RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/19/2017 1:32:19 PM

Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

In days of olde I think as small percentage of men teachers and priest use to just fiddle with the kiddies…the women teachers dunno. But the point being it has went on since the beginning of time. Only in the last decade or so those thousands upon thousands be it at schools, homes, clergy have come forward. I am actually numb to al the stories

Vincent – I get you I tend to stay away from that argument. I will however argue if you are olde enough to die for your country then you are olde enough to drink and have sex and vote…now across the UK-which is 4 nations, this is 18 to vote, 16 to join the army, and 18 to have delicious booze….exception in the Scottish election anyone at 16 can vote.

Grooming is something different..actually some of the American stories are filtering across the the BBC website but they are all of the nature women has relationship with students.

I dont doubt for one iota the men would be hammered, imprisoned, sentenced far more severely and that is patently wrong/unfair.

I don't think it is unfair at all given that mostly the men are serial abusers and are often prone to do a Humbert Humbert upon earlier ages. Saying we need to separate the wolves as to type, as to prey, and as to circumstance. Imo, justice is never served by a one size whacks all Hammer.

I get what you are saying. But my experience, seeing behind the scenes what kind of turmoil these types of situations cause in the lives of those involved, personally and professionally, leaves me little compassion for adults who abuse their roles as teachers.

(in reply to vincentML)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/19/2017 2:48:10 PM

Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

In days of olde I think as small percentage of men teachers and priest use to just fiddle with the kiddies…the women teachers dunno. But the point being it has went on since the beginning of time. Only in the last decade or so those thousands upon thousands be it at schools, homes, clergy have come forward. I am actually numb to al the stories

Vincent – I get you I tend to stay away from that argument. I will however argue if you are olde enough to die for your country then you are olde enough to drink and have sex and vote…now across the UK-which is 4 nations, this is 18 to vote, 16 to join the army, and 18 to have delicious booze….exception in the Scottish election anyone at 16 can vote.

Grooming is something different..actually some of the American stories are filtering across the the BBC website but they are all of the nature women has relationship with students.

I dont doubt for one iota the men would be hammered, imprisoned, sentenced far more severely and that is patently wrong/unfair.

I don't think it is unfair at all given that mostly the men are serial abusers and are often prone to do a Humbert Humbert upon earlier ages. Saying we need to separate the wolves as to type, as to prey, and as to circumstance. Imo, justice is never served by a one size whacks all Hammer.

I get what you are saying. But my experience, seeing behind the scenes what kind of turmoil these types of situations cause in the lives of those involved, personally and professionally, leaves me little compassion for adults who abuse their roles as teachers.

This is a delicate subject and I wish to thread lightly lest I ruffle anyone's moral feathers. Firstly, according to this research a high number (almost all) of female offenders were themselves abused as children SOURCE

What is known about female sex offenders?
They appear to break down into three main types; those who abuse their own
children, those who abuse adolescents and those who offend with another
male abuser, either through coercion or in varying degrees of participative
involvement.

[SNIP]

Nearly all female sex offenders have had troubled and abusive childhoods and their relationships with their own parents or carers are often marked by
damaged parent child relationships where the child has absorbed the abusive
image projected onto them by the adult. Rejection, neglect and insecure
attachment are common experiences and sex becomes the only route to any
emotional attachment.

Trying to sort the affect had upon teenage boys who are victims of female teachers is compounded by the fact that the literature is scarce and also mucked up by the fact that more often the female offender is a maternal family member, breaking a more profound biological bond of trust and security. Here is one study I found. The data set is terribly limited and mucked about by the incest factor.

This qualitative study explores the experience and long-term impact of sexual abuse by women. The data were derived from in-depth interviews with 14 adult victims (7 men, 7 women) of child sexual abuse by females. Most respondents reported severe sexual abuse by their mothers. The vast majority of participants reported that the experience of female-perpetrated sexual abuse was harmful and damaging.

Until I see serious quantitative studies affirming harm done by female teachers on teen age boys I will remain more than a tad skeptical.

