Cable Forum

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Lifestyle (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=22)
-   -   Which person is worse? (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33710291)

Dude111 07-08-2021 18:43
The one who believes that their evil acts are good,or 1 who knows their being evil?

I recently watched a vid that compared two different types of evil characters. It discussed the villains who know they are evil,but act evil anyway for the sake of it,vs. the villains who actually believe that their evil acts are good and they are good people for doing them. It led to raise this question.

Which type of evil person is worse? One who knows they are being evil but do it anyway,or one who is convinced they are being good by doing evil things?

I know this is an interesting question,but any thoughts?

RichardCoulter 07-08-2021 19:34
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude111 (Post 36088904)
The one who believes that their evil acts are good,or 1 who knows their being evil?

I recently watched a vid that compared two different types of evil characters. It discussed the villains who know they are evil,but act evil anyway for the sake of it,vs. the villains who actually believe that their evil acts are good and they are good people for doing them. It led to raise this question.

Which type of evil person is worse? One who knows they are being evil but do it anyway,or one who is convinced they are being good by doing evil things?

I know this is an interesting question,but any thoughts?
It is an interesting question. I believe that after we leave this physical existence that there will be compensation and retribution for all good and evil deeds done whilst we are in this realm.

If someone has done bad things on purpose, it's fairly simple for the first example. But what if, say, someone murders someone whilst mentally ill?

A disability should never be punished as it won't have been done on purpose (but the public would need to be protected from them). They may not have even known that they were doing it or were suffering from hallucinations or delusions.

I personally think that various of our Prime Ministers have done terrible things, but if they genuinely believed that it was the right thing to do for the greater good then they won't face retribution (but will possibly be given education though).

So, in answer to your question, the first example is definitely the worst.

admars 07-08-2021 19:38
Re: Which person is worse?
 
fantasy, or real life?

fantasy, it's like comparing say Joker (who sometimes is killing with "good" reason but is generally unstable and likes chaos) to Dexter (although he knows he's bad, but "has to kill" so it's damage control who he targets ;) ).

In real life you have say Westboro Baptist Church, aka The Most Hated Family in America, who knowingly do horrible thing, but justify them by saying they're preaching the word of god
Vs the murderers etc we hear about on the news.

hmnn it comes down to point of view, ppl not in westboro baptists church could say they're just bad people so no different to the bad bad ppl

Hugh 07-08-2021 22:34
Re: Which person is worse?
 
I look at it from the victims’ viewpoint - if something evil is done to you, you don’t care if it was done out of enjoyment (evil person) or for what they believe are good reasons (good(?) person); to the victim, they are both equally as bad.

RichardCoulter 08-08-2021 01:50
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36088934)
I look at it from the victims’ viewpoint - if something evil is done to you, you don’t care if it was done out of enjoyment (evil person) or for what they believe are good reasons (good(?) person); to the victim, they are both equally as bad.
Yes, there may well be different viewpoints from the various people in the scenario.

I was speaking as an observer, but the victim is likely to hold a viewpoint that is tainted by anger, fear or resentment etc.

This is why decisions (on this Earth) in civilised countries take into account victim statements, but the final decision as to whether someone had diminished responsibility or was simply being evil and what action should be taken rests with people independent of the situation.

The Yorkshire Ripper was deemed by experts to have killed due to diminished responsibility and, therefore, by default, was not evil, but i'm sure that the victims and their families wouldn't have cared about this (it wouldn't be reasonable to expect them to be impartial and reasonable in the circumstances) and they would have wanted him to be severely punished.

The irony is that had he been deemed to have done something out of badness, there would have been more of a chance that he wouldn't have spent his last years locked up.

Carth 08-08-2021 11:20
Re: Which person is worse?
 
In a worldwide sense it depends on where you are, the religion, and cultural beliefs/practices.

Kill and eat a dog in much of the western world and you're in trouble . .

People are still 'executed' by stoning in some countries . . and the crime they've committed can be no crime at all in others.

In wars, there are thousands/millions killed yet both sides believe they're in the right . . . with God on their side.

RichardCoulter 08-08-2021 22:22
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Very good points.

If a 17 year old lad has sex with his 15 year old girlfriend in the UK he's (incorrectly) labelled a paedophile.

In some American states this would be totally legal; in Mexico (as long as there are no complaints) it would be fine if she was 12!

Chris 08-08-2021 23:39
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Fun fact: only one of the three principal charges (“crimes against peace”) levelled against senior members of the Nazi Party after the war had any basis in pre-existing international treaties. The other two, namely “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” were in effect presented as self-evidently unacceptable behaviour. The ethical basis for this was Natural Law, a system developed by a medieval theologian called Thomas Aquinas.

At the conclusion of the Nuremberg Trials, 12 people were convicted of, and executed for, these crimes, and the concept of “war crimes” remains potent to this present day, regardless of whether or not there is a governing treaty in operation. Appealing to Natural Law might have been an expedient way of dealing with those who had set Europe alight but their legacy has been to elevate the concept of virtue ethics, particularly in international law. Thomas drew a primary precept from his ethical system, which is that good must be pursued and done and evil must be avoided. He believed that the system could work because humans are rational beings. In effect, there will always be enough rational people available to judge whether good or evil is being done in a particular situation.

In a virtue-ethics system the question of “who is more evil?” becomes a secondary concern. The system is very much focused on whether behaviour is virtuous or not, as rationally judged by those who govern the system, not on whether the perpetrator of an act believed their actions to be good or evil. To bring it back round to the Nazis (and therefore also prematurely to fulfil Godwin’s Law); Hitler and his closest circle undoubtedly believed that they had right on their side and that they were correcting historic injustices against their people. Yet they are arguably the best example of pure evil in recent human history. To argue whether they were less evil than someone who believed they were in the wrong but went ahead anyway seems to be missing the point somewhat.

TheDaddy 08-08-2021 23:57
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089017)
Very good points.

If a 17 year old lad has sex with his 15 year old girlfriend in the UK he's (incorrectly) labelled a paedophile.
No he isn't, he's labeled a sex offender, if his 'crime' is investigated at all

---------- Post added at 23:57 ---------- Previous post was at 23:49 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36089026)
Fun fact: only one of the three principal charges (“crimes against peace”) levelled against senior members of the Nazi Party after the war had any basis in pre-existing international treaties. The other two, namely “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” were in effect presented as self-evidently unacceptable behaviour. The ethical basis for this was Natural Law, a system developed by a medieval theologian called Thomas Aquinas.

At the conclusion of the Nuremberg Trials, 12 people were convicted of, and executed for, these crimes, and the concept of “war crimes” remains potent to this present day, regardless of whether or not there is a governing treaty in operation. Appealing to Natural Law might have been an expedient way of dealing with those who had set Europe alight but their legacy has been to elevate the concept of virtue ethics, particularly in international law. Thomas drew a primary precept from his ethical system, which is that good must be pursued and done and evil must be avoided. He believed that the system could work because humans are rational beings. In effect, there will always be enough rational people available to judge whether good or evil is being done in a particular situation.

In a virtue-ethics system the question of “who is more evil?” becomes a secondary concern. The system is very much focused on whether behaviour is virtuous or not, as rationally judged by those who govern the system, not on whether the perpetrator of an act believed their actions to be good or evil. To bring it back round to the Nazis (and therefore also prematurely to fulfil Godwin’s Law); Hitler and his closest circle undoubtedly believed that they had right on their side and that they were correcting historic injustices against their people. Yet they are arguably the best example of pure evil in recent human history. To argue whether they were less evil than someone who believed they were in the wrong but went ahead anyway seems to be missing the point somewhat.
Nuremberg was tainted for me by the deals done, it should have been above side deals for super powers considering the enormity of what happened. Interesting about Thomas Aquinas though, a name I'd not heard for decades

RichardCoulter 09-08-2021 08:22
Re: Which person is worse?
 
I actually meant labelled by the public, not as defined by law.

mrmistoffelees 09-08-2021 09:43
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36088912)
It is an interesting question. I believe that after we leave this physical existence that there will be compensation and retribution for all good and evil deeds done whilst we are in this realm.

If someone has done bad things on purpose, it's fairly simple for the first example. But what if, say, someone murders someone whilst mentally ill?

A disability should never be punished as it won't have been done on purpose (but the public would need to be protected from them). They may not have even known that they were doing it or were suffering from hallucinations or delusions.

