Daughter urged to bash disabled teen (1 Viewer)

[spyro14]

this is a significantly lesser crime than an ordinary bashing, since the victim lacked the cognitive resources to understand the ramifications of the attack, and the attack itself, by way of comparison to the understanding that a regular, non-retarded human being would have.

i endorse a lenient sentence - perhaps a good behaviour bond. while the crime is in itself not heinous, we can't be having this all the time. an example must be made - 6 months suspended home detention

Even to me you seem like one sick son of a bitch...

 

[Ben Netanyahu]

explain to me how this crime is equal to the bashing of say, a regular, capable citizen such as John Doe.

crimes must be evaluated in terms of the loss they create for the victim, and in certain cases, society also. the victim in this case is mentally disabled, and regardless of the disability, has less ability to process the loss than John Doe, thus it is a lesser crime and the sentence ought to reflect that.

 

[spyro14]

explain to me how this crime is equal to the bashing of say, a regular, capable citizen such as John Doe.

crimes must be evaluated in terms of the loss they create for the victim, and in certain cases, society also. the victim in this case is mentally disabled, and regardless of the disability, has less ability to process the loss than John Doe, thus it is a lesser crime and the sentence ought to reflect that.

No they don't and what you're saying is quite reflective of the type of person you are. It's a worse crime to attack a defenseless person than it is to a normal person. But then again if we go by your logic I think you would be the perfect candidate for a nice loving punch in the face.

 

[SnowFox]

explain to me how this crime is equal to the bashing of say, a regular, capable citizen such as John Doe.

crimes must be evaluated in terms of the loss they create for the victim, and in certain cases, society also. the victim in this case is mentally disabled, and regardless of the disability, has less ability to process the loss than John Doe, thus it is a lesser crime and the sentence ought to reflect that.

Thats a bit fucked.

If you were mentally disabled, in any form or level, would you want to be gang bashed?

 

[spyro14]

Only a bit?

 

[daniieee]

No they don't and what you're saying is quite reflective of the type of person you are. It's a worse crime to attack a defenseless person than it is to a normal person. But then again if we go by your logic I think you would be the perfect candidate for a nice loving punch in the face.

Thank you.

A lesser sentence would never be handed down because that would not reflect Australian societal values. The disabled are not, and will not be, victims of their own societies. I don't know what sick values have been drilled into your mind, Ben Netanyahu, but I happen to have a developmentally disabled cousin, so your vile opinion has hit me quite personally.

 

[Bacilli]

this is a significantly lesser crime than an ordinary bashing, since the victim lacked the cognitive resources to understand the ramifications of the attack, and the attack itself, by way of comparison to the understanding that a regular, non-retarded human being would have.

Fuckwit

 

[Enigmanation]

Well from a completely logically legal standpoint I get what that fuckwit is going on about.
However, if the courts do in any way have a moral backbone then to see the bashing of someone who is developmentally challenged to be more justifiable or “lenient” than that of the bashing of an ordinary citizen is really a kick in the balls for the moral progression of society.

If you make that association than by all means any criminal harm done to a developmentally challenged person can be brushed off by the mere reasoning that they “lack the cognitive resources” to know that they are being attacked, or mugged, or even raped.
That’s a pretty fucked up argument to go on. What’s more, if that whore of a mother gets off on anything less than a jail sentence, or an execution I don’t really mind, I think ill submit to the sweeping notion that the Australian judicial system is absolutely pathetic.

 

[Ben Netanyahu]

No they don't and what you're saying is quite reflective of the type of person you are. It's a worse crime to attack a defenseless person than it is to a normal person. But then again if we go by your logic I think you would be the perfect candidate for a nice loving punch in the face.

Ok but you haven't said why it's worse. That's what I was after - not you simply telling me that it is, again.

If you were mentally disabled, in any form or level, would you want to be gang bashed?

You ride a motorcycle so ur kewl, and I'll b nice to you.

But come now Snowfox - that's a silly question on two counts. Firstly, of course I wouldn't like to be bashed, and would like for someone else to be bashed instead of me. As far as an individual is concerned, they >> anyone else. Secondly, we know that a person with learning difficulties will not be able to process information as quickly, or completely, compared to a socially accepted, normal person would. Why can we not therefore say that because of this fact, they would not suffer as much in a personal attack, and therefore the crime is not as heinous in comparison to an attack on one whose faculties are in acceptable order? The harm is lesser, the suffering is lesser, ergo the crime is lesser! Someone please explain this to me, because I'm thoroughly confused! Through these ad hom's you're laying upon me I don't see a rebuttal against what I'm saying!