In the meantime, these women ought not to be treated by law in the same fashion as compulsive male predators. I suspect they are two different classes of offenders, the former more amenable to rehabilitation than the latter.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Wayward5oul)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/21/2017 11:04:10 AM

Posts: 32566
Status: offline

Fast reply.

I read this a couple of days ago, including the link referenced, and I've been thinking about it on and off ever since. I don't have a good way of saying my yuck factor on it. This sentencing kind of sucked.

I'm not going immediately that the woman got a break because she's a woman (though I know that happens, sometimes) and only because she's a woman. I don't agree with the light sentence at all. I do wonder if there's a little more to it. Things like one (or both) of the attorneys were trying to avoid the circus that these things become or the prosecution's case wasn't terribly strong. I saw the mention of electronic evidence in the link but no mention of physical evidence. That does make it tougher. Not that I doubt she did it. Just trying to look at what the prosecution would be looking at when it comes to did they think they could win the case or not.

It doesn't seem to happen terribly often that a judge will increase a sentence if a plea deal has been reached. I can't really say much about that either. Wasn't the whole 'position of authority' thing for offenders supposed to allow for greater sentencing when that situation was abused? WaywardSoul's post was very much the way I understood it to be. Didn't have to be the teacher of the class that the students were taking. I've always thought it was supposed to center regarding real or implied influence of one individual over the other.

Pretty lousy. It's kind of a shame the best thing that can be said is at least she lost her teaching license. I'd have rather seen it be worse.

_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 12:45:47 AM

Posts: 1035
Joined: 1/9/2008
Status: offline

It's difficult to comment on this specific case, especially given the impression that this woman was a serial offender.

From a moral point of view when you are dealing with students over the age of consent, the case for employment based sanctions seems to be pretty unarguable. If you accept a teacher's job with all of its reponsibilities, having the common sense and care for your students not to engage in sexual relations with them seems like a fairly basic requirement, like psychiatrists not sleeping with their patients.

The thing that gives me pause for thought in these cases however is the criminal sanction. Under the age of consent this once again is unarguable, but in the case of students over the age of consent I think that it is different, not because it is morally excusable but just because I do not think that all such cases are abusive, coercive or involve "taking advantage" of the student.

I say this not because I think that teachers who sleep with students should be given a break. Indeed in the past I also didn't have a lot of sympathy for students who positively pursued their teachers, of whom I knew a couple (their own admission and description of their actions not mine).

The reason why I don't think an automatic criminal sanction is appropriate when the student is over the age of consent is because of conversations I have had with people who were the students in such relationships, who even as adults had not reappraised their experience as a negative one, a small number of whom had long term relationships including marriage involving past teachers.

I think the possibility of abuse or undue influence in such cases must always make us wary, especially when those who are damaged by their experiences are less likely to talk about them. For that reason alone teachers must always risk losing their livelihoods when they sleep with a student, whatever their age.

However much as "adults" (especially those with children) might see all student/teacher relationships as sexual crimes, the truth is that there are people whose own stories testify to quite the opposite. We might not like the thought of teenagers after their sixteenth birthdays choosing to sleep with older adults, including teachers, but if we think they are mature enough to consent, we must be alive to the possibility that choosing to sleep with a teacher might not always be a damaging experience.

Professional sanctions yes, but a statutory sexual crime for all student/teacher sexual interaction where the young person is over the age of consent is not appropriate in all circumstances.

(in reply to LadyPact)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 1:14:19 AM

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

I'd almost be willing to bet real money that the only way to trigger a "professional sanction" is by having some kind of criminal charge leveled.

We're not a one-horse town anymore and I have no issue a teacher's record showing that their certificate was removed from them so that they NEVER find employment in another school.

That to the side, you mentioned a psychiatrist, losing their license. Do you know how that normally comes about? Most patients are not sophisticated enough to go directly to the APA Ethics Board. So ... they go ... to the police.

The police investigate. The prosecutor charges the shrink (based upon some level of mental incapacity) and the shrink avoids jail by handing over their license and some fines or suspended sentence.