I personally think that various of our Prime Ministers have done terrible things, but if they genuinely believed that it was the right thing to do for the greater good then they won't face retribution (but will possibly be given education though).

So, in answer to your question, the first example is definitely the worst.
So, just a couple of points on this.

1. Highly, highly unlikely (nearly impossible) that someone whose mental health played a direct part in someones death would result in a murder conviction. it would be manslaughter, or manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.

2. You're not punishing the disability, you're punishing the offence committed. having a disability does not give a get out of jail free card. If someone's disability/mental health presents such a threat to themselves or to society then you have to ask should these people be in general society??

Chris 09-08-2021 10:55
Re: Which person is worse?
 
No, they should not. If they were in control of their actions, they are a danger to society and their liberty must be removed from them for society’s safety. If they were not, then there is hard evidence that their diminished responsibility is a danger to society. The only difference is whether they are sent to jail following a conviction or sent to a secure hospital following a judge’s ruling.

mrmistoffelees 09-08-2021 11:00
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36089070)
No, they should not. If they were in control of their actions, they are a danger to society and their liberty must be removed from them for society’s safety. If they were not, then there is hard evidence that their diminished responsibility is a danger to society. The only difference is whether they are sent to jail following a conviction or sent to a secure hospital following a judge’s ruling.
Quite right...

TheDaddy 09-08-2021 12:12
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089047)
I actually meant labelled by the public, not as defined by law.
So did I, perhaps I just have a higher opinion of the public than you do

RichardCoulter 09-08-2021 15:54
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36089076)
So did I, perhaps I just have a higher opinion of the public than you do
I disagree, in my experience any sexual interest in those under 16 is labelled as paedophilia by most people whether it is or not. I think that this is partly because of ignorance of the subject matter and partly because the term paedophile makes the offence sound worse for effect.

Also, if you look on YouTube, there are lots of videos where people trying to pick up underage boys/girls are incorrectly referred to as paedophiles, sometimes by people who should know better.

---------- Post added at 15:54 ---------- Previous post was at 15:50 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36089070)
No, they should not. If they were in control of their actions, they are a danger to society and their liberty must be removed from them for society’s safety. If they were not, then there is hard evidence that their diminished responsibility is a danger to society. The only difference is whether they are sent to jail following a conviction or sent to a secure hospital following a judge’s ruling.
Totally agree. The former will usually do their time and get out, whereas the latter would go into a secure hospital and may never come out.

Hugh 09-08-2021 15:55
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Yes, because there’s nothing worse than those sexual predators who are trying to harm under-age children being given the wrong label…

RichardCoulter 09-08-2021 16:08
Re: Which person is worse?
 
How about someone who was compos mentis at the time of the offence, but subsequently became mentally incapacited before the offence came to light?

https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/...or-nine-years/

Was it right to imprison a man in his eighties to give the victims justice, or should it not have been done because someone who doesn't know what's happening won't know where they are or why, so won't be able to be rehabilitated (which is what our society says imprisonment is for)?

---------- Post added at 16:08 ---------- Previous post was at 16:05 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36089129)
Yes, because there’s nothing worse than those sexual predators who are trying to harm under-age children being given the wrong label…
It's just incorrect, like a burglar being referred to as a murderer when they are not.

joglynne 09-08-2021 16:22
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089127)
I disagree, in my experience any sexual interest in those under 16 is labelled as paedophilia by most people whether it is or not. I think that this is partly because of ignorance of the subject matter and partly because the term paedophile makes the offence sound worse for effect.

Also, if you look on YouTube, there are lots of videos where people trying to pick up underage boys/girls are incorrectly referred to as paedophiles, sometimes by people who should know better.

---------- Post added at 15:54 ---------- Previous post was at 15:50 ----------





Totally agree. The former will usually do their time and get out, whereas the latter would go into a secure hospital and may never come out.
Richard. What is your definition of a paedophile? In what way,or in what circumstances, could an adults "sexual interest in those under 16" be excused and described as acceptable?
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/pedophile

Have you any views on grooming or is that something that you also find to be an acceptable behaviour ?

Hugh 09-08-2021 16:23
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089133)
How about someone who was compos mentis at the time of the offence, but subsequently became mentally incapacited before the offence came to light?

https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/...or-nine-years/

Was it right to imprison a man in his eighties to give the victims justice, or should it not have been done because someone who doesn't know what's happening won't know where they are or why, so won't be able to be rehabilitated (which is what our society says imprisonment is for)?

---------- Post added at 16:08 ---------- Previous post was at 16:05 ----------



It's just incorrect, like a burglar being referred to as a murderer when they are not.
No, what’s "incorrect" is quibbling about the difference between ephebophilia and paedophilia, as all the children involved are under the age of consent.

It’s child abuse, no matter what age the child is.

mrmistoffelees 09-08-2021 16:27
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089133)
How about someone who was compos mentis at the time of the offence, but subsequently became mentally incapacited before the offence came to light?

https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/...or-nine-years/

Was it right to imprison a man in his eighties to give the victims justice, or should it not have been done because someone who doesn't know what's happening won't know where they are or why, so won't be able to be rehabilitated (which is what our society says imprisonment is for)?

---------- Post added at 16:08 ---------- Previous post was at 16:05 ----------



It's just incorrect, like a burglar being referred to as a murderer when they are not.

Hardly rocket science if they're fit to serve a normal custodial sentence they do, if they're not then they go to somewhere like Ashworth.

I'm perplexed as to why you think the onset of a mental health condition negates his prior criminal activities ?

RichardCoulter 09-08-2021 19:44
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by joglynne (Post 36089139)
Richard. What is your definition of a paedophile? In what way,or in what circumstances, could an adults "sexual interest in those under 16" be excused and described as acceptable?
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/pedophile

Have you any views on grooming or is that something that you also find to be an acceptable behaviour ?
A paedophile is someone with a sexual interest in pre pubescent children, but being a paedophile in itself is not against the law.

Where have you got the idea from that I find that child sex abuse is acceptable?

My contributions to the thread about (mainly) Asian men grooming gangs clearly demonstrate that I don't.

---------- Post added at 19:34 ---------- Previous post was at 19:20 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36089140)
No, what’s "incorrect" is quibbling about the difference between ephebophilia and paedophilia, as all the children involved are under the age of consent.

It’s child abuse, no matter what age the child is.
Correct, according to our culture & society, it's regarded as child sex abuse. However, in my example, the man concerned would not be a paedophile.

What if they ended up together and started a family of their own (I know of a family in this situation).

If people incorrectly labelled him as a paedophile and a family with toddlers lived next door, they are going to be needlessly concerned because of this sloppy use of the English language.

If someone in your home rang you to say that they had adopted a cat and you came home to find a horse in the house, I doubt that explaining it away by saying "oh well, they are both members of the animal kingdom" would wash!

---------- Post added at 19:44 ---------- Previous post was at 19:34 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089141)
Hardly rocket science if they're fit to serve a normal custodial sentence they do, if they're not then they go to somewhere like Ashworth.

I'm perplexed as to why you think the onset of a mental health condition negates his prior criminal activities ?
Your view was obviously shared by the judicial system and, no, I don't think that the onset of dementia negates past crimes.

I was just questioning the point of imprisoning him. Our society says that prison is a means of rehabilitation rather than punishment. As he's suffering from dementia, this won't be possible because he won't know what he did in the past, where he is or why he's there. All at great cost to the taxpayer.

The only thing I can think of is that a custodial sentence may give his victims a feeling of having achieved justice for what he did to them.

I believe that such acts are dealt with in the afterlife, so he wouldn't have got away with it, but do accept that some people believe it is the end when our soul/spirit leaves our physical body, so may wish to seek justice on this physical Earth.

mrmistoffelees 09-08-2021 19:47
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089155)
A paedophile is someone with a sexual interest in pre pubescent children, but being a paedophile in itself is not against the law.

Where have you got the idea from that I find that child sex abuse is acceptable?

My contributions to the thread about (mainly) Asian men grooming gangs clearly demonstrate that I don't.

---------- Post added at 19:34 ---------- Previous post was at 19:20 ----------



Correct, according to our culture & society, it's regarded as child sex abuse. However, in my example, the man concerned would not be a paedophile.

What if they ended up together and started a family of their own (I know of a family in this situation).

