Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Lynch mob castrate rapist in India.


dlonewolf85

Recommended Posts

So now Mexico doesn't apply to the argument you made? This is called special pleading.

I agree you could be right here. I don't know for certain how the justice system works in Mexico. It applies to my argument. Was suggesting that even if it doesn't work in Mexico, there's a possibility it would work in another state or country.

Only your opinion, still better than giving a predator another chance to destroy someone else's life.

Not really. I'm not the one trying to justify breaking the law, and murder. Try that in America and see where it gets you. Two in the forehead, because they believe in murder too. And it's not in your favour.

In other words, your ideology functions as a vicious cycle, with no true justice involved.

Was that meant to be funny?

Let me rephrase that.

"More prison space? For who? Another murderer"? Guess you'd fit in that prison cell just fine? Don't you see the holes in your theory?

A dead rapist is one less predator in society, all you've presented is list of maybes and what-ifs based on wishful thinking.

Understanding is in principle solely based on wishful thinking. To understand, one must be willing to explore such idea's, for the betterment of mankind.

But sounds like you'd rather jeopardise society's safety just to give rapists more chances.

They'd be imprisoned for 30-40 years if I had a say in things. In the meantime I'd install re-education services, psychiatric and medical facilities to do what I could to transform willing participant into better people, who understand they can't just act on urges like an animal, in a civilized society.

This is my idea of an ideal society.

Jobs would be offered. Peace officers [not police officers, there's a big difference] would be put in place. Again, this would be how I'd run things in an ideal society.

Society can be changed. I realise, at this point that's a bit of a stretch, but I stand beside my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. I'm not the one trying to justify breaking the law, and murder. Try that in America and see where it gets you. Two in the forehead, because they believe in murder too. And it's not in your favour.

In other words, your ideology functions as a vicious cycle, with no true justice involved.

Nor am I unless your laws are like that of India, in which case you're justifying impotent laws that do little but harm society, in that case sometimes justifiable homicide is needed.
Let me rephrase that.

"More prison space? For who? Another murderer"? Guess you'd fit in that prison cell just fine? Don't you see the holes in your theory?

Your inability to tell the difference between a threat and eliminating a threat isn't a hole in my theory.
Understanding is in principle solely based on wishful thinking. To understand, one must be willing to explore such idea's, for the betterment of mankind.
The betterment of the rapist, don't pretend it's for anything else. Most people don't rape. Edited by Rlyeh
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nor am I unless your laws are like that of India, in which case you're justifying impotent laws that do little but harm society, in that case sometimes justifiable homicide is needed.

Your posts seem to suggest you condone murder. Posts like this:

"A dead rapist is one less predator in society".

I live in England, not India. But if I lived in India, and held some platform of power regarding law, I'd study all laws and diligently examine and distinguish those that are necessary for a healthy society in India, chucking self-serving laws out the window. It needn't be too problematic. Justifying impotent laws is a joke. There's no purpose in a powerless law.

Rapists would receive 30-40 year sentences at the least.

Inmates that were sincerely willing to change their ways and help society for the better would be taken into a wellness program. The inmate must first make peace with his victim, as a means of showing he is sincere before being accepted into a wellness program.

It is possible to make Earth a better place. When there's a will, there's a way.

Your inability to tell the difference between a threat and eliminating a threat isn't a hole in my theory.

Calling for castration is a call for blood. You're calling for somebodies death, here. Your "threat" teeters on the periphery of acting on said threat. Just admit you support and condone murder, as your earlier posts indicate.

The betterment of the rapist, don't pretend it's for anything else. Most people don't rape.

For the betterment of both. I believe you are the one pretending murder is a morally acceptable and civilised practice.

If castration is your punishment for rapists... what's your punishment for murderer's?

It just seems hypocritical you'd punish one and not the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your posts seem to suggest you condone murder. Posts like this:

"A dead rapist is one less predator in society".

Can you show this statement is false?
I live in England, not India. But if I lived in India, and held some platform of power regarding law, I'd study all laws and diligently examine and distinguish those that are necessary for a healthy society in India, chucking self-serving laws out the window. It needn't be too problematic. Justifying impotent laws is a joke. There's no purpose in a powerless law.
As you hold no form of power, pretending what you might or could do if you did is a moot argument.
Calling for castration is a call for blood. You're calling for somebodies death, here. Your "threat" teeters on the periphery of acting on said threat. Just admit you support and condone murder, as your earlier posts indicate.
And again you prove you are utterly incapable of differentiating between a threat to society and eliminating such a threat.
For the betterment of both. I believe you are the one pretending murder is a morally acceptable and civilised practice.

If castration is your punishment for rapists... what's your punishment for murderer's?

It just seems hypocritical you'd punish one and not the other.

A straw man argument. You have lazily lumped all "killings" as murder; irrelevant of the reasons, so you misrepresenting my position on murder is kind of predictable.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you show this statement is false?

You were lying?

As you hold no form of power, pretending what you might or could do if you did is a moot argument.

Not necessarily.

And again you prove you are utterly incapable of differentiating between a threat to society and eliminating such a threat.

You just can't argue against the truth, can you? You ought to know better. I'd perceive anyone calling for blood as a threat.

A straw man argument. You have lazily lumped all "killings" as murder; irrelevant of the reasons, so you misrepresenting my position on murder is kind of predictable.

It was sound logic, which is why it's difficult for you to argue against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were lying?

What relevance is this question?
You just can't argue against the truth, can you? You ought to know better. I'd perceive anyone calling for blood as a threat.
The fact the law has the concept of justifiable homicide proves that your comprehension skills are woefully lacking.
It was sound logic, which is why it's difficult for you to argue against it.

No, a straw man argument is not logically sound, it's a fallacy. I have already explained why it's a straw man, I'll repeat it anyway;

"You have lazily lumped all "killings" as murder; irrelevant of the reasons, so you misrepresenting my position on murder is kind of predictable."

Misrepresenting my argument then telling barefaced lies implies you're just trolling.

Edited by Rlyeh
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What relevance is this question?

So you were telling the truth. Thought so.

The fact the law has the concept of justifiable homicide proves that your comprehension skills are woefully lacking.

Castration doesn't grant justice and it isn't justifiable as a result.

No, a straw man argument is not logically sound, it's a fallacy. I have already explained why it's a straw man, I'll repeat it anyway;

"You have lazily lumped all "killings" as murder; irrelevant of the reasons, so you misrepresenting my position on murder is kind of predictable."

Misrepresenting my argument then telling barefaced lies implies you're just trolling.

So we conclude that your revenge killing isn't justifiable and therefore not righteous. Your choice of dealing with rapists is morally wrong, and doesn't function to serve a civilised world. Bye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we conclude that your revenge killing isn't justifiable and therefore not righteous. Your choice of dealing with rapists is morally wrong, and doesn't function to serve a civilised world. Bye.

That is a more than fair comment, however, you will never have a civilised world as long as rapists exist. If that mindset cannot be eradicated with reason, which we know it cannot, what alternatives exist? These people have forfeited their right to live in a social situation, and are a danger to people in general, locking them up just creates great expense which is not fair on the rest of the population.

This Lynch mob acted in a manner befitting a rapist, which I would say is a sub human being. He got to taste the horror he inflicted on another. Vigilante justice is not an answer, but perhaps current laws dealing with this sort of scum are perhaps a bit light on and this lynch mob is screaming that loudly? Not much of a deterrent when it is an everyday occurrence, and women in general deserve to feel safe, as well as all men don't deserve to be tarred by this brush, which they often are.

How do you feel would be a fitting way to deal with filthy scumbags like a rapist?

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your posts seem to suggest you condone murder. Posts like this:

"A dead rapist is one less predator in society".

That honestly sounds more like WIld West Gun Culture mentality to be honest.

Rapists would receive 30-40 year sentences at the least.

Do you not feel that burden is unfair to the society as a whole though? Why should people pay for the food to feed him and security to watch him?

Inmates that were sincerely willing to change their ways and help society for the better would be taken into a wellness program. The inmate must first make peace with his victim, as a means of showing he is sincere before being accepted into a wellness program.

Would you personally take the responsibility for re-offenders though?

How do you believe someone who has already forfeited a place in society?

It is possible to make Earth a better place. When there's a will, there's a way.

I am sure you are right, but I am not sure that offering criminals a place in society will better anything. They have shown they have no regard for others.

Calling for castration is a call for blood. You're calling for somebodies death, here. Your "threat" teeters on the periphery of acting on said threat. Just admit you support and condone murder, as your earlier posts indicate.

What about medical option such as chemical castration (administration of antiandrogen drugs, which is given as an injection every three months)? Some have opted for this, and it has been shown to be effective with regards to removing the sick desires.

