CDZ Anyone here ever feel Murderous?

[Wake]

Don't get too caught up in the thread title please. :]

Say you're a well-meaning person who stays out of trouble and is a decent person.

You read on the news that a young girl was raped and murdered and they're still looking for the bastard.

Stories like this make an otherwise nice guy feel psychotic and want to hunt down and kill rapists and child molesters.

But wait. Is that feeling so crazy? Is it unreasonable to feel that way, or to enact upon it?

Deep down I suspect more than a few people would pull the plug on these evil bastards if they knew they were evil and could get away with it.

Obviously this messageboard is anonymous, and a good one at that. That being the case, I feel like venting some of my emotions a bit, because I had the misfortune of reading a few articles this week involving innocent child and adult victims, and I am still seething, quietly and in a controlled manner.

I hate anyone who would hurt a child. I hate anyone who would sexually assault or abuse or hurt innocent people. I hate them and would want them preferably dead if known to be guilty, or locked away or put to work.

Yes, this drags in the whole ethics thing and morality and religion [which I do not believe in], and other things. Then you'd also have the family members of said child molesters and rapists getting in the way and having to be nullified [i.e. make them have no impact while not hurting them whatsoever].

And then there's the rights issue, even though rights are imaginary things as summed up by one George Carlin.

Long story short, who else can honestly resonate how they really feel about these people who rape, molest, abuse, and murder others? If anything I would bet my bottom dollar that a whole hell of a lot of people feel the same or even moreso, but are better at keeping those honest [and really, there's nothing wrong with it] feelings concealed. In a way it sort of reminds me of the Dexter series, but this is a tad different, in that I'd simply want these bastards put down quickly and cleanly, instead of his messy and sadistic way.

I just have had enough of hearing children and men and women being brutally murdered, raped, abused, etc. It eats at you after a while, sort of like a corrosive acid in the thin layer of your skin. This is honestly how I feel at the moment, and my thinking is likely cloudied a bit from anger and sadness reading in detail what happened to these innocent victims. I'm going to @ a couple members too to get this ball rolling and hopefully get a better, more rational, and less emotional perspective on this.

SassyIrishLass, Delta4Embassy, Ringel05, WinterBorn, FA_Q2

 

[G.T.]

I am mentally prepared for the worst, so I already know my reactions due to said deep comtemplations.

It works, Ive had it work in practice already, even.

Thing is, the rationalization of hurting a child molestor to quell your thirst for revenge is much more selfish and wrong because then YOU go to prison, giving the victim, presumably your daughter, DOUBLE the pain/loss whereas the system may have very well worked for everything.

I also try not to fight people anymore, too.

 

[Wake]

That hinges on whether or not you get caught.

I do see your point, though, if that happens.

 

[Moonglow]

So who are we targeting now? I'll let you know if I want to murder them...

 

[WinterBorn]

Do I get angry and want to do harm to people? Sure!

Would I abandon my morals and principles and murder someone? Absolutely not. With a single exception. I am a father. If any sick bastard harmed my daughter, I would happily go into the most sadistic murderous rage you can imagine. But I hope my friends and family would stop me.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Don't get too caught up in the thread title please. :]

Say you're a well-meaning person who stays out of trouble and is a decent person.

You read on the news that a young girl was raped and murdered and they're still looking for the bastard.

Stories like this make an otherwise nice guy feel psychotic and want to hunt down and kill rapists and child molesters.

But wait. Is that feeling so crazy? Is it unreasonable to feel that way, or to enact upon it?

Deep down I suspect more than a few people would pull the plug on these evil bastards if they knew they were evil and could get away with it.

Obviously this messageboard is anonymous, and a good one at that. That being the case, I feel like venting some of my emotions a bit, because I had the misfortune of reading a few articles this week involving innocent child and adult victims, and I am still seething, quietly and in a controlled manner.

I hate anyone who would hurt a child. I hate anyone who would sexually assault or abuse or hurt innocent people. I hate them and would want them preferably dead if known to be guilty, or locked away or put to work.

