Yeah when Vance released that book and everybody said you’ve got to read it It explains the entire mindset of the conservatives. I found a copy and read it. I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop.
The entire f****** book is just an explanation that towns were built around big companies in coal mines and the big companies went overseas in the coal mines closed down. In the way it left drugs and joblessness.
It’s not like immigrants are coming in and taking their jobs. And then the entire right is begging for companies to not have any repercussions for doing any of that s***. It’s like they think if they’re really nice to the companies the companies will be really nice back to them or something.
The whole book is just a poorly written country song that doesn’t absolve any of the bad behavior at all.
Here’s another controversial take. We did something like that before, where we excluded a group of people from society because we didn’t like them. In the US we called it “Separate but Equal” and “Jim Crow”. I think it was called Apartheid in South Africa. Now I understand you aren’t suggesting we segregate people based on their race but rather their past convictions but it is similar and will have a similar outcome. Though you may want to limit it to a specific type of crime I will guarantee that it will expand to encompass more crimes and more people will be convicted of those crimes so that they can be excluded from society as well. Even here in the US there are some Republicans talking about adding teachers to the sex offender list if they talk about the wrong topic to their students.
You’re right it will be abused. I would like to say, in no way was I advocating for anything. I personally feel that once a person has completed their sentence they should be done. Period. Pedos disgust me but if they’re done with their sentence that’s it. They’re done.
You are seriously comparing punishing pedophiles to Jim Crow laws? Are you really comparing the abuse and mistreatment of black people to the punishment of pedophiles? Do you have any idea how that makes you sound?
Now I understand you aren’t suggesting we segregate people based on their race but rather their past convictions but it is similar and will have a similar outcome.
I was pretty clear on what I said. Segregation is bad no matter your excuse. If they did their time in prison then they return to society. If you don’t like how much time they served then argue for a longer sentence without it being cruel and unusual punishment. Further excluding them from society after their sentence is up does no good except make some people feel better. Why not do that for all crimes from the terrible ones like murder and manslaughter to DUIs and fraud. Kick everyone out of society so we can have only people with clean records. But since you came to my reply with your outrage why don’t you elaborate on why you are upset. What problems do you have with what I said?
You can argue rehab vs punishment, but what you are being downvoted for, correctly in my view, is for comparing people who were convicted for crimes according to law directly with people who never did anything wrong in first place.
You may say that everyone who finished serving a sentence is equal to anyone else before the law, but that may not be the case in practice, there are lots of legitimate reasons for people to stigmatize e.g. if they personally don’t agree with the sentencing length.
That may or may not be fair, but it is what it is.
Stigmatizing someone just because of the way they look is just wrong, people may have tastes in who they want to hang out with, but it is not equivalent to naturally fearing an ex-convict.
Washington Post - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Washington Post:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
I appreciate that they are made public for analysis, but there is no fucking way I’m watching those bastards stand outside, knowing they just stood there while children were being murdered.
Watch it. Be angry. Get your blood boiling. The parents and families deserve our anger at these fuck ups in uniform. Our anger will get things moving. These families need the outcry of every one of us to call these officers out and ask for their heads. Hold them accountable, and never let something like this happen again.
I think I made it quite clear that I am already angry at them and holding them accountable. All watching the video will do will make me feel awful. What does that accomplish?
I’m with you. I watched the video of the man who was trying to comply with orders from the police and the officer warned him if he did anything other than what he was being ordered, he would be shot. Then, he was given confusing orders, and was shot when he did the wrong thing. He was on his knees with his hands in plain view when the threat came. There were multiple officers with weapons drawn. The man was sobbing and begging before he was shot. I can’t unsee it. I think it’s important that people see it so others can be held accountable, but not EVERYONE has to see it.
Agree 100%. And, on top of the reason you gave for it to be important for some people to see, it’s also important to keep as a historical record. But I personally do not need to see or hear people dying or people not reacting despite knowing other people are dying to be upset about the situation or to want to hold those responsible to account.
I’ve never seen George Floyd’s murder. That did not stop me from protesting the police murdering him because… you know… they murdered him.
In August 2018, Brailsford was reinstated by the Mesa Police Department, staying for a further 42 days in what the department described as a “budget position”. The department agreed to reimburse Brailsford for medical expenses related to his post-traumatic stress disorder – the result of his shooting of Shaver and the resultant criminal trial. The reinstatement allowed Brailsford to apply for “accidental disability” experienced during the course of work. As a result, Brailsford was unanimously approved to be retired on medical grounds. Brailsford was also given a pension of $2,500 per month. The fact that Brailsford was ultimately medically retired instead of remaining fired was only revealed to the public in July 2019.
He just fucking executed him in the hallway and walked over his body, and he gets rewarded?
Yes, Daniel Shaver. It was horrible to watch. I hadn’t heard about the medical retirement or pension. I generally don’t advocate for violence, but if he came to a violent end, I would not shed any tears.
Nikkei Asian Review - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Nikkei Asian Review:
> MBFC: Right-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - Japan
> Wikipedia about this source
Alright… now I’m willing to bet that most people on here, if asked, believe strongly in criminal rehabilitation. But the comments here make me think ‘maybe not’.
