What to do with child molesters?

[Don Corleone]

I'm moving this over from the Fascist thread (sorry about the diversion, Beirut). Anyway, there's two schools of thought on this (with all sorts of variants within the two camps).

One side says the offender is a victim themself, of a terrible disease, and deserves therapy and treatment. Just as we shouldn't punish somebody for catching cancer, this school of thought says the perpetrator should be treated, not punished. Among other things, they point to the fact that most molesters were themselves molested in their own childhood.

The other camp points to the high recivitism rate, even when the offender has received the best available care. The number of reoffending paedophiles is a hard number to judge, as they are certainly not going to volunteer the information. There is also the tricky question of what concerns a re-offense. In any case, estimates run as high as 80%, it's one of the highest recivitism rate crimes there is. In light of this, this camp advocates terrible punishments for the perpetrators, in an effort to discourage them (or prevent them). This is where you hear things along the lines of execution, castration, extended prison sentances, etc. One of the justifications for this camp believing the perpetrator is responsible for their actions is that they agree most perpetrators were themselves victimized, they point to the fact that the overwhelmingly number of sexual abuse victims DO NOT grow up to become offenders themselves. In other words, while victimization might be a flag, it is certainly not correlated enough to be a 'cause' in the sense of removing responsibility.

Now, I've recently come to a place where I've decided that my Christian faith cannot square with the death penalty. The public whipping sounded really good, and not just from a vengance standpoint. Singapore absolutely swears by their system (of caning). In most criminology studies, the reason deterrants don't work isn't because the potential criminal isn't afraid of the punishment if he knew he was going to receive it, he has worked out the odds and considers the likelihood of being punished so low, it's worth the risk. I believe that if paedophiles knew they were going to be publicly whipped (or even in private) and for minor offenses you were forced to watch a whipping, the predators would take different actions.

I'd really like to hear from qualified professionals, such as A. Saturnus (but all are welcome to share their views) to discuss what those in the rehabilitation camp propose doing about the high recitivism rates of paedophiles. As it currently stands, even with the best of treatments, 4 out of 5 of these guys are going to come out of prison and reoffend. Is that the price we as a society have to pay?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Simple . Send them all to Jags home for rehabilitaion. ~D Where has the darlin boy been by the way?

[Duke Malcolm]

lol ~:)

I would castrate them, then 10 years in gaol, then brand the word "PAEDO" somewhere on them, and then let it be.

[King Henry V]

Castrate them, then lock them in a cell with one bed for 24h with 6 foot 9, 250 pound convict called "Pooches".

[Ronin]

lock them up and throw away the key....make sure the prison population is well aware of the subject´s crime in order to assure a "warm" welcome.

no death penalty.....but a suicide option should be presented at any time that the subject asked for it.

[TosaInu]

A hot topic. I understand the emotions, but keep it clean and civil.

[The_Doctor]

Castrate them

What if it was a woman?


We had one in our road only 3 houses away from mine in a big old house that is used as flats, nobody knew about it until we read it in a local newspaper.

And ironically we also have a man who got an MBE for running a youth club for a long time.

[Redleg]

Child Molesters and Rapists are like Sociopaths. Both are proven incurable, and un-rehabilitatable. You can do some things to lessen the risk, but you can never cure someone like this. Regardless of whatever victimizations they might have gone through at one point, is that not further reason to remove them from society? If they are running around raping and molesting, they are creating more people like themselves.

Child Molesters and Rapists need to be killed, in my opinion.

For committing the crime of molestion and child rape - lock them up for a long period of time - There is a push to make it a mandatory sentence of not less then 25 years. Not sure where I actually fall into on this - the first time offense could be treated if an investigation is conducted toward the why of the crime to determine what made the individual do such an act - but for multiple offenders - I have absolutely no problem having them locked up for the rest of their lives.

For committing child rape and then murdering that child - well I have already stated numerous times that such an act warrants the death penality.

[ShadesPanther]

executed or at the very least locked up in jail until they die with no chance at all of parole

Also in my school just before I went there there was a paedophille teacher so yes lock them up untill they die at the very least

[Kagemusha]

I think they cant be cured.Lobotomy or castration and lifetime in jail.Some people just arent able to be part of the society.

[doc_bean]

Lock them up and throw away the key, allow suicide.

[sharrukin]

There exists the problem of wrongful conviction, particularly when the victim is a child, and more susceptible to outside influence. That aside.

If there exists clear proof (DNA, video, etc) then the death penalty seems the only long term solution that works. Long prison terms have a magical way of becoming shorter as time goes by. And then we have another victim.

When one of these guys is arrested, it is rare indeed, to hear that this is their first run-in with the law. They have usually done this several times before that the legal system was aware of.

Death penalty

[Red Harvest]

I'm not willing to accept the "disease" argument as it is generally presented. I can accept it if we treat it as a disease that requires stringent permanent quarantine. That quarantine would of course be lifetime imprisonment. Castration might work for some, but it is not going to work for many. In a voluntary capacity it might have some application.

I strongly support the death penalty for many offenses against children. It must be my rural roots, but we put dangerous animals down. (Incurably ill ones too...hence my acceptance of assisted suicide.) To me, someone who cannot live in our society without destroying the lives of innocents qualifies as a dangerous animal, rather than a human worthy of my sympathy. They should be put down with extreme prejudice.

[drone]

The death penalty is too kind here. King Henry V's idea is more of what I'd prefer. At least 20 years in the general population of a maximum security prison. In prisons here in the States, pedophiles are about three rungs lower than pond scum in the hierarchy, chances are you'd get the same result as the death penalty, but with a cleaner conscience and lower electric bill.

[yesdachi]

I'm not willing to accept the "disease" argument as it is generally presented. I can accept it if we treat it as a disease that requires stringent permanent quarantine. That quarantine would of course be lifetime imprisonment. Castration might work for some, but it is not going to work for many. In a voluntary capacity it might have some application.

