Pedophiles - 'Brand' them like the animals they are

reply to post by crazydaisy

Its too bad the laws do not make a difference between say a 17 year old and a 16 year old being together as far as sex offenders are concerned. That's not my problem, I don't make the laws and I see no way to change it.

Dot

Dot

Dot

The laws need to be stricter to hopefully deter this type of crime!

Wow....

You care to reconcile that?

-Edrick (Injustice for All)

I am sorry that I would have to disagree with branding as a form to prevent further victims. There are studies after studies on this topic. Juvenile sex offenders have one of the lowest recidivism rates for sex offenses even compared with normal criminals. Adult sex offender recidivism rates are really low as well, providing the offender is not diagnosed as a pedophile. There is an extreme difference in types of offenses committed by these sexual predators that cannot be lumped into a single category. Simple touching of a child in any form on any part of the body is a sexual offense when the intention was to arouse the child or themselves. Now I might, just might, agree that branding could work on serious violent offenders. Violent sex offenders should never be released, or released when they are so old they no longer pose a significant threat to anyone. However I think violent sex offenders are an entirely different breed than the sick uncle in the family that touches the children inappropriately. Branding the uncle might not be a great idea when the offenses occur within the family unit. Many of the families are better at helping the uncle upon release from prison from ever committing another offense, assuming they do not disown the uncle. Contrary to public belief many sex offenders main support system is their family upon release, and a family that involves themselves in rehabilitation with the sex offender the sex offender will have a higher likely-hood of never offending another person again.

Just my thoughts.

reply to post by silo13


Star and Flag wish I could give more. As a past victim you have my vote on this may I hold the iron. No seriously I cannot add anything more to how you weighted up the pros and cons of various actions. The children need protection and the parents cannot protect their young from the unknowns (unless they are like my mom who knowingly handed me to at least one).... Everything else curbs freedom which we all relish and want to enjoy!

These people have proved that they live outside of society and society needs to see their mark to show who they are to be able to protect our families to prevent more victims.

Silo wish I could give you more flags to a wonderful equitable solution. For those who might think this is unjust wish you could have lived 5 mins under what I had to. I am being merciful by not suggesting an hour!

I’ve been offline - as I said on what, page 7, now for 3 days.
Just got back and skimmed through the replies.
I’ll go back and read in depth but what strikes me right off is how many people who defend pedophiles against having facial disfigurement. Like being beautiful is more important than saving kids from convicted pedophiles. Wow, what a society we live in. I’d laugh if it didn't make me feel seriously ill. puke.

By the way, added note here - I never said to ‘brand them’ without the process being as surgically clean and pain free as possible - but to those of you who thought otherwise, knock yourselves out thinking I’m a sadist. I’d rather be though of as a sadist than a namby-pamby ‘I don’t have the sack to stand up for what’s right’ kind of person.

Why do I think branding is ‘right’?

We’ve all kinds of warnings in life.
From warnings on plastic bags from the dry cleaners, to stucco buckets of calking cement.
But they all say the same thing...
DO NOT LET CHILDREN IN OR AROUND THIS (ITEM) etc.

If there is a convicted child rapist, re-offender, that for whatever reason is going to be let ‘back out’ into society, I just don’t see how this can even be contemplated without the offender having and OUTWARD warning for all the world to see.

What so many people fail to remember is the victim is marked forever.
Oh, you might not see it, but the victim does.
The mark never goes away.
It’s permanent and indelible.

If justice is to be served, yes, the pedophile, the predator, should be marked too. Right out there were everyone can see and be warned.

peace

reply to post by silo13


Silo i'm afraid you haven't read the replies well enough so i'll highlight some rather obvious flaws in your plan.

1. Some people are convicted of paedophilia and then found to be innocent later. These poor people, while rare would be branded like all the rest and sadly a brand would not be reversable. You could try and use surgery and makeup to cover it and in day to day life it wouldn't be seen but hen they are intimate with someone they'll have to explain it. That right there is a big issue. Not to mention the psychological damage that will have occured.

2. It would be easy enough to cover it in daily life and this then means people become complacent. They don't see a brand and so they trust the individual.

So what exactly would branding give us silo? It could be covered up with makeup and so doesn't serve the purpose of protecting children. It seems to me that the only reason to do it is simple vengeance and that's one of the most pathetic things in this world when a society acts out of vengeance.

