Paedophiles and Sex Offenders

[pjm007]

I appreciate this is a touchy subject, but this a spin off from joules99's question about 'Hanging'. What do people (especially parents) think the fate of (forensically proved) paedophiles and sex offenders should be ? I've made my feelings on the subject perfectly clear and you can see these by clicking on the link in the following post. Does anyone else share my views, or am I alone in my 'vigilante' style of thinking ?

[pjm007]

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question106869.html

[netibiza]

I basically think they are the scum of the earth and shouldn't have any rights - lynch them!!

[tetherend]

Rather than keep them apart from other prisoners, let the other inmates have them.

[Philtaz]

I couldn't condone torture, otherwise you definitely lose all sense of civility, but the death sentence by a quick and humane method is more than acceptable.

As in America, the sentiments of the family should be read aloud via a statement in court(pre-sentence) which is now commonplace and was being considered for our justice system.

For paedophiles who rape and murder, the sentence should definitely be death.  That person should be allowed their own choice of method i.e. hanging, lethal injection, electric chair.  In Russia the bullet through the back of the head is often used.  One prisoner in America did elect for death by firing squad, though I am unsure as to whether his wish was granted.

The likes of Sidney Cooke, Roy Whiting and Ian Huntley do not seek help for their deviances and actively avoid any help, usually because they are in denial of having any problem.

Did anyone see the programme on BBC last year that showed the work of the Paedophile unit of the Metropolitan Police?  In one programme they were following a man whom they believed had entered the Boat Show in Earl's Court.  His particular MO was to enter public toilets and wait for young boys to enter alone. In his bag was a piece of rope and a knife. He was once found in a school toilet with such items.  I was almost at the point of vomiting (no exaggeration) as a young boy entered the toilets by himself. He was roughly 7 years old. Thankfully he was joined by a parent within 30 seconds, but they were 30 of the longest seconds I have ever known.

Because of the ridiculous laws in this country, these sorts of people are able to prowl the streets with impunity and know that the liberal sentencing in this country will ensure them free reign to continue their crimes within a short space of time.

[silly moo]

My answer is almost exactly the same as Andy Hughes - but i am the parent of only 2 girls.

[Philtaz]

cont'd.

And therein lies the problem.  In this day and age it has now become de riguer to provide shelter and help to these creatures, when most deny they are commiting a crime, laugh at the justice system and sneer behind a thin veil of pretence at remorse for their crimes, only to re-offend all too quickly.

The likes of the names of those I have mentioned will NEVER make any form of valuable contribution to society and for the safety of the public and often their own safety they remain in jail for the term of their lives.

But why?  They are a drain on resources.  How much money has been spent on the health and welfare of Ian Brady, who has actively sought death?  How much of the money spent on his care and incarceration could have been spent tackling child cancer's and illnesses?  He knew when he was sentenced that he would never see the light of day again, so why keep him alive?

[pjm007]

andy hughes, it is definately a highly emotive subject, but I truly believe that these people don't deserve any kind of rehabilitation or treatment, they are alot more intelligent that people think and know what their fate will be if they ever get caught. I don't think that being fed, watered and given an education (paid for by taxpayers) is any kind of punishment comparable to the crimes they have committed. When Roy Whiting grinned that sick grin and put his thumbs up in victory, he knew that the so-called law was a soft touch and that he would be able to take advantage of prison benefits. You are right in saying that laws make us civilised, I couldn't agree more with that, but when you go above the law in the way of paedophilia and sex offences I think the right to be treated as civilised should cease. The laws need to be reviewed in such cases.

[MargeB]

yawn...these questions always drag the Sun and Daily Mail ignorati out of their corners.

Many people with paedophilic tendencies have no choice in the matter. Does it occur to you that young children in this country are more likely to be the victim of an attack from a paedophile as a result of the attitude you display (I direct this mostly at Philtaz). Other people are not 'just like you, but making slightly different choices', they were BUILT differently, often in a way that is unacceptable to modern society (but which is completely acceptable to their genes). It is just a matter of pure chance that you were born without the tendency instead of being in their state. Many successfully seek treatment, and do not offend, but a great many do not seek treatment and do offend, because they are aware of the demonization by your average Sun reader.

Think a little bit more before jumping on a soapbox. In the final analysis, none of us is worthy.

And I'm writing this as one who deplores the act of paedophilia as much as the next person.

[Philtaz]

Wide of the mark by a country mile MargeB.

Just because someone has views that differ from yours doesn't automatically mean they read and inwardly digest the daily sh*t-sheets that pass as 'the great British press'. You'll be accusing me next of watching Eastenders, Coronation Street and Trisha, those most valuable purveyors and bastions of 'great British telly'.  Give it a rest.

Agreed that may with such deviant tendencies have no choice in the matter(initially).  However when it is made more than obvious to them that these are crimes deemed to be among the most heinous in society, they persist in denying thus and actively avoid treatment.  Paedophiles are probably the most devious, cunning and deceptive of all criminals.  They prey on children, take advantage of their trusting nature and then abuse them in the most violent manner possible.  They then take advantage of such nature by threatening the child with a worse fate should they divulge what has occurred.  This is why many paedophiles continue their crimes for 20, 30 and even 40 years.  They form their little 'groups' and pass children amongst themselves to be used and abused by all, for the duration of the poor unfortunate's childhood.

