Teens torture disabled woman

phantom_lord · 27-02-2008 01:36PM

sickening.

Earthhorse · 27-02-2008 01:48PM

Dragan wrote: »

I don't consider either to be overly responsible for it's own actions, more it's functions and instinct. People? You know when your hurting someone, doesn't matter how bitter and twisted you are physical pain cannot be mistaken for anything put that.

The very reason we can be more callous when it comes to machines and animals is precisely because they bear no responsibility for their actions. We have no hope of teaching them responsibility. Equating them to animals is essentially the language of warfare.

Dragan wrote: »

Yes, i believe i actually said so twice. As for "mentally ill", like anything else there are varities of "mental illness" , once somebody does not end up in the column where there mental illness leads them to harm others then i have no problem with them.

Well, you did say so twice but what you also said so once was "These guys clearly cannot function as members of society, ergo we owe them nothing." which implies - in fact, it outright states - that we owe nothing to people who "clearly cannot function as members of society". I just wanted clarification on what that was and it appears to be "We owe nothing to people who cearly cannot function as members of society and who commit violent acts".

Dragan wrote: »

If you had been reading my posts you would clearly see that i talk about degree's in crime. The difference between any crime are the main two factors....what was it and why was it done. This was a sick torture that appears to have been done for nothing more than kicks. I don't see the participants having any possible fututre healthy part of society and frankly i firmly believe that some people and actions just don't deserve a second chance.

Maybe they don't deserve a second chance. Maybe they were never given a first one.

Again, I ask, would you have us kill the bullys who operate in schools and workplaces throughout the country? They do things for nothing more than kicks. They flush heads down toilets, beat people up, make them feel excluded, embarass and humiliate them. Those of school going age go on to become, by and large, pretty productive members of society. But your mind is made up about these kids because...

Dragan wrote: »

As for you last sentence, if you want i'll decide. Sure, it won't be easy and decisions will no doubt weigh on me and possible have adverse affects on my health and sanity but i wouldn't ask anyone else to do it if i wasn't willing.

Thanks, but I'd rather you, and those who agree with you, were kept as far away from making such decisions as possible. I'd prefer to see people interested in the extent of the victim's injuries, physical and psychological, people who care about the backgrounds of the perpetrators, sick and twisted as we may regard them, and generally people who seem to care why things happened in charge of any such decision (for the record, I wouldn't want anyone to have the decision to end a life), rather than people uninterested in digging deeper and reaching for expedient solutions.

Stark · 27-02-2008 02:06PM

Earthhorse wrote: »

You're dead right. And when my TV breaks I throw it in the skip. But these guys aren't animals or machines.

Indeed. It's unfair to animals to call them animals.

Dinter · 27-02-2008 02:07PM

That's the whole point though, there is no excuse for what some people do to others.

Hitting someone around the head whilst they whimper and beg you not to because they've just had surgery show's that you cannot function as an acceptable member of society. Why then does society owe you anything? Why should society carry the can for your impulsive behaviour and obvious lack of morality?

There is no justifying such acts except to reach for the "everyone who doesn't think like me is so callous" card. I'm not callous. Someone who would try to justify such behaviour by shifting the blame for it onto society shows a callous disregard for the victim.

Society by it's very existence is meant to protect it's weakest members. However unlike liberals that weep for the hard done by perpetrators driven to such acts, the realists amoungst us know that the real victim is the victim. The clue is in the title.

So whilst some may call for rehabilititation in a vain hope of reforming such characters I call for punishment. Society needs to know that the predators that stalk our most vulnerable by their acts cry out for punishment.

Rehabilitation is a reward for such horrendous acts in that we improve the perpetrators standard of living. Thus there is no retribution.

Dragan · 27-02-2008 02:25PM

Earthhorse wrote: »

Thanks, but I'd rather you, and those who agree with you, were kept as far away from making such decisions as possible. I'd prefer to see people interested in the extent of the victim's injuries, physical and psychological, people who care about the backgrounds of the perpetrators, sick and twisted as we may regard them, and generally people who seem to care why things happened in charge of any such decision (for the record, I wouldn't want anyone to have the decision to end a life), rather than people uninterested in digging deeper and reaching for expedient solutions.

Well thats cool, and i respect your opinion and where you come from.

However,

I see a world where the violent and the oppressive will happily prey on people like you simply because you will take the soft road and look for a way to help them out.

Criminals and scumbags thrive on this bull**** "understanding" that only goes one way. As a intelligent and caring society we are supposed to feel pity for these people who "have been driven to this life". It's a load of bull****.

You don't keep a good garden by "understanding the weeds" you keep a good garden by ripping them out.

3 years ago i would have sat here and said the same thing as you, today i'm saying bring on the punishments for those who abuse others. It's as simple as a differrence of opinion. I won't change yours and you won't change mine but has been nice having a proper debate with someone without it resorting to insults and such!

Cheers.

mike65 · 27-02-2008 02:28PM

Some more misery by and against teenagers

Girl bound and gagged by boys in Schoolyard attack

By Brian McDonald
Wednesday February 27 2008

Gardai are investigating a shocking attack by a gang of boys on a teenage girl in her schoolyard.

