sick gak

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/irishman-linked-to-eu-paedophile-ring-2967014.html

It is disgusting but not surprising.

The internet is really good at bringing people together with common interests. Some are just really good at hiding it than others.

Wouldn't call it an "EU Paedophile Ring" because Switzerland is not in the EU, but good on the police for catching these scumbags.

sparkywtf wrote:It is disgusting but not surprising.

My thoughts exactly............

I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

Monster Rain wrote:I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

Same...

Monster Rain wrote:I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

Or chemical castration.

Albatross wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

Or chemical castration.

Death by castration?

purplefood wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

Same...

In a perfect world, yes. But we don't live in a perfect world, do we. Capital punishment, therefore, is never the answer.

Having said that, if I knew someone was interfering with one of my daughters in such a manner, that person would disappear forever. No traces.

The 'just' thing to do is to toss scum like this, into a proper jail. Let the inmates do the same crimes to the pedos as they did to the kids. Prisoners hate pedos more than any other kind of criminal and they follow their own 'code' with dealing with them.

Only once they've suffered enough, hang them. The important thing is to remind them that not even hell would take people as degenerate as them. Make them suffer as much as possible before death.

Mr Hyena wrote:The 'just' thing to do is to toss scum like this, into a proper jail. Let the inmates do the same crimes to the pedos as they did to the kids. Prisoners hate pedos more than any other kind of criminal and they follow their own 'code' with dealing with them.

Only once they've suffered enough, hang them. The important thing is to remind them that not even hell would take people as degenerate as them. Make them suffer as much as possible before death.

What purpose, exactly, does this torture serve? Surely not justice.

Its the closest thing to 'justice' we can get for the victims. Let the criminal experience what he did to the child; then execute him to rid the world of his evil.

Why let them sponge off the government, rotting in a jail?

Doesn't do too much to help with rehabilitating the other inmates though

SilverMK2 wrote:Doesn't do too much to help with rehabilitating the other inmates though

Rehabilitation, ain't that a dirty word round here? I thought it was all about the punishing!

MrDwhitey wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:Doesn't do too much to help with rehabilitating the other inmates though

Rehabilitation, ain't that a dirty word round here? I thought it was all about the punishing!

Only if we are talking about the victim - after all, they are the ones to blame!

It is my considered opinion that these sort of criminals have shown themselves to be unfit for the company of civilized human beings, and have forfeited any claim they might have once had to their 'human' rights.

In cases where DNA evidence is established, I think execution is the proper answer. Preferably by 12-gauge to the groin.

Vulcan wrote:It is my considered opinion that these sort of criminals have shown themselves to be unfit for the company of civilized human beings, and have forfeited any claim they might have once had to their 'human' rights.

In cases where DNA evidence is established, I think execution is the proper answer. Preferably by 12-gauge to the groin.

Again, how does the torture help? How is anyone's situation improved by this act?

It would help my situation to know that if you've got a terabyte of baby rape videos in your house that you'd be summarily executed.

It would help my situation a great deal.

sparkywtf wrote:It is disgusting but not surprising.

My thoughts exactly summed up.

Yeah, it's no surprise, just good to know they caught this particular group. Just in time, from the sounds of it, if this is true:

Investigators said one of the men arrested was in the process of grooming a young child and was arrested before an attempted face-to-face meeting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Hyena wrote:Its the closest thing to 'justice' we can get for the victims. Let the criminal experience what he did to the child; then execute him to rid the world of his evil.

Yes, I'm sure more rape in the world is exactly what the victims want. Why simply rid the world of an evil when you can recreate it first!

feeder wrote:

Vulcan wrote:It is my considered opinion that these sort of criminals have shown themselves to be unfit for the company of civilized human beings, and have forfeited any claim they might have once had to their 'human' rights.

In cases where DNA evidence is established, I think execution is the proper answer. Preferably by 12-gauge to the groin.

Again, how does the torture help? How is anyone's situation improved by this act?

1) It's cheap. Much cheaper than most modern methods of execution, much less giving this... thing... room and board the rest of his life.

2) He won't suffer that long. Damage to the femoral arteries will see to that.

3) I PROMISE you, he'll never, ever relapse and do it again.

Albatross wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

Or chemical castration.

Yeah, I'll entertain arguments against the death penalty on most things, but purchasing/producing/fapping to baby rape videos should really just result in having the cops go Torquemada on your ass.

Monster Rain wrote:

Albatross wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

Or chemical castration.

Yeah, I'll entertain arguments against the death penalty on most things, but purchasing/producing/fapping to baby rape videos should really just result in having the cops go Torquemada on your ass.

I think they should be tied to a chair and then Matty beats them about the head and shoulders with a giant dildo until they die.

mattyrm wrote: I think they should be tied to a chair and then Matty beats them about the head and shoulders with a giant dildo until they die.

Justice, ladies and gentlemen.

feeder wrote:

Vulcan wrote:It is my considered opinion that these sort of criminals have shown themselves to be unfit for the company of civilized human beings, and have forfeited any claim they might have once had to their 'human' rights.

In cases where DNA evidence is established, I think execution is the proper answer. Preferably by 12-gauge to the groin.

Again, how does the torture help? How is anyone's situation improved by this act?

Um... if just ONE person out there who's thinking about maybe doing something like this and doesn't because of the heinous and horrifying manner in which the criminal died, it'd totally be worth it. It is the lack of harsh sentences that perpetrates these terrible things.

Yes, I'm sure more rape in the world is exactly what the victims want. Why simply rid the world of an evil when you can recreate it first!

Because we should want the criminal to suffer before they are executed (in a painful way).

I don't consider baby rapists and baby rape enthusiasts to be deserving of the same rights and privileges that more civilized folk should enjoy.

Capital punishment is not cheaper due to the number of appeals. Before wishing for extreme punishments as you are advocating, consider the situation if you (or your father, for example) were accused in the wrong. The courts are not infallible, and forensic evidence is not a silver bullet.

This sort of rabid posting convinces me that paedophiles are simply the last group it is socially acceptable to absolutely and unreservedly hate, and that people love a bit of pure hatred.

Also, there is plenty of research showing that people who commit crimes do not expect to get caught, so many times, punishment does not act as a deterrent. I would be interested in what causes the development of such an aberrant psychology and how we could prevent it though.

Da Boss wrote:Capital punishment is not cheaper due to the number of appeals. Before wishing for extreme punishments as you are advocating, consider the situation if you (or your father, for example) were accused in the wrong.

Consider someone in your family starring in one of said videos, as the victim.

Da Boss wrote:This sort of rabid posting convinces me that paedophiles are simply the last group it is socially acceptable to absolutely and unreservedly hate, and that people love a bit of pure hatred.

Yes, I truly enjoy knowing that these people exist. It makes me happy. I get all the pure hatred I need from the existence of Gleeks.

Frankly, if one doesn't have strong negative feelings (Definition of hate: 1. to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest, don't see why it's a "naughty" word in this contest) toward raping babies I think that there's something quite wrong with them as well. I'll put up with the whole "message board, postmodern, dispassionate pseudo-intellectual" act most of the time, but there's times where you should just be a person.

Justice = Revenge/Vengeance.

I'm doing it right yes?

There's no such thing as true "justice" so define it however you wish.

There's been debate on the subject since the time of Plato, I doubt we'll cover any new ground here.

How many priests are aspiring priests were caught in the sting?

@Monster Rain: Indeed not, sometimes I wonder the point of it all.

Internet ego stroking?

There was a term for that on another forum I saw, something like "intellectual masturbation". I liked that one.

An arguement I have seen, which is not popular in some circles as it means the fabled 'Rehabilitation' is nigh on impossible. Is that, folks who are this way, either naurally find Children sexually attractive (and have limited to no control) or have chosen to like children, as say someone can choose to be bisexual or homosexual.

It's not very easier to fix as they in effect 'wired' that way, so the best you can do is convince them not to follow through on their urges.

Chemical Castration for example has been shown not to work in some cases, and in fact made some more aggressively disposed towards 'dominating' Children, much like the mindset of most Rapists.

I sadly do not think there are any easy answers, the best I have is someone is given one chance to repent (control themselves, whatever you want to call it) after being caught. As soon as they have become a multiple offender (unless they already are when first caught) then they are extremely sanction/watched etc for the rest of their lives. Probably with long prison terms attached.