Having derided the contribution made by others on this thread you can now go back to your Open University studies and continue reading The Independent.

[Jooleebobs]

Use them for medical / cosmetic testing instead of poor animals, you know squirt shampoo in their eyes etc to see the effect or maybe reintroduce hunting but use them instead of foxes. Alternatively just throw them in a big pit and bury them.

[netibiza]

I agree with Philtaz wholeheartedy - and having different hormones is no excuse - surely they know right from wrong. I often see something in a shop that I would like but do I steal it? no because its wrong. Oh and by the way I NEVER read newspapers.

[El D]

I find you sad and disturbing. We should be more than this . . . you are on about the same level as the people you despise in giving in to your baser emotions and thinking it justified.

[netibiza]

Ah El D but the difference is we do not give in to our emotions - and any decent human will find them disturbing.

[Ducati]

As a parent of an 18 month old girl, I find it extremely difficult to be anything other than subjective on this matter, and therefore strongly believe these animals should live a life of absolute hell - and by that I mean spending the rest of their worthless lives in a 4 by 4 cell with nothing but their sicko thoughts for company, wallowing in their own filth.

 

I do not advocate either the death penalty or physical torture.

 

These people do not deserve our help - by providing them with help we are, by definition, providing them with compassion, and, as I sit here typing this, the thought of being compassionate to these sub-beings is actually making me angry!

 

I am sick of people wanting to 'understand' what drives these people to commit their wicked acts - I'll tell you what drives them: a sick mind, there you go, job done: now you can go and moan about the treatment of other people - I'm sure Shipman was doing the old people a favour by dispatching them, and aren't the authorities wicked by banging him up: let's all empathise!!!

 

Also, if somebody has a slightly right wing view on crime and punishment, it doesn't make them a Daily Mail reader - this is a bloody stupid idiotic view that far too many people on this site have: Give it a rest.

[camille79]

As I am not a parent, I cannot really comment but the best response was from my boss (mother of 2 young children) when we were discussing this is the office.  She said that if anyone harmed either of her children, she would want them to suffer and ultimately be tortured and put to death for what they have done.  However, as a rational adult she knows that is why it isn't for her to make that decision and this is what makes the difference between vengence and civilised justice.

[littleoldme]

See, this is why I could never join a political party - I'm fairly left of centre on a lot of issues, but get me on a subject like this and my inner right-winger comes leaping out of his box. I wonder if any of the hand-wringing, empathetic liberals have children. I don't, but it still doesn't make me think these sickos need "understanding", they need punishing. Many of them don't want treatment, they don't feel "ill" - they're quiet happy in their disgusting little underground circles, ruining children's lives for their own gratification.

I don't advocate the death penalty for any crime, but they should be locked up without the cosy escape of being kept away from other prisoners. When let out, no need for their residence to be kept secret - let people know where they are (just as long as the "good" people of the neighbourhood know the difference between a paedophile and a paediatrician - we don't want another Paulsgrove happening).

Finally, genes and hormones may make someone gay or bisexual - it doesn't make them a paedophile. Unlike homosexuality, paedophilia is not "just a way some people are". It's a way they choose to become. There is a big difference between a sexuality and a perversion. I don't buy into the theory that they don't think they're doing anything wrong, either. I suspect they know very well - they simply don't care. It feels good to them, so they do it. Simple.

(and I don't read the Sun or the Daily Wail either)

[jake-the-peg]

How do you determine what is an "appropriate" sentence for a crime?

I can understand the "eye for an eye" argument even though I don't necessarilly agree.

You need an element of proportionallity - do you want to cut open with rusty blades an 18 year old who runs off with his 15 year old girl friend? is he a paedophile?

Is a "Date rapist" worthy of the same sentence as somebody who commits a violent sexual assault (not rape)?

How about a drunken assault in a pub (not sexual) or an assault in a sports match? (There were some pretty vicious uppercuts thrown in the scrums in the rugby recently)

I have no respect for anybody who just wants to lynch rapists but huge respect for anybody who has a coherent and proportional sentencing policy to suggest even if involves hanging which I disagree with.

Which are you? 

[MargeB]

Forget the Sun and Daily Mail stuff.

The point is that plenty of people (I'm tempted myself) have a knee jerk reaction to paedophiles, but it just doesn't work. You have to be correct in your understanding of what is going on with them, and understanding does not mean condoning, but if someone cannot control it by just saying 'No!' then often treatment would work. By insisting that they are like you (netibiza alludes to this idea) expect that they just choose to go after kids, because they are evil is simply not correct. There are a number who genuinely let their wicked side flow, and they happen to have a bent towards children. But there are very many who would NOT wish to be drawn towards children, but are, and stay away from treatment that would protect themselves and children from evil, because they are treated as demons by the likes of about half the people on this thread. The irony is that as a result of all this misguidedness, more children end up being abused. Yeah, well done guys, keep up the good work.

[Lorcan]

I would consider myself right-wing on this issue and take the Philtaz etc side of the debate here.

However, the death penalty is not one I agree with. My brother - very liberal - changed my view on this when he said 'Some people have no right to life. But we have no right to kill them.'