Should child molesters be killed?

[murrays 0]

Regular lashings for .... 30 to 40 years.

--
Murray

"No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: the officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets." - Edward Abbey

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>I think the only way to be sure that the crime does not get
>committed again by the convicted child molester is by death.

Or life in prison without parole. Both work equally well.

Well, this has been proven wrong for murder. But I guess in this case it would stand up given the lack of available minors. And since prisons seems to go after these type anyway, it's not that different from a death penalty anyhow. If he were put on death row he'd be more isolated from the general population.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

To kill is such A final solution. The current train of thought is forgiveness for everything under the sun. F-that. I think the death penalty for a lot of things would cut crime. If you know that when or if you get caught you die, you will definitely think again before committing the act. I realize that this is not realistic with the way our liberal government operates but it is simply what I would support. We need some population control anyway so kill them all.
(Evil laughter echoes in the back ground.)

Quote

I think the death penalty for a lot of things would cut crime.

Deterrence is the most tired argument of all, and the least supportable by data. It's a novel thought and if worked would be hard to argue against, but now it is just used as misdirection from the truth.

Quote

If you know that when or if you get caught you die, you will definitely think again before committing the act.

Remember, that deterrence only goes from life w/o parole to death, which is a pretty narrow sliver. Do you really think people capable of 1st degree murder use logic and carefully weigh jeopardy?

Quote

I realize that this is not realistic with the way our liberal government operates but it is simply what I would support.

We are one of the few industrialized countries that still have CP, we just did away with juvenile executions 6 months ago (there were 8 doing it, we did 19 of the last 39), we have virtually no social welfae compared to other nations, we have arguably the worst medical programs of all advanced nations; no socialized medicine as most countries have, we have one of the highest rates of incarrceration in the world, so how is it that you call the US liberal? Can ya help me with that one?

Quote

We need some population control anyway so kill them all.

OK, let's start at the RNC - I agree

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Killing serves no other purpose other than making victims "feel good." And that's not the purpose of justice.

Actually, it is one of the purposes of justice; it's just not the only purpose of justice.
There are certain philosophical justifications of punishment, which are not identical, but which may coexist:
1. Retribution/vengeance. Society expresses its outrage, and victims "feel good" by having their vengeance.
2. General deterrence. Make an example out of the offender to deter others in society from committing crimes.
3. Specific deterrence. By punishing the offender, society hopes to make him think twice before committing another crime.
4. Restitution. Make the offender pay something back to society and/or the victim for the crime he's committed.
5. Prevention. By removing the offender from society, he is physically prevented from preying on society.
This is all theoretical, of course. Mid-level undergrad stuff.

Quote

3. Specific deterrence. By punishing the offender, society hopes to make him think twice before committing another crime.

This does not apply to CP, as with deterrence theory there must be choice - no choice for dead people, hnce no specific deterrence.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Unless they're female offenders.

This has come up twice, now. Why the double standard?

-
Jim

I was just jk'n by saying they can't cut off her junk.

[Tenshi 0]

Depends on the nature of the abuse and the psyche of the abuser. Raping toddlers on demand should probably get you killed. I think a difference should be made between child molesters and pedo's. The first category can not be healed and should therefor be punished severely and without remorse. The second category falls under sexual orientation and something can be done about this. Therefor they should be punished and treated.


Please be aware that I am trying to be pragmatic about this. If a pedophile raped my kid I probably wouldn't talk about treatment as my only thought would be on vengeance and torture. But that's just the way it is, isn't it?

(Did not take into account that I believe death can never be a punishment since we are all walking dead people...)

