He had it coming.
The system slipped up on this one. I’m not saying she did “the right thing”, but she did something that I can imagine doing if somebody hurt my mom/sisters/niece like that.
[quote]SSC wrote:
Alright! Listen, listen… I’m not saying I don’t understand WHY she lit the motherfucker on fire. I’m human! I can understand how incredibly emotionally distressful it must have been to have had her daughter raped, let alone taunted about it.
What I don’t get… are the people HERE. On a MESSAGE BOARD. APPLAUDING what she did.
There’s a big difference here… or am I just talking to a wall at this point? I’m not meaning to sound pissy, I truly am not understand if you guys are getting what I’m saying.
Again - NOT question her motives. Questioning the people commending setting someone on fire.[/quote]
Has anyone in your family been raped? From your posts, I doubt it.
If it had, you would have a different outlook on this.
I speak from experience. Not saying I would do the same, but I can understand something like this occuring.
Applaud her!?!?!?!?
I reward her ONE MILLION INTERNETS for heroic deeds of Epic Justice!
[quote]red04 wrote:
youngblood52 wrote:
How can we assume that she became mentally “unstable” or “illogical” when she decided to kill this man?
I would bet money that she logically made the decision to kill this man, and accept the consequences. I would bet she was thinking as clearly and sanely as any other human being. And I think that even now, she has no regrets, and she does not have any sort of mental problem.
Well for her sake, if she actually was of a clear mind at the time of this, she was probably informed to claim otherwise(no recollection of the events that took place at all) to avoid life in prison for murder 1.
I don’t see how she can have no memory of her actions, but the testimony of the alleged taunting goes unquestioned. Dude spent 7 years in prison and was going to have a drink(what the fuck is that 3 day pass, seriously, how messed up is that?), maybe he still was a piece of shit I dunno, but it seems pretty fucking random.[/quote]
The idea with passes like that is that you try to get them used to the outside world again.
He was probably going to be released soon.
Makes sense to get them used to that bit by bit instead of all at once.
At least most of the times.
[quote]tom8658 wrote:
Where did she get the gas?
Does she walk around with a thermos of gasoline, just in case?
So, one possibly mentally-ill person burned another mentally-ill person alive. Fantastic.
The real question is, why did the guy only get 9 years, and why was he out of jail on a three-day pass after he was convicted of a violent crime? That just seems stupid.[/quote]
No, that is the European justice system and I´d be reluctant to condemn it as an American.
Because, you know, we have much lower sentences and much lower crime rates?
[quote]SSC wrote:
Alright! Listen, listen… I’m not saying I don’t understand WHY she lit the motherfucker on fire. I’m human! I can understand how incredibly emotionally distressful it must have been to have had her daughter raped, let alone taunted about it.
What I don’t get… are the people HERE. On a MESSAGE BOARD. APPLAUDING what she did.
There’s a big difference here… or am I just talking to a wall at this point? I’m not meaning to sound pissy, I truly am not understand if you guys are getting what I’m saying.
Again - NOT question her motives. Questioning the people commending setting someone on fire.[/quote]
All I can say that after having seen Gran Torino I have found one great thing about really old age:
You do not have to give a fuck.
So, if I am close to 80 and someone rapes a little girl and comes close to bragging about it, I know I have options.
And, quite frankly, if such a thing happened once or twice every year, rapes would probably less frequent.
Let’s analyse the lynch mob… ah … discussion for a moment. We all agree that rape is as despicable as it gets, and we all agree that the punishment needs to fit the crime.
If you look at the abominable record for rape convictions and the ridiculous sentences often handed out in our ‘civilised’ countries, the time he got seems actually not bad. Should it have been more - probably, but eventually, you’ll have to leave people out again.
A crime for which people tend not to get out again so early compared to rape is murder. A planned action to dowse someone with flamable liquid and torch them, will most probably lead to a murder conviction - and should do so. Even if the mother ends up with a conviction of manslaughter, it’s a gruesome crime, and needs to be punished accordingly.
How this will pan out in any form not harming the daughters who’ve not only lost immeasurable quality of life through their rape, but now also their mother (even if she gets a lenient sentence), completely escapes me.
Sure, it’s cool to root for brutal vigilantism on TV, comic books and the Internets - but it tends to leave out the suffering of the people surrounding the vigilantes.
Is the mother’s impulse understandable? Sure. Is acting out on it acceptable? No.
Besides the fact that normally you just don’t walk out of jail without bail conditions; and most probably walking up to the family of your victims to taunt them tends to break them - the prudent and correct thing would have been to report it to the police and get the fucker back into prison. That would have served justice, set a sign, showed T-mom-ness and would have saved her daughters more suffering. It would have never made the newspapers though.
Makkun
PS: Sorry Molotov - English isn’t my native language and I’ve made that ‘loose’ mistake before. I feel ashamed. 
