NationStates Jolt Archive

how is making sure that these "people" never hurt another person again a wrong?

thats so so wrong and evil. that anyone can actually argue against death for these monsters is beyond me.

The priority here is keeping the criminal from ever repeating his crime, yes? Death isn't the only way to do this.

I could, for example, permanently put any sexual predator out of business with 30 seconds of time, an Exacto knife, and their retinas. Simple. Death isn't the only practical solution.

how is making sure that these "people" never hurt another person again a wrong?
Locking them up does that. If I thought treatment would be adequate I'd go for that. After an appropriate time served.

The priority here is keeping the criminal from ever repeating his crime, yes? Death isn't the only way to do this.

I could, for example, permanently put any sexual predator out of business with 30 seconds of time, an Exacto knife, and their retinas. Simple. Death isn't the only practical solution.

Ok...so this has devolved into a "lets come up with really sick tortures and pretend we are not sick individuals by targetting our sadism at people everyone hates" thread once again. Im outta here. Have fun

Locking them up does that. If I thought treatment would be adequate I'd go for that. After an appropriate time served.

prison costs taxpayers money, and it's better then what they deserve. i wouldn't recommend the torture suggestion, state sponsored sadism generally isn't a good idea. a bullet in the head seems about right.

Ok...so this has devolved into a "lets come up with really sick tortures and pretend we are not sick individuals by targetting our sadism at people everyone hates" thread once again. Im outta here. Have fun

Prison could be considered torture, as could castration, I suppose. Any punishment is torture if it isn't deserved. The argument is simply that some deserve it. Taking away a predator's tools (sight, for example) ends his status as a predator.

As a victim I know exactly how it feels to have no "justice". Depending on my mood I would rather just be able to forget what has happened to me in my life than to have someone killed. But if somebody attacked my daughter then there would be no hesitation in my decision for vengeance. Since I would do anything in my power to help my daughter avoid any type of experience that would steal her childhood and innocence the way it has stolen mine and countless other childrens. But there are countless opinions on what type of consequences should be handed out and there will never be a solution that everyone can agree on. Since we also have to keep in mind that the perpetrators family are also victims due to the crime.

Prison could be considered torture, as could castration, I suppose. Any punishment is torture if it isn't deserved. The argument is simply that some deserve it. Taking away a predator's tools (sight, for example) ends his status as a predator.

I will have to disagree with these solutions since you don't have to be able to see to still be a predator. Also castration is not a solution since in these days we have drugs such as viagra and steroids to bring back testosterone levels. The solution lies in society and the way we raise our children. Unless you believe that people are born "sick". In my opinion that is just an easy excuse that people believe since we as human beings have to understand "why" and we will grasp at anything that will help us cope. Cause it all boils down to choice. Nobody is forced to do anything.

I will have to disagree with these solutions since you don't have to be able to see to still be a predator.

I'll repost from before to try and clarify.

The most important part of the term "sexual predator" is not the sexual aspect, but the predatory nature of the criminal. This is key.

A blinded predator can learn to be a productive member of society, work a regular job, even have regular friends or family. However, a blind person can not prey on a child - the child must be brought to the predator, which would be possible, but unlikely, since the predator wouldn't know in most situations whether there were bystanders or parents in the general area, and escape would be far easier for a child of any age from a predator without his main tool - sight.

If this policy were put into effect, the only children available for rape would be family members' children, who, if the family members were notified of the predator's history, would be kept away unless extreme negligence were present, which can't be defended against anyway.

Anyway, my point was that an incorrigible predator can be dealt with in other ways than death, as someone else suggested. Incapacitation can take multiple forms.

i personally would rather be dead then blind.

i personally would rather be dead then blind.

Have you ever known a blind person? Their quality of life is often no worse than yours or mine. They adapt and still have regular families and relationships quite often.

i don't know i just don't like the idea of not being able to see..

i don't know i just don't like the idea of not being able to see..

Do you prefer the idea of not being?

i don't know i just don't like the idea of not being able to see..

I can understand that. It certainly wouldn't be a pleasant experience for some, but it certainly would put an end to a predator's sex crimes.

Do you prefer the idea of not being?

scroll up and you'll get an answer...


anyway it probably would cut back on the number of cases of abuse, but i'm opposed to mutilation as a form of punishment.

Think about it. This bastard wants to rape/molest/etc. but he doesn't have a dick or balls to do it. Imagine the mental anguish he goes through...especially in his life in prison. As he's getting raped daily and has to piss into a bedpan, he'll realize the error of his ways, or at least die trying.


Actually castration does not involve the removal of the penis, only the testicles. Thus it reduces the testosterone levels. Whether this is useful, I am not altogether decided.

I've read the whole of this thread thus far, and noted a distinctive lack of discussion on one detail that I feel is key to what really needs to be done to prevent further sexual assault, especially on minors.

First and foremost, though, I want to thank everyone who carried out their conversations with all due respect. This is an issue that necessarily evokes a lot of emotion, and while debate must be made in rational ways, the emotion must never be dismissed in its entirety.

That said, throughout this thread the content has almost exclusively focused on "what's to be done once we have that offender in our hands?" I find it dismaying that so much discussion could occur without much serious mention of initial prevention.

Essentially, I feel it is terribly easy to look at this as an issue of individuals. When we talk about offenders being caught, we often make it seem like they've appeared out of thin air, assaulted (perhaps repeatedly) others, and then landed in jail. It is this sort of naive (if, for the most part, inevitable) quantification of the problem that will lead to its continuation in our culture.

Did these offenders appear out of thin air? Of course not. They were born, for the most part, to parents with some desire to raise them properly. They were kindergarteners; they fussed over their greens as toddlers.

But please don't misconstrue this stance as one attempting to deny their later crimes. We'll get to that in a moment. What I want is to emphasize right now is that offenders don't come out of thin air, and that they are all born innocent.

What I want to emphasize is the element of social influence.

Because I think it's fair to say that for every offender out there, there was a turning point, a trigger or juncture, at which point that person could have been turned away from their criminal path. A point where they would have gone on to live a normal life. And then this person reaches this juncture - and it could have been a previous arrest for, say, petty theft, or abuses they suffered, or what-have-you - and once they reach this juncture, something clicks, and a new pattern of thought, a new morality, a new consciousness of the world emerges.

What we fail to recognise, I think, is that society creates its individuals. It is our social development, the way we interact with family, friends, colleagues, and so forth, that gives rise to our beliefs and our way of thinking. Social practices encourage some behaviours, and discourage others.

This is, for one, why I find the death penalty entirely inappropriate. If we imagine the offender as dropping out of thin air, sure - they've been raised in a culture outside our own, and their crimes are not a reflection of our training, our people. But the offender does not drop out of thin air; the offender has lived and breathed and grown in our culture. And, through our social practices, he has gone astray and not been given the means to set himself straight while there was still opportunity for significant and drastic change.

So, with the death penalty, we are doing the equivalent of pointedly ignoring when our pets nibble from our plates, and then suddenly beating them to death at one particular instance. Yes, this prevents the dog or cat from eating more of our food, but we could have prevented the issue long beforehand, when our pet was first hopping on the table. And since we could have prevented it sooner, the offender must be dealt with sternly (I am not denying the severity of the crime, nor the expected willpower of offender! Nor am I trying to equivocate rape to cats and dogs - it's just a simplified example), but we cannot deal with this offender without also dealing with the realisation that we wouldn't need to be this stern if we as a society had handled the matter sooner.

All in all, I feel we need to remember that when the rates for sexual abuse rise (and right now I've seen stats that say something like one in three children has been abused or assaulted throughout his or her life), it is a direct reflection of the piss-poor job our society has done in curbing this mentality. Long before we consider how to make the punishment fit the crime, we need to consider how the hell we're going to prevent it from happening in the first place - how we're going to prevent those triggers from being set off in the future, and breeding a new generation of sexual predators.

It's for this reason, I feel, that more emphasis on the development of our society's children will lead to the improvement of our society as a whole through the next generation. We need to put more effort into breaking cycles of abuse, as well as those cycles of poverty that lead to the sort of power-hunger mentality that starts many on sprees of rape. We need more emphasis on women's rights, and we need more people talking about this issue, everywhere. Help phone commercials, TV ads, school presentations: we need people to be aware of the issue, and able to recognise the signs. We need stronger community programs to encourage healthy and safe ways for our children to spend their free time (instead of loitering on downtown streets, for instance), stronger advertising for neighbourhood watches, and, most of all, we need stronger social reprobation.

Because - and this has also, I feel, not been covered adequately in this thread - there are two ways in which to inflict punishment: legally and socially. But the legal avenue is, again, less of a deterrent as it should be, and acts more as a body for punishment. However, it is and always will be that the greatest punishment comes socially. Employers not hiring because of an applicant's background, a community not accepting an individual because of his crimes, a released convict getting harassed for his past. Yes, technically, criminals have, by this point, served their Judge-decreed time for the crime committed, and should, technically, not need to suffer any further, but all such sentencing is always made with an acute awareness of the social ostracisation that will follow a criminal's re-integration with society. It's expected.

Here I will note, however, that I do not intend to make any claim about what sort of jail sentence would be best. Beyond my point about the death penalty, I honestly don't know. My point is instead about social reprobration. Indeed, I find it most intriguing that right-wingers are more likely to be for the death penalty (i.e. the government having say over who lives and dies), while at the same time criticising the government for over involvement (favouring instead a more efficient, small-scale bureaucracy). The real way to keep government out is to focus more on society as a suitable and long-lasting punishment, as well as the stronger deterrent.

By focusing less on exterminating present sexual predators and more on raising awareness, teaching children to be street-smart, and emphasizing healthy, protected child development, we will be assuring that the next generation is less predatory. More than legal punishment, we need to remember how strong and pervasive a force we have in social reprobation, and also how tremendous a tool we have for preventing future assaults on our children, our loved-ones, our way of life. Recognising our power as a connected people is our first and best means for success in the fight against assault.

And, again, thank you all for your comments; it has been a pleasure reading this thread. If you've read this far, thanks for that, too!

Peace.

MLClark,

Im glad to see someone else who has an interest in actual prevention. I agree we need to do those things you mention. But I have never heard any claims about any sort of trigger that causes people to change direction. The only place Ive seen such things is in movies, never in serious psychological writings.

If parents and the community did a better job of providing for the needs of children, it would go a long way toward lowering many different types of crime, not just sexual abuse. The situational pedophile is a perfect example of someone who, if he had a positive self image, a good self esteem, and the ability to relate well with others, would never be even tempted to sexually abuse any children. A person raised in a positive environment is much more likely to have those things and therefore have a much healthier life mentally speaking.

However, for the preferential pedophile we still need to provide more than just a good upbringing, because their condition is a sexual orientation, and we cannot yet tell what causes sexual orientation, and alot of signs point towards genetics. That being the case, raising them well is not going to affect anything. You still need to provide them with the tools they need to keep from acting on their desires.

Im not sure you did read the whole thread as you claim because I did make suggestions for stopping abuse before it even starts. I like your idea, and I think it is essential and would work well hand in hand with mine.

If someone is sentenced to death, the process is long enough for that person to come to terms with their mortality while they make appeals to have the sentence overturned. Capital punishment is intended to punish the criminal, but if that criminal has made peace with himself and whatever god he chooses to believe in, then the whole point of killing him is lost. He escapes any living consequences of his actions.

It's the family of this criminal who are truly punished by the sentence. Those of you who are seeing this issue as only kids vs perpetrators, rather than acknowledging that both are human beings, seem not to comprehend that the perpetrator is someone's son or daughter, sibling, spouse or friend. Just because you, in your rage, cannot see past the behaviour and find the person doesn't mean that others are so shortsighted.

Behaviour belongs to a person, but does not define the person. People are far more complex than the things they do, and to persist with the "perpetrators aren't human beings" angle is an emotive and weak argument. It is offensive to people on this forum who are actually giving thought to the argument. Don't bring us all down to that level.

Actually castration does not involve the removal of the penis, only the testicles. Thus it reduces the testosterone levels. Whether this is useful, I am not altogether decided.

Actually, castration is currently done by chemical means in many U.S. states, usually with a long-term injection, similar to Depo-Provera or the rod. Castration is more successful with perpetrators who are motivated to stop their behaviour, and believe me, there were enough of them for studies to be conducted.

Castration alone only kills the sex drive, it doesn't stop the psychological factors of attraction and the emotional need for sexual contact. So if castration is an option, it must be part of a wholistic treatment regime, otherwise it'd be like treating the flu with tissues and nothing else.

First offense, 20 years without the possibility of parole, confinement to take place in solitary at a supermax prison. Arms, legs, and face tattooed with the words, "SEXUAL PREDATOR".

On release, must wear a GPS with transmitter so that every move you make can be traced at all times. Would be required to start every conversation with everyone they meet with the words, "I am a sexual predator" before giving their name. Would be required to wear a special orange shirt or jacket with the words "SEXUAL PREDATOR" on front and back. Any violation of the minor conditions, and you go back to jail forever.

Second sexual offense, whipped to death in public on television.

First offense, 20 years without the possibility of parole, confinement to take place in solitary at a supermax prison. Arms, legs, and face tattooed with the words, "SEXUAL PREDATOR".

On release, must wear a GPS with transmitter so that every move you make can be traced at all times. Would be required to start every conversation with everyone they meet with the words, "I am a sexual predator" before giving their name. Would be required to wear a special orange shirt or jacket with the words "SEXUAL PREDATOR" on front and back. Any violation of the minor conditions, and you go back to jail forever.

Second sexual offense, whipped to death in public on television.

This would be effective, yes. But think of how much cheaper a 10-or-so year sentence followed by removal of the eyes would be, for crimes of child molestation (naturally longer for rape). The criminal returns to the workforce, minus the tools to harm another child.

This would be effective, yes. But think of how much cheaper a 10-or-so year sentence followed by removal of the eyes would be, for crimes of child molestation (naturally longer for rape). The criminal returns to the workforce, minus the tools to harm another child.

Gouge out the eyes, ok. But I'm afraid then that we'll have to chop off the arms at the elbows.

No I am not...(Maybe you should hit your head harder)

No it is not simple, thats why we have so many different opinions.

so in your opinion a 18 years old is still a "child"...


The question is "in your opinion" what should be minimum proof...

If your answer is "whatever the state provisions are"...that means that you are happy with your current state rape laws...In that case we need to know what is your State or Country...(maybe its so perferct that we need to emulate).

In any event your answers are not clear and direct...you have clear thinking issues.

Hey Ocean Drive, :upyours:

Gouge out the eyes, ok. But I'm afraid then that we'll have to chop off the arms at the elbows.

I think the ability to harm children is diminished enough with just the eyes, without having to go further and completely disable someone. After all, the purpose is to return the criminal to society, not cripple him so badly that he must continue to be taken care of by the state. Taking one's arms, in addition to one's sight, would all but rule out that person's ability to get a job and become productive.

I think the ability to harm children is diminished enough with just the eyes, without having to go further and completely disable someone. After all, the purpose is to return the criminal to society, not cripple him so badly that he must continue to be taken care of by the state. Taking one's arms, in addition to one's sight, would all but rule out that person's ability to get a job and become productive.

Oh, I'm willing to pay to have a permanent monument to what happens when you commit crime. Welfare in such a case would be cheaper than prison, and everyone would see what happens when you're that much of a monster.

I'd be more than willing to have them cast alive into a molten mass of Lucite, and allow it to harden with them inside, like bugs in amber, and remain on public display forever.

MLClark,

Im glad to see someone else who has an interest in actual prevention. I agree we need to do those things you mention. But I have never heard any claims about any sort of trigger that causes people to change direction. The only place Ive seen such things is in movies, never in serious psychological writings.

When I say trigger, I am perhaps using the wrong word. Crossroads is a better one. I feel there is a point (or maybe several) when people can be turned back from the paths on which they're heading. I feel it is important to remember that there are these missed opportunities, and to recognise the existence of these opportunities in one's dealings with the next generation.

If parents and the community did a better job of providing for the needs of children, it would go a long way toward lowering many different types of crime, not just sexual abuse. The situational pedophile is a perfect example of someone who, if he had a positive self image, a good self esteem, and the ability to relate well with others, would never be even tempted to sexually abuse any children. A person raised in a positive environment is much more likely to have those things and therefore have a much healthier life mentally speaking.

I agree with you completely.

However, for the preferential pedophile we still need to provide more than just a good upbringing, because their condition is a sexual orientation, and we cannot yet tell what causes sexual orientation, and alot of signs point towards genetics. That being the case, raising them well is not going to affect anything. You still need to provide them with the tools they need to keep from acting on their desires.

Which is, again, why it's important for the community to be aware of the signs. A community aware of the signs can get such individuals into counselling, and to teach them how to handle their urges, if it turns out they are genetic.

Im not sure you did read the whole thread as you claim because I did make suggestions for stopping abuse before it even starts.

Harsh words, dude. I did indeed read everything. I remember your discussion about the reasons why pedophiles do what they do, and about possible mental treatment. Again, though, while you may have made cursory comments about the role of the community, I felt your statements were also on an individual-by-individual basis, so I didn't classify them as the same as the global social changes I'd like to see, ones that do more than dropping the stigma fro mental health groups, but which also emphasizes community and childhood development. Please don't take what I said as a means to disparage your points; I just felt they were dealing with a more specific matter, when I felt we weren't opening it up generally enough.

I like your idea, and I think it is essential and would work well hand in hand with mine.

Ditto here. Good to chat with you.

MLClark,

Im glad to see someone else who has an interest in actual prevention.

<_< Looking at the thread, though, I don't think it's going to make any difference.

<_< Looking at the thread, though, I don't think it's going to make any difference.

And just how would you prevent it?

Mandatory psychological testing of everyone? And what tests would you use?

Quite a few threads ago I was accused of not thinking through my answers. I don't go around with definitions of child molesation laws etc. in my hip pocket so I did a little research.

The following website has a definition of Child molestation:

http://www.uslegalforms.com/lawdigest/legaldefinitions.php/child_sexual_molestation.htm

I also looked up the statute for the State of Indiana where I live on the code for molesting a child and it follows:

IC 35-42-4-3
Child molesting
Sec. 3. (a) A person who, with a child under fourteen (14) years of age, performs or submits to sexual intercourse or deviate sexual conduct commits child molesting, a Class B felony. However, the offense is a Class A felony if:
(1) it is committed by a person at least twenty-one (21) years of age;
(2) it is committed by using or threatening the use of deadly force or while armed with a deadly weapon;
(3) it results in serious bodily injury; or
(4) the commission of the offense is facilitated by furnishing the victim, without the victim's knowledge, with a drug (as defined in IC 16-42-19-2(1)) or a controlled substance (as defined in IC 35-48-1-9) or knowing that the victim was furnished with the drug or controlled substance without the victim's knowledge.
(b) A person who, with a child under fourteen (14) years of age, performs or submits to any fondling or touching, of either the child or the older person, with intent to arouse or to satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the older person, commits child molesting, a Class C felony. However, the offense is a Class A felony if:
(1) it is committed by using or threatening the use of deadly force;
(2) it is committed while armed with a deadly weapon; or
(3) the commission of the offense is facilitated by furnishing the victim, without the victim's knowledge, with a drug (as defined in IC 16-42-19-2(1)) or a controlled substance (as defined in IC 35-48-1-9) or knowing that the victim was furnished with the drug or controlled substance without the victim's knowledge.
(c) It is a defense that the accused person reasonably believed that the child was sixteen (16) years of age or older at the time of the conduct.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.2. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.38; Acts 1978, P.L.82, SEC.2; Acts 1981, P.L.301, SEC.1; P.L.79-1994, SEC.12; P.L.33-1996, SEC.8; P.L.216-1996, SEC.18; P.L.31-1998, SEC.5.

I don't think the laws go far enough. A child who is molested, and if they are lucky enough to have survived their ordeal, will relive that molestation for the rest of their lives. No amount of therapy fully removes the trauma they suffered. On the other hand the molester can relive the molestation in a different way, by fantasizing about what he, (assuming the molester is a man), did to gain pleasure for himself in some way. That's what needs to be stopped. The only way that can be done is by giving the molester a lobotomy or executing them. Letting the molester live in prison is to good for them and I certainly do not want to allow them to live to continue to fantasize about their crime in their heads on my dime...

First offense, 20 years without the possibility of parole, confinement to take place in solitary at a supermax prison. Arms, legs, and face tattooed with the words, "SEXUAL PREDATOR".

On release, must wear a GPS with transmitter so that every move you make can be traced at all times. Would be required to start every conversation with everyone they meet with the words, "I am a sexual predator" before giving their name. Would be required to wear a special orange shirt or jacket with the words "SEXUAL PREDATOR" on front and back. Any violation of the minor conditions, and you go back to jail forever.

Second sexual offense, whipped to death in public on television.
Let me tell you something. You are firstly an idiot, and secondly, you are obviously not very mature. It is this kind of action that makes other countries such terrible places to live. People like you tick me off, and I'm starting to get a headache arguing with idiot Zealots like you and explaining to the pedophiles that because I agree that age laws are to strict and unreallistic does not mean I'm a pedophile like them.
What is with you people? Don't you get it!? So many innocent people have been hurt because of people like you! When are you going to stop!? Wehn are you going to learn to leave people alone and stop hurting people who are doing NO WRONG! I understand throwing someone who is actually hurting some small child in jail, but to throw an innocent person in jail who is in love. My Fiance Alex would be devistated! She would try to kill herself knowing her! She loves me as much as I love her, thats why she said "yes" when after 2 years of going out I finally popped the question.
Would you really want to hurt a couple like us this way? Do you reallize the humiliation you would be heaping on innocent people? Do you reallize the pain in a girl like Alex's heart as she had to watch the man she loved going through that? Even worse, if I had to be whipped to death. Think of the effect that would have on her to have to watch the man she loves endure such a painful death, and know that people all over the country who don't know the truth where rejoicing at her love's death. It makes me want to cry just thinking of how hurt she would be. I personally would count it as nothing for love of her. She is everything to me and I couldn't live without her. If I have to die for a love like that, I would gladly do so in an instant because I love her that much. Now tell me. Am I evil? Would you like to whip me to death because my Fiance is 15?

Now tell me. Am I evil? Would you like to whip me to death because my Fiance is 15?

If you were over the age of 21, and she was my daughter, you would already be trying to pull your intestines down out of the tree in front of my house.

Hope you don't live in America, because the laws are going to get stricter with each event like this.

You remember the Dunblaine massacre in the UK? Well, there they blamed the gun, and not the man.

Here, we blame the man, and not his predilection. Couey is as good as dead in Florida. He just doesn't know it yet.

Let me tell you something. You are firstly an idiot, and secondly, you are obviously not very mature. It is this kind of action that makes other countries such terrible places to live. People like you tick me off, and I'm starting to get a headache arguing with idiot Zealots like you and explaining to the pedophiles that because I agree that age laws are to strict and unreallistic does not mean I'm a pedophile like them.

first of all, beginning a post with that kind of insulting rant is totally counter-productive. you are making a post demanding fair and reasonable treatment, predicated on the idea that you are a nice guy who is potentially victimized by unreasonable laws, yet you are coming across as a rage-filled psycho who shouldn't be having sex with ANYBODY.

second, just because you don't agree with age of consent laws does NOT mean you get to break them. you know the laws, and if you choose to be involved with a minor then you deserve what you get. you can work to change the laws, but if you go around breaking every law you dislike then you will have to face the consequences.


What is with you people? Don't you get it!? So many innocent people have been hurt because of people like you! When are you going to stop!? Wehn are you going to learn to leave people alone and stop hurting people who are doing NO WRONG! I understand throwing someone who is actually hurting some small child in jail, but to throw an innocent person in jail who is in love.

whether or not somebody is "in love" has no bearing on this issue. many pedophiles are "in love" with 5 year olds, and that's irrelevant. if you engage in a sexual relationship with an individual who cannot give consent, you are a rapist no matter how much you "love" that individual. you are NOT innocent...the victim is.


My Fiance Alex would be devistated! She would try to kill herself knowing her! She loves me as much as I love her, thats why she said "yes" when after 2 years of going out I finally popped the question.

she sounds deeply disturbed and co-dependent. i would strongly advise her to get counseling immediately, to deal with this Juliet complex of hers, and i would strongly advise her to not be in any romantic relationships (least of all with an older man) until she addresses her personal problems.

Now tell me. Am I evil? Would you like to whip me to death because my Fiance is 15?
15 is borderline. at 15, there are still many young people who are not neurologically capable of giving adult consent. your fiance MIGHT be one of the few who can, though her choice in lover doesn't speak to highly in that regard, but the law should not be based on "might be" cases...and neither should your romantic decisions.

a human being below a certain age will simply not be able to give adult consent. period. they don't have the brain development to do it. if you were having sex with her or "loving" her before this point, she was not consenting because she was not physically capable of consenting. if you had sex with her at that point, and you were over the age of consent at the time, then you are a rapist regardless of how much you "love" her or she "loves" you. if you were also a minor then you effectively "raped" each other, and neither of you can be rightfully accused of exploiting the other.

if you are a rapist, as i described, i would not want you whipped to death, but i would want you put in prison for the remainder of your life with no possibility of parole. i believe the sexual exploitation of a child is unacceptable no matter what magical romantic emotions you try to associate with it.

if you are currently an adult who is engaged to a 15 year old, seek professional help immediately. no 15 year old should be engaged, and no person who loves a 15 year old would allow them to make such a critical choice before they physically mature enough to be positively able to evaluate the full ramifications of that choice. by proposing you proved you do NOT care about her welfare enough to do what is best. if you want to prove your love, act lovingly by doing what is right. quit trying to push blame onto others.

castration

take away the tools and they can't work


I agree with the delegate from Steel Butterfly. Castrate all sexual predetors no ifs ands or buts about it. No 2ne or 3rd chances are to be given to these degenerates. But we should not just stop there. I believe that if we the duly recognized Leaders of our States should insititue a program whereby there be public executions and public disciplinary hearings. There proceedings will then be documented, filmed and distributed to all of the schools, starting from primary on up to high school & even college, to prevent such ocurrances of these and possible all crimes.

Please feel free to comment......

The Supreme Commander of Elven Springs

15 is borderline. at 15, there are still many young people who are not neurologically capable of giving adult consent. your fiance MIGHT be one of the few who can, though her choice in lover doesn't speak to highly in that regard, but the law should not be based on "might be" cases...and neither should your romantic decisions.

a human being below a certain age will simply not be able to give adult consent. period. they don't have the brain development to do it. if you were having sex with her or "loving" her before this point, she was not consenting because she was not physically capable of consenting. if you had sex with her at that point, and you were over the age of consent at the time, then you are a rapist regardless of how much you "love" her or she "loves" you. if you were also a minor then you effectively "raped" each other, and neither of you can be rightfully accused of exploiting the other.



Wasn't there a study recently released that young people aren't "neurologically" fully developed until they are like 25 or older?

This is why I mentioned, attacking 18 and younger children should be punishiable to the full extent of the law as it currently is. But, the law is not stringent enough even then. If this SOB is seeing/having sex with, and/or is engaged to a 15 year old...if she was my daughter he wouldn't live to see another day... :sniper: :mad:

Wasn't there a study recently released that young people aren't "neurologically" fully developed until they are like 25 or older?

the human brain continues to develop and change throughout our entire lives. however, the structures which are active during adult reasoning, impulse control, and moral evaluations are present by about 16 years old. with these structures, an individual has the ability to give what we refer to as "adult consent"; without them, it is physically impossible for an individual to give such consent. a 25 year old may not be neurologically "finished," but they have the ability to give adult consent...a 15 year old MIGHT have that ability, but they might not.

i believe it is best to set age of consent at the point where essentially all individuals will have the necessary structures for consent, and i believe that current research ballparks that age at 16. a lot of 15 year olds would be ready as well, but we have to set one age to apply across the board and i think we are better safe than sorry on this one.

Well, for me, you can quibble about the upper limit all you like.
The girl in Florida was 9.

I've rethought the punishment, and I believe he should get a cortical stimulator installed in his head, so that we can use succinylcholine to paralyze his body in a hospital bed, and then light up the pain centers of his brain with far more pain than he could ever physically experience, and then just leave him like that.

He wouldn't be able to move, but he would be fully conscious, and experiencing a continuous whole-body sensation of pain 10,000 times greater than any physical torture.

Well, for me, you can quibble about the upper limit all you like.
The girl in Florida was 9.

I've rethought the punishment, and I believe he should get a cortical stimulator installed in his head, so that we can use succinylcholine to paralyze his body in a hospital bed, and then light up the pain centers of his brain with far more pain than he could ever physically experience, and then just leave him like that.

He wouldn't be able to move, but he would be fully conscious, and experiencing a continuous whole-body sensation of pain 10,000 times greater than any physical torture.

I agree. He wont lose consciosness, so he'll get the full benefit. You may want to remove his exterior plumbing and leave it where he can see it and be reminded of it during his treatment.

Well, for me, you can quibble about the upper limit all you like.
The girl in Florida was 9.

I've rethought the punishment, and I believe he should get a cortical stimulator installed in his head, so that we can use succinylcholine to paralyze his body in a hospital bed, and then light up the pain centers of his brain with far more pain than he could ever physically experience, and then just leave him like that.

He wouldn't be able to move, but he would be fully conscious, and experiencing a continuous whole-body sensation of pain 10,000 times greater than any physical torture.

What is the greater evil? If you can with a logical mind condemn sombody to that kind of treatment regardless of their actions then you have a serious mental problem and need to seek advice. I can ask this since I was molested as a young child by my grandfather and a son of my parents friends. One thing that is overlooked also is that it is also not always motivated by sex. Power is a far more intoxicating motivational factor.

What is the greater evil? If you can with a logical mind condemn sombody to that kind of treatment regardless of their actions then you have a serious mental problem and need to seek advice. I can ask this since I was molested as a young child by my grandfather and a son of my parents friends. One thing that is overlooked also is that it is also not always motivated by sex. Power is a far more intoxicating motivational factor.

Regardless of their actions? Raping and killing a 9 year old girl?

first of all, beginning a post with that kind of insulting rant is totally counter-productive. you are making a post demanding fair and reasonable treatment, predicated on the idea that you are a nice guy who is potentially victimized by unreasonable laws, yet you are coming across as a rage-filled psycho who shouldn't be having sex with ANYBODY.

second, just because you don't agree with age of consent laws does NOT mean you get to break them. you know the laws, and if you choose to be involved with a minor then you deserve what you get. you can work to change the laws, but if you go around breaking every law you dislike then you will have to face the consequences.
ok, normally, you are right. But if you check, I've been arguing against nitwits like this since yesterday and they keep showing up. I can't stand idiots.


whether or not somebody is "in love" has no bearing on this issue. many pedophiles are "in love" with 5 year olds, and that's irrelevant. if you engage in a sexual relationship with an individual who cannot give consent, you are a rapist no matter how much you "love" that individual. you are NOT innocent...the victim is.


she sounds deeply disturbed and co-dependent. i would strongly advise her to get counseling immediately, to deal with this Juliet complex of hers, and i would strongly advise her to not be in any romantic relationships (least of all with an older man) until she addresses her personal problems.
Firstly, Pedophiles aren't in love. They know they aren't. They just want to screw the little girl and any other little girl they see. This is why they kill them afterwords usually, or threaten to hurt them. I wouldn't ever hurt Alex like that, and if she didn't want me, I would be devistated, but I would leave her alone if she wanted that. However, she loves me. The fact is, that most people who are in love would feel like how I described her. They would want to kill themselves. They won't necessarily do it, but they will want to. I hope that Alex wouldn't kill herself, despite the immense pain, because I would want her to keep on living and to find a way to be happy. Then one day I would want her to join me in eternity after her life has met a natural end. Alex is fully capable of choosing the right man for her, which is why she chose me. She chooses to be with older men because the boys her age are too immature for her.


15 is borderline. at 15, there are still many young people who are not neurologically capable of giving adult consent. your fiance MIGHT be one of the few who can, though her choice in lover doesn't speak to highly in that regard, but the law should not be based on "might be" cases...and neither should your romantic decisions.

a human being below a certain age will simply not be able to give adult consent. period. they don't have the brain development to do it. if you were having sex with her or "loving" her before this point, she was not consenting because she was not physically capable of consenting. if you had sex with her at that point, and you were over the age of consent at the time, then you are a rapist regardless of how much you "love" her or she "loves" you. if you were also a minor then you effectively "raped" each other, and neither of you can be rightfully accused of exploiting the other.

if you are a rapist, as i described, i would not want you whipped to death, but i would want you put in prison for the remainder of your life with no possibility of parole. i believe the sexual exploitation of a child is unacceptable no matter what magical romantic emotions you try to associate with it.

if you are currently an adult who is engaged to a 15 year old, seek professional help immediately. no 15 year old should be engaged, and no person who loves a 15 year old would allow them to make such a critical choice before they physically mature enough to be positively able to evaluate the full ramifications of that choice. by proposing you proved you do NOT care about her welfare enough to do what is best. if you want to prove your love, act lovingly by doing what is right. quit trying to push blame onto others.
ok, as far as physical maturity, I think you need to think again. Alex has finished her growth, even her doctors have said that in the most, she will maybe gain slightly more in her breasts and that would be it. She already has Size D breasts! God! How can you think she's not phyiscally developed? The funny thing is, the laws that we have don't actually line up with facts and the truth of growth and psychology. Studies have proven time and time again that 16 year olds are more then mature enough to live on their own. This is why there are the new immancipation laws. However, I don't think they've gone far enough. What I'm angry about is that people like the first person I responded to, and you yourself, all seem to be so bent on putting bad people in jail that you don't care if multiple hundreds of innocents are also thrown in jail. You are basically like the French during their revolutionary years. You just want to hurt everyone for your own darn ammusement! This is why I get angry and seem irrational. I've tried to be civilised, but the more civilised and educated I speak my case, the more idiotic people's ideas become. Everyone who has seen her picture has said they figured she was around 21 at least. She looks far older then she really is. She acts older then she really is. I'm not trying to get with her cause I'm some sick pedophile who likes little girls. I am with her because I love her. I didn't exactly have control over it. I didn't even know her real age until I was in the relationship to far to just pull out. Then, despite my attempts to slowly cut things off, we both grew deeper and deeper in love and before long certain things happened which let us both know that our love was not about to be stopped any time soon by any means. Anyway, I have to go. This is getting long and I have babies to take care of. Unlike some people, I work instead of complaining that innocent people should be whipped to death on public tv.

This is in response to Whispering Legs

Who does that punishment actually help???? It does nothing and will never be implemented in society. And then where does it stop??? Then that just opens the door to more violent punishment across the board. Say a drug dealer sells someone drugs and then they go commit a crime are you going to serve the same sentence to everyone involved??? If that is the case then it all starts with the parents Correct??? So does that mean you will subject everyone involved. (and sorry about the next one) What about the parents of the child victim?? Since they were neglegent in their actions to protect their child are they due some punishment also? If you are going to violently punish someone for something then you need to follow the course all the way. Prevention is not achieved by consequences. Cause even though my daughter will hate me for ruining her life I will always know where she is and what she is up to. And if anyone says that it is too hard to do that then in my opinion you are not putting your children first. Everyting is possible as long as you are motivated.

'America: Where we kill people who have killed people to show other killers that killing is wrong!'

Maybe this just creates a viscious cycle, where we create more people who are capable of committing acts without remorse, guilt, or a second thought while we breed the idea of violence into our consciousness.

HARSH punishments, yes. I'd like to see the chance for probation taken away for all repeat offenders. I liked what the one guy said about labour camps and a life sentence - that I would reserve for the second offense. 25 years in prison will rot you to the core, and thats exactly what needs to happen to a lot of these people..

And as much as I am for rehabilitation, I think we're finding more and more that the majority of -these- criminals can't be rehabilitated.

This is in response to Whispering Legs


I can't prevent every act of pedophilia without constantly subjecting everyone to a battery of psychological tests and observation. I'm not willing to be that intrusive.

In the event that someone does commit pedophilia, I believe in several things:

1) Societal retribution - always a longstanding consideration in punishment.
2) Terrifying the potential perpetrator - only as good as the potential of getting caught - so not a primary reason
3) Punishment - I want the perpetrator to feel the absolute agony greater than death - for as long as it is possible to feel it. Technologically, this is possible to achieve.

I would then have them executed, to accomplish

4) Making sure they never do it again.

I don't want someone to say, "well, he got off light". I can't bring back the dead child, and I can't un-abuse the child. But I can have some small measure of retribution, and be sure that the perpetrator can never again harm another child.

No, I don't have the slippery slope that you have, saying that eventually everyone would receive this punishment. That's a bogus argument and you know it.

Wasn't there a study recently released that young people aren't "neurologically" fully developed until they are like 25 or older?

This is why I mentioned, attacking 18 and younger children should be punishiable to the full extent of the law as it currently is. But, the law is not stringent enough even then. If this SOB is seeing/having sex with, and/or is engaged to a 15 year old...if she was my daughter he wouldn't live to see another day... :sniper: :mad:
Good thing she's not your daughter. The fact is, if her father had any say, he would love to have me in jail. Not because of my age, cause he is an actual pedophile, but rather because he doesn't want her to be happy and will do anything he can to stop her from being happy. This man is the type of guy who should be in jail. He raped Alex regularly for 10 years, but he is rich and a speciallized surgeon so nothing was done when everyone found out. Her mother left him with her, but is now deciding that she loves him more then her daughter and has decided to tell Alex that she is "Ruining this family" so she's sending her to live with her older sister so she can live with this man. As a result of trauma, Alex had to grow up very fast, and has done just that. Now the guys who are in her age group are not strong enough to make her feel sage, or mature enough to make her feel like she's talking to an equal. Most of the stupid boys want her to think she's inferior. I've always told her she is an equal if not superior to me. So perhaps if you where her father, she wouldn't be with me. But sadly, that's not the case. So, whatever you think. Alex is no ordinary 15 year old. She is metally, and physically matured. I still state the same thing I did in my first suggestion. There should be a test. A minimum of 1000 questions with enough combinations so that the tests are not all the same. This test would be designed and thought up by the most renowned psychologists and psychiatrists in the coutry. The result would determine whether the person taking the test was mature enough to make their own decisions. If the test is passed, then the person, male or female, will be given all the rights of an adult except such stable and set rules as laws on voting, drinking and smoking ((But then I believe that Tobacco should be illegal so thats just me)). He/She should be allowed to sign legal documentation, including marriage papers and prenuptual agreements. This is what I think. I think that if this where inacted, then alot of stupid people would finally reallize how stupid they have been as people they thought where children start to score higher then most adults nowadays. So, thats my thought.

Darnit. By the way, I own Unther. This is Me and Alex's nation and occasionally nationstates auto logs me onto it. I don't know why. I didn't tell them to...

Quite a few threads ago I was accused of not thinking through my answers. I don't go around with definitions of child molesation laws etc. in my hip pocket so I did a little research.

The following website has a definition of Child molestation:

http://www.uslegalforms.com/lawdigest/legaldefinitions.php/child_sexual_molestation.htm

I also looked up the statute for the State of Indiana where I live on the code for molesting a child and it follows:

IC 35-42-4-3
Child molesting
Sec. 3. (a) A person who, with a child under fourteen (14) years of age, performs or submits to sexual intercourse or deviate sexual conduct commits child molesting, a Class B felony. However, the offense is a Class A felony if:
(1) it is committed by a person at least twenty-one (21) years of age;
(2) it is committed by using or threatening the use of deadly force or while armed with a deadly weapon;
(3) it results in serious bodily injury; or
(4) the commission of the offense is facilitated by furnishing the victim, without the victim's knowledge, with a drug (as defined in IC 16-42-19-2(1)) or a controlled substance (as defined in IC 35-48-1-9) or knowing that the victim was furnished with the drug or controlled substance without the victim's knowledge.
(b) A person who, with a child under fourteen (14) years of age, performs or submits to any fondling or touching, of either the child or the older person, with intent to arouse or to satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the older person, commits child molesting, a Class C felony. However, the offense is a Class A felony if:
(1) it is committed by using or threatening the use of deadly force;
(2) it is committed while armed with a deadly weapon; or
(3) the commission of the offense is facilitated by furnishing the victim, without the victim's knowledge, with a drug (as defined in IC 16-42-19-2(1)) or a controlled substance (as defined in IC 35-48-1-9) or knowing that the victim was furnished with the drug or controlled substance without the victim's knowledge.
(c) It is a defense that the accused person reasonably believed that the child was sixteen (16) years of age or older at the time of the conduct.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.2. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.38; Acts 1978, P.L.82, SEC.2; Acts 1981, P.L.301, SEC.1; P.L.79-1994, SEC.12; P.L.33-1996, SEC.8; P.L.216-1996, SEC.18; P.L.31-1998, SEC.5.

I don't think the laws go far enough. A child who is molested, and if they are lucky enough to have survived their ordeal, will relive that molestation for the rest of their lives. No amount of therapy fully removes the trauma they suffered. On the other hand the molester can relive the molestation in a different way, by fantasizing about what he, (assuming the molester is a man), did to gain pleasure for himself in some way. That's what needs to be stopped. The only way that can be done is by giving the molester a lobotomy or executing them. Letting the molester live in prison is to good for them and I certainly do not want to allow them to live to continue to fantasize about their crime in their heads on my dime...


Personally, I think that this law goes a little too far. You may have missed this criticallittle point but it doesn't make exceptions for consentual sex between minors. If two 13 years olds decide to do some sexual experimentation both are guilty of a Class B felony under this statute.
Furthurmore what is even more absurd is tha tphrase "submits to" in part (a). By strictest definition, an adult who is forcibly raped by a 13 year old is guilty of a Class A fellony. Should we really have laws that can be used to treat rape victims like rapists?

ok, normally, you are right. But if you check, I've been arguing against nitwits like this since yesterday and they keep showing up. I can't stand idiots.

i understand this is an emotional topic, and i know it can be hard to hold your temper. i just figure that you sound like somebody who wants to be reasonable and to be treated reasonably, so being that aggressive wouldn't help you get what you want. i'm glad you are on board with that part :).


Firstly, Pedophiles aren't in love. They know they aren't. They just want to screw the little girl and any other little girl they see. This is why they kill them afterwords usually, or threaten to hurt them.

i'm sorry, but you are incorrect. many pedophiles believe they are in love. many pedophiles do NOT kill or otherwise injure the child(ren) they molest.


I wouldn't ever hurt Alex like that, and if she didn't want me, I would be devistated, but I would leave her alone if she wanted that. However, she loves me.

many pedophiles say precisely the same things about their victims. 45 year old men insist their 5 year old "lovers" care for them deeply, that they have true romance, that they are just misunderstood by society.


The fact is, that most people who are in love would feel like how I described her. They would want to kill themselves. They won't necessarily do it, but they will want to.

you have some very interesting notions about love, none of which seem well-grounded in reality.


I hope that Alex wouldn't kill herself, despite the immense pain, because I would want her to keep on living and to find a way to be happy. Then one day I would want her to join me in eternity after her life has met a natural end.

well, that much is good.


Alex is fully capable of choosing the right man for her, which is why she chose me. She chooses to be with older men because the boys her age are too immature for her.

Alex would not be capable of making such a choice at the age of 13 (which i think is when you said you first became involved with her). at 13, she would not have the neurological structures necessary to consent to sexual contact, and i don't feel it is appropriate to expect a child to show abilities they simply cannot possess due to their biology. she could not make responsible or "mature" choices at that age.


ok, as far as physical maturity, I think you need to think again. Alex has finished her growth, even her doctors have said that in the most, she will maybe gain slightly more in her breasts and that would be it. She already has Size D breasts! God! How can you think she's not phyiscally developed?

wow. i mean...wow.

the body and the brain are not the same thing. girls as young as 8 have been able to get pregnant, and fully developed breasts have been shown on 7 year olds...should those young girls be considered adult?

of course not. because it is not the body that makes an adult, but the brain. no matter how big her boobs are, a girl of 13 or 14 is NOT NEUROLOGICALLY ADULT. she isn't. her brain is not that of a grown up. her body may seem ready to you, but her mind is not.


The funny thing is, the laws that we have don't actually line up with facts and the truth of growth and psychology. Studies have proven time and time again that 16 year olds are more then mature enough to live on their own. This is why there are the new immancipation laws. However, I don't think they've gone far enough.

as i have said, i believe the age of consent could reasonably be dropped to 16 without any serious problems. even 15 MIGHT be something to be considered. lower than that, and you are in a situation where the majority of young "adults" will actually not have the physical capacity for adult reasoning...it would be wrong to expect these children to function as adults, when they are not neurologically capable of doing so.


What I'm angry about is that people like the first person I responded to, and you yourself, all seem to be so bent on putting bad people in jail that you don't care if multiple hundreds of innocents are also thrown in jail.

no, you are angry because people are telling you what you are doing is wrong. people are reminding you that taking advantage of little girls is a no-no. you like your little girl, you like her body, and you like that she thinks she's in love with you. you aren't concerned about her welfare (as you have made quite obvious), nor are you concerned about really building a solid adult relationship, you just like the way you feel and don't want to be told that it's wrong.

i have no interest in putting innocent people in prison. however, any person who would have a sexual relationship with a non-consenting individual is not "innocent." they are a rapist. if you had sexual contact with a girl of 13 or 14 you are a rapist.


You are basically like the French during their revolutionary years. You just want to hurt everyone for your own darn ammusement!

wow, you managed to combine ignorance of law, ignorance of history, and ignorance of my position all in one neat little package. how impressive.


Everyone who has seen her picture has said they figured she was around 21 at least. She looks far older then she really is. She acts older then she really is.

as i have said, that doesn't matter in the slightest. her body is not what gives consent, her MIND is what gives consent, and her 15 year old mind is most likely not able to give adult consent at all. her 13 year old mind was most definitely not able to do so.


I'm not trying to get with her cause I'm some sick pedophile who likes little girls. I am with her because I love her. I didn't exactly have control over it. I didn't even know her real age until I was in the relationship to far to just pull out. Then, despite my attempts to slowly cut things off, we both grew deeper and deeper in love and before long certain things happened which let us both know that our love was not about to be stopped any time soon by any means.

all of which could have been pulled straight from a NAMBLA forum. your "love" clearly does not include respect, honor, or care for your partner's wellbeing, and i regard such "love" as worse than nothing.


Anyway, I have to go. This is getting long and I have babies to take care of. Unlike some people, I work instead of complaining that innocent people should be whipped to death on public tv.
again with the pointless jibes. perhaps i shouldn't be chastising you at all...your behavior suggests you are much younger than 15, so i guess maybe "Alex" is the cradle robber in the relationship :).

castration

take away the tools and they can't work

if i was a bad man........nope sorry i wont do it...see worked :D

we are talking about all of it tho right?

She already has Size D breasts! God! How can you think she's not phyiscally developed?


the more brutal forms of punishment suggested in this thread are starting to look more and more appealing..

the more brutal forms of punishment suggested in this thread are starting to look more and more appealing..

I agree.

No shit, smartass. Nothing like following me around is it? Anyhow, you still can't rape someone with a penis you don't have.

Ever hear of "rape by implementation?" It doesn’t require the rapist use any of his body parts.

The police got wind of all this, and naturally arrested the mother. They also arrested all the men they could track down, got them convicted and sent to prison.

Where is the justice in that?

My brother-in-law had a great saying. "You sink the sausage, you pay." People should give that some serious thought before they pull down their zipper.

Here's an odd but possibly effective idea: Let's find a more creative and legal outlet for these sexual urges.

Sex fights. Put them in the ring and let them beat the shit out of eachother. Winner fucks the loser right there in the ring.

Best of all, there might even be a television market for this. :eek:

My brother-in-law had a great saying. "You sink the sausage, you pay." People should give that some serious thought before they pull down their zipper.

Spoken like a true sexophobe.



Baldur

A few points:

Most pedophiles DO care about children, and truly love them, which is why most do not have sex with children in societies where harm would come to children as a result.

When considering age-of-consent laws, why do we assume we NEED an age-of-consent for sex?

I can understand an age-of-consent for entering into contracts, especially long-range contracts that would affect a significant portion of one's life. I can understand an age-of-consent for playing dangerous sports that have a high possibility of causing significant harm.

But what is so harmful about sexual contact other than society's reaction to it?

Certainly, there can be physical harm, or STDs, or pregnancies - but we now have the means to prevent them. More importantly, these are extremely unlikely in cases of mutual masturbation or oral sex performed on a child (quite possible with regards to oral sex performed BY a child), yet all of these are treated the same, and without any recognition of the differences.

It seems clear that society, especially in the English-speaking countries, has a huge problem with sexuality, and makes the assumption that sex is a negative thing to be avoided wherever possible. What is more, the English-speaking countries seem to have a similar attitude toward children. It is no wonder that combining the two provokes such a hysterical reaction.

But does it make any sense?



Baldur

To all those people in favor of brutal punishment of child molestors, think of this. If the molestor is a family member, punishing them in such a manner may do more harm to the child than the offense itself. Regardless of the crime a father/step-father/brother/uncle commits against a child, the child usually still loves them. Most sexual abuse committed against children is perpertrated (sp?) by a family member or family friend. A child might be discouraged from reporting even brutal abuse if Daddy or Uncle Bob is going to be tortured or killed.
I knew a girl that was ostracized by her whole family, to the extent of being put in foster care, because her step dad killed himself rather than go to jail. True, it's her crazy family is at fault, but think how much harder it would be if all such predators were tortured and killed. Her feelings of guilt would be so much stronger.

My Girlfriend was raped on saint patrick's day.......... I feel so bad for her, she barely even talks to me anymore. She attempted suicide as well. I feel like I can do something, but she won't let me. It has been making me feel reallt depressed. Any advice?

Let me tell you a real story that goes on right now. I don't know if it's relevant, because it's not really rape.


I am a Senior at a H.S. in NYC. It's a very big school (5000 students). One of the history teachers, is accused of sexually harrassing one of the students. His picture was in the paper, along with a 1/2 page article. According to the girl, he hugged, and kissed her and talked inappropirately. However, I had that teacher. He is a really great teacher, everyone loves him. I can bet my internet access for a month, that he probably failed her, so she decided to press charges to take revenge. Knowing him, he often allows cursing in class, and sometimes curses himself. He could also put his hands around her shoulder, and even kiss her on the cheek/forehead. He does that, I know, i've seen him do it. However is it really "sexual harassment"? Hell no. Now, even if they find him innocent, his picture was still in the paper, and he still faces all the shame.


I think that rapists/molestors/harrassers are dealt with badly enough. In jail, the inmates that get treated the worst by their neightbors fall into that category. While a convict who killed his wife for cheating on him is respected, a rapist/child molestor/sexual harrassor is tortured, ass raped,... the list goes on. And even when they get out, they have to register and their picture gets sent out to all homes. Rebuilding and rehabilitating your life, after the shame of everyone knowing that you are a sex offendor is absolutely impossible. So yes, I do think that the system needs to be changed. Just changed a different way.

My Girlfriend was raped on saint patrick's day.......... I feel so bad for her, she barely even talks to me anymore. She attempted suicide as well. I feel like I can do something, but she won't let me. It has been making me feel reallt depressed. Any advice?
Get her to see a shrink any way possible. If she objects, trick her, say you two are going shopping, and then say "oh look, lets go in". "Oh look, it's a phychologist office".

Here's an odd but possibly effective idea: Let's find a more creative and legal outlet for these sexual urges.

Sex fights. Put them in the ring and let them beat the shit out of eachother. Winner fucks the loser right there in the ring.

Best of all, there might even be a television market for this. :eek:
:)

OR better yet: an eye for an eye. You rape someone else's children, they get to rape yours. Same thing goes for wife/girlfriend.

Pedophilia touches a nerve with me in several ways. For a long time I was incredulously angered by it. Why? Because my fatherh ad exual relations with me when I was a child. And I enjoyed all of them, and even encouraged him. I remember these incidents clearly.

For the longest time I hated him for it, not automatically mind yu, but do you know why? Because I saw a commercial that told me that it was bad. And then I told my family about it. And they treated it like it was the most horrible thing in the world for a little while. And then they acted like it never happened.

But gues what? It felt natural when it happened, and I can remember this after I got over my programming. I enjoyed it on a level that I have rarely approached since. It bonded me with my father in more ways than one.

Add I have forgiven him of it. He is dead now, has been for a long time. He paid for whatever crimes he committed and then some. I am NOT advocating pedophilia at all, and I would never dream of fucking a child, but I am sharing that it was not a horrible experience FOR ME.

Pedophilia touches a nerve with me in several ways. For a long time I was incredulously angered by it. Why? Because my fatherh ad exual relations with me when I was a child. And I enjoyed all of them, and even encouraged him. I remember these incidents clearly.

For the longest time I hated him for it, not automatically mind yu, but do you know why? Because I saw a commercial that told me that it was bad. And then I told my family about it. And they treated it like it was the most horrible thing in the world for a little while. And then they acted like it never happened.

But gues what? It felt natural when it happened, and I can remember this after I got over my programming. I enjoyed it on a level that I have rarely approached since. It bonded me with my father in more ways than one.

Add I have forgiven him of it. He is dead now, has been for a long time. He paid for whatever crimes he committed and then some. I am NOT advocating pedophilia at all, and I would never dream of fucking a child, but I am sharing that it was not a horrible experience FOR ME.
You might have not minded the sex, but what about inbreading, and homosexuality, both of which exist in your story.

I have no problem with homosexuality. And while I am a male, and my father and I shared intrcourse orally and anally, I have no homosexual urges that I wish to act upon at present.

Inbreeding is a different issue for me. I do not believe that it would be very wise for a brother and sister to copulate, or a mother and son or father and daughter, to the end of producing a child. History and royalty teach us this is not wise. But I think that genetic similarities break down past second cousin.

... He paid for whatever crimes he committed and then some.how did he pay?

He died slowly of lung cancer, eventually falling into a coma and dying. Andj ust for good measure, he was cremated. I think he paid more than adequately.

He died slowly of lung cancer, eventually falling into a coma and dying. Andj ust for good measure, he was cremated. I think he paid more than adequately.I dont know about that...

A lot of men are exellent fathers and still die of Cancer...its not punishment...its a health problem...its bad luck.

At least you dont seem to have any residual Trauma...

Since pedophilia can be considered a mental illness, perhaps a lobotomy is an alternative to castration/blinding/execution.
Regardless of any other factors, the number one consideration for convicted pedophiles is ensuring that they can never reoffend. All other considerations are secondary.
I might suggest hefty jail terms and intensive rehabilitation/physchiatric tests for first time offenders, followed by lifetime monitoring after release. For reoffenders, LIFE prison terms with hard labour and solitary confinement, or possible lobotomy.
I know this is an emotional issue, but I sometimes think civil libertarians are more concerned with protecting the rights of the perps than the rights of the victim. As I said above, the number one concern MUST be protecting society from convicted pedophiles and other rapists.

Another point that has come up repeatedly in this thread:
You CANNOT compare the act of an adult sexually preying on a child (say, a 40 year old man and a 10 year old girl) to two minors of similar ages engaing in "consentual" sex (say a 16 year old male and a 15 year old female). These are two TOTALLY different incidents - comparing them in any way is just ludicrous. If the law in any state doesn't make this distinction, the law is SERIOUSLY FLAWED and needd ammendment immediately.

I dont know about that...

A lot of men are exellent fathers and still die of Cancer...its not punishment...its a health problem...its bad luck.

At least you dont seem to have any residual Trauma...

I know it wasn't punishment, as I don't consider my instance to be a crime, but I think he suffered. I wish he had not suffered, though. He loved me and I loved him, both for reasons outside the "abuse" that occurred.

Since pedophilia can be considered a mental illness, perhaps a lobotomy is an alternative to castration/blinding/execution.
Regardless of any other factors, the number one consideration for convicted pedophiles is ensuring that they can never reoffend. All other considerations are secondary.
I might suggest hefty jail terms and intensive rehabilitation/physchiatric tests for first time offenders, followed by lifetime monitoring after release. For reoffenders, LIFE prison terms with hard labour and solitary confinement, or possible lobotomy.
I know this is an emotional issue, but I sometimes think civil libertarians are more concerned with protecting the rights of the perps than the rights of the victim. As I said above, the number one concern MUST be protecting society from convicted pedophiles and other rapists.

I do not believe that a violent punishment can ever fit a nonviolent offense. The only reason that most children are traumatized by pedophilic acts on them are the responses of the rest of society that come to them.

Now, I draw a LARGE distinction between nonconsensual (or even consensual) noviolent sex and traumatic, violent rape. I believe that a rapist should be killed. I think that someone who commits nonviolent nonconsensual sex doesn't deserve that.

Pedophilia touches a nerve with me in several ways. For a long time I was incredulously angered by it. Why? Because my fatherh ad exual relations with me when I was a child. And I enjoyed all of them, and even encouraged him. I remember these incidents clearly.

For the longest time I hated him for it, not automatically mind yu, but do you know why? Because I saw a commercial that told me that it was bad. And then I told my family about it. And they treated it like it was the most horrible thing in the world for a little while. And then they acted like it never happened.

But gues what? It felt natural when it happened, and I can remember this after I got over my programming. I enjoyed it on a level that I have rarely approached since. It bonded me with my father in more ways than one.

Add I have forgiven him of it. He is dead now, has been for a long time. He paid for whatever crimes he committed and then some. I am NOT advocating pedophilia at all, and I would never dream of fucking a child, but I am sharing that it was not a horrible experience FOR ME.

Your father was a very sick man. Just because you enjoyed it doesn't make it less wrong.
A lot of children enjoy it physically. Physical reactions are automatic, and don't neccesarily lessen the emotional trauma. As a matter of fact, some children suffer tremendous guilt because of this and blame themselves for the abuse.
Children also may become extremely attached to their abusers. Sometimes the abuser may be the only person they get love and attention from. Sometimes they try to appease and please the abuser. Sometimes they feel very guilty for "encouraging" the abuse by going back for more. This may be because the abuser is the only source of tenderness, and a child will seek it regardless of the consequences.

Riptide, I don't mean to sound insulting, but I think what happened with your father may have severely warped you emotionally - you mightn't even realise it. Pedophilia - of a grown man on his son - is NEVER right, even if the child enjoys (or thinks they enjoy) it. It is not merely a societal convention that it is wrong, it is extemely harmful to the physchological and sexual development of the child. There is never "justifiable" pedophilia, especially in the instance of parent/child relations.

Your father was a very sick man. Just because you enjoyed it doesn't make it less wrong.
A lot of children enjoy it physically. Physical reactions are automatic, and don't neccesarily lessen the emotional trauma. As a matter of fact, some children suffer tremendous guilt because of this and blame themselves for the abuse.
Children also may become extremely attached to their abusers. Sometimes the abuser may be the only person they get love and attention from. Sometimes they try to appease and please the abuser. Sometimes they feel very guilty for "encouraging" the abuse by going back for more. This may be because the abuser is the only source of tenderness, and a child will seek it regardless of the consequences.

I believe that you have never met my father, therefore you cannot pass such a judgement on him. Why do you say that it was wrong, even though I was not harmed by the act itself? I never blamed myself or felt guilt until I learned, by the people around me, that that is how I was SUPPOSED to feel.

I was horrendously traumatised and hated my father after I learned that that was the "correct" response.

I had a firm grasp of sex and sexual pleasure ever since I was a young child, possibly even before the "abuse" started. I am not apologizing for pedophiles, or rapists. I am saying that not every relationship between an adult and a child is harmful for the child. And as a result I will never have children, and I refuse to be around small children, because I would not be able to bring them up to function in this society.

Riptide, I don't mean to sound insulting, but I think what happened with your father may have severely warped you emotionally - you mightn't even realise it. Pedophilia - of a grown man on his son - is NEVER right, even if the child enjoys (or thinks they enjoy) it. It is not merely a societal convention that it is wrong, it is extemely harmful to the physchological and sexual development of the child. There is never "justifiable" pedophilia, especially in the instance of parent/child relations.

I don't take any offence by that, and I realize that that is your opinion and I respect it. And I would never condone my situation to anyone else. I tortured myself over it for years, angsting, contemplating suicide and the like. But I came to a resolution, a closure. Even if it was a trespass against me, I have forgiven it. It is not worth mehating him for it, or hating myself for it. In fact, it made me who I am. While most people might think me unbalanced or psychologically unsound, I am proud of the way I am, and that is good wnough for me.

IMHO I believe that prisoner rights are too stupid; if you commit a violent crime I believe the criminal should be stripped of all rights as a citizen. They should not be given a plush cell, cable television, comfortable bed, etc for killing/raping someone. They should be (and I know this sounds harsh, but imagine the deterrent effect) shackled to a wall, and serve their sentences mostly in darkness, with heavy work duties, like on a state controlled farm or something, for the betterment of society, basically paying their own way through prison.

A little melodramatic, but I don't think its fair for someone to commit homicide, and get a free ride through prison, and then get out early because of some dipshit with no form of degree says hes reformed.

....They should be (and I know this sounds harsh, but imagine the deterrent effect) shackled to a wall, and serve their sentences mostly in darkness, with heavy work duties, like on a state controlled farm or something, for the betterment of society, basically paying their own way through prison.

A little melodramatic, but I don't think its fair for someone to commit homicide, and get a free ride through prison, and then get out early because of some dipshit with no form of degree says hes reformed.
LOL

why?...why all you people trying so hard? ...trying to avoid giving them the DeathPenalty...

that all the repists deserve...

Its like you want to make them suffer horribly...endlesly...to avoid executing them.

its just an excuse...

LOL

why?...why all you people trying so hard? ...trying to avoid giving them the DeathPenalty...

that all the repists deserve...

Assuming that all rapists are violent offenders, as I believe, then we are in concordance, privided we can prove that they actually brutally raped someone.

Assuming that all rapists are violent offenders, as I believe, then we are in concordance, privided we can prove that they actually brutally raped someone.of course.

there has to be rockSolid proof...and it has to be Real Rape.

Riptide, I don't mean to sound insulting, but I think what happened with your father may have severely warped you emotionally - you mightn't even realise it. Pedophilia - of a grown man on his son - is NEVER right, even if the child enjoys (or thinks they enjoy) it. It is not merely a societal convention that it is wrong, it is extemely harmful to the physchological and sexual development of the child. There is never "justifiable" pedophilia, especially in the instance of parent/child relations.


yet some people still feel the need to defend them..

well at least this thread has taught me a LOT of seriously messed up people play this game.

Good thing she's not your daughter. The fact is, if her father had any say, he would love to have me in jail. Not because of my age, cause he is an actual pedophile, but rather because he doesn't want her to be happy and will do anything he can to stop her from being happy. This man is the type of guy who should be in jail. He raped Alex regularly for 10 years, but he is rich and a speciallized surgeon so nothing was done when everyone found out. Her mother left him with her, but is now deciding that she loves him more then her daughter and has decided to tell Alex that she is "Ruining this family" so she's sending her to live with her older sister so she can live with this man. As a result of trauma, Alex had to grow up very fast, and has done just that.

This is all hearsay. Your word, rather her word, against his. If nothing was done then you are either saying, that the guy paid off the law somehow, or he was able to beat the rap because of his status in the community. Both scenarios highly unlikely in today's world, Mr. jackson as an example.

Alex is no ordinary 15 year old. She is mentally, and physically matured.

I have forgotten your age, but no 15 year old is mentally and physically mature.(my opinion) Please see threads by Bottle. Even though he may agree that some 15 year olds may be mature enough it does not mean they can handle what life has put upon them. My daughter is 16 and I consider it very mature that she chooses not to be sexually active. My concern for your girlfriend is that even though you make the claims of abuse by her father you are still perpetuating the abuse by having a relationship with her. She needs therapy regardless.

I lost the rest of your thread...

There should be a test.

There is one, but unfortunately it is not used as much any more. The parents ask all the questions and meet the boy friend etc. Being involved in your child's life is the key. Ignoring them and letting them do what they please isn't good for them. Kids need guidance despite what they think.

Hey Ocean Drive, :upyours:

and I love you too Pharoah. :D

6.Executions on tv (you don't have to watch so I don't want to hear it.)

Because sex offender will be thinking "if i rape this kid, i'll get executed. but what the hey, as long as they don't execute me on tv, it'll be fine" ?

Since pedophilia can be considered a mental illness, perhaps a lobotomy is an alternative to castration/blinding/execution..
A lot of things *can* be considered a mental illness. Homosexuality was considered a mental illness for a long time.

It is becoming more and more obvious that these people are not being "rehabilitated" while "doing their time"...

So, we give them these "levels" of likely re-offense and set them loose among Society again...

Why is that? We are saying we know it is likely they will re-offend, so why do we do this?

Either we need to make the punishment more severe, i.e. they either willfully submit to sexual castration before being re-admitted to Society or they are not re-admitted to Society until they are no longer considered a "Threat"...

Just because someone has "done their time" doesn't mean we have to allow them out if they are likely to re-offend, does it?

Regards,
Gaar

A lot of things *can* be considered a mental illness. Homosexuality was considered a mental illness for a long time.
yeah, i don't like the idea of mucking about in the brain before we learn a whole hell of a lot more about how it works.

besides which, i don't care at all if somebody has pedophilic feelings. the feelings aren't the problem. it's that they ACT upon them. if a fellow lives his whole life feeling pedophilic urges but never victimizes a single child in any way, that's just fine by me...he can be as "sick" as he wants.

i don't believe in punishing people for having feelings. only for how they choose to act on those feelings.

yeah, i don't like the idea of mucking about in the brain before we learn a whole hell of a lot more about how it works.

besides which, i don't care at all if somebody has pedophilic feelings. the feelings aren't the problem. it's that they ACT upon them. if a fellow lives his whole life feeling pedophilic urges but never victimizes a single child in any way, that's just fine by me...he can be as "sick" as he wants.

i don't believe in punishing people for having feelings. only for how they choose to act on those feelings.

that's a progressive viewpoint these days.

would you define "victimise" in such a way that an adult could have some form of sexual contact with a child without "victimising" the child?

Homosexuality was considered a mental illness for a long time.

you think it isn't?

you think it isn't?
yes. i think homosexuality isn't a mental illness.

....a way that an adult could have some form of sexual contact with a child without "victimising" the child?when the 17 years old child has a 19 years old girlfriend.?

I don't really care what the rest of you do with or to your children. Really. You can sell them all into whoredom for all I care.

That being said, anyone who sexually abuses any of my children won't have to worry about being arrested by the police, or tried in court.

That being said, anyone who sexually abuses any of my children won't have to worry about being arrested by the police, or tried in court.Looks to me that the US justice system has failed you.

Looks to me that the US justice system has failed you.

No, it hasn't yet.

But if it did, I wouldn't be waiting for the police to get off their collective asses and get out of the parking lot of the donut shop.

Let me add that I am 100% behind you...WL

If Im in the Jury...I would figth to declare you inocent.

Let me put it this way. Rape is horrific. Quite possibly a far worse crime in many ways than homicide. But that doesn't mean we can justify killing these people, or mutilating them, or being cruel to them. "Eye for an eye" lost its original connotation of mercy long ago. Life in prison without parole doesn't seem like a bad idea to me for a repeat rapist. Obviously, their first "rehabilitation" didn't work, so we can't trust them to be free again. But that doesn't mean we should stop trying to rehabilitate them. It just means that even if they are rehabilitated, we aren't letting them out. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

And as far as a first penalty goes, well, I'll let others think of that.

Let me add that I am 100% behind you...WL

If Im in the Jury...I would figth to declare you inocent.
One crime, no matter how vile, does not justify another.

would you define "victimise" in such a way that an adult could have some form of sexual contact with a child without "victimising" the child?
i don't believe it is possible to have any sexual contact with a child without victimizing that child. a child cannot consent, therefore any sexual contact with a child is (by definition) a nonconsentual sexual act. i believe nonconsentual sex is unacceptable, no matter who the victim is, so i don't believe there is any sexual contact with a minor that should be tolerated.

....a way that an adult could have some form of sexual contact with a child without "victimising" the child?when the 17 years old child has a 19 years old girlfriend?

when the 17 years old child has a 19 years old girlfriend?
well, as i have clarified on several threads, i believe the age of majority should be 16. i believe there is ample evidence establishing that 16 year olds are perfectly capable of giving adult consent, so i see no reason for the law to regard them as "children." however, until the age of majority is changed, the fact remains that a 16 year old is not considered legally able to consent, so sex with a 16 year old is non-consentual in the eyes of the law.

i believe the age of majority should be 16. In many countries...the age of majority is 18.

..., so i see no reason for the law to regard them as "children."Tell it to the Judge.

In many countries...the age of majority is 18.
yes, i am aware of that.

Tell it to the Judge.
why? i am not now, nor have i ever been, involved with an underage individual. i suppose a judge could theoretically provide legal advice, but it would probably be more directly useful to consult with an attourney and the legislative branch of government to effect change in the age of consent laws. so that's what i do.

WE SHOULD SET AN EXAMPLE I SAY HAVE A PUBLIC EXECUTION OF A SEX OFFENDER THAT WOULD TEACH EVERYONE. :sniper:

1) WE SHOULD STRIVE TO DESTROY SEX OFFENDERS SCARE THEM OUT OF IT

2) WE SHOULD TRY TO TEACH CHILDREN TO STAY AWAY FROM STRANGE MEN OR WOMEN(YES THERE ARE WOMEN).

3) cRACK DOWN MORE AND HAVE MORE SEVERE PUNISHMENT FOR FONDLING OR OTHER SUCH THING LIKE A PRISON SENTANCE REGISTER AS A SEX OFFENDER AND KEEP A TRACKER ON THEM DEPENDING ON THE SEVERITY OF THE CRIME.

WE SHOULD SET AN EXAMPLE I SAY HAVE A PUBLIC EXECUTION OF A SEX OFFENDER THAT WOULD TEACH EVERYONE. :sniper:

1) WE SHOULD STRIVE TO DESTROY SEX OFFENDERS SCARE THEM OUT OF IT

2) WE SHOULD TRY TO TEACH CHILDREN TO STAY AWAY FROM STRANGE MEN OR WOMEN(YES THERE ARE WOMEN).

3) cRACK DOWN MORE AND HAVE MORE SEVERE PUNISHMENT FOR FONDLING OR OTHER SUCH THING LIKE A PRISON SENTANCE REGISTER AS A SEX OFFENDER AND KEEP A TRACKER ON THEM DEPENDING ON THE SEVERITY OF THE CRIME.
deep breaths. soothing thoughts. chill.

why? i am not now, nor have i ever been, involved with an underage individual. i suppose a judge could theoretically provide legal advice, but it would probably be more directly useful to consult with an attourney and the legislative branch of government to effect change in the age of consent laws. so that's what i do.
yawn

Let me put it this way. Rape is horrific. Quite possibly a far worse crime in many ways than homicide. But that doesn't mean we can justify killing these people, or mutilating them, or being cruel to them. "Eye for an eye" lost its original connotation of mercy long ago. Life in prison without parole doesn't seem like a bad idea to me for a repeat rapist. Obviously, their first "rehabilitation" didn't work, so we can't trust them to be free again. But that doesn't mean we should stop trying to rehabilitate them. It just means that even if they are rehabilitated, we aren't letting them out. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

And as far as a first penalty goes, well, I'll let others think of that.

An eye for an eye is still a good policy. But, we should remember that it only applies when the victim is a noble. When the victim is a commoner a monetary fine will suffice.

Hammarabi was a great person. He usderstood that there is no crime that cannot be compensated with a sufficient amount of money. However, he also understood that commoners need nobels to tell them what to do and thus nobels should be protected by harsh punishments.

Since there are no more nobels, it only makes since that we get rid of prisions and have fines for everything.

My Girlfriend was raped on saint patrick's day.......... I feel so bad for her, she barely even talks to me anymore. She attempted suicide as well. I feel like I can do something, but she won't let me. It has been making me feel reallt depressed. Any advice?

Advice. Talk to a professional who can advise you how to get her some counseling help. Maybe a rape hot line. Do it now! She needs some professional help to get thru this and deal with it.

And as a result I will never have children, and I refuse to be around small children, because I would not be able to bring them up to function in this society.

Your father molesting you has affected you. You just don't realize it.

You see all of this talk is doing nobody any good, The following is from a town near where I live;

http://www.etruth.com/news/story/344377/index.html

If the law starts getting close to them then they just move away apparently luckily these guys didn't get away with that.

I'm tired of these slime balls getting away with what they are doing they need to be severly punished...I guess I don't know what else can be done...

I guess this thread is dead :(

If we were talking about cases where there was clearly lack of will/want of the action to occur, then the act itself is damning to the victim, as the victim in this case is truly a victim.

If however we are broadtyping, and assuming that consentual sex between a 15yo and a 17yo is rape, and worth life/death.. we are creating a situation whereby we outlaw consentual sex with as much vigour... and therefore leave there no reason for a real perpetraitor to go further.

For example, look at the current laws, where you get life or more (in one notable case 860 years!) for looking at images of child porn... what deterrant is there then to the rapist if merely looking at an image earns you more time in jail than actually commiting an act?

We lose our sense of direction, and also impact of the law when people falsely apply it to be a cover all, when all that is needed is a sensible law, with sensible interpretations.

Sadly, our country has lost all of its sensibilities.