Any folks caught doing catagory five stuff, murder associated (to cover up) their attacks or touching pre-school/babies (under five) should be rubbed out immediately as far as I am concerned, no questions asked.

Da Boss wrote:Capital punishment is not cheaper due to the number of appeals. Before wishing for extreme punishments as you are advocating, consider the situation if you (or your father, for example) were accused in the wrong. The courts are not infallible, and forensic evidence is not a silver bullet.

This sort of rabid posting convinces me that paedophiles are simply the last group it is socially acceptable to absolutely and unreservedly hate, and that people love a bit of pure hatred.

Also, there is plenty of research showing that people who commit crimes do not expect to get caught, so many times, punishment does not act as a deterrent. I would be interested in what causes the development of such an aberrant psychology and how we could prevent it though.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil This sums it up quite well.

All crime is bad; but rape is especially considered a morally and socially unforgivable crime. Pedophiles can't be cured whatsoever as it appears that they are born that way. (Have we had any successful rehabilitation of these creatures?) All that means is a burden on the state, knowing these creatures can't be released.

Its pretty impossible to prevent it occurring unless theres some sort of genetic screening for it offered to women carrying children.

Monster: I am aware that the justice system shouldn't work based on the feelings of the people who have been hurt by a crime. If someone hurt my nieces I'd want to murder them, that would be my emotional response. However I am aware that this is an emotional response and that society shouldn't base policy on it. Tends to lead to shortsighted and badly thought out policies.
In the end, brutally murdering the perpetrator would not make my family member feel better, and it would be an act designed to make ME feel better (in my opinion).

Did I say their existence makes you happy? Because I'm pretty sure I didn't. I'm pretty sure their existence makes you sick and angry.

I also didn't say that I tolerate them, or have sympathy for them. You took it that way, which is cool. You then characterised me in a way that makes my viewpoint easier to dismiss, which is sad.

If "just be a person" means I'm not allowed to disagree with you or put forward ideas you find objectionable, I reckon you need to re-evaluate your ideas around free speech. I feel that life imprisonment and study (intense study) is the best way to deal with these people.
I do not believe that paedophilia (or any sexual orientation) is entirely genetic. There are environmental factors, there is no doubt in my mind. And that means we can train this behaviour out of people, or identify the precursors and stop it. Many paedophiles are themselves victims of abuse.

It can't be trained out of them otherwise we wouldn't have so many cases of repeat offenders without at least 1 case where they didn't reoffend. It may be that they were the victims of abuse but in no way does that justify their actions. Not surprising that the justice system has been extremely lenient on these things (much to the despair of those they hurt when reoffending).

If they aren't going to be executed; then put them in jail or a loony bin for life.

feeder wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:The 'just' thing to do is to toss scum like this, into a proper jail. Let the inmates do the same crimes to the pedos as they did to the kids. Prisoners hate pedos more than any other kind of criminal and they follow their own 'code' with dealing with them.

Only once they've suffered enough, hang them. The important thing is to remind them that not even hell would take people as degenerate as them. Make them suffer as much as possible before death.

What purpose, exactly, does this torture serve? Surely not justice.

Its like Jewish people buying German stuff from WWII to burn it.

Mr Hyena wrote:It can't be trained out of them otherwise we wouldn't have so many cases of repeat offenders without at least 1 case where they didn't reoffend.

You can't train a puppy not to urinate on the rug because of all the cases where puppies repeatedly urinate on the rug. C'mon. Re-examine your statement. How do you know there is not a case where a paedophile did not re-offend?

You can't train a puppy not to urinate on the rug because of all the cases where puppies repeatedly urinate on the rug. C'mon. Re-examine your statement. How do you know there is not a case where a paedophile did not re-offend?

Why don't you prove that they are safe to rehabilitate?

LOVE IT!

Awww yeah, what a FANTASTIC argument.

How about you prove that the death penalty would work as a deterrent?
Or that rehabilitation would not prevent re-offence?
Or that paedophilia isn't at least partially caused by environmental factors which could be minimised or avoided?

Da Boss:

I was only making the point that I disagree with the idea that my distaste for baby rapist is somehow tied in to enjoying being socially allowed to hate them.

Okay, I will accept that. I can see how that comment might have caused you some offence, and I apologise.

How about you prove that the death penalty would work as a deterrent?

It doesn't. It saves money on the incurables though.

r that rehabilitation would not prevent re-offence?

Why do we have repeat sexual offenders then?

Or that paedophilia isn't at least partially caused by environmental factors which could be minimised or avoided?

It could be partially environmental. That doesn't change the fact of how dangerous it is to release these things.

Mr Hyena, current rehabilitation is not effective because it is based on shoddy science. I'd be happy with a slight loosening of ethical guidelines and letting the behaviourists into the prisons to experiment on these guys.

Also, the death penalty does not work out cheaper.

The current system doesn't no. If we put in an express lane for iron-clad cases though...

Nothing is iron-clad. Forensic evidence is not as reliable as people think.

And yet it is praised for freeing convicted felons.

It's a tool, nothing more.

Da Boss wrote:Mr Hyena, current rehabilitation is not effective because it is based on shoddy science. I'd be happy with a slight loosening of ethical guidelines and letting the behaviourists into the prisons to experiment on these guys.

Also, the death penalty does not work out cheaper.

Psychology as a whole is 'shoddy science' thats barely deserving of the word science though.

Cognitive psych is really very bad, but behaviouralism and neurobiology are okay.
The entire field suffers from poor stats due to responder bias though (among other concerns.)

Monster Rain wrote:I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

Not outrageous at all. I myself have thought this several times for crime cases.

The reason it never will be considered a proper science is because, largely, it is not measurable like a physical science.

It is measurable if you look at behaviours as the output, but that is insanely complicated so most psychologists don't favour it. But it's the only way the field will progress, IMO. The other issue is the obsession with a) humans and b) human mental illness over working out the basics.

Monster Rain wrote:I don't consider baby rapists and baby rape enthusiasts to be deserving of the same rights and privileges that more civilized folk should enjoy.

This. This a million times over.

It really bugs me when a pedo gets thrown in the clink and then gets special protection because hes a kiddy fiddler. Throw em to the wolves i say aand then after Bubba has his fun, cut his balls open and let him bleed for a bit, then stitch him back up. Rinse and repeat. I wouldnt even give him the death penalty. I'd let him rot in a cell for the rest of his years.

I don't hate molesters and rapsists out of some vague intellectual distaste. I hate them because I know several people who were their victims. I have seen the damage they cause.

Death is a mercy, compared to the pain thier victims suffer.

Murderers and torturers are frequently horrible people and destroy lives too. We seriously do not want to employ any torturers or ever think that torture as punishment is a good idea. Even if a given offender deserves it, you are corrupting the person inflicting the punishment, and setting an awful example to other people involved in the system. We know from experience (Abu Ghraib, Bagram, and years before that, England/Northern Ireland) that when torture is permitted to be used even in extreme cases, it tends to become accepted and routine even in lesser cases.

Our justice system and our commitment to our principles ares always most sorely tested when dealing with the worst offenders.

Da Boss has it. While I won't rule out that some folks deserve death*, our ability to ascertain with certainty which folks those are has always been imperfect. The best option is life imprisonment without parole, and dedicated study by behavioral psychologists to try to figure these folks out and whether there is any way to "fix" them.


*Though we can also quote Gandalf here: " Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

Gandalf did his fair share of killing, though.

it's true, but I don't think he went out looking to kill or torture even Orcs or Balrogs.

I'd like to distance myself from the torture crowd, if I may.

Think of the most humane way to kill them, and let's go with that. Oh, and you can't say "Old Age."

That runs up against my perpetual problem with capital punishment. If you wrongfully convict & execute some people (which is a mathematical certainty), you can never fix that. With life imprisonment they've always got the chance of exoneration.

Meh, as I said before, I think the argument against Capital Punishment is valid. I disagree, but I understand the points you make.

In the instance of actively supporting raping babies, however, I'm likely not entirely sane on the matter.

SlaveToDorkness wrote:It is the lack of harsh sentences that perpetrates these terrible things.

This just one more of your political opinions that sit in direct contrast with reality. Seriously, these things are studied and the results show the same things constantly - greater punishments do not impact the crime rate, particularly not with sex related crime.

Seriously, have you never read or looked into the issue at all? If not, why not? Why did you think it would just be enough to say 'well I think there'd be less crime if we were harsher to the victims, so I'm just going to assume it is true'.

I think he wants to be harsher to the perps, not the victims.

I don't see what purpose torture would fulfill, unless you wish to show that you are little better than they are.

They’re sick, remove them from society.

They may be animals but we are not, no need to bring ourselves down to the level of beasts to deal with one.

They’re sick, remove them from society.

And whats the most cost effective way to keep them away from society?

The best option is life imprisonment without parole, and dedicated study by behavioral psychologists to try to figure these folks out and whether there is any way to "fix" them.

I can tell a poncy behaviourist quack isn't going to get very far. There is NO way to fix these people otherwise we'd have figured even the slightest bit out already. (Not to mention thats a very very light sentence...given all the 'special protections' pedos get)

Why do you want the taxpayer to pay for these creatures?

Grind them up to feed starving people, IMO.

In all seriousness, you know my opinion on this; particularly heinous crimes, like child rape, deserve little more than a captive boltgun to the back of the head. There should be no doubt at all regarding the guilt of the condemned if you're gonna do this to them, but when this is the case...

Mr Hyena wrote:

The best option is life imprisonment without parole, and dedicated study by behavioral psychologists to try to figure these folks out and whether there is any way to "fix" them.

I can tell a poncy behaviourist quack isn't going to get very far. There is NO way to fix these people otherwise we'd have figured even the slightest bit out already. (Not to mention thats a very very light sentence...given all the 'special protections' pedos get)

There are so many things wrong with this you honestly come off as trolling.

1. Dismissing the profession/discipline is insulting and dumb.
2. As already pointed out, saying that a thing is impossible to do just because we haven't done it already is really dumb. We things every day our ancestors thought impossible or inconceivable. Your thesis here would only make any kind of sense if you could point out a widespread, longterm, dedicated effort to figure out this mental problem and cure it, and its lack of results. Since no such program has ever been undertaken, claiming that one could never work is silly.
3. To the best of my knowledge prisoners in general are protected from abuse by other prisoners. Because prison is the punishment society metes out, not rape and torment in prison. People who advocate for/applaud the abuse of prisoners by orher prisoners are talking out of a desire for vengeance, not reason or justice. And revenge is no basis for a civilized justice system.

Mannahnin wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

The best option is life imprisonment without parole, and dedicated study by behavioral psychologists to try to figure these folks out and whether there is any way to "fix" them.

I can tell a poncy behaviourist quack isn't going to get very far. There is NO way to fix these people otherwise we'd have figured even the slightest bit out already. (Not to mention thats a very very light sentence...given all the 'special protections' pedos get)

There are so many things wrong with this you honestly come off as trolling.

1. Dismissing the profession/discipline is insulting and dumb.
2. As already pointed out, saying that a thing is impossible to do just because we haven't done it already is really dumb. We things every day our ancestors thought impossible or inconceivable. Your thesis here would only make any kind of sense if you could point out a widespread, longterm, dedicated effort to figure out this mental problem and cure it, and its lack of results. Since no such program has ever been undertaken, claiming that one could never work is silly.
3. To the best of my knowledge prisoners in general are protected from abuse by other prisoners. Because prison is the punishment society metes out, not rape and torment in prison. People who advocate for/applaud the abuse of prisoners by orher prisoners are talking out of a desire for vengeance, not reason or justice. And revenge is no basis for a civilized justice system.

Dismissing it is fine as it doesn't follow the scientific method. You can't prove/disprove behaviour the same way you can support a theory in molecular biology. Thats what 'quack' science means. Come back with a way to measure human behaviour mathematically and we'll be able to consider the profession properly. How do you think it would be cured anyway? Take a course of pills to stop it? send them on a 'counselling session'?

'life inprisonment' is hardly a punishment when the prisoners are given PS3's, television etc. Thats called a hotel.

Mr Hyena wrote:

They’re sick, remove them from society.

And whats the most cost effective way to keep them away from society?

Unfortunately, not execution.

This has become an argument against the death penalty: it's too expensive to sentence them to death.

Never mind that it's largely death penalty opponents who have made the death penalty so expensive...

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:An arguement I have seen, which is not popular in some circles as it means the fabled 'Rehabilitation' is nigh on impossible. Is that, folks who are this way, either naurally find Children sexually attractive (and have limited to no control)

I don't think anyone "naturally" finds children attractive - paedophilia is a paraphilia and most likely results from psychological damage or trauma of some kind.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:or have chosen to like children, as say someone can choose to be bisexual or homosexual.

The old "being gay is a choice" chestnut? Have you seen this argument from anyone other than the westboro baptist church?

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Chemical Castration for example has been shown not to work in some cases, and in fact made some more aggressively disposed towards 'dominating' Children, much like the mindset of most Rapists.

This is absolutely true, chemical castration isn't a magic bullet and can make some offenders worse as you pointed out.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:I sadly do not think there are any easy answers

Yep. Refining the system that's common in the west at the moment (attempting to rehabilitate and then monitoring offenders, using psych evaluations to determine if they're still to dangerous to release and indefinately detaining them if they are) is probably the closest we'll ever get.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Hyena wrote:I can tell a poncy behaviourist quack isn't going to get very far.

Of course! You're right... we should leave the issue up to aggressively juvenile revenge fantasists, whyever didn't I see that before?

Of course! You're right... we should leave the issue up to aggressively juvenile revenge fantasists, whyever didn't I see that before?

Probably better than the psychologists, prison wardens and government that allowed pedophiles out of jail to rape children again.

If the tests aren't giving accurate results; they need to be scrapped.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Of course! You're right... we should leave the issue up to aggressively juvenile revenge fantasists, whyever didn't I see that before?

Probably better than the psychologists, prison wardens and government that allowed pedophiles out of jail to rape children again.

If the tests aren't giving accurate results; they need to be scrapped.

I think you should clarify that to "Released paedophiles from prison after their alloted sentence had finished", which I believe is what happens to most if not all prisoners.

The ones who aren't released are of course those that either have life sentences or die in prison.

biccat wrote:This has become an argument against the death penalty: it's too expensive to sentence them to death.

It depends how you do it. The main reason for the expense is the system of investigation and judicial review intended to prevent you from executing the wrong people (which probably still isn't foolproof). It was very cost-effective in, say, Cambodia under Pol Pot, but that's hardly a shining example of a well-run justice system.

I don't disagree with the death penalty on an ethical level, but I can't agree with empowering the state to kill its citizens partly because I've yet to come across a state I'd trust with that kind of power, and also because the only way to create a system that as closely as possible "ensures" you don't periodically execute someone for nothing is to expend staggering amounts of time and money which are better invested elsewhere.

Mannahnin wrote:That runs up against my perpetual problem with capital punishment. If you wrongfully convict & execute some people (which is a mathematical certainty), you can never fix that. With life imprisonment they've always got the chance of exoneration.

I wonder what's greater, the number of wrongfully executed people, or the number of victims of murderers and rapists after they are wrongfully set free?
It could be an intersting statistic.

Mr Hyena: You are displaying a lack of knowledge on what behavioural psychology is, how it is practiced, and how it's theories are tested. It is not a perfect field, but there is no field of science which is. I would say it is approaching a level of reliability that makes it useful, but is held back by an over-reliance on human brains and the ethical considerations that come with that.
I think you are confusing it with cognitive psych or psychiatry, neither of which are particularly related.

In any case, "curing" the paedophiles is only one outcome of study. Others might be identifying the causes, and therefore being able to effectively prevent people becoming paedophiles. There is a lot to be said for studying these sorts of things.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:I don't think anyone "naturally" finds children attractive - paedophilia is a paraphilia and most likely results from psychological damage or trauma of some kind.

An opinion that may or may not be without merit.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:The old "being gay is a choice" chestnut? Have you seen this argument from anyone other than the westboro baptist church?

While homosexuality may not be a conscious choice, it's certainly not genetic as some have offered. It's probably a combination of environment and genetics.

Presumably a lot like pedophilia.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:The main reason for the expense is the system of investigation and judicial review intended to prevent you from executing the wrong people (which probably still isn't foolproof).

In part. But that leaves the question of who are "the wrong people". In the US it's not simply those who are not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but those who didn't have good lawyers, those who might be mentally deficient (depending on the state), and those who haven't committed a homicide offensive.

We could all agree that "the wrong people" shouldn't be executed, but we'll all disagree on who meets that standard.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:also because the only way to create a system that as closely as possible "ensures" you don't periodically execute someone for nothing is to expend staggering amounts of time and money which are better invested elsewhere.

A system that is 50% efficient at killing the right people would be pretty cheap. However, when you move up the scale it gets more expensive for a smaller step in efficiency. 100% efficiency - which people with opinions similar to yours have made - might be possible, but it would be prohibitively expensive.

Relapse wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:That runs up against my perpetual problem with capital punishment. If you wrongfully convict & execute some people (which is a mathematical certainty), you can never fix that. With life imprisonment they've always got the chance of exoneration.

I wonder what's greater, the number of wrongfully executed people, or the number of victims of murderers and rapists after they are wrongfully set free?
It could be an intersting statistic.

The number of victims, without question.

We value the lives of criminals higher than we value the lives of their victims. This is a good thing (IMO) because it means that the state is sensitive to its own exercise of power. Better that N guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. (where N may be 10).

Da Boss wrote:

In any case, "curing" the paedophiles is only one outcome of study. Others might be identifying the causes, and therefore being able to effectively prevent people becoming paedophiles. There is a lot to be said for studying these sorts of things.

I have personal experience with this kind of thing and I can tell you what police, lawyers and psycologists who deal with these people told me.
After a certain age, there is no current known cure for pedophiles, they just keep cycling the behavior pattern. If someone grows up in a violent home, they are statistically more likely to be a pedophile.
Even more disturbing to me, that I personally witnessed, was a mother and grandparents who denied her son was a pedophile, even though multiple accusers who had no relation ship to each other came forward. I watched her lie in court about where he was and what he was doing, all the while accusing the victems.
After the kid(12years old) was convicted, she changed her story to "It was society's fault my lil' darling is messed up."

biccat wrote:While homosexuality may not be a conscious choice, it's certainly not genetic as some have offered. It's probably a combination of environment and genetics.

Presumably a lot like pedophilia.

Except that one is a dangerous mental illness and equating the two is pretty offensive to homosexuals so I'd be cautious of doing that outside concernet trolling efforts. And no, as far as I'm aware there's no "gay gene" (and I never argued that homosexuality was genetic, in case anyone thought that's what I was saying). In fact, the gay/bi/straight trichotomy is potentially misleading, as sexuality is often more fluid than that in humans and a number of other animal species, but that's another issue.

biccat wrote:But that leaves the question of who are "the wrong people". In the US it's not simply those who are not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but those who didn't have good lawyers, those who might be mentally deficient (depending on the state), and those who haven't committed a homicide offensive.

We could all agree that "the wrong people" shouldn't be executed, but we'll all disagree on who meets that standard.

Oh definitely, that's a whole debate in itself imo. But as long as we agree that there are wrong people te execute, my point holds up.

biccat wrote:A system that is 50% efficient at killing the right people would be pretty cheap. However, when you move up the scale it gets more expensive for a smaller step in efficiency. 100% efficiency - which people with opinions similar to yours have made - might be possible, but it would be prohibitively expensive.

Yeah, that's prettymuch what I said. In order to have a system that wasn't dangerously likely to kill the wrong people (however you define those), you'd probably have to spend so much on it it wouldn't be worth it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Da Boss wrote:In any case, "curing" the paedophiles is only one outcome of study. Others might be identifying the causes, and therefore being able to effectively prevent people becoming paedophiles. There is a lot to be said for studying these sorts of things.

Agreed. Another possible benefit of study is greater understanding of psychopathology and behaviour, which has aided a number of criminal investigations in various parts of the world

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:

biccat wrote:While homosexuality may not be a conscious choice, it's certainly not genetic as some have offered. It's probably a combination of environment and genetics.

Presumably a lot like pedophilia.

Except that one is a dangerous mental illness and equating the two is pretty offensive to homosexuals so I'd be cautious of doing that outside concernet trolling efforts.

Why? It's no different than other traits, such as: what music you like, whether you prefer gold or blue parachute pants, whether you like colored sugar or sprinkles on your cupcakes, and how you vote.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:And no, as far as I'm aware there's no "gay gene" (and I never argued that homosexuality was genetic, in case anyone thought that's what I was saying).

Well that's refreshing. So many people (especially a few here) make the assumption that it's one or the other and, finding one offensive for whatever reasons, choose the other.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Yeah, that's prettymuch what I said. In order to have a system that wasn't dangerously likely to kill the wrong people (however you define those), you'd probably have to spend so much on it it wouldn't be worth it.

From what I read of your posts, you seem to be in favor of a system of capital punishment in theory, but in practice would oppose any that wasn't prohibitively expensive. How is this any different from complete opposition to capital punishment?

I am always fairly amused by people claiming there's a "gay gene." If it were the case, there'd be a "gay protein" we could isolate from their bodies, and a "gay protein inhibitor" could be developed.

Da Boss wrote:I am always fairly amused by people claiming there's a "gay gene." If it were the case, there'd be a "gay protein" we could isolate from their bodies, and a "gay protein inhibitor" could be developed.

An interesting factoid I heard on QI was that whilst only 8% of all people have hair forming the crown of their head rotating anti-clockwise, 30% of "homosexuals" have anti-clockwise hair. No sources were cited, but it does present an interesting glimpse into the possibility of some biological basis for homosexuality. There have also been studies into hormone levels (both in the subjects, and the levels they were exposed to during gestation), etc, etc.

After all, biology is extremely complex, and there is rarely just one gene which can be pointed to as the gene that controls something as complex as sexual attraction. Even something as simple as eye colour has numerous genes which control it.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Except that one is a dangerous mental illness

I agree wholeheartedly, it is a sexual perversion that ought to be rooted out and stopped.

I for one support the death penalty for these freaks, but even if that isn't supported by law, then chemical castration should suffice, as these freaks are an abomination and should be destroyed.

Was I talking about paedophilia or a historical view of homosexuality there?

Because before recently people had many of the punishments proposed in this thread for paedophiles inflicted upon them for homosexuality, and even today there are many countries where these punishments are still meted out.

Just something for everyone to think about.

Da Boss wrote:I am always fairly amused by people claiming there's a "gay gene." If it were the case, there'd be a "gay protein" we could isolate from their bodies, and a "gay protein inhibitor" could be developed.

In the interest of taste and class I am not taking the potential of the term "gay protein" to its logical conclusion.

Goliath wrote:

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Except that one is a dangerous mental illness

I agree wholeheartedly, it is a sexual perversion that ought to be rooted out and stopped.

I for one support the death penalty for these freaks, but even if that isn't supported by law, then chemical castration should suffice, as these freaks are an abomination and should be destroyed.

Was I talking about paedophilia or a historical view of homosexuality there?

Because before recently people had many of the punishments proposed in this thread for paedophiles inflicted upon them for homosexuality, and even today there are many countries where these punishments are still meted out.

Just something for everyone to think about.

Are you suggesting that pedophilia is not a sickness and will one day be accepted?

I really, really hope he isn't.

It seems that way, the way the attitude towards gays is defined as previously the same as the current attitude towards pedophiles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Perhaps it's just a bad analogy.

The trolling in this thread has taken a fascinating turn.

I won't say "popcorn", as the stuff gets caught in my teeth and I can't stand that, but my interest is suddenly rekindled.

Relapse wrote:

Goliath wrote:

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Except that one is a dangerous mental illness

I agree wholeheartedly, it is a sexual perversion that ought to be rooted out and stopped.

I for one support the death penalty for these freaks, but even if that isn't supported by law, then chemical castration should suffice, as these freaks are an abomination and should be destroyed.

Was I talking about paedophilia or a historical view of homosexuality there?

Because before recently people had many of the punishments proposed in this thread for paedophiles inflicted upon them for homosexuality, and even today there are many countries where these punishments are still meted out.

Just something for everyone to think about.

Are you suggesting that pedophilia is not a sickness and will one day be accepted?

No, but I am suggesting that the people recommending these punishments maybe take a step away from the computer and calm down, because they seem to forget that not all paedophiles will act on their urges.

If the punishments are being proposed only for people that actually commit child rape then I am fine with that, but suggesting that they should be extended to anyone with the slightest sexual attraction to children would imply some sort of secret police whose sole purpose is to hunt down paedophiles who haven't yet acted out their urges.

On a different, but related note, what about cases like this?

where both of the participants are under age, but one of them is older than the other?

Would the people on this board propose the death penalty or chemical castration for the girl in this case?

That case has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Though I can see where you'd get confused. A difference of two years when both of them are underage is very similar to what happened in this story.

OP's Link wrote:"extreme online videos of children, including babies, being sexually abused and raped".

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Goliath wrote:No, but I am suggesting that the people recommending these punishments maybe take a step away from the computer and calm down, because they seem to forget that not all paedophiles will act on their urges.

If you don't act on your urges, you're golden.

Can't punish people for thoughts, just actions.

Goliath wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Goliath wrote:

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Except that one is a dangerous mental illness

I agree wholeheartedly, it is a sexual perversion that ought to be rooted out and stopped.

I for one support the death penalty for these freaks, but even if that isn't supported by law, then chemical castration should suffice, as these freaks are an abomination and should be destroyed.

Was I talking about paedophilia or a historical view of homosexuality there?

Because before recently people had many of the punishments proposed in this thread for paedophiles inflicted upon them for homosexuality, and even today there are many countries where these punishments are still meted out.

Just something for everyone to think about.

Are you suggesting that pedophilia is not a sickness and will one day be accepted?

No, but I am suggesting that the people recommending these punishments maybe take a step away from the computer and calm down, because they seem to forget that not all paedophiles will act on their urges.

If the punishments are being proposed only for people that actually commit child rape then I am fine with that, but suggesting that they should be extended to anyone with the slightest sexual attraction to children would imply some sort of secret police whose sole purpose is to hunt down paedophiles who haven't yet acted out their urges.

On a different, but related note, what about cases like this?

where both of the participants are under age, but one of them is older than the other?

Would the people on this board propose the death penalty or chemical castration for the girl in this case?

If he hasn't acted on his urges, life in a mental asylum would be the fair punishment imo.

I believe that age should be factored into the punishment. Refer back to my earlier post on this thread concerning what I learned first hand about pedophiles.
In the case of the girl, there is some need of psychiatric attention in the long term.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Goliath wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Goliath wrote:

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Except that one is a dangerous mental illness

I agree wholeheartedly, it is a sexual perversion that ought to be rooted out and stopped.

I for one support the death penalty for these freaks, but even if that isn't supported by law, then chemical castration should suffice, as these freaks are an abomination and should be destroyed.

Was I talking about paedophilia or a historical view of homosexuality there?

Because before recently people had many of the punishments proposed in this thread for paedophiles inflicted upon them for homosexuality, and even today there are many countries where these punishments are still meted out.

Just something for everyone to think about.

Are you suggesting that pedophilia is not a sickness and will one day be accepted?

No, but I am suggesting that the people recommending these punishments maybe take a step away from the computer and calm down, because they seem to forget that not all paedophiles will act on their urges.

If the punishments are being proposed only for people that actually commit child rape then I am fine with that, but suggesting that they should be extended to anyone with the slightest sexual attraction to children would imply some sort of secret police whose sole purpose is to hunt down paedophiles who haven't yet acted out their urges.

On a different, but related note, what about cases like this?

where both of the participants are under age, but one of them is older than the other?

Would the people on this board propose the death penalty or chemical castration for the girl in this case?

If he hasn't acted on his urges, life in a mental asylum would be the fair punishment imo.

This is the thing that I have problems with.

He hasn't acted on his urges. He keeps them hidden, lets say that he knows that they're wrong and he's ashamed of them, but for all intents and purposes he is a normal member of society.

You're suggesting that there should be some sort of secret police to root through people's personal lives and determine whether or not they are a paedophile, and then throw this man who hasn't done anything wrong into a mental asylum for his entire life?

Viewing images of children being raped should be a crime. The difficulty arises in that you can accidentally view such things, or they can be maliciously sent to you or planted on your computer. But it remains a serious crime to intentionally view these images and videos. A paedophile who does not look at such images or act on their urges in any way is not a problem, but possession of child pornography should be a crime.

Da Boss wrote:Viewing images of children being raped should be a crime. The difficulty arises in that you can accidentally view such things, or they can be maliciously sent to you or planted on your computer. But it remains a serious crime to intentionally view these images and videos. A paedophile who does not look at such images or act on their urges in any way is not a problem, but possession of child pornography should be a crime.

That's the truth.

Da Boss wrote:Viewing images of children being raped should be a crime. The difficulty arises in that you can accidentally view such things, or they can be maliciously sent to you or planted on your computer. But it remains a serious crime to intentionally view these images and videos. A paedophile who does not look at such images or act on their urges in any way is not a problem, but possession of child pornography should be a crime.

This I agree with.

This is the thing that I have problems with.

He hasn't acted on his urges. He keeps them hidden, lets say that he knows that they're wrong and he's ashamed of them, but for all intents and purposes he is a normal member of society.

You're suggesting that there should be some sort of secret police to root through people's personal lives and determine whether or not they are a paedophile, and then throw this man who hasn't done anything wrong into a mental asylum for his entire life?

The difficulty is that he may act on his urges. Regardless if he did anything right or wrong; hes still a pedophile for having pedophillic thoughts.

Its the same reason someone who has too many violent thoughts should go to a mental asylum.

Mr Hyena wrote:

This is the thing that I have problems with.

He hasn't acted on his urges. He keeps them hidden, lets say that he knows that they're wrong and he's ashamed of them, but for all intents and purposes he is a normal member of society.

You're suggesting that there should be some sort of secret police to root through people's personal lives and determine whether or not they are a paedophile, and then throw this man who hasn't done anything wrong into a mental asylum for his entire life?

The difficulty is that he may act on his urges. Regardless if he did anything right or wrong; hes still a pedophile for having pedophillic thoughts.

Its the same reason someone who has too many violent thoughts should go to a mental asylum.

But as I said, this man is, for all intents and purposes, normal.

The man that you said would be in a mental asylum would be acting erratically, and could well have very obvious signs that he is troubled.

The paedophile would only be identifiable as a paedophile if he went up to someone and said "I am a paedohile"

How would you suggest that we detect that this man was having paedophilic thoughts?

By thinking about children in a sexual way; in otherwords, him admitting he has sexual thoughts of children.

Viewing sexual imagery counts acting so its the only way to tell.

biccat wrote:From what I read of your posts, you seem to be in favor of a system of capital punishment in theory, but in practice would oppose any that wasn't prohibitively expensive. How is this any different from complete opposition to capital punishment?

Basically, yes. It's not really different in practise from a complete opposition, but it is ideologically different from most opposition to capital punishment which tends to be rooted in the idea that killing is inherantly wrong. I don't think it is, but I generally oppose capital punishment for the reasons I mentioned; in order for it to be satisfactory, the cost would be prohibitive, so I would oppose it on economic grounds.

I can't really say "I support the death penalty in cases of absolute certainty of guilt" because while I would, that level of certainty is so hard to come by that it would make for a very impractical legal position. I completely support it in certain contexts (the execution of Caucescu, for example)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Hyena wrote:someone who has too many violent thoughts should go to a mental asylum.

Mr Hyena wrote:

This is the thing that I have problems with.

He hasn't acted on his urges. He keeps them hidden, lets say that he knows that they're wrong and he's ashamed of them, but for all intents and purposes he is a normal member of society.

You're suggesting that there should be some sort of secret police to root through people's personal lives and determine whether or not they are a paedophile, and then throw this man who hasn't done anything wrong into a mental asylum for his entire life?

The difficulty is that he may act on his urges. Regardless if he did anything right or wrong; hes still a pedophile for having pedophillic thoughts.

Its the same reason someone who has too many violent thoughts should go to a mental asylum.

By that reasoning anyone who goes to a violent movie should be locked up because they have violent thoughts.

Mr Hyena wrote:By thinking about children in a sexual way; in otherwords, him admitting he has sexual thoughts of children.

Viewing sexual imagery counts acting so its the only way to tell.

Ah, in that case then he should be forced by the courts to undergo psychiatric treatment, maybe not life imprisonment.

By that reasoning anyone who goes to a violent movie should be locked up because they have violent thoughts.

Theres a difference between thinking about yourself as an action hero in a movie... than thinking about repeated stabbing your wife/child over and over and over.

Ah, in that case then he should be forced by the courts to undergo psychiatric treatment, maybe not life imprisonment.

Yes. Perhaps monitored too in case of an offence.

Mr Hyena wrote:

By that reasoning anyone who goes to a violent movie should be locked up because they have violent thoughts.

Theres a difference between thinking about yourself as an action hero in a movie... than thinking about repeated stabbing your wife/child over and over and over.

What about slasher movies?

I'm pretty sure you can tell the difference between what I mean. People who are serial killers frequently have obsessive, violent thoughts.

Mr Hyena wrote:Its the closest thing to 'justice' we can get for the victims. Let the criminal experience what he did to the child; then execute him to rid the world of his evil.

Well if someone downloads kiddie porn, he is abusing noone, so there is no need to treat him as visciously.

I think we need to draw a very firm line between owning illegal porn and actual direct sexual abuse of a child.
Paedophiles need help not beatings. However they cannot seek help because just being a paedo is considered a crime, let alone anything they might do.

Orlanth wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:Its the closest thing to 'justice' we can get for the victims. Let the criminal experience what he did to the child; then execute him to rid the world of his evil.

Well if someone downloads kiddie porn, he is abusing noone, so there is no need to treat him as visciously.

I think we need to draw a very firm line between owning illegal porn and actual direct sexual abuse of a child.
Paedophiles need help not beatings. However they cannot seek help because just being a paedo is considered a crime, let alone anything they might do.

I disagree. If you own kiddie porn, somewhere, a child was abused sexually to create it, making you an enabler and accomplice. In my mind it's one in the same. As I said earlier in the thread, I have direct experience with this, and I have learned from psycologists an police that once a certain age is reached, someone who abuses children or contributes to their abuse (kiddie porn users), has no real prospect of rehabilitation.

Relapse is 100% dead on, here.

Orlanth wrote:if someone downloads kiddie porn, he is abusing noone

He's benefitting from abuse and increasing the demand for abusive material

Orlanth wrote:I think we need to draw a very firm line between owning illegal porn and actual direct sexual abuse of a child.

Yes, they're different crimes, but the deliberate consumption of material created by abuse still needs to be a serious offense.

Relapse wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:Its the closest thing to 'justice' we can get for the victims. Let the criminal experience what he did to the child; then execute him to rid the world of his evil.

Well if someone downloads kiddie porn, he is abusing noone, so there is no need to treat him as visciously.

I think we need to draw a very firm line between owning illegal porn and actual direct sexual abuse of a child.
Paedophiles need help not beatings. However they cannot seek help because just being a paedo is considered a crime, let alone anything they might do.

I disagree. If you own kiddie porn, somewhere, a child was abused sexually to create it, making you an enabler and accomplice. In my mind it's one in the same.

Watching an act and committing an act can never be one and the same. That being said, I agree that simply possessing/distributing this material is harmful and dangerous, and people who do so deliberately are indeed enablers and accomplices.

Relapse wrote: As I said earlier in the thread, I have direct experience with this, and I have learned from psycologists an police that once a certain age is reached, someone who abuses children or contributes to their abuse (kiddie porn users), has no real prospect of rehabilitation.

Funny thing- back in the 80s, many police and people who advised police would tell you authoritatively that D&D players had criminal tendencies, and that Satanists were commiting crimes of child abuse, kidnapping and murder across the country. Neither of which was even remotely true. Now, I'm not disagreeing that there is real evidence of high rates of recidivism amount child molesters (there certainly is), but just because a policeman, or even a psychologist, tells you some absolute truth or law of human behavior doesn't necessarily make it so. If they are truly and totally irredeemable, and can never control themselves, that negates all responsibility on our part AND on their part to even try. I think that kind of convenient rationale is very morally dubious, and becomes a convenient way to abdicate our obligation to try to look for solutions.

Da Boss wrote:This sort of rabid posting convinces me that paedophiles are simply the last group it is socially acceptable to absolutely and unreservedly hate, and that people love a bit of pure hatred.

I'm attending university in pursuit of a bachelor's degree in psychology, so I can become a social worker, and one of the first things we were taught is that while you may hate something, like a pedo or a serial killer, you have to accept that they are what they are, you may not condone it, but you have to understand it. Yes, it is classified as a mental illness in the DSMIV, yes, I do find it repulsive and disgusting, but all these violent suggestions of punishment are not going to help anything in the long run.

@Mannahnin, I had a real good inside look at this situation and the people telling me about the recidivism rate among child molesters and those indulging in kiddie porn spoke from years of experience.

I think that what Mannahnin is saying is that if you do a bit of research and get some hard numbers from a credible source you'll be able to make a more convincing argument than what basically boils down to "This guy told me something that I believe despite not having inherently verified it."

If you locked people up for being sexually attracted to children, you'd have to imprison 1-2% of the population, despite them posing no risk to the safety of children whatsoever.
It's a sexual urge like any other, and can be controlled. Obviously people who actually harm children should be hanged, as should people who claim that pediatricians are pedophiles.

Joey wrote:...as should people who claim that pediatricians are pedophiles.

Is this really that rampant? I bet it's huge among the "hurrr vaccines are bad" crowd.

Monster Rain wrote:

Joey wrote:...as should people who claim that pediatricians are pedophiles.

Is this really that rampant? I bet it's huge among the "hurrr vaccines are bad" crowd.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society wrote:Self-styled vigilantes attacked the home of a hospital paediatrician after apparently confusing her professional title with the word "paedophile", it emerged yesterday...Five families who were wrongly identified as harbouring sex offenders were forced to flee their homes in the Paulsgrove estate in Portsmouth as violence flared earlier this month...The Sunday tabloid wants the government to introduce a law allowing people access to information on the identities and addresses of paedophiles in their areas.

Witch-hunting peadophiles sells papers.

I imagine that places podiatrists in harm's way as well.

Monster Rain wrote:I imagine that places podiatrists in harm's way as well.

They'll have to hop to it, then. Something like that could cost them an arm and a leg...

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:An arguement I have seen, which is not popular in some circles as it means the fabled 'Rehabilitation' is nigh on impossible. Is that, folks who are this way, either naurally find Children sexually attractive (and have limited to no control)

I don't think anyone "naturally" finds children attractive - paedophilia is a paraphilia and most likely results from psychological damage or trauma of some kind.

Tbh I have no research to back anything up, but from a few things I've read/seen over the years, there do seem to more than one or two Psychologists who believe that you can have a natural preference for children, that stems onwards from their own childhood. Where as the 'average' (hate that word regarding humanity) person grows up and finds adult women attractive, a Paedophile, sees no distinction between a child and a woman on a sexual level once he reachs adulthood.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:or have chosen to like children, as say someone can choose to be bisexual or homosexual.

The old "being gay is a choice" chestnut? Have you seen this argument from anyone other than the westboro baptist church?

A bit harsh, if you note my sentance I say someone, implying an individual. There are many reasons for being interested in those of the same gender as yourself and not a subject for this thread, and it has been known for folks to just 'try' it, that was no comment on a connection between the two and I am not against homosexuality in anyway whatsoever.

I was trying to imply (sadly it seems badly) that paedophila can be discovered upon and in effect a choice as well. In fact most psychologists I have seen speaking about the viewing of these images seem to think it is a slippery one way slope once on it. I sadly think the number of police officers who have at one time been involved in the seeking out of the criminals who preform these acts, to then be discovered to be commiting offenses regarding keeping images, is a pretty strong warning on why this stuff needs to be purged from the internet.

remilia_scarlet wrote:

Da Boss wrote:This sort of rabid posting convinces me that paedophiles are simply the last group it is socially acceptable to absolutely and unreservedly hate, and that people love a bit of pure hatred.

I'm attending university in pursuit of a bachelor's degree in psychology, so I can become a social worker, and one of the first things we were taught is that while you may hate something, like a pedo or a serial killer, you have to accept that they are what they are, you may not condone it, but you have to understand it. Yes, it is classified as a mental illness in the DSMIV, yes, I do find it repulsive and disgusting, but all these violent suggestions of punishment are not going to help anything in the long run.

I've worked with a lot of pedophiles back when I was a correctional nurse. Pedophilia is a mental illness that has little to no chance of being cured, so psychiatry, psychology, and therapy won't accomplish much. Throwing pedophiles in prison where they face daily threats of rape and death will just turns them into even more dysfunctional monsters, which is highly problematic because the next thing we do is release them from prison and tell them they can't go near children anymore. If you understand the disease and objectively look at the success rates of treatment the result is consistent failure. If you objectively look at the success rates of the prison system in treating pedophilia the result is almost universally that they come out of prison a more dangerous individual than when they entered prison. We just can't help them out enough with treatment that is successful enough to keep children safe. I don't see a primitive need to torture and kill people for what they are, nor do I see a need for a fear inspired knee jerk reaction to break out the zyklon b, but if pedophiles are allowed to roam free the net result is children will be raped. I hate to say this, but if we don't permanently quarantine pedophiles away from children the result should be obvious. It doesn't need to be an entire life of hard time behind bars in a supermax, but they have to be isolated from children.

Okay, let's look at a hypothetical situation.

Guy goes to college to be a teacher. Discovers along the way that he has an inapropriate attraction to the youngsters. He switches majors to something else - say, business management. He avoids schools, playgrounds, McDonalds, and anyplace else lots of kids are going to be at (avoiding kids in public entirely is probably impossible, but he tries his best). He marries late, because it takes him a good long time to establish that the person he is dating is really, really serious about not wanting to have kids - he doesn't dare have any for fear of what he might do. He doesn't babysit for his mates, in fact he avoids his mate's kids entirely even at the potential expense of the friendship.

In short, he never acts on his inapropriate attraction to kids at all. He goes out of his way to avoid being tempted.

Should he be punished?


That's my real problem with teachers, foster care providers, and what not that are peodphiles. If you KNOW you have this problem... what are you doing hanging out with kids all day? And so, I have little sympathy for them if they act. It's really not THAT hard to avoid the little monsters in the first place.

(I'm really not fond of kids, you might have noticed. Aside from the inapropriate attraction and the teaching major, the scenario is pretty much the way I live my life. I cannot stand children. And avoiding being exposed to them entirely has proved to be impossible, I have certainly managed to minimize my exposure to them by avoiding places they frequent. So... what's your excuse, Mr. Pedophile Teacher?)

Relapse wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:Its the closest thing to 'justice' we can get for the victims. Let the criminal experience what he did to the child; then execute him to rid the world of his evil.

Well if someone downloads kiddie porn, he is abusing noone, so there is no need to treat him as visciously.

I think we need to draw a very firm line between owning illegal porn and actual direct sexual abuse of a child.
Paedophiles need help not beatings. However they cannot seek help because just being a paedo is considered a crime, let alone anything they might do.

I disagree. If you own kiddie porn, somewhere, a child was abused sexually to create it, making you an enabler and accomplice. In my mind it's one in the same. As I said earlier in the thread, I have direct experience with this, and I have learned from psycologists an police that once a certain age is reached, someone who abuses children or contributes to their abuse (kiddie porn users), has no real prospect of rehabilitation.

The majority of extreme porn is in fact CGI. And yes that deos count in the laws of many European countries including the UK. Animation is a safe means of procuring extreme porn. as people do not get to see what the offender is looking at we might not be aware of the level of offense. Yes there could be some life porn, but that need not be the case. Also trial notes and sentencing and the record will not delimit between the two, its still possession of pornographic images involving children. Therefore it is possible to be convicted of child porn offences without ever directly or indirectly harming a child. Furthermore as the material would be confiscated and destroyed you will nto be able to tell the difference.

This calls directly into question your logical 'right' to subsequently act as public avenger and call for maltreatment of such offenders.

Monster Rain wrote:Relapse is 100% dead wrong, here.

Fixed.

The issue is that abuse is not guaranteed.

A good comperable example is extreme BDSM and torture porn. That is legal and easy to find on the net. The vast majority is CGI nowadays, it creates the scene without harming the victim. Kiddie porn is apparently no different and criminal legislation makes special mention of it in both for a non-exhaustive example both EU and UK law.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:

Orlanth wrote:I think we need to draw a very firm line between owning illegal porn and actual direct sexual abuse of a child.

Yes, they're different crimes, but the deliberate consumption of material created by abuse still needs to be a serious offense.

agreed, possession of any type of child pornopraphy should be a serious offense. I see it as three of four stages rather than two, rapidly declining in culpability after the first two.

- Child abuser manufacturing porn.
- Child abuser.
- Recipient of child abuse porn
- Manufacturer or recipient of simulated child abuse porn.

@Orlanth,

I have an intimate knowledge of child molesters and their motivations, chance at rehabilitation, etc. Due to the fact that one attacked my three year old daughter.
Fortunatly he was stopped by my wife before he did more than get her panties off, but in the ensuing year and trial that followed, I had plrnty of chance to study the matter and talk to proffesionals who deal with these kind of people.
I can tell you I don't care if someone is watching cartoons. It's when they indulge in kiddie porn with real people involved that gets me pissed.
I know a good deal more about this I think than you do.

Relapse wrote:@Orlanth,

I have an intimate knowledge of child molesters and their motivations, chance at rehabilitation, etc. Due to the fact that one attacked my three year old daughter.
Fortunatly he was stopped by my wife before he did more than get her panties off, but in the ensuing year and trial that followed, I had plrnty of chance to study the matter and talk to proffesionals who deal with these kind of people.
I can tell you I don't care if someone is watching cartoons. It's when they indulge in kiddie porn with real people involved that gets me pissed.
I know a good deal more about this I think than you do.

I havent experienced that, but that does not mean you know all the cases. You had a scare story that is all, not to belittle a close call.

When that fether gets to prison someone might be in the same week found with kiddie CGI on his computer who has never hurt a child and may never do. Both are labelled 'paedos' and people do not stop to think too much beyond that point.

Let me give you a good case in point. 'Operation Ore' was the UK end of a FBI sting involving a snap site, msotly of adult porn with a tag along site containing one picture of genuine child pornography. Anyone who visited the site got busted, this included people who had their credit card ID stolen and used to pay for the site by third parties, people who paid for the site themselves never knowing there was a page with child porn etc. All got labelled 'paedos' or were in danfer of such. Some including a man who had his ID stolen and never visited the site commited suicide, many more lost their jobs.

You see you met a child predator, a real one. Fair enough. However even those who were guilty caught under Operation Orb, let alone those who didnt know what they has signed up for were all in the same boat as the scumbag who tried to take your daughter. In the minds of many there is no difference between them. You seem to be at least partly of that opinion when you promote an appeal to authority by your experiences. what happened to you is the aberration, the majority of people caught are done so for virtual offences, often very insignificant ones. After all the offending photo used to prosecute for Operation Avalanch and Operation Ore was a single image.

We cannot in all honesty treat them all the same category as the man your family encountered..

Any time someone knowingly seeks out and watches kiddie porn with live children involved, they are no better than the actual creaters.
As I said, I had ample time and motivation to study these people, and it is a spiral that only gets worse the more it is indulged to the point where there is no real hope of cure for most.
It's a sad and loathsome world these people end up in, whether from being abused themselves and acting out on there victimization, growing up in a violent home, or, in my mind the worst of the lot, getting into the lifestyle out of curiousity.

Orlanth wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Relapse is 100% dead wrong, here.

Fixed.

The issue is that abuse is not guaranteed.

Cute, but still wrong.

Purchasing and subsequently fapping to material in which actual children are actually sexually abused guarantees abuse by definition. Bringing up CGI is a red herring and completely beside the point.

Monster Rain wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Relapse is 100% dead wrong, here.

Fixed.

The issue is that abuse is not guaranteed.

Cute, but still wrong.

Purchasing and subsequently fapping to material in which actual children are actually sexually abused guarantees abuse by definition. Bringing up CGI is a red herring and completely beside the point.

CGI is a red herring defenense lawyers use to explain why their client has over half a terabyte of child porn between their hard drive, cell phone, and thumb drives. They then try to convince 1 idiot on the jury that their client thought all of it was CGI.

Can't say how things go in the uk but in the usa revieving and distributing child porn makes a person part of a conspiracy under the rico act. Most of the people out there with large libraries of child porn build it by trading child porn with other pedophiles which makes it a conspiracy under the rico act.

Not a red herring but situational.

One can be prosecuted entirely on CGI porn in a lot of countries including the UK. In fact especially the UK as a lot of quite regular artwork had to be made exception for because the rules are so severe. e.g Madonna and Child paintings etc.