How about we do something more sensible and just lock them up for the rest of their lives. If they are branded and released they can still abuse children, if you just lock them up until they die then they can't hurt any child ever.

reply to post by OzWeatherman


As I understand it castration only makes sexual attackers more angry and do worse things as a revenge for their lost of sexuality. I have heard many people through the years say this and sort of make sense. My abuse was bad enough I cannot imagine when young being attacked by an angry frustrated abuser who now looks for other activities to satisfy his needs.

reply to post by silo13


You are Absolutely Right.

We SHOULD Brand them...


But Why Stop There?


Why Not Start Branding Pinko Commies?

Or Vegans?

Why not start Branding Homosexuals?

Marxists?

Muslims?

Mormons?

People Who are Left Handed...... people who are too short?

Socialists?

People Who speak out against the Unchecked Growth of the Federal Government Jurisdiction?

If there is a convicted child rapist, re-offender, that for whatever reason is going to be let ‘back out’ into society

No, look... let me help you out here.

Find out WHY they are being let out, and If that is Too Soon....

Whether or not they have had time to be Rehabilitated.

What you REALLY WANT, is like an escalating punishment scale, with time served increasing per infraction. (Double each previous time, or something)

That, at least... would be a Civilized form of punishment.

-Edrick

reply to post by silo13


The rate of re-offending for child molesters is no different that that for other criminals. Why is it that only the ones who harm children should be branded? Why not all rapists, so women know to steer clear from them? Why not con artists so everyone knows what they are capable of? Why not murderers?
This is just one step away from branding EVERY person who goes to jail. Many go to jail wrongfully.

And by the way, making it so someone is completely isolated from society by putting this information on their forehead makes them psychologically more likely to re-offend. They need support from friends and family if they are going to go through the very difficult process of rehabilitation (which only 13% of sexual offenders are given the OPTION to do, by the way. Hard to claim they "can't be rehabilitated" if they've never even been allowed to try)

More people who get arrested for child molestation are NEW offenders than RE-offenders. So tell me how this will protect these children? You tell them "oh honey just stay away from the people with that mark on their face and you will be fine", and then they trust people they shouldn't. It is the PARENT's job to teach children not to trust strangers. And even that will not stop the majority of molestation, as more people are molested by family members than strangers by a LONG shot, and a large majority of those "known" dangers are never reported to the police, never arrested, and therefore never branded.

In short, in any situation that doesn't involve the child being kidnapped or their home being broken into (rare), the parent should have done more. The child goes with some stranger to help find his dog? Parent's fault. If they are not old enough to be taught the dangers of the world, they are not old enough to be allowed outside alone. The molester is a father/uncle/family member? Unless they are the sole guardian, whoever else is taking care of that child should NOTICE the other person taking an abnormally long time in their children's room, with the door closed. Molestation cases are almost never with a single parent or other guardian being the molester as there are very few single dads with children young enough to do that to without them knowing it was wrong and doing something about it, which means there is almost always someone who should have noticed and made it stop.

reply to post by Edrick


Most sexual offenders are given 7 year sentences. A large proportion of child molesters are let out earlier, at 3 years. (good behavior, etc)
However, only 13% of convicted child molesters get the order to include mental health treatment programs.
This is the reason that the rate of re-offending is so high (theoretically. I only have stats on those who re-offend in the first 3 years and had to assume it stayed constant)
Because if you have molested a child, you have mental issues, and mental issues like those do not simply "go away" on their own because you've sat in a grey building for a couple of years. You need actual, professional help to be able to expect them not to re-offend. Those that don't re-offend without psychological help are the very lucky ones. They found the coping mechanisms for their urges on their own, or they had the money to seek help once they got out of jail. Many won't.

reply to post by BiohazardsBack


Sorry but i just disagree. If someone crosses the line of fantasy and engages in reality then they will reoffend when it comes to a crime like paedophilia. While statistics may show that not all of them reoffend i would say that those figures are flawed in two ways.

1. Those figures include men and women who sleep with girls/guys who are say 15 but look and claim they are older, these are not paedophiles but they have the label by law so obviously they won't reoffend because they're not attracted to children.

