And while the rest of the world was focusing on North Korean developments, the Chinese moved anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles onto the man-made islands in the South China Sea.
Nice pass fake by the Chicoms and Noko.
8 ( +10 / -2 )
If you don't want him and just want to play around, then at least pretend to have some semblance of maturity and give him up for adoption to a loving family that will cherish and provide for him. Please do this immediately before you've had the chance to create permanent mental scars. He's still little so there is time.
Those that you "play around" and "be free" with aren't going to love you once your fleeting youth is (already) gone. They will not be there to hold your hand when you leave this world, they will not remember your life or visit your grave. Time to grow up, and if you don't want to do it then step aside and let someone who is willing to care for the boy. The child has done no wrong and shouldn't have to pay for his mother's severely prolonged immaturity.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Police have made an arrest. The creep appears to be Yusuke Miyashita (宮下裕介) a 20 year-old temp worker from Tanabe city, and unfortunately for him 20 is the age of majority.
Hope they throw the book at him, and it would be awesome if they gave the girls' father, grandfather, and uncles 15 minutes with him alone in a locked cell.
4 ( +5 / -1 )
@Nerakai I don't doubt that some people can change in prison, and I'm sure that it's harsh. Perhaps a few people can manage to change themselves, but data shows the recidivism approaches 80% so the overwhelming majority of those imprisoned never experience an appreciable shift in their moral compass.
To answer your question though, if there is no surviving family (although I think that's not very common and being used as a red herring) then life in prison without the possibility of parole should be the sentence. Again, if the family of the victim wants to spare the murderer's life in exchange for life in prison with no chance of parole, I think that's acceptable as well and it's not up to me to intervene.
However, in the case of a murderer of children I think the death penalty should still be applied. Someone willing to prey on society's most vulnerable (children) can never be reformed and can still be a risk to other children even if paroled at 70.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
@Ah_so - That's exactly why civil courts exist: to seek retribution for debts and offenses, and in cases where the offense was exceedingly blatant or callous, to also impose punitive damages. Not sure why people think that the criminal justice system should be any different.
Prison can not rehabilitate an individual, nor should it be up to prison to do that. Nothing can reform an individual but himself, so it's up to him whether he wants to reform himself for the sake of himself. Even if he does decide to reform himself, that does not forgive the debt he has to his victims. Why you see fit to insert yourself into the equation to say how repaying that debt is "fair" to both parties is beyond me. If you're not personally involved, then you shouldn't really have any interest in the matter other than virtue signalling.
-3 ( +1 / -4 )
Morosawa's point is pretty spot on. There really is no rehabilitating someone that has committed heinous crimes, and I can't think of anything more heinous than killing a 4 year-old girl, her parents and an elderly woman all for the sake of 340,000 yen. Despite him being a 19 year-old "minor" under Japanese law should not shield him from responsibility. Even a high school student (or younger) is clearly capable of understanding the gravity of his actions and how irreversible they are. You either have it in you to do something as horrific as that, or you do not. There is no rehabilitation from that. It's not like peer pressure pushed him over the edge to try drugs or something like that. He did it on his own and in cold blood. What's the point of trying to rehabilitate him anyway? The penal system is punitive, not rehabilitative.
Some here have stated that the death penalty doesn't offer a deterrent. I would argue that it does to a point, in that while it may not deter everyone it deters enough people and I'd hate to think what would happen if the penalty for murder wasn't significant.
Either way, I think that whether the murderer should be put to death is a decision that should be left to the surviving family members. If they want to spare him, then fine. If they want justice and want the murderer put to death, then that's fine too. The murderer created a debt to that family. How that debt is to be satisfied should be up to the family, and not to the public that thinks they have the right to intervene on behalf of the "human rights" of the murderer.
-4 ( +3 / -7 )
One can only imagine the howls of protest that North Korea would send up if Japan decided that it was going to in turn conduct a ballistic missile test that overflew North Korean Territory or dropped close to NK in the Sea of Japan.
Something tells me that Neither China nor Russia would sit idly by if Japan decided to begin testing nuclear capable delivery systems and firing them westward.
If China doesn't begin to exert maximum pressure on NK to stop this, then they will keep going and upping the ante until a much larger event (such as war) stops them. Better to avoid this now than later.
0 ( +4 / -4 )
Some people in Japan don't seem to understand the concept of jurisdiction.
Statues erected in the USA or South Korea, are not really the concern of the Mayor of Osaka. His concern as Mayor should be representing the people of Osaka and dealing with Osaka's issues.
Seems that the "private" groups and the SK government don't seem to understand jurisdiction either. The US and SF should not be dragged into a matter between Japan and SK. Especially when the matter has been officially settled numerous times.
Of course Japan did things wrong in the Imperial era, as did all countries with an imperial or colonial past. For better or for worse their imperial era coincided with a time in history where humanity had the technical ability to record and disseminate images and information. Sometimes it was disseminated in a fair and unbiased light, but often it was also selectively used and targeted with a good dose of patriotism and propaganda to serve the specific needs of one side or the other.
With that being said, Japan has become an upstanding member of the world community since the end of world war II. I don't think that fact is in dispute at all. The generation that is alive today, even the most senior people had zero to do with the decisions made by imperial Japan. So there is really no reason to punish the children and grandchildren for what occurred during Imperial times. If that was the expected norm, I think that most countries except for a very few would be eternally guilty of some crime or another whether real or perceived.
Japan has at least owned up to the harm they have done other countries in the past. I can think of a few of it's neighbors that do not allow any sort of criticism at all whether internal or external. I think that for anyone that wants to see this for what it is, it is above all a political move. No one is seeking justice for the women that may have been harmed by Imperial Japan. If they were, then there would be a full and transparent audit of the money paid to the women that were supposed to benefit from it.
Short of this, the only point of putting these statues around the world to any local government that will accept them is to set the stage for future extortion and giving Japan a black eye international which the government of SK smiles on.
7 ( +9 / -2 )
Since this is a multi-person statue installation, why not include a statue of the Korean pimps that organized the women, or better yet the Korean fathers that sold their daughters to the pimps to pay off gambling or drinking debts?
History needs to be remembered, but if we're going to remember it then let's remember all the sordid details. Leaving out the unflattering parts for political purposes seems criminal in and of itself. The women themselves seem to be of little consequence to the groups providing these statues and working so hard to keep hate alive.
10 ( +14 / -4 )
Why is a 12 year old girl walking around alone at midnight anyway? Always best to not invite disaster if you can.
7 ( +8 / -1 )
I can't think of anything more rude or narcissistic than publicly protesting your own government in your host country. The Japanese populace has next to nothing to do with US domestic issues, and forcing them to have to see/listen/endure signs, bullhorns, chants and pink pussy hats shows a level of self-absorption the protestors have but fail to see for themselves.
What good will protesting your government in a very crowded space in Tokyo (which Trump probably will not even pass by, unless I'm missing something) do for your cause? The only immediate effect it will have is to make the Japanese think of Americans as loudmouthed, insensitive, know-it-alls who have no qualms at disrupting the mood and flow in Tokyo in order to further their own goals. Goals that have nothing to do with the Japanese passersby that have to endure the loud Americans.
0 ( +3 / -3 )
All the AC ads after the quake and subsequent fallout were indeed creepy. Gave the impression that the studio had been abandoned and that they were just running an ad loop.
AC ads in and of themselves have gotten creepy in recent years and are quite politically charged, but still quite subtle if you compare them to the AC ads run in the US. The one with Wanda Sykes chiding a few teenage kids for using the word "gay" inappropriately takes the cake.
Although I didn't see this particular one anymore after the quake and soon departed Japan, there was one about domestic violence that kind of got me thinking. A woman is sitting down, obviously troubled by something, with a lot of bubbles with words floating up around her, with descriptions of acts that are considered DV. Two of the bubbles really caught my attention, one saying "He ignores me", the other "He doesn't give me money to live on".
Now, I'm certainly no supporter of domestic violence, but I have a big problem with accepting that ignoring someone be considered DV. For a couple that constantly bickers, ignoring each other might be the easiest way to co-exist until they decide what they want to do going forward. I've seen many cases where the wife completely ignores the husband as well...is this also to be considered DV against him?
Also, it's quite normal for the wife in Japan to withhold money from the husband, and dole it out to him as she sees fit. Is this also to be considered DV against him? If the couple has come to the conclusion that they don't have a future together, and the husband is the sole breadwinner, would he want to continue allowing the wife to control the purse strings so that she can squirrel more and more money away before the inevitable divorce? Will looking cross-eyed at your partner become the next recognized act of DV?
Most of the AC ads seem fairly innocuous with ideas such as "love your children", which everyone should understand and do anyway. Seems like in recent years they have been slipping the social engineering messages in to see if people notice. I've often wondered what the funding source behind the AC is, and now that these ads are running back to back I wonder even more.
0 ( +0 / -0 )