Pedophiles - 'Brand' them like the animals they are

Considering the predatory nature of this & in the case of indisputable guilt, why would it be unjust to disappear them & then, dispose of them properly? That is exactly the way they operate. Wouldn't this eliminate the risk of future victims being killed because of the potential punishment? In fact, it would eliminate the risk of future victims, ever.
+ 2 or 3 that someone who did this to my child would never make it to court.

I'll probably get kicked out for this but they should do them like they did the Nazi in Inglorious Bastards!!

After reading this thread I've been trying very hard to understand the mentality of a paedophile, what drives them towards this sort of, i guess obsession?

Is it something they missed out on in their childhood and wish to go back and relive life as a child, but are trapped in an adult body who has lost the innocence so approaches it in a different way?

or just getting a thrill of doing something illegal?

I can't seem to pinpoint it

Originally posted by TheNewKid
After reading this thread I've been trying very hard to understand the mentality of a paedophile, what drives them towards this sort of, i guess obsession?

Is it something they missed out on in their childhood and wish to go back and relive life as a child, but are trapped in an adult body who has lost the innocence so approaches it in a different way?

or just getting a thrill of doing something illegal?

I can't seem to pinpoint it

edit on 6-10-2010 by TheNewKid because: (no reason given)

I think its the same mechanisms at work that make people gay or make people straight.

Some people are into bondage, some people are into sado-masochism, some people are into scat, and lord knows what else.

It is not something that has a root cause that can be pin-pointed and addressed.

The key thing here is punishing aggression and coercion.

What people do voluntarily between themselves is none of the State's business - it is only when coercive force is used that an outside agency should step in to remedy the situation.

I think there is something in the constitution about "cruel and unusual punishment".

How about we just stick to due process of law with juried trials and the evaluation of evidence?
This is something you *don't* want to be wrong about, because today - sex is a weapon, warranted or not.

Ever wonder why our politicians do the damnedest things? Maybe they have been blackmailed?
Better yet, forget maybe - I know they have been.

You say we can't band their books etc because it sets a rprecedent for other books to be banned. But branding would have just as much effect.

If you brand a paedophile do you brand a rapist, a murderer, a thief? Where is the line drawn...and how long would it be before that line was pushed back further?

It also opens up the posibility forattacks on people, any brand could be easily replicated and placed upon someone who is not a paedophile for a number of reasons...branding an innocent member of the public to get into a gang for instance.

And of course, looking at it purely from a technical point of view there are many different 'types' of paedophile. Here in England I am 18 and my girlfriend is 16, all fine and well, but in certain parts of America I would be considered a paedophile. In Canada I belived the age limit is a mere 14 years, I remember reading it is common for a 19 year old and 14 year old to be going out...but in every part of America that would make them a paedophile. Despite how you feel about those situations I am sure you can all agree neither is as bad as a person who commits sexual acts to a three year old.
Branding wouldn't show any difference. 1 Day is all there is between perfectly legal and 'yoyur a dirty paedo'.

reply to post by silo13


except that might violate our small constitutional right of no " excessive or unusual punishment"

Your sick for considering branding people. That's not better than what these pedophiles do.

I think were supposed to set and uphold the bar, not lower it.

reply to post by mnemeth1


I'm okay with this...

Walter block convinced me a few years ago that this would work.

Making the pedophile a slave of the state and then charging the victim for his keep is doubly-victimizing the victim. Creating circumstances where the labour of the slave benefited his rape victim is a better way.

Plus, the child rapist will probably be safer under those circumstances than amongst the general population of inmates.

"He's my butler!"

-Seinfeld.

reply to post by ATS4dummies

I think there is something in the constitution about "cruel and unusual punishment".

Interesting that coming from a land where if you're a suspected 'terrorist' - all your rights are null and void.
You can be kept, indefinitely.
You've no right to representation.
In other words - POOF - there goes your Constitution.

BUT - if you're a CONVICTED pedophile.
Convicted.
Convicted of committing acts of terror against a child. An innocent.
Convicted of crimes against the humanity's children and all at once everyone's worried about upholding the Constitution and anything cruel and unusual.
ROTFL - 'cruel and unusual.'
What could be more 'cruel an unusual' than rapping a 2 year old to death?

peace

reply to post by VonDoomen

except that might violate our small constitutional right of no " excessive or unusual punishment"

Your sick for considering branding people. That's not better than what these pedophiles do.

See the reply above.

As for me being 'sick' like a pedophile? Well well well, I was wondering when some genius was going to trot out that old tired line. And that you can equate someone who is trying to defend children to their predators? Well, ya don't need me to say it that by your own words you're a shining example of someone who hasn't one clue. Not a one.

But, if 'sick' means I'm SICK and tired of hearing in the news these animals re-offend?
Then I guess you're right.

