Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Pedo gets whats coming


Blue90

Recommended Posts

Not that any of the above scenarios is acceptable, but this is a toddler. If a woman (girl was used in description) assaults a 5 year old I'd feel the same way.

Anyone who forces themselves on another is unacceptable. When a child is involved, it's particularly disturbing in that they have no idea what is even happening. Their innocence, from that point on, is stripped away. There is no processing beyond terror, that will last with them for a lifetime in the form of PTS, etc. All people will likely experience that sort of reaction, but a child will not be afforded the luxury of a normal childhood as a result. Gone.

Again, not to suggest that any adult/child relationship is appropriate (in referring to "students" who are obviously older) - it's not. Exploitation of any trusting relationship is upsetting...when it's a child who trusts in the adults around them, it's criminal.

I don't like violence - period. But do you guys cheer for hockey fights? Why is it acceptable for physical violence to be used in ANY situation? If you support two guys punching it up for sport, then you can surely understand people who supported this man's use of physical force in a moment of realization that someone had violated his daughter. Either you're in or you're out...if ever there was a time that it (physical force) SHOULD be tolerated, this is it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How anyone can even justify calling this a killing or call it mob mentality is beyond me. The father reacted to a rape as it was occurring - This is not a case of the father planning out an attack and searching for the rapist. This is a case of the dad running to his 5 year old daughters screams and finding a rape occurring.

The dad had 2 choices only - call 911 and wait for the police or pull the rapist off his daughter. This man did what nearly all people would do and jump the attacker. Once the attacker had been removed - and this is why I think this man deserves a medal - instead of grabbing his daughter and leaving this man to die alone he called 911 and focused on trying to get the rapist medical help. Most men I know would have walked away with their daughters in their arms and would have not focused on the rapists health until their daughter was far from the scene. This man had the patience of Job to flip the switch from outrage to concern for the rapists.

The rapists is 100% to blame for everything in this case including his own death - To the posts saying 2 wrongs don't make a right I simply can not follow your thought pattern.....

This dad deserves a medal - He did not murder or kill - He defended his daughter by using force to stop a rape in process. The rapist died as a result of his own actions - not because someone hunted him down or planned to kill him. There should be no arguments or debate on justified killings in this example because that is not what occurred. What occurred was a rapist died of injuries that occurred when force was used to stop his attack on a child as it was occurring - the death was a self inflicted wound.

When someone jumps in front of a moving truck and dies - we do not say the truck driver killed the person - we say the pedestrian has died as a result of their actions. The rapist died as a result of their actions - the dad was simply the truck that this guy jumped in front of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've always been disturbed by the double standard of CDC re: male and female sex offenders

when a female teacher rapes a male student, it is almost cheered and considered a joke. it's an opportunity for the least clever members of CDC to make obvious comments about the victim being 'lucky' and all that

yet when an adult male rapes a student or whatever, it's met with violent anger and calls for justice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Food for thought - if this girl commits a sexual assault on a young person years from now, should she be beaten to death?

Edit: not to bring guilt to the father in this issue.. I believe his actions to be appropriate given the situation. I've been trained in threat assessment and given the information the man is of no threat to anyone else other than very specific circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your sample comparison is not applicable in this case. The father of the child did not beat the rapist to death. The father of the child used immediate force to stop the rape as it was occurring - this is not a case of the father chasing the rapist as he ran away and beating him to death. The rapists died on injuries that occurred during his removal. If the police had walked in while the rape was happening and after delivering 2 blows to the head with their nightsticks to halt the rape - the guy died - we would not be having this debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that any of the above scenarios is acceptable, but this is a toddler. If a woman (girl was used in description) assaults a 5 year old I'd feel the same way.

Anyone who forces themselves on another is unacceptable. When a child is involved, it's particularly disturbing in that they have no idea what is even happening. Their innocence, from that point on, is stripped away. There is no processing beyond terror, that will last with them for a lifetime in the form of PTS, etc. All people will likely experience that sort of reaction, but a child will not be afforded the luxury of a normal childhood as a result. Gone.

Again, not to suggest that any adult/child relationship is appropriate (in referring to "students" who are obviously older) - it's not. Exploitation of any trusting relationship is upsetting...when it's a child who trusts in the adults around them, it's criminal.

I don't like violence - period. But do you guys cheer for hockey fights? Why is it acceptable for physical violence to be used in ANY situation? If you support two guys punching it up for sport, then you can surely understand people who supported this man's use of physical force in a moment of realization that someone had violated his daughter. Either you're in or you're out...if ever there was a time that it (physical force) SHOULD be tolerated, this is it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I have a problem with is that as Pimp Curtly has pointed out on the first page of this thread is that there is a existing thread on this that is over a year old. Every morning I wake up to find threads about rapists , child molesters , murders , all the worst of human behaviour , do we have to drag up incidents that are over a year old just to express our righteous indignation at some horrible act that was already discussed a year ago. In the hockeys forums on this board if a topic has multiple threads started , a moderator will come in and shut it down providing a link to the existing thread , why was this not done with this thread ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't speak for Deb, but I regularly read these forums and I had no idea that this was already posted a year ago. Wouldn't have thought to check on it, either, which you would probably have to do for every thread if you wanted to remove all redundancies.

Just my opinion, but I'd say it's pretty easy to miss a single post, even if it is on the first page. Regardless, maybe this thread has gone in its own direction, enough so, that it warrants staying open? Moderating is a pretty tough, thankless job, and Deb's easily one of the good ones. Just saying.

I get your point about negative threads in general, however, and I do agree with you there. It's the age old reason why some people avoid watching the news, it's generally pretty depressing stuff. But it is general discussion, and if the flavour of this sub-forum doesn't float your boat, there are plenty of hockey-only subs to choose from. As an example, you'll never, ever, catch me perusing the Proposals forum. I'd go insane within seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Remy I have a lot of respect for you , I understand that people will post in the topics that interest them , BUT board rules state . You will not start a new topic (i.e. hit the "new topic" button) if the topic already exists.

This rule seems to be enforced in most other circumstances and I believe it should have been in the case of this thread. There is enough injustice and horrific crimes committed in the world today , why doe we have to revist a topic that was discussed a year ago and one that highlights the darkest side of human nature, especially since it is breaking board rules to do so. Actually the prospals forum gives me a good belly laugh every now and again :lol: , it is the insanity of Canucks Talk that I avoid . There are a few people that post in the off topic forum that I really respect , even some that I do not agree with all of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...