In a less-than-surprising move, the alleged 17yo rapist of a 12yo goes free, further undermining the credibility of the judiciary (which, post-Covid, isn't in high regard anyways)
I understand the sentiment (trust me, I do), but no, I do not believe you would "take justice into your own hands" if one of your kids were to get raped and the state refused to do anything about it. What would you actually do? You'd pack your bags and move away, quite possibly out of the country. Why? Because that would be by far the most effective way for you to protect your kid, that's why. Protecting your kids does, in fact, matter more than getting revenge (or "justice," whatever you want to call it).
See, that's what's been on my mind as I kept reading about the Rape of England. The families simply didn't have the means to do the one thing that would have protected their kids: to get the hell out of the area. Now, they shouldn't "have to" be the ones to get the hell out of the area. No matter. Anyone who actually had the means to get the hell out would have gotten the hell out.
Also, note that leftist and progressive and liberal parties all over Europe has been a driving force this kind of thing since the 1960s: making child sex legal.
What we should strive for is an American-style law on rape, where underage equals rape, period, no exceptions.
And go back to the old-timey punishment for rape: dismemberment.
"I suppose that, should people realise that ‘the system™’ won’t protect them—and let’s not mince words here: the local, ‘white’ (oh, how I hate this term) population will once more resort to self-justice."
Maybe. Or maybe not. Look at what happened in the UK.
I don't know. I'd heard about the "grooming [that should be child-rape] gangs" years ago, but I had no idea about the extent. I'm genuinely surprised that (a) the authorities did so little to stop them, and that (b) in view of (a), there hasn't been any vigilante justice. I find this quite odd, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
We also haven't heard about immigrant (first- or second-generation) girls being targeted. Maybe we just haven't "heard" about it, maybe there were few such girls (other than the Pakistanis) in those towns. It's certainly possible. Or maybe as soon as, say, Polish/Chinese/etc. moms heard credible rumors about what was going on, they flat-out forbade Agnieszka/LingLing/etc. from going anywhere near the Pakistanis ("and no, you're most DEFINITELY not going to your friend Fatima's house"), without worrying so much about being called the r-word. "Stay the hell away from Pakistanis" is a blunt instrument, but when those in charge refuse to use a scalpel (i.e. prosecute the responsible and make sure they never walk free again), blunt instruments are all that remain. Either that, or just accept the risk of your kid being gang-raped.
This is a rather lop-sided problem (as far as crime statistics go, and this is something perhaps @rikard could illustrate with Swedish data?)--typically, the violent/sex crime incidence among 'certain people' is so far off the charts relative to the locals, it's hard to keep pretending 'all men' would be 'the problem'.
In terms of practical issues, here's what we do: generally don't do sleepovers, and one of the girls goes, the destination is carefully vetted (generally, families with seemingly stable marriages and several kids are about as safe a bet as there can be). I've been called many things and names in my life, but not (yet) a racist.
As to the scalpel vs. broad-sword argument: isn't it odd that what most people seem to desire is the law being enforced? Many have apparently forgotten that as sovereign citizens (Norwegians aren't, by the way), they don't petition the gov't to enforce the law; it's the other way round.
See, vigilante justice is the "old" way of handling these things. For most of human (pre)history, it was the *only* way of handling these things. Sure, there are downsides. These include (but are by no means limited to) innocent people getting lynched by the mob every once in a while. Then, "we" came up with more sophisticated ways. Y'know, police, courts, etc. When those work as intended, they're far superior to the "old" way. Ah, but then the "sophisticated" people decided that the police and courts were mean, mean I tell ya! And not to mention racist! Well. That can go on only for so long before the "old" ways kick in as a back-up plan. Because some things are not really negotiable, or at least not over the long term. "They rape our children and we just accept it as a fact of life" doesn't really work in the long run, whatever "Sir" Keir Starmer and his ilk may think about it.
There are constant low-key race wars in Australia that often turn violent.
By my count about 10 different factions currently on the boil.
White people keep getting killed by Africans and Aboriginals and the police have...started looking the other way during home invasions...if you know what I mean.
The politicians whine and cry but the police actually know what is up, especially in the small towns. People have really had it.
While not that drastic (yet, I fear) in Austria or Scandinavia, my brother-in-law is a police officer: he always says this is the case, adding that none of his colleagues will take a bullet or even a punch for any politician. Most policing is fake/make-believe, with attendants participating as extras.
The police also practice 'racial profiling' I'm told--and guess why: certain 'peoples' are a bit more dangerous to interact with than others. Of course, this is strictly forbidden, but officers do this to avoid harm.
If I were that girls parents, I can tell you exactly what I would do. But you can use your imagination.😎
As a father of two girls, I think along these lines, of that I can assure you!