[quote]Vegita wrote:
SSC wrote:
Alright! Listen, listen… I’m not saying I don’t understand WHY she lit the motherfucker on fire. I’m human! I can understand how incredibly emotionally distressful it must have been to have had her daughter raped, let alone taunted about it.
What I don’t get… are the people HERE. On a MESSAGE BOARD. APPLAUDING what she did.
There’s a big difference here… or am I just talking to a wall at this point? I’m not meaning to sound pissy, I truly am not understand if you guys are getting what I’m saying.
Again - NOT question her motives. Questioning the people commending setting someone on fire.
Fuck it dude, I applaud the shit out of her, and I HOPE she was clear minded when she did it. My sister told me she got raped and I drove 8 hours to her college with a few buddies. If I found the guy that night, he would have been buried in the woods in a lot of little peices.
There are very few things worth destroying a human being over. Violent rape is one of them. You are arguing about laws, the people here cheering this lady on are doing so based on our instincts of right and wrong. Laws mean shit when your the little girl getting raped. So when good people break the laws to do bad things to bad people I’m all for it.
V[/quote]
Agreed, sometimes there is a big difference in what is lawfull and what is justified.
[quote]makkun wrote:
Let’s analyse the lynch mob… ah … discussion for a moment. We all agree that rape is as despicable as it gets, and we all agree that the punishment needs to fit the crime.
If you look at the abominable record for rape convictions and the ridiculous sentences often handed out in our ‘civilised’ countries, the time he got seems actually not bad. Should it have been more - probably, but eventually, you’ll have to leave people out again.
A crime for which people tend not to get out again so early compared to rape is murder. A planned action to dowse someone with flamable liquid and torch them, will most probably lead to a murder conviction - and should do so. Even if the mother ends up with a conviction of manslaughter, it’s a gruesome crime, and needs to be punished accordingly.
How this will pan out in any form not harming the daughters who’ve not only lost immeasurable quality of life through their rape, but now also their mother (even if she gets a lenient sentence), completely escapes me.
Sure, it’s cool to root for brutal vigilantism on TV, comic books and the Internets - but it tends to leave out the suffering of the people surrounding the vigilantes.
Is the mother’s impulse understandable? Sure. Is acting out on it acceptable? No. Besides the fact that normally you just don’t walk out of jail without bail conditions; and most probably walking up to the family of your victims to taunt them tends to break them - the prudent and correct thing would have been to report it to the police and get the fucker back into prison.
That would have served justice, set a sign, showed T-mom-ness and would have saved her daughters more suffering. It would have never made the newspapers though.
Makkun
PS: Sorry Molotov - English isn’t my native language and I’ve made that ‘loose’ mistake before. I feel ashamed. ;-)[/quote]
Thank you, good sir!
Since when is being “T” meant being homicidal?
[quote]makkun wrote:
Let’s analyse the lynch mob… ah … discussion for a moment. We all agree that rape is as despicable as it gets, and we all agree that the punishment needs to fit the crime.
If you look at the abominable record for rape convictions and the ridiculous sentences often handed out in our ‘civilised’ countries, the time he got seems actually not bad. Should it have been more - probably, but eventually, you’ll have to leave people out again.
A crime for which people tend not to get out again so early compared to rape is murder. A planned action to dowse someone with flamable liquid and torch them, will most probably lead to a murder conviction - and should do so.
Even if the mother ends up with a conviction of manslaughter, it’s a gruesome crime, and needs to be punished accordingly.
How this will pan out in any form not harming the daughters who’ve not only lost immeasurable quality of life through their rape, but now also their mother (even if she gets a lenient sentence), completely escapes me.
Sure, it’s cool to root for brutal vigilantism on TV, comic books and the Internets - but it tends to leave out the suffering of the people surrounding the vigilantes.
Is the mother’s impulse understandable? Sure. Is acting out on it acceptable? No.
Besides the fact that normally you just don’t walk out of jail without bail conditions; and most probably walking up to the family of your victims to taunt them tends to break them - the prudent and correct thing would have been to report it to the police and get the fucker back into prison.
That would have served justice, set a sign, showed T-mom-ness and would have saved her daughters more suffering. It would have never made the newspapers though.
Makkun
PS: Sorry Molotov - English isn’t my native language and I’ve made that ‘loose’ mistake before. I feel ashamed. ;-)[/quote]
Mebbe, but if you want to be all utilitarian, how many rapes would there be if a rapist knew dying in a flaming inferno is a serious option?
So, maybe a few more vigilantes would prevent a lot of rapes and the prevented suffering was a net positive?
[quote]orion wrote:
[…]Mebbe, but if you want to be all utilitarian, how many rapes would there be if a rapist knew dying in a flaming inferno is a serious option?
So, maybe a few more vigilantes would prevent a lot of rapes and the prevented suffering was a net positive?[/quote]
Historically I would argue, corporeal punishment tended to rather render societies more violent, not less. Add to that the massively increased risk of laypeople dispensing law and killing and maiming the wrong people, and you’ve got a recipe for disaster.