You are assuming everyone convicted had either actual live child porn or was a de facto abuser. Sorry this need not be the case. Therefore further classification is needed especially if you advocate marking paedos for additional social punishment 'for the sake of the children'.

What nails people in the usa is the actual child rapist takes pictures, trades the pictures for more media to paedo B, then paedo B trades with paedo C, and when they get busted they are all now in a rico conspiracy case.

There is something called chemical castration that can be opted for in some countries. although if were talking cost over punishment, I admit I dont know what something like that costs.

Child predators like this should be tossed into a ring and be forced to drop the soap while surrounded by a bunch of Chaos terminators of Khorne with lightning claws, while making sure not to kill the offender. After hours of being eviscerated, they should be hung/decapitated in front of the others who are next in line. OR, they could be dragon kicked in the groin by Chuck Norris wearing electric eel cleats a hundred times, then karate chopped in half by Raedyn from Mortal Kombat.

Vulcan wrote:Okay, let's look at a hypothetical situation.

Guy goes to college to be a teacher. Discovers along the way that he has an inapropriate attraction to the youngsters. He switches majors to something else - say, business management. He avoids schools, playgrounds, McDonalds, and anyplace else lots of kids are going to be at (avoiding kids in public entirely is probably impossible, but he tries his best). He marries late, because it takes him a good long time to establish that the person he is dating is really, really serious about not wanting to have kids - he doesn't dare have any for fear of what he might do. He doesn't babysit for his mates, in fact he avoids his mate's kids entirely even at the potential expense of the friendship.

In short, he never acts on his inapropriate attraction to kids at all. He goes out of his way to avoid being tempted.

Should he be punished?


That's my real problem with teachers, foster care providers, and what not that are peodphiles. If you KNOW you have this problem... what are you doing hanging out with kids all day? And so, I have little sympathy for them if they act. It's really not THAT hard to avoid the little monsters in the first place.

(I'm really not fond of kids, you might have noticed. Aside from the inapropriate attraction and the teaching major, the scenario is pretty much the way I live my life. I cannot stand children. And avoiding being exposed to them entirely has proved to be impossible, I have certainly managed to minimize my exposure to them by avoiding places they frequent. So... what's your excuse, Mr. Pedophile Teacher?)

Temptation is not a crime; so the answer is no. If he manages to avoid offending (including seeking child porn because that is just child abuse by proxy) then he is not a criminal he has a psychological difficulty he is dealing with.

In an offender paedophilia isn't so much a choice as a sexuality, the only offending paedophile that does not repeat thier crimes is a paedophile that is locked up. It's like telling a straight guy not to like women.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orlanth wrote:

When that fether gets to prison someone might be in the same week found with kiddie CGI on his computer who has never hurt a child and may never do. Both are labelled 'paedos' and people do not stop to think too much beyond that point.

Let me give you a good case in point. 'Operation Ore' was the UK end of a FBI sting involving a snap site, msotly of adult porn with a tag along site containing one picture of genuine child pornography. Anyone who visited the site got busted, this included people who had their credit card ID stolen and used to pay for the site by third parties, people who paid for the site themselves never knowing there was a page with child porn etc. All got labelled 'paedos' or were in danfer of such. Some including a man who had his ID stolen and never visited the site commited suicide, many more lost their jobs.

You see you met a child predator, a real one. Fair enough. However even those who were guilty caught under Operation Orb, let alone those who didnt know what they has signed up for were all in the same boat as the scumbag who tried to take your daughter. In the minds of many there is no difference between them. You seem to be at least partly of that opinion when you promote an appeal to authority by your experiences. what happened to you is the aberration, the majority of people caught are done so for virtual offences, often very insignificant ones. After all the offending photo used to prosecute for Operation Avalanch and Operation Ore was a single image.

We cannot in all honesty treat them all the same category as the man your family encountered..

Operatio Ore went further than that.

I was a student in the late 90's and did what I shall call a little "grey hatting". I wanted to know who was running kiddie porn sites and getting away with it.

I resolved the DNS addresses of the sites back to IP addresses the did a trace route back to the host server. I then resolved the address back to find the server owner and location.

Guess what the result was in 9 out of 10 cases:

FBI, Langley, Virginia, US.

There was a prolonged period in the mid to late nineties when the world's number one distributor of child pornography was the FBI. Ok they were entrapping paedophiles but...

"A vast amount of material has been seized, much of it encrypted. One suspect in Switzerland had more than 120 terabytes (1,000 gigabytes) of data -- amounting to thousands of hours of high-definition video footage, Europol said."

That is a lot of footage. How does someone even find the time to look up that many different video, or create them for that matter?

And babyrape? Seriously? WTF kinda messed up sh&^ is that?

Razorspirit wrote:"A vast amount of material has been seized, much of it encrypted. One suspect in Switzerland had more than 120 terabytes (1,000 gigabytes) of data -- amounting to thousands of hours of high-definition video footage, Europol said."

That is a lot of footage. How does someone even find the time to look up that many different video, or create them for that matter?

And babyrape? Seriously? WTF kinda messed up sh&^ is that?

If it's encrypted how do they know what it is? It could be hours of static or he could have a lot of pirate movies. You can't prosecute someone based on what you guess is on their hard drive.

Sonophos wrote:You can't prosecute someone based on what you guess is on their hard drive.

I'm sure that's exactly what is happening.

"What's on that hard drive, detective?"

"I dunno."

"Well, book him for fapping to baby rape videos then."

Monster Rain wrote:

Sonophos wrote:You can't prosecute someone based on what you guess is on their hard drive.

I'm sure that's exactly what is happening.

"What's on that hard drive, detective?"

"I dunno."

"Well, book him for fapping to baby rape videos then."

A very hard line good cop/bad cop routine for the copyright police, I think.

"Give us the encryption key and admit you are pirate bay or we will prosecute you for having kiddie porn on there."

The "You wouldn't steal a car" advert is due a replacement seeing as the soundtrack infringes copyright anyway.

Just on chemical castration- I really doubt that'll stop some twisted SOB from hurting kids if that's what they want to do.

Da Boss wrote:Just on chemical castration- I really doubt that'll stop some twisted SOB from hurting kids if that's what they want to do.

There are cases of chemically castrated offenders escalating. It is not done in the UK but we do make the mistake of letting them out.

Monster Rain wrote:I am not saying this to be "outrageous" or anything, but I'd like to see this sort of thing punished with death.

If we punish rape with death, What is preventing them with killing to victim to prevent a witness?
But yeah. Sick stuff. So damn sick. I look and my nieces and nehews it just disgusts me that there are people out there who wish to harm them like that.

I would think that harsher punishments handed down would incentivise a perpetrator to protect themselves by killing the victim.

The vast majority of child abuse is familial abuse, followed by abuse by persons of trust and a very small number of abductions for abuse.

I would arhue that the actual incidence of child abuse per head of population has not risen since the 1950s but the reporting and perception of it has changed.

In the UK during the 1970s statutory rape was treated very differently to the way in which it is handled now. It was a slap on the wrist affair by comparison and in some instances was ignored as harmless.

What I do see is that fear of the Paedophile is driving parents to keep thier kids in ever more controlled environments where they can not learn self reliance or responsibility.

CHILD SNATCHERS ARE VERY RARE. Harsh punishments lead to crime escalation, so the punishments given to paedophiles should not be reported in the press; equally the sordid details of these crimes should not be pawed over in the press.

Paedophilia has an exceptionally high recidivism rate so I do not beleive they can be reformed in most cases but the death penalty (or the harhser punishments many advocate) will only lead to the death of the main witness to the crime.

Don't worry guys, Greece has got this problem solved.

I love this bit:

"The new government "disability" list also includes compulsive gamblers, fetishists, exhibitionists and sado-masochists, the Associated Press news agency reports."

All you need to do to get disability benefit in greece is to go into a casino, show some people your privates whilst abusing a lettuce and asking for a croupier spanking.

And the Germans are bailing these guys out?

I would like to point out that since the IMF is also bailing out Greece so are you.

biccat wrote:Don't worry guys, Greece has got this problem solved.

what in the feth?

Sonophos wrote:I would like to point out that since the IMF is also bailing out Greece so are you.

Greece is officially on my list.