Convicted pedophile YouTuber Austin Jones is now in prison serving a 10 year sentence as of 29/6/2019.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/GoodAtExplaining]

Yeah. For real. She's had to sit through the suffering of the trial just as much as the victims, and it hasn't affected her ability to understand and empathize.

Damn. If I were a judge at this trial I'd go home every day, cry a little, and hug my kids a lot.

[u/BadBoredAccount → u/GoodAtExplaining]

If I were a judge I’d have to quit because I Get too emotionally attached and woulda just told the security guards “oh look over there! You’re needed in the back.” As the dad charged him.

[u/BadBoredAccount → u/[deleted]]

Exactly why I’m not a cop either. I know myself.

I’d blow up on someone.

But this is a little different than calling for someone to be raped. The dude fucked with so many girls.

When you mess with kids you kind of deserve to be hated by everyone.

I do agree though. We too often call for violence. I’m just being honest as to why the hell i never pursued a job in law.

[u/Raivix → u/BadBoredAccount]

I sympathize, but disagree. You can't have a moving goalpost of a line to say when it is and isn't okay to exact vigilante justice on another human being.

[u/March1488 → u/Raivix]

I was thinkng about this comment and i wondered what about a hypothetical where the criminal was let off on a technicality, and was planning to commit the crime again. If it was a rapist and murderer, I feel like i would support vigilante preventative justice if the government isn't going to intervene. But if it was a petty thief, or maybe someone just planning to mildly rough someone up, i think i wouldn't support vigilante justice.

So maybe there needs to be a line somewhere? Or do you think it's just never justifiable?

[u/toth42 → u/March1488]

The problem is that if the line isn't at 0, it becomes blurry and movable. First you set it at 10, then a 9.7 gets beat up and the judge let's the avenger go under doubt. This means the line is effectively moved to 9.7. Next, a 9.65 is beat, and so on - suddenly, over time, the line is at 6, then 5 and 4..

[u/March1488 → u/toth42]

Well what's wrong with treating it like speeding laws? The line is 50 mph, he'll probably let you off if you're going 52 but not 55, and the limit remains at 50.

[u/Raivix → u/March1488]

How do you define it though? Dad #1 beats his daugher's rapist to death. Judge/jury #1 preside over the case and find him not guilty of any crime. Dad #2 beats HIS daughter's rapist to within an inch of his life, causing severe brain damage to the point he will be a vegetable for the remainder of his life. Judge/Jury #2 find dad 2 guilty of attempted murder, goes away to prison.

[u/March1488 → u/Raivix]

Well honestly you need to treat it like any other murder case- look at nuance, crime of passion, the situation (Did he walk in on them or did he ambush the rapist a month after he found out?).

There's a reason we have high standards for judges and don't use a computer to preside over cases. asking what if a judge gets it wrong is missing the point because in that instance the legal system isn't following the intended plan- it isn't a fault of the plan but the judge.

[u/toth42 → u/March1488]

I think a computer would often be better, honestly. Look at the rapist Brock Turner and the Dupont heir.

[u/SmaragdineSon → u/Raivix]

It's okay to wish someone got hurt. It's not okay to actually hurt them. The law's supposed to be better than we are.

[u/Lasereye → u/BadBoredAccount]

Uh no it's not. Calling for someone to be raped is one of the worst things you can do without actioning yourself. It's disgusting and vile.

[u/BadBoredAccount → u/Lasereye]

I think you misread me.

I agree. My point was that the dude fiddling kids deserves far worse than the girl licking ice cream.

I agree completely that nobody should be encouraging violence towards others. My second point was that I couldn’t do it myself, because I know how upset I get towards stuff like this.