BF2S Forums Paedophiles= castration for the sick scum

Bubbalo wrote:

Personally, I'd rather find out what makes them attracted to children regardless of the consequences and prevent that.

not a bad idea at all

A human brain is incredibly complex, to understand what causes something, when there are invariably a number of contributors, is highly difficult.  Add to that the fact that serious efforts to deal with these people haven't exactly been going on in force historically, and I think there's room left to try.  Many of them seem to believe that they aren't harming anyone, which is irrational, and, therefore, an illness (IMHO).  That's not to say that authorities don't need to review control mechanisms as well, however.  Of course, I don't believe in the death penalty anyway...............

no i havent seen the film but if its about this very subject then no i wont see it either

SFR-Rooo wrote:

Should these sick evil narrow mined people be castrated and imprison for life.?They pray on the very innocence  of early vulnerable life and ruin such individuals who some take revenge if thats the right term to then themselves do the same,so should they be imprisoned for life and the safety of others?..........what do you think?

Agreed - so long as they have confessed, or there is 100% evidence that they commited the crime

K8Kommunist wrote:

Out of curiousity, what penalty would you want for murderers?
Considering that molestation, rape and sex crimes as a whole are far less severe then murder, I'd say you would have to have murderers impaled on burning hot iron spikes, only to be held in a state of half-conciousness for all eternity by some modern medical miracle if we were to make the penalties in proportion with the magnitude of the crime, in the eyes of the law.
Do you get where I'm going here?
Life imprisonment is rarely even given to those convicted of third degree murder. Make the punishment in proportion with the crime. Sex crimes involving underage minors should only lead to single digits of years in prison.
I've always found it interesting that people have a stronger emotional reaction to pedophiles than murderers.

In answer to your post, i think a murderer should get the same punishment as the crime he or she did IE: If you drown your kids, you should be locked in a fucking carseat and driven into a lake!!! Ect Ect Ect.

As for sex offenders, I say They should have there balls chopped off, along with there fingers (this way they cant co much else includeing masturbation). Now my stance on women rapists, Thats different, im just mad because a hot ass teacher didnt seduce me when i was 15 WTF, i never catch a break!

I need to add, that the moral fiber of our country does add to this situation, we are in reality animals, with repressed instincts. Some other countries understand this and make the allowable age to merry someplace in the 14-16 year old range. cutting back on these tendincies to commit such acts. The human brain has been conditioned over time to repress these tendencies, but some weaker minded individuals act on there primal urges. Ask yourself this, did our society create these monsters? Remember, it was common even here in the US to merry at the age of around 13-14 years old.

Last edited by <[onex]>Headstone (2006-06-26 07:19:26)

K8Kommunist wrote:

Out of curiousity, what penalty would you want for murderers?
Considering that molestation, rape and sex crimes as a whole are far less severe then murder, I'd say you would have to have murderers impaled on burning hot iron spikes, only to be held in a state of half-conciousness for all eternity by some modern medical miracle if we were to make the penalties in proportion with the magnitude of the crime, in the eyes of the law.
Do you get where I'm going here?
Life imprisonment is rarely even given to those convicted of third degree murder. Make the punishment in proportion with the crime. Sex crimes involving underage minors should only lead to single digits of years in prison.
I've always found it interesting that people have a stronger emotional reaction to pedophiles than murderers.

Me too, +1.  I've always wondered that but if you try and have a debate on the subject people make you out to be a padeophile yourself for "supporting" them.

I think both murder (premeditated) and paedophillia are disgusting acts, but when you murder someone you've have ended their entire existence.  A paedophile causes their victim a lot of psychological damage but they can still live a full life.  However, make a joke about muder or see a news story and there isn't much reaction, do the same with paedophillia and it's another story.

P.S I know someone who was abused at the age of 9 by their adopted family.  It made me sick when she told me but she is now living a great life, jet-setting around the World and really enjoying life.  Her trauma has made her a better person than I could ever hope to be.......

Whilst I agree that paedophilia is a horrible thing, and I do agree that they should be severely punished because of what it is, however, it is a mental disease (or whatever word you want to use), so it is not their 'fault' that they do this. What I think we should do, is stick them in a mental institute for the rest of their lives, where we can figure out what causes this, and we keep them away from the public for ever. Sending them to jail doesn't solve anything, as they're out within 10 years, and we still know nothing more about why they do it.

parthian1000 wrote:

It seems that paedophilia is a sexual orientation much like heterosexuality and homosexuality.

Giving it a classification in the same realm as the norm is a step closer to justifying. There is nothing normal about it, nor will there ever be. It should be across the board execution, end of story.