I strongly support the death penalty for many offenses against children. It must be my rural roots, but we put dangerous animals down. (Incurably ill ones too...hence my acceptance of assisted suicide.) To me, someone who cannot live in our society without destroying the lives of innocents qualifies as a dangerous animal, rather than a human worthy of my sympathy. They should be put down with extreme prejudice.
Since seeing the original question posted a while ago I have been trying to think of a response that would be appropriate without spending a lot of time (I am at work) Thanks Red Harvest :bow: for saving me the trouble. I agree.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

My faith teaches against the use of the death penalty, and I have slowly come around to agreement with that position.

Heinous offenders of this type are demonstrably damaging to society (creating a new generation of the same being among the worst elements). Redleg's commentary about quarantine is apt. Taking life judicially may be unneccessary in a modern society and thereful too "vengeful" to constitute a truly ethical response. Allowing such offenders to continue among us, especially in light of the known recidivism/failed treatment rates, is equally unethicical. Imprisonoment until the threat is nullified is the only moral choice.

Seamus

[Crazed Rabbit]

For all those advocating killing, what do you think of this:

Man claims he killed 2 sex offenders in city (http://www.bellinghamherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050907/NEWS09/509070342/1006/LIFE) ?

I personally say lock them up and throw away the key or just save some jail space and execute for the particularily henious crimes.

Crazed Rabbit

[Devastatin Dave]

Simple . Send them all to Jags home for rehabilitaion. ~D Where has the darlin boy been by the way?

LOL, I was about to post the exact same thing!!! Beat me to it!!! :bow:

[Tribesman]

What to do with child molesters?

Oh , that didn't actually work did it . :furious3:

[yesdachi]

For all those advocating killing, what do you think of this:

Man claims he killed 2 sex offenders in city (http://www.bellinghamherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050907/NEWS09/509070342/1006/LIFE) ?
I’m not sure why he turned himself in ~:confused: . If your going to be a vigilante, I say really go for it! He should have been going from town to town with a copy of the “registered sex offenders list” in one hand and his 9mm in the other. :charge:

[BDC]

Therapy or whatever if that will actually change things. If not, prison I guess. Either way don't let them near kids at all.

Still, no point in letting someone who could actually work (just not near vulnerable people) rot in prison.

[Crazed Rabbit]

yesdachi, I'm not sure why he turned himself in either. It seemed like he was not a suspect. Whatcom County could do with less sex offenders.


Crazed Rabbit

[PanzerJaeger]

Sexuality does not define a person, but it cannot be changed within a person. Bluntly, you like what you like. If a person acts on an attraction that is illegal they should be punished and put in a position where they cannot do it again.

However, we should be careful not to hate people who have sexually deviant thoughts. A man that is attracted to 8 year old girls is no different than a man who likes other men. Both of them cannot help what they are attracted to, and both of them could be perfectly great people on and intellectual and emotional level.

If you're lucky, when you start to feel your own sexuality you will feel attracted so someone of the opposite sex that is around your same age. If not, then thats your cross to bear the rest of your life.

Some people are just unlucky enough to be born with attractions that simply are not able to be fulfilled without hurting another person.. like pedophiles. They are forced to live a life of celabacy or learn to enjoy more normalized sexual behavior.

We should never hate or wish death on people that are pedophiles, homosexuals, or any type of sexual deviant. They cannot help it. Society is right to punish and villify those who act on their selfish deviations at the cost of others.

Child molestors should be killed.

[Kanamori]

What to do with child molesters?

Oh , that didn't actually work did it .


Should child molesters and child rapists get the same punishment?

Along similar lines, is murder worse than child rape/child molestation?

Although child rape is certainly an awful thing, I do not know if murder is worse or not. One can be incredibly scarring -- I cannot even begin to imagine how terrible it must be -- but with the other the chance for life is lost entirely.

[Kanamori]

Sexuality does not define a person, but it cannot be changed within a person. Bluntly, you like what you like.

I wonder if this has been supported by any studies, and to what degree (I would imagine sexual deviance in this area is a bit harder to track than, say, homosexuality).

[Louis VI the Fat]

For all those advocating killing, what do you think of thisI say give the guy a medal and put him on a government payroll.

[Tribesman]

And could we stop with the Church-bashing?
Why?
It is my church so I have every right to complain about its failings in dealing with clerical child abuse , failings that went on and on for years .

[Kralizec]

Caution: What I'm going to type now is going to upset a lot of you

Todays societies, and ESPECIALLY Dutch society, force young people and especially girls to become...err, mature early on. This is the MTV generation, kids being stimulated everywhere they look. In the Netherlands C&A is selling string underware for girls as young as 12! I could think of more such examples, but that would be kind of redundant.
When discos fail to keep 13 year old girls out (and I mean come on, bouncers are doing this several evenings per week- how difficult is it to tell if a girl is 13 or 21?)
Older guys visit those discos, guys who also grew up with MTV etc...on top of this, it's not just a case of an older guy wanting a young girl- the young girl wants him too.
Stuff like that happens outside of discos too. Kids have sex younger and younger when the years pass, and don't mind doing it with somebody way older.
So it's easy to put them in jail, and even easier to give them the electric chair. Ignore the root of the problem and just kill the guy, the mob approves anyway.

I know this isn't what you meant in your post Don, but those guys fall under "pedophile" too and I wanted to add some nuance here. As for the kind of guy you're talking about, ie the old pervert who abducts little girls in cars, I can be brief. Unless we can be very, very certain that in a particular case there's practicly no risk of recidivism, life long imprisonment. Otherwise a long sentence and compulsory psychiatric treatment before released in the open (TBS in the Netherlands allows this lifelong, dunno about the rest of the world)
So no public floggings, live executions on TV, etc

[Goofball]

Well. Like The Don, I also cannot reconcile myself to the death penalty. Unlike Signor Corleone, my disagreement with the death penalty comes not from religious/moral beliefs, but from my observation that our justice systems are extremely far from perfect, and I don't believe we can always be certain we are executing the right person.