[Richards 0]

I think a difference should be made between child molesters and pedo's. The first category can not be healed and should therefor be punished severely and without remorse. The second category falls under sexual orientation and something can be done about this. Therefor they should be punished and treated. ***

I would allow treatment for pedos who acknowledge their problem and seek treatment before they act on their impulses. While pedophilia can be considered a mental illness, these people are not incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong. They know that regardless of their urges, acting on it will harm a child, and they know that harming a child is wrong. Therefore once they have acted on their impulses and harmed a child, they have forfeited the right to ask for treatment and should only receive the harshest of punishments for harming societies most vulnerable members.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[Tenshi 0]

I can agree with that. That leaves the question as to where we draw the line.
I suppose we can all agree that the guys making these vids, selling these vids, or demanding/buying these vids deserve no treatment.
But should a guy who watches these movies (without actually making a demand or paying) still get treatment?

I'm also curious as to why the topicstarter chose the age of 11? If you rape a twelve year old, does that make it less of a crime than raping a 6 year old? And when is having sex with someone no longer considered molestation? 16 years old? 18?

[Richards 0]

Quote

But should a guy who watches these movies (without actually making a demand or paying) still get treatment?

With regards, to the people who download the videos, they are still part of the demand side of the market for this sort of abuse. I suppose if the government was interested in identifying people and treating them they could offer an amnesty (much like gun amnesties), whereby people who download this stuff voluntarily turn themselves over to the police, and agree to treatment, supervision and some degree of probation in exchange for not having the book thrown at them. Immunity would not apply for those already under investigation. Nor could it be offered as an alternative to sentencing for those who have been caught. That is about as lenient as I could tolerate.

Again I am not trying to sound like a hardass, but with respect to crimes against children the courts should be willing to give looooong prison sentences to those who are even caught downloading that stuff. I would also agree with greater authority on the part of the police with respect to monitoring online to catch people who download it. People will scream about big brother but if you are not doing anything wrong you should have nothing to worry about. It is a tradeoff; privacy versus protection of children...you cannot increase one without sacrificing the other so it depends on what you feel is more important. I personally would prefer to see more safegaurds in place to catch people like that.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[billvon 2,425]

Let's say you buy mainstream porn. Later it turns out that one of the actors was 17, rather than 21 as was implied by the seller. Should you get a loooong prison sentence?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Let's say you buy mainstream porn. Later it turns out that one of the actors was 17, rather than 21 as was implied by the seller. Should you get a loooong prison sentence?

there's a lot of mis labeled porn out there on the internet. Running an automated binary ripper on a usenet feed is likely to generate a lot of kiddie porn that can't be deleted until viewed. And there's of course that whole genre of 'I'm just legal.' No way to validate if they are or not, and it's perfectly legal to lust for 18 year olds.

Can't punish without establishing intent, and I have no idea how that is done.

[Richards 0]

Quote

Let's say you buy mainstream porn. Later it turns out that one of the actors was 17, rather than 21 as was implied by the seller. Should you get a loooong prison sentence?

The law allows that if you take the right legal safegaurds (ie buy from a registered distributer who would be required to comply with the law) then you would not be held accountable. I think you know what I meant by what I said so I am not sure why you are deliberately trying to take my comment out of context. Common sense would indicate that the law would have to be demonstrate that the person knew they were buying material with underage girls or ought to have reasonably foreseen that it was likely that the material did not comply with state and federal laws. Judges are capable of distinguishing between an honest mistake and a scumbag who was deliberately seeking that material.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Common sense would indicate that the law would have to be demonstrate that the person knew they were buying material with underage girls or ought to have reasonably foreseen that it was likely that the material did not comply with state and federal laws. Judges are capable of distinguishing between an honest mistake and a scumbag who was deliberately seeking that material.

the law is often not written with a vague notion of what 'common sense' entails. The mere possession of many items, and I believe child porn fits into the category, presumes intent. In the best case scenario, you're dragged off to jail and into the media and then you can fight for release without any further damage.