If people incorrectly labelled him as a paedophile and a family with toddlers lived next door, they are going to be needlessly concerned because of this sloppy use of the English language.

If someone in your home rang you to say that they had adopted a cat and you came home to find a horse in the house, I doubt that explaining it away by saying "oh well, they are both members of the animal kingdom" would wash!

---------- Post added at 19:44 ---------- Previous post was at 19:34 ----------



Your view was obviously shared by the judicial system and, no, I don't think that the onset of dementia negates past crimes.

I was just questioning the point of imprisoning him. Our society says that prison is a means of rehabilitation rather than punishment. As he's suffering from dementia, this won't be possible because he won't know what he did in the past, where he is or why he's there. All at great cost to the taxpayer.

The only thing I can think of is that a custodial sentence may give his victims a feeling of having achieved justice for what he did to them.
A suitable custodial sentence would be justice. Like I said before having a mental illness/health condition or the onset of mental illness/health condition isn’t a get out of jail free card

Hugh 09-08-2021 20:14
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089155)
A paedophile is someone with a sexual interest in pre pubescent children, but being a paedophile in itself is not against the law.

Where have you got the idea from that I find that child sex abuse is acceptable?

My contributions to the thread about (mainly) Asian men grooming gangs clearly demonstrate that I don't.

---------- Post added at 19:34 ---------- Previous post was at 19:20 ----------



Correct, according to our culture & society, it's regarded as child sex abuse. However, in my example, the man concerned would not be a paedophile.

What if they ended up together and started a family of their own (I know of a family in this situation).

If people incorrectly labelled him as a paedophile and a family with toddlers lived next door, they are going to be needlessly concerned because of this sloppy use of the English language.

If someone in your home rang you to say that they had adopted a cat and you came home to find a horse in the house, I doubt that explaining it away by saying "oh well, they are both members of the animal kingdom" would wash!

---------- Post added at 19:44 ---------- Previous post was at 19:34 ----------



Your view was obviously shared by the judicial system and, no, I don't think that the onset of dementia negates past crimes.

I was just questioning the point of imprisoning him. Our society says that prison is a means of rehabilitation rather than punishment. As he's suffering from dementia, this won't be possible because he won't know what he did in the past, where he is or why he's there. All at great cost to the taxpayer.

The only thing I can think of is that a custodial sentence may give his victims a feeling of having achieved justice for what he did to them.

I believe that such acts are dealt with in the afterlife, so he wouldn't have got away with it, but do accept that some people believe it is the end when our soul/spirit leaves our physical body, so may wish to seek justice on this physical Earth.
They could correctly label him as a child abuser, and your casuistry about which group of sex offenders someone who molested a child is in is rather strange…

RichardCoulter 09-08-2021 22:33
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36089166)
They could correctly label him as a child abuser, and your casuistry about which group of sex offenders someone who molested a child is in is rather strange…
They could label him a child abuser yes, as in this country, we deem someone to be a child until their 16th birthday, so that would be correct.

I've already explained why it's sloppy use of the English language to label someone incorrectly and the problems it causes.

It would be like someone prosecuted for grabbing a woman's breasts being labelled a rapist. He wouldn't be a rapist, a sex offender yes, but not a rapist.

---------- Post added at 22:33 ---------- Previous post was at 22:28 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089159)
A suitable custodial sentence would be justice. Like I said before having a mental illness/health condition or the onset of mental illness/health condition isn’t a get out of jail free card
Fair enough if that's your opinion. It just seems pointless to punish someone who doesn't know they are being punished (let's face it, prison is more about punishment than rehabilitation) at a vast cost to the taxpayer in an institution where there aren't enough places.

He probably thinks he's still in a hospital, but is taking a place that someone who would know they are being punished could be utilising.

I'd also say that life has punished him for his past deeds already by giving him dementia. I've had short periods where you don't know where you are, who you are or even what you are and it's absolutely terrifying.

Having this all the time must be intolerable, dementia is truly a cruel, cruel disease for both the sufferer and their loved ones.

mrmistoffelees 10-08-2021 11:30
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089204)
They could label him a child abuser yes, as in this country, we deem someone to be a child until their 16th birthday, so that would be correct.

I've already explained why it's sloppy use of the English language to label someone incorrectly and the problems it causes.

It would be like someone prosecuted for grabbing a woman's breasts being labelled a rapist. He wouldn't be a rapist, a sex offender yes, but not a rapist.

---------- Post added at 22:33 ---------- Previous post was at 22:28 ----------



Fair enough if that's your opinion. It just seems pointless to punish someone who doesn't know they are being punished (let's face it, prison is more about punishment than rehabilitation) at a vast cost to the taxpayer in an institution where there aren't enough places.

He probably thinks he's still in a hospital, but is taking a place that someone who would know they are being punished could be utilising.

I'd also say that life has punished him for his past deeds already by giving him dementia. I've had short periods where you don't know where you are, who you are or even what you are and it's absolutely terrifying.

Having this all the time must be intolerable, dementia is truly a cruel, cruel disease for both the sufferer and their loved ones.
So it's pointless to punish someone who committed a criminal offence because they now have a mental health condition? And you're worried about how they might feel?

Here's a thought, direct your compassion, focus & sympathies to those that deserve it. Those being the victims that suffered by his actions.

You're so desperate for those with disabilities to be treat equally, let's bang them up in a standard prison. No? thought not....

Your words are an utter disgrace and an insult to those who suffered.

tweetiepooh 10-08-2021 11:40
Re: Which person is worse?
 
If someone is such that they are unaware of their actions and are "a danger" or have committed a crime then they do need to be handled in an appropriate way. It's not just to punish/rehabilitate the offender but also to protect society.

SnoopZ 10-08-2021 12:05
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089250)
So it's pointless to punish someone who committed a criminal offence because they now have a mental health condition? And you're worried about how they might feel?

Here's a thought, direct your compassion, focus & sympathies to those that deserve it. Those being the victims that suffered by his actions.

You're so desperate for those with disabilities to be treat equally, let's bang them up in a standard prison. No? thought not....

Your words are an utter disgrace and an insult to those who suffered.
I couldn't agree more, Richard should be ashamed of himself, utterly shocking. :td:

RichardCoulter 10-08-2021 15:54
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 36089253)
If someone is such that they are unaware of their actions and are "a danger" or have committed a crime then they do need to be handled in an appropriate way. It's not just to punish/rehabilitate the offender but also to protect society.
Absolutely right.

---------- Post added at 15:48 ---------- Previous post was at 15:39 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089250)
So it's pointless to punish someone who committed a criminal offence because they now have a mental health condition? And you're worried about how they might feel?

Here's a thought, direct your compassion, focus & sympathies to those that deserve it. Those being the victims that suffered by his actions.

You're so desperate for those with disabilities to be treat equally, let's bang them up in a standard prison. No? thought not....

Your words are an utter disgrace and an insult to those who suffered.
I'm being pragmatic. What's the point in wasting public funds punishing someone who doesn't know they're being punished? They won't learn anything from it and, from their point of view with their diseased mind, it will be no different to them being kept in a hospital. Society won't get it's pound of flesh by way of revenge- he will have no idea what's happening to him.

Because there is such a shortage of prison spaces, it would be far better to use his place for someone who is aware that incarceration is a result of their crimes.

It's a shame that you've defaulted to your usual posting style, I was thinking that we were having a mature and calm debate. Don't forget that you have a 50% chance of developing dementia and you will be in exactly the same position as this offender- imprisoned in your own mind.

---------- Post added at 15:54 ---------- Previous post was at 15:48 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnoopZ (Post 36089257)
I couldn't agree more, Richard should be ashamed of himself, utterly shocking. :td:
It's more about being pragmatic. Nobody will gain from putting him in prison, but the taxpayer will lose out and someone (possibly a paedophile) who will appreciate the punishment being dished out will probably get a suspended sentence, tagged etc instead due to the shortage of spaces.

mrmistoffelees 10-08-2021 17:34
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089277)
Absolutely right.

---------- Post added at 15:48 ---------- Previous post was at 15:39 ----------



I'm being pragmatic. What's the point in wasting public funds punishing someone who doesn't know they're being punished? They won't learn anything from it and, from their point of view with their diseased mind, it will be no different to them being kept in a hospital. Society won't get it's pound of flesh by way of revenge- he will have no idea what's happening to him.

Because there is such a shortage of prison spaces, it would be far better to use his place for someone who is aware that incarceration is a result of their crimes.

