By Rob Beschizza at 7:24 am Thu, May 9, 2013
Easier to bust smokers than freaks.
What’s a ‘freak’?
Someone who keeps three kidnapped girls prisoners for 10 years.
Being a ‘freak’ is a stigma we project onto others and is evidence only of your own level of discomfort. Kidnapping and holding three girls prisoner for any length of time is a criminal, and prosecutable under several laws.
You said it right there. ‘Being a freak’. Being is an objective state, name assignation is subjective. You give it more credence than I.
He makes me very discomfortable. He freaks me out.
So, basically we actually have to go through the dog and pony show of declaring a “war on rape” in order to actually start making the world a safer place for women, rather than just realizing that we’ve always known that rape is one of the most heinous, society crushing crimes, and get on the f-ing case…
First they need a law that gives the Police the right to seize and auction off an alleged-rapist’s property…
Perhaps if rape was classified a Schedule I narcotic….
Please. You and I both know that if the government declares a war on rape, they’ll spend billions of dollars to persecute people for small-time rapes that don’t actually hurt anyone, and the total number of rapes will actually go up. We’ll end up with prisons full of “soft rapists” while the affluent white males are free to commit non-stigmatized rape without fear of police reprisal.
n.b. – all rape is bad. Above paragraph is tongue-in-cheek commentary on the war on drugs only.
It’s a depressingly fucking accurate prediction, for all that…
More margin in prisoners and pharmaceutical monopolies.
Lesson learned. If something really weird is going on over at the neighbor’s house, tell the 911 dispatcher that you suspect they’re cooking meth or growing weed.
You don’t get grants from DOJ for busting rapists.
Police get cool new gear for terrorism and drug enforcement. You don’t get it for assaults or robbery.
three main reasons why police efforts are focused on drugs, the first being already nicely surmised above here: monied interests (both in keeping folks reaching for legal profit making addictives and the incarceration industry) and the second being that drugs are seen as having a political component, namely: “all them commie hippy liberal progressives are drug addicts” …particularly a factor as regards marijuana. the third is scale, while sickeningly horrific, such crimes as this are comparatively infrequent compared with illegal drug use (again, often “illegal” because of the first two reasons).
of course, i hope and expect there will be a full embarrassing review as to why the cops stopped making even apparently a basic effort to investigate the complaints against this house of horrors. are there no more police “detectives”, or were they always hollywood fiction?
i think it is easier to go after a cancer patient with a little weed, and get a big government check for your department, than a scary psycho who might beat your ass, and you get nothing from the fed for it. Same thought, it is easier to “crack down” on DUI, than go after armed gang members. Watching a local traffic officer get out of his cruiser in full combat gear, to hassle my 84yr old neighbor about not signalling a right turn into our neighborhood? i keep saying it over and over. Our System is BROKEN. VERY BROKEN.
Um. For a start, surely most reports of girls on leashes are going to be about people engaging in consensual play? Can you imagine the BoingBoing stories about *that*? “COPS PERSECUTE BDSM!”
Further, almost all the facts in that about the abduction story are false or disputed.
Could you provide some links to support that statement?
Who is disputing them? The police department that massively dropped the ball?
Yeah, big surprise there.
Yeah, I know, right? I see girls on leashes all the time and they are all really happy! And when they are banging on windows and doors trying to get some attention its because all that consensual play is SO MUCH MORE FUN with someone watching. Girls are dirty sluts and I’m just glad someone is finally saying WHAT WE’RE ALL THINKING!
You seem to be considering the defense’s case. I’m going to guess that the quote attributed to Ariel Castro, where he wonders why he kidnapped a third woman, when he already had two, will be useful too if the defense goes for an insanity plea.
I’ve been rolling that scenario around in my head today: What did the witness see? What did the witness report they had seen to the dispatcher? What did the dispatcher hear the witness say about what they saw? What happened next?
Mail (will not be published) (required)
crime drugs police
Submit a tip
The rules you agree to by using this website.
Who will be eaten first?
Jason Weisberger, Publisher
Ken Snider, Sysadmin