9
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
9 points (100.0% liked)
Aotearoa / New Zealand
1653 readers
23 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general
- For politics , please use !politics@lemmy.nz
- Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, and non-NZ topics belong in !offtopic@lemmy.nz
- If you need help using Lemmy.nz, go to !support@lemmy.nz
- NZ regional and special interest communities
Rules:
FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom
Banner image by Bernard Spragg
Got an idea for next month's banner?
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is a tough one; clearly what these men did as boys was reprehensible. I agree with them that there would very likely be significant issues if their names were released.
However, this doesn't address the ongoing harm that the victims are experiencing.
As I've said before, we need to as a society decide; are we a punish and detain society or are we a rehabilitate and educate society? It is cases like these that really test the conviction of these views.
Punishing these men further; will not alleviate the suffering that they have caused. Name suppression for these men will reduce the punishment that they feel, and to be fair they are unlikely to offend again, so further punishment doesn't make society safer.
How then do we make things better for the victims; given that punishing the men further will not change things for them.
How about we ask the victims instead of speaking to their suffering out of your ass?
Oh wait. We did ask. And they said LIFTING NAME SUPPRESSION WILL ALLEVIATE OUR SUFFERING. Their message was absolutely crystal clear and they waived their own name suppression before they opposed the offenders.
I give no fucks about these two rapists.
The desire for revenge is not a healthy one. As I posited above.
I don't think revenge will alleviate the suffering of the victims; revenge is not the panacea that those seeking it think it will be; and I am saddened that they think it will fix anything for them. This is exactly what I was posing when I said the above; how do we make things better for the victims?
You assume what the victims think and are assuming what is good for them. Speaking to what is good and healthy for them is incredibly condescending.
You ask how to make things better for victims. The victims directly said what would alleviate their suffering. Why do you not believe them? How would you know better?
The victims made it crystal clear what they wanted. And they are now legally prohibited from speaking about their experiences, permanently, under threat of prosecution.
How does this result help them in any way? Now they have to carry it with them in silence enforced by the legal system.
The only lasting consequences are being borne by the victims.
This result is disgusting.
To speak to the wider issue though.
The strawman question of punish and detain or educate and rehabilitate is just that. The goal is preventing recividism. (Which coincidentally is what the victims above have said they wanted.)
The largest factor in reducing recividism and in particular for sexual offences, is offender age. Recividism rates drop as age increases across the board.
Detention remains the most effective tool for prevention for those who have demonstrated they will carry out crimes against the body of another we have, by far.