It's a shame that you've defaulted to your usual posting style, I was thinking that we were having a mature and calm debate. Don't forget that you have a 50% chance of developing dementia and you will be in exactly the same position as this offender- imprisoned in your own mind.

---------- Post added at 15:54 ---------- Previous post was at 15:48 ----------



It's more about being pragmatic. Nobody will gain from putting him in prison, but the taxpayer will lose out and someone (possibly a paedophile) who will appreciate the punishment being dished out will probably get a suspended sentence, tagged etc instead due to the shortage of spaces.

Disability or not, you need to take a long, long hard look at yourself.

RichardCoulter 10-08-2021 19:50
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089293)
Disability or not, you need to take a long, long hard look at yourself.
No I don't, it's you that needs to do that.

mrmistoffelees 10-08-2021 21:31
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089316)
No I don't, it's you that needs to do that.
Funnily enough, I think you’ll find that the majority of people are in agreement with me.

Now, off you pop….

RichardCoulter 10-08-2021 22:20
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089333)
Funnily enough, I think you’ll find that the majority of people are in agreement with me.

Now, off you pop….
This is expected behaviour from an internet Troll.

They get off on harrasing those who they perceive as inferior or weaker than themselves. It gives those who feel powerless IRL an outlet for their dissatisfaction.

There are other vulnerable and minority groups on here, I wonder if you will go on to start following them around the forum with your juvenile & unpleasant comments, or of it only gives you a buzz to try and spoil the forum for people in my situation. Whose to know.

SnoopZ 10-08-2021 22:30
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089343)
This is expected behaviour from an internet Troll.

They get off on harrasing those who they perceive as inferior or weaker than themselves. It gives those who feel powerless IRL an outlet for their dissatisfaction.

There are other vulnerable and minority groups on here, I wonder if you will go on to start following them around the forum with your juvenile & unpleasant comments, or of it only gives you a buzz to try and spoil the forum for people in my situation. Whose to know.
What a load of Bo****cks, you should look in the mirror at yourself and take your blinkers off, what's next are you going to attack me and call me a troll because I agree with him and then the next person etc? :td:

RichardCoulter 10-08-2021 23:58
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnoopZ (Post 36089344)
What a load of Bo****cks, you should look in the mirror at yourself and take your blinkers off, what's next are you going to attack me and call me a troll because I agree with him and then the next person etc? :td:
I have no issue at all with people who disagree with the views of others, after all, debating, comparing views and sometimes changing the minds of others or having your own mind changed is what it's all about.

When it's done in such a rude, belittling and disrespectful way is when it ceases to be a debate and becomes trolling.

This is particularly relevant when the same behaviour has been present in a previous thread that got closed due to arguments instead of the subject being discussed.

It appears to me that this individual has purposely come into this thread to carry on what they could no longer do in the closed thread. Little of relevance to the topic(s) has been posted, just rudeness and criticism with no explanation at all. It's very disappointing to see such an interesting thread about a very serious subject being purposely derailed like this.

I don't think that you are a troll because you haven't been following me around the forum stirring things up and engaging in troll like behaviour.

Out of respect for the OP, I suggest that we now get back to the subjects in hand as I personally find it to be a very interesting topic.

---------- Post added at 23:58 ---------- Previous post was at 23:40 ----------

Coincidentally, it's been on this evenings news about the Prince Andrew allegations and this actually relates to a point I made earlier.

Which people are defined as children (and therefore whether engaging in sexual activity with them is appropriate or not) isn't absolute and varies by country and culture. It, therefore, follows that whether someone is a sex offender depends on their geographical location!

If the alleged offence of sex with an underage girl had of taken place on the UK, it wouldn't be an issue as (in this instance) the girl was over 16.

However, in the place where it is alleged to have taken place, because of differing definitions about what is or isn't appropriate, it becomes an issue.

I believe that the state where it is claimed the incident took place allows for sex with those aged 14 and above, with the proviso that the partner must be under 18.

Therefore, situations can and do arise where it's perfectly legal for a 14 year old girl to have sex with her 15 year old boyfriend but, as soon as he hits 18, all sexual activity must cease until she becomes 18 or over!

Hugh 11-08-2021 00:18
Re: Which person is worse?
 
You do seem to spend a lot of time and effort defending alleged sex offenders…

You defend Prince Andrew by giving an example that isn’t relevant (Andrew isn’t under 18).

TheDaddy 11-08-2021 01:24
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36089354)
You do seem to spend a lot of time and effort defending alleged sex offenders…

You defend Prince Andrew by giving an example that isn’t relevant (Andrew isn’t under 18).
And he claimed accusations had been made about certain GB News presenter masturbating in front of year 9's, which was far worse than the original tweet on twitter and when pulled up on his outrageous misrepresentation he doubles down and starts quoting the law :spin:

RichardCoulter 11-08-2021 02:00
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36089354)
You do seem to spend a lot of time and effort defending alleged sex offenders…

You defend Prince Andrew by giving an example that isn’t relevant (Andrew isn’t under 18).
Nope, don't know where you've got that idea from. I'm trying to show that whether an act is a sex offence or not isn't cut and dried. It depends where it's done.

As long as there are no complaints, it's acceptable to have sex with a 12 year old in Mexico*. Imagine if someone did that here! They'd be in serious trouble because it's worse to have sex with a non teenager.

* If Brtish citizens did this though they can be prosecuted by the UK.

Prince Andrew isn't under 18 no, that's why, if proved to be true, he will have committed an offence. If he had done it here it would have been fine from an age point of view (though there is the additional accusation of sex trafficking that wouldn't be).

---------- Post added at 01:44 ---------- Previous post was at 01:42 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36089356)
And he claimed accusations had been made about certain GB News presenter masturbating in front of year 9's, which was far worse than the original tweet on twitter and when pulled up on his outrageous misrepresentation he doubles down and starts quoting the law :spin:
That's correct, accusations of this nature were made. How many threads are you going to cross post this in?

To say you're supposed to be so shocked and outraged, you seem to be obsessed with what is now old news.

TheDaddy 11-08-2021 03:07
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089359)



That's correct, accusations of this nature were made. How many threads are you going to cross post this in?

To say you're supposed to be so shocked and outraged, you seem to be obsessed with what is now old news.
No accusations of that nature were made except by you, don't you understand the difference between saying a presenter was doing that in front of year nines and another year nine was doing that in front of other year nines? I am genuinely shocked you can't see the difference, grimey is lucky he just became a national joke because gossips like you misrepresenting what was said could have got him killed.

Perhaps instead of looking at it as being ganged up on look at it as can all these people be wrong, perhaps it's not us it's you after all

Russ 11-08-2021 07:02
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36089362)

Perhaps instead of looking at it as being ganged up on look at it as can all these people be wrong, perhaps it's not us it's you after all
:clap:

---------- Post added at 07:02 ---------- Previous post was at 06:53 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36088912)

A disability should never be punished as it won't have been done on purpose (but the public would need to be protected from them). They may not have even known that they were doing it or were suffering from hallucinations or delusions.
How about when someone tries to blame their awful actions on their disability?

Carth 11-08-2021 09:15
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089364)

How about when someone tries to blame their awful actions on their disability?

I'm expecting* at least one person strenuously denying that ever happens, followed by other people posting quite a few links to show it has.


*If I'm right it's because I'm clever, if I'm wrong it's because I'm an old fart who doesn't understand the question ;)

Maggy 11-08-2021 09:41
Re: Which person is worse?
 
As much as I am enjoying the to and fro I suspect this is a thread that's facing closure if everyone doesn't calm down and
avoid name calling.

mrmistoffelees 11-08-2021 09:47
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089343)
This is expected behaviour from an internet Troll.

They get off on harrasing those who they perceive as inferior or weaker than themselves. It gives those who feel powerless IRL an outlet for their dissatisfaction.

There are other vulnerable and minority groups on here, I wonder if you will go on to start following them around the forum with your juvenile & unpleasant comments, or of it only gives you a buzz to try and spoil the forum for people in my situation. Whose to know.

Sorry, just to clarify, are you accusing me of 'picking on you' because you have a disability?



1. I'm not picking on you because of your disability, I'm criticizing you heavily because of your toxic opinion.

2. Pretty sure you've been told by the mods about doing that before.

Russ 11-08-2021 10:51
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36089373)
I'm expecting* at least one person strenuously denying that ever happens, followed by other people posting quite a few links to show it has.


