Sorry to rip straight from bajab's suggestion but he put it far better than I could



So, could we learn something from the wizarding system? Do you think it's kind of antiquated and in desperate need of an overhaul? Is the Dementors Kiss worse than the Death Penalty? Is that what the Veil was, an older system of execution? What happens to the victims of the Dementors kiss? Should wizards be 'certified insane' the way that some criminals in the real world are, is that an excuse for murder? Should wizards be hospitalised rather than imprisoned for their crimes? The wizarding world doesn't seem to try to understand criminals actions or motivations very much and concentrates on the victims more, the business of being 'seen' to have done something, regardless of the truth of innocence or guilt - is that a good thing?

More to the point...if Snape was guilty, what would be an appropriate punishment? A wizarding one or a real-life one?

That should be enough to get the ball rolling hopefully...

wow, good topic.

Since reading HP, i've asked myself the question, light heartedly, 'What would i do if I were a witch as a job, and with my life?' And one thing's really stuck out is to get Human Rights In Azkaban.

In other words? To Get rid of the Dementors, and make it so everyone has a fair trial, Siruis said that he didn't get a trial. Yes, he was apparently caught 'Red handed' there was no way that Siruis couldn't have done it in the eyes of the Ministry. And of course there was, and Sirius was innocent. Also, we've never seen Azkaban, in Harry's eyes, but the way it is described, it is a cold place, stone walls, no central heating etc... That would change in my hands. Beds, clean linin, make the place comfortable.

I know that sometimes prisoners (in real life) have TV's in their cells, and people find this a bit ridiculous sometimes, and i see there point, I think it's silly having a Playstaion2 in their cells, but the punishment that people have in prison is having rights taken away. The right to do what you want when you want, eat what they want, and of course be able to vote is taken away.

I'm a bit Skeptical when it comes to prisons anyway. There are people in there who are Victims. Drug addiction, and also people who can't afford to pay debts. Who are too poor to live and therefore put in prison.

Also putting murderers, rapists, etc in together probably isn't the best idea either.

However, I'm a firm believer in rehabilitation in prison. In stead of making wallets and mailbags, to get an education, something they may never have achieved before, so when they are released they can a least get a job and contribute to society.

As to Capital Punishment? The last hanging in Britain was in the 1960's (i can't remember the exact date off the top of my head, or who it was) and I do not think we should go backwards and start killing people 'An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth' and public executions, are rather well, i don't really like the idea that much.

In the US where capital punishment is legal and it takes place, people are due to be executed, but they can be on death row for years and years, waiting to die, while appeal after appeal is done, to make sure that they actually did the crime. What sort of punishment is that? IMO it's worse than actually bing killed, the impending doom of waiting to die, being held in prison. If any one's read/seen Stephen Kings Green Mile (why did i want to type the shining there? lol) or John Grisham the chamber, (i'm sure there are more but they're the only ones i've seen) will see the wait that these people have to go through.

If the death penetly was in fact to come back, in Britain this is what would await our criminals. I don't think it's fair.

I don't really know however is The Dementos Kiss would be worse. Lupin says that it gets your soul sucked out of you. As i'm an Atheist, I do not believe that the human body has a soul, so if i think about it that way, all it would be INO is having a horrid taste in your mouth...

However.... if there was a way to be able to do the same effect that A dementors kiss does... i dunno, suck out your personality. No wouldn't agree with it in our system. It's horrid, and i don't think that any one really deserves that.

Then again. afterwards, it's not like they would know about it... so if you look on it that way. But no, i still do not think that it should be in our system

So, what i'm trying to say in all that babble, is that no, we shouldn't take a leaf out of the system in HP. I'm a believer in Human rights, and i don't think we should go and create some dementors to keep our prisoners in check and calm, with the side effects of total insanity There are some things wrong with the system that western cultures have, to go and make it worse... *shivers*

Although after having read HP i don't mind our system so much. Still don't like the idea ' You're too poor to live go to jail' thing. Did you know (in scotland at least) if a woman with a young child goes to prison, the child goes with her? Imagine spending your first few years in a prison?

As for Snape, if he's guilty? A life sentence in a proper prison, like i said, no dememtors, get some heat, and proper clothes, linen etc...

No one deserves Azkaban IMO

So, if Snape is guilty, he should not be turned over to the dementors, as they have been shown too willing to join with evil. I don't believe dementors should be used for any part of the wizarding justice system.

I believe, whatever punishment is issued, it should be done in such a way that people will know that he has committed a grievous crime and that any who may contemplate committing a similar crime in the future will choose not to because the cost of getting caught multiplied by the probability of getting caught is greater than the benefit of getting away with the crime multiplied by the probability of getting away with it (Let C = cost, B = Benefit, G = get caught, and N = not get caught, then C*P(G) > B*P(N) for all B, and N).

The Death penalty has one major flaw: Once the sentence is carried out, there is no way to reverse it should new evidence come to light. We've had some very well known cases over the past few decades in Canada where people were released after 10-20 years in jail because new evidence came to light due to new information or simply because of new investigative techniques. David Milgaard was one, and Guy-Paul Morin another. Both these men would have received the death penalty for their alleged crimes had it not been abolished. As it were, Milgaard spent 23 years in jail for a crime he did not commit, Morin, 11 years. Clearly, these two examples show how the death penalty is not an appropriate punishment.

However, having stated the above, I don't believe that people who are guilty of horrendous and sadistic crimes, like Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka for instance, should EVER get out of jail. Life sentences should be exactly that: a life sentence, i.e.: one where you are incarcerated for the rest of your natural life. Allowances, of course, to be made in cases where new evidence comes to light, but once convicted and proven guilty, you're in there for good.

Rehabilitation, for petty criminals, is a good thing and I will agree that having the chance to receive an education is a crucial step in the right direction. However, having said that, prisons should also not be cozy places, or places where one would like to return to. In far too many cases, once released at the end of their sentence, criminals will re-offend because they simply cannot get to a point where they can have the same things they had on the inside. This one is a tough one to crack, any ideas? Ygraine?

As for Azkaban, all I can say is that it does sound positively medieval. Of course, the Potterverse is permeated with a certain "out-of-time" feeling to it, swinging from the medieval to Victorian to present day... What would a "modern" prison be like in the wizarding world, I wonder?

Consider what would you do if you had some of the abilities/resources available to wizards:

Veritaserum - an almost pefect lie detector. (This is possibly only usefull for prosecution since somebody might be able to lie and say they are innocent, but nobody would lie and say they are guilty. So if you confessed, while under the effects of Veritaserum, you believe you are guilty.)

Imperious Curse - could it be used to force people to tell the truth?

Prior Incartem (sorry about the spelling) - can help identify murder weapons.

Pensieve - Actual memories of events can be examined in detail. Invaluable for witness cross-examination.

Sneakoscopes - Imperson character judgement devices?


There is a down side to each and every one of these, but if used in combination they add up to a formidible tool for discovering the truth. If a few of these had been used in the case of Hagrid, Sirius, or Harry, they would have gone a long way towards proving their innocence.

So, assuming wizards have much better tools for determining guilt than we currently do, punishments are able to be much less lenient because the fear of 'getting it wrong' is less likely, but should they be?

If you could be absolutely sure of a person's guilt, with compelling evidence to back you up, shouldn't you still try to reform the person? Surely more use of the same tools can positively help you identify when that person has really achieved the required level of reformation?



If the person is not able to be reformed, there are still may forms of punshment availble besides execution. How about:

Years living under the imperious curse 'working off your debt' to society.

or

Removing your memories and implanting new ones to destroy your current 'aborhent' personality.


We have seen both of these used in HP in one form or another, although not very professionally.

Then of course we have Azkaban - a living torture. This prison has no function except punishment. It's sole purpose is to keep people in a subhuman existance. If people do get out of Azkaban, you can be sure that they will go to almost any length to stay out. Unfortunately, our real world experience has shown that does not necessarily mean they will behave themselves, even if Azkaban is much worse than any prison we have. I think the only reason this place exists is as a bigger deterent than death.

But, as a last resort, if death was the sentence, I can see how finding an executioner could be a problem. It is very well to say 'push them through the curtain in the DoM', but who has the responsibilty of doing the pushing? Dementors are willing executioners, and it is by their nature, not by choice. Getting Dementors in is a an 'easy' way out for those who pronounce the ultimate penalty, but does it lessen the value of human life? I believe so.


The really scary part of all this is that science and technology are making huge progress in comming up with tools that have similar functions as the ones in the magical world. Improved lie detectors that work on brain wave patterns, DNA analysis, video surveillance, behaviour control drugs, memory surgery, the list goes on. There can be little doubt that people found guilty today are more likely to be so than they were a hundred years ago. In the next 20 or 30 years, we may all be facing these 'exact' issue ourselves.


BTW - I just want a pocketsneako'scope for dealing with used car salesmen and trades people.

I thought of another one - What if you had to take an unbreakable vow to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (just for the length of your time in court)?

I have never thought of the wizarding criminal system before now but, this is really getting me thinking, hmmm...


Should Wizards be certified insane?

Well, i think that they already are, in the wizarding sense, pleading guilty but under the imperious curse, is the equivilant to pleading insanity, if you think about it, because either way you are not in your right mind when you do it.


The dementors kiss vs. capital punishment:

Ok I am on the fence for which one is worse, i guess if i had to choose it would be the kiss, because at least if you are executed you retain your soul, (if you believe in an afterlife) because with the dementor feeding on your soul i'd imagine you dont get it back, meaning no afterlife. But if you think about it, is either right, you are showing a murderer that murdering is ok, you are commiting the same atrocity that you are punishing the criminal for, can you say that it is ok, because they commited murder?


making an unbreakable vow to confess only truths in court:

hmm, very very interesting, that would eliminate all types of purgury, but does it infringe on any rights, probally not if it keeps the world safe, them ministry of magic sometimes reminds me of the patriot act, specially the times we see barty crouch at the head. I wonder if the wizarding world even has any rights, because in a world where you can get anything, what is stopping someone from taking advantage of their magical powers?

Humm...this is a really good topic..

I think the reason their punishments are or seem severe is because the ministery realizes that they are dealing with magic..not necessarilly ordinary people. And the exposure of the wizarding world is always huge..But as many people have said I agree that people should at least get some sort of fair trial. Sirius while he may have been caught red-handed was not infact the murderer..they would have known that had they used vertiaserum or somthing to that effect. It seems that the Ministery is trying to set the punishments high..or to some degree evil because they figure it will decrease the crime rate in the magical world. As we have seen in HP magic can be very dangerous when toyed and played with.
It seems like the case of Hammauribi(sp?) he had a code that tolerated nothing..it was fair in some ways because it was an arm for an arm, it also kept the crime rate down because no one wanted to be punished by death or get an arm chopped off or somthing like that. I also agree that the persons mental stability should be taken into concideration, like they do in the U.S and many other places.
As for Dementors' kisses being made public, Snape says in the third movie that they are almost unbearable to witness. So I don't think that it would be somthing done in public. I mean imagine if you were that persons family? How would that be to see them lose their soul? Imagine being the mother or sibling or father or child of someone who had to go through with it. But if it was done in a somewhat public place I think that it would be optional to attend. I remember from my history class when they did the witch trials in France and America and Britain they did it in the town squares and everyone had to come because it was basically a warning if this is what you do this will happen to you. So maby the dementors kiss is used as a sort of fear tactic, many leaders have used fear tactics to gain control of people.
I also think that in some cases it is worse then the death penalty because you are still alive, but you are soul-less meaning you can live and walk but you can't feel or love and basicaly your life is taken and you waste away so its a slow and probably painful death.

Ok well I'll stop boring everyone now! lol!

Courtney[color=#33CCFF]

I'm going to spin this in a slightly different direction.

I'm sure a lot of you have heard the story about the man who repeatedly molested a 12 year old girl and was given probation - yes, probation - for ten years. The story is here.

This is astounding. If it's something that even the ACLU won't get behind, then you know it's got to be out there. But it brings up some interesting discussion around our legal system (the slight shift in the conversation.)

Do you think the judge was right in not sending this man to hell, let alone prison, for what he did, and confessed to? Do you think that judges ought to have the power to not enforce a penalty based on...opinion?

It's said that a society is judged by how they treat their weakest members. Sirius say's to watch how a man treats his inferiors. What do you think it says about our society today that a crime like this goes virtually unpunished?

There's also a case that I heard about on the radio of a boyfriend who killed his girlfriends three year old son for no apparant reason, and was sentenced to only two years. It was pointed out that this man would go to prison longer for killing a dog. How does that compare to the story above? Does the time fit the crime?

South Carolina has legislation still in the voting stages, and I doubt it'll be passed, to legalize the death penalty for repeat child molestation offenders. Do you think that is a fair penalty?

This topic was fringed on in the Daily Prophet's 4th edition here.

Well, this is my first time replying to something really major, and to tell the truth, I have no idea. It's sickening about what some people do, and that they don't get the right punishment for it. What I thought when you wrote that Sirius said, 'look at how a man treats his inferiors', is that there probably are some unfair judges who go by the rule, and if someone confesses to a crime, then they don't have as bad a punishment. I don't think it matters if they do confess; for it doesn't make what they did go away, and there's still the matter of someone being hurt out there.

Oh, and for the man killing the boy, and the other killing the dog, I think it just depends on who's in charge in the courtroom..

Hmm I really think that the wizarding system is really good and if it were possible i would say that it should be done the same way in the world. I believe that the dementors kiss is worse than the death penalty, even though its the same in some ways, but to live without your soul, no happiness i think that would be worst than death. Wow this is a really good topic.
Now if i think about it the Veil could have been an older system of execution....but then who knows what happens to the victims that fall into the veil....

But to change the subject just a little, I believe that the wizarding system of punishing criminals is pretty good. I think that murders and molesters and all of the people that fall into that category should be killed/executed. It is not right to let a murder get 40 years in jail after killing someone. I believe in the statement an eye for an eye. And molesters should be killed as well, the are able to ruin young lives. For example Richard P. DeArment is a molester and after reading this short article i just couldnt believe it. Why is it that people like him only go to prison....? shouldnt they be killed so they cant do it again?

This topic is really interesting and it can certainly raise some serious arguments.

Overall, i think that our legal system should be damped as it is not working in a fair way and most of the times, it is not even effective, meaning that criminals are not punished or punished equally to the crime they committed. I'm sorry to say that but even justice doesn't treat all thieves the same, all murderers the same etc. I have heard of people who killed others having a tv and other luxuries inside their cell, whereas people who stole lived under horrible circumstances, though killing someone is obviously much worse than stealing something.

Something else i never understood. How can we speak of life penalty, when it is only 20 years of prison? You can kill someone and if you behave well you may get out in less than two decades. Or even worse, pretend you have a psychological problem (if you are strong enough) and escape prison this way. This doesn't seem reasonable to me.

About death penalty, i can't say i'm pro or against it. It is not a decision i can make when sociologists and others have not decided yet if it should be banned or not. If it is a mass murderer we're dealing with or a molester just like Polandbaby16's example, death seems the only fair price to pay. But, is death really a punishment from them? I can't be sure.. What's for sure is that by killing these people we prevent other possible murders.

However, there is also the other side of the coin. When the government decides to kill someone, *technically* it accepts that killing a person can be legal under certain circumstances. Plus, we're talking about a country killing its citizens, which sounds weird enough. But i'm on the outside, and i know that if i had to deal with a murderer who hurt a person i love, i would probably want to see them dead. But still, human nature can act in very strange ways.

A movie i want to suggest on death penalty is David Gale's life. It might have been suggested already. But it is a great movie that will put you in lots of thinking.


Alright, that's it for real world. I could write more but this post has to end somewhere!

Ok, wizards. I agree as well that the magical world (if we can say that) is afraid of criminals since they are more powerful than Muggles. They can kill someone without even touching them. However, again, it is not fair convicting someone without taking them to the court were all evidence can be examined. However, still, it is hard to be sure that one has or has not committed a crime. We've already seen Voldemort altering his grandpa's (or uncle's, not sure ) memories so as to make him seem guilty. And although Dumbledore extracted these memories from him, it took a lot of time, exhaustion and great skills. But i think it would be worth it to have professional investigators who could be like Aurors who trace not criminals but clues.

Another argument i think no one has pointed out, is that all criminals are dealt with the same way. Sirius would be treated the same with a common thief. And though we know that he was innocent, he was believed to be a murderer. This is not fair. Why should someone who has robbed someone or broken into a house, be treated the same way as a murderer and suffer Dementors, which is a torture itself? Maybe they should develop a different system of punishing people according to the significance of the committed crime.

Last but not least, Dementor's kiss. To me, it is more horrible than killing a person. Cause this means he would have to live for long without actually living. Walking around like zombies, something like the guys in Invasion movie (have not seen it yet but that's the impression the trailer caused to me). It is the worst penalty ever. And especially expecting it. Cause you will not be really dead but you won't be able to live either. "Hell doesn't want him, heaven won't take him" or something. I am against Dementors as well. These creatures have nothing to do with humans and by giving them pain, we feed them and grow the evil hidden inside of them. There is no reason to do that...

So,I am against both systems, though ours seems more appropriate and lenient. I think there are huge changes to make but if we take it seriously, maybe one day our legal system will not only punish the way it should criminals, but also, be able to prevent people from committing a crime, of any sort.


Alkisti

This topic was known as "Crime and Punishment", and is now renamed "Law and Order".

The goal of this topic is to discuss the laws adopted in your country, the legal system, justice in courts, and everything that fits in this category. You can give links to articles that seem appropriate, and you are free to discuss anything that catches your attention.

This topic is like any other topic in the Great Hall. This means that while posting here, you have to keep in mind the rules and respect everyone else's opinions. No personal attacks will be accepted.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One topic to begin this conversation comes from a suggestion made by Harry James Potter.
I'm quoting his post, which pretty much is self-explanatory:



So, what do the Duellers think? Is marijuana the same as cigarettes? Should it be legalized in other parts of the world as well?

Discuss!

I think that American's are severly overweight to begin with...this may just compound the problem

Seriously though. I found this ARTICLE and I would like to hear what the VTM Dueling Club thinks.

This article goes way beyond just medicinal marijuana...it is talking about legalizing all illegal drugs. Some economist think that gang wars are going to decline if you take their major money maker away from them and give the American public easier access to drugs at the local Walgreens. I don't know about that. Gangs who suddenly become poor also become desperate and desperate people do crazy and dangerous things.

It is almost like the people who are suggesting this have never been affected personally by someone who has fallen into an addiction of drug use. The impression I am getting is that if people are stupid enough to waste their money on drugs, legal or not, then they are stupid enough to not care about the adverse effects drugs can do to the body. It is almost like if the drug addict dies, it is one less person for the government to feed, clothe or prosecute.

I don't know how I feel about legalizing marijuana for medical purposes. I know the reports show that it helps the pain but does it do anything else? I do know that I think it is crazy to legalize other drugs because even if it does wonders for the economy, it will destroy people's lives.

From what I've read, Amanda, it also improves the appetite, and keeping up with eating can be a very hard thing to do when you're going through chemo, as it makes you nauseated often.

I don't think that marijuana is a big deal. It wasn't all that long ago that people smoked it all the time. Even our first President, George Washington, grew it and smoked it. People actually only smoked the tops then, and used the leaves to make rope, cloth, and paper and all manner of useful things. The trouble came when William Randolph Hearst, a newspaper tycoon of the late ninteenth-century, had just bought entire forests that he wanted to chop down to make into newspaper. Someone had also come up with a really great way (ecologically sound, too, unlike making newsprint from wood!) to make newsprint from hemp, and that just made him hopping mad! So he suddenly started having articles in his newspaper talking about how bad marijuana was, how harmful, when in fact he just wanted to get back on his investment in wood! This was the same guy whose desire for a juicy news story led to the Spanish-American War, so actually, quite a greedy little rat, this guy. But very rich, and very powerful. He got all the temperance people up in arms and the legislation pushed through to ban marijuana, and it's been illegal ever since, even though, by and large, it's much less harmful than alcohol.

Other drugs, like cocaine, heroin? Man, I don't know. Seems we'd just be trading in one social evil for another, wouldn't we? Increased gang crime, or increased addiction problems burdening society? That was a really good point about the desperation of the gangs, too, Amanda, I had never thought about it in those terms. Not that we should keep a vice illegal just so these thugs can make a lot of money, because I suppose they'd just find something else to do that's illegal, like a lot of them fighting dogs and roosters. They can, and will, find somethinglese to do--they always do.

Seems drugs are another thing humans are always into, just like war. We're a weird species!

You know, it's hard to tell. Let's say that marijuana was legalised. I wouldn't try it, having seen so many movies and heard so many things about drugs. I don't care that it is illegal. I wouldn't try it cause I'm scared of the effects it would have on me. I haven't even smoked, so why try something much worse?

However, the truth is that not everyone thinks the way I do. Drug addicts for example, would probably increase their dose (it would probably be cheaper if it was disposed legally) and die. And others would turn to it instead of drinking, when faced with problems. But I believe that the majority of people would try it in the beginning, but then get bored of it, and forget about it.

But the truth is that legalizing it would make things much more complicated. Marijuana might end up in everyday products, making all of us addicts, for the sakes of profit.

See? That's another issue I don't know how to handle.

The problem is not the drug itself. It is the people and how they will use it either on themselves or in other people. That's what I fear the most. How will everyday people react to such a decision and where will this thing lead us.

Thanks to BRoyals we've got an article to liven up this topic a little bit!

Some of you may remember this, others have not heard of it probably. Robert Dziekanski was a foreigner who got tasered at Vancouver airport a couple of years ago because of the way he was acting. Shortly after the attack, he died.

Authorities announced a few days ago that his being tasered is probably the main reason that led to his death. Some doctors claim that his heart was already weak because of alcoholism but tests have not proven this. You can read the story here and watch the video of the attack here.

My question is this: When should police/security etc use such weapons without threatening one's life? Should they come up with other means of protection (of themselves and the public) or persecution of people who resist arrest? And a more general question...do you think that police violence can be handled, is excused, or reasonable?

Share your views!

My question is this: When should police/security etc use such weapons without threatening one's life? Should they come up with other means of protection (of themselves and the public) or persecution of people who resist arrest? And a more general question...do you think that police violence can be handled, is excused, or reasonable?


I think that they should only use such weapons when there is NO other option. And when someone's life is threatened (e.g. their own or a bystander's). Because even weapons that aren't thought of as harming someone else's life can be dangerous, like with a taser making someone have a heart attack. The police don't know the health of every person who resists arrest. Although in general, they could probably assume it's not the best. You just wouldn't know what was going to happen when you used something like that. People are too variable. I think that they should try to come up with other means of protection, but at the moment, I'm at a loss for what they could be. Probably to implement anything else would require a complete overhaul of the police system in its entirety--which would actually, in all likelihood, be a good thing!

I don't really think that police violence can be excused. Maybe they had a reason, like someone was resisting arrest and posing a danger to other people, but I still don't think that is justifiable as an excuse. They would still be harming another person. And most of the time, or at least from what I've seen in the news, they don't even have that excuse of someone posing a danger to another person. They just don't want to go to jail, so they get beaten up or whatever, and charged with resisting arrest or whatever. That's not fair to anybody. Just because you're a police officer, it doesn't mean that you have the power to do whatever you want. There are other ways to make someone cooperate with being arrested--like persuasion, etc. That way, you don't hurt somebody else, no matter what they might have done as an arrestable offense, and they give themselves up peaceably. Everybody wins...in my opinion, anyways.

Some of you may have heard this story, others may not. Personally, I think it is one of the most wicked crimes I've ever read about.

A pregnant girl in Massachussets got murdered and had her eight-months-old fetus removed right out of her uterus. The dead body was discovered by the girl's landlord who got complaints by neighbours. She was wrapped tightly in a blanket and hidden in a closet, where she was found.

The police has been looking for the murderer, and it seems that they found who commited this horrible crime. A 35-years-old woman received charges. Apparently, she had been telling her friends that she will have a baby, and then one day, she appeared with a girl, unable however, to give any details of the baby's identity.

The police is investigating the crime right now, as well as the suspect. The only postive aspect of this story is that the baby was found and she is healthy and doing well, despite the violent way she was extrected from her mother's body, 4 weeks before the birth-date.

You can read an article about this story here.

What do you think about this crime? Isn't it worrying how far mentally unstable people can go? How is this baby's life going to be now, with no mum, and her dad getting married to someone else?

Share your views with us.

I have read one crime book too many dealing with this exact thing. It's like these women are so obsessed with having a child because for some reason or another they cannot have their own. They stalk these pregnant women and girls, befriend them and at times don't even actually know the victim and boom they attack the pregnant woman and rip the baby right out of the womb of the mother.
I watched a show on this very thing a couple of weeks ago on Oxygen Network's Snapped. It was a story about a young woman that was pregnant and another woman (who had been found to be extremely unstable) saw where the pregnant woman was advertising that she needed baby items or what not on the internet. Well the assailant answered the lady's ads, offering that she had baby items, such as cribs, clothes and things. The pregnant woman eventually befriended the assailant and was lured out by said woman to her house to "pick up" baby items.

Well one thing led to another and the woman tried to attack the pregnant woman, the victim was calling 911 and screaming that this psycho was attacking her and trying to kill her to basically get her baby. Well the cops eventually showed up, the attacker was arrested and taken to jail. The pregnant woman was beaten pretty bad but survived as did her baby.

OK things like this happen alot more than what the public hears about. What kind of line do these desperate women cross when they think thats it's ok to play God and rip a helpless unborn baby out of their mothers' stomach? These women are obviously mentally unstable from the get go and are so intent on having something that they are unable to have, they will take whatever means possible to achieve this.

These women should not be pitied (the attackers), they should be jailed or institutionalized for their crimes. In some cases when this crime occurs the mother as well as the unborn baby do not survive the vicious attack. Again has society placed such an importance on the need to bear children, that these women who are not fertile will take nature matters into their own hands? Again I don't pity these individuals just the families that they have torn apart by their selfishness.

I don't know if it's peer pressure, society pressure, mental instability, or all three, but this is a serious incident. I was freaked out only by the thought of a person ripping out a baby out of its mother's womb. How unstable is such a person?

This reminds me of a movie with Kim Basinger (not sure though), where she played this pregnant woman abducted in her house by a couple of unstable people, a man and a woman. This couple couldn't have kids, so they decided to abduct Basinger, keep her locked in the basement till she gave birth to the baby, and then, kill her. The woman actually pretended to be pregnant by wearing more clothes and pillows around her belly. It was pretty obvious that she was unstable. Her husband had a...crush...on Basinger, and he ended up dead. I think that the story ended with Basinger being saved and the woman being killed or arrested. It was a pretty intense movie, and to think that this has probably happened at least once.

Poor girl, and poor baby. It's horrible having such an ugly start in your life.

I'm taking a class on criminal justice this semester. Today, we did an activity where the class came up with 10 things we do every day like eating, using the bathroom, texting and we had to decide if there were any types of laws involved with those things (yes for all 10), what the purpose of the law was, if it was a federal, state, or local law etc. We will end the semester with a mock trial. Second semester I might do Villians in History where we look at actual cases and decide where they fall on our teachers villain spectrum and try them for ourselves.

*looks up* I'm SO jealous!

I took two criminology classes this year, but none of them was that practical. I just love this field! If I lived in France, I might have followed this profession, but since criminology is in baby state here in Greece, I'm going to stick to just reading books about it.

I was always fascinated by the criminal mind. All the factors that lead one to crime, the genetic factor and whether this can make one a criminal or not... I think that crime is the edgiest situation a person can find themselves into, thus it's the most interesting to investigate!

As for the laws part, well apparently, we've all broken a few hundreds of them, since there are so many laws we are not aware of. Oh well, noone's a saint, right?

Let us (me) know how the classes go!