Vigilante Justice In Action

[Joe Demko]

http://www.ashlandcitytimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070915/NEWS03/709150361/1291/MTCN01

This is an example of why I am less than enamoured with people deciding to take justice into their own hands.

[Manedwolf]

While pedophiles should indeed DIAF, that's not justified, no.

The best way to deal with a pedophole, IMO, if you find that one is in your neighborhood via the map thing, is to just keep putting their photo, name and address with "Convicted Pedophile! Keep your children away from this person" all over the neighborhood, near schools, and such until they leave. And also to have volunteers out at Halloween to warn families away from their house.

[Strings]

GAH!!! Why do *I* keep having to jump in on things like this?!?!?

 First off... "pedophilia" was mentioned nowhere. What the article said: "charges he downloaded more than 100 pornographic pictures of young girls". Entirely possibly that downloading pictures was all he did, and even that the pictures in question were of young-looking adult women. That said...

 Every time something like this (or the other instances mentioned in the article) happens, I cringe. whenever a community protests the release of a "sexual predator", I get a little more concerned...

 All these are adding up. Soon, there won't BE notification to the community, and there won't BE a list of sex offenders. Enough of this stuff goes on, and there will be challenges in the courts to the laws that mandate community notification and sex offender registry...

 Don't get me wrong: someone guilty of harming a child can't have enough bad stuff happen to them, in my opinion. But we could easily be looking at having the information available (via the sex offender registry, and community notification when a predator is released into said community), and having it gone because it puts these "poor folks who have paid their debt to society" at risk...

 Which would people prefer?

[Balog]

Is a mandatory death sentence for people convicted of sexually abusing children out of the question?

[Manedwolf]

Strings, the issue is that if they download pornographic issues of children, then a child somewhere was abused to make them. So they're a consumer of it, and encouraging it to happen.

That's why we punish them.

I also fear that the stuff will be pulled from online, but I think if anyone causes that, it'll be the damned ACLU. Well. When they're not busy defending jihadists.

[Joe Demko]

Is a mandatory death sentence for people convicted of sexually abusing children out of the question?

The person they killed isn't the one accused of the crime.  The accused man isn't convicted.  The house they burned down wasn't even his property.  The vigilantes would have done better to stay home and let the system handle the accused.

[Balog]

My point was that if the people knew that a convicted child abuser would be put to death by the system they would be less likely to "take the matter into their hands."

And in honor of my profligate pronoun use, They.

[Stand_watie]

Is a mandatory death sentence for people convicted of sexually abusing children out of the question?

The person they killed isn't the one accused of the crime.  The accused man isn't convicted.  The house they burned down wasn't even his property.  The vigilantes would have done better to stay home and let the system handle the accused.

But they'd have done even better to have actually found a properly convicted pedophile, chained his or her legs to the flagpole, given them a hacksaw, told them they had poisoned their lunch milk, and the only way to get the antidote was to saw off their own legs...

[Balog]

No need for elaborate revenge fantasies. But I'll admit if I ever get diagnosed with terminal cancer I plan on killing as many child rapists as I can before the cops stop me. I just want to leave the world a better place.

[De Selby]

The capital murderers in this case should have to face the death penalty just like child killers.  They burned some woman to death who, as far as we know, did absolutely nothing wrong. 

[Balog]

I truly don't understand a society so weak and gutless that it refuses to destroy those who rape children like the rabid dogs they are.

Rape of adults often carries complicated issues of consent; she was drunk, but so was he etc. If they find your semen inside a 5 y/o there is no issue; you have forfeited your right to use oxygen. Period.

[Strings]

>Strings, the issue is that if they download pornographic issues of children, then a child somewhere was abused to make them. So they're a consumer of it, and encouraging it to happen.<

 Not arguing that at all. However, the guy was only accused. We DO still work on the assumption of "innocent until proven guilty", don't we?

 Oh... for y'all wanting to execute pedophiles? There's one BIG problem with that...

 Uncle buck molests his nephew, Little Johnny. Now, Johnny KNOWS what Uncle Buck did was wrong. But he still loves his Uncle Buck. because of that, we have a difficult enough time getting Johnny to testify NOW, when the only consequences are imprisonment. How much harder would it be if Johnny knew (and trust me, children WOULD find out this info) that his words could lead to "Beloved Uncle Buck" being executed?

[jeepmor]

I truly don't understand a society so weak and gutless that it refuses to destroy those who rape children like the rabid dogs they are.

Rape of adults often carries complicated issues of consent; she was drunk, but so was he etc. If they find your semen inside a 5 y/o there is no issue; you have forfeited your right to use oxygen. Period.