Having said that, I also cannot buy into the public corporal punishment school of thought. It's just too barbaric and again, our legal systems are not surefire enough for me to be comfortable that we would be strapping the right guy into the stocks in the public square, then administering a torture that would leave his flesh shredded as he stood in pools of his own blood. And quite frankly, I would not want to be a part of a society that condoned such a thing.

What to do with child molesters?

Simple.

Lock 'em up. Forever. No chance of release, ever.

It shouldn't be about revenge. It should be about punishment, and keeping society safe.

Locking them up accomplishes both.

[Devastatin Dave]

And could we stop with the Church-bashing?
Why?
It is my church so I have every right to complain about its failings in dealing with clerical child abuse , failings that went on and on for years .

Yup, its only allowed to bash Christianity here.

[Don Corleone]

Okay, well, I'm actually surprised by some of the responses I've seen in here, not because of content, but because there's more people on my page (and from a wider perspective) than I would have thought. Still, even a lynch mob has a majority in agreement, so we shouldn't be too quick to castrate/flog/execute the perpetrator.

I'd like to address a comment by Seamus that pedophiles 'create a whole new generation'. Not all pedophiles were in fact molested, and the vast majority of victims DO NOT come of age and begin offending. I'm not criticizing you, it's a common myth put forward by pop-psychology. If you really believe the pedophile is created directly in such a fashion, surely you must view him/her as blameless, as they have no concious role to play, correct?

I understand what people are talking about when it comes to execution not as vengance, but as a public health solution, but again, as this is a human being we're talking about, I do not believe we have the right to take his/her life. It's hard, believe me, very hard, to continue to toe this line, but I really honestly believe the Lord reserves final judgement for Himself.

Anyway, is A. Saturnus the only one we have in the backroom that's 'in the know' when it comes to prevalanent modern theories of psychology and what's being bandied about in their journals? I really would like to understand the thought process of people that advocate for rehabilitation of pedophiles. I think I know what Jag would say, but he approaches it from his notion of social justice, and I'm looking for something derived in the crucible of scientific method, or at least in conjunction with it.

[Kanamori]

Yup, its only allowed to bash Christianity here.

The Church is not the same as Christianity, and I haven't heard any widespread cases of Rabbis moving Rabbis to different synagogues, or Imams moving Imams to different mosques. Criticizing the clergy is distinct from criticizing the religion. At any rate, I remember a particularly nasty thread about Islam.

[Tribesman]

Dave , if you could point me in the direction of an organisation with a very long history of child abuse and coverups of that abuse stretching all the way to the top of that organisation then I will bash that organisation .
Until then why should I not bash an institution that fits all of that criteria ?

[Adrian II]

I really would like to understand the thought process of people that advocate for rehabilitation of pedophiles. I think I know what Jag would say, but he approaches it from his notion of social justice, and I'm looking for something derived in the crucible of scientific method, or at least in conjunction with it.I have researched this theme a bit because there have been several widely-publicised cases of repeat sex offenders in The Netherlands recently.

The trouble is there is no known cure for serious sexual deviancy. Chemical castration is the alternative, but only in combination with forced psychotherapy and rehabilitation. Therapy is necessary because a main part of the problem of sex offenders is that they incapable of dealing with stressful situations. A long prison sentence followed by forced treatment tends to work in The Netherlands. The repeat offenders I mentioned were typically convicts who eluded their parole officers, stopped taking their medication and were caught within days of their escape. The Dutch parole system for sex offenders clearly needs an overhaul.

[TosaInu]

Note!

This topic is getting pretty heated. I've been editing and PM'ing for a couple of hours just because of this topic, both private and general. This is the last warning: keep it civil.

Avoid the generalisation trap and the :bigcry: or this topic will be purged. A shame, as I think it also contains some reasonable discussion from several sides.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Current laws being pushed in the United States specify 12 and under. Not that you can't get in trouble for 13-18, just that a mandatory 25 year sentence is not imposed because situational factors may intervene, however infrequently.

As to 13 being "younger and younger," your comment is only true if viewed through the lens of modern western society. Numerous other cultures and many traditional Western cultures allowed marriage at or near that age.

If your're saying that selling dental floss style undies to minors obviates an adult from correct behavior I must vehemently disagree. If you are saying that there are instances where it is not a crime of violence to the same extent as a stereotypical pedophilea attack (if there can ever be sadi to be such a thing), you may have a point for consideration.

Seamus

[yesdachi]

The punishment needs to fit the crime. There is a difference between pedophilia and child molestation. There is a difference between rape and statutory rape. There is a difference between pre-meditated murder and killing in self-defense. And in each instance there are several levels of difference. In each case the punishment needs to be flexible enough to fit the crime. Some crimes are serious and demand punishment but others are horrible and those who commit them should never be allowed the opportunity to commit them again, punish them and save society, put them to death.

Anyone that thinks it’s appropriate to jail a criminal for life to take them out of society is forgetting that they are still part of society. They cost society money and their imprisonment forces others to interact with them. The thought of being in the same society as a child molester or a rapist is terribly offensive and a cause of fear and anger, but can you imagine being in jail for robbery (out on parole in a few years) and being cellmates with one who is in for life! That’s cruel and unusual punishment. A life sentence is a ridiculous punishment because it causes a drain on tax dollars and still allows the convicted to influence society. The only way to remove them from society and guarantee they will never harm anyone again is to put them to death.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/noose.jpg

[Turin]

What to do with child molesters?

Lock them up??? Do you have any idea how expensive it is to lock a person up for the rest of their lives these days? With that money you can put almost a hundred underprivilaged kids through college!

