Lots of fantastic stuff to unpack here, Conor. The myopic application of empathy is characteristic of our “enlightened” leaders. It’s noble, but often misguided and juvenile.
Liberals have become so indoctrinated with progressive ideology that they fetishize diversity, even celebrating Dublin as “a multiracial city” just hours after that diversity just unleashed barbarous cruelty upon citizen children who the government and community should be committed to protecting beyond anything and anyone else, including asylum seekers.
But the English speaking world is led , both politically and culturally, by people who think that denial of asylum to thoroughly alien people coming from wholly alien cultures is cruel without giving much thought to whether granting asylum to these people results is a cruelty that is downstream of the ruinous empathy that seems to have replaced cold-hearted reasoning.
I cannot follow these cases of violence against children too closely. They make me too angry. I've no experience with violence and couldn't say I'd kill the perpetrators of such crimes, but I know I would not intervene in their defence, and I would find it acceptable if they were killed on the spot.
The (overwhelmingly) women who stop such summary justice seem to have magical beliefs about the nature of violence, and ones that are increasingly ungrounded by belief in some redemption in the next life. It is not so much that one barbarian being killed or not matters, but that the attitude seeps into all law enforcement, and makes our lives more dangerous. Their lunacy must be stopped.
I basically feel exactly as you do and wrote the article because I just don’t understand why we’re not talking about giving this guy a death sentence- it seems indecent. On the “we’re not savages” lady- from reading the coverage, it seemed to me she had some role in disarming the man so she seemed slightly different from the usual “leave him alone” types which irritate both of us so much. But yeah
To give savagery its due, at least it’s a healthy human instinct at times.
I think the civilised thing to do would be simply using murderers for donor organs; this would go some way towards the cliché of “paying their debt to society”. The financial incentive problem “à la chinoise” would not exist in the Irish system, or could elsewhere be mitigated by ensuring that proceeds don’t touch the justice or medical system but go directly to the victims’ families who are the injured parties and cannot influence the sentence.
What is certainly not “civilised” is keeping these rabid monsters around for silly sentimentality, and letting them create further social cost for their room, board, and safekeeping; potentially forcing everyone, including the families of their wrecked victims, to suffer paying their upkeep for decades.
I would probably pass on the whole organ harvesting proposal, but I do agree there is something perverse in having to implicitly pay for the murderer of your child. And plainly those resources have alternative uses.
I should say I'm averse to the death penalty for all the usual jurisprudence reasons. I just think the mushy arguments against it are weak.
I think the issues people generally have with the death penalty are not really “weak” as arguments – to kill an innocent man is an enormity.
I think they’re morally childish and cowardly though: Government implies these trade-offs between false positives and negatives, between punishing the innocent to avoid more future crimes by the falsely not-guilty.
I’m not sure I could stand being in such direct responsibility for these amounts of life-or-death decisions, but then again I didn’t volunteer for them. A lot of people do everything to get into roles that they then refuse to perform.
As an Italian naval commander told a famous such case: “vada a bordo, cazzo!”
It certainly tallies with some of what you've said about women relating differently to men of fighting age, to quote the phrase. Although there are many men who would claim that we are above lethal violence too.
Lots of fantastic stuff to unpack here, Conor. The myopic application of empathy is characteristic of our “enlightened” leaders. It’s noble, but often misguided and juvenile.
Liberals have become so indoctrinated with progressive ideology that they fetishize diversity, even celebrating Dublin as “a multiracial city” just hours after that diversity just unleashed barbarous cruelty upon citizen children who the government and community should be committed to protecting beyond anything and anyone else, including asylum seekers.
But the English speaking world is led , both politically and culturally, by people who think that denial of asylum to thoroughly alien people coming from wholly alien cultures is cruel without giving much thought to whether granting asylum to these people results is a cruelty that is downstream of the ruinous empathy that seems to have replaced cold-hearted reasoning.
I cannot follow these cases of violence against children too closely. They make me too angry. I've no experience with violence and couldn't say I'd kill the perpetrators of such crimes, but I know I would not intervene in their defence, and I would find it acceptable if they were killed on the spot.
The (overwhelmingly) women who stop such summary justice seem to have magical beliefs about the nature of violence, and ones that are increasingly ungrounded by belief in some redemption in the next life. It is not so much that one barbarian being killed or not matters, but that the attitude seeps into all law enforcement, and makes our lives more dangerous. Their lunacy must be stopped.
I basically feel exactly as you do and wrote the article because I just don’t understand why we’re not talking about giving this guy a death sentence- it seems indecent. On the “we’re not savages” lady- from reading the coverage, it seemed to me she had some role in disarming the man so she seemed slightly different from the usual “leave him alone” types which irritate both of us so much. But yeah
To give savagery its due, at least it’s a healthy human instinct at times.
I think the civilised thing to do would be simply using murderers for donor organs; this would go some way towards the cliché of “paying their debt to society”. The financial incentive problem “à la chinoise” would not exist in the Irish system, or could elsewhere be mitigated by ensuring that proceeds don’t touch the justice or medical system but go directly to the victims’ families who are the injured parties and cannot influence the sentence.
What is certainly not “civilised” is keeping these rabid monsters around for silly sentimentality, and letting them create further social cost for their room, board, and safekeeping; potentially forcing everyone, including the families of their wrecked victims, to suffer paying their upkeep for decades.
I would probably pass on the whole organ harvesting proposal, but I do agree there is something perverse in having to implicitly pay for the murderer of your child. And plainly those resources have alternative uses.
I should say I'm averse to the death penalty for all the usual jurisprudence reasons. I just think the mushy arguments against it are weak.
I think the issues people generally have with the death penalty are not really “weak” as arguments – to kill an innocent man is an enormity.
I think they’re morally childish and cowardly though: Government implies these trade-offs between false positives and negatives, between punishing the innocent to avoid more future crimes by the falsely not-guilty.
I’m not sure I could stand being in such direct responsibility for these amounts of life-or-death decisions, but then again I didn’t volunteer for them. A lot of people do everything to get into roles that they then refuse to perform.
As an Italian naval commander told a famous such case: “vada a bordo, cazzo!”
It certainly tallies with some of what you've said about women relating differently to men of fighting age, to quote the phrase. Although there are many men who would claim that we are above lethal violence too.
This is the best summary I have read of this horrible case, and the issues it gives rise to.
Hopefully we will be able to look back at it in 10-15 years to see it was a step towards the abolition of the asylum system.