Sure. He hasn’t taken any real responsibility nor faced adquete consequences for raping a child. He blames others for “bullying” rather than making any attempt to understand the outrage.
If his crime had been committed decades ago, and he faced appropriate sentencing, and made steps at reconciliation with the community this would be a more nuanced conversation.
No sympathy for him from here, but this is an interesting conversation about justice.
Is it his responsibility that the justice system gave him the sentence it did?
Who gets to decide what is adequate consequences, how long ago the crime should have been, what is appropriate sentencing and what is appropriate steps of reconciliation?
I agree with the gut feeling that he was sentenced lightly, but as the previous comment said, how do we combine that with a belief in the rehabilitation of criminals?
Makes sense. But does this community know whether he has done so? My understanding is that the crime was committed a decade ago, and that he admits fault. I assume nobody here followed it at the time.
It seems this community has turned very quickly to an un-nuanced discussion with very little data.
Absolutely, but the morality of said rapist competing at the Olympics a decade later, after having served his sentence and possibly having been rehabilitated is a pretty nuanced subject, wouldn’t you say?
That’s why he also had psychological treatment that he underwent willingly and why he has taken extensive measures to avoid any contact with children despite the fact that he has the all-clear if that were to happen.
If you’re going to be an apologist for a predator at least understand the situation. It looks like you are arguing just to be contrarian- not a good look in this case, highly insensitive given the type of crime we are discussing.
He did not serve his full eight year sentence. He was transferred back to Holland from England to serve the remainder of his eight year sentence - and was released the same year
So to answer you: No he absolutely did not serve his sentence
The Netherlands has different laws. He was convicted of the lesser crime of “ontucht”, which carries a different sentence. He served the sentence that matched with that crime. And given his successful rehabilitation, it was the right sentence to give.
He was arrested, prosecuted and convicted. He pled guilty. He served his prison sentence and underwent psychological treatment. He has taken extensive measures to avoid contact with children. This all happened over a decade ago. He repeatedly reflected on what happened and regrets it to this day.
The child in question only seems to regret he was arrested, and cut herself because of it. She doesn’t seem to think negatively about him at all, and because of that he was not convicted of grooming.
At this point, what the fuck more do you want from him? He’s fully rehabilitated. He knows what he did, why it’s bad and has done more than enough to prevent it from happening again. This “moral outrage” is just stupid and seems to be largely fuelled by right-wing British tabloids, because here in the Netherlands nobody seems to give a shit.
What’s your message here? “Rape a child, rape a dozen, we don’t care because we’re going to ostracize you from society forever?” Why would anyone bother to rehabilitate then?
We want this child raper to die. He raped a kid once, he’ll do it again. Rehabilitation doesn’t work to cure pedophiles, a 9mm super sonic rock through the dome is the cure.
That is very different from simply not wanting him to be a representative for his country and potential role model for aspiring athletes in one of the biggest media events of the world though. Being welcomed back as a member of society is one thing, but there is a point to be made about expecting more of Olympic athletes than your average member of society.
Yes, child rapists should be ostracised forever. As adults, we have a responsibility to protect the children in our communities. Sorry if this is hard for you to understand but the safety of innocent children is infinitely more important than the poor delicate feelings of a child rapist. If they don’t want to suffer the consequences of their actions, then they shouldn’t do the bad thing.
Also, he didn’t even serve the full sentence given by the court that sentenced him. So no, he did not serve his punishment. That’s a load of shite. His government extradited him and let him off easy. And then they effectively spat on the whole punishment again by letting him represent his country anyway.
It doesn’t matter how long ago it was. The harm was still real. And it screams “we care more about perpetrators’ rights than victims.” Or maybe they don’t care because the victim wasn’t Dutch. I don’t know.
I do however agree that they shouldn’t go after his family. He committed the crime, not them. Even if I am disgusted by the very idea of anyone willing to sleep with a nonce. Still not my business.
She doesn’t seem to think negatively about him at all, and because of that he was not convicted of grooming.
How do you know what she thinks today? There is a reason many countries do not consider a 12-year-old to be able to consent to sex. They don’t understand sex. They don’t understand rape. They may have only been menstruating for less than a year.
Why are you defending a pedophile so hard in this thread?? He didn’t even serve his full sentence since he was pulled out of the UK early. What we want from him is an apology for what he did, but it doesn’t look like we will ever get that since he is now playing victim as the rapist. Maybe if he actually served his full sentence things would be a little different, but he got a small slap on the wrist for one of the worst crimes someone can commit. He should never have been sent to the Olympics as a representative of the Netherlands.
I am glad you are saying this. I have started typing a similar comment several times, but didn’t want to deal with the inevitable avalanche of comments from what seems to be the lemmy hive mind on this subject.
“Rape a child, rape a dozen, we don’t care because we’re going to ostracize you from society forever?” Why would anyone bother to rehabilitate then?
Sounds fine to me. Put them all in a cage forever. We don’t need people in society that have to have “raping kids is a bad thing” explained to them. If I was confident the justice system wouldn’t falsely convict people I’d be arguing to execute them.