[Richards 0]

Quote

the law is often not written with a vague notion of what 'common sense' entails. The mere possession of many items, and I believe child porn fits into the category, presumes intent. In the best case scenario, you're dragged off to jail and into the media and then you can fight for release without any further damage

If an individual had never downloaded such material and had once stumbled across one of those sights by accident, I am sure that the authorities would take that into account when deciding whether or not to proceed with an investigation. I am guessing that if someone has been convicted of that, they were probably not in contact with it by accident, or conducting research (Peter Townsend is a scumbag) etc. While it is healthy to have a certain degree of oversight in our justice system we should not be so afraid of judicial abuse that in tradeoff we allow for dirtbags to escape justice.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[rhys 0]

Quote

Would cutting their dicks off be enough?

Thats what I was going to say too. but you've gotta get the gonads.

When a cat or dogs nuts get snipped off, they become less primal, more affectionate and don't piss everywhere.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Hawkins121 0]

Quote

Killing serves no other purpose other than making victims "feel good." And that's not the purpose of justice.

Deterence is a purpose.

Death would be a great deterent to this sort of crime. I gurantee you it would happen less if we started killing child molesters.

[likearock 1]

Quote

Quote

Let's say you buy mainstream porn. Later it turns out that one of the actors was 17, rather than 21 as was implied by the seller. Should you get a loooong prison sentence?

The law allows that if you take the right legal safegaurds (ie buy from a registered distributer who would be required to comply with the law) then you would not be held accountable. I think you know what I meant by what I said so I am not sure why you are deliberately trying to take my comment out of context. Common sense would indicate that the law would have to be demonstrate that the person knew they were buying material with underage girls or ought to have reasonably foreseen that it was likely that the material did not comply with state and federal laws. Judges are capable of distinguishing between an honest mistake and a scumbag who was deliberately seeking that material.

Some judges perhaps. But suppose you draw a very moralistic judge who is almost as much anti-adult-porn as he is anti-child-porn? The law as written doesn't provide too many safeguards. You could end up putting someone who has no interest in child porn into jail for a very loooong time.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Would cutting their dicks off be enough?

Quote

Unless they're female offenders.

------------------------------------------------------------


This has come up twice, now. Why the double standard?

um, Jimbo, I think you need to have a little talk with your parents.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Let's say you buy mainstream porn. Later it turns out that one of the actors was 17, rather than 21 as was implied by the seller. Should you get a loooong prison sentence?

Tracy Lords......15

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Killing serves no other purpose other than making victims "feel good." And that's not the purpose of justice.

Deterence is a purpose.

Death would be a great deterent to this sort of crime. I gurantee you it would happen less if we started killing child molesters.

Guarantee? I have the feeling your writing from your heart and not via statistical research. If you did, you would realize that deterrence does nothing to reduce crime.

[Cyanide41 0]

that would be ironic. In Ca if you engage in sex with a person 16+ with consent it is only a misdemeanor.

So in your scenario, You would get a greater penelty for watching a video with a 16 y/o girl than if you would if you had sex with her.

The ones who blatantly have kiddie porn should be punished severely. 17 is hard to tell, but 9 is pretty obvious. having 179 gigs of child porn is hard to say "i didn't realize"

JAMES

[Lindsey 0]

I think a difference should be made between child molesters and pedo's. The first category can not be healed and should therefor be punished severely and without remorse. The second category falls under sexual orientation and something can be done about this. Therefor they should be punished and treated.

I'm not following you here. If a pedophile acts on his sexual urges towards children, then it is child molestation. He he only fantasizes, then no crime has been committed. It's been a few years since I worked in this field, but unless there's some new intervention that I'm not aware of, then treatment is rarely successful.

To say that "pedophilia" fall under sexual orientation???? I don't think so.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[LisaM 0]

Yeah, let the other inmates get them.

~ Lisa
~ Do you Rigminder?

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Yeah, let the other inmates get them.

My thoughts exactly.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[LisaM 0]

Less tax money would go towards executing them.

I saw a show the other night about how the death row coutns are way up and some facilities had to open a new area to house the death row inmates. and hwo the officers have to get in full gear (face shield and everything) just to hand out food. What are they wasting my money for! If they wanna start a fight... don't feed 'em!

~ Lisa
~ Do you Rigminder?