It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
Weird how some people here believe.
It does not matter if he did it or not. It seems that a lot of people here support vigilantism. I've seen that in a lot of threads like this. That is what so scary about it.
originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Eunuchorn
Humans are no different to any other animal - "rape" exists in the animal kingdom a plenty, it isn't some symptom of an inherently unworthy creature. The only different between humans and animals is that we have decided that non-consensual sex should be a crime and even the concept of that is a relatively new one.
originally posted by: Metallicus
The guy has / had a right to a trial before she acted as judge and jury. Unless she actually saw him doing this I can't justify her actions.
originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Eunuchorn
The only different between humans and animals is that we have decided that non-consensual sex should be a crime and even the concept of that is a relatively new one.
originally posted by: crazyewok
originally posted by: Metallicus
The guy has / had a right to a trial before she acted as judge and jury. Unless she actually saw him doing this I can't justify her actions.
I hate to say it but I agree with you.
You cant take the law into your own hands as there would be caos.
She should get the minimum sentance allowed. But she should still have pay for her crime.