ChatterBank0 min ago
About time ?
After the abduction of that poor little girl in Portugal. Is it not time that we should adopt a complete zero tolerance on animals that prey on kids. I know it is not a foregone conclusion that it is indeed a nonce responsible, but i sadly feel it is but a matter of time until it is the case. I wish that we could bring back hanging for these b##tards. Kids should be safe all of the time. Parents should not have to worry about deviants . (Footnote) Please do not post comments regarding "why did the parents leave her there ?" as i am sure they will live with that for the rest of their lives.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Neilzulu1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
pilchard "So the age for sexual consent in Portugal is 14. Do you think is ok/normal/healthy?" - well, without being too crude, a girl once she has had her first menstrual cycle, is ready for a sexual relationship. This is perfectly natural. In this country we don't see it as normal purely because that is what we are used to. To give a comparison, 50 years ago, homosexuality was illegal. 20 years ago, the age of consent was 21, then 18 and now 16.
naomi24"I've just had a quick look at the first couple of lines from the Home Office link Vic gave" - I think this says it all. If you only read two lines, and also don't read my original post, you will completely miss the point.
In my original post I state: Personally, I think I would accept the death penalty for convicted pedophiles in the high / medium-high categories.
I can't work out why someone would find a young child sexually attractive either. But it seems very obvious to me that there is something wrong with them. If there is something wrong with somebody - do you really think that they should be put down?
Personally, I think that they need help (and the link provided shows that a lot of the lower risk pedophiles responded to treatment and did not reoffend).
If you think that anyone who has a mental illness (because imho that is what it is) should be killed, then it is a slippery slope. I would like to see treatment and if this is not successful then lifetime incarceration or possible the death penalty.
naomi24"I've just had a quick look at the first couple of lines from the Home Office link Vic gave" - I think this says it all. If you only read two lines, and also don't read my original post, you will completely miss the point.
In my original post I state: Personally, I think I would accept the death penalty for convicted pedophiles in the high / medium-high categories.
I can't work out why someone would find a young child sexually attractive either. But it seems very obvious to me that there is something wrong with them. If there is something wrong with somebody - do you really think that they should be put down?
Personally, I think that they need help (and the link provided shows that a lot of the lower risk pedophiles responded to treatment and did not reoffend).
If you think that anyone who has a mental illness (because imho that is what it is) should be killed, then it is a slippery slope. I would like to see treatment and if this is not successful then lifetime incarceration or possible the death penalty.
Vic, why read any more? The initial statistics given say it all. If these people are ill, then to protect children they should be locked up securely for life, but they're not. They are given the benefit of the doubt and released into the community.
Whatever category they come into, their actions are totally unacceptable, and if death was the penalty for the crimes they commit, then they couldn't reoffend, children would be safer and society would be well rid of them. I have no sympathy whatsoever with any of them.
Whatever category they come into, their actions are totally unacceptable, and if death was the penalty for the crimes they commit, then they couldn't reoffend, children would be safer and society would be well rid of them. I have no sympathy whatsoever with any of them.
Having read all the posts I find it interesting to see that those in favour of "zero tolerance" are making sweeping statements backed up by no facts whatsoever, and coming across rather like an hysterical lynch mob. Those arguing against, are talking from personal experience of working with abused children, or with the benefit of factual evidence, and they are taking a much more balanced and realistic approach. Could this be the whole problem with so called zero tolerance? It is such an emotive issue that anyone who calls for such a balanced and realistic approach is immediately accused of being a left wing "hippy social worker" who is protecting the interests of abusers over the people they abuse.
Of course every single right minded person here wants to protect children, but I want resources to be concentrated on detecting and detaining the criminals who are a real threat to my children, not the teenagers having consensual sex together, or the drunken streakers, or the people who made a mistake once and are now trying to rebuild their lives.
Of course every single right minded person here wants to protect children, but I want resources to be concentrated on detecting and detaining the criminals who are a real threat to my children, not the teenagers having consensual sex together, or the drunken streakers, or the people who made a mistake once and are now trying to rebuild their lives.
So let's drive them all underground, right?
What's better?
a) A climate where someone with these urges can approach a doctor or a psychologist and seek help (which may involve being confined to remove any temptation?
or
b) One where they suspect they'll be killed if they tell another living soul, so instead choose to remain under the radar, letting their urges grow and grow and - probably - never ever getting caught.
What's better?
a) A climate where someone with these urges can approach a doctor or a psychologist and seek help (which may involve being confined to remove any temptation?
or
b) One where they suspect they'll be killed if they tell another living soul, so instead choose to remain under the radar, letting their urges grow and grow and - probably - never ever getting caught.
No it wouldn't. Are there no murders commited in the countries where murder carried the death penalty? Of course there are, nobody commits a crime thinking they are going to be caught. People who feel compelled to commit sex crimes will still have that compulsion, because it is caused by some mental inbalance or illnes that neither you nor I , nor anyone who does not feel it can empathise with.
You only need to take a look at Death Row..or the many unsolved murders throughout history.
The death penalty will never prevent murders or rapes.
Paedophiles and rapists are often called 'sick' and of course that is what they are. Apparently the majority of rapes commited are about control, rather than a sexual urge..despite it being a sexual crime.
The death penalty will never prevent murders or rapes.
Paedophiles and rapists are often called 'sick' and of course that is what they are. Apparently the majority of rapes commited are about control, rather than a sexual urge..despite it being a sexual crime.