The 15-year-old girl was grabbed by a number of boys, tied up and blindfolded before an attempt was apparently made to pull down her trousers and pull up her top.

Despite her terrified screams, nobody intervened to help her.

Gardai in Co Galway are now investigating the attack, while the school, which cannot be named for legal reasons, is also carrying out an investigation. A number of pupils have been suspended by the school for three days.

The girl's mother told Gerry Ryan on RTE2FM yesterday that she received a phone call from the school to pick up her daughter -- the only girl in a class of boys.

"She was very upset and told me she had been assaulted by some boys in her class. She said she was talking to her friends when the boys came behind her with tape. They tied her hands together with the tape, knocked her to the ground and tied her legs together.

"She was screaming and telling them to get away. They tied the scarf around her to hold her down. They then stuffed the scarf into her mouth and blindfolded her", said the upset mother.

As a number of other students gathered to watch, the boys -- up to five are believed to have been involved in the incident -- wrote all over the girl's face. The girl's mother added the attack took place in the school yard at break-time.

Mike.

Dragan · 27-02-2008 02:30PM

And i suppose we should try and "understand" those little cnuts as well?

mike65 · 27-02-2008 02:34PM

Chances are these scummers will have the vid or link on bebo as you read this.

Mike.

Earthhorse · 27-02-2008 02:36PM

Dragan wrote:

Well thats cool, and i respect your opinion and where you come from.

However,

I see a world where the violent and the oppressive will happily prey on people like you simply because you will take the soft road and look for a way to help them out.

Criminals and scumbags thrive on this bull**** "understanding" that only goes one way. As a intelligent and caring society we are supposed to feel pity for these people who "have been driven to this life". It's a load of bull****.

You don't keep a good garden by "understanding the weeds" you keep a good garden by ripping them out.

3 years ago i would have sat here and said the same thing as you, today i'm saying bring on the punishments for those who abuse others. It's as simple as a differrence of opinion. I won't change yours and you won't change mine but has been nice having a proper debate with someone without it resorting to insults and such!

Cheers

Oh, yeah? Well you're a smellyhead!

I don't want to drag this on but just to close; I'm not as soft as perhaps you expect. I absolutely believe in punishment. The death penalty I disagree with, purely on the grounds that we can't guarantee every conviction, but I would happily see these guys locked up for long periods of time. I also think that death in this case would be too harsh a punishment and believe people are having a knee-jerk reaction to this.

In fairness to you, you at least have the guts to step up to the plate and say you'd pull the trigger (whether you would or not is another thing) unlike those who want for this to happen but want no part in it.

We now return to your scheduled After Hours posts.

Dragan · 27-02-2008 02:37PM

To be honest, what i find most annoying is the pack of pussies who gathered around to watch.

I see this everytime some scumbag acts up in public, loads of people standing around goind "oh my god, thats terrible" while it's the one or two folks getting stuck in to get the problem sorted.

Everyone should be a bit more like Mairt to be honest and try actually helping people out in these ****ed up situations.

Dudess · 27-02-2008 02:38PM

Dragan wrote: »

And i suppose we should try and "understand" those little cnuts as well?

Oh no doubt some clueless bleeding heart will insist we should (a few posters already spring to mind).

Earthhorse · 27-02-2008 02:40PM

Dragan wrote: »

And i suppose we should try and "understand" those little cnuts as well?

No. We should shoot them in the back of the head.

Dragan · 27-02-2008 02:43PM

Earthhorse wrote: »

No. We should shoot them in the back of the head.

Now your coming round to my way of thinking! Shooting them for this one might be a bit much though..... a few years down the salt mines though.....that will do it.

mike65 · 27-02-2008 02:45PM

I think the assailants should suffer the fate of the victim.

Mike.

Degsy · 27-02-2008 03:03PM

Something very similar happened in Dublin a few years back.Two scrotes robbed a disabled man in the phoenix park,threatened him at syringe-point,beat him up,robbed the car and left him there unable to walk for help.He wasnt discovered for hours either.Dunno if the shiitebags were ever caught but its just typical of the scumbags in this country..cowardly,inept,AIDS-riddled little scrotes.Shoot them into a pit that they were made to dig themselves.

Dinter · 27-02-2008 03:25PM

Well personally I believe that it's all down to nurture not nature.

The poor guys obviously grow up in a depressed area where there is no good role models in the immediate environment. They also have to contend with the ravages of drug abuse on a daily basis. It's no wonder their morals will slip especially as crime is probably their only source of income bar the dole and assorted other freebies they get.

Could any one of us who had to endure growing up in such a hellhole really believe that they could be anything other than small time, vicious, petty criminals.

That's why I advocate a policy of forced sterilisation. It's cheap and also 100% effective in ensuring that for once we break this cycle.

mike65 · 27-02-2008 03:35PM

In New York during the 1990s it was noted that scummy criminal behaviour fell markedly, the office of Mayor Giuliani was quick to take credit but its reckoned by some the real reason for the drop was thanks to legal abortion being introduced in the early 70s. An interesting theory but not proven.

