Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If I saw someone hurting a child they probably wouldn't make it to prison anyway.
I dont know why so many people say this kind of thing, I hear it often when someones house is burglarized, they say they will not call police if they find out who it is.
I dont believe this for a second, if they saw a child being abused out in public, or somehow found the person who broke into their house, they would be calling police in a heartbeat.
Some people get stuck on the fact of who happened to be killed in this particular instance. Like you said prison guards have been brutally assaulted sometimes killed, my brother has spent years inside prisons , most recent San Quentin, for his job meeting with clients who he defends. And one thing that's sometimes wearing on him is that some of his inmate clients who he is there and tries so hard to help will actually turn on him, cuss him out-- he was even threatened physically by the very inmate who he had spent countless hours on his case and had gone in to meet with him. A few yrs before he started there a psychiatrist was killed there by an inmate. A psychiatrist-- who was on that inmates "side" attempting to help him.
A big yes about the inmate who was killed- I hate him too.
A big no on the naive belief that inmates are either the good guys who have a moral code or the bad guys who hurt women or children.
Many inmates have done crimes themselves against a child or woman.
A large block of them do have, not all, but yes a large percentage do have serious personality disorders -- hence the beating or killing of another inmate over ramen or skipping ahead in the phone line. And threatening the very attorney who's there to help him. Or attacking a guard. And even a psychiatrist who is just there to help them have medication and appropriate services.
Morals of inmates largely consist of "what's in it for me?"
The smartest reply yet to striking a difference with my statement.
The fallacy is that people are implying I was thinking this was done out of a moral code. It's not. The last statement sums it up perfectly. What's in it for me?
Predators of children, when found guilty, normally have 0 outside support. They also are among violent criminals that all had the strength/capacity to take down adults instead of children. That makes child predator weak and an easy target relatively. Nobody cares what happens to them anymore. Want to raise your standards in the prison for being tough...that's an easy target. What's in it for them? Raising of street rep in the prison system.
Murder puts you in with the murderers. Some of these guys aren't going anywhere. If said dude killed my baby, I know what I'd want to happen. There's no need for me to go vigilante. If the warden agrees, perhaps he'll put the guy in with a twisted psychopath and let some monster take him out. Once he does, the monster can be put back in the hole. What's in it for the monster? He gets to kill again. Basically, why buy the cow if the milk is free? Alternatively, it's as simple as crossing affiliations. Put a crip and blood in the same cell block....have some neo nazi room with a jew. etc. Pressure will build on that guy to show his affiliation with the group. What's in it for him? Continued affiliation with the group.
Access to the warden will be, by need, limited. Access to one of the guards, however, is quite a bit easier. The will have a good idea of what people's triggers are. I know of one case where a dude got a very light sentence for something heinous done but struck a fast plea deal when only a portion of the truth was known. The right people were contacted and sure enough, this dude is suddenly in fights and won't be getting any parole any time soon. Actually, they had to move him to a new prison. I'm not sure what was in it for the fighters, but I suspect they had something promised.
So, if that's reality, the question is....do you want to change that? Do you want to invest resources to figure out how to prevent that? I'd answer...not unless the warden feels it's out of control.
I dont know why so many people say this kind of thing, I hear it often when someones house is burglarized, they say they will not call police if they find out who it is.
I dont believe this for a second, if they saw a child being abused out in public, or somehow found the person who broke into their house, they would be calling police in a heartbeat.
Never said I would hurt someone for a burglary after the fact, but if I saw someone raping a child and could get away with it, I would shoot them for sure.
The smartest reply yet to striking a difference with my statement.
The fallacy is that people are implying I was thinking this was done out of a moral code. It's not. The last statement sums it up perfectly. What's in it for me?
Predators of children, when found guilty, normally have 0 outside support. They also are among violent criminals that all had the strength/capacity to take down adults instead of children. That makes child predator weak and an easy target relatively. Nobody cares what happens to them anymore. Want to raise your standards in the prison for being tough...that's an easy target. What's in it for them? Raising of street rep in the prison system.
Murder puts you in with the murderers. Some of these guys aren't going anywhere. If said dude killed my baby, I know what I'd want to happen. There's no need for me to go vigilante. If the warden agrees, perhaps he'll put the guy in with a twisted psychopath and let some monster take him out. Once he does, the monster can be put back in the hole. What's in it for the monster? He gets to kill again. Basically, why buy the cow if the milk is free? Alternatively, it's as simple as crossing affiliations. Put a crip and blood in the same cell block....have some neo nazi room with a jew. etc. Pressure will build on that guy to show his affiliation with the group. What's in it for him? Continued affiliation with the group.
Access to the warden will be, by need, limited. Access to one of the guards, however, is quite a bit easier. The will have a good idea of what people's triggers are. I know of one case where a dude got a very light sentence for something heinous done but struck a fast plea deal when only a portion of the truth was known. The right people were contacted and sure enough, this dude is suddenly in fights and won't be getting any parole any time soon. Actually, they had to move him to a new prison. I'm not sure what was in it for the fighters, but I suspect they had something promised.
So, if that's reality, the question is....do you want to change that? Do you want to invest resources to figure out how to prevent that? I'd answer...not unless the warden feels it's out of control.
"...they all had the strength/ capacity to take down adults instead of children.."--
>> false... negative.. many inmates there have committed a crime against a child and either were not caught or busted for it OR it was a prior and now theyre in for "just a drug case"
>> as far as the inmates that "only" committed violence against an adult..-- is that ok, the new low standard ? Also, some of the inmates who committed an act against another adult, you aren't thinking (I hope) they were things like a bar fight? Cuz many inmates in for a crime against an adult are often kidnapping, rape, assault, domestic on a spouse----uh, are these now considered the higher echelon?
LOL no...that isn't it. Now people are going all rogue and claiming if they saw a child being injured they would pull out a gun and kill them. The whole thing is off the rails. Its in La La land now.
LOL no...that isn't it. Now people are going all rogue and claiming if they saw a child being injured they would pull out a gun and kill them. The whole thing is off the rails. Its in La La land now.
Some of these posters are clearly off the rails, don't worry about it. I hope they never sit on juries.
Even when you hear about horrible things happening to babies you need to control your emotions and stay level-headed and think rationally. This case happened in England and it doesn't seem he was even tried for it yet, just that he confessed and was jailed (correct me if I'm wrong anyone). But if that is the case, he wasn't even officially convicted. People falsely confess to crimes they didn't commit for various reasons. I'm not saying he did here, what I'm saying is don't jump the gun. Use your brains. Don't be so emotional about it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