LINK - Chemical Castration.

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we I conclude that based on my misrepresentation, your revenge killing isn't justifiable and therefore not righteous. From my moral high horse your choice of dealing with rapists is morally wrong, and doesn't function to serve a civilised self-righteous world. Bye.

Fixed that for you. Try actually reading what people write next time, you might get a better reception champ.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have lazily lumped all "killings" as murder; irrelevant of the reasons, so you misrepresenting my position on murder is kind of predictable.

Misrepresenting my argument then telling barefaced lies implies you're just trolling.

Fixed that for you. Try actually reading what people write next time, you might get a better reception champ.

Fused two of your posts into one for convenience. You've just misrepresented my position on dealing with criminals the correct way, which makes me believe you're hypocritical after that post.

You've nothing of substance to add. Why are you here?

Because we are not in a position to deal out execution, we have no moral justification and therefore we have no dog in this fight. So we're still unjustified dealing out executions to people who are often merely suspected of rape.

Dare I say it, your ideology is unsound and wouldn't work. All it would do is bring more destruction and misery, ultimately solving nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a more than fair comment, however, you will never have a civilised world as long as rapists exist.

True.

If that mindset cannot be eradicated with reason, which we know it cannot, what alternatives exist?

Has it been proven? I don't know truth be told, however we could try and develop an understanding and find some common ground with the suspect. Remind the rapist about his own family. Ask him what he would do if somebody sexually assaulted his mother? Would he look at rape the same way? I know things tend to be more complicated than that, but it's a start.

These people have forfeited their right to live in a social situation, and are a danger to people in general, locking them up just creates great expense which is not fair on the rest of the population.

You're right. It's not fair to the rest of the population, which is why I'd pay for everything myself, if the system was set up in such a way, meaning if the government doesn't demand taxes be used to fund the prison. That would be a problem.

There's more joy in giving than receiving. It'd become one's aim to give to the city he was born in, to benefit the people and help create a healthy, decent and respectable society to live in. All great notions begin somewhere.

Of course one needs a lot of money to keep a prison/wellness system operating. Such a task would likely require one to be in an additional, well-paying line of work. I'd personally dedicate my life to becoming a heart surgeon, Human relations manager or banker to help fund the prison. Something that obviously pays well. But again, in an ideal society.

Keeping such a system operating for the betterment of that particular society would be something to be proud of. Especially if nobody was forced to help pay for it. That would be my offering to society, or the world but this ideology is still in it's early stages. It would require much more thought and planning to assemble such a system where one could run, control and pay for everything themselves and still live a relatively stress-free life. Without being a burden on the population.

There are likely flaws in my concept here, but this is just the early stage of thinking. Merely a "What I'd do" ideology.

It'll probably amount to nothing more than a dream, but it's better than calling for the blood of what is sometimes an innocent man. If you had children, I don't believe they'd appreciate you killing the rapist (not paedophile, a rapist - very slight difference) if she knew there were better methods for dealing with the criminal. When your son or daughter grow older, they're going to realise you are just as much a criminal as the rapist.

This Lynch mob acted in a manner befitting a rapist, which I would say is a sub human being.

Only sincere repentance would be necessary to change this "sub-Human Being" into an upright and decent person. A wellness prison program would have to focus on this point to help turn people from the temptation of crime.

He got to taste the horror he inflicted on another.

I understand your point, but by this logic, or by this form of 'justice', the lynch mob deserve to taste the horror they inflicted on the rapist. The rapist is sometimes someone completely innocent who the mob mistakes for a particular rapist. It's happened, I think.

If this kind of logic was signed into law, the world would be a much more bloodier place. Particularly places like America where it's legal to own firearms.

Vigilante justice is not an answer, but perhaps current laws dealing with this sort of scum are perhaps a bit light on and this lynch mob is screaming that loudly? Not much of a deterrent when it is an everyday occurrence, and women in general deserve to feel safe, as well as all men don't deserve to be tarred by this brush, which they often are.

Not all men are rapists. I understand the frustration of the people in power never doing their jobs properly and the "laws" being too light. Here in England, rapists usually only get around 6-10 years at most, if memory serves properly. I'd give them 40. Rapists who were willing to make a sincere change from their ways would be placed in said wellness program.

How do you feel would be a fitting way to deal with filthy scumbags like a rapist?

Life in prison, until I could figure out a greater/less expensive method for dealing with them - excluding execution, or wellness program for those willing to change.

I think the only reasonable kind of violent justice would be poetic justice, but uncertain still. I think I'd exclude rapists from this however as sodomizing a man or woman to death is just barbaric and monstrous.

That honestly sounds more like WIld West Gun Culture mentality to be honest.

About 2 steps away from Mad Max gun culture mentality in todays world. Which still means one is breaking the law, therefore isn't justified in killing other people.

Do you not feel that burden is unfair to the society as a whole though? Why should people pay for the food to feed him and security to watch him?

Again, in my ideal system, it wouldn't be a burden to anyone else but myself. If it means keeping men, women and children safe. A welcome burden.

Would you personally take the responsibility for re-offenders though?

I would. I would use each opportunity to cultivate humility, that I don't grow hot with anger against the re-offender. I'd use any tool at my disposal from counselling, re-education to teach him dignity, respect, humility, love. To teach him to be at peace with all Human Beings.

Teach him the greater things in life, and he probably won't want to go on raping. There's more joy had in a fruitful, healthy relationship with a woman you find beautiful than to waste time on urges to molest innocent people, risking being thrown in prison for the rest of your life.

How do you believe someone who has already forfeited a place in society?

I believe in mercy, forgiveness and understanding. He would of course be punished for his evil, but if sincerely willing to change, I'd give him another chance. He must first make sincere peace with the people he has hurt or wronged. In this case, raped.

I am sure you are right, but I am not sure that offering criminals a place in society will better anything. They have shown they have no regard for others.

That's the point of a wellness program. Turn them from criminals, into upstanding people.

What about medical option such as chemical castration (administration of antiandrogen drugs, which is given as an injection every three months)? Some have opted for this, and it has been shown to be effective with regards to removing the sick desires.

LINK - Chemical Castration.

Undecided. Sorry, Psyche101.

Thanks for the interesting reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fused two of your posts into one for convenience. You've just misrepresented my position on dealing with criminals the correct way, which makes me believe you're hypocritical after that post.

Projecting doesn't work on me. Your "correct way" is nothing more than your self-righteous opinion and nowhere have I changed the meaning, show me I'm wrong.
You've nothing of substance to add. Why are you here?
The straw men lack substance, is that why you prefer to attack them than my arguments?
Dare I say it, your ideology is unsound and wouldn't work. All it would do is bring more destruction and misery, ultimately solving nothing.

Then again compared to your ideology of ass-backwards priorities it could actually achieve in keeping society safe.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Projecting doesn't work on me. Your "correct way" is nothing more than your self-righteous opinion and nowhere have I changed the meaning, show me I'm wrong.

Believing in what is right and practicing righteousness doesn't make one self-righteous by default. It would seem you can't tell the difference...

I've already shown you you're wrong. You were calling for blood earlier, and tried to justify it. Basically, you want revenge. "I hate rape so castrate all rapists" won't fly in court. Not in terms of vigilante justice. Some alleged 'rapists' have proven to be innocent people wrongly accused. That is where you're standard for dealing with rapists fails. Then what?

The straw men lack substance, is that why you prefer to attack them than my arguments?

I don't know what a straw man argument is. I speak from my heart. I say what I mean and mean what I say. Sounds like you're just making an excuse not to reply to rebuttal's you cannot disprove. There's nothing wrong in us admitting we're wrong.

Then again compared to your ideology of ass-backwards priorities it could actually achieve in keeping society safe.

Unless everyone in that society decides to practice rape, or something else you don't like. Then you'd just castrate everybody. Dictating what society can ultimately do is no way to keep society safe. "Rapists, you better follow my laws or I'll castrate every one of you". Doesn't paint a pretty picture does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believing in what is right and practicing righteousness doesn't make one self-righteous by default. It would seem you can't tell the difference...

I've already shown you you're wrong. You were calling for blood earlier, and tried to justify it. Basically, you want revenge. "I hate rape so castrate all rapists" won't fly in court. Not in terms of vigilante justice. Some alleged 'rapists' have proven to be innocent people wrongly accused. That is where you're standard for dealing with rapists fails. Then what?

One moment I'm calling for the blood of rapists, now castration? You've shown you're incompetent. You can't even get your accusations straight.
I don't know what a straw man argument is. I speak from my heart. I say what I mean and mean what I say. Sounds like you're just making an excuse not to reply to rebuttal's you cannot disprove. There's nothing wrong in us admitting we're wrong.
If you used your brain instead you probably would know why you're wrong.