*If I'm right it's because I'm clever, if I'm wrong it's because I'm an old fart who doesn't understand the question ;)
I’d certainly be interested to hear the response.

RichardCoulter 11-08-2021 13:02
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36089362)
No accusations of that nature were made except by you, don't you understand the difference between saying a presenter was doing that in front of year nines and another year nine was doing that in front of other year nines? I am genuinely shocked you can't see the difference, grimey is lucky he just became a national joke because gossips like you misrepresenting what was said could have got him killed.

Perhaps instead of looking at it as being ganged up on look at it as can all these people be wrong, perhaps it's not us it's you after all
These accusations were made in the media and not by myself. You seem hung up about this for some inexplicable reason, but the post made it clear that in these allegations, he was of a similar age to the other children. As previously stated, however, I doubt that the parents would find it any more acceptable because of this.

I can only think of one reason why you repeatedly regurgitate this in thread after thread that has nothing to do with this allegation. After going through this on at least four previous occasions and, considering that it does not concern you in any way, there is rrally nothing further to add.

I acknowledge that my disability affects my cognitive skills and can affect my ability to express myself effectively. This is true of all neuro diverse people.

As a result of this, and because I believe that you are gaslighting me, the contents of this thread have been reviewed by a disability support worker. In addition, I sent a link to it to a close friend who volunteers for Childline.

Neither party believes that it is me that is at fault here.

I hope that you are enjoying the output of GB News.

---------- Post added at 13:02 ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089364)
:clap:

---------- Post added at 07:02 ---------- Previous post was at 06:53 ----------



How about when someone tries to blame their awful actions on their disability?
I'm sure that this has happened, sometimes legitimately, sometimes not (but I have no personal experience of this, so must rely on the medical experys).

The acts of the Yorkshire Ripper were caused by his mental health illnesses, so it can and does happen and is correct.

Russ 11-08-2021 13:09
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089405)
I'm sure that this has happened, sometimes legitimately, sometimes not (but I have no personal experience of this, so must rely on the medical experys).

The acts of the Yorkshire Ripper were caused by his mental health illnesses, so it can and does happen and is correct.
Here's the reason I specifically asked.

It's been noticed by some that my use of CF over the past 5/6 years has diminished. This is because I devoted a lot of my time to being part of a paedophile hunting group. Now I'm not interested in the discussion about whether they're a force for good or not (at least not in this thread) but I can tell you that in the 150 or so stings/cases I was involved with, I'd estimate 80% of the people caught claimed it was because they have ADHD, Aspergers, Autism, depression etc.

As a sufferer of ADHD and Aspergers myself that made my blood boil. I'm not disputing whether or not they had had any of the mentioned conditions. But their 'disability' was so often their go-to excuse for their behaviour.

Such disabilities are NEVER a legitimate reason for such behaviour.

RichardCoulter 11-08-2021 13:54
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36089380)
As much as I am enjoying the to and fro I suspect this is a thread that's facing closure if everyone doesn't calm down and
avoid name calling.
That's exactly what they want Maggy. I predict that a tiny number of familiar names will ignore you're warning and carry on until dude's thread is closed. Then they'll move onto another if they stay true to form.

They don't realise that derailing threads to the point where a moderator has no alternative but to close it bores the vast majority of members who click on a thread because it looks of interest. They think that they are being clever and look good, if they did but know it it's quite thd opposite.

---------- Post added at 13:33 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089382)
Sorry, just to clarify, are you accusing me of 'picking on you' because you have a disability?



1. I'm not picking on you because of your disability, I'm criticizing you heavily because of your toxic opinion.

2. Pretty sure you've been told by the mods about doing that before.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and to disagree with the opinions of others. However, the way that you have done this is not by debating the issues, but by blatant baiting and trolling.

You may feel smug that you have escaped disability up until now and that you can entertain yourself by running rings around neuro diverse people, but the majority of people will become disabled in their lifetime through accident, attack, disease or old age. If this doesn't affect you personally, then it's highly likely that it will affect one of your loved ones. As an example, it's predicted that about 50% of people will get cancer and that a similar number will get dementia.

How would you feel if one of your loved ones was affected by one of these conditions and someone were to follow them around the street making the sort of remarks that you have in thr manner that you have? Would you not think it wrong and that there life was challenging enough as it was?

If they had dementia and kept forgetting things and asking the same questions over and over and over again, would you start to publically criticise and belittle them and, if they became upset and complained, would you tell them that their illnessrs/disabilities were no excuse for their behaviour and attempt to gaslight an already vulnerable person into believing it was them that was the problem and any distress caused was entirely their own fault?

Have a think about what you're doing and do the right thing, you don't have to backtrack publicly on here if you're afraid of losing face have a quiet think about it on your own.

There's nothing to be ashamed of in making mistakes either. It takes a man to face up to them, let alone apologise for them and this is how we learn to become better people. I truly believe that it is this that is the meaning of life and why we come here on temporary visitation.

---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089407)
Here's the reason I specifically asked.

It's been noticed by some that my use of CF over the past 5/6 years has diminished. This is because I devoted a lot of my time to being part of a paedophile hunting group. Now I'm not interested in the discussion about whether they're a force for good or not (at least not in this thread) but I can tell you that in the 150 or so stings/cases I was involved with, I'd estimate 80% of the people caught claimed it was because they have ADHD, Aspergers, Autism, depression etc.

As a sufferer of ADHD and Aspergers myself that made my blood boil. I'm not disputing whether or not they had had any of the mentioned conditions. But their 'disability' was so often their go-to excuse for their behaviour.

Such disabilities are NEVER a legitimate reason for such behaviour.
I'd say it depends upon the person, the condition and it's severity.

Mental illnesses and disabilities can cloud a person's view of the world and what is right or wrong. Some sufferers know what they are doing, but don't fully appreciate the seriousness of their actions ie they could be treating it like a game, particularly if they see the world through the eyes of a child or have developmental problems.

Some adults feel inadequate compared to other adults and only feel confident with children that they can more easily relate to, whilst some simply view what we would call grooming as chatting to a friend like we used to when we were juveniles.

Add in, often unmet, adult sexuality to the mix and it's a recipe for disaster.

Some people may know exactly what they are doing and are attempting to use their condition as a smokescreen, but if any action is taken against them, mental health professionals will be assessing them to ascertain the correct position.

From what i've seen of these groups (and some are much more professional than others), the accused is usually asked if they have any mental or physical conditions, probably as part of the duty of care process. If they then go on to say that they have a mental illness/disability, the less professional groups start to say XYZ condition doesn't lead to a sexual attraction to children. The YouTube comments are then often filled with comments such as 'I have the same condition and I don't innapropriately speak to children online'.

I have some real life insight into this as a former member of our staff was seriously sexually abused by a man when he was a child. As is so often the case, his life fell apart as an adult due to various addictions and he confided all this with me. He is on the mend after receiving councilling and help to quit his substance addiction.

My point in sharing this is that someone else who had been abused as a child could go on to say that his addiction was his own fault and that the abuse that he'd suffered was being used as an excuse, their reason being that they hadn't turned to drugs.

Neither of these two situations are that simple for an unqualified person to assess.

Russ 11-08-2021 14:07
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089408)

I'd say it depends upon the person, the condition and it's severity.

Mental illnesses and disabilities can cloud a person's view of the world and what is right or wrong. Some sufferers know what they are doing, but don't fully appreciate the seriousness of their actions ie they could be treating it like a game, particularly if they see the world through the eyes of a child or have developmental problems.

Some adults feel inadequate compared to other adults and only feel confident with children that they can more easily relate to, whilst some simply view what we would call grooming as chatting to a friend like we used to when we were juveniles.

Add in, often unmet, adult sexuality to the mix and it's a recipe for disaster.

Some people may know exactly what they are doing and are attempting to use their condition as a smokescreen, but if any action is taken against them, mental health professionals will be assessing them to ascertain the correct position.

From what i've seen of these groups (and some are much more professional than others), the accused is usually asked if they have any mental or physical conditions, probably as part of the duty of care process. If they then go on to say that they have a mental illness/disability, the less professional groups start to say XYZ condition doesn't lead to child sex attraction. The YouTube comments are then often filled with comments such as 'I have the same condition and I don't innapropriately speak to children online'.
That is the biggest pile of brown-stuff I have ever seen you post.

