Guys you're getting distracted by the pedo aspect. That's not important here.

Lets just agree here people,

any form of application of sexuality to a child is BAD, and the people who do it should meet justice

So was he like tried and found guilty by a judge? Or was it a jury verdict?

Only real children.

If the child is imaginary, no harm is done, and therefore no foul.

@R9b1t he was released on bail as the judge ruled he was not being a danger to the community.

they're not a child then, they're imagination 😛

stop justifinf your drawings. We're talking about real kids here.

See, you don't get specific enough.

Nibwor#t

People have been jailed only hearing the way YOU phrase it.

Very similar to how the New Mexico compound families were released on bail.

So you are conflating real CP to loli are youj?

Me shower me mad

Poppy are you bein a butt?

***THE PEDO ASPECT IS UNIMPORTANT***

I'm trying to get you to shut up about your drawings

Atkins, the conversations has pivoted.

Stop trying to unpivot.

considering he was accused of raping a child, he's a molester, not just a pedo

The criminal could easily have been a murderer, or a rapist, or anything.

You can resume your argument when we've become disinterested in our own

He was accused of being a rapist

The important thing is that someone acted as a vigilante because the judge made a shitty decision.

Sure.

It's happened before.

And the vigilante specifically decided to rub the judge's nose in their failure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PUE8fYxjq8

Should be done a bit more imo, though not necessarily through putting a beheaded corpse at their door 😉

That's good parenting.

No it should not be done more.

This is really, really bad.

Let's say for the sake of argument that he DIDN'T ACTUALLY DO IT

I would agree with you, this is bad

But lets say the evidence that he'd DONE IT is irrefutable.

The only thing that keeps us from turning into a pack of heavily armed violent savages trapped in an ever escalating cycle of retributive violence is that the state is perceived as having a monopoly on the legitimate use of force.

It is, but i have trouble caring considering its a miscarriage of justice on both sides

Two wrongs don't make a right,
But I can't feel bad for this incident

And the judge simply decides he isn't a danger anyway.

--Well. Tough shit. Molestation is a death sentence.

With prepubescence there isn't a grey area.

If the state wants a monopoly on legitimate use of force,
The state should earn it respectfully, by actually having justice

If the people lose faith in the system, they'll find their own solution to get waht they want