Makkun
[quote]orion wrote:
Mebbe, but if you want to be all utilitarian, how many rapes would there be if a rapist knew dying in a flaming inferno is a serious option?
So, maybe a few more vigilantes would prevent a lot of rapes and the prevented suffering was a net positive?
[/quote]
I don’t know the mind of a rapist nor do I intend on ever knowing it, but wouldn’t you think it is very much an impulse crime? I wouldn’t think it’s one of those times where someone is like, “Hey, I might suffer for this.”
This could very much turn into a very philisophical debate(moreso than it already is) from here though, but there have been points in human history where vigilantism was the norm, and it turns out we decided(as a race) that we found a judiciary system to be superior.
Tweaks to the system are clearly necessary if armed rapists are getting out in 9 years, I am in full agreement with all of you there. This wasn’t exactly a drunken one night stand turned rape trial, this dude should have been serving pound-me-in-the-ass time for much longer.
[quote]red04 wrote:
I don’t know the mind of a rapist nor do I intend on ever knowing it, but wouldn’t you think it is very much an impulse crime? I wouldn’t think it’s one of those times where someone is like, “Hey, I might suffer for this.”
This could very much turn into a very philisophical debate(moreso than it already is) from here though, but there have been points in human history where vigilantism was the norm, and it turns out we decided(as a race) that we found a judiciary system to be superior.
Tweaks to the system are clearly necessary if armed rapists are getting out in 9 years, I am in full agreement with all of you there. This wasn’t exactly a drunken one night stand turned rape trial, this dude should have been serving pound-me-in-the-ass time for much longer.[/quote]
I agree. The judicial system, however imperfect, is much better than wide spread vigilantism.
I also agree that making the penalty more severe probably won’t prevent any rapes. Years in prison, electric chair, or being castrated all probably weigh about the same in the mind of a criminal, who, lets face it, isn’t the best at evaluating the consequences of his actions. He’ll only really become aware of the difference between years in jail and being castrated when he thinks he’s about to be caught.
[quote]orion wrote:
No, that is the European justice system and I´d be reluctant to condemn it as an American.[/quote]
Well I’m Canadian so I’ll condemn it on your behalf. 
I for one am sick of hearing about Canadian criminals who are released onto the streets despite having several convictions.
I heard on the radio today that a thirteen year old boy was arrested for armed robbery at a transit station in Vancouver. He already has OVER FORTY convictions!
The police arrest and re-arrest known gang members who have multiple convictions, then get a mild, revolving-door sentence, and are back on the streets again within two years.
I’m not a fan of “three strikes”, but I do think we should have compounding punishment for reoffenders of violent and organized crime.
A lighter sentence for a “first offence” of say, 2 years.
If they straighten out, then fine.
If they reoffend within 2 years of being released from prison, then they get 4 years.
If they reoffend within 4 years then they get 8 years.
Reoffend within 8 and they get 16.
Reoffend within 16? Well, it’s only a matter of time before you run out of years and die. With this system, nobody can argue that they “didn’t get a chance” to straighten themselves out – and nobody gets 3rd-strike life imprisonment for stealing a slice of pizza.
Say a punk 12 y/o kid commits armed robbery and gets 3 months in Juvie. He reoffends within 3 months of his release, then he gets 6 months.
Now at this point he’s 13 years old and probably contemplating straightening out because he knows he’s not going to get a slap on the wrist, he’s going to get a solid YEAR in prison the next time he screws up, then TWO YEARS after that, FOUR, EIGHT, and so on.
The only leniency given to “young offenders” would be that their compounding sentences start out at a much lower prison-time.
That or, you know, we could base our entire criminal justice and rehabilitation system on SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE so that we can use PROVEN methods for preventing crime and rehabilitating violent offenders.
But then that would make sense.
In conclusion, T-Mom = Yes.
ElbowStrike
Just to be clear, I don’t necessarily condone her actions. I just can bring myself to condemn her actions either.
If the facts were as stated in the article (which was incredibly light on information)and if I were on the jury, I wouldn’t convict her.
I don’t know if this has been said, but how the hell did she not set herself on fire?
I mean he must of struggled or something and some of that petrol or whatever it was must of gone on her?
But fairplay, he should of been executed anyway.
Would of prevented anything like this from happening.
SAF
I would gladly donate to her legal defense. And I would probably take matters into my own hands if I was faced with the same situation.
At least she has come up with a therapeutic modality for rapists that prevents recidivism 100%. That’s better than anything the APA/AMA has come up with.
[quote]Christine wrote:
imhungry wrote:
While I understand the arguments made against the people applauding the womans actions and I would tend to agree with them, the fact that the rapist asked how her daughter was doing, that’s what puts me over the edge in this situation.
Exactly.
What does one expect when they poke a mamma bear? [/quote]
Honey.
[quote]Christine wrote:
I also like the Showtime show Dexter.
It’s fun to root for a serial killer.[/quote]
The book is also worth reading if you get the chance.