Thief who has both legs and one arms broken by victim - claims that he is the real victim and that t
317 replies, posted
If they're treated badly as a response to what they've done, then they are treated badly as a reaction.
Having something bad being done to you and trying to stop it, regardless of whether or not it hurts the person doing something bad to you, or responding to it in a negative way after the fact, is a reaction.
It is not a separate, equally wrong action. It is a reaction, an extension of wrong and harmful actions perpetrated not by the victim, but the initial aggressor.
It changes, say, if someone does something bad to you and you instead respond aggressively to someone entirely unrelated, though.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43694779]If they're treated badly as a response to what they've done, then they are treated badly as a reaction.
Having something bad being done to you and trying to stop it, regardless of whether or not it hurts the person doing something bad to you, or responding to it in a negative way after the fact, is a reaction.
It is not a separate, equally wrong action. It is a reaction, an extension of wrong and harmful actions perpetrated not by the victim, but the initial aggressor.
It changes, say, if someone does something bad to you and you instead respond aggressively to someone entirely unrelated, though.[/QUOTE]
yes it is a separate equally wrong action. no-one gets a free pass cause "he started it first!! [img]http://fi.somethingawful.com/images/smilies/emot-crying.gif[/img]"
[QUOTE=Juniez;43694855]yes it is a separate equally wrong action. no-one gets a free pass cause "he started it first!! [img]http://fi.somethingawful.com/images/smilies/emot-crying.gif[/img]"[/QUOTE]
So what, you get damaged by a criminal in some way, and then sit there and feel sorry for them because society "made them that way" in entirety?
That's idiotic, and biased in the favour of the initial detractor. If someone is doing something to damage you, you stop them, regardless of what happens to them. You don't let them go ahead and fuck you over and then let them walk away. They do not have a right to damage you and then leave you behind, they should stay along with the wreckage they've created.
"He started it" is a perfect excuse in my book, anyway. They've damaged you, or are currently damaging you, and you respond to stop the damage, return the damage, or repair the damage at their cost. You wouldn't have responded if they hadn't had damaged you. They have no excuse to get away with something because "they are equal".
Criminals lose the privilege to be treated like someone who hasn't done anything when they start hurting others.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43694953]So what, you get damaged by a criminal in some way, and then sit there and feel sorry for them because society "made them that way" in entirety?
That's idiotic, and biased in the favour of the initial detractor. If someone is doing something to damage you, you stop them, regardless of what happens to them. You don't let them go ahead and fuck you over and then let them walk away. They do not have a right to damage you and then leave you behind, they should stay along with the wreckage they've created.
"He started it" is a perfect excuse in my book, anyway. They've damaged you, or are currently damaging you, and you respond to stop the damage, return the damage, or repair the damage at their cost. You wouldn't have responded if they hadn't had damaged you. They have no excuse to get away with something because "they are equal".
Criminals lose the privilege to be treated like someone who hasn't done anything when they start hurting others.[/QUOTE]
no, you call the police on them, let them conduct a proper investigation, and don't go around chasing people down and breaking limbs in the name of justice
because revenge isn't justice
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;43694539]
Another fun fact: In the state of New Mexico, if you get out of jail, you can ask for a gun and a horse and the state is legally obligated to provide you with both. We actually had a guy who flat-out refused to leave until he got his horse.
[/QUOTE]
Can foreigners get a gun and a horse? If so I'm off to New Mexico to become a bandit.
[QUOTE=Juniez;43694970]no, you call the police on them, let them conduct a proper investigation, and don't go around chasing people down and breaking limbs in the name of heroics[/QUOTE]
Less chasing them down in the name of heroics and more getting his fuel back, whereas calling the police had more or less a chance of netting him nothing except a loss of his time.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695042]Less chasing them down in the name of heroics and more getting his fuel back, whereas calling the police had more or less a chance of netting him nothing except a loss of his time.[/QUOTE]
yes getting your fuel back is an appropriate (but stupid. what if he was armed? imagine being in a life-or-death situation over 50 quids worth of fuel) response.
...not breaking three limbs. like what, breaking a leg didn't incapacitate a 50 year old enough? better break the other one! and an arm for good measure
Justice is subjective. If justice is about equalization, then revenge is justice. If justice is about maintenance of everybody regardless of their actions, then justice is about rehabilitation. If justice is about repairing the cost to society done by a malignant individual, then justice is about labour and payment.
