They got Roman Polanski...

[Mir]

Why did Swiss officials suddenly decide to detain him. He has frequently travelled between Switzerland and France in the past. That is a question I'm very curious to know the answer to.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Alan

I really doubt it was the community who convinced Switzerland to extradite him thirty years after the ****.

I was talking about your example, though in a representative democracy, taking the action to detain a criminal, assuming that it's in the best interests of a community, is hardly the most egregious misuse of power.

[Alan]

But then it goes back to how is this in the best interest of the community, which goes back to believing it will be some sort of crime deterrent.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Alan

But then it goes back to how is this in the best interest of the community, which goes back to believing it will be some sort of crime deterrent.

In your example, a rapist rapes someone and is immediately forgiven by the victim. In this instance, why do you think it is wrong to detain the rapist in the interest of the community's safety?

[Alan]

You have a point, but that just means in the real scenario there's even less reasons to actually care to send Polanski to jail!

[JCC]

Explain that.

[Alan]

Goes back to Joker's post. Polanski is not some sort of serial rapist that will be a hazard to America for the rest of his life, which probably will happen before we finish college.
So he was forgiven, it's been thirty years, and he poses no threat.

It doesn't matter how you say it, putting him in jail just comes down to what Saya implied in the first page "This is absurd but the law is absurd so make him pay"

[DRM]

In my opinion it's not so much is it right or wrong to make him serve the time as much as it's whatis the statue of limitations.
I mean, where do we draw the line?
Next time would it be okay to kill little 13 year old Cindy and not serve the time as long as you run away for a few decades?

I know it wont teach others not to do it but, it might make it more clear exactually how much people can get away with.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Alan

Goes back to Joker's post. Polanski is not some sort of serial rapist that will be a hazard to America for the rest of his life, which probably will happen before we finish college.
So he was forgiven, it's been thirty years, and he poses no threat.

Do you even read?

Originally Posted by Despanan

Also, it's important to note, that I doubt Polanski really is that different of a person. This situation was not a momentary lapse in judgment. Polanski has been known to be into underage girls (e.g. Natassja Kinski) throughout his career.

Originally Posted by Roman Polanski

Everyone wants to fuck young girls

THE MAN IS A PEDOPHILE. He is capable of ****. He is virtually remorseless about the **** he committed. He has the money and connections to continue to **** all he wants because idiots like you will always forgive him. That equals a hazard you braindead fuckwad. Not to mention the fact that to allow such a thing to go unpunished, while other rapes, by non-famous people are punished, just sends the message to everyone that the upper-class is exempt from the law.

Oh, and I particularly like how Jillian tried to pull the "Oh shit, I have no argument, better just use my gothic.net cred to imply that Desp is wrong and I am right!" and Apathy totally spiked it back in his face like a volleyball. That was badass.

Changing your screen name has broken the spell Jill; everyone's realizing just how dumb you are.

and I think that's hilarious.

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Alan

Look at what you said. There's a hurt victim. Let's say my sister gets *****. For some reason, it doesn't take thirty years, she just happens to be fucking Jesus and she forgives the criminal. I'll hate him forever but who am I to arbitrate over my sister? Why is MY form of justice the one that takes precedence? Where did the justice system stop giving a fuck about my sister when she's the one that was *****?

Oh my god, you're so totally right. The forgiveness of a victim should always mean the release of their rapist. In fact, someone ought to go ahead and legislate that shit right now. Fuck, I bet that when grieving parents forgive the children of their killers, what they really mean is, "Let the guy out of jail - HE'S NOT A BAD PERSON!" I mean, there's absolutely NO WAY that forgiving someone is a personal choice between dwelling on the past and attempting to move forward, rather than a substitute for any real consequences for the person who invaded their life and fucked up their shit.

Originally Posted by Alan

By the way on eugenics, my argument was simply that you guys had a double standard. I complain about the possible exploitation of eugenics just as much as I complain about the REAL exploitation of industrialism. Eugenics in itself IS NOT inherently exploitative. We seriously have to go back to that? I thought I had made myself clear by now.

