Quote:
Originally Posted by
zealanddonk
On a serious note I have two concerns:
A not guilty verdict would encourage more vigilante retribution and there is always the chance that the victim ends up attacking the wrong person for whatever reason. In this case, its the claim the assumed molestor had used a false name, its possible in some cases the wrong person is targetted.
The other concern is, not everyone who is molested ends up with a shambles of a life. Not everyone with a shambles of a life was molested.
Survivors should get counseling, society should be protected from molestors.
you kind of have the right idea here, but not quite IMO.
let's see- can a reasonable person look at facts and see the laws and public opinion favor, to a degree, the pedo's?
I would say so.
Rather than give vigilanti's more ammo, let's make shit fair- the dude gets found guilty, but in the spirit of equality, howz about we change the laws just a bit, to favor the sufferer of abuse. Make's perfect sense to me, and serves a modest deterrent to the creepy fucks "well I've just had a call from God, He says dave, drop what you're doing meow and get memorizintg that bible you hear me? No sex either for life, just because I run shit, and lest you forget it, you'll have some swollen blue balls to remind you for the rest of your life
BUDDY
IDK KIND OF A TOUGH SELL TO ME, BUT THEN WHAT DO I KNOW