What do you do when innocent people end up getting convicted?
Why do we need people in society who need “raping adults is a bad thing” explained to them? Or “killing kids is a bad thing”? Or “killing adults is a bad thing”? Or “drinking and driving is a bad thing”? Or “robbery is a bad thing”?
I already covered this in my post. If we could determine guilt with 100% accuracy kill them. We can’t so settle for locking them up forever. If they’re found to be innocent later they can be released and compensated for their time. For raping adults and killing kids the same criteria as raping kids should be applied.
Or “killing adults is a bad thing”? Or “drinking and driving is a bad thing”? Or “robbery is a bad thing”?
These are all very different from rape or harming children and there can be other factors to consider regarding motive that would have to be taken into account when doing the sentencing. For instance in the Gary Plauché case. He murdered the man who kidnapped and molested his son. If that’s his threshold for murder, it’s unlikely he would re-offend (and he didn’t for the rest of his life).
So we don’t need rapists (incl. of adults) or child murderers in society because they can’t be rehabilitated. But people who murder adults can serve their time and be welcomed back into society…am I following what you’re saying?
Are we counting it as the age of majority? Murder a 15/17 year old, imprisoned for life, murder a 16/18 year old, regular sentence?
Rape an adult, life imprisonment, murder an adult, regular sentence?
So we don’t need rapists (incl. of adults) or child murderers in society because they can’t be rehabilitated. But people who murder adults can serve their time and be welcomed back into society…am I following what you’re saying?
Apparently not. I said you have to look at the context of the murder to determine how to handle them appropriately. I even gave you an example of one where with mitigating circumstances. If it’s unlikely the murderer can be rehabilitated lock them up forever too. As for what’s considered a child I don’t have a good answer, I suppose again, it would have to be contextual.
I get the impression that many lemmy users don’t have a lot of life experience. Everyone deals in absolutes and ideals, no one seems to see the nuance.
The question of “should this guy be allowed to compete” is a complex one, and anyone who thinks there’s an easy answer is an idiot.
It’s the exact opposite of a complex question. People who rape children shouldn’t be allowed to represent their nation at the Olympics. That’s a hard line in the sand that normal people are perfectly fine with. It’s amazingly reasonable. No one who rapes a child gets rewarded with honor and respect. If they serve an appropriate punishment and show remorse, two things he never did, you can return to life. You should not however be honored on the national and even worldwide stage that is a privilege that should be lost forever. Don’t like it? Don’t rape kids. Not a lot of nuance needed.
“Everyone deals in absolutes” sure sounds a lot like an absolute. It’s easier to fall into using absolutes in short form, instantaneous internet comments.
I absolutely believe in rehabilitation. I also don’t believe that a little over a year in prison for repeatedly raping a child is enough time to rehabilitate someone who did that. As I pointed out elsewhere in the thread, he’s done things like say it was a mistake, but he has yet to apologize for it. That, to me, says he has not been rehabilitated. In fact, I would say that one of the first signs of rehabilitation is to apologize for your actions.
I’d argue being an Olympian, which requires relying on a mix of public funding, ones own resources (usually family or sponsors), and gives an international platform, media coverage and potential prominence is a privilege given quid pro quo for behavior befitting that privilege.
Post-rehabilitation and having served one’s time - There’s no reason this person couldn’t practice their sport in private, there’s no reason this person couldn’t be a private citizen with a regular office job.
However, I’m sure you could agree that they shouldn’t ever be allowed to work with children again, so there must be a line of compromise you agree with.
I’d also argue that knowing that one’s mistakes - although paid for - may have lifetime consequences - are also part of the rehab process. Like how alcoholics can never have one drink again.
Just imagine if our national infrastructure was as neglected as the maintenance on these buildings. That sure would be expensive to sort out if we ever get around to it!
yeah but luckily we have been collecting appropriate amount of tax for the last 50 years so even if it happens we can just pull from our massive rainy day fund or borrow since we have no deficit.
the deficit is related to our options for future spending needs. More available credit and of course rainy day funds remove the need to borrow for emergencies.
to be fair, the kids were on bikes? cars are weapons, and I can see not wanting those in your community. this is the fuckcars activism we need in the world.
One thing that confounded me when I went to Starbucks for the first time. Asked them for a large black coffee. Since their coffee is way overbrewed so it can be mixed with stuff, it was super strong super hot garbage.
Someone later told me to order it with a little ice to make it drinkable and dilute the flavor.
My question was: why can’t I just buy coffee at a coffee place?
Have a stack of 5-10 year old Starbucks gift cards I’ve collected from various work functions that are still valid. I still haven’t gone back. They can’t even get me as a free customer.
I’m not saying that one should be confined to home eating only what they personally curate. I am saying that this broad made it through medical school, did a residency, dealt with a healthy cross section of society at is dumbest. Who literally puts their life in the hands of a waiter, who has to them communicate to a cook, if there was one. Some doctors graduate with D’s.
I’m not saying that one should be confined to home eating only what they personally curate, but I’m saying that one should be confined to home eating only what they personally curate. Also I’m sexist af.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.