2. Once caught it is shown that many paedophiles take extra precautions to not get caught again. So instead of viewing the figures as proof that they can control their urges it is probably more accurate to view them as proof that these people become more careful.

Once they touch a child or download images of children that are sexual in nature then these people need to be locked up for life. Maybe in future a genuine fix will come along but keep them locked up until then.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


There are genuine solutions, they are just not in place, they are not being used.
And no, those two points don't really apply, because people whose age is not many years different are not included in those statistics. And once again, for possibly the fourth time in this thread, there is no legal label of Pedophile for those who are child molesters. That takes a psychological exam which shows that most people arrested for child molestation claims are not. Legally they have the label of child molester or sex offender. The law does not have the right to label someone Pedophile, only someone who has a real grasp on what that means can, through tests designed to detect it.

People who download photographs of children that are sexual in nature are not causing a social problem. They do not pay for these photos as that would make it too easy to track, and those who take the photos would do so even if nobody viewed them but themselves. They take the photos for their own desires, and share them as a byproduct, stopping the downloaders would not stop the problem, or even slow it down. Most people these days who collect internet porn have found photos that would be considered illegal. Most teenaged girls have a photo of themselves or themselves and their friends that would be considered illegal, and they can (and have in several cases) be prosecuted for owning child pornography for it. Owning, making copies of, and distributing.

Exile

reply to post by Segador


I agree with the idea for unforgivable crimes. Someone murders someone? Revoke their citizenship, make them find somewhere that will accept them despite it. People say there is a death sentence to stop people from continuing to hurt others, well, send them away, ban them from your country, and see if another country will have pity and them and try to reform them.

But not everyone labeled by law as a child molester is really one. Some 12 year old girls look 18 (or 16 as is the legal age of consent in most states and many other countries), and someone shouldn't be blamed for not knowing that they are not, especially since there is such a thing as fake IDs (making asking them for ID completely useless, as they could just throw it away once they start a lawsuit or report you to the police)
It would need to be more specific in terms of exactly which crimes get such a punishment. You kidnap some kid to do things to them? Sure, send them away if you don't think you have the resources to try to help them better themselves. Better than branding them, for sure, because it has the best of both worlds. They have the option to reform, you have them gone so they are no longer a threat to any of the children in your country. You expose yourself at the mall and a kid happens to see? Noooot really such a big crime. It still can count under the umbrella terms in the law as "molestation" or some other version, exposing children to sexual images for the offender's sexual arousal, etc etc.
The problem is just how many crimes fit under this term. I think it should be amended in some way so that only those purposefully trying to do something sexual with a child get given this term, because so many people are listed in the national database for terms that really don't accurately describe what they have done.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

Silo i'm afraid you haven't read the replies well enough so i'll highlight some rather obvious flaws in your plan.

I haven't read them yet at all, rather gave a glance, which I readily admitted to after being off line for days.
You want to point out your opinion of my flaws then go ahead but starting out by one, not reading my post above and two insulting me doesn't lend for good communication from the get go.

1. Some people are convicted of paedophilia and then found to be innocent later. These poor people, while rare would be branded like all the rest and sadly a brand would not be reversable.

Now you’re the one who hasn’t done you reading.

I stated far back at the being the branding would be applied to hose predators who have been convicted with positive proof, DNA, teeth marks, etc. And for those I could care less about the ‘psychological’ side effects. I’d rather they were exterminated, but, since there’s such an outcry over the death penalty and the number of pedophiles that are released I’ve offered up a solution as many many convicted pedophiles are again released into society and thus allowed to offend again.

2. It would be easy enough to cover it in daily life and this then means people become complacent. They don't see a brand and so they trust the individual.

Well then we’d just have to make sure it wasn’t easy to hide now wouldn’t we. And that it would be a crime to do so.

So what exactly would branding give us silo? It could be covered up with makeup and so doesn't serve the purpose of protecting children. It seems to me that the only reason to do it is simple vengeance and that's one of the most pathetic things in this world when a society acts out of vengeance.

What it would give is an outward symbol of an inward deficiency and thus surely save children.

And no, it has nothing to do with ‘vengeance’ as so many seem to think. But, the simple minded and wishy-washy find it much easier to point a finger and make erroneous character judgments than look at the issue at hand and take a stand for what is right, protecting children.

Oh, and you want to talk about pathetic? LOL
What could be more pathetic than a society that allows convicted pedophiles back into society with NOTHING to warn children and parents of what lies behind their slimy smiles. THAT is pathetic.

How about we do something more sensible and just lock them up for the rest of their lives. If they are branded and released they can still abuse children, if you just lock them up until they die then they can't hurt any child ever.

Unless you see locking them up for life only re-victimizes the victim by making them pay (in taxes) for the care of their abuser.

Regardless, I’m all for it - if they keep them for life and if there is no way for them to ‘get out’ - but - sorry to say too many judges don’t agree with us and because so many are released another step has to be taken towards protecting the unsuspecting parents and children of society.

peace

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

Once they touch a child or download images of children that are sexual in nature then these people need to be locked up for life. Maybe in future a genuine fix will come along but keep them locked up until then.

My compliments. We agree on this one 100 percent.

Thanks for the reply...

And yes, for those who rape pre-pubescent children? I've heard it from their own mouths, over and over again, that no matte how much 'treatment' they get they would never want to be allowed to be in the presence of a child again as they would rape again.

peace

reply to post by silo13


How exactly is it that so many people who have hate towards people with a specific mental problem know so VERY many of them that they have learnt the inner workings of their minds and been given a confession that would only be given to a psychologist, who would in fact know that there are severe consequences to this plan, which would create more re-offending molesters than there are already.

So please, tell us all how you have spoken about their sexual urges with these people?
What position are you in that gives you so much experience with them?

reply to post by BiohazardsBack

How exactly is it that so many people who have hate towards people with a specific mental problem know so VERY many of them that they have learnt the inner workings of their minds and been given a confession that would only be given to a psychologist, who would in fact know that there are severe consequences to this plan, which would create more re-offending molesters than there are already.

'So many people'? 'Hate'? What are you going on about?

Look, if you want to accuse me of something, have at it, but at least have the sack to come right out and say it instead of generalizing.
Oh, but before you do, I suggest you also leave presuming behind.
I do not 'hate' these people, I am merely trying to stop them - Something most here on this thread, (or it would seem,) care so little of in lue of attacking the OP, me.

Look, you can say and think and try all you want to cast me in the light of a hater, a liar, a sadist, etc, but in trying these cheap tactics you forget yourself. And you forget the CHILD RAPISTS are on trial here, not me.

As for 'confessions that would only be given to a psychologist?’
Are you really that naive?
Have you heard of journalists? Non-Fiction Writers?
I've stated before in this thread exactly when and where I got the information I've quoted. If you care to look for it, instead of pointing a finger and acting like a child demanding 'You better tell me right now!' you might find it.

FACTS are:

The majority of pedophiles have abused between 250-350 children on average.

The majority of child rapists/molesters report they were molested s a child.

So look at those numbers and tell me this problem is going to do anything but increase year after year?

NOTHING is ‘working’ to STOP these crimes. Not the judicial system as the FACTS so prove.

Approximately 24% of those offenders confined for rape and 19% of those imprisoned for sexual assault had been on parole or probation at the time of the crime.

Of those released sex offenders who were accused of another sex crime, 40% were arrested for the new offense with a year after their release.

source

So, call me sadist, question my sources, do whatever it is that scares the boogie-man back under the bed for you, I couldn't care less. And far be it from me to encourage you or anyone else on this thread to use the time and effort and energy you spend attacking me, to finding a way to HELP THE INNOCENT CHILDREN.

peace

reply to post by Segador
Yeah,open up a useless tract of scrubland to send them to.

I believe this has been done to marginalized peoples before.

Marginalizing anyone denies them redemption.

Branding marginalizes a person,and the brand would quickly identify that person as a...whatever...

A lot of you should brand yourselves as "notparticularlyintelligent",NPI....

"NPI",right across your forehead,so I can avoid you.

reply to post by Brood
Yes,most american's are sociopaths,so many in fact that it has become the.......

"Societal Norm"

Nearly everyone I talk to seems to be crazy to at least a degree.

..............................

That's why you are no longer free,none of you......

You don't deserve to be.

I can see the real problems with this society.

I can't seem to get anyone to see things for what they are.

I give up.