192
this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
192 points (98.5% liked)
World News
37466 readers
2132 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Italy needs to get serious on imprisonment for career criminals, they don't.
It's not morality to teach kids about all the options they can choose to earn a living.
It astounding that you can't think of why government kidnapping is a bad thing. They have no right to take kids from homes because they want to "tame the savages".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Indian_boarding_schools
Did you miss my big, big disclaimer? "excepting the potential for abuse of this precedent".
In the case under discussion, the parents are convicted major criminals, there's a big difference from targeting a certain race. I do agree it's a potential slippery slope.
You can teach the kids their options, but the home environment obviously exerts a greater influence, especially if they are brought up to glorify it.
I have a serious, non-rhetorical question that I'm honestly interested in an answer to. Given that the parents and family have proven themselves to be bad influences and unfit guardians, why would we WANT to continue exposing the kids to their influence? This question is specific to this situation, not about the potential for abuse of the law in other situations. I don't have a dog in this fight, I appreciate hypothetical discussions.
Only in a perfect scenario would there be no abuse, so it's nonsensical to ignore it. The reality is how bad will the abuse have to be before this program is deemed a failure.
There was no due process to kidnap the kids. Part of the parents sentence was not loss of custody. If you look at history the state has been a much more terrible guardian.
Source? It's an official govt program being run by a judge. Not even those opposing the program are claiming it's against the law, they're just saying it's a bad idea.
Worse than grooming the kids to be crime lords? It's a closely scrutinised program, and nobody's calling shenanigans on the implementation, not even the kids being interviewed. It might not work out, that's true, but I am not seeing a reason that it would be a definite failure.
I'll know this may sound strange but just because it's a government program does not mean due process is followed. Loss of custody was not part of sentencing, these are additional conditions applied after sentencing.
The interviews published were hand selected, the articles are very biased. I'll sumerize a different way, only 3 of the 100 kids taken from their parents did not speak poorly about their experience.
One of the foster centers is the Catholic church. Nothing mixes better than Catholic priests and children.
Due process means the law was fairly applied and their rights were respected. I agree and understand that a govt program does not mean this is the case. In the absence of any countervailing evidence however, that would be the default assumption.
I agree with you there. The kids are not under a gag order though. Is there any other article or source that indicates a different situation from the one described here?
Additional sentencing was added, a parent or parents went to jail and their kids were taken from them.
Trusting the government to do the right thing is a poor idea. Politicians will only do the "right" thing if it helps them out.
That usually starts trickling out much later, look at how long it took for the truth to come out about troubled youth camps.
How is that additional sentencing? In essence, they proved themselves to be unfit parents (because, you know, the whole grooming for crime thing), and had their kids removed due to that. It's like if you lost your job because you were convicted of a crime. That's not additional sentencing, that's just a consequence of your actions
Without any information, this is just idle conspiracy theorising. It's not even about politicians, since from the sound of it this came from regular govt officials, not elected politicians.
The difference there is the state is doing both things for the same crime, and employment is a conditional agreement.
Blindly trusting that the government would do the right thing requires a severe lack of understanding of history.
Elected officials are the ones who hold regular govt officials accountable.