I stated a dead rapist doesn't rape and refuted your claim nothing good can come from executing rapists, your only response was some pathetic touchy feely ideology of helping the rapist.

Unless everyone in that society decides to practice rape, or something else you don't like. Then you'd just castrate everybody. Dictating what society can ultimately do is no way to keep society safe. "Rapists, you better follow my laws or I'll castrate every one of you". Doesn't paint a pretty picture does it?

Sorry, I'd castrate everybody unless they are rapists? Are you even trying to make sense? Doesn't laws already dictate what society can do?

How does a society of rapists paint a pretty picture to begin with? Your utterly ridiculous scenario doesn't help your argument.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One moment I'm calling for the blood of rapists, now castration? You've shown you're incompetent. You can't even get your accusations straight.

You've been arguing for either castrating or killing rapists via mob punishment. If you don't want to confuse people, make your posts clear. Not my fault. Your method for dealing with rapists was proven unsound several posts ago, anyhow.

Here, you're condoning murder:

I on the other hand can name a few good things about slaying a rapist.

Here, I'm left to assume you were in want of castration since I called you out for condoning murder before. Then again, you use the word "Dead" so...:

A dead rapist is one less predator in society.
If you used your brain instead you probably would know why you're wrong. I stated a dead rapist doesn't rape and refuted your claim nothing good can come from executing rapists, your only response was some pathetic touchy feely ideology of helping the rapist.

"I, on the other hand can name a few good things about slaying a rapist".

The word "slaying" by definition means "To Murder". When the word is used in context of animals, it means "To kill". There's nothing wrong in admitting one is wrong, Rlyeh.

Sorry, I'd castrate everybody unless they are rapists? Are you even trying to make sense?

If I didn't make sense, I apologise. Let's go back and look at your point:

Your argument here, was that castrating all rapists would keep society safe. .

I then took your logic, and applied it to a scenario where society as a whole started practicing rape.

Using your logic, you'd castrate everyone, for they would all be practicing rape, in an attempt to "keep society safe". I did this to once more prove to you that your logic is, for want of a polite word, warped, and really wouldn't keep society safe. It's a backwards attempt at reason.

So your method for dealing with rapists is once again, flawed. It comes across as unreasonable anger for revenge which is understandable, but it's not justified.

Doesn't laws already dictate what society can do?

Laws are put in place to turn people away from harmful practices and wrongdoing. The above scenario naturally assumes you are in power and make the laws. That's how I demonstrated my point that you threatening society with castration comes across as dictating and wouldn't "keep society safe" which you tried to argue.

Historically, the death sentence hasn't done much to intimidate would-be criminals. I don't believe authorities threatening castration would do much to keep society safe in the long-run.

How does a society of rapists paint a pretty picture to begin with? Your utterly ridiculous scenario doesn't help your argument.

It just did. A society of rapists is bad but crime is what one expects from criminals. The righteous people, like you seem to lump yourself with, are expected to always exercise goodwill, righteousness, love, mercy, forgiveness, kindness, compassion, dignity, etc. So a person in a position of power who is expected to lead by example, calling for the mass castration of rapists in such a horrific example paints an even darker picture and would do nothing to keep society safe if your twisted logic where to be applied to the real world.

Once yet again, your logic is backwards. Slaying rapists only makes you a murderer. What's your punishment for murderer's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've been arguing for either castrating or killing rapists via mob punishment. If you don't want to confuse people, make your posts clear. Not my fault. Your method for dealing with rapists was proven unsound several posts ago, anyhow.

Wrong. I made the factual statement that a dead rapist can't rape, can you disprove it? As for castrating a rapist, the article said that not me.

Now someone like yourself who is easily confused should start paying better attention.

Here, I'm left to assume you were in want of castration since I called you out for condoning murder before. Then again, you use the word "Dead" so...:
To which I just refuted, next.
The word "slaying" by definition means "To Murder". When the word is used in context of animals, it means "To kill". There's nothing wrong in admitting one is wrong, Rlyeh.
It means "to kill" in both contexts.
Your argument here, was that castrating all rapists would keep society safe. .
I'll have to take you up on that, show me the exact post.
I then took your logic, and applied it to a scenario where society as a whole started practicing rape.
You aren't good at this logic thing, because you've just refuted your own ideology. In a society that practices rape there is no solution to keep it safe.

