 35873 |
 29819 |
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | GFWiki | Members List | Donate | Arcade | ChocoJournal | Mark Forums Read |
| Welcome to the Gamingforce Interactive Forums. |
|
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).
|
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
 Member 336 Level 19.26 Mar 2006 
|
The whole issue of pedophiles is something that bothers me, as a friend argued with me that they deserve to die, but she does not, because even though she is guilty of crimes, she's not a pedophile. I don't think that anyone NEEDS to die, but if they DO die, I'll be happier. |
Member 336 Level 19.26 Mar 2006
|
Maybe it should be, RR. Then we can up all of the sentences and everyone can end up in jail! |
 Member 7 Level 40.42 Feb 2006
|
Pretty much combining thoughts between:
|
Member 137 Level 34.11 Mar 2006
|
He has no grounds for an appeal--or for sympathy, for that matter.   |
Member 11 Level 53.46 Feb 2006
|
Well hey, let's say he was on 4chan's /b/ and some asshole posts child porn. Guy happens to be from Arizona. Is it fair that he should go to jail b/c some asshole in New Guinea or whatever posts some pictures and a thumnail of it goes into his cash? You go to jail b/c anonymous is a pedo asshole and you happened to live in Arizona? That's fair?
 [ SCHNEE-4 - Karlheinz Fassbinder ] |
Member 336 Level 19.26 Mar 2006
|
When did I say that they do not deserve harsh(er) penalties? I just said that someone doesn't NEED to die solely based on a crime. Before you point out serial killers, serial rapists, and serial pedophiles... I just have to say, SERIAL. It means they're prone to repeat it. As I stated before, (I believe or was it in chat?) there was a house with two sex offenders living together, who had not repeat offended in years (or at all, it was a one time thing), and they both lived together and helped each other out. Some dude got a hold of Sex Registry information, went to their house, and shot them. They were not repeat offenders. I am of the opinion that we have no real rights to say who can live and who can die. I know that doesn't jive well with the current government and the current laws, but that is my belief. I know, I act like and come off like everyone should die, but I do not hold that belief. My friend said that pedophiles need to die as if she was judge, jury, and executioner. They ARE human too. I mean, I'd hate it if someone was like "You did this. You deserve to die." |
Member 7 Level 40.42 Feb 2006
|
Additional Spam: Actually, I was curious, and tried to look at how likely someone is to commit another sexual-based offense.
Also, I imagine that guy that went and killed the two sex offenders could have just looked in court records for a trial involving a sex offender, and used any of the internet lookup services to find out where they were currently living and done the same thing.
Last edited by RacinReaver : Jun 13, 2007 at 08:03 PM.
Reason: This member got a little too post happy.
|
Member 336 Level 19.26 Mar 2006
|
I actually feel bad for the two guys who were killed, since they tried to get on with their lives and tried living a normal life with each others support. |
Member 137 Level 34.11 Mar 2006
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/27/wa...rssnyt&emc=rss He was sentenced for 200 years..... (and he is from Arizona) |
Member 12 Level 35.63 Feb 2006
|
The jury I was on a few years ago convicted a man of child molestation and child pornography. The judge came in after the trial and basically told us that the sentence given to the defendant would probably put him in jail for the rest of his life (he was in his 50s if I remember). I think someone asked which one was the harsher punishment and he said either one would be too big for him to ever get out alive.
|
Member 122 Level 43.54 Mar 2006
|
|
|
Chocobo
Member 1401 Level 12.13 Mar 2006
|
A friend of mine, who works at Fascinations (an adult store in the US), says that, if you steal from the store, you are labeled a sex offender, and can be arrested if you try and enter the store again. (Among other fun things)
I don't know if the law has different levels of severity of sexual offenses, but in society's eyes, they're all labeled the same. I dunno; it's terrifying to think that there's people who were found guilty for these crimes but, at the same time, it doesn't seem fair to group everyone under "child-molester/rapist/socially-indept" or whatever. Just throwing out a questions here, if anyone's able to answer it: are sexual offenses different for every state in the US? 
|
Member 848 Level 30.62 Mar 2006
|
As a counter point, it's also worth noting that rapes frequently go unreported. Recidivism among such sex offenders is probably reported as being a lot lower than it actually is. How much its being underreported, I couldn't say. Still, there's a lingering and unfair sentiment that once you've committed a given crime, you're destined to do it again. On top of that, people have a pretty warped view of what the justice system is for. Rehabilitation is the most ideal goal, but people primarily want revenge. They don't want that pedophile to undergo counseling and learn to control his urges so as to safely re-enter society, they want him to fucking DIE because he's obviously not a human being, just a child-molesting monster. The more I think about it, the more I dislike the whole idea of a sex offender registry. Essentially, it's presuming guilt before it's been proven, fueled by anecdotal superstitions.  |
Member 12 Level 35.63 Feb 2006
|
Well, it's not the therapy system, it's the justice system. Rehabilitation is part of it but, in the case of child sex abusers, you're right at least from my standpoint. I don't give a fuck if these people rehabilitate, I don't ever want them walking the streets again. And if they do walk the streets, I sure as fuck don't want to live next to them if I have children. Rights of people with priors or not, my kids would be the absolute most important thing and I want to know if I have any reason to be more cautious than normal.
|
