Posted on 08/22/2013 9:22:33 AM PDT by marktwain
The Norwegian Royal Palace, located in the heart of Oslo, is surrounded by a pleasant little park called Slottsparken. It contains lawns, flower beds, and a rippling brook spanned by a footbridge. Behind the Palace is a small cabin where members of the palace guard spend their down time napping and watching TV.
A less charming feature of the park is that it’s also been the setting of several rapes – no fewer than five of them between June and October of 2011 alone. Things got so bad that the Radisson Hotel – which is just across the street from the park, a minute’s walk from the Palace – began to provide its guests with rape alarms to wear when going out for a stroll.
A newspaper profile of one of the 2011 Slottsparken rapists provides a pretty representative picture of the kind of individual who commits most of these crimes. The perpetrator was a young Iraqi man who came to Norway in 2003 as an asylum seeker. His asylum application was rejected, but – as is standard practice – he was allowed to stay anyway. Three years later, he brutally raped an 18-year-old girl outside Oslo’s City Hall and was sentenced to four years in prison. In 2009, after his release, a deportation order was issued; he challenged it in court; in 2010, he lost his case. Nonetheless, he was again allowed to stay. A year later, still in Oslo, he raped a woman outside the Royal Palace.
A Muslim asylum seeker; a rap sheet; a meaningless deportation order: in today’s Scandinavia, these are among the standard bullet points on many a rapist’s résumé.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
I disagree. The men that are perpetrating this deliberate attack may be IN the West but they are not OF the West.
And still, the emasculated liberal males of that nation do nothing, while their daughters are raped.
Don’t assume so. Events like this are not isolated, and when women start fighting back, it often results in a moment of hesitation in the attackers, pausing to ponder if their potential victims might be armed.
They usual assumption is that they would just take this into consideration when continuing the attack; but often this is not the case, because the majority of such attackers are cowardly, and if there is even a possibility that they could be harmed, they instead look elsewhere.
Rapists especially, are believed to be trying to use rape to *dominate* their victim. If their intended victim fights back, it makes domination incredibly hard.
Since many more states in the US have become gun friendly, especially with concealed carry, there has been a strong decline in violent crimes. However, some violent criminals have indeed changes their tactics to initiating attacks with a sneak attack to disable or even kill their victim. But this is done out of fear, and it is only a small fraction of the violent criminals out there. When they are taken up, it pretty well ends it.
The bottom line is that right now, girls and women are being violently attacked, raped and even murdered, without struggle. Any resistance they could mount at all would strongly raise the “degree of difficulty” for their attackers, beyond a point many are not willing to go.
It adds a burden to being a violent criminal which should not be considered a bad thing.
All of what you suggest is great in theory, but putting it into practice is another matter. What is going on now in Scandinavia is something fairly recent and it can be attributed almost entirely to Muslim immigrants.
The bottom line is that right now, girls and women are being violently attacked, raped and even murdered, without struggle.
Where in the article does it say that the victims were not putting up any resistance?
I should have said “effective struggle”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.