I understand the sentiment (trust me, I do), but no, I do not believe you would "take justice into your own hands" if one of your kids were to get raped and the state refused to do anything about it. What would you actually do? You'd pack your bags and move away, quite possibly out of the country. Why? Because that would be by far the most effective way for you to protect your kid, that's why. Protecting your kids does, in fact, matter more than getting revenge (or "justice," whatever you want to call it).
See, that's what's been on my mind as I kept reading about the Rape of England. The families simply didn't have the means to do the one thing that would have protected their kids: to get the hell out of the area. Now, they shouldn't "have to" be the ones to get the hell out of the area. No matter. Anyone who actually had the means to get the hell out would have gotten the hell out.
This is dhimmi; bowing down to islam.
Also, note that leftist and progressive and liberal parties all over Europe has been a driving force this kind of thing since the 1960s: making child sex legal.
What we should strive for is an American-style law on rape, where underage equals rape, period, no exceptions.
And go back to the old-timey punishment for rape: dismemberment.
Sounds like what it is, isn’t it?
As to your solution, I don’t see a way to avoid this.
"I suppose that, should people realise that ‘the system™’ won’t protect them—and let’s not mince words here: the local, ‘white’ (oh, how I hate this term) population will once more resort to self-justice."
Maybe. Or maybe not. Look at what happened in the UK.
Fair point.
Don't you wonder if the various Europeans have 'it' still in them or perhaps we are too docile?
I don't know. I'd heard about the "grooming [that should be child-rape] gangs" years ago, but I had no idea about the extent. I'm genuinely surprised that (a) the authorities did so little to stop them, and that (b) in view of (a), there hasn't been any vigilante justice. I find this quite odd, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
We also haven't heard about immigrant (first- or second-generation) girls being targeted. Maybe we just haven't "heard" about it, maybe there were few such girls (other than the Pakistanis) in those towns. It's certainly possible. Or maybe as soon as, say, Polish/Chinese/etc. moms heard credible rumors about what was going on, they flat-out forbade Agnieszka/LingLing/etc. from going anywhere near the Pakistanis ("and no, you're most DEFINITELY not going to your friend Fatima's house"), without worrying so much about being called the r-word. "Stay the hell away from Pakistanis" is a blunt instrument, but when those in charge refuse to use a scalpel (i.e. prosecute the responsible and make sure they never walk free again), blunt instruments are all that remain. Either that, or just accept the risk of your kid being gang-raped.
I think you're right on both counts:
This is a rather lop-sided problem (as far as crime statistics go, and this is something perhaps @rikard could illustrate with Swedish data?)--typically, the violent/sex crime incidence among 'certain people' is so far off the charts relative to the locals, it's hard to keep pretending 'all men' would be 'the problem'.
In terms of practical issues, here's what we do: generally don't do sleepovers, and one of the girls goes, the destination is carefully vetted (generally, families with seemingly stable marriages and several kids are about as safe a bet as there can be). I've been called many things and names in my life, but not (yet) a racist.
As to the scalpel vs. broad-sword argument: isn't it odd that what most people seem to desire is the law being enforced? Many have apparently forgotten that as sovereign citizens (Norwegians aren't, by the way), they don't petition the gov't to enforce the law; it's the other way round.
I support vigilante justice in these circumstances
Isn't the death penalty for child molesters/rapists envisioned in Florida?
See, vigilante justice is the "old" way of handling these things. For most of human (pre)history, it was the *only* way of handling these things. Sure, there are downsides. These include (but are by no means limited to) innocent people getting lynched by the mob every once in a while. Then, "we" came up with more sophisticated ways. Y'know, police, courts, etc. When those work as intended, they're far superior to the "old" way. Ah, but then the "sophisticated" people decided that the police and courts were mean, mean I tell ya! And not to mention racist! Well. That can go on only for so long before the "old" ways kick in as a back-up plan. Because some things are not really negotiable, or at least not over the long term. "They rape our children and we just accept it as a fact of life" doesn't really work in the long run, whatever "Sir" Keir Starmer and his ilk may think about it.
There are constant low-key race wars in Australia that often turn violent.
By my count about 10 different factions currently on the boil.
White people keep getting killed by Africans and Aboriginals and the police have...started looking the other way during home invasions...if you know what I mean.
The politicians whine and cry but the police actually know what is up, especially in the small towns. People have really had it.
While not that drastic (yet, I fear) in Austria or Scandinavia, my brother-in-law is a police officer: he always says this is the case, adding that none of his colleagues will take a bullet or even a punch for any politician. Most policing is fake/make-believe, with attendants participating as extras.
Oh my gosh this is fascinating.
The police also practice 'racial profiling' I'm told--and guess why: certain 'peoples' are a bit more dangerous to interact with than others. Of course, this is strictly forbidden, but officers do this to avoid harm.