politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Prisons are for separating people from society where they can do damage, they don't have to be cruel
Okay? What other arbitrary rules do you want to set.
Unlike you I'm not a vindictive person; I would cry because my child was raped not because of how their rapist was treated.
Prison isn't a reward
That’s absolutely true, but they’re also for punishment and rehabilitation. Giving her access to a puppy in my eyes is the opposite of punishment, and she ain’t getting rehabilitated. This person destroyed thousands of lives if not more including those of children. This monster deserves zero sympathy and zero pleasures. The fact that she’s in a cushy prison is disgusting and wrong. There’s no justice for the countless victims and their families.
Could anything be done to her to make it right or to give justice to the victims?
I'd say no. So there's no point in trying to do that. The only closure that can be given is the knowledge that she will never be able to hurt people again. Having a dog doesn't change that.
With that logic then why is she in jail at all? If nothing can make it right or deliver justice then why lock her? Giving her comforts isn’t something that should be happening. For the love of me I cannot fathom why you’re defending a pedophile.
So she can't cause further harm.
YOU ARE DEFENDING A PEDOPHILE RAPIST.
That doesn't make them not human
Who says?
I do
They lost their humanity many atrocities ago.
So what are they now? Just an object?
So we're taking notes on how to treat people out of a pedophiles book now?
The issue is preferential treatment, especially for sick sex offenders like her 🤮.
If she got a puppy why not everybody else?
She gets to ruin hundreds of lives and live like a queen in a prison? While people for much much smaller crimes are treated much much worse. How is this fair? How is this justice being served?
Yeah that's the injustice here, people want her to suffer because they don't like her. They think having a dog isn't fair because she shouldn't be happy, not because this privilege isn't extended to other prisoners
How so
I’ve never been to prison, but I don’t think it would be a safe place for a puppy. Dogs need stable environments, space to play, walks, etc.
Also, Maxwell specifically is a person who lacks empathy, judging by her crimes. She shouldn’t be trusted with a vulnerable animal.
Prisons should be safe, it's a minimum security prison too
inappropriate joke
the puppy is a childYou've got me there lol
although I agree with you in general. it's frustrating that rich people get rich people jail, which is basically what all jails should be, but everyone else gets forced labour torture camps for minor drug offences.
Yeah. That is definitely the injustice here that people are ignoring because they simply hate this specific prisoners and believe she should suffer.
Imagine you're building more comfortable prisons to house all the people incarcerated in the US. Who do you move to the comfy prisons first? Elderly inmates? Non-violent offenders? While all the inmates deserve better treatment, I'd prioritize those who have committed less severe crimes.
Well yeah? I don't think the US needs more prisons though.
Prisons in the US are overcrowded. On the other hand, many are in prison for stupid reasons, and should probably just get released.
True. But there are other prisoners who deserve puppies and kittens. Not her. I would rather see a few murderers get an innocent animal to care for and learn how to love instead of that fucking bitch.
Yeah I agree, I mentioned it in another comment of mine but the injustice here is the privilege that isn't being extended to other prisoners. I think it's clear that people who wrote the article and the majority of comments here don't believe that to be the injustice. They clearly think this lady should be made to suffer and that her having a dog is in of itself an injustice because it might bring her happiness. I disagree with that.
They shouldn’t be nice either. She committed real crimes and ruined the lives of dozens of women/girls. She shouldn’t get to play with puppies or touch the internet. She should be made to live the rest of her life working to apologize and make “right” whatever way possible.
I'm general, I think jails should be humane a place for healing and recovery.
HOWEVER, what pisses me off is that rich pedophiles get the noce jail, while minor drug offences get forced labour torture camps. two tier justice system.
I don't see why that matters. No one can undo the damage she's done least of all her. At this point she just needs to be separated from society. That in of itself is the punishment
Are professionally bred domesticated pet animals not a perk of being a part of society?
As long as it's all offline or receive-only, should she also get any TV channels or blu-ray movies or game consoles she's willing to pay for?
I'm not here to advocate for cruelty or dehumanizing people who have committed crimes. Just wondering about the thought process.
I bet for most people who aren't "internationally infamous monster" level criminals, having a pet to care for could be a valuable part of rehabilitation. Maybe they could even take the pet with them after release to give them incentive to get up and go to work to support it.
In this case though, it's all annoying because we have a very very bad person getting outrageously special treatment for the shadiest of reasons.
Is that why people are actually mad though? Because of the privilege that isnt being extended to other prisoners or because they want this person to suffer. I think it's quite clear that they do perceive the injustice here being that she has a dog, not that other prisoners don't have dogs.
Because we're not like her. Being cruel accomplishes nothing. Her punishment is being segregated from society. That is enough, anything else is vindictive.
I think this topic might be triggering you, maybe filter out the names of the people mentioned in the title so you don't have to see this in future.
Prison isn't a reward. Her quality of life is objectively worse now. It isn't enabling, it's the total opposite. Confinement to a place damage can no longer be done
Their not rewards because she isn't getting those things because she's a pedophile, she's getting them because she's rich and well connected. That's the injustice here. Pedophiles aren't motivated to commit pedophilia because they'll get a dog I'm prison. It being a reward for pedophilia is such a poorly thought through take.
They also don't have to be cushy and provide preferential treatment to people willing to perjure themselves to protect those in power.