Kill them, clear and simple, most of the time the bastards confess. Oh, and you need to do it cheaply too... eh, slit their throat while they stand over a ditch. A little brutal, but really, how much more brutal is it than strapping someone to a chair and frying them or tying a noose around their neck and letting the weight of the body snap their neck? At least with the knife it's a quick and relatively quiet affair.

Of course, this goes without saying that there needs to be a very big thick book for this law. Only when the defendent has either confessed, or after extensive retrials and appeals. No one's life should be that easily discarded.

And make sure their assets go to a charitable organization, this way they can give back to society in death what they took away in life.

[kiwitt]

This would be my approach.

1) First Offence, Jail, Monitoring for a period of time
2) Second Offence, Castration is voluntary option, Jail (3 x longer), Monitoring for 3 times the length of time
3) Third Offence, Castration is mandatory, Jail (10 x longer), Monitoring for the rest of their life

A bit like 3 strikes and you are out. Harsh but necessary to protect society.

[Goofball]

What to do with child molesters?

Lock them up??? Do you have any idea how expensive it is to lock a person up for the rest of their lives these days? With that money you can put almost a hundred underprivilaged kids through college!

Kill them, clear and simple, most of the time the bastards confess.

This guy: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/milgaard/ "confessed" too. Good thing we didn't kill him, because we eventually found out he didn't do it. But hey, you're right. It's definitely worth killing people if we can save a few bucks...

Disgusting.

[Devastatin Dave]

Dave , if you could point me in the direction of an organisation with a very long history of child abuse and coverups of that abuse stretching all the way to the top of that organisation then I will bash that organisation .
Until then why should I not bash an institution that fits all of that criteria ?

But in the same context if I say something critical about Islam, or that many terrorist happen to be muslim, I get warnings tacked on while you and others can say that Cathlic Priests have sex with children and the Christianity is bad for society, and an eye is barely batted. But back to topic since obviously nothing will be done about the apparent anti-Christian tolerance in this forum, child molestors cannot be allowed in society, rather they be Catholic priests or Democratic voting NAMBLA liberals.

[Kralizec]

Seamus Fermanagh:
Well yeah, I am talking through the perspective of modern western culture. From what other viewpoint could we possibly talk about? You and me don't belong to any of the cultures that condone pedophilia, or Aztec sacrificial rites or any other sick things that took place by human hands (and other body parts). Advocating that something is not normal because some other culture does it doesn't hold water IMO.
Besides I think that pedophilia in those cultures is more practicly minded. It occurred in medieval times in Europe. People lived shorter in those days and life was harder, peasants in medieval times wouldn't bear the burden of supporting their daughters longer then necessary. Marry them off at 14, why not? Now Greek pedastry is something entirely else though, at the time seen as a pedagogical.
I wouldn't call it "unnatural" because as soon as girls enter puberty, nature has from a evolutionary viewpoint intended them to get children. But people aren't animals who just eat, have sex and get little puppies. Unlike what the Greeks thought I think it's harmful for the kids emotional development. (If some academic could confirm me on this that'd be great ;) )
I'm not sure I understand your comment on dental floss underwear. I intended it to be an example of how society is pressuring kids to learn...inappropriate stuff at an early age, and this causes them to behave "mature" when they're in fact barely in puberty.
I was also trying to argue that not all pedophilia falls under the old pervert stereotype as you noticed.

To all:
what if a 17-19 year old boy has a night with a girl from the 13-15 year range...strictly token that's pedophilia, even by Hollands' pretty liberal legislature. What about that?

[Devastatin Dave]

This would be my approach.

1) First Offence, Jail, Monitoring for a period of time
2) Second Offence, Castration is voluntary option, Jail (3 x longer), Monitoring for 3 times the length of time
3) Third Offence, Castration is mandatory, Jail (10 x longer), Monitoring for the rest of their life

A bit like 3 strikes and you are out. Harsh but necessary to protect society.

Harsh? I don't think it is harsh enough. In order to get to strike 3, 3 lives have been ruined by the molestor. Why give a sexually difuntioned person this many chances. If sexuality is genetic, as many claim, then child molestation in ingrained within the person much like a homosexual, heterosexual, necrophiliac, etc. I do not believe it is worth the risk to have these people in society. Kill them? No. But put them all on an island somewhere that they cannot escape from and their lifestyle is accepted, Possibly California after the Big One... ~D

[Redleg]

My faith teaches against the use of the death penalty, and I have slowly come around to agreement with that position.

Heinous offenders of this type are demonstrably damaging to society (creating a new generation of the same being among the worst elements). Redleg's commentary about quarantine is apt. Taking life judicially may be unneccessary in a modern society and thereful too "vengeful" to constitute a truly ethical response. Allowing such offenders to continue among us, especially in light of the known recidivism/failed treatment rates, is equally unethicical. Imprisonoment until the threat is nullified is the only moral choice.

Seamus

I do believe you were refering to Red Harvest - even though my thoughts on the matter are very similiar - his were more precise and he did use the term.

[Tribesman]

I get warnings tacked on while you and others can say that Cathlic Priests have sex with children and the Christianity is bad for society, and an eye is barely batted.
I have never said that Chritianity is bad for society
Failing to address chid abuse is bad for society and any organisation that fails to address it is not only bad for society , it is bad for the organisation itself .
If something is wrong then it should be criticised , if elements of a group that you belong to is wrong then it is even more important that you are critical of its failings .

[econ21]

I agree with Yesdachi that people need to be careful to make distinctions between types of paedophiles. At one extreme, there are the violent child molesters who may kill or worse (type A). At the other extreme, there are people who are sexually aroused by children but who never act on it (type B). There is then a wide continuum of "child molestation" between.