Mike.

Dudess · 27-02-2008 03:46PM

Weird, someone was just telling me about that (from Freakonomics) at lunchtime.

Degsy · 27-02-2008 03:55PM

Put a sterilising agent in the John Player Blue,watch crime disapear!

Dinter · 27-02-2008 04:11PM

If you put it in the Methadone the fcukers would drink it willingly.

PHB · 27-02-2008 04:23PM

Here's my way to deal with it.

A. Find out what happened to these people as kids. If they were abused by their parents or something, get involved in stopping that. If they watched TV and were influenced, give involved in stopping that. Whatever the causes, treat the causes.

B. Shoot them.

Just because people are affected by their society doesn't mean they are completely affected by their society. There is always personal choice.
Treating the causes of crimes and killing the people who commit horrendous crimes aren't mutually exclusive policies.

If they break a window, or even get involved in drugs, let's try fix them. If they've done something like this, let's just get rid of them.

Stark · 27-02-2008 04:24PM

That would be pretty much my view.

I can understand someone getting involved in petty crime, theft, burglaries etc. because of their upbringing. But torturing weak and vulnerable people for fun isn't something you can blame on upbringing. Some people are just rotten.

helimachoptor · 27-02-2008 04:28PM

Here is a good case of an eye for an eye. I'm sure some iranian interoogators could be flown in on special visas as "experts" in their field!

Put them to good work, torture these f**ksticks then throw them into a dark wet pit feed them once a week let them out of the hole once a month.

f**k their upbringing, they should be severly punished.

Dudess · 27-02-2008 04:53PM

Degsy wrote: »

Put a sterilising agent in the John Player Blue,watch crime disapear!

LOL

Dashticle · 27-02-2008 05:00PM

Strange that juvenile offenders can be named publicly though they're not being tried as adults... also I doubt they ever will be tried as such.

Dinter · 27-02-2008 05:18PM

Dashticle wrote: »

Strange that juvenile offenders can be named publicly though they're not being tried as adults... also I doubt they ever will be tried as such.

There was some little filthbag in the Times on Saturday. (From a broken home of course.) Anyway when he was 17 he shot a child in the throat with an illegally held pellet gun. He's now 19 I think. The child has recovered completely except for the psychological trauma obviously.

Anyway the scummer got sentenced to FOUR years in prison. One suspended. I was very pleased with that result. Remember he was only a "child" when he did it.

That'll teach him.

Earthhorse · 27-02-2008 05:28PM

mike65 wrote: »

In New York during the 1990s it was noted that scummy criminal behaviour fell markedly, the office of Mayor Giuliani was quick to take credit but its reckoned by some the real reason for the drop was thanks to legal abortion being introduced in the early 70s. An interesting theory but not proven.

Dudess wrote: »

Weird, someone was just telling me about that (from Freakonomics) at lunchtime.

Pretty good debate by the co-author of Freakonomics (Levitt) and another economist (I assume, Sailor) here: http://www.slate.com/id/33569/entry/33571/. (One critique of the theory not mentioned is that Levitt assumes an abortion rate of zero before legalisation which is obviously not true, though it would be difficult get accurate data on abortions before legalistion too).

Also, if I remember correctly didn't Freakonomics also conclude that one of the few proven ways to reduce crime was simply to increase the number of policemen employed?

Dashticle · 27-02-2008 05:38PM

Dinter wrote: »

There was some little filthbag in the Times on Saturday. (From a broken home of course.) Anyway when he was 17 he shot a child in the throat with an illegally held pellet gun. He's now 19 I think. The child has recovered completely except for the psychological trauma obviously.

Anyway the scummer got sentenced to FOUR years in prison. One suspended. I was very pleased with that result. Remember he was only a "child" when he did it.

That'll teach him.

Well my point was in Ireland when you hear about crimes like this, committed by 16-17 year old (though thank God there haven't been many), the suspects usually are not named for legal reasons.

And it's good to hear of that four years sentence, sometimes it seems like you'll only need a couple changes of underwear when going to jail.

4Xcut · 27-02-2008 05:43PM

They should be tied naked to a rock with honey smeared on their genetils and have the crows peck at them. Then just tie them to the ground on the desert and cut their eyelids out and let the sun do its job. - Worked for the romans;)

Dinter · 27-02-2008 05:48PM

Dashticle wrote: »

Well my point was in Ireland when you hear about crimes like this, committed by 16-17 year old (though thank God there haven't been many), the suspects usually are not named for legal reasons.

And it's good to hear of that four years sentence, sometimes it seems like you'll only need a couple changes of underwear when going to jail.

Yep, especially as the court found that he had shot the child accidentally. That's the sort of sentence that might act as a deterrent.

Still bearing in mind the severity of the sentence given for causing harm that was temporary and accidental think of all the other crimes that have occurred where the person responsible has being jailed for pathetically short amounts of time. Less than four years.

I'm thinking of certain Judges who don't appear to understand that prison is the punishment not their long, dreary monologues on why light sentences are appropriate.

Teens torture disabled woman

Comments