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to longwayhome)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 4:42:34 AM

Posts: 1349
Joined: 12/28/2013
Status: offline

The problem is the same as with all laws. Laws cannot look into the hearts and minds of people who “break” them.

I know of one young man, just over the “line” who had sex with his girlfriend who was just under the “line”. But what does the law say? That he is a child molester and should spend time in prison and should be on the sex offender list for the rest of his life.

Was this young man truly a sex offender, someone young girls everywhere should be warned about and who in his 40s and 50s would still be looking for underage girls to have sex with? To me it was just a case of foolish young love and not something to be used to destroy the rest of his life.

When I was in school I use to fanaticize about have sex with a number of my teachers and if they had accommodated me, I would have been extremely pleased and would not have considered myself in the least coerced and would not have thought the teacher should be punished in any way for it. It had nothing to do with them being teachers or authority figures, only that they were there and very attractive.

This not to say that infants should not be protected from perversion, when children have not reached the ability think and reason out consent they should be protected by law. Although how to decide what age that is for each individual is again problematic for a law to do.

Marriage having been mentioned, I will say this about that, I feel that no woman should get married before the age of 23 and no man before 25. Although I know some marriages that have worked at younger ages but that it was a little like they hit the lottery.

(in reply to bounty44)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 6:04:18 AM

Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

im not trying to "convince" you of anything. im simply sharing information germane to the topic.

But this topic has been brought up in the past, and each time your responses indicated that you do agree with this line of thought. So yes, germane to the topic, but an attempt to support your viewpoint as well, isn't it?

quote:

I can say this however, people of all ages are not immune to risks inherent in ANY intimate relationship.

I would argue that a 13 year old would be significantly more susceptible to any inherent risks in a relationship with a person in their 40s, than say, two people in their 40s. In fact, I would argue that such a relationship would actually have significantly more inherent risks than the latter.

quote:

and sorry--I don't see one "town hall" article in what ive posted. and even if they were, so what?

My bad. I am used to that being your standard posting source. But no matter. I would have the same to say regardless of the source. It's the content I addressed.

whether it supports my particularly viewpoint or not is still immaterial. im not trying to convince you of anything.

as far as townhall---its my favorite for libertarian/conservative news and commentary, but no, not really, I post from dozens of different sources.

I don't disagree that a relationship between a 13yr old and a 40 yr would have more risks than one between two 40 yr olds. the point being, that since risk is involved everywhere, it cannot be used on its own as the bottom line for making distinctions between X is okay and Y is not. note the commentary from other posters here who either did what we are talking about, or who wanted to and would have had the opportunity presented itself.

if you want to address that point, as well as the content of what I previously posted, and actually support what you have to say, you'll have to do a couple of things.

one is, successfully argue how a teen-ager is not a free autonomous agent when it comes to sexuality. that includes relationships with their peers. why is it okay for two 16yr olds to have sex, but not a 21 and a 16yr old? all the arguments about power and potential conflicts of interest when it comes to teachers/students are meaningful, but again, they exist everywhere.

the other is, show the results of studies, not personal inferences/judgments you make, that unequivocally show that and how teen-agers are irreparably harmed by romantic relationships with their teachers/coaches. and those results will have to differ significantly from the harm that occurs from any relationship going bad.

lastly, I think you'd have to address/account for any number of those types of relationships that turn into everlasting ones--often at great social cost to the actors.

< Message edited by bounty44 -- 3/22/2017 6:14:45 AM >

(in reply to Wayward5oul)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 6:15:50 AM

Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
Although how to decide what age that is for each individual is again problematic for a law to do.

that was in part the impetus for the article behind the pdf link I posted a page or so back. I perused the article with the intent of posting the meaningful parts of it but it was a pretty dense and difficult article to come at from that perspective.

(in reply to Milesnmiles)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 7:51:36 AM

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

It often is ok in many states for a 16 and 21 year old to have sex. I believe in MN the age of 16 is ok for consentual sex.

minimum age of consent in the US by state range from 12 to 15 (with restrictions) and 16 to 18 (no restrictions).