You may have seen some clips online, I have witnessed 150+ cases live and in the flesh. I've read some of the vile chatlogs too.

Talking to and relating to kids is one thing but you know full well that's not what I'm talking about.

It's interesting in that each of the scenarios where the predators claim it's due to their "ADHD", or learning difficulties etc, during the chat they say such things to the decoy as "don't tell anyone about this, I'd get in trouble".

It is nothing to do with the "condition and its severity".

---------- Post added at 14:07 ---------- Previous post was at 14:04 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089408)
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and to disagree with the opinions of others. However, the way that you have done this is not by debating the issues, but by blatant baiting and trolling.
And people are entitled to believe your posts are also 'baiting and trolling'.

TheDaddy 11-08-2021 14:12
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089405)
These accusations were made in the media and not by myself. You seem hung up about this for some inexplicable reason, but the post made it clear that in these allegations, he was of a similar age to the other children. As previously stated, however, I doubt that the parents would find it any more acceptable because of this.

I can only think of one reason why you repeatedly regurgitate this in thread after thread that has nothing to do with this allegation. After going through this on at least four previous occasions and, considering that it does not concern you in any way, there is rrally nothing further to add.

I acknowledge that my disability affects my cognitive skills and can affect my ability to express myself effectively. This is true of all neuro diverse people.

As a result of this, and because I believe that you are gaslighting me, the contents of this thread have been reviewed by a disability support worker. In addition, I sent a link to it to a close friend who volunteers for Childline.

Neither party believes that it is me that is at fault here.

I hope that you are enjoying the output of GB News.
I think you'll find you were the only person to make this allegation and made no reference to him being of similar age in it either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter
There have been allegations that one of the presenters masturbated in front of year 9 children. He has threatened legal action over this.
The reason I've regurgitated as you say is because of your point blank refusal to accept what you've written is plain wrong and bang out of order and after reviewing my posting history it's not at least 4 previous occasions at all, we've discussed it in the original GB News thread and this one, mainly because I try to keep interactions with you to a bare minimum because I find you so unpleasant

RichardCoulter 11-08-2021 14:14
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089414)
That is the biggest pile of brown-stuff I have ever seen you post.

You may have seen some clips online, I have witnessed 150+ cases live and in the flesh. I've read some of the vile chatlogs too.

Talking to and relating to kids is one thing but you know full well that's not what I'm talking about.

It's interesting in that each of the scenarios where the predators claim it's due to their "ADHD", or learning difficulties etc, during the chat they say such things to the decoy as "don't tell anyone about this, I'd get in trouble".

It is nothing to do with the "condition and its severity".

---------- Post added at 14:07 ---------- Previous post was at 14:04 ----------



And people are entitled to believe your posts are also 'baiting and trolling'.
You have misunderstood. I'm talking about chats of a sexual nature.

As you will know yourself, mental health conditions do not necessarily equate to a lack of intelligence.

They may know what they are doing is wrong and take steps to try to not to get into trouble, but still not realise the seriousness or consequences of their actions.

There are some who believe that paedophilia is a mental illness in itself, it will be interesting to see the outcome of any research.

Russ 11-08-2021 14:20
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089418)
You have misunderstood. I'm talking about chats of a sexual nature.

As you will know yourself, mental health conditions do not necessarily equate to a lack of intelligence.

They may know what they are doing is wrong and take steps to try to not to get into trouble, but still not realise the seriousness or consequences of their actions.

There are some who believe that paedophilia is a mental illness in itself, it will be interesting to see the outcome of any research.
Probably best not to try to sound like an authority on a subject you have little to no knowledge of, especially when discussing it with someone who is vastly more experienced.

RichardCoulter 11-08-2021 14:32
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36089416)
I think you'll find you were the only person to make this allegation and made no reference to him being of similar age in it either.



The reason I've regurgitated as you say is because of your point blank refusal to accept what you've written is plain wrong and bang out of order and after reviewing my posting history it's not at least 4 previous occasions at all, we've discussed it in the original GB News thread and this one, mainly because I try to keep interactions with you to a bare minimum because I find you so unpleasant
This is simply not true, you have raised this repeatedly and the full facts of this allegation were made clear. We will have to agree to disagree if you believe otherwise.

I'm sorry that you feel this way. Can I ask you to put me on ignore for the benefit of all concerned? As it stands you are choosing to read posts that you claim to find so offensive, which is rather silly and counter productive.

This way you won't have to read what you regard to be unpleasant posts, I won't be exposed to your deeply unpleasant remarks whilst coping as best I can with my serious brain injury, others won't have to read your tedious interjections whilst topics are being discussed and it may well save the mods having to clean up threads etc.

Now, if only all of life's problems were as easy to resolve :D

---------- Post added at 14:32 ---------- Previous post was at 14:25 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089419)
Probably best not to try to sound like an authority on a subject you have little to no knowledge of, especially when discussing it with someone who is vastly more experienced.
I don't doubt that you have experience with these groups, but you have no idea what experience I have of the subject in any capacity. Most people choose not to disclose this for a wide variety of reasons.

Russ 11-08-2021 14:33
Re: Which person is worse?
 
You have not had any experience of being in a paedophile hunting team.

If you did then there’s no way you would have posted the above.

I’ll say it again. There is never any valid excuse of “neuro diversity” in these peoples’ actions.

RichardCoulter 11-08-2021 14:37
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089424)
You have not had any experience of being in a paedophile hunting team.
I haven't, but you don't know if I have or not. Assumptions are seldom true and never helpful ;)

That is your unqualified opinion and you are entitled to hold it, but I disagree with your assessment of the situation.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go as it's shortly my time to speak to my specialist. I've been experiencing pain and weird sensations the last couple of days and it concerns me.

Russ 11-08-2021 14:42
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089425)
I haven't, but you don't know if I have or not. Assumptions are seldom true and never helpful ;)
So my assumption was true then? Irony alert.

Enjoy your day.

TheDaddy 11-08-2021 14:52
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089420)
This is simply not true, you have raised this repeatedly and the full facts of this allegation were made clear. We will have to agree to disagree if you believe otherwise.
No we won't have to agree to disagree at all, my posting history is available for all to see simply by clicking my user name public profile

mrmistoffelees 11-08-2021 16:19
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089425)
I haven't, but you don't know if I have or not. Assumptions are seldom true and never helpful ;)

That is your unqualified opinion and you are entitled to hold it, but I disagree with your assessment of the situation.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go as it's shortly my time to speak to my specialist. I've been experiencing pain and weird sensations the last couple of days and it concerns me.

You mean the assumption you made where you assumed that 'i had escaped disability'

Please tell me what makes you think I don't suffer from a disability ?

Maggy 11-08-2021 17:02
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089408)
That's exactly what they want Maggy. I predict that a tiny number of familiar names will ignore you're warning and carry on until dude's thread is closed. Then they'll move onto another if they stay true to form.

They don't realise that derailing threads to the point where a moderator has no alternative but to close it bores the vast majority of members who click on a thread because it looks of interest. They think that they are being clever and look good, if they did but know it it's quite thd opposite.

---------- Post added at 13:33 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------



Everyone is entitled to their opinion and to disagree with the opinions of others. However, the way that you have done this is not by debating the issues, but by blatant baiting and trolling.

You may feel smug that you have escaped disability up until now and that you can entertain yourself by running rings around neuro diverse people, but the majority of people will become disabled in their lifetime through accident, attack, disease or old age. If this doesn't affect you personally, then it's highly likely that it will affect one of your loved ones. As an example, it's predicted that about 50% of people will get cancer and that a similar number will get dementia.

How would you feel if one of your loved ones was affected by one of these conditions and someone were to follow them around the street making the sort of remarks that you have in thr manner that you have? Would you not think it wrong and that there life was challenging enough as it was?

If they had dementia and kept forgetting things and asking the same questions over and over and over again, would you start to publically criticise and belittle them and, if they became upset and complained, would you tell them that their illnessrs/disabilities were no excuse for their behaviour and attempt to gaslight an already vulnerable person into believing it was them that was the problem and any distress caused was entirely their own fault?

Have a think about what you're doing and do the right thing, you don't have to backtrack publicly on here if you're afraid of losing face have a quiet think about it on your own.

There's nothing to be ashamed of in making mistakes either. It takes a man to face up to them, let alone apologise for them and this is how we learn to become better people. I truly believe that it is this that is the meaning of life and why we come here on temporary visitation.