I'd rather have a mixture of all of them, considering that depending on your actions, no, you aren't equal to others. I couldn't begin to decide if an individual is more important than society, or the other way around, though. But I do think justice should have the eyes of a hawk, instead of being blind.
I like how all of you are assuming that the dude tied the thief to a chair and slowly broke all three of his limbs.
It's entirely possible (especially with a 50 year old) that he simply pushed him over and he broke his limbs from that. Old people have brittle bones.
We are getting literally none of the details to make any assumptions over this case. White knights need to get off their moral high horse and the bloodthirsters need to stop being blood thirsty.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695094]Justice is subjective. If justice is about equalization, then revenge is justice. If justice is about maintenance of everybody regardless of their actions, then justice is about rehabilitation. If justice is about repairing the cost to society done by a malignant individual, then justice is about labour and payment.
I'd rather have a mixture of all of them, considering that depending on your actions, no, you aren't equal to others. I couldn't begin to decide if an individual is more important than society, or the other way around, though. But I do think justice should have the eyes of a hawk, instead of being blind.[/QUOTE]
Are you saying that your ideal justice system would have "revenge is justice" as one of its key concepts.
[QUOTE=Juniez;43695061]yes getting your fuel back is an appropriate (but stupid. what if he was armed? imagine being in a life-or-death situation over 50 quids worth of fuel) response.
...not breaking three limbs. like what, breaking a leg didn't incapacitate a 50 year old enough? better break the other one! and an arm for good measure[/QUOTE]
In this case, chasing him down and permanently disabling him means that he won't be able to do any harm anymore. Maybe the other two limbs were excessive, but that is an emotional response of the victim that can't be blamed on the victim.
Green was part of the active detracting force against Woodman's business, and now he is stopped. That's all that matters. The police obviously weren't able to help in this matter considering all the business has lost, too, so he had no choice but to start taking matters into his own hands. His livelihood and business are worth more than the petty criminals who are destroying it, Green was just the first person he had caught after having decided to give up passively letting his main source of income be tarnished by the malignancy of others.
[QUOTE=Craptasket;43693914]Should have kept mod bda, you could have used excessive force on that troll![/QUOTE]
Sorry C-taps, but I just couldn't take being The Man. I'm a rebel bad boy, born to fight the system and tear down the established order.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695189]In this case, chasing him down and permanently disabling him means that he won't be able to do any harm anymore. Maybe the other two limbs were excessive, but that is an emotional response of the victim that can't be blamed on the victim.
Green was part of the active detracting force against Woodman's business, and now he is stopped. That's all that matters. The police obviously weren't able to help in this matter considering all the business has lost, too, so he had no choice but to start taking matters into his own hands. His livelihood and business are worth more than the petty criminals who are destroying it, Green was just the first person he had caught after having decided to give up passively letting his main source of income be tarnished by the malignancy of others.[/QUOTE]
Does anyone else think this is a really dangerous way of thinking or am I just crazy
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;43695186]Are you saying that your ideal justice system would have "revenge is justice" as one of its key concepts.[/QUOTE]
Maybe not in the same sense as it is in a country where they cut thieve's hands off.
I'm no sociologist, but I do know that different types of justice work differently in different socioeconomic, political, and cultural states, and that even on an individual level, people react to different types of punishments or treatments in many various ways individual to them and them only.
Sometimes, punishment is better, sometimes, rehabilitation is better. Sometimes, you get people like the Oslo shooter who are nothing but sociopathic detractors and are parasites on the belly of society, and I can't decide which is better for them because my principles on the issue of justice and criminality aren't set in stone.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695189]In this case, chasing him down and permanently disabling him means that he won't be able to do any harm anymore. Maybe the other two limbs were excessive, but that is an emotional response of the victim that can't be blamed on the victim.
