News0 min ago
Gary Glitter
59 Answers
Just heard he may face the death penalty!
Why don't they just castrate sex offenders?
He deserves what he gets - good to know that you can run, but can't hide!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by snapdarlich. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
So is it death penalty or castration, or perhaps you'd like both, perhaps torture before death? And is this for looking at child porn images or do you have to go further? Is this in addition to prison time, so they get released one day or do you want them locked up for life? And with reference to the initial post, is this for all sex offenders irrespective of whether children are involved?
Oneeyedvic in that case yes they are. I hadn't heard that previously and to be honest it makes me feel physically ill that a Government can legalise paedophilia ....
My step daughter is 14 and she is an absolute sweetheart, one minute very adult and the next a little kid cuddled up on the sofa, she is NO WAY old enough mentally to make that decision ... for gods sake she is a kid .... the thought of her having sex yet is really horrible, she would be completely taken advantage of and in my opinion it would be rape ..... the thought that a 13 year old girl could be accused of leading someone on is terrible ....
IMO sex offenders are all sick ... sex offenders who target little kids are disgusting and they deserve to be castrated at the very least and then they should be locked up for life, I would personally go by DNA evidence
There seems to be some strong evidence coming from studies in Denmark and Germany that castration is effective. - Incidently it doesn't remove the capacity but lowers the drive I'm reading about reoffending rates of about 5% .
Might be worth trying in the UK but it has to be looked at as a "treatment" not a punishment otherwise we're into lopping of the hands of teenage car thieves.- I think in both countries the offenders agreed to the treatment
Nope, don't agree with the death penalty or with torture, which people may find difficult to believe considering my generally mid right of centre views - however, if a grown man is found guilty, beyond any possible doubt backed up by unquestionable DNA evidence, of forcing his penis, fingers or whatever into the vagina, anus or mouth of a child, then I fail to see why castration shouldn't be an option.
Emotive language possibly, but this is what some of these 'men' do.
I am genuinely happy to have my mind changed on this, but thus far I have yet to see anybody demonstrate a resonable argument as to why castration shouldn't be an option.
Why? Why shouldn't castration be an option?
If prison really were a deterrent (which we have heard time and again on this site that it isn't), or if prison really did rehabilitate and we could vitually guarantee that these people wouldn't re-offend, then great - but what's the chances of this? IMO this is far too great a risk to run, and therefore, and for fear of being boring by repeating myself, I say whip their spuds off and thus remove the desire and temptation.
In my humble opinion ANYONE who abuses a child, sexually, physically or mentally should pay the highest price possible. If a woman is raped it has a devastating effect on not only her but also her whole family. A child is completely unable to cope with these feelings and emotions and will carry the scars FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE also affecting everyone close to them, both at the time and in the future.
Rape is a terrible thing but the rape of a child is worse. I know I would be able to rebuild my life and put it behind me eventually if it happened to me - if it happened to my son not only would he never fully recover but neither would I.
Chemical or physical castration is the ONLY OPTION.
Rape is a terrible thing but the rape of a child is worse. I know I would be able to rebuild my life and put it behind me eventually if it happened to me - if it happened to my son not only would he never fully recover but neither would I.
Chemical or physical castration is the ONLY OPTION.
Sorry to butt in, but chemical or physical castration doesn't work. This has actually been tried in some countries. It stops them raping (obviously) but it doesn't stop them physically abusing - sexually or otherwise. Sexual assualt is usually an expression of power, not of a sexual need (there are of course exceptions). So the power struggle continues after castration - it just manifests itself in the form of increased violence, occasionally even murder.
Just put him in the nick once found guilty and let him suffer for the rest of his life.
Although he would probably do away with himself anyway cos it would be too tough.
I agree with stevie21 - none of this cushie British Jails nonsense - let the country in which the offences have occurred deal with him he will then experience abuse once jailed.
Honestly, the bloodthirsty mob that hides behind their keyboard and yells for murder, torture and castration is simply a sickening disgrace to so called civilised society. I hope anyone who calls for it would have the guts to do it themselves if it came down to it.
Every crime is a failure of society. ding dong without wishing to sound too harsh, you just advocated castration for someone pushing their fingers into the mouth of a child, and I note the later post stating that such measures have been tried and would not work very effectively - does this not tell you something regarding how to react to emotionally evocative crimes? While I do not defend such actions, I would consider you the bigger criminal for such an act.
