It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


A quarter of adults to face 'anti-paedophile' tests (UK)

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 11:09 PM
Holy cow. Its turned into a witch hunt. This is the modern day witch hunt.

posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 11:59 PM

Originally posted by MCoG1980
I see your point, it gets messy doesn't it, if this as you say is not a reliable method then what method is there. observation and education probably, but again, people will get paranoid - catch 22 situation. Its a sad fact, that people who you may think are trrustworthy and normal can be wolves in sheeps clothing. I feel for all those children who innocence and mental state are stolen forever by one persons selfish need to satisfy his lust.

The only fair thing to do is a background investigation. I have a friend, 20 years military with me and he been single all his life. I know him well, and a few years ago he was turned down as a Big Brother, and it really bothered him. He was interviewed and the interviewer decided “he wasn’t a good choice”. Well there is one lonely kid in this world because of that.

I have two young boys of my own, and for a few years I coached basketball. I never had a problem, but there were times I gave a hug to a crying child, pat them on the back, or got down close to their level to talk to them (I’m 6’6”). Even with their parents there it was still uncomfortable how far we have come in our PC of everything.

I just hate how all are a suspect because of the few, but that is how life is today. I just hope we do not get to the point that a personally test or probes determined if you are guilty or not.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:22 AM
The biggest threat to kids is drunk drivers and speeders on the highways but the brits, like the yanks, don't give a damn about kids killed and maimed by criminal drivers.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:25 AM
reply to post by stumason

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither freedom or safety.”

These things aren't "required" to keep children safe. The reason government even bothers with all this bureaucratic nonsense is, and contrary to what you may believe about people actually giving a damn, is the very solemn fact that parents today are not passing down the values that they themselves received (or rather neglected) when they were children. This is a cause for concern. Many parents today are just not psychologically equipped to raise children. This is what happens when people become irresponsible. Increasing burdens on society itself forces the government to make their own attempt at correcting common social problems, and this will largely come at the expense of those responsible few remaining.

Your attitude that this is the only way to protect our children, through the submission of our most inalienable rights to privacy, is symptomatic of our very age, a result of the dilapidation of conservative family values, of the dereliction of traditional social norms, and the abandonment of age-old cultural modes. As a part of this massive trend to urbanization, people just aren't psychologically equipped to deal with the artificial lifestyle such city life demands, what with the dissolution of the extended family (and the support network it provides), as well as the massive population densities of large cities, whose inhabitants are rarely closely related...

We need new social institutions to protect our children when it comes to high density urban environments with limited family support. This shouldn't be achieved through laws, which sacrifice our most important privacy rights, cultivated out of the Age of Enlightenment and the Democratic revolutions of the past few centuries. There are better ways. I'm certain key goals can be achieved with the use of not-for-profit organizations whose mission is the dissemination of advocacy information through all media sources and and through lobbying initiatives started by concerned citizens. Prison sentences can be more severe for those who offend.

We should NOT get into the attitude that these people will commit the crimes no matter what the severity of the sentence is. That's ridiculous. No one wants to go to jail forever. If they commit a crime, punish them severely and without remorse, with no opportunity for parole or lenience upon "good behavior". Capital punishment could be a suitable option as well. But it's not like we need to be monitoring every adult individual in the entire country so as to "prevent" crime. That is not the job of the judicial system. All it should do is defined crimes and assign punishments accordingly. Otherwise, they are inclined to overextend the purview of their powers. When the privacy of the citizenry is violated, they have broken the limit of their power. They must be kept in place.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by cognoscente]

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:36 AM

omgomgomg We better strap mind reading chips into EVERYONE'S brain because we assume some kid somewhere might get hurt if we don't know what everyone is thinking!!

Btw, if we are going to test for child molesters, we might as well test for people who get turned on at animal porn, murder scenes in movies, etc.

Hell, I have a better idea. To make sure some random 'child' somewhere in the world doesn't get hurt we should keep all adults in cages, and then let the government selectively breed us. Kinda like a puppy mill, but for all of us instead.
Then only the government has access to kids, and nobody will ever get hurt or molested or killed or drunk again.

Fixes all problems.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 01:20 AM
In Other News...

The Catholic Church and United Nations have announced the planned withdrawal of all personnel from the United Kingdom.

Levity aside, the issue is a sensitive one because kids do need to be protected from sexual predators, but it's far too easy to go overboard and end up doing more harm than good.

That's the premise of the article which, I think it's important to bear in mind, is from June 2008.

All the talk of "tests" is somewhat misleading, since the the author of the article went on to explain that what's actually being conducted are criminal background checks. That seems to have resulted in misunderstandings on the part of some members.

Of greater concern than the "tests" is an atmosphere of paranoia which hurts both adults and children alike.

I don't think anyone is arguing that children shouldn't be protected, nor that there aren't reasonable measures that can and should be taken. Putting children in a "lock box" and turning all contact with adults into Kafkaesque ordeals, however, is not the answer.

Far and away the most important thing next to responsible supervision is to teach children their rights, and make sure they know they can talk to someone they trust when they are in any way concerned about an adult's behavior. They don't need to be terrorized, just educated and listened to.

Meanwhile, adults must be sensitive to concerns about safety and ensure that their behavior toward children is appropriate and sensible.

By nature, paranoia is not rational, so until it dies down, we can expect more trouble from it. On the other hand, the problem of sexual abuse of children hasn't received enough attention until recently, either.

Far too many children have suffered for far too long to ever sweep it under the rug again.

So yes, some of the measures being used to protect children from sexual predators can be irritating or downright discouraging.

But in the end, I still think it's better than the alternative.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 03:26 AM
reply to post by MCoG1980
well said ,i better not say to much or i will get banned but ,i will say this. i have been on many forums and i think that they are contact media for paedophiles . ban me if you want to .

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 04:40 AM
Paedophilia is more likely to happen in the home than by a teacher, scout master or any such activities. Paedophilia is like rape, the victim often knows the perp. Unlike rape, paedophiles select and groom their victims. The selection is based on their ability to manipulate the child and the level of attention offered to the child by its parents and relations. Paedos avoid precocious and articulate children who would scream blue murder if these freaks come near them.

Children must be empowered to have boundaries, taught how not to be manipulated and brought up to discuss with their parents what they have in mind. Shy and introverted walk around with a big target on their head and should protected.

Experts and professional know this but do nothing, yet the state puts all people under suspicion, grows data bases and encourages paranoia. As citizens we are all being held to account by the state at an increasing rate for matters we are not even responsible for while the accountabilities of the authorities are diminishing rapidly.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 07:49 AM
reply to post by C.C.Benjamin

yes jim royle . in prison people from the outside can pay using drugs
to have you labeled a nonce ,you can have your head kicked in by the whole prison . if you burgle the wrong property or beat up the wrong person etc. people can have that done out of prison as well ,money talks.and is the root of all evil

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 07:54 AM
reply to post by LostNemesis

i like your signature- if the world realy is against you its usualy for a good reason. yes drug abused children that kill .

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 08:14 AM
As i do voluntary work sometimes, i have to have a CRB check but the last one i had was for working with ex offenders, drug addicts and the homeless all aged above sixteen.
The irony of it was that the person who ran the group had shot someone a few years before. And they wanted ME checked out.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in