Green was part of the active detracting force against Woodman's business, and now he is stopped. That's all that matters. The police obviously weren't able to help in this matter considering all the business has lost, too, so he had no choice but to start taking matters into his own hands. His livelihood and business are worth more than the petty criminals who are destroying it, Green was just the first person he had caught after having decided to give up passively letting his main source of income be tarnished by the malignancy of others.[/QUOTE]
it was stopped once he took his fuel back - anything further was absolutely wrong (but understandable if it were an accident)
so he broke 3 of the dude's limbs- what did that accomplish? it didn't get any of his previous fuel back, it didn't even physically incapacitate him permanently (don't get any ideas guys!!) - all it may have done is make him feel better (if he was into watching people suffer, that is)
but wow! I guess that's the hard life of a vigilante. some wild west shit right here, right in the heart of the UK
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695189]In this case, chasing him down and permanently disabling him means that he won't be able to do any harm anymore. Maybe the other two limbs were excessive, but that is an emotional response of the victim that can't be blamed on the victim.
Green was part of the active detracting force against Woodman's business, and now he is stopped. That's all that matters. The police obviously weren't able to help in this matter considering all the business has lost, too, so he had no choice but to start taking matters into his own hands. His livelihood and business are worth more than the petty criminals who are destroying it, Green was just the first person he had caught after having decided to give up passively letting his main source of income be tarnished by the malignancy of others.[/QUOTE]
You been reading Ayn Rand, or something?
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695279]
Sometimes, punishment is better,[/QUOTE]
oh!
i see
you people have some serious disorders that need attending to.
[QUOTE=Juniez;43695288]it was stopped once he took his fuel back - anything further was absolutely wrong (but understandable if it were an accident)
so he broke 3 of the dude's limbs- what did that accomplish? it didn't get any of his previous fuel back, it didn't even physically incapacitate him permanently (don't get any ideas guys!!), all it may have done is make him feel better (if he was into watching people suffer)
but wow! I guess that's the hard life of a vigilante. some wild west shit right here, right in the heart of the UK[/QUOTE]
It didn't incapacitate him permanently, but it does mean he'll not be able to be physically active enough to commit tangible crimes for a very long time. That might matter, considering the police aren't very watchful if they've allowed a business to lose thirty thousand pounds.
No matter if what he did afterwards was entirely justified or not, it is excusable. His psychological state at the time was directly caused by the buildup of incidences that he has suffered, along with the one caused by Green. He doesn't have the ability to control himself like a professional officer or something with pursuit stress.
[editline]28th January 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;43695303]You been reading Ayn Rand, or something?[/QUOTE]
Ayn Rand was a selfish asshole who didn't care about innocent (but poor or otherwise disadvantaged) people and criminals alike.
I just have something against criminals, or otherwise malignant people.
Me and most of my views are the byproduct of two people who, depending on what law book you read, are malignant and abusive criminals. Maybe that means I'm biased.
I just don't think society should treat innocents and malignants equally at all.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695347]It didn't incapacitate him permanently, but it does mean he'll not be able to be physically active enough to commit tangible crimes for a very long time. That might matter, considering the police aren't very watchful if they've allowed a business to lose thirty thousand pounds.
No matter if what he did afterwards was entirely justified or not, it is excusable. His psychological state at the time was directly caused by the buildup of incidences that he has suffered, along with the one caused by Green. He doesn't have the ability to control himself like a professional officer or something with pursuit stress.[/QUOTE]
most crime (like theft, for one) is a consequence of a buildup of unfortunate circumstances but you seem to be awfully keen on advocating their maiming
if he just had a single leg or an arm broken then i'd probably say he had it coming but both legs and an arm seems a tad excessive
like if they've stolen from him before i can understand how frustrating it must've been but self control's p. important
[QUOTE=SCopE5000;43687230]I think the atrocious thing is that the robber was only fined £75 (and no jail time) for attempting to steal £50 worth of diesel... So what does that mean? You only risk £25 when you go to steal £50 worth of goods so you might as well give it a go?[/QUOTE]
idk but having 3/4 of your limbs broken makes up for it hilariously
[QUOTE=Juniez;43695420]most crime (like theft, for one) is a consequence of a buildup of unfortunate circumstances but you seem to be awfully keen on advocating their maiming[/QUOTE]
I said that I don't care about the passive circumstances caused by society. It is their fault that their circumstances manifest into something harmful to a person that has absolutely nothing to do with the circumstances themselves.
They fix their circumstances through legal means, by climbing out of the pit or fighting for societal change, or they do their crime and remain in squalor forever (as it currently stands with the way a lot of western and eastern society works).
