Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mistofoleese » Fri Jul 18, 2014 2:54 pm

Tell me gang if YOU were the parent what would YOU have done to this creep
http://news.yahoo.com/police-fla-father ... 06138.html

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby truly_trussed » Fri Jul 18, 2014 5:44 pm

Misto - I'm sure you're going to get a lot of macho chest thumping, especially from guys. I'd like to ask what would be the reaction if the creepy 18 year old was a woman.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby drawscore » Fri Jul 18, 2014 6:40 pm

An 18 year old male molesting an 11 year old male, probably deserved what he got. An 18 year old female has no damn business messing with an 11 year old boy. But if the boy was 15-16, I, as a father, would probably be upset, but not to the point where I'd beat the crap out of the girl.

It does remind me of an incident from my youth, where I was 16, and bragging to my friends (and adding considerable embellishment) of a sexual conquest the previous night. "How good was she?" one of my friends asked.

"She was so good, I wanted to get off and take pictures!" I replied.

Drawscore
Last edited by drawscore on Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mistofoleese » Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:32 pm

truly_trussed wrote:Misto - I'm sure you're going to get a lot of macho chest thumping, especially from guys. I'd like to ask what would be the reaction if the creepy 18 year old was a woman.


Doesnt make a damn bit of difference male or female if it was a female sure I'd stop what ever was going on then I'd step aside and let the wife have at it Because a real man doesn't hit a woman if YOU saw YOUR child being molested what would YOU do .
I think the guy played it smart, yeah he could have put a bullet in the kid instead he beat the snot out of the guy ,called the police stood up said yeah I did that I was protecting my son. He took responsibility for his action The Police were able to get a confession out of the guy NO charges were filed against the father.

Do'n't get me wrong I'm glad you had the courage to speak your mind and ask that question. NEVER be afraid to speak your mind

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:43 pm

While I find this boys behavior disgusting, to put it mildly, I find the reactions to the father oddly more disturbing. Yes, he walked in on sexual abuse, but there's no mention of violence on the offender's part. For all intents and purposes, the man assaulted him in a rage that makes what happened to Zimmerman look like a play fight, and everyone seems perfectly happy with it. I know people are gripped with revulsion over someone who, in their minds, no longer deserves any identity other than a pedophilic sex offender and can never be anything else again, but isn't everyone supposed to deserve justice?
I find this especially odd considering forum members like ducttapestar have interests that could very well be viewed in the same light, and would certainly not appreciate this treatment.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby FelixSH » Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:10 pm

Mikey, this is not about pedophilia itself, but about acting on it. The father saw someone raping his own child, of course he gets extremely angry. Comparing it to a fetish is nonsense. There is a big difference between being turned on by something and acting on it, especially if the other person does not give his consent.
While it might not be the morally correct choice, I can't blame a parent for acting that way in such a situation. And I certainly have no pity for the rapist. I mean, he should be treated in a just way by the state, but if it happened like it is stated in the article I hope he never leaves prison, so that he can never hurt someone again. Hopefully the kid is ok.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby bondagefreak » Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:17 pm

If that was my child or my sibling, I'd have done the same thing.

FelixSH wrote:Hopefully the kid is ok.


Most likely not. Even after years of therapy, this kind of traumatism will re-surface later on in life.

That's the sad part when things like this happen.
The child is the one who's life will be affected for years to come.
Image

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby Tieup1 » Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:19 pm

Any parent whose child had been sexually abused, would naturally go beserk, and do the offender harm. Lets face it, the offender deserves all he/she gets for messing with a child.
Obviously the judge in this case, got it right, jail the offender, but no charges against the father.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:37 pm

But this is just a knee jerk reaction. Of course most people would feel justified, but the law says a very different thing. How can we condemn criminals, yet make special exceptions? Trayvon Martin assaulted a man in a similar way and was legally shot dead, and yet it's okay here simply because it was an acceptable target? If the guy was actually an immediate threat that would be one thing, but the motivation for this beating was base and ugly.
Also, there's always the child to consider. Seeing your own father do that to someone could potentially cause just as much trauma as the abuse itself. Add the fact that he likely doesn't understand that how he was treated is wrong yet, and he will have to share a home with and be dependent on someone who beat one of his "friends" half to death.
Felix, I'm not comparing it to a fetish. I'm just saying that some of the stuff on this forum can be viewed the same way taken outside of context. Would you want someone walking in on a tug with a niece or nephew, believe you're trying to make them some BDSM sex slave, and go berserk on you? Not really the same case, but it demonstrates the dangers of such blind rages.
I feel it's important to point out that I'm in no way defending this teenager. I'm simply saying that the father need to be held responsible for his actions. Such brutality wasn't necessary to protect his child, and witnessing it will probably scar him further.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby FelixSH » Sat Jul 19, 2014 12:33 am

If I would find a stranger tying up my 11-year old kid you can be certain that my reaction would be similar. If the guy is known to me, say my brother, then I DO think that the situation is different. Because rape IS a special case. I'm not even saying that such a reaction is ok, bit it is understandable. Also, the rape was a traumatizing situation for the kid. My guess is that it saw his father beating up the guy like a hero beating up a monster. I don't believe that this will create a trauma. The guy WAS an immediate threat for the kid. And there is nothing wrong with the motivation to protect your kid.
I understand that you want justice for everyone, Mikey. I would have thought the same way some years ago. But people are not perfect, and expecting a father to react calm and rational in such a situation is asking to much. If someone you love is in danger you should have the right to defend that person, or maybe yourself, without being afraid of facing problems because you went too far. This would only lead to people being afraid of defending themselves.

Also: If the rapist wouldn't have chosen to do this, nothing would have happened. It's bad enough that I think a special case is acceptable.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:05 am

It is understandable to react like this to such atrocities. I've resorted to violence in the past myself Felix. However, I don't think the kid's reaction would be that simple. The guy likely spent some time gaining his trust, and combined with ignorance about the depths of how horrible what was done to him was, the son still cared for him. Even if he was filled in later, he may not understand it on an emotional level for some time.
As for protecting your kid, get the bastard away from him, hold a weapon on him, even rough him up a bit. What was done was just excessive. It is possible to beat someone to death. Would everyone be alright with murder?
I suppose I'm just a bit pissed about how society accepts excessive acts of violence because it's deemed as justified or understandable.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby skybird137 » Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:38 am

This problem is not with this situation, but there are times when someone could misunderstood the situation.

For an example, supposing a father is looking for his young daughter and he sees her with her hand being held by another man. The father in an act of defending his daughter from being kidnapped by this pervert, hits the man and knocks him unconscious. The police turn up and arrest the man, only to find out from eye-witness reports and CCTV that the daughter walked up to the stranger and held his hand, mistaking the person as her father because they look similar from behind.

We have ended up with a person who through no fault of their own has ended up being the victim of a severe assault.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby Kyle » Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:50 pm

According to everything I've read, the father walked in and saw it happening and it was pretty clear what was going on (the guy admitted to it). I don't see the problem here. I'm surprised there are people who do have a problem with it to the point of being more upset over what the dad did than the abuser did. Strange times we live in.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:33 pm

Kyle wrote:According to everything I've read, the father walked in and saw it happening and it was pretty clear what was going on (the guy admitted to it). I don't see the problem here. I'm surprised there are people who do have a problem with it to the point of being more upset over what the dad did than the abuser did. Strange times we live in.

Really, the greater problem is how nonchalant everyone is about this. Yes, beating the guy to a pulp is a natural reaction. Plenty of natural reactions are illegal for good reason. If they can prove the creep was an immediate threat to their lives then that's one thing, but this man used excessive violence in front of his son and no one seems to give a care. It really seems like what he did was....unnecessary.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby skybird137 » Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:47 pm

I don't see the problem here.


It doesn't stay here though. There is something wrong with this when a father shoots an innocent teen dead because his daughter lied to him.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Tue Jul 22, 2014 10:53 am

Exactly. The base problem here is celebration excessive violence against the "bad guy" and ignoring possible consequences.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby Kyle » Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:32 pm

Seriously? What does that have to do with anything? This is not a case where the father attacked the guy on unsubstantiated evidence, or even just carried out a revenge beating later. He walked in and caught the guy in the act and defended his son. So because some people will decide to carry out revenge down the road, we shouldn't be allowed to defend someone else or ourselves to stop a violent crime?

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:50 pm

Kyle wrote:Seriously? What does that have to do with anything? This is not a case where the father attacked the guy on unsubstantiated evidence, or even just carried out a revenge beating later. He walked in and caught the guy in the act and defended his son. So because some people will decide to carry out revenge down the road, we shouldn't be allowed to defend someone else or ourselves to stop a violent crime?

The only details we have is that he was sexually abusing the kid. Disgusting, yes, but hardly more damaging than watching your dad beat someone bloody. This is someone the boy trusted, and just when he's trying to figure out why he's being touched in bad places his dad hulks out in front of him.
But that's okay. It's just one more thing to work through in therapy. The dad's a stand up citizen.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby skybird137 » Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:56 pm

This is not a case where the father attacked the guy on unsubstantiated evidence


The daughter lied to her father when she said that she did not know the boy. The father decided that the evidence was substantiated.

He walked in and caught the guy in the act and defended his son


The father caught the boy in his daughter's bedroom and defended his daughter.

So because some people will decide to carry out revenge down the road, we shouldn't be allowed to defend someone else or ourselves to stop a violent crime?


This was what the father was doing concerning his daughter.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Tue Jul 22, 2014 1:24 pm

You're talking about different stories Skybird.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby Kyle » Tue Jul 22, 2014 1:27 pm

mikeybound wrote:
Kyle wrote:Seriously? What does that have to do with anything? This is not a case where the father attacked the guy on unsubstantiated evidence, or even just carried out a revenge beating later. He walked in and caught the guy in the act and defended his son. So because some people will decide to carry out revenge down the road, we shouldn't be allowed to defend someone else or ourselves to stop a violent crime?

The only details we have is that he was sexually abusing the kid. Disgusting, yes, but hardly more damaging than watching your dad beat someone bloody. This is someone the boy trusted, and just when he's trying to figure out why he's being touched in bad places his dad hulks out in front of him.
But that's okay. It's just one more thing to work through in therapy. The dad's a stand up citizen.


Okay. let me see if I understand what you're saying. You actually think it's better for the sexual assault to continue rather than have the dad stop it because he beat the guy, and this is somehow worse than the sexual assault h was experiencing?

I cannot for the life of me imagine this is what you're actually saying, but I've re-read it twice and I can't interpret it any other way. I am surely missing something here. I absolutely hate being wrong and having to admit it, but in this case I am far more scared of being right.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Tue Jul 22, 2014 1:42 pm

I'm saying excessive violence was overboard. Stopping the creep and calling the cops was expecting, but did you see the pic of what was done to him? Can you imagine seeing your dad do that to someone as a child? No matter what, I can't picture a kid being comfortable seeing their dad doing that.
The point I'm making is the lengths the father went to were unnecessary, and probably further traumatized his son. It may have been technically illegal to do that much damage. So how come no one else is disturbed about the lengths he went to to satisfy his anger? Cops can't do that, so why should he?
Here's another thing to consider. Let's say the same reaction happens to a misunderstanding. Would it be okay for someone to beat a person bloody, just because they jumped to conclusions?

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mistofoleese » Tue Jul 22, 2014 4:55 pm

mikeybound wrote:I'm saying excessive violence was overboard. Stopping the creep and calling the cops was expecting, but did you see the pic of what was done to him? Can you imagine seeing your dad do that to someone as a child? No matter what, I can't picture a kid being comfortable seeing their dad doing that.
The point I'm making is the lengths the father went to were unnecessary, and probably further traumatized his son. It may have been technically illegal to do that much damage. So how come no one else is disturbed about the lengths he went to to satisfy his anger? Cops can't do that, so why should he?
Here's another thing to consider. Let's say the same reaction happens to a misunderstanding. Would it be okay for someone to beat a person bloody, just because they jumped to conclusions?

Mike
I would say that man used the maximum amount of restraint. he COULD have killed the guy I have talked about this guy with a lot of people over the last few days people from various backgrounds and walks of life but ALL whom share one thing regardless of their chosen careers they are ALL parents.

They ALL agree the father DID use maximum restraint now I understand your views Mike and I commend you for having the courage to speak your mind on this subject but I have to ask you one simple question are YOU yourself a parent what would YOU do if you walked on some one REGARDLESS if they were male or female abusing YOUR child
Again I commend you for speaking your mind NEVER Be afraid to speak your mind

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Tue Jul 22, 2014 5:20 pm

If I was putting the child first, I'd at least wait until he's gone to whale on the guy. Probably try and set a good example, because that most definitely didn't look like maximum restraint.
If I was the type to indulge myself, I'd hit the guy until he can't move, hit him some more, and drag him out front for the cops.
Seriously, did it occur to this man that he could've gone away for manslaughter at best? People like him are supposed to be the victims.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby Kyle » Tue Jul 22, 2014 5:30 pm

You think the guy is just going to stand there and wait for the kid to leave the room before the father beats the daylights out of him? That's not exactly realistic. He may well attack the dad and/or the kid even worse. Sometimes you have to put a stop to it right then and there. It's not exactly a good thing to see extreme violence, but it's better than letting them become a victim of a violent crime, or to let a violent crime continue. If the guy was holding a gun to the kid's head, and the father had a gun of his own, he better take the shot right then. Sure, letting the kid see the violence isn't the best thing, but it's better than the alternative. This situation is similar to that.

I think the dad exercised pretty good restraint. A lot of fathers wouldn't have stopped when he did. There are some types of sexual assault you are justified in killing the guilty party, and regardless, a lot of parents may well have done that.

I understand the point about jumping to conclusions, but from everything I know about the case, it was pretty cut and dry what was going on here. That's a legitimate discussion, but I don't understand what it has to do with this case. The guy admitted to the police what he did. I'm not sure what is questionable about what took place. There is no question here.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:39 pm

Perhaps it's good restraint relative to most people, but to me it seems impulsive and unnecessary. The kid was a creep, but there doesn't seem to be anything about this case to suggest that that level of force was necessary to keep anyone safe. While it's natural and good to be outraged, I can only imagine that this beating satisfied less than noble urges. The father sounded like a type of monster himself with what he did, and people are agreeing with him.
As for bringing ambiguity in this, it's like the example Skybird gave. If you accept these reactions as natural, then you end up shooting your daughter's boyfriend because she told a lie about not knowing him. While he was in her bedroom. So what if watching daddy beat someone to a pulp right after a rape just adds to the trauma and fucks the kid up? True restraint means never having any regrets.

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby Kyle » Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:35 pm

I cannot make sense of the line of thought it's somehow worse for a dad to defend his kid from sexual assault than it is to let the kid get assaulted. This just makes no #!&@ sense to me. This is the same line of thought an intruder who gets injured breaking into someone else's house should be able to sue for getting injured for being in a place they shouldn't be in the first place.

I'll bet this dad doesn't have a single regret about what he did, so he likely fulfills your definition of "true restraint."

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:49 pm

What I'm saying is the pedo being bad doesn't make what the dad did right. He could've handled it with far less violence, but he didn't. How does the stuff in the picture protect anybody?

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mistofoleese » Tue Jul 22, 2014 10:01 pm

mikeybound wrote:What I'm saying is the pedo being bad doesn't make what the dad did right. He could've handled it with far less violence, but he didn't. How does the stuff in the picture protect anybody?

By your words mike its clear to everyone your not a parent. The Father by defending his son and beating the snot out of the guy he spoke for parents EVERYWHERE You do this to MY child THIS is what will happen pure and simple
Update
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/22/justice/f ... s-suspect/

Re: Now THIS is what I'm talking about

Postby mikeybound » Tue Jul 22, 2014 10:29 pm

Am I seriously the only one kinda freaked out that this man was gonna stab a teenager to death in front of his son if he wasn't stopped? You're all okay with this?
And what's with this fundraiser stuff?