---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------



I'd say it depends upon the person, the condition and it's severity.

Mental illnesses and disabilities can cloud a person's view of the world and what is right or wrong. Some sufferers know what they are doing, but don't fully appreciate the seriousness of their actions ie they could be treating it like a game, particularly if they see the world through the eyes of a child or have developmental problems.

Some adults feel inadequate compared to other adults and only feel confident with children that they can more easily relate to, whilst some simply view what we would call grooming as chatting to a friend like we used to when we were juveniles.

Add in, often unmet, adult sexuality to the mix and it's a recipe for disaster.

Some people may know exactly what they are doing and are attempting to use their condition as a smokescreen, but if any action is taken against them, mental health professionals will be assessing them to ascertain the correct position.

From what i've seen of these groups (and some are much more professional than others), the accused is usually asked if they have any mental or physical conditions, probably as part of the duty of care process. If they then go on to say that they have a mental illness/disability, the less professional groups start to say XYZ condition doesn't lead to a sexual attraction to children. The YouTube comments are then often filled with comments such as 'I have the same condition and I don't innapropriately speak to children online'.

I have some real life insight into this as a former member of our staff was seriously sexually abused by a man when he was a child. As is so often the case, his life fell apart as an adult due to various addictions and he confided all this with me. He is on the mend after receiving councilling and help to quit his substance addiction.

My point in sharing this is that someone else who had been abused as a child could go on to say that his addiction was his own fault and that the abuse that he'd suffered was being used as an excuse, their reason being that they hadn't turned to drugs.

Neither of these two situations are that simple for an unqualified person to assess.
It was your use of the word Troll which caused me to post that warning so you needn't think you are innocent in this

RichardCoulter 11-08-2021 23:47
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36089427)
No we won't have to agree to disagree at all, my posting history is available for all to see simply by clicking my user name public profile
Indeed it is.

---------- Post added at 23:21 ---------- Previous post was at 23:20 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089426)
So my assumption was true then? Irony alert.

Enjoy your day.
Thank you. It's been a rather strange day, but I feel a bit better now that i've spoken to my specialist.

---------- Post added at 23:23 ---------- Previous post was at 23:21 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089426)
So my assumption was true then? Irony alert.

Enjoy your day.
Thank you. It's been a rather strange day, but I feel a bit better now that I've spoken to my specialist. I had to take something and have only just woken up!!! I'm still very groggy, tired and feeling like i'm here but not here if you know what I mean. He's given me a sleeping tablet to take, so it won't be long before I'm back in bed.

Do you upload your stings? I'd be interested in seeing some. You can PM it to me if you don't want to post this publically.

---------- Post added at 23:34 ---------- Previous post was at 23:23 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36089440)
It was your use of the word Troll which caused me to post that warning so you needn't think you are innocent in this
This was my assessment of the situation. Because my brain injury affects my cognitive abilities and, as a result of this, I acknowledge that I can sometimes misinterpret things or express myself badly, I asked two people to independently assess the overall situation. One in an official capacity, my disability support worker and the other a friend who works for childline. Both agreed that it was trolling and one said that she thinks it's online bullying.

---------- Post added at 23:47 ---------- Previous post was at 23:34 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089436)
You mean the assumption you made where you assumed that 'i had escaped disability'

Please tell me what makes you think I don't suffer from a disability ?
I assume that people don't have a disability unless they choose to disclose this.

Please don't talk in riddles as it's difficult for me to understand and could be viewed as you trying to run rings around a severely disabled person.

If you are disabled, then you should know better. However, just because one person has a disability doesn't necessarily mean that they will understand and empathise with the disability of another. A wheelchair user, for example, won't automatically understand someone with mental incapacity issues, but they should at least try.

Also, being disabled oneself doesn't mean that you cannot be guilty of unlawfully discriminating against others on the grounds of disability. That would be like saying that a black man cannot be guilty of unlawful racism!

I remember when you first joined the forum and you weren't at all antagonistic or rude. I suspect that you've slipped into this as a form of defense because of the actions of the others that do this, it is easy to slip into without even realising it.

Russ 12-08-2021 07:33
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089465)

Do you upload your stings? I'd be interested in seeing some. You can PM it to me if you don't want to post this publically.
Trust me there are plenty, PLENTY of people out there who deliberately behave in an unpleasant manner and when they get called out on it, blame their ‘disability’.

mrmistoffelees 12-08-2021 10:00
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089465)
Indeed it is.

---------- Post added at 23:21 ---------- Previous post was at 23:20 ----------



Thank you. It's been a rather strange day, but I feel a bit better now that i've spoken to my specialist.

---------- Post added at 23:23 ---------- Previous post was at 23:21 ----------



Thank you. It's been a rather strange day, but I feel a bit better now that I've spoken to my specialist. I had to take something and have only just woken up!!! I'm still very groggy, tired and feeling like i'm here but not here if you know what I mean. He's given me a sleeping tablet to take, so it won't be long before I'm back in bed.

Do you upload your stings? I'd be interested in seeing some. You can PM it to me if you don't want to post this publically.

---------- Post added at 23:34 ---------- Previous post was at 23:23 ----------



This was my assessment of the situation. Because my brain injury affects my cognitive abilities and, as a result of this, I acknowledge that I can sometimes misinterpret things or express myself badly, I asked two people to independently assess the overall situation. One in an official capacity, my disability support worker and the other a friend who works for childline. Both agreed that it was trolling and one said that she thinks it's online bullying.

---------- Post added at 23:47 ---------- Previous post was at 23:34 ----------



I assume that people don't have a disability unless they choose to disclose this.

Please don't talk in riddles as it's difficult for me to understand and could be viewed as you trying to run rings around a severely disabled person.

If you are disabled, then you should know better. However, just because one person has a disability doesn't necessarily mean that they will understand and empathise with the disability of another. A wheelchair user, for example, won't automatically understand someone with mental incapacity issues, but they should at least try.

Also, being disabled oneself doesn't mean that you cannot be guilty of unlawfully discriminating against others on the grounds of disability. That would be like saying that a black man cannot be guilty of unlawful racism!

I remember when you first joined the forum and you weren't at all antagonistic or rude. I suspect that you've slipped into this as a form of defense because of the actions of the others that do this, it is easy to slip into without even realising it.


It's very odd how you can write articulately, but as soon as you don't like something being said to you you whip out the 'i have a disability' card. As if you didn't understand what i said.

Now, go and seek affirmation from your support worker, I'm sure they will tell you again, that you did, said absolutely nothing wrong & It's certainly everyone else's fault

I'm not going to waste any more of my time on a weapons grade helmet such as yourself.

admars 12-08-2021 10:19
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Back on topic, this story seems relevant:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1899674.html

Quote:
Man killed fellow prisoner who raped his sister after chance meeting behind bars
Quote:
A prisoner in Washington state has been jailed for almost 25 years after unexpectedly being placed in the same cell as the man who raped his younger sister and beating him to death.
So, they knew what they were doing, an act of revenge, they knew they were doing a bad thing, but as we know, sometimes these attacks go "unseen", as they're deemed "fair game". Some might say that's a "good" evil act?


it does seem too much of a coincidence for this to happen by (bad) luck.

TheDaddy 12-08-2021 10:58
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by admars (Post 36089529)
Back on topic, this story seems relevant:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1899674.html




So, they knew what they were doing, an act of revenge, they knew they were doing a bad thing, but as we know, sometimes these attacks go "unseen", as they're deemed "fair game". Some might say that's a "good" evil act?


it does seem too much of a coincidence for this to happen by (bad) luck.
I don't have much problem with trial by combat tbh

RichardCoulter 12-08-2021 11:32
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089493)
Trust me there are plenty, PLENTY of people out there who deliberately behave in an unpleasant manner and when they get called out on it, blame their ‘disability’.
Some dementia sufferers can become violent as a direct result of their condition, it would also be wrong to blame this on the individual instead of apportioning this to their condition.

Russ 12-08-2021 11:41
Re: Which person is worse?
 
So I’m guessing you missed where I said “plenty” and not “all”?

RichardCoulter 12-08-2021 12:05
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089522)
It's very odd how you can write articulately, but as soon as you don't like something being said to you you whip out the 'i have a disability' card. As if you didn't understand what i said.

