Actually, I can’t agree with either of those premises as a universal, without knowing the criteria you are using for “worse”.
For example, if you murder somebody by shooting them through the head without them being aware it’s happening, I doubt they mind at all. Society and their relatives will mind, though.
And with arm-cutting and rape, well, how much the suffer depends on how long you let them live after…though again, society and their relatives are going to probably want to have words with you either way.
This whole discussion really seems like an apples and oranges thing to me - though the detail that the dude being murdered was a clearly unrepentant rapist does seem to push the ‘worseness’ of his murder down enough that it’s probably somewhat fairly safe to say that it’s better than the rape. Though the lady should still go to jail.
This is precisely it. The opinion people were expressing in the thread the OP links to is not that a person getting raped is worse than a person getting murdered; it is that something horrible happening to an innocent young girl is worse than something horrible happening to a hardened assholish criminal.
Very close to what I was going to say. I’d phrase it slightly differently, though: While I do think it is possible for a person to deserve death, I do not think it is ever our place to decide that in a specific case. So I would not say that murder is ever justifiable, though it can be just.
What? I guess you mean the ‘stop struggling or I’ll kill you’ kind of circumstances. But not all rapes are like that, and there are many other reasons people don’t, or can’t resist - and many reasons that people might try to resist ‘to the point of death,’ but be thwarted.
That’s a line of reasoning I hadn’t considered.
For the victim, being dead is the absolute worst state, and as far as they’re concerned it doesn’t matter all that much whether they were a victim of murder, manslaughter, drunk driving, or even an accident. In any case, being dead is worse than being raped.
You wouldn’t think so from some newspaper articles I’ve read over the years. Many of them indicate that someone’s life is pretty much over because they’ve been raped, and I’ve heard people say that maybe the rape victim would be better off dead. Not so. Rape is a despicable act and can be (usually is) hard to cope with, especially violent rape, but it doesn’t meant the victim should ever be written off.
For the killer I’d say that rape is different to murder - murder, not manslaughter (like it might have been in case linked to in this thread - we don’t know the details). True, I can think of situations where it’s justified to kill someone, but they’re all self-defence, and that is not murder - not all human killing is murder. I bet there are plenty of rapists who could honestly say that they’d never murder anyone, and plenty of murderers who despise rape. It would be impossible to say whether the rapist or the murderer were categorically ‘worse’ than the other.
The law punishes the murderer more because of the effect on the victim, not because their crime makes them more dangerous. Well, also because some judges thinking that the victim brought it on herself, or wanted it really, and so on, which they’re less likely to think in the case of murder.
Not “generally” no, regular NO. Rape’s a terrible thing and I’m glad it’s an acceptable thing to discuss today - but the idea that a woman’s broken forever once she’s raped, or that her life is ruined as expressed in the Pit thread, is actually backward and antiquated. It’s not helpful. Sympathy and understanding are helpful, and I don’t mean to tell anybody how to deal with their own trauma… but this can’t be a useful way of viewing women who survive rape.
But hold on here - let’s not go too far the other way, either. For some people (men and women) being raped really is worse than death. How can we tell? 'Cause sometimes rape victims kill themselves rather than live with the pain/memory/dishonor/PTSD of the rape.
The only rape(s) I can answer the OP for are my own. No, my rapes were not worse than anyone’s murder. I was pretty messed up (As Freudian Slit says, *more *from other people’s reactions and misguided advice than the rapes, but yes, the rapes left their mental and emotional scars, too) as a result of being raped, and I pretty well messed up some other people (boyfriends) as a result, but eventually I got over it and so, I think, have they.
Not everyone does get over it. And so for those people, yes, perhaps, rape is worse than death. I refuse to tell any survivor of rape what he or she should feel.
The problem is you’re not ignoring the greater issue of vigilantism, you’re giving it a big thumbs up. He’s better off dead and dousing him in gasoline and lighting him on fire isn’t even bad? While I can understand the reasons behind the mother doing this, that doesn’t make her actions “not even bad” and actually benificial to society. There is a reason that civilized society doesn’t accept vigilante ‘justice’ or extra-judicial killings as being not bad and actually pretty much okay.
That’s why I specifically set aside the vigilantism issue. I realize that vigilantism has many negative effects on society, and I wasn’t saying she should go free. I should’ve said it “arguably isn’t even bad”, as clearly it can be argued.
Put another way - if the guy suddenly died of a stroke, society would probably be better off. Therefore his murder is less bad than some random person being murdered.
My point is you didn’t set it aside, you said it was a positive for society that he was burned alive. Just saying you’re putting vigilantism aside and then saying society benefits from his death and he’s better off dead and killing him isn’t even bad doesn’t mean you actually put vigilantism aside. You’ve pretty much said it was okay.
Eh, throwing “arguably isn’t as bad,” in front of the murder of someone who’s better off dead doesn’t really help it. Note that you called what she did murder rather than killing, because that’s what it was - extrajudicial killing or more simply murder.
[QUOTE=SenorBeef;10874864
In this case - the guy’s a rapist who taunted the mother of his rape victim. He’s clearly unrepentant scum to the gravest extreme. Ignoring the greater vigilantism issues, society benefits from his death. So in this case you’re comparing a random rape - always bad - to the murder of someone who’s better off dead - not even bad. There’s no reason to infer a greater “murder vs rape” implication from it.[/QUOTE]
The effects of vigililantism are complex and tangenital to my point. I was simply trying to articulate that this wasn’t simply a matter of which was worse between rape and murder, but that the particular circumstances were more relevant.
I wasn’t attempting to take a stance that what she did wasn’t a crime. I could’ve been more clear about that though.
Anyway, I’ve been raped (twice) and I in no way see it as worse than death. Hell, I don’t even see it as worse than being seriously beaten up, which I’ve also had happen to me.
I’m not willing to conclude that something is worse than death because it leads to suicide. Some people kill themselves after going broke or the end of a relationship and few of us would agree those are worse than death. Some people aren’t able to deal with it for whatever individual reasons. I’m not telling anybody what to feel, I am objecting to the attitude that the life of every rape victim is ruined by this one act to the point that they might actually be better off dead.
I generally agree, but it doesn’t work for me when I start substituting specific terms in place of “murder.” For instance, I couldn’t agree if your first statement was “I think we can all agree that there are times where ‘burning someone alive’ is justified.”
Death of Asshole Vigilantism Net
+1000 -2000 -1000
You can be for the murder or somebody and still be against vigilantism. The death penalty is just murder by consensus of more people.
I agree with you. Setting someone on fire isn’t one of the times when I can work up a justification, though I’m not saying it could never, ever be justified. This particular case, though? No. Basically, she tortured him to death.