*While I do not normally condone extrajudicial punishment, and still don’t under any circumstances, the case below elicits zero sympathy from me for the victim.
I tried to find links for this, but it was mostly on facebook so yea.
Someone posted on facebook in Trinidad circles of a cell phone video as an example of how to discipline harsh and right, it had a man showing a teenage babysitter how to get shit done. A two year old girl refused to drink a different brand of milk, so he would try to force her to drink it physically and when she wouldn’t he would grab her by the hair on the back of her head and slam her face into the floor hard. Eventually she drank it.
This caused outrage online and in the media, the man was identified and arrested. He later claimed while in custody he was abused by prison officers who decided to reenact the video forcing him to drink milk and when he refused to they slammed his head into the floor. He was very outraged and without a shred of irony wanted something done about this abuse of justice.
I was reading this and I had an epiphany about the cultural divide in America. I think this reaction to the story is a very “liberal” view. The story is about retribution and do unto others as you would have done to you, hypocrisy etc.
But by categorizing the people that are meting out just as as “the police” and the act as “felonies” and then implying that the thing to take away from this story is the the OP condones police violence general gives a very different tone. It has gone from an unsavory character getting his just desserts to a story of police brutality.
Of course you have not changed any of the facts of the story, yet the point and meaning are completely different. It is very intelligent and sophisticated, yet lacking in the sense of really addressing the true point of the story.
If only there were some way to determine the facts of the story. Maybe with a panel of 12 disinterested persons hearing both sides before condoning the meting out of punishment…nah. Pitchforks it is.
There is some ground between “Pitchforks” and just deserts. This is also tangential to the main point; again exemplifying the epiphany I was alluding to earlier.
One can appreciate the “what goes around comes around” aspect of the situation while still disapproving of the physical brutality involved, regardless of which party is inflicting it upon another party.
I can agree with this - this is a more reasoned response without resorting to excessive mischaracterizations and tangential extrapolations. The previous posts were qualitatively different from this tip of response IMHO.
The main point I’m making is that an epiphany occurred to me - I just want to make that clear.
“Fair” and “right” are not the same thing. What the police did was not right. Let me make that unambiguously clear: They should not have done that, and the world is a slightly worse place for the fact that they did.
Only some felonies. The law does its job well in having fair or reasonable punishments for violations. It does not cover everything, and every once in a while, vigilante justice is better. We should be careful to condemn it, of course, but still be ok with it happening
Why would it be horrible? In fact, I know vigilantism like jury nullification used to be used primarily for evils like getting white criminals off for harming blacks, but as the world shifts, we can use it for good like getting pot smokers out of jail because the law is sometimes idiotic or applied unfairly. Anything overused or used extremely is bad, but that doesn’t mean select application of vigilantism isn’t a good thing. If a guy gets off on a technicality or something, I’d be fine if he gets what’s coming to him on the streets. Condemn the lawlessness, but be happy for the times when the universe works in your favor
No, he flat out said that was not what he was doing. It’s the very first thing in his post. Did you not read it, or do you not get that everyone else can read what he said and see that you’re spouting bullshit?
He said flat out that he doesn’t condone it. That means he’s not okay with it. He just has no sympathy for the guy. Hell, while I can have sympathy for pretty much anyone, that only extends as far as being sorry he grew up in a way that he thinks this is allowable. I have no sympathy for him having to experience that.
And I can say that while also advocating that these police officers be thrown in jail.
Although he stated that’s not what he was doing, that’s exactly what he did in the rest of the post. And, oddly enough, that’s exactly what you just did in your post.