To further complicate it, you have rather a large "grey area" arising from who is defined as a child or a child abuser. As a result some people may be classified as paedophiles when they are not - for example, in the UK, a sixteen year old sleeping with someone a year younger, ie below the age of consent (type C). Most people seem to be implicitly equating type B with type A and the law, being an ass, often comes down hard on type C, e.g. in the UK, they may well be registered on the sex offenders list.

I assume most of the discussion here is around Type A. I have no solution for these offenders. Lock em up and throw away the key is the best I can come up with.

With type C, I am pretty liberal and provided nobody gets hurt, everything is consensual, I would have them warned but not prosecuted.

With type B or those close on the scale to B than A, I think we perhaps should be less hysterical. In my childhood, I knew of a case of a stereotypical scout master. Every child knew he liked to give his boys a bath. We were too young to understand anything explicit about this but we knew it was odd and not quite right. But most scouts merely thought it funny, although it deterred me from ever joining their ranks. I believe some parents and people in authority knew also, but did nothing. I don't suppose he hurt anyone and was probably a kind harmless man. I believe people were too unconcerned in those days - I was gobsmacked thirty years later to know that adults knew about this scout master's nature. But the pendulum seems to have swung too far in the other direction and I do not believe he should have been stigmatised or locked up.

I suspect the real challenge for the police and others in authority is determining which kind of person they are dealing with. Ian Huntley, who killed two schoolgirls in the UK, came to police attention before the murders but they let it go because they thought he was a type C and not a type A. As a layman, my hunch is that a key distinguishing factor is whether violence is involved; obsessing about paedophilia may detract from that. It's not love that kills. For cases not involving violence, I think the extent of the harm - or potential harm - to children should determine the severity of the punishment and the need for incarceration.

[Azi Tohak]

I'd really like to hear from qualified professionals...

Well, I'm out!

Azi

[Strike For The South]

1st mandatory castration 10 years
2nd LIFE

[Seamus Fermanagh]

1st mandatory castration 10 years
2nd LIFE

SFTS:

Don't you remember reading the "cruel and unusual" clause my fellow superpatriot yank?

Seamus

P.S. Sorry to have confused the "Reds." Happy it didn't lead to one of you being badly misrepresented.

[Strike For The South]

SFTS:

Don't you remember reading the "cruel and unusual" clause my fellow superpatriot yank?

Seamus

P.S. Sorry to have confused the "Reds." Happy it didn't lead to one of you being badly misrepresented.

I dont see how it is

[Soulforged]

The same thing done today, jail for a time, and then realease them. Treating them will make them an instrument and will give the state the higher moral ground (and the ability to imposse that moral, wich the state cannot do). On the other hand execution is out of the question, it's desproportional.

To all of you that propose castration (execution I'll not even bother) one thing. The problem is psychologycal, the molester will continue to molest, with accesories perhaps, or with his own tongue, wich is considered as carnal access too. Just for you to notice how useless castration is.

[Reverend Joe]

My only solid opinion lies with pedophilia.

If a person is found guilty of child molestation, he will receive whatever sentence child molesters get, along with a thorough psychological evaluation. If they are found to be prone to child molestation, they will be carefully watched. If they perform a second act of molestation, they will be given massive surgery. This goes far beyond simple castration, which is technically just the removal of the genitals. In men, the penis and testicles will be removed, along with all other possible sources of sexual stimulation, especially the prostate and nipples and areolae, but possibly the nerves on the palm and fingers, and the foot and toes, to remove all sensation form those areas. For women, the procedure is basically the same, with all sections of the vagina being removed, especially the clitoris, and the nipples and areolae, and if necessary, the nerves in the palm, fingers, feet and toes.

If any of the women on this site argue that the penalties for women are harsher because they lose the entire vagina, whereas men just lose the penis and testicles- trust me, it's just as bad.

These people would no longer gain any pleasure from molesting children, and thus could be released to lead as normal lives as they could, even though these lives may be somewhat hollow. Then again, it's better than the death penalty- less expensive.

[Adrian II]

Just for you to notice how useless castration is.Chemical castration works in The Netherlands. See my earlier post.

[Samurai Waki]

Turn pedophiles into steers for all I care. It's horrible and disgraceful.

[bmolsson]

It's a very difficult problem. Society needs to be protected so they have to be removed from society. Death penalty is not an option since we are better than that. Medication and therapy when away from society is the only option.
But, a very difficult problem which can not be taken seriously enough.....

[English assassin]

Hmm, we need JAG. Never mind, I'll have a go.

Although I can sympathise, and probably agree, with those who say they need to be removed from society for as long as they are dangerous, this too poses dangers.

First, lets get rid of all the flogging and hurting stuff. Does that unmolest a single child? No. Will it deter a future offence? I doubt it, and even if it does, it com,es at the proce of brutalising the whole of an already pretty brutal society. So, lock them up for the puinishment part of the sentence in normal conditions, and if they need to be detained thereafter on a preventative basis, that should be in normal, comfortable conditions. Take away their liberty to the extent necessary to protect children, but otherwise why should they not live a normal life? After all at this point we are detaining them only for a crime they might commit in the future, not for one they have done in the past.

And that, I would just like to point out, is a dangerous precedent. We all agree that paedophilia (SA's type A paedophilia) is a particularly horrible crime, and it seems to be the case that most offenders really cannot help themselves reoffending. Preventitive detention certainly seems appealing. But locking people up for what they might do is a very different concept from locking them up for what they have done. Suppose, as we move a little way down the slippery slope, we identify people who have themselves been victims, who have accessed child pornography, who show an unhealthy interest in playgrounds and scout groups. Our psychologists tell us this person is almost certainly an offender in waiting, maybe they even admit to being attracted to children and delude themselves that such relationships can be consensual and acceptable. But they have never in fact so much as touched a child. By parity of reasoning presumably we lock them away for ever?

