CMV: Some felons deserve to have songs written and sung about them, depending on what crimes they committed.

destro23 · 2022-01-23T20:30:27+00:00

No one wants to hear a song about a child rapist.

2022-01-23T20:31:45+00:00

No body cares about your song.

megatravian · 2022-01-23T20:50:13+00:00

Your post is contains some explicit contradiction/confusion of the motive of 'creating songs about felons'.

First you make it seem like we are 'shaming' the felons by creating humiliating songs about felons.

Especially since Gilbert Alagyu, Jr. did something heinous to a 12 y.o. when he was 16, he deserves the humiliation the song creates on him.

Then you make it seem like you are rewarding felons.

I think it's only fair to compensate the people I write songs about, including felons. If this ballad about Gilbert ever becomes a commercial success, I'll share him a cut of the royalties.

So on one hand you are punishing them with these songs and on the other hand you are rewarding them for having committed the crimes ---- the motivation behind 'creating songs' then remains fuddled.

It really seems to me you are just trying to promote yourself. Since that is one things that has been coherent throughout the post.

OMNlClDE · 2022-01-23T20:37:37+00:00

This is weird af.. why tf would anyone want to listen to a song ab a child rapist?

robotmonkeyshark · 2022-01-23T20:42:27+00:00

Do you think you should have to get his permission before releasing it?

You say that the felon is entitled to royalties, how much should they be entitled to? Or should the writer be able to choose and if they say they only want to give 0.0000001% should that be allowed? Or are you advocating for some minimum allowed royalties that the felon is entitled to.

Are they entitled to gross or net profit royalties? It would be very easy to claim the song never make an actual net profit because you can always make up excuses for expenses that you incurred to produce or promote the song. Which once again would be a very easy loophole to say they are not entitled to anything.

budlejari · 2022-01-23T21:12:01+00:00

However, I think it's only fair to compensate the people I write songs about, including felons. If this ballad about Gilbert ever becomes a commercial success, I'll share him a cut of the royalties.

And here in lies the problem.

One of the biggest issues that people have with many convicted felons is their ability to profit from their crimes, despite costing the public purse a tremendous amount of money to investigate, prosecute, and incarerate. They may also have egregiously hurt a family, perhaps removing their breadwinner, and resulting in a lot of pain and suffering.

Part of being in prison is punishment. If they have the ability to profit off their crimes and use them to generate money, fame, and attention, then it is not a punishment. Their victim(s) are not being compensated and their crimes become center stage.

When criminals become famous, they become idealized and rewarded for their abhorrent, harmful, and deeply immoral behavior. In your example, he abused a child, and was charged with a host of other crimes, including kidnapping. (Despite trying to find out specifics, all the websites showing this were either broken or just didn't lead anywhere, even with a VPN). Let us be clear, he abused, harmed, and potentially caused decades of harm for a child and many other people. Allowing him to profit off of this implies that, to some extent, harming another person is a profitable and even lucrative outcome that can be taken advantage of and even replicated. This was the reason that New York created the infamous "Son of Sam" law which have survived in various forms, even if the original one did not.

We do not want criminals to be idealized. They do not need people to raise up and defend them, their actions, or to be willing to push them aside when constructing media about them We do not want them to become famous for their crimes because this invites other people to not necessarily commit crimes but to take their own lawnessness up to become infamous. It is not enough to kill someone, it becomes tempting to become famous for doing so. We do not want people who commit murder to be able to become 'household' names, where their identity is their currency, and where they are allowed to view it as their 'celebrity factor'.

It is particularly important to do this in cases where notoriety and fame would be a particular lure for people to commit crimes in the most graphic and public way possible, including in terrorism and in spree killers etc. Drawing attention to their mission, their harm, and inciting a cult of personality around them is precisely what they want and benefit from. For example, Elliot Roger in 2018 wanted to incite others to join his cause and commit more crimes like his to push his perspective around women and misogyny. It is patently clear why we would not want people to know his name or to give him or his estate any attention, rather than the people he killed.

It is one of the reasons that many news stations decline to name killers who have been caught and prefer to show faces of the victims and their identities instead. Rather than focus on the person who did the taking, it allows focus on the those that were taken.

harley9779 · 2022-01-23T21:31:29+00:00

I don't think it makes any sense to do anything that keeps the memory of a horrible person around.

We do this often with documentaries, books and articles about the worst criminals. I think knowledge of what they did is important, but glorifying them is wrong.

A song about a criminal would likely do the exact opposite of what you think. A horrible criminal would more likely think it was cool that they had a song written about them rather than be shamed by it.

This is also assuming the criminal would ever even hear the song or know about it's existence.

DeltaBot · 2022-01-23T21:40:38+00:00

/u/TSoWAY (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.

All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.

Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.

^{Delta System Explained} ^| ^Deltaboards

ViewedFromTheOutside · 2022-01-23T21:43:03+00:00

Sorry, u/TSoWAY – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule D:

Posts cannot express a neutral stance, suggest harm against a specific person, be self-promotional, or discuss this subreddit (visit r/ideasforcmv instead). No view is banned from CMV based on popularity or perceived offensiveness, but the above types of post are disallowed for practical reasons. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.

Sorry, u/TSoWAY – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule D:

Posts cannot express a neutral stance, suggest harm against a specific person, be self-promotional, or discuss this subreddit (visit r/ideasforcmv instead). No view is banned from CMV based on popularity or perceived offensiveness, but the above types of post are disallowed for practical reasons. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.

BIG YES BOMB!!!!!

Sunday, January 23, 2022

CMV: Some felons deserve to have songs written and sung about them, depending on what crimes they committed.

No comments:

Post a Comment