Yes, this drags in the whole ethics thing and morality and religion [which I do not believe in], and other things. Then you'd also have the family members of said child molesters and rapists getting in the way and having to be nullified [i.e. make them have no impact while not hurting them whatsoever].

And then there's the rights issue, even though rights are imaginary things as summed up by one George Carlin.

Long story short, who else can honestly resonate how they really feel about these people who rape, molest, abuse, and murder others? If anything I would bet my bottom dollar that a whole hell of a lot of people feel the same or even moreso, but are better at keeping those honest [and really, there's nothing wrong with it] feelings concealed. In a way it sort of reminds me of the Dexter series, but this is a tad different, in that I'd simply want these bastards put down quickly and cleanly, instead of his messy and sadistic way.

I just have had enough of hearing children and men and women being brutally murdered, raped, abused, etc. It eats at you after a while, sort of like a corrosive acid in the thin layer of your skin. This is honestly how I feel at the moment, and my thinking is likely cloudied a bit from anger and sadness reading in detail what happened to these innocent victims. I'm going to @ a couple members too to get this ball rolling and hopefully get a better, more rational, and less emotional perspective on this.

SassyIrishLass, Delta4Embassy, Ringel05, WinterBorn, FA_Q2

It's 'understandable' to feel such feelings in view of what triggered them. It's 'UNreasonable' to act on them. And it's probably 'worrisome' if someone actually persists in their murderous desires after getting up fromt he computer or tv and going off to do other things.

Our emotions are all the result of neurochemicals being produced by our brains in response to some stimulus. Everything we feel then is some chemical getting churned out in our brains. So if murderous desires or fantasies are enduring in a person's mind following a triggering event it's potentially indicative of pathology or dysfunction that what should have subsided hasn't yet.

Some believe that these emotional chemicals are psychologically addictive, I tend to be one of these. Angry people tend to be angry often and in an escalating severity, sad people are sad often and for things others shrug off, happy people happy, etc.

What helps the most I think is simply being aware that bad news is by design. TV and media has a financial interest in manipulating their consumers so we then alleviate our negative emotions through buying things. If we were given positive-news as often as negative-news we would eat a lot less junk food for starters.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Btw, we're not anonymous online. Just takes a little doing to find out who people are but it's not especially difficult if you have that skill set. And the other way is simply note personal details in a file as people reveal them in threeads, private discussions, etc. Added together there's usually more than enough info to start making an educated guess/muscle/process of elimination search to figure out who and where people are.

 

[G.T.]

That hinges on whether or not you get caught.

I do see your point, though, if that happens.

No, it hinged on your brain even allowing for the RISK of getting caught in then1st place. Vigilante justice is immoral because youre risking the loss of yourself to your family - causing compounded harm to their lives and stability.

In a perfect world though....id kill a pedophile every fcking time.

 

[G.T.]

I have a particular dislike for a poster here who is always attempting to argue against age of consent laws, argue against protecting children from sex, argued that it is a natural/beautiful thing for the duggar to molest his sister, and argued that banning child porn increases rape instances and so it shouldnt be banned.

There is nothing more to need to know about this individual - its history.

 

[Josf]

"Long story short, who else can honestly resonate how they really feel about these people who rape, molest, abuse, and murder others?"

As with most accusations the most competitive idea is this:

"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

That idea drives the idea of avoiding (if possible) the phenomenon known as "knee jerk reaction," or "mob rule," or "condemnation before investigation," or "false and misleading accusations," or any other phenomenon where you place yourself in the shoes of the one who is accused of any wrongdoing whatsoever.

Most people, with almost no exceptions, consider my viewpoints to be worth-less, but here is a very good example of a competitive viewpoint that is offered to you in this specific situation.

If you are falsely accused of child molestation, or worse, such as serial child molestation, or worse, such as pedophile human trafficking for profit as you feed children to devil worshipers who routinely torture and murder babies, toddlers, children, teenagers, and sometimes adults who are able to defend themselves more effectively, then you could be found guilty based upon a simple accusation charged to you by someone who may actually be guilt of said crimes.

Then you go to prison.