A short way down the slope are other sexual offenders, who also seem to have a very high reoffending rate. After that I am sure we can identify sociopaths, psychopaths, people with poor impulse control, incorrigible drug addicts, etc etc etc. We could probably clean up society a lot by locking up people who are "very likely" to do things we don't like.

Sounds dangerous to me?

Edit: a further thought

We live in a society where horrible things happen to children. A child being smashed to a pulp by two tons of speeding steel is not nice, yet we are apparently prepared to tolerate the fact that it happens so we can all have the liberty of driving where we like. Children being smashed to bits could easily be stopped by banning motor transport, or, less draconianly, fitting mandatory 20 mph speed governors activated in all urban areas. Can someone explain to me why the liberty of driving as we wish outweighs the need to stop children being smashed to pieces, but the liberty of only being punished for the crimes you commit, not the crimes you might in the future commit, is somehow less important?

Clue: in my cynical opinion the answer would be different if general motors made a profit from paedophilia.

[Petrus]

Never mind, I'll have a go.



To my greatest regrets, I must agree with you on this topic.

In a previous post that mysteriously disappeared, I suggested to kill, cook and eat child molesters.

Having not the chance to live in a country such as China, Iran or the US which provide legally fresh human flesh from subjects in good general health situation at the moment of their death, it seemed to be a good opportunity to taste this kind of food usually reserved to crows and flies.

But after a bit of reflection, I doubt the remains of mob’s justice through painful death can provide a good quality human flesh.

I also think that defining law and justice by emotional reactions, whatever their strength and their justification, is not a good thing.

Hoping my English is understandable, I will take as an example the Eichmann’s trial.

This man was judged in a country where a very large part of the citizen had very good reasons to wish to extract his brain through his eyes with a screwdriver.

Despite this, he was not insulted, was judged with a perfect equity following the same rules as for any other criminal, was accused without biases, defended himself without restriction, was convicted in his direct responsibility into the murder of six millions human beings, was condemned to death, hung, his body burned and the ashes dropped into the sea.

I think this is justice, without hate, without passion, clear and equitable whatever the heat of hate was burning into every Israeli citizen heart.

Although it is a very extreme example, I think it reflects the only way to provide justice, judging without passion.

[Byzantine Prince]

Boilem', mashem', stick 'em in a stew... ~:handball:

[Don Corleone]

Very interesting perspective, EA. I'm going to have to spend some time mulling it over before I respond completely, but I would like to address one particular item, your comparison to traffic fatalities.

Traffic fatalities are an undesirable (and possibly as you suggest intolerable) unintended result of a very desirable phenomenon, rapid transport. As I understand things, there is is no positive benefit for society to allowing paedophiles access to children, and let's face it, our probation systems are horribly inept at the process of monitoring released offenders. The decision is between life incarceration or an almost certain future molestation (you don't know which will re-offend, but you know more will than won't).

As for the rest of your post, very intriguing. I intend to give it some serious regard before saying anything. Thank you for the honest effort at presenting the other side.

[Soulforged]

Chemical castration works in The Netherlands. See my earlier post.So you think it's for a model of modern and rational society? please...

[scooter_the_shooter]

Kill them every last one of them (if there is solid proof). I may have removed some groups from my "kill them all" list recently but pedos are still on there.

[Adrian II]

So you think it's for a model of modern and rational society? please...The method is rational, the treatment is humane. I wouldn't know about modern, I hear that notion has been deconstructed..
~;)

[Adrian II]

Kill them every last one of them (if there is solid proof). I may have removed some groups from my "kill them all" list recently but pedos are still on there.Well, that is a relief, as well as big news for the entire forum. I have had sleepless nights wondering who was on Ceasar010's deathlist and who wasn't. This means I can sleep again. Thank you for your invaluable contribution.
:bow:

[Byzantine Prince]

Provided there is no doubt that they are actually child molestors:

forgive their actions, and then kindly place a bullet through their heads for courtesy.

:blank2:

[Adrian II]

Provided there is no doubt that they are actually child molestors: forgive their actions, and then kindly place a bullet through their heads for courtesy. :blank2:I hate to think what you would do to adult molesters. :dizzy2:

[scooter_the_shooter]

Well, that is a relief, as well as big news for the entire forum. I have had sleepless nights wondering who was on Ceasar010's deathlist and who wasn't. This means I can sleep again. Thank you for your invaluable contribution.
:bow:


Its not really a death list...I just want killers, pedos, etc dead (car jackers and bread thieves used to be on there though)

..................................................................



Seriously though...they ruined a kids life why not kill them?

[Malcolm Big Head]

guillotine.

[AntiochusIII]

The issue seems to be complicated.

On an emotional-only point of view, you'd be surprised how many people advocate immediate, brutal execution of such offense. That is understandable, but is it right? I don't believe so.

Viewing logically, however, pedophilia is complicated in itself. There are claims that it's caused by being a victim of an earlier pedophile; others claim genetic makeup. But since both biological and psychological studies around these things are pretty much conflicting and/or lacking, we couldn't properly agree on anything. I, myself, of course, would agree on different levels of punishment based on the seriousness of the crime.

Indeed, for the most serious cases (actual murder, rape, etc) death may, in fact, be considered a merciful action. And, even among those who completely disagree with any death penalty, society is, to a point, justified to defend itself.

For less serious ones, though still damaging to the victim, my opinion would be that these people should be put into a mental facility for at least 10 years, with no utterly stupid "punishment time reduction" rules put in. And close monitor after that. Of course, repeated offense would require that the individual be removed from society. Though death penalty is, in my opinion, too severe in this case. "Lock up for life" would be a good choice. The argument that the cost would be too high is not wise. Who are we to determine a life's worth?

For very mild ones, that I'd say being "rehabilitated" and closely monitored for several years. And perhaps regular meeting with psychologists for close inspections. Who knows? Could it be healed? Human minds are too complex for a few millenia of isolated studies with no real direction.

