Americans are violent

[kiliarien]

Take a different perspective on it for a moment;

The person grew up in a farm.
His father and all known friends are the same.
It's not at all in his teachings/life lessons that this is bad.

It's possible afterall.

Now he gets convicted, told that it IS bad and gets 90 days in correctional.

IF he is fixed by that 90 days, wouldn't it be enough?

I see your viewpoint. You're suggesting inbred malice though. Watching that vid, do you really think that his father and all known friends are the same?? That would be one seriously skewed moral compass as a family and is highly unlikely.

For conjecture you could say:

The person grew up in a small town.
His father and family are misogynists (including passive females).
It's seen as generally accepted to aggressively force yourself on someone.
Rape is OK.

It's possible after all.

Would that be corrected in 90 days? Same premise after all.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I'm not saying that ignorance is a free card to crime, i'm saying that it could very well be a point to be taken in rehabilitation.

killarien, it's more likely that the family has low morales on cow hitting then on rape. If he did rape someone, the punishment would fit that. Cow hitting being ok by his father(and thus passed on) isn't as far fetched as rape being a "fun thing to do around here".

In any case iwasn't giving a defense for the behaviour, i was giving an option how the 90 days could very well be enough. If it is, it simply is.

The key point still stands on that the law defines the appropriate punishment that the law sees fit for rehabilitation. I trust a judge to give more appropriate punishments as it's his life work, then for someone on a forum with a soft spot for animals.

Like i said earlier, if we did give the public the option, we'd have all rapist and murderers killed.

 

[old.Tohtori]

But this whole discussion is fairly dangerously drifting away from what was said and soon it'll be another case of claims that hold no ground, so let's try and keep it on the matter;

- Not defending the mans actions.
- Not saying animal cruelty(needless) is ok by any means.
- Saying that i feel the law is set as it is and should be same for all(in this case 90 days).
- Also saying i find it to be enough, considering it's bred slaughter livestock.
- Saying that the lack of morale may ery well be upbringing(and as such taken into consideration).

 

[kiliarien]

But this whole discussion is fairly dangerously drifting away from what was said and soon it'll be another case of claims that hold no ground, so let's try and keep it on the matter;

- Not defending the mans actions.
- Not saying animal cruelty(needless) is ok by any means.
- Saying that i feel the law is set as it is and should be same for all(in this case 90 days).
- Also saying i find it to be enough, considering it's bred slaughter livestock.
- Saying that the lack of morale may ery well be upbringing(and as such taken into consideration).

Oh don't get me wrong Toht; I know you're not defending his actions. And again I would like to reiterate that I've never said you have. And please avoid broadly speculating that everyone putting an opinion forward here has a soft spot for animals. I don't. I eat them, although the quickest way for them to meet their maker would be my preferred option.

I see your point about the morality and background, but I am also arguing on the planned malevolence involved here. This individual deliberately set out to cause pain and anguish to another being. So in that respect, animal or not 90 day's just isn't enough imo.

Let's just let him meet some cute fluffy bunnies!!

YouTube - Hardcore Fluffy Bunnies

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah didn't mean to insinuate that ALL posters here have an overly grown soft spot. Guess we'll just disagree on the penalty and how we measure it, can't really say who wiuld be "right" before the 90 days(atleast) is over and see how it changes him.