, in your view, a legitimate excuse apparently. Defending rapists is now "informed analysis"! Next up on Cerebral Bore's informed analysis: Why women who dress slutty have it coming! Seriously, gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
Retarded Goatee posted:Yeah sure, might be applicable in this specific case but if you believe that all rapists are convinced they're not doing anything wrong, you're a god drat moron. Sure is a good thing he hasn't said anything of the sort, nor has anyone else ITT. edit: McCloud posted:But I find it fascinating that you apparently think ignorance of the law means they should get less jail time. "Oh sorry officer, I didn't know drugging someone then raping them was a crime" is, in your view, a legitimate excuse apparently. Defending rapists is now "informed analysis"! Next up on Cerebral Bore's informed analysis: Why women who dress slutty have it coming! How bad at reading do you have to be to reach this conclusion? What the gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
McCloud posted:You stick them in a prison cell for a long rear end time, then try to rehabilitate them by teaching them to act like human beings. That sends the message that rape is unacceptable, and that we actually consider it a serious offense, while trying to make the shitstains realise why they're being shitstains and how not to be shitstains. This isn't rocket science. Did you drop out of middle school, or are you having a stroke? Retarded Goatee posted:Yeah sure, might be applicable in this specific case but if you believe that all rapists are convinced they're not doing anything wrong, you're a god drat moron. So you're super angry about an article written about a specific case making an argument pertaining to this specific case and your reason for this is that it's not applicable to the general case? OK then. EDIT: Mainly I'm just baffled by ostensible adults who still haven't managed to grasp the distinction between normative and descriptive statements. Cerebral Bore fucked around with this message at 12:34 on Jan 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
Beeswax posted:Sure is a good thing he hasn't said anything of the sort, nor has anyone else ITT. Cerebral Bore posted:
Pretty easy to reach the conclusion, actually! I'm pretty tired of all this hand wringing and "informed analysis" in the defense of these poor poor rapists. This isn't some gordian knot of unimaginable complexity. You break the law, you suffer the consequences. That the consequences of rape in this country are laughable is the real issue here, not the ignorance of the rapist. Ignorance of lovely behavior is no excuse to break the law and should be punished. This is to A) Deter future shitheads who want to do the thing, or claim ignorance as an excuse to get a lighter punishment, and to B) signal that we as a society view this sort of behavior as unacceptable. Yes, future shitheads might commit the exact same crime due to their ignorance, but by punishing current shitheads now we increase the odds of future potential shitheads knowing that this is a crime, we punish this sort of stuff harshly and to not loving do it by much more than just putting them in rehab and calling it a day. Doubly so in cases with lots of media attention. Stop defending this poo poo and stop pretending that article has any form of "informed analysis". It's bullshit through and through.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
You do realize that with current sentencing laws rape can land you anywhere between 2-10 years in prison depending on severity, right...?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:You do realize that with current sentencing laws rape can land you anywhere between 2-10 years in prison depending on severity, right...? Current sentencing laws are based upon proving the appearance of non consent, rather then proving that there was consent. Thus a huge margin of rape trials never go to court. Due to to the lack of proper actions taken and the dismissal of many rape trials due to technicalities, i completely understand any anger and won't hold it against anybody screaming "cut the dicks of the rapists."
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
You can increase punishment until we lob rapist into the sun but it won't matter a bit when the problem is difficulty of prosecution. Some of that can be resolved by untangling outdated judicial wordings (jesus what was that even last year) but there's a reason that most experts consider this to be a battle that is best fought by changing norms. Increasing punishment makes it seem like you're doing something but in actuality you're not really doing anything, like murder statistically most rapes are not planned. For example, when three fuckers with a livestream put their hands on a girl you can bet your rear end that risk-analysis was the last thing on their mind. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 13:25 on Jan 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 13:22
|
|
|
Some people make it their life's work to combat sexual predatory behaviour in all kinds of different ways. I can understand that they're annoyed when suddenly one case happens to blow up in the newspapers because of some sensational detail, and now everyone is a holy warrior with a strong opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
McCloud posted:Stop defending this poo poo drat, the Rape Defenders ITT got owned
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:You can increase punishment until we lob rapist into the sun but it won't matter a bit when the problem is difficulty of prosecution. Some of that can be resolved by untangling outdated judicial wordings (jesus what was that even last year) but there's a reason that most experts consider this to be a battle that is best fought by changing norms. This is a good point. The case with the woman in a wheelchair was horrifying, and I can't for the life of me understand why the courts are so god drat insistent on giving every single benefit of the doubt to rapists. I don't know what the issue is, if it's weird legaleese or lovely people with lovely opinions, but something has to change.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 13:44
|
|
|