However, for my standpoint, the safety of "society" (though mainly concentrated on would-be victims) comes first.

[Divinus Arma]

Set them on fire.Then put out the fire. Then set them on fire again. Then put out the fire again. Then set them on fire again. Then put out... etc.etc. eternity.

Yay.

[ichi]

Set them on fire.Then put out the fire. Then set them on fire again. Then put out the fire again. Then set them on fire again. Then put out... etc.etc. eternity.

Yay.

I have a little experience and knowledge about what happens when people are burned, and to be honest, no one deserves this.

That said, I support severe punishment, including castration and the death penalty, for pedophiles

ichi :bow:

[Soulforged]

One thing is what you like to do, and another thing is what the state can do...The better way is to put yourselves in their shoes. How do you know that you'll never become one? Even more if the society causes this problems (as it sure does) then how can society protest for his own creation, and even execute them...It always amuses me how some people think really...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

What purpose does the death of the pedophile serve -- aside from vengeance.

Removal from society until cured (which is unlikely at best) is a necessity.

Working to identify any possible genetic component, definable mental abberation so as to head off such horrible events before they occur is highly desirable.

Torture or cruelty in effecting punishment is simply sadism. I have problems seeing the value of torture to extract information that may save lives, enacting torture or maiming a criminal so as to let her/him suffer more seems a little sick. If their sins have earned them eternal torture in some classical version of Hell, it will arrive soon enough and last long enough without society adding to it -- and lowering itself in the process.

If the only means of effectively removing such a criminal from society is death, it should at the least be quick and as painless as possible. We do put down mad dogs, but we don't drag them behind a pickup truck for 6 miles to accomplish it.

Seamus

[Soulforged]

If the only means of effectively removing such a criminal from society is death, it should at the least be quick and as painless as possible. We do put down mad dogs, but we don't drag them behind a pickup truck for 6 miles to accomplish it.You can remove him from society if you want with life in prison. That's the equivalent here to death penalty. If the state makes a mistake they've the possibility to take him out. But again this is not a problem of vengeance. The retribution (possition that I'm begining to abandon) gives rational canons of proportionality to the matter. If you put a murderer in jail, let's say for life, then the molester cannot have that punishment, it has to be much less. After all the state cannot tell you what's best for you. Then if you commit the crime you're for, let's say, 10 years 15 max in jail and then you get out. This kind of reaction of people calling other mans "dogs" or "rabid dogs" or doing that kind of anallogy really impresses me, hopefully the law considers them humans nontheless.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

You can remove him from society if you want with life in prison. That's the equivalent here to death penalty. If the state makes a mistake they've the possibility to take him out. But again this is not a problem of vengeance. The retribution (possition that I'm begining to abandon) gives rational canons of proportionality to the matter. If you put a murderer in jail, let's say for life, then the molester cannot have that punishment, it has to be much less. After all the state cannot tell you what's best for you. Then if you commit the crime you're for, let's say, 10 years 15 max in jail and then you get out. This kind of reaction of people calling other mans "dogs" or "rabid dogs" or doing that kind of anallogy really impresses me, hopefully the law considers them humans nontheless.

Please note that the initial line of my post spoke against the judicial use of the death penalty. The "rabid dog" analogy was only a fallback point, noting that cruelty in punishment was unjustified even if you believe death to be a valid judicial penalty. Aim your sarcasm at the totality of my message, do not pick and choose separate bits. To do so is unfair to my point. If my point is not clearly expressed enough for you, ask me to clarify.

As to your other point (proportionality in sentencing and the state's right to act/control in such instances), I believe my rights cease when they harm the life, liberty or property of others. In the case of violent crime, I believe society has the reluctant duty to incarcerate the malefactor so as to protect society as a whole. Graduated sentencing and an often haphazard parole system may not be accomplishing that goal. I have little sympathy whatsoever for recidivists, and I am annoyed that my country's judicial system allows for too much of it.

Seamus

[yesdachi]

You can remove him from society if you want with life in prison.
Being in prison is not being removed from society. :bow:

[Redleg]

As to your other point (proportionality in sentencing and the state's right to act/control in such instances), I believe my rights cease when they harm the life, liberty or property of others. In the case of violent crime, I believe society has the reluctant duty to incarcerate the malefactor so as to protect society as a whole. Graduated sentencing and an often haphazard parole system may not be accomplishing that goal. I have little sympathy whatsoever for recidivists, and I am annoyed that my country's judicial system allows for too much of it.

Seamus

Couldn't agree with you more. :bow:

[Soulforged]

Being in prison is not being removed from society. :bow:yes it's. They're called "cilvil deads". Trully. :yes:


If the only means of effectively removing such a criminal from society is death, it should at the least be quick and as painless as possible. We do put down mad dogs, but we don't drag them behind a pickup truck for 6 miles to accomplish it. A) My post was not aimed with sarcasm. b) It was not aimed at you, but in general. c) I was against your last point (the one quoted). D) The dogma in law, and law itself, provide general appliable laws (norms, principles, models) that must be abstract. The judge can move within those lines. The legislation cannot leave to the arbitrarianess of the judge the decision over the kind or intensity of the punishment.

I believe my rights cease when they harm the life, liberty or property of others.I too.
In the case of violent crime, I believe society has the reluctant duty to incarcerate the malefactor so as to protect society as a whole. I too, though I differ in the way that society intercedes.
Graduated sentencing and an often haphazard parole system may not be accomplishing that goal. I believe that too, but as a general rule. In concret cases if there's no need for more reprehenssion then the subject can and must be freed (if I understood the meaning of parole). However in the somewhat inverse case (reincidence) I totally disagree, the state must limit itself to judge actions and not persons, wich this rule does.
I have little sympathy whatsoever for recidivists, and I am annoyed that my country's judicial system allows for too much of it. I don't understand the word "recidivist" (it would help me if you explain it to me :embarassed: ).