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to bounty44)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 8:06:58 AM

Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005
Status: offline

I come from a different cultural prospective, and here we also have different laws that reflect that cultural difference. Here the age of consent is in general 14 and for a teacher/student relationship 16, I find it consistent with my mental devellopment.
I honestly don't think the teacher belong to jail because at 17 a person (boy or girl) is in my opinion fully capable of understanding what a relationship means what is sex, it's consequences and can interact with a teacher without being manipulated. Also I do not think the adult engaging in a relationship with a 17 years old person is somehow sick like a pedophile as the phisical sexual characters are already develloped, I still don't understand what kind meaningful relationship there could be anyhow.
I have the idea that in this cases the concern and what the law tries to protect is not the devellopment of the minor but the scandal the society might feel if the relationship is disclosed, and the need of the paarents to be in control of the life of their children.
It would have been different if the boy was pressured in any form like grades, money, blackmail or violence to accept the sexual contact with the teacher, but if they simply met and felt for each other I don't see why the law should be involved.

(in reply to bounty44)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 1:12:56 PM

Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

The other is, show the results of studies, not personal inferences/judgments you make, that unequivocally show that and how teenagers are irreparably harmed by romantic relationships with their teachers/coaches. and those results will have to differ significantly from the harm that occurs from any relationship going bad.

I posted earlier there is scant evidence for harm to teenage boys resulting from sexual contact with female teachers. Imo, there are two things that muck up the data: 1. more often the female abuser is a family member, 2. we are conditioned by decades of news accounts about male predators abusing and sadly often killing young children.

In the first case, long lasting harm resulting from abuse by a female relative is well documented. It is a slippery slope to assume the same to be true when the abuser is a female teacher.

In the second instance there is a knee jerk of moral outrage falling upon the female teacher comparing her however subconsciously to serial male pedos who harm or kill children. There seems to be a medieval fervor to place the witch in stocks in the commons.

As indicated earlier, almost all of these female abusers were themselves victims of abuse having long lasting consequences on their psyches.

Mitigating factors are an essential part of American justice. Not every killer is assessed the same penalty. Why the outrage in the case of teacher/student interactions?

Fortunately, they are few in number. But sadly, they are always sensationalized in the most prurient fashion, and being so rare they leave sparse data for study.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to bounty44)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 1:13:12 PM

Posts: 1349
Joined: 12/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
...
It would have been different if the boy was pressured in any form like grades, money, blackmail or violence to accept the sexual contact with the teacher, but if they simply met and felt for each other I don't see why the law should be involved.

Like I was saying, if one of those attractive teachers tried to apply any "pressure" to me for sex when I was in school, I would have said no need for that the sex itself would be plenty of incentive for me.
;-)

(in reply to eulero83)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 1:26:22 PM

Posts: 1349
Joined: 12/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I posted earlier there is scant evidence for harm to teenage boys resulting from sexual contact with female teachers. Imo, there are two things that muck up the data: 1. more often the female abuser is a family member, 2. we are conditioned by decades of news accounts about male predators abusing and sadly often killing young children.

In the first case, long lasting harm resulting from abuse by a female relative is well documented. It is a slippery slope to assume the same to be true when the abuser is a female teacher.

In the second instance there is a knee jerk of moral outrage falling upon the female teacher comparing her however subconsciously to serial male pedos who harm or kill children. There seems to be a medieval fervor to place the witch in stocks in the commons.

As indicated earlier, almost all of these female abusers were themselves victims of abuse having long lasting consequences on their psyches.

Mitigating factors are an essential part of American justice. Not every killer is assessed the same penalty. Why the outrage in the case of teacher/student interactions?

Fortunately, they are few in number. But sadly, they are always sensationalized in the most prurient fashion, and being so rare they leave sparse data for study.

As I was reading your comment; I was thinking, if we got here by evolution, the only "damage" done by "abuse" to young ones who are in or past puberty is a result of applied morality and not from the act itself.

If we look at the animal life around us, there is no "damage" done by what our morality would call "abuse", young with old, old with young or even incest.