If 'sick means I'm SICK and disgusted of children being left unprotected with no clue who the predators are, then yes, I'm sick.

And if me being 'sick' means I'm SICK and horrified in a country where a President can with one word strip a citizen of all his/her rights, but that one word is not used against a pedophile? Then yeah, I guess that makes me sick. And very proudly so.

Like I've stated, IMO these 'people' should be wiped off the face of the earth. Period.
But no one has the sack to do that, oh you faint and bleeding hearts.

So until someone comes up with something else to break the status quo of allowing pedophiles CONVICTED pedophiles to re-offend?

BRAND THEM.

peace

reply to post by silo13


Well , according to this Story , the EU thinks it's Normal ! ...........God Help Us All !


www.prisonplanet.com...

reply to post by Exuberant1

Making the pedophile a slave of the state and then charging the victim for his keep is doubly-victimizing the victim. Creating circumstances where the labour of the slave benefited his rape victim is a better way.

Great point, well taken. Thank you.

Why not put them to hard physical labor? Let someone get some benefit out of their existence. Or as others have suggested lend them to 'science' - though honestly I wouldn't want to see that happen. Not because it's 'cruel and unusual' but IMO it would make these people into some twisted martyrs - the very last thing we need.

peace

They can wreck a whole life. Or more. I say don't let 'em. Brand 'em and make 'em register as the scum they are. They should wear a visible sign identifying them when they're out in public. Better yet, keep 'em penned in like the animals they are; don't think there's a pill to cure 'em so lock 'em up.

Originally posted by seagull
In theory? Great idea.

In reality? Not so much. Here's why (feel free to prove me wrong though...not a big fan of pedos...).

More of the victims would be murdered by the animals. Or so it would seem to me, especially by the unbranded ones...because they'd be facing that stigma, once they served their time.

Pedos function best, obviously, when they're camouflaged by society. That brand would take away that camouflage...so to avoid that, they remove the victim from the equation.

The laws should be changed to a death sentence upon conviction, and the usual appeals process.

That's my thought anyway.

That right there to me is so true. The impact would do more harm than good to the child in the hands of these predators.

Being branded is the wrong type of deterrent.

But the OP says kill them. Now again this is open to questions from many angles.

I don't see why LIFE in prison should not be used for sexual Crimes against children. Maybe throw in some hard labor like they had in the early 1900's. (whoops, Human Rights, I forgot)

Are you talking about having Sex with a Legal Minor, or with a Pre-Pubescent Child?


Because the Two are not Equivalent.


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a98e7c59c916.png[/atsimg]
en.wikipedia.org...

-Edrick

Pedophiles are adults who molest children. Who could be for that?? Seriously....

reply to post by queenofsheba

Pedophiles are adults who molest children. Who could be for that?? Seriously....

We are talking about *LEGAL* classifications, not subjective ones.


At What Age does a Child become an ADULT, LEGALLY?


We must set CONCRETE VERIFIABLE limits for LAWS to interact with.



What about a 19 year old, that is having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend?


Is that pedophilia?


No.... it is not.




How about a 42 year old man, having sex with a 16 year old girl.... is *THAT* pedophilia?



No, it is not.


Pedophilia is sex with a PRE-PUBESCENT child.


Meaning a child that has not reached PUBERTY.




So, again.... what is your definition of a Child?


What Age would that Be?


Or are we going by "Puberty"?

-Edrick

Oh I know, instead of branding them, put an RFID chip in them with GPS, that way they can be tracked at all times!

Then we can go after murderers, rapists, speeders, jaywalkers, children, immigrants, women, men. YAY NWO Conditioning!

reply to post by Edrick


A pedophile is an adult who is sexually attracted to a child. A minor child is under the age of 18 in most states. I think the thread is about pedophiles who by definition are predators of minor children. You really want to defend them? Have fun with all that....

reply to post by whatukno


SUPER Great Idea!


If only we had some sort of CHEMICAL that would cause girls to sexually mature FASTER than they normally Would.........

Since 1994 there have been six publications that link fluoride exposure to direct adverse effects on the brain. Two epidemiology studies from China indicate depression of I.Q. in children (11,12). Another paper (3) shows a link between prenatal exposure of animals to fluoride and subsequent birth of off-spring which are hyperactive throughout life. A 1998 paper shows brain and kidney damage in animals given the "optimal" dosage of fluoride, viz. one part per million (13). And another (14) shows decreased levels of a key substance in the brain that may explain the results in the other paper from that journal. Another publication (5) links fluoride dosing to adverse effects on the brain's pineal gland and pre-mature onset of sexual maturity in animals. Earlier onset of menstruation of girls in fluoridated Newburg, New York has also been reported (6).

www.nteu280.org...

It would be a Great Prelude to Criminalizing Sex ALTOGETHER!

YAY!!

-Edrick