If we take such unreversible actions, we basically admit these people cannot be helped - and by doing so we acknowledge that our flaws are uncontrollable. Are we then saying that a thief is always a thief, a murderer always a murderer, a drink driver always a drink driver, perhaps even a speeder is always a speeder? In such circumstances surely you could not argue against the revocation, permanently, of said speeders license? After all, they deserve everything, having committed the initial crime.
Every crime is a failure of society. ding dong without wishing to sound too harsh, you just advocated castration for someone pushing their fingers into the mouth of a child, and I note the later post stating that such measures have been tried and would not work very effectively - does this not tell you something regarding how to react to emotionally evocative crimes? While I do not defend such actions, I would consider you the bigger criminal for such an act.
If we take such unreversible actions, we basically admit these people cannot be helped - and by doing so we acknowledge that our flaws are uncontrollable. Are we then saying that a thief is always a thief, a murderer always a murderer, a drink driver always a drink driver, perhaps even a speeder is always a speeder? In such circumstances surely you could not argue against the revocation, permanently, of said speeders license? After all, they deserve everything, having committed the initial crime.
El D
How many times does Gary Glitter have to go to jail in UK for child pornography and untried alleged under age sex with a minor,escape to Cuba and have a little girl living with him until he was rumbled and deported,then going to Cambodia where I believe he had a taste for young boys now on to Vietnam where as we are aware he has been rumbled again.
He deserves to be taken out of the equation and jailed so he is no longer a threat to children.No draconian measures just taken of the streets.He has a severe inherent problem.
Buddy, just to correct a couple of points:
1) in 1999, Glitter was charged with but aquited of molesting Alsion Brown when she was under 16. (were you also aware that she sold her story to the News of the World back in 93 that he was bald and a wig wearer, but then tried taking him to court after the PC world incident took place)
2) After leaving prison he went to Cuba with his girlfriend aged 24 - he moved after a tabloid exposed his whereabouts. He was never deported.
3) In May of 2002, the Cambodian authorities wanted to expel Gary Glitter as it wasn't good for the countries image. They found that they couldn't despite ministers being involved as he had commited no crime. He finally left of his own accord.
4) He returned to Cambodia and he was finally expelled from there at the end of 2002 as he was detained for suspected sex offenses for 2 nights. Funy how a country so keen to crack down on this kind of thing didn't press charegs (if it actually happened of course)
5) As you say, he is now in Vietnam accused of commiting 'lewd acts' with a 12 year old (and conflicting reports about a 18 year old)
So, looking at the facts, he has a conviction for looking at child porngraphy and that is it.
It may be that he is a child molester (and if he is found guilty by a fair trial, then he should be punished accordingly), but there has certainly not been sufficient evidence to date to charge him.
There is certainly no thirst for blood from me - I do not believe in the death penalty or torture - I am merely suggesting, in fact I'm asking, why castration shouldn't be considered an option?
And I really wish people would wake up to the fact that some people cannot be helped: Neilson, Whiting, Brady, Shipman, West, Huntley, Sutcliffe etc etc etc..... These people cannot be helped, and I am fed up with people suggesting that people who commit the most heinous of crimes can and should be given our help. NO they should not.
hmmmm .... just a quick question oneeyedvic and El D IMO you are seeming to condone what these people do .... and also you seem to be blaming society .... I have to admit to being a little bit confused by your views, I mean how the hell is it our fault that perverts like Glitter go and molest and sexually attack children?? Do you feel that we have 'failed' them in some way? If you do think that I would like to just say get your heads sorted and put yourselves in the position where you are responsible for a child, you love that child and some pervert comes along and rapes your child .... is that your fault? Is it society's fault? or is it simply the case that the "person" is a physco who deserves everything he gets? YOUR child ... what would you do? DNA evidence, your child's word, their now completely fuc*ed up life ... what puishment would be fit for someone who did that to YOUR child?
No I am certainly not condonig what he did, and if you read my previous post, you will see that I write "if he is found guilty by a fair trial, then he should be punished accordingly" - I don't see how you can misinterpret this.
What I am pointing out is that people are advocating torturing and killing a person who maybe innocent. I don't know the full facts of this case, and I suspect that you don't either. I live in England and have been brought up with this justice system which presumes innocence until found guilty.
I don't know if he is innocent or not, but I do feel he should have a fair trial - and you can see by my previous post that I do not feel he will have one as 'facts' often get misstated - Buddy beleives everything she wrote (I assume), however it may not actually be true.
I brought up the Spanish age of consent as an interesting point of debate (and I have started a new thread on this)
Latest Posts
News20 mins ago
And Even More Good News From Labour.
News26 mins ago
Brexit Hit To Uk Trade Less Than...
News27 mins ago
