Paedoplilia

[LJP07]

I want to emerge a topic that has had much debate here and all over the media currently. But I want people to first express your opinion to the following question:

If you have a paedophile and he commits his actions towards children 7 times and gets caught, what action should the US courts give?

I'm not going to give my opinion yet until I get a few responses to this question to see what the general idea of what the punishment should be.
Feel free to express your comments.

I'll express my thoughts after a few responses.

[Eclogite]

Originally Posted by Prolu2007

I'll express my thoughts after a few responses.

I believe your poll alternatives have already made your thoughts clear.

I find it impossible, on the basis of the scenario you have postulated, to conclude what would be the correct punitive, deterrent, or prohibitive action. Relevant information that appears lacking in your scenario:
1) Age of the paedophile
2) Mental age of the paedophile
3) Mental condition of the paedophile
4) Nature of the 'attacks'. (e.g. deliberate public exposure of the genitalia could be considered an attack.).
5) Are the seven attacks on the same subject?
6) What is the time spread of the seven attacks?

Without clarification of these points one is left with appropriate actions that vary between an admonition to "stop getting drunk and exposing yourself at your upstairs window to the neighbour's children", to lifelong incarceration in a penal or mental institute.

I am also not clear whether you are truly meaning this to relate to paedophiles, or to child molesters. Remember that not all child molesters are paedophiles and not all paedophiles are child molesters. I suspect that you intended this to relate to child molesters, in which case I would lean to a very lengthy prison sentence.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by Prolu2007

If you have a paedophile and he commits his actions towards children 7 times and gets caught, what action should the US courts give?

I answered “other”, because, apparently like Eclogite, I don’t have a sufficiently precise definition of “actions” and “children” as they are used in the question.

I don’t require a definition of “paedophile”, and feel it can be replaced in the question with “person”. I consider the emotional or sexual characteristics and state of the person committing an action to be of little, the action itself to be of great, consequence. For example, I consider a person with no sexual attraction toward children injuring or killing a child (or an adult), other than in self-defense, to be guilty of a crime, while I consider a person who engages in fantasies of sex with even very young children, but does not act on them, to be guiltless.

[LJP07]

Well, I wanted to express my opinion that Paedophiles that do commit these horrific crimes are tested and proved to be all " mentally ill " so to speak. I agree that the person should be given a lengthy prison sentence before like Eclogite because it's the most moral for two reasons:

1. If he's mental then he won't be exposed to the environment where his condition will allow him to attack another child.
2. We don't kill him as that's not moral.

I know from a recent poll that many people wouldn't care about the mental condition and would want them killed. I refer to the following specifications:

Age : 50.
Mental State : Proved to be mental.
Nature of attack : Taking a child under 5 at night from family and abusing him.
Same subject for all seven : Yes.
Time Spread : 20 years.

Many people have expressed their opinions and I think for these people and for all other convicts of mentally proved crimes should not be killed and if people here agree with that then they must agree with getting rid of the death sentence.

I would like to know if anyone would want them killed like America for these crimes?

[HydrogenBond]

Paedophilia is a complicated subject because of the wide range of things that are included in the definition. For example, if there is a knock-out gorgoeous female teacher 21, playing with her male students, who are 14-15, most young guys would give her a medal. Almost all male students have had a crush on a pretty female teacher. If the opportunity for free sex-ed had presented itself to them, they be thanking God.

On the other hand, if we have a genuine preditor who is attacking children using physical assault, piece-meal neutering would be an appropriate penalty. Maybe they could lose one nut every three times. At number seven we perfom a chopadickoffome.

[LJP07]

Yes, actually a Castration process would be a good start because of obvios reasons. But then like I said above Hydrogen Bond they deserve life imprisonment and mental care to at least relieve some of the symptoms if not all but an account from an actual paedophile:

" We are never cured of this condition. We may get generous help, but at times we urge ourselves on when we feel what we have to do is right "

Quite a sick response, that certainly stirred the audiences stomachs into oblivion. Based on this, maybe we cannot help these people indefinitiely and maybe just let them in prison for life. Sad really considering that if most of them weren't abused as a child, they may have grown up to help the world they live in instead of destroying it for one's mother.