Now, go and seek affirmation from your support worker, I'm sure they will tell you again, that you did, said absolutely nothing wrong & It's certainly everyone else's fault

I'm not going to waste any more of my time on a weapons grade helmet such as yourself.
You have no idea how my disability affects me, nor what accessibility aids that I use. Russ suffers from a variety of conditions but (to my knowledge) is able to write in a perfectly articulate fashion without any help.

This just goes to show how little you understand about the difficulties that those with mental & physical disabilities face. There's nothing wrong with that in itself, but you don't even try, in fact you go out of your way to make the lives of disabled people even harder than they already are.

Whilst I wouldn't wish dementia etc on you or anybody else, if this happens to you, I hope that you are met with a similar nasty arrogant attitude from those around you.

Best to put me and any other disabled members on ignore if you aren't able to discuss/debate matters with disabled/vulnerable people in a decent, respectful and adult manner.

Hopefully, the forthcoming online harms legislation will help to protect the disabled community from being subject to such unpleasant online behaviour.

---------- Post added at 11:56 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by admars (Post 36089529)
Back on topic, this story seems relevant:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1899674.html




So, they knew what they were doing, an act of revenge, they knew they were doing a bad thing, but as we know, sometimes these attacks go "unseen", as they're deemed "fair game". Some might say that's a "good" evil act?


it does seem too much of a coincidence for this to happen by (bad) luck.
Yes, it would be nice to get back to the subject under discussion rather than indulging those who crave hostility and discord from deliberately orchestrating arguments.

I have no doubt that what you say is correct and that a blind eye is taken when it suits.

My own opinion is that the due process of law should be applied. Society has decided that rape is unacceptable and that it should be punished in certain ways that doesn't include vigilantism.

I can understand why people feel aggrieved and want to exact personal revenge, but cannot support this behaviour.

A breakdown in law & order would be to the detriment of everyone in society.

---------- Post added at 12:05 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089541)
So I’m guessing you missed where I said “plenty” and not “all”?
I personally don't know of anybody that has done this, but on the balance of probabilities I accept that it's likely to have happened as people seek to avoid going to prison.

Ironically, the result of them doing this successfully could be that they end up being locked up for life to protect the public. Imprisonment would likely mean that they would be released after a period of time.

The thing is, medically untrained people aren't able to differentiate the difference, so it's best left to the experts who have trained over many years to be able to do so.

Russ 12-08-2021 12:17
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089543)

I personally don't know of anybody that has done this,
We all know of at least one person who does it.

Carth 12-08-2021 12:46
Re: Which person is worse?
 
The difference between medically trained and medically untrained people:

A spoilt, disruptive, attention seeking child/teenager with no respect for others, can be viewed by the untrained as 'a spoilt brat that needs a good slapping'

The medically trained expert however, would probably view them as a child/young adult with a mental disability that causes them to act this way, and the poor little lost souls need lots of care and support (and lawyers) to prevent them being classed as naughty.

Once the affected person grasps the idea that 'it isn't their fault', it gives them the excuse needed to carry on regardless, with the knowledge that there's an army of experts at hand to absolve them.

Just my thoughts on the matter, and it's quite possible I'm the only person in the world that thinks like this . . . probably my fault due to refusing to get into the box society assigned to me. ;)

mrmistoffelees 12-08-2021 13:12
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36089543)
You have no idea how my disability affects me, nor what accessibility aids that I use. Russ suffers from a variety of conditions but (to my knowledge) is able to write in a perfectly articulate fashion without any help.

This just goes to show how little you understand about the difficulties that those with mental & physical disabilities face. There's nothing wrong with that in itself, but you don't even try, in fact you go out of your way to make the lives of disabled people even harder than they already are.

Whilst I wouldn't wish dementia etc on you or anybody else, if this happens to you, I hope that you are met with a similar nasty arrogant attitude from those around you.

Best to put me and any other disabled members on ignore if you aren't able to discuss/debate matters with disabled/vulnerable people in a decent, respectful and adult manner.

Hopefully, the forthcoming online harms legislation will help to protect the disabled community from being subject to such unpleasant online behaviour.

---------- Post added at 11:56 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------



Yes, it would be nice to get back to the subject under discussion rather than indulging those who crave hostility and discord from deliberately orchestrating arguments.

I have no doubt that what you say is correct and that a blind eye is taken when it suits.

My own opinion is that the due process of law should be applied. Society has decided that rape is unacceptable and that it should be punished in certain ways that doesn't include vigilantism.

I can understand why people feel aggrieved and want to exact personal revenge, but cannot support this behaviour.

A breakdown in law & order would be to the detriment of everyone in society.

---------- Post added at 12:05 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------



I personally don't know of anybody that has done this, but on the balance of probabilities I accept that it's likely to have happened as people seek to avoid going to prison.

Ironically, the result of them doing this successfully could be that they end up being locked up for life to protect the public. Imprisonment would likely mean that they would be released after a period of time.

The thing is, medically untrained people aren't able to differentiate the difference, so it's best left to the experts who have trained over many years to be able to do so.
If you want to make a complaint about my perceived behaviour then do it, but either do it or shut up with the poorly veiled threats. You odious little fool.

RichardCoulter 12-08-2021 14:39
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36089565)
If you want to make a complaint about my perceived behaviour then do it, but either do it or shut up with the poorly veiled threats. You odious little fool.
No threats have been made, veiled or otherwise.

Your statement that you were to cease dialogue with me didn't last long, this confirms my suspicion that you get some sort of perverted kick out of upsetting others.

If you don't enjoy doing this, then stop, for your own sake. It won't do you any good in this life or the next.

There may well be reasons why you're dissatisfied with your life to the point of internalised anger, resentment or bitterness. If so, i'm sorry that this has caused you to become like this because it's a crying shame that you are wasting the time that you have left instead of enjoying the wonder that this world has to offer.

I and other people in my disability support group have actually discussed this and the general consensus was that it is so easy for people to become bitter & twisted or even consider suicide as an option when their life doesn't turn out as expected.

We all agreed that it is helpful to take on board that there is always somebody out there in a worse position than yourself, always. The best thing to do with your remaining years is to put whatever it is that's eating away at you behind. If it's another person that's wronged you, the only person that will suffer from this will be yourself, they won't know or care.

We are all here for a very short time and, as we get older, we appreciate this more and more. I believe that the whole point/meaning of life is to learn and grow as people/souls/spirits whatever you want to call it. We will all make mistakes along the way, but that doesn't matter as long as we learn from making them.

If you would like to talk in private, you can always PM me and I will do my best to help or point you in the direction of someone who can.

People are probably wondering why I would offer the hand of friendship to someone who has gone out of their way to be as unpleasant as possible, well the answer to that is I believe in 'love the sinner, hate the sin'.

All the best and I hope, for your own sake and nobody else's, that you can take some quiet time at some point to have a think about things and start to enjoy your life in a more positive way.

---------- Post added at 14:39 ---------- Previous post was at 14:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36089548)
We all know of at least one person who does it.
I don't know anybody like this. As you probably know, disabled people are more likely to play down their disability than anything else.

Russ 12-08-2021 14:43
Re: Which person is worse?
 
#MassiveIronyAlert

RichardCoulter 12-08-2021 14:44
Re: Which person is worse?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36089554)
The difference between medically trained and medically untrained people:

A spoilt, disruptive, attention seeking child/teenager with no respect for others, can be viewed by the untrained as 'a spoilt brat that needs a good slapping'

The medically trained expert however, would probably view them as a child/young adult with a mental disability that causes them to act this way, and the poor little lost souls need lots of care and support (and lawyers) to prevent them being classed as naughty.

Once the affected person grasps the idea that 'it isn't their fault', it gives them the excuse needed to carry on regardless, with the knowledge that there's an army of experts at hand to absolve them.

Just my thoughts on the matter, and it's quite possible I'm the only person in the world that thinks like this . . . probably my fault due to refusing to get into the box society assigned to me. ;)
A lot of parents of neuro diverse children get very upset at attitudes like this.

They say that when they go outside with their children, some less enlightened people glare, tut or even make comments along the lines of bad parenting, naughty children etc. Whilst this might be true in some cases, it's much more likely to be the result of autism ADHD etc.

If I come across this I just ignore it because I don't know the causes of the behaviour and don't wish to make a difficult situation even worse. #bekind

#therebutforthegraceofgodwalki


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:02.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum