You gotta define pedophile. Someone who looks at nude pictures of kids can hardly be said to be dangerous unless you are saying this always leads to physical contact.
[QUOTE=ouryL]
You gotta define pedophile. Someone who looks at nude pictures of kids can hardly be said to be dangerous unless you are saying this always leads to physical contact.
[/QUOTE]
Come’on guys, is it really that hard to know what I’m asking here? This is the second person asking for a definition.
I stated plainly what I meant:
I mean come’on, define “child” ? WTF? lol
[QUOTE=diggleblop]
Come’on guys, is it really that hard to know what I’m asking here? This is the second person asking for a definition.
I stated plainly what I meant:
I mean come’on, define “child” ? WTF? lol
[/QUOTE]
So do we treat the 40 yr old man who molests a 12 year old the same as an 18 yr old “man” with a willing 17 yr old girlfriend?
Under 18 is under 18. A child is a child. If it’s considered a “sex crime”, then yes, you do treat him the same.
[QUOTE=ThePCapeman]
So do we treat the 40 yr old man who molests a 12 year old the same as an 18 yr old “man” with a willing 17 yr old girlfriend?
[/QUOTE]
In Illinois I think there has to be a certain age differance, for some reason seven years comes to mind, and 17 is the age of consent or even older in many places.
[QUOTE=diggleblop]
Under 18 is under 18. A child is a child. If it’s considered a “sex crime”, then yes, you do treat him the same.
[/QUOTE]
Then in those places without “Romeo & Juliet” exceptions, I think life imprisonment is absurd.
[QUOTE=Cluricaun]
In Illinois I think there has to be a certain age differance, for some reason seven years comes to mind, and 17 is the age of consent or even older in many places.
[/QUOTE]
Right, and I didn’t want to get into a semantics argument regarding age difference and consentual sex. I’m talking about pedophiles who were convicted of sex crimes against a minor child.
[QUOTE=diggleblop]
Right, and I didn’t want to get into a semantics argument regarding age difference and consentual sex. I’m talking about pedophiles who were convicted of sex crimes against a minor child.
[/QUOTE]
Well the point I was getting around to was how do we draw the line of which sex offenders get life sentences and which don’t. Do you want the same sentence for the guy who fondles a little girl’s butt as the guy who rapes her?
[QUOTE=diggleblop]
Under 18 is under 18. A child is a child. If it’s considered a “sex crime”, then yes, you do treat him the same.
[/QUOTE]
Sex crimes include public urination. I think the death penalty is a bit harsh for that.
Just to differentiate concerning ages, hebephilia is the attraction of an adult to someone past puberty; IE: an ephebephile.
I’m not especially religious, but Luke 17:2 seems appropriate:
That pretty much sums it up for me. It’s bad if you hurt someone, worse if you kill a man or woman. Harm a child? Intentionally? Abusively? Forget it. Society has no further use for you. If we can’t execute, then permanent lock 'em up.
[QUOTE=ouryL]
You gotta define pedophile. Someone who looks at nude pictures of kids can hardly be said to be dangerous unless you are saying this always leads to physical contact.
[/QUOTE]
Except for getting hold of naked pictures of actual kids.
:rolleyes:
Yes digglebop, defining a child is important.
Where I live (Canada) the age of consent is 14. Also, in some cases, children under 14 can have legal sexual contact so long as they are no more than 2 years apart.
In other words, here, as in many other countries, you do not have to be a legal “adult” in order to be capable of consenting to sex.
[QUOTE=Foxy40]
[QUOTE=miss elizabeth]
erie774, that really is a terrible story, and I’m sorry you are having to endure it. The boy’s parents should be monitoring him much better, and your daughter should not be forced to ride the bus with him, certainly.
I personally do not understand why Erie hasn’t put her home for sale and moved to a new neighborhood. I know that would be my first action so my child could avoid seeing him when she goes out to play. 