If you go to prison on a child molestation conviction, even if you are falsely accused, you won't last long in prison. If that is not true, then ask around, ask people in prison, and get back to me and let me know that I've been given false information concerning what happens to child molesters in prison.

Rule of law, which is no longer a process used in the (false) Federation known as U.S.A. (LLC), demands that no one is above the law, not even congressmen.

If it turns out that said congressmen are child molesters, and worse, and they claim that they are above the law, then how does that set with your current dilemma concerning right and wrong in reaction to clear and present dangers to children alive today, right now?



The crime of consuming posterity, actually consuming children, in time and place, is the one crime that no one tolerates; with a few exceptions to the rule. Criminals who take over governments, as a rule, give themselves permission to consume children on a regular basis, and that is the one thing they rarely do out in the open.

http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/death/death.html

True rule of law protects criminals as well as victims, but not in the sense that criminals are protected from prosecution, the idea of rule of law protects criminals because rule of law makes it much too costly for any criminal to even think about injuring anyone, let alone massive numbers of innocent children burned alive in churches, just for fun, or just to prove a point.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Would say rule of law protects criminals and avenges victims. A law against murder didn't protect the victim did it?

 

[G.T.]

Would say rule of law protects criminals and avenges victims. A law against murder didn't protect the victim did it?

No, it protects potential victims by the % of might be murderers who are deterred by the consequence. Obviously.

 

[Josf]

Thank you. Not only does the idea, practice, and use (trial and error leading to higher quality and lower cost), of rule of law deter the criminal who is pre-meditating - with malice aforethought - a specific crime, the current victim, once accurately identified as one, is inculpatory evidence useful in setting in motion rule of law, so as to accurately identify the criminal, and put the criminal on trial, whereby the idea (rule of law) is to find the truth, not cover it up, and then the criminal, if found guilty, is dealt with according to what the whole country of people (in a trial jury) consider to be the right thing to do with said criminal.

That is the idea, and the whole country speaks through the jurists. There is no clearer case of the wisdom of doing so, no clearer case of rule of law as the right thing to do, than cases where posterity is being consumed by guilty criminals who consume children under the color of law.

What are the chances that 12 randomly selected people from the area where the crime occurred are going to claim that child torture and child murder is perfectly acceptable in their area? That is the point about prison life. Child molestation is a crime according to criminals. The only ones that claim that child molestation is not a crime are the criminals who take over governments as they cover up their own child molesters, and that includes the governments known as (false) religions.

 

[G.T.]

Thank you. Not only does the idea, practice, and use (trial and error leading to higher quality and lower cost), of rule of law deter the criminal who is pre-meditating - with malice aforethought - a specific crime, the current victim, once accurately identified as one, is inculpatory evidence useful in setting in motion rule of law, so as to accurately identify the criminal, and put the criminal on trial, whereby the idea (rule of law) is to find the truth, not cover it up, and then the criminal, if found guilty, is dealt with according to what the whole country of people (in a trial jury) consider to be the right thing to do with said criminal.

That is the idea, and the whole country speaks through the jurists. There is no clearer case of the wisdom of doing so, no clearer case of rule of law as the right thing to do, than cases where posterity is being consumed by guilt criminals who consume children under the color of law.

What are the chances that 12 randomly selected people from the area where the crime occurred are going to claim that child torture and child murder is perfectly acceptable in their area? That is the point about prison life. Child molestation is a crime according to criminals. The only ones that claim that child molestation is not a crime are the criminals who take over governments as they cover up their own child molesters, and that includes the governments known as (false) religions.

And those who feel children can consent to sex with adults should be executed - put down like dogs.

 

[Josf]

"And those who feel children can consent to sex with adults should be executed - put down like dogs."

I do not agree, but I've been in a jury trial, and I have some experience on how rule of law does work, despite all the falsehood spewed forth by so many people, including judges, lawyers, politicians, and religious people. When push comes to shove, when it is either save the innocent children, or "injure" the child molesters, there are few, almost none, people ON A JURY who are willing to confess that they favor the child molester's side of things, and they judge in favor of the child molester, and thereby add to the injury done tot he child.

