The Wall Street Occupation

Ubereil · November 4, 2011

blatantninja said:
Actively discouraging involving the police, which is what they are doing even if they say it ok to involve with rape cases, IS acting against their imprisonment.

If not helping the police is protecting criminals then I'm a murderer for not giving all my money to charity. And that's pretty much what the movement is doing: not helping the police.

blatantninja said:
They also do better work than a lot of Western countries. Read up on the case of Amanda Knox. As bad as US Police departments may be, the vast majority of the mistakes in that investigation never would have occurred in the US.

If you compare youself to a country that's voted a guy involved in multiple corruption scandals into office three times you should probably feel shame if you didn't end up being better managed than they are.

But yeah, there are countries with worth policing than the US. But that doesn't mean there are quite a number of serious flaws in your policing.

blatantninja said:
If he is in jail, at least until he gets out, he will not be raping anyone (anyone not in prison at least). Again, I ask for even ONE legitimate phycologist that believes rapists can be reformed with counseling, Hell, I'll settle for a legitimate study.[/url]

Were you going to say anything here?

blatantninja said:
They share similarities, but I think there are significant differences in the motivations, at least for rapes that occur against strangers.

Then again, most rapes by far are by someone you know (source). That rape usually means stranger rape is a myth.

blatantninja said:
While I do not advocate the abuse of prisoners (either by prison staff or other inmates), there is a big difference between a person that is a convicted criminal and person walking down the street.

Like I said, rape is ususally committed by someone who knows you. Usually not when you're walking down the street either.

blatantninja said:
I already did. Any person in prison won't be raping anyone outside of prison during their stay.

They'll be raping though, so putting them in prison won't stop rape.

blatantninja said:
I never said it would permanently fix the problem, it won't. And no evidence exists that counseling will either.

Evidence does exist that fixing a similiar crime is more likely to fix it permanently than prison alone though.

blatantninja said:
How are you going to do that without putting them in prison? I'm not against trying counseling while they are locked up BTW.

Well, prison is one alternative. Another is electronic tagging that monitors that the criminal won't be placed in situations where s/he might rape (along with warnings of what might happen if they even suspect that this isn't enough).

blatantninja said:
Most rapists don't rape because they think the person is asking for it. It's not like they were walking down the street minding their own business and saw a person dressed scantily and thought 'Wow, that person wants me to rape her!'

I'm not arguing with you about the cause. I was merely saying that whatever the attitude that caused the rapists to rape (without the idea that it's ok to rape you won't rape), questioning it will work better than not questioning it.

blatantninja said:
Domestic abuse is often the result of abuse previously received by the abuser, from what I understand. Additionally, it stems from a desire to control a specific person. Rape generally is not about a specific person. Now to be clear, I'm talking about violent rape of at least relative strangers, not so-called 'date rape' that occurs between people that are familiar with each other.

And, as I mentioned, most rapes are committed by aquaintances. Though I suspect stranger rapists are a bit like heavy criminals - beyond help. They're so set in their mindset there no way to get them out of it.

blatantninja said:
Castration is pretty much the only thing that HAS been proven to work consistently. That said, I think it should be reserved for repeat offenders. If someone is convicted of multiple rapes at different timer intervals to different victims, there's pretty much no doubt that a person was unfairly convicted. A single rape charge, though lessened with DNA testing, is much more ripe for being overturned.

The thing is, castration isn't given to work either. There might not be that high a reoffence rate (1-10 %), but it's not 0. I suspect that if we go with councelling to find ways to deal with sexual desire without raping (those are the ones who'll be fixed by castration), the reoffence rate will slowly move towards the same numbers (it might not reach them, but the better we get the closer it will become). Those it won't fix are those that don't do it out of sexual desire.

Sure, castration is a simple fix. But have we really tried the alternatives yet?

Übereil

skavenhorde · November 4, 2011

dteowner said:
And the Grinch's black heart swelled 3 times that day… Bakery fresh donuts, ice cold milk, and frontier justice—it's a good good morning in dte land! There's hope for you yet, skav.

Glad to be of some service with the heart thing

I'll stay out of the political side of discussions, but this ….this is just common sense.

It's the most logical conclusion to this problem. They don't want the cops, right? Well, there goes your deterrent for this kind of behavior. They need to think of something that doesn't bring in the law, but keeps the animals at bay because animals don't care about talking.

They can't kill the guy because that brings in the cops. They can't castrate him because that brings in the cops as well. A good old fashioned beating plus a threat of more severe violence is the only logical conclusion. They keep their hands clean (unless he comes back around) and the beating just reinforces the threat. If the man is dumb enough to report it, well it's just a fight.