McCloud posted:Pretty easy to reach the conclusion, actually! Literally nobody has defended any of this, so I suppose this all is just a case of your reading comprehention being piss-poor. EDIT: I mean, for gently caress's sake, we're talking about some shitheads who were literally livestreaming their crime It's pretty safe to say that somebody who is just feigning ignorance about what they're doing would be dumb enough to literally provide decisive video evidence of their criminal act. Your attempted counterpoints are pure nonsense and miss the point by a country mile. Cerebral Bore fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Jan 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
Aight, I clearly missunderstood and built up strawmen. Mea culpa. So humor me and explain what you did mean then, for my own clarity and benefit if nothing else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
McCloud posted:Aight, I clearly missunderstood and built up strawmen. Mea culpa. Tha article is addressing a specific situation of some shithead fuckers raping a girl and livestreaming it. The point it's making is that super-lovely attitudes towards women in society lead to super-lovely dudes like this raping but also not think of it as a "real" rape and hence a not crime. Here we could bring up the the standard list of excuses that rapists tell themselves, but I'll omit that for the sake of brevity. The problem it brings up is that the reaction to poo poo like this happening is generally to demand harsher sentencing to deter more poo poo like this from happening in the future. After this the article then asks a very good question about how exactly stiffer sentences are supposed to deter people who don't see the crime they're committing as a crime. This doesn't have anything to do with letting the aforementioned shithead fuckers off the hook, but is rather a descriptive statement about criminal psychology. Simply put, while ignorance of the law isn't an excuse, it's hard to see how harsh sentences will deter somebody from committing a crime they're ignorant of. Therefore it concludes that a better solution to preventing poo poo like this particular case from happening in the future than demanding harsher sentences would be to make a real effort in educate people about what rape actually is. This shouldn't be a hard argument to grasp, and it's not saying that raping women is A-OK as long as the rapist doesn't think what they're doing is rape. It's simply arguing for taking a more effective approach towards preventing cases like this from happening in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
Executing people who didn't understand what they were doing is rape is a 100% sure way to prevent them from having a similar misunderstanding in the future,
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
White Rock posted:Don't lump the communists with the "left" the fields identity politics, they hate it as much as you: interesting, good listen for my frustrated mind
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:You sound like an rear end in a top hat if your knee jerk reaction is to mindlessly dismiss informed analysis in favour of your other knee jerk reaction. The correct answer is to place them in a center for behavioral correction, kind of like a mental hospital, indefinitely. They will only be released once a panel of experts agree that they have truly learned and sincerely believe rape is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Executing people who didn't understand what they were doing is rape is a 100% sure way to prevent them from having a similar misunderstanding in the future,
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
doverhog posted:The correct answer is to place them in a center for behavioral correction, kind of like a mental hospital, indefinitely. They will only be released once a panel of experts agree that they have truly learned and sincerely believe rape is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
It would be only fair, their imprisonment could be very short indeed if they are willing to learn and abandon bad views. If they are not, they are a danger to the public, much like the criminally insane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
doverhog posted:The correct answer is to place them in a center for behavioral correction, kind of like a mental hospital, indefinitely. They will only be released once a panel of experts agree that they have truly learned and sincerely believe rape is wrong. At this point I'm actually starting to believe that our educational system doesn't really teach our children to read.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
How would you educate people convicted of rape, not believing rape is wrong, that it in fact is wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
See, there's a bit of an elephant in the room here. It has four wives, some weird notions about rape and trying to correct those would push some uncomfortable buttons among people who pretend to be concerned about the elephant. (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 11:50
|
|
|
Karpaw posted:See, there's a bit of an elephant in the room here. It has four wives, some weird notions about rape and trying to correct those would push some uncomfortable buttons among people who pretend to be concerned about the elephant. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
I think Jimmie is kinda cute and vulnerable
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Well you say that but
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
Karpaw posted:See, there's a bit of an elephant in the room here. It has four wives, some weird notions about rape and trying to correct those would push some uncomfortable buttons among people who pretend to be concerned about the elephant. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2017 12:34
|
|
|
I have very similar glasses, which really bugs me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 10:49
|
|
|
Beeswax posted:Well you say that but "Tonight: You." Great, now I'm imagining him colored yellow with giant flabby hands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
evilmiera posted:"Tonight: You." Hey, what's that sound? Oh... it's just me screaming internally, because that is a terrifying mental image. Although shouldn't he be colored vaguely orange and have tiny hands for maximum effect? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2017 07:43
|
|
|
Hejsan, jag kommer här att bringa kultur. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdhMHRQdh0Y
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 15:22 |
|
|
Vilket original. Han har inte fel precis
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 09:27
|
|