Note:


Focus of attention is not focused on the school where accusations of tunnels were claimed by accusers.

In rule of law, according to the common law, an accuser is afforded access to the same rule of law afforded to everyone, including children. If the local Sheriff is on the take, protecting a child molester, or if the Sheriff is a child molester, then rule of law breaks down at the point at which the accusation is censored by the Sheriff. If rule of law works, then the Sheriff moves due process to the point where 25 people are randomly selected from the local area where the accusation of an alleged crime has occurred. Now you have 25 people, moms, dads, single parents, professional working people, business owners, and not likely many fellow child molesters, but one may be in this group of 25, and these 25 people represent the accuser ONLY. The job of these 25 randomly selected people is to find all the facts they want to find, and they have the power of rule of law behind them, to get any records they want from anyone, anytime, especially from anyone claiming that their records are secret, such as a secret tunnel in a room. So the 25 people can investigate the school themselves. But their job is only to pass, or fail, the accusation based upon reason, facts, and moral integrity.

So a presentment is written by the 25 people, and the accused is put on his, or her, trial by jury, if the 25 find good cause to move the accusation to a trial jury. No one is found guilty at that time. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty at that time. The accuser is thereby absolved of guilt for false accusation because the 25 people took up the matter for the purpose of justifying the accusation on the merits (the facts) of the case. The 25 are now absolved of guilt for false accusation. The 25 are NOT absolved of guilt if it turns out that the accusation was true and they did not act accordingly. What are the chances that all 25 randomly picked people are also child molesters and so they all consider the accusation to be a waste of time and effort?

Note:


Either there are no victims since there are no convictions whenever someone in "government" is accused, or the criminals (child molesters) took over government.

"And those who feel children can consent to sex with adults should be executed - put down like dogs."

If a jury sentences a child molester to prison, the prisoners deal with the child molester. That is why the child molesters are so fond of taking over governments, so that the child molesters never get convicted.

 

[xdangerousxdavex]

I felt myself like this when I just gave up eating meat, I felt hatred of all the mankind. But it was about 5 years ago and these feelings had been lasting for about half of a year.

 

[Josf]

"I felt myself like this when I just gave up eating meat, I felt hatred of all the mankind."

Who ever said anything about "hatred of all the mankind"?

Walking in on someone doing horrible injury to your own kin folk has obvious natural effects to someone who is naturally effected by such things with or without having just eaten meat.

How about other possible side affects of other possible naturally occurring processes that may contribute to increases or decreases in natural effects resulting from walking in on someone ever so busy working feverishly to injure someone loved by someone?

1. Just before discovering a criminal busy at work perpetrating unspeakable crimes to someone I love I ate a ham sandwich with barbeque sauce made from high fructose corn syrup.

2. Just before discovering a criminal busy at work perpetrating unspeakable crimes to someone I love I had been the victim of a very similar crime done to me by the very same criminal.

If the point concerns a state of mind resulting from witnessing unspeakable crimes done to children, then that may actually be the point worth discussing, or not.

If the point is to change the subject to affects of general states of mind of people as a result of eating meat, then that is another point. If the claim is that everyone who eats meat is someone who will suffer murderous rage constantly, or constantly feel hatred of all mankind, then that claim might be worth looking into, if it were true. If some people just can't live another day without torturing children, my guess is that the cause is not eating meat, as the cause is more likely to be an unnatural condition known as necrophilia, or also known as narcissism, also known as a someone who is diagnosed as a sociopath, or psychopath. People caring nothing about defending children against wild animals, who eat meat, or wild humans who have been known to eat children, or wild humans who are clinically criminals who rape, torture, murder, and mass murder, including rape, torture, murder, and mass murder of children, may want to eat some meat once in awhile if they may want to care enough about children to want to defend them against those who harm them.

Or not.

 

[JoeMoma]

WWMD, What would (Thomas) Magnum do?

 

[JoeMoma]

WWDD? What would Data do?

 

[Bush92]

Never. The violence I felt and acted upon was during my military experience in the combat zone. Otherwise, I have wished for the worst for some of the sicko criminals that have been in the news.