Most important part would be to spread the word on what happened or there won't be any deterrent for other scumbags out there. Otherwise they'll think it's open season on the protesters.

BTW, I've been thinking a lot about how mankind stays "civilized" because the show, Survivors, is bugging the crap out of me. That's Survivors with an "s". A show about a plague that wipes out most of the human race. It's a UK TV series and it's getting very annoying. The main characters are this group of survivors that banded together after the plague. Guns are a big NO NO to them and the only "enforcer" they have in their group is treated like a leper at times. He's the only one that makes any sense.

I could go on, but it's way off topic and you guys seem to be having way too much fun to be distracted with a TV show.

blatantninja · November 4, 2011

Ubereil said:
If not helping the police is protecting criminals then I'm a murderer for not giving all my money to charity. And that's pretty much what the movement is doing: not helping the police.

No it isn't. They are ACTIVELY discouraging people from reporting crimes. That is different than just not helping the police in an investigation.

If you compare youself to a country that's voted a guy involved in multiple corruption scandals into office three times you should probably feel shame if you didn't end up being better managed than they are.

Just one example of a Western country that the police here are significantly better than. I think they are better probably than the UK as well.

Were you going to say anything here?

Didn't get posted somehow and the moment has passed.

Then again, most rapes by far are by someone you know (source). That rape usually means stranger rape is a myth.

That's true, it usually is someone you know, but not generally intimately like you do a spouse. It's most often someone you are acquainted with.

Like I said, rape is ususally committed by someone who knows you. Usually not when you're walking down the street either.

You dodge the point. A rapist is going to rape again most likely, in or out of prison. Society is better off if it occurs in prison.

They'll be raping though, so putting them in prison won't stop rape.

see above.

vidence does exist that fixing a similiar crime is more likely to fix it permanently than prison alone though.

Who said anything about prison alone? You yourself said that you need to put something in place to keep them from raping while they are counseled.

Well, prison is one alternative. Another is electronic tagging that monitors that the criminal won't be placed in situations where s/he might rape (along with warnings of what might happen if they even suspect that this isn't enough).

You really think a warning is going to make a difference? As if rapists didn't already know that if they get caught raping that they're going to prison? And an electronic tag only monitors, it does not prevent. If a rapist lives in an apartment building, how do you keep him from raping one of his neighbors?

I'm not arguing with you about the cause. I was merely saying that whatever the attitude that caused the rapists to rape (without the idea that it's ok to rape you won't rape), questioning it will work better than not questioning it.

Click to expand...

And I am fine with questioning, just remove them from society until they are no longer a threat.

The thing is, castration isn't given to work either. There might not be that high a reoffence rate (1-10 %), but it's not 0. I suspect that if we go with councelling to find ways to deal with sexual desire without raping (those are the ones who'll be fixed by castration), the reoffence rate will slowly move towards the same numbers (it might not reach them, but the better we get the closer it will become). Those it won't fix are those that don't do it out of sexual desire.

Click to expand...

Unless they are using a foreign object, castration is pretty much 100%.

Thrasher · November 4, 2011

dteowner said:
I wouldn't want to put words in your mouth, so is this a vote for "Liar"?

DTE, putting words in other people's mouth is your modus operandi. Need I say more?

xSamhainx · November 4, 2011

It's weird, I dont really care about all these losers standing around, but still i had a strange dream last night involving them.

I dreamt that I was driving around in a van w/ a friend from work, and we came upon a camp of them all lying around sleeping. I couldnt control the van at that point, and it lurched forward at full speed ran them over, backed up over them, then drove away w/ the survivors chasing us on foot.

skavenhorde · November 4, 2011

It was the Keeper Samhain trying to get out

dteowner · November 4, 2011

Thrasher said:
DTE, putting words in other people's mouth is your modus operandi. Need I say more?

No quotes do I see. Shall we go for "fucking liar"?

Pladio · November 4, 2011

A bit more on topic....

Another view of the protests.
http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hpho...4838360_290539813359_8114280_2042568915_n.jpg..

zakhal · November 5, 2011

Pladio said:
A bit more on topic….

Another view of the protests.
http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hpho...4838360_290539813359_8114280_2042568915_n.jpg..

Do you think people are suffering and protesting on the streets because they chose an expensive college?

Pladio · November 5, 2011

Some would. Others because they took on too large house mortgages or took on debts for everything ranging from houses to cars to computers to phones and anything in between, with no regard to risk at all.

Others because of many other circumstances, but the idea that you can live your live in debt is a bad one. The idea that the government should be in debt is also a bad one. You shouldn't spend what you don't have and even if you do, you should be sure you can actually pay it back. Neither people, nor institutions, nor governments think like that and that's a major issue.