[/QUOTE]
Why should I have to move? We are not the criminals here. His family has been ostracized by the neighborhood yet they are not getting the hint that they are not welcome. I heard that someone saw them doing a lot of painting inside so I hope they are going to sell.
[QUOTE=erie774]
I think I should have gone with my first instinct and killed the little fucker.
[/quote]
[QUOTE=erie774]
“You know, I’ve got shovels and Quick-rete in the garage. The river is pretty close.” I wanted to hug the man.
[/quote]
[QUOTE=erie774]
Send them to Siberia. Use them for medical experiments you wouldn’t test on a rat. Strap them to the front of a tank.
[/quote]
[QUOTE=erie774]
I say we take him out to a red ant hill, stake him down and cover him with honey.
[/quote]
So, although you are against the touching of children’s sexual organs, you are all for the torturing and killing of children?
[QUOTE=erie774]
[QUOTE=Foxy40]
Why should I have to move? We are not the criminals here. His family has been ostracized by the neighborhood yet they are not getting the hint that they are not welcome. I heard that someone saw them doing a lot of painting inside so I hope they are going to sell.
[/QUOTE]
So, what about the next neighborhood that he moves in to? I do understand why you want him to leave but unfortunately, that just spreads the problem to other people.
A lot of people strongly support legislation which forbids sex offenders from living in areas which have children. Unfortunately, these laws have an unseen consequence. Sometimes the restrictions are so encompassing that a sex offender can’t find any place in a city to live that’s not within 1000 feet of a school, playground or daycare. It’s sometimes an extremely frustrating process trying to find a home and this frustration can lead some of them to “go underground” and not report their adresses. Without that monitoring, their chances of recidivism is increased and the monitoring boards are so swamped with cases, it’s unlikely he’ll be found unless he reoffends.
Where are they supposed to go? I offer no answers because I don’t think there *are *any. No one wants to live next to a sex offender (I know I don’t!) but somebody has to.
The problem with this is that if molesting a child was automatically a life sentence, you’d virtually be guaranteeing that more molesters would be acquitted.
Sex crimes are notoriously hard to prosecute. Often, there isn’t any physical evidence so it boils down to one person’s word against another’s. When the victim is a child, it becomes even more difficult because children are terrible witnesses. A clever defense attorney doesn’t have to try very hard to confuse a kid into giving contradictory statements or make it look like he/she has been coached.
Juries are sometimes hesitant to put a person in prison for the rest of their life on such shaky evidence. If they could convict on a lesser charge, they probably would, but in an “all or nothing” situation, more guilty people are going to walk free because juries often don’t want to gamble when the stakes are so high.
Faced with this, prosecutors often try to work out a plea. They’d rather get *some *prison time out of the defendant than risk a jury’s acquittal. Very, very few people will take a plea that results in life in prison (unless they’re faced with the death penalty). I can’t imagine a competent defense attorney that wouldn’t urge their client to take their chances with a jury in that situation. As a result, you’d see more cases going to trial, further burdening an already-overwhelmed system.
[QUOTE=erie774]
We can’t file a restraining order to keep him away until after the trial. He is supposed to be under constant parental supervision but we see him riding his bike around the neighborhood. Meantime, my daughter hides when she sees him outside.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know if its because he is a minor or something but in most jurisdictions you can get a judge to issue a restraining order on something like probable cause until the trial.
[QUOTE=Rigamarole]
So, although you are against the touching of children’s sexual organs, you are all for the torturing and killing of children?
[/QUOTE]
WTF? erie774 stated his daughter was FIVE years old her molester was 14.
The fucktard knew what he was doing and erei774s reaction was, as a parent quite understandable, as was that of his friends/neighbours.
How would you feel should a similar thing happen to your children
[QUOTE=chowder]
WTF? erie774 stated his daughter was FIVE years old her molester was 14.
[/QUOTE]
Yes. A 14 year old is a child by our working definition here. So my question stands.
[QUOTE=Rigamarole]
Yes. A 14 year old is a child by our working definition here. So my question stands.
[/QUOTE]
As does mine