News2 mins ago
About time ?
After the abduction of that poor little girl in Portugal. Is it not time that we should adopt a complete zero tolerance on animals that prey on kids. I know it is not a foregone conclusion that it is indeed a nonce responsible, but i sadly feel it is but a matter of time until it is the case. I wish that we could bring back hanging for these b##tards. Kids should be safe all of the time. Parents should not have to worry about deviants . (Footnote) Please do not post comments regarding "why did the parents leave her there ?" as i am sure they will live with that for the rest of their lives.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Neilzulu1. 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.
neilzulu - I am not sure what the point of your 'acid test' is as if i say no you will call me a liar and if I say yes then I wouldn't have meant anything I have said.
I would hope that the person responsible would be sent to prison and treated there for any mental problems that they may or may not have. if he was a low / medium risk and the treating psychiatrist thought there was very little chance of reoffending, then yes, I would be happy for them to be released.
If he was classed as a high risk then I would look for life time incarceration / death penalty as I originally stated
So now my question for you:
In the case of a brother molesting his sister (lets say ages 14 for the boy and 13 for the girl) would you want the "I wish that we could bring back hanging for these b##tards."
Would you want him to be killed / life imprisoned - Or would you want the boy (and his sister) to have counselling etc.
You are the one calling for a Zero Tolerance approach - regardless of any cases.
I am simply saying that yes, in some cases your approach is correct, however, there are a lot of times when death / lifetime incarceration is simply not appropriate
I would hope that the person responsible would be sent to prison and treated there for any mental problems that they may or may not have. if he was a low / medium risk and the treating psychiatrist thought there was very little chance of reoffending, then yes, I would be happy for them to be released.
If he was classed as a high risk then I would look for life time incarceration / death penalty as I originally stated
So now my question for you:
In the case of a brother molesting his sister (lets say ages 14 for the boy and 13 for the girl) would you want the "I wish that we could bring back hanging for these b##tards."
Would you want him to be killed / life imprisoned - Or would you want the boy (and his sister) to have counselling etc.
You are the one calling for a Zero Tolerance approach - regardless of any cases.
I am simply saying that yes, in some cases your approach is correct, however, there are a lot of times when death / lifetime incarceration is simply not appropriate
I believe that boy should be locked up and NOT released as his tendencies are for sexual gratification. These people can not be helped as you put it. I do not wish to argue with you Vic, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. We can not continue to put up with the constant stories of children getting abducted or raped. Of course i can see your point, but zero tolerance could involve life meaning life, not hanging. But you know which one i would prefer, how can they deem someone safe to let out as while they are in prison, they have no kids around them to test their twisted sex drive.
Vic
I�m very confused about your views. So let me put this scenario to you.
Your grandchild has been a victim of child abuse (god forbid) by a registered sex offender who lives opposite you grandchild. Due to the lack of evidence on this occasion he is released despite his previous convictions, which also means he is free to move back home opposite his victim. He has also in the past been evaluated as a low to medium risk by the required �experts�.
My questions are, how would you feel, do you think this he deserves any rights in this instance?
Also I�m very familiar with the New Scientist I receive every issue, due to the fact I�m a scientist at the UK largest Medical Research Institute, granted not an neurologist but I�m certainly no stranger to this field. I also on occasion disagree with fellow colleagues research or theories
As to what do I suggest happens to an abused child? Treat them as the victim, which is exactly what they are and with the right help they will not become the abuser.
As to your scenario with the brother and sister. The sister is the victim and deserves the counselling. The brother is older enough to know what he is doing and deserves punishment. You have to think what would make a 14 year boy sexually abuse his own sister, not sure I care about the why�s/how�s, just that he never has the opportunity to do it again. Or would you prefer he receives the counselling and then still goes on to rape a child, would you like to make the judgement call and take responsibility?.
I�m very confused about your views. So let me put this scenario to you.
Your grandchild has been a victim of child abuse (god forbid) by a registered sex offender who lives opposite you grandchild. Due to the lack of evidence on this occasion he is released despite his previous convictions, which also means he is free to move back home opposite his victim. He has also in the past been evaluated as a low to medium risk by the required �experts�.
My questions are, how would you feel, do you think this he deserves any rights in this instance?
Also I�m very familiar with the New Scientist I receive every issue, due to the fact I�m a scientist at the UK largest Medical Research Institute, granted not an neurologist but I�m certainly no stranger to this field. I also on occasion disagree with fellow colleagues research or theories
As to what do I suggest happens to an abused child? Treat them as the victim, which is exactly what they are and with the right help they will not become the abuser.
As to your scenario with the brother and sister. The sister is the victim and deserves the counselling. The brother is older enough to know what he is doing and deserves punishment. You have to think what would make a 14 year boy sexually abuse his own sister, not sure I care about the why�s/how�s, just that he never has the opportunity to do it again. Or would you prefer he receives the counselling and then still goes on to rape a child, would you like to make the judgement call and take responsibility?.
pilchard In your scenario I would of course be absolutely livid and probably be crying out for his blood but I would not be the right person to consult. Sentences are given out by the judiciary as they are impartial as oppose to the victim or the victim's family.
You (and I) can come up with several thousand scenarios to suit are argument - the difference is - I am calling for each scenario to be taken on its own merits - you (or should I say the original poster) are asking for all of them to be treated in exactly the same way.
So you think a 14 year old should be locked up for life with no regard for why he abused his sister, whether he was abused himself or whatever? Fair enough, your opinion.
I am glad you are aware of the New Scientist article. The reference was not for your benefit but the OPs. The point is that Neilzulu1 kept asking for proof so I showed them some. I was (and still am) curious as to his qualifications to think it is all rubbish (and some counter research would be nice to see).
I keep going back to the fact that I do agree that sometimes there should be lifetime incarceration - but there are other times when this is not right.
Someone who kidnaps, rapes and tortures a 3 year old girl should not be treated in the same way as a 17 year old man who has a one night stand with a 15 year old girl. This is what Zero Tolerance means.
To take it off an emotive scenario, let compare it to theft. Someone who steals thousands of pounds to buy fancy cars should (imho) not be treated the same as someone who steals bread to fee their family.
You (and I) can come up with several thousand scenarios to suit are argument - the difference is - I am calling for each scenario to be taken on its own merits - you (or should I say the original poster) are asking for all of them to be treated in exactly the same way.
So you think a 14 year old should be locked up for life with no regard for why he abused his sister, whether he was abused himself or whatever? Fair enough, your opinion.
I am glad you are aware of the New Scientist article. The reference was not for your benefit but the OPs. The point is that Neilzulu1 kept asking for proof so I showed them some. I was (and still am) curious as to his qualifications to think it is all rubbish (and some counter research would be nice to see).
I keep going back to the fact that I do agree that sometimes there should be lifetime incarceration - but there are other times when this is not right.
Someone who kidnaps, rapes and tortures a 3 year old girl should not be treated in the same way as a 17 year old man who has a one night stand with a 15 year old girl. This is what Zero Tolerance means.
To take it off an emotive scenario, let compare it to theft. Someone who steals thousands of pounds to buy fancy cars should (imho) not be treated the same as someone who steals bread to fee their family.
What Oneeyedvic is saying is that the world is not all black & white. What is right for some isn't right for all...of course lots of different scenarios have to be explored in order to come to a conclusion.
He makes his point very clear ~ this is the reason why we have different sentences for manslaughter & murder..not every case is the same, therefore sentencing must follow suit.
One comment in this thread stressed that we must rid the streets of anyone who is a threat to a child. This is why women with postnatal depression were mentioned.
He makes his point very clear ~ this is the reason why we have different sentences for manslaughter & murder..not every case is the same, therefore sentencing must follow suit.
One comment in this thread stressed that we must rid the streets of anyone who is a threat to a child. This is why women with postnatal depression were mentioned.
I would like to add that a mother suffering from post natal depression is more likely to hurt themselves than their child. Any woman who has suffered this condition would be horrified by the constant comparsion. Medication is also successful in treating PND, i've yet to read proven evidence it helps a sex offender.
I remember reading about this case at the time:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7338/6 34
I also worked with a woman who demanded help after suffering 'murderous thoughts' towards her baby. She was admitted into psychiatric care, and after a visit from her husband and baby she ran into a plate glass window, killing herself. She had been on medication which obviously didn't help her at all.
Exteme I know, but it does happen.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7338/6 34
I also worked with a woman who demanded help after suffering 'murderous thoughts' towards her baby. She was admitted into psychiatric care, and after a visit from her husband and baby she ran into a plate glass window, killing herself. She had been on medication which obviously didn't help her at all.
Exteme I know, but it does happen.
As oppoed to realising that an inncent person had been execute by mistake?
Or how about the parent of the victim being executed? Do you really think that will help the situation?
The fact is tht the government need to take this issue by the hornsand make some really tough deisions about reforming the penal system, the judicial system, and removing some human rights fom people.
Only then can we know that life really does mean life and that the perpetrators of these terrible crimes are contibuting to society fromthe inside of a cell, insteadof draining the state.
Or how about the parent of the victim being executed? Do you really think that will help the situation?
The fact is tht the government need to take this issue by the hornsand make some really tough deisions about reforming the penal system, the judicial system, and removing some human rights fom people.
Only then can we know that life really does mean life and that the perpetrators of these terrible crimes are contibuting to society fromthe inside of a cell, insteadof draining the state.
Latest Posts
Crosswords3 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
Society & Culture11 mins ago
Crosswords13 mins ago
We’re Doomed Under A Labour...
News23 mins ago