posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:07 PM
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Thanks for replying.
So far it's 1 parent for and 1 against.
Here is the reality Slayer this does not protect Children it endangers them further. Many more pedophiles are now opting to kill their victims rather
than risk life long sexual offender status and three strikes and you’re out laws by allowing their victims to live.
Retribution doesn't protect a child already harmed. It's too late for that.
The form of retribution chosen though can in fact imperil a future victim whose parents or an institution failed to protect.
The only thing retribution protects are irresponsible adults not wanting to put real intellectual thought into laws that protect children by holding
the people who endangered them responsible for it as well instead of just the people who victimized them responsible for it.
As a parent I have made it my business to keep track of my children and restrict their freedom to place them selves in endangering situations.
That's protecting a child, not brutally murdering the person who already victimized an unprotected child.
As a parent my responsibility is to protect my children and I surely do!
If one my children were to be raped I would consider myself as much as fault as the person who did it, because I failed to protect them in my
responsibility as a parent.
Are people in their rush to exercise retribution and blood lust protecting children or are they protecting their own conscious in regards to not
better protecting children by acting out revenge.
The statistics of the new laws already point to a disturbing trend in child predators killing their victims to eliminate them as witnesses against
Explain to me how that protects Children as I surely would like to know.
Mine is not the heart that is bleeding, mine is the head that is thinking and asking the tough questions not the feel good solutions.
[edit on 3/11/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]