Just saying...
;-)

(in reply to vincentML)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 4:45:46 PM

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

The problem is the same as with all laws. Laws cannot look into the hearts and minds of people who “break” them.

Of course they can! That's how we got "Hate Crime" enhancements.

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Milesnmiles)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 6:59:07 PM

Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I posted earlier there is scant evidence for harm to teenage boys resulting from sexual contact with female teachers. Imo, there are two things that muck up the data: 1. more often the female abuser is a family member, 2. we are conditioned by decades of news accounts about male predators abusing and sadly often killing young children.

In the first case, long lasting harm resulting from abuse by a female relative is well documented. It is a slippery slope to assume the same to be true when the abuser is a female teacher.

In the second instance there is a knee jerk of moral outrage falling upon the female teacher comparing her however subconsciously to serial male pedos who harm or kill children. There seems to be a medieval fervor to place the witch in stocks in the commons.

As indicated earlier, almost all of these female abusers were themselves victims of abuse having long lasting consequences on their psyches.

Mitigating factors are an essential part of American justice. Not every killer is assessed the same penalty. Why the outrage in the case of teacher/student interactions?

Fortunately, they are few in number. But sadly, they are always sensationalized in the most prurient fashion, and being so rare they leave sparse data for study.

As I was reading your comment; I was thinking, if we got here by evolution, the only "damage" done by "abuse" to young ones who are in or past puberty is a result of applied morality and not from the act itself.

If we look at the animal life around us, there is no "damage" done by what our morality would call "abuse", young with old, old with young or even incest.

Just saying...
;-)

I understand your point, Miles, but as potent as evolution is in getting us here, it is trumped for the most part by social rules and morality which dictate how we apply to our social contract what evolution gave us. Morality is married to social custom, the one influencing the other in turn.

I will meet you half way, if you agree, and observe that social custom and morality are occasionally at odds with human evolution. One example i have in mind is miscegenation law which prohibits mating between individuals of different skin pigments. There never was a biological justification for such law.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Milesnmiles)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 9:34:04 PM

Posts: 1349
Joined: 12/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I posted earlier there is scant evidence for harm to teenage boys resulting from sexual contact with female teachers. Imo, there are two things that muck up the data: 1. more often the female abuser is a family member, 2. we are conditioned by decades of news accounts about male predators abusing and sadly often killing young children.

In the first case, long lasting harm resulting from abuse by a female relative is well documented. It is a slippery slope to assume the same to be true when the abuser is a female teacher.

In the second instance there is a knee jerk of moral outrage falling upon the female teacher comparing her however subconsciously to serial male pedos who harm or kill children. There seems to be a medieval fervor to place the witch in stocks in the commons.

As indicated earlier, almost all of these female abusers were themselves victims of abuse having long lasting consequences on their psyches.

Mitigating factors are an essential part of American justice. Not every killer is assessed the same penalty. Why the outrage in the case of teacher/student interactions?

Fortunately, they are few in number. But sadly, they are always sensationalized in the most prurient fashion, and being so rare they leave sparse data for study.

As I was reading your comment; I was thinking, if we got here by evolution, the only "damage" done by "abuse" to young ones who are in or past puberty is a result of applied morality and not from the act itself.

If we look at the animal life around us, there is no "damage" done by what our morality would call "abuse", young with old, old with young or even incest.

Just saying...
;-)

I understand your point, Miles, but as potent as evolution is in getting us here, it is trumped for the most part by social rules and morality which dictate how we apply to our social contract what evolution gave us. Morality is married to social custom, the one influencing the other in turn.

I will meet you half way, if you agree, and observe that social custom and morality are occasionally at odds with human evolution. One example i have in mind is miscegenation law which prohibits mating between individuals of different skin pigments. There never was a biological justification for such law.

It was a thought that occurred to me while reading your post and I threw it out to see what others thought, whether it is the "abuse" that causes the "damage" or the "moral custom" that causes the "damage" apart from the act itself? Perhaps without the morality there would be no damage?