You kept complaining about this double standard, yet neglected to produce any evidence for it, or to admit that despite its theoretical existence genetic engineering would only be available to the wealthy. You repeated the same question eight or so times in the face of more reasonable responses and requests for evidence. Eventually, you left the thread, presumably to go to another one and tell everyone how you're a genius.

Fuckin' crystal.

Now this next statement, given in response to Mir's asking whether your response would be different if the victim had NOT forgiven Polanski, is my personal favorite:

Originally Posted by Alan

Actually yeah. That simple.

Well smack my ass, there was me giving you WAY too much credit as usual and assuming this was about the failures of the justice system, when the truth is it has nothing to do with questioning the ability of prison to rehabilitate but functions entirely on your delusion that people forgive because they don't want justice, and would in fact treat any attempt of society to punish the person who probably haunts their dreams as an even more profound violation than being drugged and sodomized.

You know, Jilly, this shit would be funny if you didn't genuinely believe you're some kind of intellectual giant and go around announcing how smart you are day in and day out.

[Alan]

I have to go to class so I'll come back to this argument, but on the short side, shit dude, do you even fucking know what EUGENICS IS?!
It's not fucking genetic engineering. Stop talking about it as if it's genetic engineering. How the fuck is choosing to have many kids with the most optimal partner (e.g. smart, beautiful, sociable) something only 'available to the wealthy'?
Going back to that thread I noticed that all your fucking arguments were about genetic engineering, not eugenics. Man; that's sad. You have more legitimacy in this thread, so I recommend you not to try and bring back one where you weren't even talking about the same thing as everyone else.

[Alan]

Fuck it

Originally Posted by Apathy's_Child

Oh my god, you're so totally right. The forgiveness of a victim should always mean the release of their rapist. In fact, someone ought to go ahead and legislate that shit right now. Fuck, I bet that when grieving parents forgive the children of their killers, what they really mean is, "Let the guy out of jail - HE'S NOT A BAD PERSON!" I mean, there's absolutely NO WAY that forgiving someone is a personal choice between dwelling on the past and attempting to move forward, rather than a substitute for any real consequences for the person who invaded their life and fucked up their shit.

So you don't give a shit about the victim? She just happened to be on the way of your judgment?

Well smack my ass, there was me giving you WAY too much credit as usual and assuming this was about the failures of the justice system, when the truth is it has nothing to do with questioning the ability of prison to rehabilitate but functions entirely on your delusion that people forgive because they don't want justice, and would in fact treat any attempt of society to punish the person who probably haunts their dreams as an even more profound violation than being drugged and sodomized.

Well, I was trying to give another argument, but it comes back to the same thing: you don't give a shit about the victim.

You know, Jilly, this shit would be funny if you didn't genuinely believe you're some kind of intellectual giant and go around announcing how smart you are day in and day out.

I don't. No need to go about with ad hominems that somehow end up exalting me. If you believe I go about feeling like an 'intellectual giant' you only have your own mediocrity to blame. No one goes about accusing GM, a man whom I consider smarter than me, of this except for those who have nothing else to say. So congratulations, you just got to the same level as Bella and xjin.


Well, that was such a waste of a post, but your post was all just attacks rather than arguments, so what were we expecting?
You want to really argue? Then let's go back to your original question:
What's your suggestion for dealing with r.apists?
Hell, I'm giving you such a big leeway in coupling Polanski with any other rapist who didn't have to wait thirty years for people to demand justice out of them.
So your solution to Polanski? Jail him? Why?

Please tell me an answer that amounts to more than "just because"

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Alan

I have to go to class so I'll come back to this argument, but on the short side, shit dude, do you even fucking know what EUGENICS IS?!
It's not fucking genetic engineering. Stop talking about it as if it's genetic engineering. How the fuck is choosing to have many kids with the most optimal partner (e.g. smart, beautiful, sociable) something only 'available to the wealthy'?
Going back to that thread I noticed that all your fucking arguments were about genetic engineering, not eugenics. Man; that's sad. You have more legitimacy in this thread, so I recommend you not to try and bring back one where you weren't even talking about the same thing as everyone else.