The fact you need to use a ridiculous scenario which no solution exists shows how far you will clutch at straws.

Edited by Rlyeh
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong. I made the factual statement that a dead rapist can't rape, can you disprove it?

You were condoning murder, whether you realise it or meant it or not.

Your method yet again, for dealing with rapists was proven unsound. Atleast for civilised Human Beings living in a civilised society.

As for castrating a rapist, the article said that not me.

You weren't calling for castration? Although you appear to believe there are good things, in slaying rapists? Murder is against the law. We've already been through this. Let's avoid going in circles.

It means "to kill" in both contexts.

No it doesn't: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/slaying

I'll have to take you up on that, show me the exact post.
A dead rapist is one less predator in society.

Okay, maybe you weren't calling for castration... Just death of the rapist.

You do realise we can't just kill rapists? It's against the law. Again, this exposes your method of dealing with rapists as immoral. Which is why you're wrong in this argument, as a civilised society doesn't follow immoral practices.

As we are talking about a case where a lynch mob castrated a rapist, one naturally assumes that's the scenario you're referring to/discussing.

And here:

Then again compared to your ideology of ass-backwards priorities it could actually achieve in keeping society safe.

Once again, murder is wrong. Deal with it. You said you weren't talking about castration, so your comment about "slaying" a rapist could only have meant murder. Maybe you didn't mean it or realise it at the time, I don't know.

If you didn't mean it, I'm sorry for saying you condone murder, but it really does seem that way, imo.

You aren't good at this logic thing, because you've just refuted your own ideology. In a society that practices rape there is no solution to keep it safe.

That wasn't my ideology. My example of how you would govern society using your rule of slaying rapists doesn't keep society safe.

Which as I explained, is why your ******* logic wouldn't work. My point was that your concept of killing rapists to keep society safe, really doesn't keep society safe at all, especially if the entirety of society decided to practice rape. It's a method that fails. We can't keep society safe by killing or castrating rapists. The only way to defeat and overcome this problem is by learning what causes people to become rapists in the first place, and then dealing with the issues present. Not bloodshed.

The fact you need to use a ridiculous scenario which no solution exists shows how far you will clutch at straws.

It shows how hard it is for you to grasp reason, and how the law works. We can't go around killing rapists simply because we think it will keep society safe.

Here's your post's again: "I on the other hand can name a few good things about slaying a rapist. A dead rapist is one less predator in society".

Again, the term "To slay" literally means, in relation to people "To murder". Your idea of dealing with rapists is against the law. Therefore, wrong.

End of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your method yet again, for dealing with rapists was proven unsound. Atleast for civilised Human Beings living in a civilised society.

Not only have you done no such thing, we aren't talking about civilised humans. Contrary to your "fluffy bunny" ideology/delusion, rapists have no place in society.
You weren't calling for castration? Although you appear to believe there are good things, in slaying rapists? Murder is against the law. We've already been through this. Let's avoid going in circles.
Then at least pretend you know what justified homicide is.
Yes, it does.

http://dictionary.re...com/browse/slay

To kill violently or destroy.

Which as I explained, is why your ******* logic wouldn't work. My point was that your concept of killing rapists to keep society safe, really doesn't keep society safe at all, especially if the entirety of society decided to practice rape. It's a method that fails. We can't keep society safe by killing or castrating rapists. The only way to defeat and overcome this problem is by learning what causes people to become rapists in the first place, and then dealing with the issues present. Not bloodshed.
Your point is you can't make an intelligent argument. I mean really, a society of rapists? Of all the idiotic arguments, you pulled this brilliant one out of your ass. Such a society by definition cannot be safe from rape. No law or ideology would work.

Do you even think out your responses before coming out with such nonsensical bull****?

Edited by Rlyeh
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of us have in the past said "castrate him" but not like this. This is quite barbaric, if you are going to do it, then at least do not behave as barbaric as the rapist. Do it "legally" if that is possible in India, but India do have a well trained section of doctors (thanks to their training in England) so all the courts have to do is hand the rapist over to them....(but imagine there will be a fee)

What?? Thanks to England? So you mean India has no med-schools? Don't forget madam, that your country tried to keep us Indians as slaves for centuries. Do take credit for that too, if you remember. Indians have recently sent a craft to Mars, I guess, we should all thank England!