Neilzulu1 "Look its simple.....if we had a law for child abuse or rape meant death, that would prevent it. " - oh if only the world was that simple.
To be honest, if you really have such a simplistic view of the world, then there is little point in debating.
naomi24Vic, why read any more - well if you have to ask, maybe it is because you have not read the article. If you can't be bothered to read a home office report which gives impartial factual statistics, then there really is little point in asking you to listen to reason.
kags very well put
To be honest, if you really have such a simplistic view of the world, then there is little point in debating.
naomi24Vic, why read any more - well if you have to ask, maybe it is because you have not read the article. If you can't be bothered to read a home office report which gives impartial factual statistics, then there really is little point in asking you to listen to reason.
kags very well put
oneeyedvic
well, without being too crude, a girl once she has had her first menstrual cycle, is ready for a sexual relationship. This is perfectly natural. In this country we don't see it as normal purely because that is what we are used to. To give a comparison, 50 years ago, homosexuality was illegal. 20 years ago, the age of consent was 21, then 18 and now 16.
Reminds me of a peadophiles comments on a documentary i once watched wereby he suggested that 'if they were big enough, they were old enough'
Because a girl experiences a menstrual cycle it means she is able to conceive, it doesn't mean physically/mentally she is ready for a sexual relationship. Ten year olds have periods....
I'm curious what do you consider old enough???
i
well, without being too crude, a girl once she has had her first menstrual cycle, is ready for a sexual relationship. This is perfectly natural. In this country we don't see it as normal purely because that is what we are used to. To give a comparison, 50 years ago, homosexuality was illegal. 20 years ago, the age of consent was 21, then 18 and now 16.
Reminds me of a peadophiles comments on a documentary i once watched wereby he suggested that 'if they were big enough, they were old enough'
Because a girl experiences a menstrual cycle it means she is able to conceive, it doesn't mean physically/mentally she is ready for a sexual relationship. Ten year olds have periods....
I'm curious what do you consider old enough???
i
I don't believe the death penalty would deter paedophiles, but it would ensure they couldn't hurt or kill another child.
Kags, you want to ensure that resources are concentrated on detecting and detaining the criminals who are a real threat to your children. A worthy sentiment, but it doesn't work because paedophiles are often released into society and go on to attack again, and that's the real problem. Fine if they were banged up for life - I'd be with you all the way - but the simple fact is they're not, and because they're not, children are continually put at risk. Every time a child dies at the hands of one of these people we hear the obligatory 'spokesperson for the authorities' saying "Lessons must be learned from this", but the lesson is never learned because it continues to happen. The only way to ensure that paedophiles cannot harm children is to take them out of society permanently - one way or another. Innocent children - sometimes babies - are the victims here and once these people have them in their clutches they are unable to fight back and they haven't a hope. Let's remember that.
Kags, you want to ensure that resources are concentrated on detecting and detaining the criminals who are a real threat to your children. A worthy sentiment, but it doesn't work because paedophiles are often released into society and go on to attack again, and that's the real problem. Fine if they were banged up for life - I'd be with you all the way - but the simple fact is they're not, and because they're not, children are continually put at risk. Every time a child dies at the hands of one of these people we hear the obligatory 'spokesperson for the authorities' saying "Lessons must be learned from this", but the lesson is never learned because it continues to happen. The only way to ensure that paedophiles cannot harm children is to take them out of society permanently - one way or another. Innocent children - sometimes babies - are the victims here and once these people have them in their clutches they are unable to fight back and they haven't a hope. Let's remember that.
I was wondering about that comment about 14 year olds having their period thus being old enough for a sexual relationship Just where exactly do you stand on this debate oneeyedvic ? That is a well dodgy comment !! I dont care about other countries and their laws, i want this country to stand up and lead the way.
The 'Virgin' Mary was about 14 when she married Joseph, who by all accounts was around 26.
This is the couple who are greatly admired all over the world. Yes, society has changed..but nature hasn't changed so much.
I agree about adding the comments regarding puberty..again this is a matter of opinion, and certain paedophiles will target toddlers or babies as they believe they are ready. The paedophile is mentally ill ~ they may have the urges and not act on them at all..in fact there have been cases of paedophiles handing themselves in and demanding chemical or medical castration. Should they still be given the death penalty?
As Oneeyedvic has rightly pointed out, the moment we decide to sentence mentally ill people to death it will be a slippery slope..there can never be one rule for one and not the other. A violent person wih multiple personalities could cause no end of death and destruction to society, but nobody is suggesting they hang?
This is the couple who are greatly admired all over the world. Yes, society has changed..but nature hasn't changed so much.
I agree about adding the comments regarding puberty..again this is a matter of opinion, and certain paedophiles will target toddlers or babies as they believe they are ready. The paedophile is mentally ill ~ they may have the urges and not act on them at all..in fact there have been cases of paedophiles handing themselves in and demanding chemical or medical castration. Should they still be given the death penalty?
As Oneeyedvic has rightly pointed out, the moment we decide to sentence mentally ill people to death it will be a slippery slope..there can never be one rule for one and not the other. A violent person wih multiple personalities could cause no end of death and destruction to society, but nobody is suggesting they hang?
Vic, this report began by saying that 8 out of 53 convicted child abusers who were released into the community went on to abuse again. And you want me to read on and listen to 'reason'? If you think your argument is 'reasonable', does that mean you see relatively low statistics and so defend or excuse these crimes? The release of a known paedophile into the community is not reasonable and as I've already said one abused child is one too many.