A lesser sentence would never be handed down because that would not reflect Australian societal values. The disabled are not, and will not be, victims of their own societies. I don't know what sick values have been drilled into your mind, Ben Netanyahu, but I happen to have a developmentally disabled cousin, so your vile opinion has hit me quite personally.

I don't care. I would SPIT upon your RETARDED cousin if I were offered the chance. Actually I wouldn't, but if it came time to decide between unleashing an equal action on a retarded citizen, and a developed citizen, I would choose to unleash it upon the retarded citizen. Why? Because they are less able to process harm, pain, and suffering.

However, if the courts do in any way have a moral backbone then to see the bashing of someone who is developmentally challenged to be more justifiable or “lenient” than that of the bashing of an ordinary citizen is really a kick in the balls for the moral progression of society.

You suggest that what I'm saying is not moral, or ethical? ON THE CONTRARY SIR! It's not accepted, but it's still quite ethical, imho. Quite frankly, I think that moral progression in society can only be realised when we favour the strong, and abandon the weak. This is the way species work: the mother duck will peck the retarded duck to death because it is an inferior being. This ought to be the same with humans.

 

[SnowFox]

We live in a time and place where such crimes are heinous and unacceptable. The same is for you about the bike thing, so i will play nice as well.

What you are describing is someone who can not comprehend whats just happened and how it will affect them in the future, am i correct?

That same person would have the same mental capacity as a small child, probably a toddler, or to a lesser extent ffhunter.

I can see where you are coming from, but if criminals knew that they could get away with it, then we would see more gang bashings and those could raise up to murder, all because the victim had no idea what was happening or how to describe them.

As for your comment about mentally impaired individuals not being able to process things such as pain or suffering, your sadly mistaken, or your just trolling?

 

[daniieee]

You suggest that what I'm saying is not moral, or ethical? ON THE CONTRARY SIR! It's not accepted, but it's still quite ethical, imho. Quite frankly, I think that moral progression in society can only be realised when we favour the strong, and abandon the weak. This is the way species work: the mother duck will peck the retarded duck to death because it is an inferior being. This ought to be the same with humans.

I get what you're saying, and to an extent I agree with you. You're an extremely intelligent man. Still doesn't change the fact that you have no morals, no human compassion. You think on an instinctual level, and I'd liken you to a wild beast. Wouldn't surprise me if you were cannibalistic either. Wanna take a chunk out of my cousin's ass while you're at it? Get with the times. You don't have to fight for your survival anymore.

 

[Ben Netanyahu]

I can see where you are coming from, but if criminals knew that they could get away with it, then we would see more gang bashings and those could raise up to murder, all because the victim had no idea what was happening or how to describe them.

Not really. I'm not advocating zero punishment/rehabilitation for the criminals - there's still the very severe impact it would have on the families and the diminished but still sizable effect it would have on the actual victim. I'm not saying no punishment, I'm advocating a lesser punishment.

 

[Tully B.]

But come now Snowfox - that's a silly question on two counts. Firstly, of course I wouldn't like to be bashed, and would like for someone else to be bashed instead of me. As far as an individual is concerned, they >> anyone else. Secondly, we know that a person with learning difficulties will not be able to process information as quickly, or completely, compared to a socially accepted, normal person would. Why can we not therefore say that because of this fact, they would not suffer as much in a personal attack, and therefore the crime is not as heinous in comparison to an attack on one whose faculties are in acceptable order? The harm is lesser, the suffering is lesser, ergo the crime is lesser! Someone please explain this to me, because I'm thoroughly confused! Through these ad hom's you're laying upon me I don't see a rebuttal against what I'm saying!

I don't see how you get from diminished mental capacity to less suffering... if anything, in my opinion, it would be more, as they would probably be much more afraid.

But then we get to the other part of your argument:

I don't care. I would SPIT upon your RETARDED cousin if I were offered the chance. Actually I wouldn't, but if it came time to decide between unleashing an equal action on a retarded citizen, and a developed citizen, I would choose to unleash it upon the retarded citizen. Why? Because they are less able to process harm, pain, and suffering.



