The Where's the Outrage Thread

[Famine]

I think it's an outrage that this kind of thing can even happen.

Sure thing, but until such a day comes where every individual is monitored all the time (and a pre-crime division arises), there's always going to be absolutely abhorrent, disgusting acts like this. I'd posit that the primary response of most people to the concept of "dad rapes baby daughter to death" is revulsion, to the point that they won't even click on the news link because they really don't want to find out any more about it. Even the gruesome fascination of a car crash response will be bypassed by the very idea of it.


The principle of "where's the outrage" seems to have sprung up from the George Floyd execution, or the Breonna Taylor murder. People were, quite rightly, outraged by these deaths, which had people in positions of power over regular citizens acting in a lethal manner and killing people - in Floyd's case for the crime of being a former prison inmate and passing a counterfeit banknote, and in Taylor's case for the crime of having an ex-boyfriend who was wanted for charges of dealing drugs - and then escaping any form of rebuke from the justice system.

For some reason, some people want to reflect that outrage onto other crimes - involving a black perpetrator and a white victim, though not exclusively - as if to suggest that if one cannot be outraged by these other crimes, one should not be outraged by the former ones - and again, generally suggesting that race plays an issue in the lack of outrage. However the outrage is not at the fact that someone is the victim of a crime, but that they're the victim of a crime by someone in a position of power over regular citizens who face no consequences from the criminal justice system for that crime.

The purpose of this thread appears to be to flag up outrageous crimes that go under-reported by the mainstream media... which is an odd raison d'etre, but whatever. The crimes flagged here, today, are being reported by the mainstream media (at least domestically; I think the UK has enough baby rapists without having the BBC cover all the US ones as well). They also feature people not in a position of power over regular citizens, and not escaping the criminal justice system.

Sure, it's awful (like, unutterably awful), but it doesn't really fit into the concept of something people aren't outraged about but should be.


If we're just going to post up crimes that are absolutely awful things that nobody really wants to read about, then the thread isn't going to last long. If we're going to post up crimes by people in positions of power over regular citizens who escape the criminal justice system, and which go under-reported (considering their magnitude), great.

 

[McLaren]

If the guy was still on the loose or gets lets off by some technicality in court, sure, be outraged, protest, etc.

But, the guy was reportedly arrested before the articles even got out. What am I supposed to be outraged over? It's sick as hell that people do this stuff, but as Famine said, until one can be monitored at all times to prevent crimes (which would invoke a huge debate about privacy rights), this stuff will sadly happen, doesn't matter if you plaster the news story, the court case, and the guy sentenced to jail/death all over the country on every major network.

 

[TexRex]

What..? What???

What? What "What..? What???"?

This reads like you not having a meaningful response so you've opted to feign outrage at having been asked the question.

How do you quantify insufficient outrage that you're compelled to post the story in this thread?

What I don't get is what difference does the number of outlets covering the story make?

You set a precedent for citing a degree of media coverage in your original post. Surely there must then be a threshold at which point media coverage such as this incident has garnered becomed media outrage.

If it was so trending in the news we'd all know about it, but guess what? I bet none of y'all knew about the story until it was posted.

I bet most people didn't know about the story until it wasn't reported on.

Oh and if someone came in here with a post with no link claiming where's the outrage? The first thing y'all would say is where's the link.

If you provided information sans link and were politely asked to provide a link so that others can easily access the information you provided as well as anything you might have missed, you'd go on a long rant about how you don't have time to get links and end said rant with a sweeping declaration that you're done talking to people here, only to renege on that declaration as soon as you want to post again.

Predicting the outcome of hypothetical events, no matter how rooted that outcome is in past events, isn't conducive to polite discussion.

There's plenty to be outraged over in that story but all y'all have better to do is be outraged someone posted a story that regardless of however many stations are showing is not trending in the news.

What is "not trending"? What's the threshold from "not trending" to "trending"?

Also, it's peculiar that outrage can be deemed not present or simply insufficient when a story is indeed covered by news outlets, and yet discussing what led someone to deem that outrage underrepresented is itself deemed outrage. It's as if invocation of outrage is just a blunt instrument that can be wielded as anything anyone wants it to be.

And so what he's been arrested?! There's still plenty to be outraged about.

That the apparent perpetrator is facing the long end of the criminal justice system is substantive. The abhorrent nature of the act doesn't diminish this.

I give up with y'all...

I just got an idea for a drinking game. Any time ryzno makes this sort of sweeping declaration at the end of an unhinged diatribe, do a shot.

If the guy was still on the loose or gets lets off by some technicality in court, sure, be outraged, protest, etc.

Failings of the criminal justice system are absolutely worthy of outrage.

 

[VolkswagenX]

What? What "What..? What???"?

This reads like you not having a meaningful response so you've opted to feign outrage at having been asked the question.

How do you quantify insufficient outrage that you're compelled to post the story in this thread?

Ok.

 

[TexRex]

Ok.

"Ok" what?

How do you quantify insufficient outrage that you're compelled to post the story in this thread?

Inb4 the question is again dodged.

 

[VolkswagenX]

"Ok" what?

"Ok" like whatever.. I don't want to answer your questions.

 

[TexRex]

"Ok" like whatever.. I don't want to answer your questions.

 

[ryzno]

"Ok" like whatever.. I don't want to answer your questions.

They'd rather play the man than talk about the subject.
I don't need anyone to tell me what I created this thread for.
Should I create another thread called "The why is no one talking about this here thread"?
They'd find something to complain about there...
I can't win to lose and they can't be pleased.

Seriously y'all are more worried about who or why it was posted instead of the actual topic.

 

[Famine]

Should I create another thread called "The why is no one talking about this here thread"?
They'd find something to complain about there...

People aren't talking about a father raping his baby daughter to death because they don't want to. It's simply too foul an act for people to even want to contemplate, much less click on even out of morbid curiosity - and I doubt they want to read the vile details of the case here on GTPlanet. I don't know why anyone would think they would. Who's thinking "a guy raped his baby daughter to death; GTPlanet will want to read about that!"?.


If this thread is going to become a dumping ground for sick ****, it's done.