[Kaiser of Arabia]

It is an interesting question, one requiring much thought and such. Can any of these people be reformed? Is it worth it?

Attacks on children are some of the most henious crimes against the human race I can think of. Anyone who would attack an innocent child out of hatred or lust is obviously a sociopath. Of course, everyone has their uses. And maybe some of these people can be reformed.

But the sad reality of the matter is most of them cannot be. And we must base descisions on the majority, rather than the few. So, the only solution I can see is either life imprisonment or, well, death.

[sharrukin]

I don't understand the word "recidivist" (it would help me if you explain it to me :embarassed: ).

It means a criminal who is a repeat offender. Usually in the case of child molestors it is half a dozen child victims or more before the state actually does something.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

... However in the somewhat inverse case (reincidence) I totally disagree, the state must limit itself to judge actions and not persons, wich this rule does. I don't understand the word "recidivist" (it would help me if you explain it to me :embarassed: ).

A recidivist is a repeat offender, a person for whom criminal acts may well have become a modus vivendi. I believe you are addressing the same thing when you say "reincidence" (American English would use the word recurrence or re-occurrence).

You seem to be advancing the position that each action be judged and dealt with on an individual basis, and that a person with a history of similar actions be treated no differently than a person for whom a criminal action is an anomaly. While valid on a philosophical level, I do not believe that this would be practical. In my country, most crime is the work of people who pursue criminal activity as a career. Such individuals are a threat to social order and should be removed from society more or less permanently (rehabilitation is possible, though infrequent) as soon as their willingness to become a careerist criminal is demonstrated.

Seamus

[yesdachi]

Originally Posted by yesdachi
"Being in prison is not being removed from society."


yes it's. They're called "cilvil deads". Trully. :yes:
A society is a sum of its parts. Prisons and the prisoners in them are a part of the sum. Being given a title doesn’t remove them from society and neither does hiding them away. They are a financial burden and force a negative influence on the people.

Here’s an exert from a report I found on $ spent in my state, other states (like CA) are way higher…

Michigan’s Department of Corrections will spend more than $1.7 billion from the state’s general fund this year, consuming more than 20 percent of the state’s general fund revenues. The state’s prison population, now around 49,000 inmates, has risen by more than 40 percent since the early 1990s. The MDOC requires nearly 19,000 employees, and according to the state Senate Fiscal Agency, it costs approximately $28,000 each year to imprison an inmate in Michigan.

How can something that takes 20% of my tax money, and has 49,000 people in it not be a part of my society? ~:confused: And this is only the money factor and not the harder to quantify “influence” factor that these monsters force on society with just their presence.

Criminals in prison may be removed from the mainstream but are still very much a part of society. :bow:

20% of my tax money!!! GAH!!!

PS. If you try and counter with “it costs more to sentence the death penalty than life in prison” I can refute that nonsense.

[Templar Knight]

As with any sex offender lock them up and don't let them out. The re-offending rates are shockingly high.

[Meneldil]

I just watched a tv documentary about recidivist rapers, and apparently both physical castration and chemical castration aren't fully effective.

The guy may still buy testosterone pills (?) and rape another woman/child.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Then why dont we just shoot them?

[Templar Knight]

waste of bullets, water is free ~:)

[scooter_the_shooter]

But a bullet is quicker.

[ah_dut]

Caution: What I'm going to type now is going to upset a lot of you

Todays societies, and ESPECIALLY Dutch society, force young people and especially girls to become...err, mature early on. This is the MTV generation, kids being stimulated everywhere they look. In the Netherlands C&A is selling string underware for girls as young as 12! I could think of more such examples, but that would be kind of redundant.
When discos fail to keep 13 year old girls out (and I mean come on, bouncers are doing this several evenings per week- how difficult is it to tell if a girl is 13 or 21?)
Older guys visit those discos, guys who also grew up with MTV etc...on top of this, it's not just a case of an older guy wanting a young girl- the young girl wants him too.
Stuff like that happens outside of discos too. Kids have sex younger and younger when the years pass, and don't mind doing it with somebody way older.
So it's easy to put them in jail, and even easier to give them the electric chair. Ignore the root of the problem and just kill the guy, the mob approves anyway.

I know this isn't what you meant in your post Don, but those guys fall under "pedophile" too and I wanted to add some nuance here. As for the kind of guy you're talking about, ie the old pervert who abducts little girls in cars, I can be brief. Unless we can be very, very certain that in a particular case there's practicly no risk of recidivism, life long imprisonment. Otherwise a long sentence and compulsory psychiatric treatment before released in the open (TBS in the Netherlands allows this lifelong, dunno about the rest of the world)
So no public floggings, live executions on TV, etc
Excellent post Germaanse Strijder, as English Assasain has already stated, we must decide what precisely constitutes a pedophile. A Pedophile who rapes and kills children (or just the first) is what EA calls a type A...give em to Capo/Kaiser is my honest opinion...

As to statuary rape, I'm sure Malcolm will back me up on this (him of Glasgow) and that's if they're child rapists (which they technically are) then a good few of my friends are going byebye...As to my understanding the boy is the rapist in USI situations. That's 2 consenting 14 year olds in this case, though in one particular situation I'd rather not get into it involved a 12 year old girl and a 14 year old.

Germaanese Strijder again presents an excellent point on the both parties are consenting and clubbing thing...I've never been able to get into a club (even one for 16 and over...I'm a pretty scrawny 14 year old so understandable) but many girls I know have (which I just don't get...) but that's life. What happens if a 14 year old girl wants a 40 year old man and vice versa? My answer, I'm going to run away as ihave no clue. Actual rape (as in one side didn't consent, mainly talking about the underage party here) is probably unforgivable and again, I'd say hand em to Kaiser or just throw away the key