Wait...is Jillian actually losing so bad in this thread that he's trying to make it into another thread that he also lost in?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh...me...oh...Hang on, let me-

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I suppose that's what happens when you realize you're arguing in favor of a child-rapist.

Edit:

Sweet. Apathy made Jillian skip class.

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Alan

I have to go to class so I'll come back to this argument, but on the short side, shit dude, do you even fucking know what EUGENICS IS?!
It's not fucking genetic engineering. Stop talking about it as if it's genetic engineering. How the fuck is choosing to have many kids with the most optimal partner (e.g. smart, beautiful, sociable) something only 'available to the wealthy'?
Going back to that thread I noticed that all your fucking arguments were about genetic engineering, not eugenics. Man; that's sad. You have more legitimacy in this thread, so I recommend you not to try and bring back one where you weren't even talking about the same thing as everyone else.

Who said eugenics is genetic engineering? GE is an AREA of eugenics (I’m assuming you’re aware of this, now PLEASE don’t depress me any more today). The area of eugenics which was being discussed at the point when I entered the thread. You remember, around the time you were arguing something like, “Nuh-UH, the rich wouldn’t genetically engineer their kids, ‘cause the extra intelligence added to the fetuses would create liberal babies who’d smash the tyrannous system their conservative parents built their wealth on!!!1”

I mean, unlike me you actually had to go back and reread the thread in order to remember what happened there, so you really should be clear on this. Me, that terrifying spectre of stupid is burned into my brain for all eternity. Once was enough.

Originally Posted by Alan

So you don't give a shit about the victim? She just happened to be on the way of your judgment?

Wait, what? How exactly is suggesting that perhaps forgiving someone who has violated you might be a PERSONAL issue – a way of making your peace with it in your own head – rather than an act of “FREE THE PEDOS!!”-style political activism, not giving a shit about the victim? Why do you think ye olde days’ executioners finish the list of charges with, “May God have mercy on your soul”?

SAVES ME A JOB, MOTHERFUCKER.

Okay, so I’m being slightly facetious here, but I assume you get the idea. However, assumptions can be dangerous things, so hit me up if you need me to explain for a third time.

Not to mention GM’s point that since she clearly wasn’t going to get any closure from the justice system, her choices were pretty much narrowed down to wallowing in bitterness and anger or getting the fuck over it as quickly as possible.

Originally Posted by Alan

I don't. No need to go about with ad hominems that somehow end up exalting me.

Exalting you? You see exaltation in insults, and in the same sentence tell me you DON’T have a disproportionate ego? DUDE.

Originally Posted by Alan

If you believe I go about feeling like an 'intellectual giant' you only have your own mediocrity to blame. No one goes about accusing GM, a man whom I consider smarter than me, of this except for those who have nothing else to say.

That’s because, as you rightly point out, he’s smarter than you.

Originally Posted by Alan

Well, that was such a waste of a post, but your post was all just attacks rather than arguments, so what were we expecting?

No, they’re arguments LACED with insults. Honestly, one minute you’re like, “All opinions are NOT equally valid, some people just can’t take the TRUTH and expect kid gloves while they spout their idiocy!”, the next you’re all, “AGGGGGH IT BURNS!!”

Originally Posted by Alan

You want to really argue? Then let's go back to your original question:
What's your suggestion for dealing with r.apists?

I believe I actually asked you this exact question a couple of posts back. Ladies first. (Okay, so I never said I’m immune to the lure of the cheap shot.)

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by despanan

sweet. Apathy made jillian skip class.

the revolution is right here, what is this "class" but a system of tyranny?!

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Apathy's_Child

the revolution is right here, what is this "class" but a system of tyranny?!

I see it happening like this:

Jill: Sorry I'm late, Professor McGuyman, I had to tell this guy on the Internet all about how we shouldn't punish ********** who **** children.