This is part of the problem.  There is no statement in the article that determines with absolute certainty that the alleged images were indeed underage and yet you post this crap trying to imply this person's guilt w/o the facts? 

I understand this is a highly emotionally charged issue, but your lynch mob mentality does very little for your argument on the original article.

How do you feel about the two pre-teen boys who were playing grab ass in NW Oregon.(McMinnville I think)   Would you have them labelled as sex offenders for doing something that nearly every boy that age likely did at one time or another while learning what is right and wrong in the world.  Labelling them for life when they don't even fully comprehend what they were actually doing?  Wow, some people scare me more than the one's they abhor.

[Vile Nylons]

This case seems to be one of manslaughter [her] and innocent until proven guilty [him].

More broadly, citizen efforts including vigilantiism, reflects a desperation on the part of the public to our judicial systems inability to deal effectively with pedophile who by their own choosing have decided to prey on our children for their own self serving interests.

Out of this desperation we have gone to excess, IMO, on casual contact as a coach swatting a kid on the butt or children grab-assing and such, or internet voyerism, out of our fear "where it may lead". But there is a world of difference between this and an adult intentionally predating our defenseless offspring.

[Manedwolf]

How do you feel about the two pre-teen boys who were playing grab ass in NW Oregon.(McMinnville I think)   Would you have them labelled as sex offenders for doing something that nearly every boy that age likely did at one time or another while learning what is right and wrong in the world. 

Look up "Kancho". Japanese elementary-school kids would get in a lot of trouble in the US!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDbA9E6Blbo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZzMh60Bdyw

(It's an apparently very common children's prank that involved sneaking up...and poking people in the butt. Hard.)

[Sergeant Bob]

More broadly, citizen efforts including vigilantiism, reflects a desperation on the part of the public to our judicial systems inability to deal effectively with pedophile who by their own choosing have decided to prey on our children for their own self serving interests.

I don't think it was any sense of desperation with the justice system in this case. I think it was just a couple of dumb a$$ rednecks who probably got liquored up and decided "We're gonna show that prevert!" and killed an innocent person.

[cordex]

Strings, the issue is that if they download pornographic issues of children, then a child somewhere was abused to make them. So they're a consumer of it, and encouraging it to happen.

That's why we punish them.

While I completely agree with the idea of prohibiting the production of child pornography, I have to wonder why the above logic wouldn't apply to videos of suicide, murder and violent assault that make their rounds on the internet.

[Werewolf]

No need for elaborate revenge fantasies. But I'll admit if I ever get diagnosed with terminal cancer I plan on killing as many child rapists as I can before the cops stop me. I just want to leave the world a better place.

You'd make more impact on society as a whole by addressing that plan to politicians instead...

[Balog]

Reading is fundamental Jeepmor. I'm not talking about this guys house getting burned down. That seems pretty retarded. I'm also not talking about child porn.

I said people who are proved to have raped kids should be put to death.

[doczinn]

I truly don't understand a society so weak and gutless that it refuses to destroy those who rape children like the rabid dogs they are.

Problem is, if the penalty for child rape and for murder is the same, why not just kill the kid and properly dispose of the body, so you won't suffer any penalty?

That's why all sorts of things that probably deserve the death penalty aren't eligible for it.

[Joe Demko]

People want the death penalty for crimes like child rape because people have a deep-seated desire to punish.  The more of an emotional response the crime provokes, the more they want to punish.  You don't have to look much farther than the average gunboard to find people spinning elaborate, bizarre fantasies about how they'd like to torture and execute rapists/molesters/drug pushers/etc. in the most grotesque ways.
The two hoopies in the story that got this thread started just decided to act one of those fantasies out.  Like most fantasies, it turned out to not be so swell in real life as it had been to just think about.

I'm curious about the mother in law.  Just like people will sometimes do the wrong thing, though their motivations were good, people can also do the right thing though they act from baser motivations.  Did she turn her son in law in because it was "the right thing" to do?  If she did, imagine how bad she must feel that she did what she thought was right and her daughter was killed as an indirect result.  OTOH, what if she just didn't like her son in law and turned him in only because it was an opportunity to get him in some *expletive deleted*it?  Do you suppose that she feels even more horrible over her daughter than she would have if operating from purer motives or will she rationalize it away?  I don't know why she turned him in, but I'm confident she never thought things would end this way.

[wooderson]

Balog, define 'proved.' DNA evidence? Or is a trial conviction with or without DNA good enough for you?