OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE ...

What? So its more expensive to take someone out back and get Krig to put a bullet through their head, than to pay for their court time, jail, rehab, etc?

seriously

god damn it people... this is EXACTLY the kind of behavior that we see in people who turn into Jeffrey Dahmer's... people who rape cats (WTF?!!!) and tortue and kill them don't take a few drugs and suddenly become nice productive useful members of society
 
In regards to allegations of "no use to society" - how do you know this guy wasn't going to write the next Hvis Lyset Tar Oss? Sorry, playing devil's advocate here

the analogy is false for numerous reasons:

1. varg clearly showed talent long before his crime; what has cat-man done?
2. varg's crime could be explained as his desire for money, or revenge, or power, or perhaps (if he is to believed which personally i don't) out of self-defense or as a pre-emptive way to avoid what he perceived as physical injury (he claims that euronymous was planning on killing him). varg is clearly a disturbed individual and he deserved his punishment... despite that however his crime at least has reasonable motives. cat-boy's is the type of crime often seen in people who turn into serial killers like bundy, et al.
 
Euronymous' murder is best explained by the fact that he made two typos on the layout of the original pressing of Burzum. I mean...that's fucking unforgivable.
 
seriously

god damn it people... this is EXACTLY the kind of behavior that we see in people who turn into Jeffrey Dahmer's... people who rape cats (WTF?!!!) and tortue and kill them don't take a few drugs and suddenly become nice productive useful members of society

Do you seriously believe that's a good idea? If so, I've lost a lot of respect for you.
 
Rape, however, is still rape. Raping a cat is just as despicable as raping a human.
Not really. It's pathetic, yes. Very pathetic. But it's not a crime against your own species. I mean, death is worse than rape, right? Should everyone who works in a slaughterhouse be jailed for killing animals?
Also, Varg made most of his contribution to music before he killed someone and was punished accordingly.
How long did Varg get? 21 years? And he almost got let out after what? 12?
So...12 years for killing a human and burning a couple churches, up to 15 for killing a cat. "Punished accordingly?" In the US he would have gotten life without doubt.

This whole "OMG but he never hurt a HUMAN!" argument is fucked tbh. The nature of the act he's committed is such that he would most likely be deemed extremely likely to follow this behaviour up with similar crimes directed at people anyway.
You don't fucking get it. The point is, you can't punish someone for crimes they didn't commit; you're assuming he'll go on to commit more crimes, so you want to increase the punishment to allow for future offenses. You can't do that.

1. varg clearly showed talent long before his crime; what has cat-man done?
2. varg's crime could be explained as his desire for money, or revenge, or power, or perhaps (if he is to believed which personally i don't) out of self-defense or as a pre-emptive way to avoid what he perceived as physical injury (he claims that euronymous was planning on killing him). varg is clearly a disturbed individual and he deserved his punishment... despite that however his crime at least has reasonable motives. cat-boy's is the type of crime often seen in people who turn into serial killers like bundy, et al.
1. Do you know? Maybe he's in a garage band that could in a few years revolutionize heavy metal.
2. The punishment must fit the crime. Ever heard of that? It's called "we can't assume that he'll go on to kill people just because he killed a cat, so we can only punish him for killing the cat"
 
So now the question is:

What is more significant; the action itself, or the direct object of the action?

I think the disturbing thing is mostly the action, but then again it would really depend where the person was brought up etc. I'm sure there are places/people that for them cat-raping is a form of vandalising, but I assume that's not the case, he just wanted to harm a lifeform, and chose a cat because it's easy, which is pathetic really. Anyway, that guy should be locked up for a good many years, but 15 is an exaggeration in my opinion, although it might be good to send a message...

And about the bullshit about him being able to contribute to society or whatever, that's a dumb argument. Don't punish criminals because there's a very small chance that they would help society? That would jsut bring down society because of all the people who would commit crimes knowing the chance for them to pay for their actions is so small. What if Saddam Hussein would've ended up writing a symphony? For that chance he should've been kept alive?
 
And about the bullshit about him being able to contribute to society or whatever, that's a dumb argument. Don't punish criminals because there's a very small chance that they would help society? That would jsut bring down society because of all the people who would commit crimes knowing the chance for them to pay for their actions is so small. What if Saddam Hussein would've ended up writing a symphony? For that chance he should've been kept alive?
Yeah ok, that's what I said. :\

First of all, I wasn't saying he shouldn't be punished, and I certainly wasn't saying he shouldn't be punished because he could theoretically contribute something to society. My point was that "bad people" can still do "good things." I was responding to people who said he will never be any use to society. I wasn't even responding to anything regarding punishment.

FFS
 
2. The punishment must fit the crime. Ever heard of that? It's called "we can't assume that he'll go on to kill people just because he killed a cat, so we can only punish him for killing the cat"

true. so what punishment fits raping, torturing and killing an animal?
 
Should everyone who works in a slaughterhouse be jailed for killing animals?

i don't think that's really a good analogy... it's one thing to kill an animal to eat it in order to survive (which is how natured has designed us) and it's another thing to kill an animal and rape it and torture it for kicks... world's apart
 
Anyway, that guy should be locked up for a good many years, but 15 is an exaggeration in my opinion, although it might be good to send a message...
Send a message to all the other cat rapists, who, rational people that they are, will say "oh, I'd better not do that"

Don't punish criminals because there's a very small chance that they would help society? That would jsut bring down society because of all the people who would commit crimes knowing the chance for them to pay for their actions is so small.
Actually, that's how the american justice system has worked since it's inception, and it has yet to bring us down. Obviously no one is saying he should be let off the hook, but sending an 18 yo kid to jail for 15 years doesn't solve any problems.

What the fuck is this?