You suggest that what I'm saying is not moral, or ethical? ON THE CONTRARY SIR! It's not accepted, but it's still quite ethical, imho. Quite frankly, I think that moral progression in society can only be realised when we favour the strong, and abandon the weak. This is the way species work: the mother duck will peck the retarded duck to death because it is an inferior being. This ought to be the same with humans.

*Cough* Nazi *Cough*

Now I'll never be able to imagine you as anything but a skinhead with a swastika branded on your arm.

However, I'd like to congratulate you for having the audacity to express such an opinion on this thread, to which you must have expected a less-than-warm response. It must have taken the online equivalent of "balls".

 

[Scinery]

Not really. I'm not advocating zero punishment/rehabilitation for the criminals - there's still the very severe impact it would have on the families and the diminished but still sizable effect it would have on the actual victim. I'm not saying no punishment, I'm advocating a lesser punishment.

I dont like it. I hate it.

My sister is disabled. Whenever this gets in the way of her life, she cries and simply says "i wish i didn't have a disability". My school has a support unit as well... even severely disabled people can understand that they have been betrayed. Certainly she wouldn't understand that she's being cheated when they "invited her over to her house"; but she would have gotten the idea when the girl started...attacking her.

The Crime is in the motive. Mens rea i think its called.

If someone attempts to attack someone who is "not retarded", their motive would be what? Revenge? To prove a point? To get their money?

This girl and her mother attacked the disabled girl with what intention? To severely hurt or even deliberately to hospitalize the girl for Lolz.

The punishment should be GREATER imo.

It gets you thinking though. What does society do with disabled people? My sister has a job, but obviously her contribution to society is much less than someone "not retarded". Disabled people feel less passion than us, so they just live and eventually die.

Well i've come to My conclusion, disabled people should be left to be as happy as possible during their stay in this society.

In Netanyahu's society, they may as well be used as lab-rats or animals- experimented on and used as guinea pigs or even eaten. They won't be able to comprehend their predicament, after all....

 

[Tully B.]

i dont like it. I hate it.

My sister is disabled. Whenever this gets in the way of her life, she cries and simply says "i wish i didn't have a disability". My school has a support unit as well... Even severely disabled people can understand that they have been betrayed. Certainly she wouldn't understand that she's being cheated when they "invited her over to her house"; but she would have gotten the idea when the girl started...attacking her.

The crime is in the motive. Mens rea i think its called.

If someone attempts to attack someone who is "not retarded", their motive would be what? Revenge? To prove a point? To get their money?

This girl and her mother attacked the disabled girl with what intention? To severely hurt or even deliberately to hospitalize the girl for lolz.

The punishment should be greater imo.

It gets you thinking though. What does society do with disabled people? My sister has a job, but obviously her contribution to society is much less than someone "not retarded". Disabled people feel less passion than us, so they just live and eventually die.

Well i've come to my conclusion, disabled people should be left to be as happy as possible during their stay in this society.

In netanyahu's society, they may as well be used as lab-rats or animals- experimented on and used as guinea pigs or even eaten. they won't be able to comprehend their predicament, after all....

SNAP! BURN! CUT! Et cetera!

 

[09er]

That is horrendous! , How can someone be so vile.
Just because someone's disabled regardless the severity, it doesn't mean their different, they are human beings and should be treated the same like the rest.
Don't diss on people with a disability

 

[kara42]

This thread and some of the people in it make me sick.
Ben Netanyahu, I respect that you have a different opinion to everyone else, but seriously man, get a fucking heart.

 

[Uncle]

i be more worried if daughter kill disable teen.
but as our friend McLoving says:

i think it is natural select

 

[Yasser Arafat]

No one gives a fuck if you have a retarded brother/sister people

get real, we dont give a fuck about the spastic

 

[Yasser Arafat]

But ben your argument seems centered on the idea that retards cant feel pain and dont have emotions. This is not true for all forms of funny reeeeeetardation m8 you know that. Sure they dont contribute to society AT ALL infact they are a burden on society, but this doesnt mean the crime doesnt affect the retard any less significantly than a normie. M8 since when is the impact of crime in relation to the victims contribution to society taken into account? If this were the case wouldnt it be more morally acceptable to murder bogans and abos than say jewish people?