Victim Blaming

[aCultureWarrior]

It's as if there aren't two people involved in a given incident. Cops realize there are cases of "mutual combat" where both people have some fault. Same with divorce cases....both can be at fault. When there are two persons involved, PERSONAL responsibility means two persons could potentially have some fault. The fault of one does not somehow magically erase the faults of the other. Seems like common sense to me. :idunno:

In domestic violence cases rarely do both parties go to jail unless there's visual proof or collaborating testimony from eyewitnesses that both were combative. Usually there is a victim and an aggressor. The aggressor goes to jail, doesn't pass "Go" and needs more than $200 to bail out.

 

[ok doser]

Iran and many middle eastern countries. Point one out here in the US.

kkk marching through harlem

 

[aCultureWarrior]

If I'd left my purse on the front seat without locking my doors, I would freely admit I deserved to get it stolen. There are consequences for what I did. A lesson learned.

You did not deserve to have something stolen from you, even though you used poor judgment by leaving your purse visible in your car. Don't be surprised when it happens, but by no means did you "deserve it".

That is taking total responsibility away from the perpetrator, i.e. giving him an excuse ("If she hadn't left her purse there, I would have never stolen it!").

That doesn't change the fact that I would press charges against the guy who stole it if he was caught, because he would deserve to pay the consequences for what he did.

But you "deserved it". Why press criminal charges against someone if you were partially responsible for what he did?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

kkk marching through harlem

Are you setting me up so that zoo can call me a racist! again?

If they had a permit to march, they'd be under police protection.

If not, it still doesn't justify violence (the only justification for violence on an individual basis is self defense).

 

[glorydaz]

in some jursidictions he would, for provoking behavior or some such

Inciting....

http://www.wafb.com/story/29223015/4-charged-with-inciting-a-riot-in-baker

I brought that example of the bikers up because it happened right across the street from where I live. The cops came and didn't do anything to the bikers because the guy was "inciting". I imagine if he'd been killed, they might have looked a little closer. Who knows?

 

[glorydaz]

Are you setting me up so that zoo can call me a racist! again?

If they had a permit to march, they'd be under police protection.

If not, it still doesn't justify violence (the only justification for violence on an individual basis is self defense).

"Justice" doesn't always count when you're talking about consequences for one's behavior. There is a higher justice even than the laws of man....sowing and reaping.

 

[ok doser]

Inciting....

http://www.wafb.com/story/29223015/4-charged-with-inciting-a-riot-in-baker

I brought that example of the bikers up because it happened right across the street from where I live. The cops came and didn't do anything to the bikers because the guy was "inciting". I imagine if he'd been killed, they might have looked a little closer. Who knows?

thank you - i'm multitasking at the moment

btw - tam's having a meltdown on the other thread

 

[glorydaz]

You did not deserve to have something stolen from you, even though you used poor judgment by leaving your purse visible in your car. Don't be surprised when it happens, but by no means did you "deserve it".

That is taking total responsibility away from the perpetrator, i.e. giving him an excuse ("If she hadn't left her purse there, I would have never stolen it!").



But you "deserved it". Why press criminal charges against someone if you were partially responsible for what he did?

Just because I got what I deserved, doesn't mean he shouldn't get what he deserved. Each person must be responsible for his OWN behavior.

I may have even been guilty of providing a temptation that was just too difficult for this man to resist. The thought may not have even entered his mind to steal a purse. But that doesn't change the fact that he needs to learn a lesson...just as I did.

 

[patrick jane]

You did not deserve to have something stolen from you, even though you used poor judgment by leaving your purse visible in your car. Don't be surprised when it happens, but by no means did you "deserve it".

That is taking total responsibility away from the perpetrator, i.e. giving him an excuse ("If she hadn't left her purse there, I would have never stolen it!").



But you "deserved it". Why press criminal charges against someone if you were partially responsible for what he did?

Good points, illustrating the foolish use of the word DESERVE

 

[glorydaz]

In domestic violence cases rarely do both parties go to jail unless there's visual proof or collaborating testimony from eyewitnesses that both were combative. Usually there is a victim and an aggressor. The aggressor goes to jail, doesn't pass "Go" and needs more than $200 to bail out.

Yeah, but there are lots of cases of mutual combat besides domestic violence. Equal fault under the law.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

"Justice" doesn't always count when you're talking about consequences for one's behavior. There is a higher justice even than the laws of man....sowing and reaping.

Meaning that your immoral lifestyle will eventually catch up with you.

God's laws are absolute though, and our civil laws reflect that:

It's "Thou shalt not steal"

not

"Thou shalt not steal unless a purse was left on a car seat and no one is around".

 

[ok doser]

bah


we've been through this misrepresenting crap before



go ahead and believe we're absolving the thief/rapist/etc from their crime

 

[aCultureWarrior]

bah


we've been through this misrepresenting crap before



go ahead and believe we're absolving the thief/rapist/etc from their crime

Not totally absolving the perpetrator, but partially.

What is shared blame doing?

Look at what society has come to: good people like glorydaz saying that she DESERVED to be a victim of a car prowl!

 

[ok doser]

Not totally absolving the perpetrator, but partially.

nope

Look at what society has come to: good people like glorydaz saying that she DESERVED to be a victim of a car prowl!

she's using emotion, not reason

and misrepresenting my argument as well

 

[aCultureWarrior]

...she's using emotion, not reason

and misrepresenting my argument as well

Then just you and me: mano mano.

Bring it on.

 

[glorydaz]

Not totally absolving the perpetrator, but partially.

What is shared blame doing?

Look at what society has come to: good people like glorydaz saying that she DESERVED to be a victim of a car prowl!

I just don't pretend like I don't live in a world filled with sin. I would be stupid if I thought I could live as if we were all saints.

It's the same as my trying to claim I wouldn't deserve to break my neck if I jumped off a tall building. Is that really what you think I should believe?

 

[ok doser]

Then just you and me: mano mano.

Bring it on.

sounds gay each:

 

[glorydaz]

nope






she's using emotion, not reason

and misrepresenting my argument as well

I'm not "misrepresenting your argument"....I'm merely bringing up another aspect of your argument. And, emotion has NOTHING to do with understanding that I deserve to reap what I sow just as much as the thief does.

 

[glorydaz]

sounds gay each:

Which is why you'd both do well to keep a woman (me) in the mix. :chuckle:

 

[ok doser]

I'm not "misrepresenting your argument"....I'm merely bringing up another aspect of your argument. And, emotion has NOTHING to do with understanding that I deserve to reap what I sow just as much as the thief does.

whoops - my bad - I thought he was talking about tam


better stop multitasking and focus on my schoolwork :wave2: