Charming Noble Savages in Canada Buck A Morally Corrupt Culture

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/29/world/americas/canada-honor-murder/index.html

Note my sarcasm

"There is a very important difference between honor killing and violence against women in the form of domestic violence.
It is plotted, it is premeditated." Mojab said.

"What we need to understand is that the male power and the male desire for the control of the woman's body and the woman's
sexuality -- the honor resides in that sort of understanding and the ownership of women's body and sexuality," he said.
"So when that is being presented in a way that is not acceptable to the social norm, then
the only way the honor can be restored is by purifying that. And the purification is through blood."

Bold mine ... Wow.

How very Mormon of them...

My favorite part is where the 13-year-old daughter called social services herself to rescue her from the tumultuous home, and they did nothing to prevent her murder. That's always good to see.

Honor.

Three grown people conspire to murder four people. They then proceed to commit the murders in a way that either, a) looks like an accident, or, b) is intended to not be discovered.

Honor? Sh'yeah right.

How does such an indoctrination engrain itself so fully that these people were actually afraid of freedom?

That freedom could actually frighten someone so much that they murder four people depresses me.

Sundae;791525 wrote:

How very Mormon of them...

Damm ! they have Mormons in Afghanistan! How crazy is that! And now those evil people are moving to Canada! We must stop the hoards from invading. Next thing you know they are going to run for president and take over the UN Cabal!

Clodfobble;791529 wrote:

My favorite part is where the 13-year-old daughter called social services herself to rescue her from the tumultuous home, and they did nothing to prevent her murder. That's always good to see.

I didn't see that in the story or the video, but even it it's true that social services were called, preventing murder isn't a fair charge against them. This is a tragedy, and the husband/father and his wife and their son were the murderers, tried, convicted and sentenced. No government agency is responsible for preventing murder, not social services, not the police, none of them. I know your comment is dripping sarcasm. It just chaps me. There's little defense for children with sane (or insane) parents bent on harming their kids.

No government agency is responsible for preventing murder, not social services, not the police, none of them.

I had kinda hoped that the police would be involved in that in some way.
Ya know like prevention or something.

Sundae;791525 wrote:

How very Mormon of them...

This is an unwarranted cheap shot.

Really?

Mormon doctrine included Blood Atonement; fundamentalist Mormons still abide by it.
Joseph Smith certainly suggested the sin of adultery should be punishable by the spilling of blood.

I'm not specifically anti-Mormon.
I view them pretty much the same as other religions.
Okay, I admit, quite a bit higher on the fruitloop scale.

But not enough to have a vested interest in taking cheap shots at them.

classicman;791641 wrote:

I had kinda hoped that the police would be involved in that in some way.
Ya know like prevention or something.

What crimes do the police prevent? What crimes are the supposed to prevent? None. They can't. The only thing that prevents crime is a person's own moral sense relative to the laws established in their time and location. That's it.

Ok, like... what evidence was there to justify a police action? I haven't seen any. An angry father? Not a crime. A murdering father, yes, of course that's a crime. The police are not responsible for preventing crime. If that's your expectation, we have trouble. The PARENTS are responsible for not murdering their children. Fuck, for that matter, the police are also responsible for not murdering the children. The police succeeded, the parents failed.

If there is some something that shows the police had cause to act and failed to do so effectively, that's important. But absent some kind of evidence like that, I can't fault the police, or the social services for that matter. I'm not a perfect parent. I'm a good parent, and no murderer. But I will never stand for a system that has the police, y'know, just hanging out, making sure I don't murder someone in my home.

There's ALREADY a crapton of this in other societies, notably the ones in the Middle East where vigilante deciders of moral values intercede. Screw that. I like my police on a strict legal leash. Murders will happen either way, but with our laws, we at least have some agreed upon framework that we each can use to hang our expectations on. We can expect that the police won't arbitrarily decide a murder was imminent and act, perhaps with deadly force. None of us wants that.

It is a criminal and a moral outrage. There are two different grievances here, the society's outrage at the murder of the girls and the shame of the family brought about by the actions of the girls. The girls' actions seemed to be within their local society's boundaries, but well outside their family's boundaries. This is the very point of conflict. This family was not in a society that had compatible standards, standards their children's behavior was compatible with. The family acted in a way that was true to their beliefs but it was tragically counter to the standards of the society in which they lived. Perhaps they believe they have their honor restored, though they'll only enjoy it in prison. They will have considerable company there. Many others have made the same tragic calculation.

BigV wrote:

I didn't see that in the story or the video, but even it it's true that social services were called, preventing murder isn't a fair charge against them.

From the written article:

Geeti was failing in school and calling social workers to get her out of a home in turmoil.

It's true that we don't know if they did "nothing" or not. Possibly they investigated, but everything in the house appeared normal, and there was no way to see that members of this family were the type to plot a murder. But when the child called social workers to ask for protection, either they came or they didn't. If they didn't, they are guilty of criminal negligence in my mind. If they did, what did she say to them? "Get me out of here because" ...what? Because my dad is violent? That's enough cause to remove younger children from a household until the situation is investigated. Because my dad threatens to kill me? Again, enough cause to do their jobs.

About the only thing she could have said that would still leave their hands tied is, "Well, my dad yells at me because I get bad grades." And maybe she said something like that, and they were justified in ignoring her. But I find it unlikely that she was smart enough to figure out how to call social services for protection, but wasn't smart enough to know what words to use to accurately portray the danger she was in.

V - I wasn't referring to this crime specifically. It was more of a general statement which I maintain.
It is part of police responsibility to prevent crime.

V - to add turmoil to the discussion...

<snip>If there is some something that shows the police had cause to act and failed to do so effectively, that's important. But absent some kind of evidence like that, I can't fault the police, or the social services for that matter. <snip>

Didn't the article say something about hours of recorded phone conversations being used during the trial ?

... maybe not the same issues.

classicman;791680 wrote:

V - I wasn't referring to this crime specifically. It was more of a general statement which I maintain.
It is part of police responsibility to prevent crime.

Not really. It is their responsibility to investigate crimes. It is their responsibility to stop crimes that are in progress. It is a hoped-for side effect that their effectiveness at the above will prevent crime.

Yeah, McGruff says "Only you can prevent crime" and Smokey Bear says "Take a bite out of forest fires."

Strike that. Reverse it. Twice.

NY State Police wrote:

A priority in our mission is to prevent crime and enforce the law.

link