Some people should not be rehabilitated. Also, look at the rate of recitivism.

the way it is regulated in switzerland is actually pretty good i find. you get convicted for relatively short periond (4 years or so) and then get detained for the rest of your life (the only problem is that they cannot appeal unless new scientific proof is obtained that you can be healed (as if that would ever happen))

Paedophiles should be hung, drawn and quartered, simple as.  Commiting such a crime voids any human rights these individuals have.  To prey on the innocent and weak is simply repugnant, and to think these bastards often get off with serving just a couple of years at the expense of the taxpayer is diabolical.  Having been very close to someone who suffered at the hands of one of these monsters I have been a first hand witness to the long term damage that they inflict on their victims.  I can only hope people campaigning for the "fair treatment" of these subhumans never have to see the effects of their acts on one of their loved ones.

K8Kommunist wrote:

Following your logic, a criminal would get less jailtime for killing a 6 year old and then having sex with her corpse. The only crime that justifies the use of the death penalty is murder. Otherwise, you're inflicting a punishment far more severe then the crime, which is unacceptable in a modern democratic society.
Also, it's important to note that in most cases molestation, sex with a minor, etc. it's mainly the victim's word against the criminal's, making the death penalty much too risky. You'd execute one innocent man for every 3 pedophiles.

In death you do nor suffer. But raped at 6 years old you are scarred for life.
In both cases the youngster are rob of the life he/she would have.
The only acceptable penalty is death.
Edit: I do not totaly dissagree but i just though i should make a point...

Last edited by Mackaronen (2006-06-26 11:13:01)

I keep seeing thigns about castration for the sick scum of MALE pedophiles.  I hate to toss this in the mix, but not all pedophiles are male. 

In the United States, if you look at the NIBRS report (National Incident Based Reporting System) for 2000 it details sex offender statistics.  I'll paste the excerpt here because people won't be able to access EBSCOhost.

"Data from the 2000 National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) show that while males make up about nine out of every 10 adult sexual assault perpetrators, totaling about 26,878 incidents within the reporting period, females account for about one out of 10 perpetrators, totaling about 1,162 incidents. Male sexual assault perpetrators offend against child victims about 25% of the time and predominantly choose female child victims, whereas female perpetrators offend against child victims about 40% of the time and choose child victims of both genders equally. Male perpetrators offend against adolescent victims about 40% of the time, and once again tend to choose female adolescent victims. Female perpetrators offend against adolescent victims a comparable amount of time (about 45%), and for forcible offenses (rape, sodomy, sexual assault with an object, and forcible fondling) choose adolescent victims of both genders equally, while for non-forcible offenses (non-forcible incest and statutory rape) they tend to choose predominantly male victims. Finally, adult male sexual assault perpetrators choose adult victims about 36% of the time while female perpetrators choose adult victims only 16% of the time. Implications for professionals are discussed, including recommendations to aid in correct identification of adult perpetrators and child/adolescent victims of sexual assault. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]"

[http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=19979456] (persistent link to record)

It details that, although men commit more rapes, women are more likely to rape children; also, while men generally rape female children, women are pretty much indiscriminate in choosing a gender.

We tend to think of only men as sexual predators, where women can be just as bad and often get MUCH less harsher sentences than men do.  I did a report on statutory rape for my college this past semester and found an interesting case of a female teacher in her 40's (I believe) who had sex with 2 boys, ages 11-13 if my memory serves correct.  She got something to the tune of 7 years of house arrest, while a male teacher, the same age, had sex with 2 female students the same age range got 27 years in prison.

Another case in point - when men have sex with young girls (in a school setting or elsewhere), even though it may be consensual on the part of the young girl (although statutory rape says any sex under the age of consent is through coersion and thus cannot be consensual) it's seen as a harsh, disgusting atrocity.  When women have sex with young boys, however, it's seen as just "something that clicks beyong the student-teacher relationship (qutoe from an actual judge on a female being prosecuted's statutory rape case)".  Because, let's face it - what kind of boy wouldn't want to have sex with an older woman.

And that's just what we're meant to believe.

But as with the train on everyone else, it IS a medical condition.  Everyone on these forums has some kind of kinky fantasy or somethign that turns them on.  You can change this fact about you just as easily as pedophiles can change how they feel about kids.  It just is.  We need to lock these guys up, yes, but what good would castration do?  It's reactionary, and not proactive.  We need to find out how to stop pedophiles before they hurt our kids, not after.

Mackaronen wrote:

In death you do nor suffer. But raped at 6 years old you are scarred for life.
In both cases the youngster are rob of the life he/she would have.
The only acceptable penalty is death.
Edit: I do not totaly dissagree but i just though i should make a point...

Because it's not like there might be a reason that they lack inhibitions/empathy?

Why do people have this view that the response to crime should be punishment rather than prevention?  That view may result in every crime being punished, but it won't do much to lessen crime.