Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
agree to disagree. at the very least i think if someone is found guilty of rape there should be mandatory chemical or physical castration. It is extremely difficult and rare for someone to even be convincted of this crime so if there is enough overwhelming evidence for them to be convicted than the penalties should be very harsh
luckily no one has ever been convicted for a crime they didn’t commit
i’ve seen a jury acquit the man who raped my friend. so personally i’m not bucking on this position.
agree to disagree. at the very least i think if someone is found guilty of rape there should be mandatory chemical or physical castration. It is extremely difficult and rare for someone to even be convincted of this crime so if there is enough overwhelming evidence for them to be convicted than the penalties should be very harsh
luckily no one has ever been convicted for a crime they didn’t commit
again. look at the statistics for rape convictions. most people charged with rape are not convicted
Cancel culture doesn't truly exist. The people who are targeted who didn't do a "jail"-worthy crime sell out stadiums. The idea this thread is more than an alarm, to those who don't want to support someone who did a crime/sexually-related act is, asking too much. None of these folks ever get truly get cancelled. They have fucking golden parachutes from work and from personal wealth or connections to the next stop.
I hate, as a [redated] person, that they keep stealing our terms and applying it backwards. R. Kelly should be cancelled - Tyler and Em have explained why they said their words. And they were words not actions.
People who deserve to be truly cancelled, do violent crimes and most often get away with it. R. Kelly got away with it for maybe 20 years. We knew. We still listened to "Ignition" as if we didn't know what was going on. We made a (maybe) bad choice at the time supporting him and continual pain he was inflicting. We also let too many things just go, and now we have this term. The term means nothing in relation with the access to power and monetary balance.
I think it's unfair to blame the masses when in reality it's the justice system, corporations and billionaires who enable these evil people.
Like I mentioned, my grandparents love R Kelly and most 90s rnb and still play his music at bbqs. I don't really think that makes them bad people nor they are not enabling him more than people who have real power.
You, with a knowledge that it isn't what your asking, is for purity in informing. As a Comm. major, that's fucking impossible - I can only use a topical character to make a point. It's not the point you are arguing it's individual decision making. I'm not even going to try over analyze but yes of course it's the court system (CK Louis would have been locked up if they could have "proven" the allegations of sexual misconduct from someone who wasn't rich and [redacted].)
To be clear blaming the masses, has more to do with monetary contribution to the artist or political figure. Especially after there are signs be blinked at us. Do I think they should feel bad about it? Not really. I went to R Kelly at Roo. I am PART of the problem but pretending we shouldn't identify said problems is also negligent.
luckily no one has ever been convicted for a crime they didn’t commit
i’ve seen a jury acquit the man who raped my friend. so personally i’m not bucking on this position.
what does that have to do with innocent people being convicted? Don’t really get how a jury getting it wrong in your friends case would increase the trust you have in them getting getting another case correct.
i’ve seen a jury acquit the man who raped my friend. so personally i’m not bucking on this position.
what does that have to do with innocent people being convicted? Don’t really get how a jury getting it wrong in your friends case would increase the trust you have in them getting getting another case correct.
the low numbers of convictions in rape cases signifies to me that if someone is convicted, than the jury must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. you are repeatedly told in a trial to vote not guilty if you have even a small amount of doubt that someone commited a crime.
Last Edit: Jun 11, 2023 15:45:59 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
tЯist♡n
Inforoo Influencer Totally Robbed of TIN 2016
what does that have to do with innocent people being convicted? Don’t really get how a jury getting it wrong in your friends case would increase the trust you have in them getting getting another case correct.
the low numbers of convictions in rape cases signifies to me that if someone is convicted, than the jury must be convinced beyond a readonable doubt. you are repeatedly told in a trial to vote not guilty if you have even a small amount of doubt that someone commited a crime.
I personally don’t trust the Justice system to murder and castrate people. Even if it’s right the majority of the time innocent people will still get convicted. You’re trusting cops and DAs to be honest which has proven to not be true time and again.
agree to disagree. at the very least i think if someone is found guilty of rape there should be mandatory chemical or physical castration. It is extremely difficult and rare for someone to even be convincted of this crime so if there is enough overwhelming evidence for them to be convicted than the penalties should be very harsh
I understand the sentiment, and also understand that it’s a really personal issue for you. I just think there has been study after study that shows that increasing the severity of punitive measures do very little to reduce the amount of them that actually happen. Whereas reformation and empathy have shown to be able to create a long-term reduction in crime.