Professor McGuyman: . . .

Jill: you wouldn't BELIEVE this guy. He actually thought Eugenics was a bad IDEA. What a DICK!

Professor: get the fuck out of my class.

[Mir]

Stop being a dick. haha

[Despanan]

What? Was that directed at me or were you adding a line of dialogue?

[Delkaetre]

I'm not all that pissed at the concept that he will serve time for the attack.

However, I am pissed at the handling of the whole thing.

First, the girl's mother has shown signs of grooming her kids for that sort of thing. If nothing else, her failure to chaperone an underage girl with a male who's known to have a strong sexual appetite for underage girls suggests either neglect or almost criminal levels of stupidity. "Ohai Mr Shady Older Man, have my young daughter totally unchaperoned for several hours".

Second, the judge is acknowledged by all parties as wanting to be a hardass for no other reason than wanting to be a hardass. Polanski arranged a plea bargain, then found out that the judge intended to completely ignore it and instead slap him with a sentence heavier than murderers or serial rapists tend to get. This is enough to inspire a serious panic reflex in anyone- with the concentration camp background, the concept of sudden and vindictive punishment far outweighing the usual punishment for the crime may have been a bit scarier to him than to most. So he ran away.

He then lived happily ever after in Europe for a few decades, during which time the US could *surely* have managed some sort of quiet little exchange of wanted criminals if they wanted him back that badly.

Instead, a big noisy snatch was staged just before a highly publicised event, throwing everything back into the public eye, dragging it all back up for the victim and throwing *her* back into the media's gaze, and making a thorough mess of it.

It's been handled badly. I do not think he should be getting off scot free, if only because sometimes it is important to show that the rich cannot just use their money to escape justice, but I also do not think that it should have been handled the way it has been.

A retrial with a less biased judge, a proper sentence, and if he goes to prison then he'll need a secure cell to avoid his being killed by other inmates. In prison, as a highly publicised child molester, he does face quite a high likelihood of experiencing GBH or attempted murder.

[Solumina]

Re-sentencing would be rather standard but I can't think of a reason to retry him as he entered a guilty plea and then fled so there is nothing wrong with the verdict.

[Delkaetre]

The judge was known to have deliberately made a strongly personally influenced judgement- he was not acting as an impartial arm of the law, but as an individual person with all the spite and unpleasantness therein.

Someone with better self control or less desire for media attention could offer a fair retrial, if anyone can be found after this horrendously public mess has biased most of the newspaper reading West.

[Solumina]

Yes the judge was biased, hence the re-sentencing, but the verdict itself is based on his guilty plea, that still stands and has nothing to do with the judge's view and a retrial would only use unnecessary resources, if he wants to change his plea then that is a different story.

[Saya]

There will be no trial because he plead guilty, and the judge has been dead for fifteen years. He plead guilty to "unlawful sex with a minor", not because they couldn't prove he ***** her, but because of the media shaming they did of her and her family (accusations of her mother grooming her, accusations of her being a L0lita), they just wanted to get it over with quickly and as painlessly as possible. So they'll likely just pick up where they left off, with sentencing. Afterward she even filed a civil suit and he agreed to pay in 1993 but he still has yet to do so.

[Despanan]

If I'm not mistaken they also have the r@pe in question on video.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Apathy's_Child

Wait, what? How exactly is suggesting that perhaps forgiving someone who has violated you might be a PERSONAL issue – a way of making your peace with it in your own head – rather than an act of “FREE THE PEDOS!!”-style political activism, not giving a shit about the victim?

Why that fucking hyperbole?
I haven't changed your argument at all, so spare me the same courtesy. If you believe the fact that I see his trial as something stupid, is some form of FREE THE PEDOS!! political activism, then you're fucking stupid.

Seriously, I would think you thought all my argument is oh so very wrong, and you can't even fucking argue against it without changing it into a black and white issue in which you're a moral white knight where I am a degenerate that wants all child r@apists to keep r@ping?
How can you even claim moral high ground with that idiocy?