As for meeting half way, I always do. I have opinions, some almost set in stone and some set in sand but either way in a forum like this I like to throw them out so that I can listen and better understand both sides of the idea and sometimes even change my opinion.

That is why I dislike the name calling (trolling) that goes on from time to time. Not that the name calling in itself bothers me but the fact that there are no ideas or concepts to even try to understand just seems like such a waste of time.

(in reply to vincentML)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 9:43:57 PM

Posts: 1349
Joined: 12/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
The problem is the same as with all laws. Laws cannot look into the hearts and minds of people who “break” them.

Of course they can! That's how we got "Hate Crime" enhancements.
Michael

Well, maybe I'm being a little picky but aren't all crimes against other person a form of "Hate Crime"? And really is it the law that decides who has committed a "Hate Crime" or is it those who interpret the law that decide?

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/22/2017 11:09:02 PM

Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
The problem is the same as with all laws. Laws cannot look into the hearts and minds of people who “break” them.

Of course they can! That's how we got "Hate Crime" enhancements.
Michael

Well, maybe I'm being a little picky but aren't all crimes against other person a form of "Hate Crime"? And really is it the law that decides who has committed a "Hate Crime" or is it those who interpret the law that decide?

Actualy the legal concept of "mens rea" is a very important one in judging a crime, and for most crimes the motivations are more than relevant, just think about the difference between the degrees of murder or manslughter. Motivations can also mitigate the sentence or completely justify, as in the case of self defence.
The hate part in hate crimes is a specific aggravation when the motivation for the crime is the victim's personal characteristics, and as everything in a trial has to be demostrated. So if you kill a woman because she owes you money is not a hate crime, if you do because of misogyni it is.

(in reply to Milesnmiles)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/23/2017 4:47:49 AM

Posts: 1349
Joined: 12/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
The problem is the same as with all laws. Laws cannot look into the hearts and minds of people who “break” them.

Of course they can! That's how we got "Hate Crime" enhancements.
Michael

Well, maybe I'm being a little picky but aren't all crimes against other person a form of "Hate Crime"? And really is it the law that decides who has committed a "Hate Crime" or is it those who interpret the law that decide?

Actualy the legal concept of "mens rea" is a very important one in judging a crime, and for most crimes the motivations are more than relevant, just think about the difference between the degrees of murder or manslughter. Motivations can also mitigate the sentence or completely justify, as in the case of self defence.
The hate part in hate crimes is a specific aggravation when the motivation for the crime is the victim's personal characteristics, and as everything in a trial has to be demostrated. So if you kill a woman because she owes you money is not a hate crime, if you do because of misogyni it is.

Thanks for the explanation and I understand what laws try to do and what they can't do.

There is no way to write a law that covers all contingencies, one that can look in to hearts and minds, that is why more laws continue to be written and more laws after that. That is why there is a whole system of courts, juries and judges to decide what the laws say and how to apply them in each case.

Whereas for someone who has love for others in his heart and mind has no need for written laws in his life, he’s not looking for loopholes in the written laws so he can get away with something.

As for “Hate Crimes”; it is interesting that if you kill someone because you hate them, it is not considered a “Hate Crime”. It is only a considered to be a “Hate Crime” if you only hate them because they are part of a specific large group of a people that you hate and that was the specific reason you killed them.

(in reply to eulero83)

RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence - 3/23/2017 7:10:43 AM

Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

It was a thought that occurred to me while reading your post and I threw it out to see what others thought, whether it is the "abuse" that causes the "damage" or the "moral custom" that causes the "damage" apart from the act itself? Perhaps without the morality there would be no damage?

Yes, of course, Miles, you are absolutely right. Morality is internalized. It is the cognitive dissonance following the "act" that creates the lingering damage. . . . the guilt, the dirtiness, the destruction of self-esteem. Spot on. The title of this very thread is illustrative, I think.

< Message edited by vincentML -- 3/23/2017 7:19:33 AM >

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Milesnmiles)

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Disgusting Example Of Jurisprudence

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

1.738