Ubereil · November 5, 2011

blatantninja said:
No it isn't. They are ACTIVELY discouraging people from reporting crimes. That is different than just not helping the police in an investigation.

Ok, let's try this explanation of what I mean: It's an income vs expense sort of thing. Not helping the police is a loss of "income" while letting a robber crash in your basement is an increase in "loss".

Semantics, though. In the short term this will make it easier for rapists to operate. Though I suspect that the idea is to make things better in the long run, which would (provided it actually works) be justified, I think.

blatantninja said:
Just one example of a Western country that the police here are significantly better than. I think they are better probably than the UK as well.

If we were to rank the quality of western police forces I wouldn't be suprized in the least if Italy ended up among the very last. I doubt the UK would be worse than the US though. But that's a pure guess, due to lack of a comprehensive view on both forces.

blatantninja said:
That's true, it usually is someone you know, but not generally intimately like you do a spouse. It's most often someone you are acquainted with.

If you look at the Brittish and Australian percentages you see that spouses makes up half of the rapes. Add relatives and you've got a clear majority.

In America spouses and relatives makes up almost as big a part as friends or aquaintances.

I suspect there's some kind of difference in data collection though, by the way (maybe they define rape differently, or brits/australians are more likely to report it when the perpetrator is someone they know). The numbers are just that significantly different.

blatantninja said:
You dodge the point. A rapist is going to rape again most likely, in or out of prison. Society is better off if it occurs in prison.

That doesn't mean prison stops rape from occuring. I also don't see what's so much better with rape within prisons than outside of them.

(Though I suspect that if you didn't have such a ridiculous amount of inmates you'd be able to significantly reduce the rape rate in prisons, which would strengthen your argument.)

blatantninja said:
Who said anything about prison alone?

Well, we were discussing the protesters councelling the rapists compared to handing them over to the police. If we hand them over to the police they'll get prison alone, because that's how your system works.

If you think that's a flaw of your prison system, then I agree.

blatantninja said:
You really think a warning is going to make a difference? As if rapists didn't already know that if they get caught raping that they're going to prison? And an electronic tag only monitors, it does not prevent. If a rapist lives in an apartment building, how do you keep him from raping one of his neighbors?

First of all, I don't see this as a suitable solution for every rapist. Some are just too dangerous. I believe most aren't though.

Second of all, rape usually involves drugs of some kind. Get drugs out of the picture (which is perfectly doable with proper surveilance) and the rapist will have an easier time controlling himself.

Third of all, while out of society those who rape do so usually think they won't get caught. If you monitor so you know you can't leave your house/apartment for very long without the police showing up, and if you monitor so someone else can't enter your house for very long without the police showing up you have to be the biggest fool out there if you think you can get away with raping someone. A precious few won't care. Those precious few are the ones we send straight to prison.

And if he lives in an apartment, place sensors on all doors. That way you know if anyone enters or leaves.

blatantninja said:
Unless they are using a foreign object, castration is pretty much 100%.

Given that castration isn't 100%, there's a fair ammount who either uses foreign objects, or switch to foreign objects. There's also the fact that castration doesn't prevent you from getting an erection. It's harder for you, and it's harder to maintain, but since that will most likely frustrate the rapists I don't see that being of much help to the woman getting raped.

Pladio said:
A bit more on topic….

Another view of the protests.
http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hpho...4838360_290539813359_8114280_2042568915_n.jpg..

#2 just about covers it.

Übereil

Pladio · November 5, 2011

Oh, I'm not saying that it's easy. I'm saying the mindset is a bad one though and would and has resulted in many bad situations.

Unrestigered · November 5, 2011

Ubereil said:
If rapists had a stern talking-to they would never rape again.

Übereil

This is absolutely insane. You think a fitting sentence for rapists is being talked to? I’m sure that will really deter rapists. Hell, if all that happens is you get talked to, I might start a’rapin’ too. I know plenty of people who would benefit greatly by having my penis shoved into their holes without their consent.

I am an extremely horny person and I’ve somehow managed not to rape anyone yet. Violent rapists should be shot in their face or raped to death with a pineapple. And, in the US at least, we haven’t tried castration for regular old rapists, so that is an alternative.

But I get it, rapists are people too. Just like pedophiles. They are just misunderstood and anyone who thinks they should be punished is a racist and a capitalist and pure evil. It’s just like wanting to take the stuff the greedy people worked for to benefit your own self isn’t greedy at all. It makes perfect sense.