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695511]I said that I don't care about the passive circumstances caused by society. It is their fault that their circumstances manifest into something harmful to a person that has absolutely nothing to do with the circumstances themselves.
They fix their circumstances through legal means, by climbing out of the pit or fighting for societal change, or they do their crime and remain in squalor forever (as it currently stands with the way a lot of western and eastern society works).[/QUOTE]
so they should either just pull themselves up by their bootstraps or it's a free for all for broken bones
god damn, dude
[QUOTE=Juniez;43694970]no, you call the police on them, let them conduct a proper investigation, and don't go around chasing people down and breaking limbs in the name of justice
because revenge isn't justice[/QUOTE]
Because the police are always so effective, right?
It wasn't like he chased him down and broke his limbs one by one, he probably chased him down, tackled him, and then got in a fight.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695511]I said that I don't care about the passive circumstances caused by society. It is their fault that their circumstances manifest into something harmful to a person that has absolutely nothing to do with the circumstances themselves.
They fix their circumstances through legal means, by climbing out of the pit or fighting for societal change, or they do their crime and remain in squalor forever (as it currently stands with the way a lot of western and eastern society works).[/QUOTE]
so you hate ayn rand but you're following her philosophy to the letter without even realizing it
did you think this through
[QUOTE=katbug;43695601]Because the police are always so effective, right?
It wasn't like he chased him down and broke his limbs one by one, he probably chased him down, tackled him, and then got in a fight.[/QUOTE]
it's understandable in a realistic sense
...but not right, and certainly not just! if you get the difference
[QUOTE=Juniez;43695578]so they should either just pull themselves up by their bootstraps or it's a free for all for broken bones
god damn, dude[/QUOTE]
No, society should work at every step of the way to support its weakest members.
But those who instead of trying to make society realize their legitimate pleas damage others to get what they want can go fuck themselves. Their circumstances should not be a mitigating factor for what they've done. They've harmed someone just as much as a white collar snake does by cutting his employees' salaries to fund the upkeep of his yacht.
Society isn't responsible for when you hurt another person on an individual level. You are. Just you and no one else.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;43695011]Can foreigners get a gun and a horse? If so I'm off to New Mexico to become a bandit.[/QUOTE]
But you have to be a bandit to get into jail in order to get out so you can become a bandit so you can go to jail and then get out and become a bandit...
Bandito-ing forever and accumulating limitless free horses/guns.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;43695666]No, society should work at every step of the way to support its weakest members.
But those who instead of trying to make society realize their legitimate pleas damage others to get what they want can go fuck themselves. Their circumstances should not be a mitigating factor for what they've done. They've harmed someone just as much as a white collar snake does by cutting his employees' salaries to fund the upkeep of his yacht.
Society isn't responsible for when you hurt another person on an individual level. You are. Just you and no one else.[/QUOTE]
im gonna give you a hypothetical. this will probably seem ridiculous and impossible but bear with me
you "live" in the middle of the bronx.
no one in your family ever graduated college.
you work a shit job at mcdonalds.
you are fired from this shit job at mcdonalds.
without this shit minimum wage job, you have no way to pay for your shit apartment, are evicted, and left out on the streets.
out on the streets you find that you can't rely on the kindness of strangers, and no one is giving you money. you have no food, you have nothing.
suddenly it's the middle of january - guess what, it's less than 10 degrees out and all of the homeless shelters are packed capacity to the point that you can't get into them.
you're turned away by the police at the subway stations - the only place that you can sleep is on the street.
but you'll literally [I]die[/I] if you try to sleep on the street without a jacket, or something to keep you warm.
given that you will [I]die[/I] unless you procure a jacket for the evening, do you deserve to be beaten the shit out of if you, in desperation, steal a pricey (or even not so pricey) jacket from someone's seat at a restuarant, park, in the street, whatever?
you "hurt" them by taking away their clothing, something that cost them money. do they have the right, and the permission, to chase you down, beat the shit out of you, take back their jacket (which hey, is most likely worth more than the 50 pounds worth of gas this dude stole), and leave you on the street?
if your only choice is to face death or ruin, is there really a choice?
[editline]27th January 2014[/editline]
i want to implore you to take this seriously and ask yourself what YOU would do in the situation. not what someone else SHOULD do, but what YOU would ACTUALLY do.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.