And honestly, I have my doubts castration would prevent a reoccurrence. Sexual assault is driven by desire for power, not sexual desire.
agree to disagree. at the very least i think if someone is found guilty of rape there should be mandatory chemical or physical castration. It is extremely difficult and rare for someone to even be convincted of this crime so if there is enough overwhelming evidence for them to be convicted than the penalties should be very harsh
I understand the sentiment, and also understand that it’s a really personal issue for you. I just think there has been study after study that shows that increasing the severity of punitive measures do very little to reduce the amount of them that actually happen. Whereas reformation and empathy have shown to be able to create a long-term reduction in crime.
And honestly, I have my doubts castration would prevent a reoccurrence. Sexual assault is driven by desire for power, not sexual desire.
if you don’t mind me asking, could you share some of the studies you mentioned? i appreciate your kindness and willingness to understand my perspective as well and respond in a respectful way
Last Edit: Jun 11, 2023 15:56:46 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
I’ll say that I don’t weep tears when awful people die but giving the government the power to do that is always a bad idea
fair take. just to clarify im not at all a fan of the government or jury process. I only advocate for harsh punishment via the law because that is the only actual option for justice. obviously vigilante justice is illegal and inherently has a lot of issues itself as well. at the end of the day, i really just want victims to have justice and peace.
in an ideal world the victims would be the ones deciding on the fate of their assailants.
Last Edit: Jun 11, 2023 16:18:53 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
in an ideal world the victims would be the ones deciding on the fate of their assailants.
this would end up with Wal Mart killing shoplifters
i didnt think it was necessary to include that i meant that as far as severe violent crime goes but for the record i meant that in the context of severe violent crimes
I’ll say that I don’t weep tears when awful people die but giving the government the power to do that is always a bad idea
fair take. just to clarify im not at all a fan of the government or jury process. I only advocate for harsh punishment via the law because that is the only actual option for justice. obviously vigilante justice is illegal and inherently has a lot of issues itself as well. at the end of the day, i really just want victims to have justice and peace.
in an ideal world the victims would be the ones deciding on the fate of their assailants.
this would end up with Wal Mart killing shoplifters
i didnt think it was necessary to include that i meant that as far as severe violent crime goes but for the record i meant that in the context of severe violent crimes
I don't trust the people who get to define what severe violent crime is
Post by problem dog on Jun 11, 2023 17:15:06 GMT -5
I don't think the urge to inflict state-supported violence on another person is healthy for anyone, victims included. Also suspect you'd be creating something else victims would have to carry for the rest of their lives. Choosing to execute your attacker might offer some relief in the moment, but then you've gotta live with that forever.
I don't think the urge to inflict state-supported violence on another person is healthy for anyone, victims included. Also suspect you'd be creating something else victims would have to carry for the rest of their lives. Choosing to execute your attacker might offer some relief in the moment, but then you've gotta live with that forever.
If you kill a murderer you just end up with two dead people.
tbh i actually do think rapists should face the death penalty or at least physical or chemical castration but i’m aware thats not a popular opinion. seeing the direct and permanent impact it causes to people close to me who have been raped or sexually assaulted and the acquittal and lack of consequences their assailants faced is what led me to having this position. so i’m aware that i’m biased but i have a strong moral conviction on this.
I think its much easier to humanize rapists and want to believe in their redemption when you havent seen or felt the direct impact of the harm they cause
I’m on the opposite end here where I don’t even think mass murderers should get the death penalty
tbh if there was a way (read: there isn't) that we could 100% guarantee that every person who gets convicted of a charge like mass murdering, i would probably feel OK with those people getting the death penalty.
but in reality/actual practice, it is definitely not a 100% success rate re: people getting charged for this most heinous crime and being guilty of it. and among false convictions, it is way more often BIPOC and/or lower income people, so if even just 1 in 100 people convicted of being a mass murderer is actually innocent, i still can't get behind supporting the death penalty for that crime given that one innocent person there would literally have their life taken from them without just reason
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