This is an interesting time to live. Logic and reason mean absolutely nothing. Facts only count when they paint a picture your side’s agenda accepts. People should never have any sort of consequence for their actions. Etc. We are reverting back into retarded cavemen. I’m sure that will lessen our carbon footprints. But, somehow, I’m almost certain, even after society falls and there are no laws, I will somehow manage to not stick my penis into people who would rather not have it in them. Rapists are pieces of shit, unfit for civilized society. What they need far more than being talked to and understood is a little something I like to call death.

dteowner · November 15, 2011

Looks like playtime in NYC is over for now.
http://news.yahoo.com/police-bust-ny-occupy-protest-nighttime-sweep-162848477.html

blatantninja · November 15, 2011

dteowner said:
Looks like playtime in NYC is over for now.
http://news.yahoo.com/police-bust-ny-occupy-protest-nighttime-sweep-162848477.html

Apparently the OWS crowd already got in front of judge who blocked the order by the city to not bring back tents and such, then the city got in front of either that judge or another, and now the block order is being reconsidered! Who says justice is slow?

FYI, one of the main issues is whether or not the park is public or private. The confusion comes from the fact that it is sort of both. It's whats called a Privately Owned Public Space. Essentially a company that wants a waiver on something (like maximum size of a building) agrees to build and maintain a place that will be still privately owned, but open to the public. Should be interesting to see how it plays out.

On another side note, guess who has been hurt worst by the OWS crowd? Not the banks or brokers, but the small businesses in the area surrounding the park! Lots of damage, excessive wear and tear, and significantly decreased sales for those business owners.

Thrasher · November 15, 2011

Another casualty of greed and deregulation.

blatantninja · November 15, 2011

Thrasher said:
Another casualty of greed and deregulation.

What are you referring to?

Ubereil · November 16, 2011

blatantninja said:
I disagree with that. Otherwise, no one would live in Texas! People seem to look for schools that are 'good enough.' Occasionally I meet someone that makes the sacrifice for a good school, but it is rare. People don't really think about the profit margin, they just seem to want the material benefit.

blatantninja said:
Well first, it is a bit of a myth that most families need two parents to work. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. They need a second car to get to work. They need the extra income to cover the child care that they need because they work. And if they are making any type of margin on the second spouses income, again, it goes back to paying for a lot of crap we don't really need: cell phones, flat screen TV's, cable, eating out, etc. Our materialism has caused the need for second incomes more than anything else.

Finally got around to rewatching the documentary (skip the first five minutes, but do watch the rest) again to get my (and yours) facts right. The first thing you notice about the bolded part is that it's simply not true that we spend more on those things. Food costs has gone down, clothes costs have gone down, appliances has gone down, electronics has gone up by a neglectible amount. To that, the cost per car is lower today than it was 40 years ago (and, actually, Americans keep their cars longer nowadays). What has mainly gone up are the costs for housing and health care. Meanwhile the extra income has been gimped by extra taxes and child care.

The main problem is that the costs that have shrunk are the smaller, more flexible costs. Meanwhile, the costs you simply can't get around have increased. In the early 70's the average family spent half it's money on those big costs I mentioned, in 2006 it spent 75 %.

Why did mortgages increase? Well, for families with children it's because of schools. Mortgage costs for a family without children increased by half as much as the cost for one with children. And when they compared suburbs in Boston they noticed that houses was loads more expensive in suburbs with good grades (even with everything else being the same). Another study from San Diego had parents saying they'd rather live next to a toxic dump than live in a neighbourhood where they thought the schools was underpreforming. Besides that, newly built houses are built for the top 20 %, not the middle class.

Übereil

zakhal · November 18, 2011

dteowner said:
Looks like playtime in NYC is over for now.
http://news.yahoo.com/police-bust-ny-occupy-protest-nighttime-sweep-162848477.html

The city's feisty tabloids had also weighed in against the demonstration. In an editorial posted on its website Tuesday, the Daily News praised Bloomberg for ending a "self-important, self-indulgent bilge." The New York Post called the demonstration "a carnival of contempt both for the law and for common decency."

You cant fight the tabloids.

Thrasher · November 18, 2011

One should do everything one can to Rupert Murdoch's tabloid news.

The Wall Street Occupation

Keeper of the Watch

Little BRO Rat

Resident Redneck Facist

Wheeee!

Paws of Doom

Little BRO Rat

Shoegazer

Guardian of Nonsense

SasqWatch

Guardian of Nonsense

Keeper of the Watch

Guardian of Nonsense

Banned

Shoegazer

Resident Redneck Facist

Wheeee!

Resident Redneck Facist

Keeper of the Watch

SasqWatch

Wheeee!