Edit: Sorry for going off-topic. But freetoroam always seems to have something negative or insulting to say about India and its people, no matter what the context is, or whatever people are discussing. Maybe some people are still raised by their parents into believing that people from some nationalities or having a colored skin are inferior to them. But then, this world is changing if you have noticed, it has no place for racist mentality anymore.

Edited by dlonewolf85
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What?? Thanks to England? So you mean India has no med-schools? Don't forget madam, that your country tried to keep us Indians as slaves for centuries. Do take credit for that too, if you remember. Indians have recently sent a craft to Mars, I guess, we should all thank England!

Edit: Sorry for going off-topic. But freetoroam always seems to have something negative or insulting to say about India and its people, no matter what the context is, or whatever people are discussing. Maybe some people are still raised by their parents into believing that people from some nationalities or having a colored skin are inferior to them. But then, this world is changing if you have noticed, it has no place for racist mentality anymore.

I do agree to a certain extent, but there is nothing racist in what I say....far from it. Many Indian doctors train in England, there is nothing wrong with that, but if India had so many good med schools, then why do so many still come to England to train?...I no way see people as being inferior just because of their skin colour..again far from it, there are many extremely clever India people and there are many stupid English people, and visa versa, my parents have never raised me to observe that, living and being brought up in an inner city area with all colours and travelling has shown me that.

I do not agree with many things which has happened throughout history, if you ever see me say i agree with what the English did in terms of slavery then yeah! call me a racist, but you will never have that opportunity.

There is nothing racist about my post, just facts..so please, put your racist card away, you are not that naive.

Edited by freetoroam
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To everybody, :)

I apologize for my earlier outburst. Lol. I did not start this thread so that there would be any form of hostility, but I had hoped to be part of a discussion with people. There are a few things, however, that I would like to point out:

1) This incident that we were discussing, happened in India - that is true. But not all Indians are rapists, and not every rapist gets castrated in India. Some of us Indians prefer to discuss social problems and whatnots with other people and aren't very different than you at all.

2) Not every Indian is uneducated or unintelligent or barbaric or 'backward' or even a completely bad person. :)

3) Indians are not trying to steal jobs from the UK (freetoroam always talks about it, every chance that she gets.). I am not a doctor, but I did go to college (in India) to become a physiotherapist. I also have a degree in Social Work. In fact, I got several job offers from the UK, before I started working as an educator to children with special needs (again, in India). @freetoroam, please refrain from making unnecessary remarks, but try to stick to the topic being discussed. Thanks. Also, sorry I said all that, but please stop making reference to how Indians are infiltrating your country, taking away your jobs, ruining your economy, etc. like you always do. We are talking about something else right now.

4) Thanks to all who shared their views. :) Please do carry on, they're all very interesting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only have you done no such thing, we aren't talking about civilised humans. Contrary to your "fluffy bunny" ideology/delusion, rapists have no place in society.

You're saying you think a civilised society should kill rapists. It's funny how you think killing rapists falls under justifiable homicide. It doesn't. You don't seem to understand homicide is against the law.

Yes, it does.

http://dictionary.re...com/browse/slay

To kill violently or destroy.

No, it doesn't.

You mean like swinging a sledgehammer into someone else's face? That falls under 'To kill violently'.

When referencing people, 'To slay' means to murder.

Your point is you can't make an intelligent argument. I mean really, a society of rapists?

Oh ****, here we go again. I'll explain it one last time, in a manner that even a child could understand it.

You think you can protect society by killing rapists.

Okay? What would you do, then, if everyone in your society practiced rape? [Let's say your in a position of power. You make the decisions regarding law and judicial decisions].

Answer: Kill them all.

This is why your logic is unsound. You're trying to justify murder. If this was perfectly reasonable, we'd probably deal with rapists this way, instead of sending them to prison, but we don't because most people know it's nothing short of unjustified homicide.

Of all the idiotic arguments, you pulled this brilliant one out of your ass. Such a society by definition cannot be safe from rape.

LMAO. Yeah, and by definition, using your logic such a society cannot be safe from homicide either, which is exactly what I've been trying to tell you. This is why homicide can't be used as a method for punishing criminals. Because it's a crime.

I am so sorry for getting agitated with you. I was beginning to think I was being trolled.

No law or ideology would work.

Not in my opinion. But then again I believe I can make a difference.

Do you even think out your responses before coming out with such nonsensical bull****?

Nothing about what I said was nonsensical. I hope I haven't painted the impression that I'm a total *******. I'm not.

Edited by Rexx
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.