Pedophiles and the Death Penalty

[Lucylu]

How can a person be a "known pedophile" if they have not made it known by actions?

A person who has been convicted for possessing indecent images of children but has never been convicted of committing child sexual abuse, for example.

[Spiral Out]

Excellent example Lucylu.

They might also confide in someone of their attractions to children and then that person might tell other people who then might tell more people.

Would you feel comfortable leaving your child alone in the care of a known pedophile, even if they had never acted on their deviant desires? Why or why not?

Do you have any other comments to the numerous facts I've provided about pedophiles and their traits, behaviors and physiology?

[Teralek]

Both are contrary to social norms, both are destructive, both are against common Human decency, both are barbaric in their fundamental intents, the victims of both crimes cannot give proper refusal of the act, etc.

Adult rape; Engaging in warfare; child circumcision...:

- contrary to social norms - check

- destructive - check

- against common Human decency - check

- barbaric in their fundamental intents - check

- victims of crimes cannot give proper refusal of the act - check

- Etc - check

No, no, no. I will not see Europe drawn back to America v.2.

Do I get super duper annoyed with hypocrisy? check

I'm yet to see any argument in favour of the death penalty that makes the slightest lick of sense.

Amen!

1. It's a heavy burden on tax payer's finances to clothe, house, feed and (attempt to) rehabilitate the criminally untreatable.

2. It's a heavy burden on state resources to clothe, house, feed and (attempt to) rehabilitate the criminally untreatable.

3. It's a positive and effective form of ongoing protection for society at large.

4. It's a greater deterrent for those predisposed to such crimes.

5. It serves to give both the victims and/or victim's families and society at large a sense of justice in a lawful society.

…to name just a few.

Is this valid for most violent crimes? check

Are you assuming that the death penalty would give a sense of justice to society at large, thus inducing your own opinion on others? check!

I don't see any reason to believe that statement.

The US of A is one of the last barbaric western states in the world because it still has the death penalty. They have pretty severe laws and also the highest percentage of population in jail. Thus, death penalty does not prevent crime. Education and equality does a way better job at that.

False. The recidivism rate for executed criminals is zero.

I think death penalty should be pretty much across the board then since recidivism is pretty high in all crimes... except in Norway... I wonder why... ( being sarcastic now)

Arguing against forcing those in society who were victimized by the criminal to financially support their clothing, housing, nutrition and unproductive living is not at all a fatuous argument.

you just got to love this conservative populist speech. In a world where only the individual counts, no one will be worth **** in the end...

Justice is a socially approved extension of vengeance.

It's very unfortunate but you are correct. I guess humans are still barbaric and are often the days where I feel disgusted to be human and proud to be different. For in a proper society the purpose of justice should be rehabilitation and not vengeance. This is why recidivism is so high. "an eye for an eye, makes the whole world blind" Ghandi.

Jeffrey Dahmer is not a Paedophile.

A paedophile is actually someone who has done no crime until the point he has or seeks sexual relation with a minor. A paedophile is someone who is often born with a sexual taste for minors, just like a gay person has a taste for the same gender. One is legal, the other is not.

Unlike murder, molestation can be very difficult to prove without a doubt. Innocents getting killed by the state would be over the roof, specially if the accused does not get a good lawyer.

Does sparing the life of an innocent worth more than killing someone who has sexually molested a child? Of course yes!!

-- Updated October 26th, 2014, 4:13 pm to add the following --

- Very sad situation going on recently. A school janitor was accused of molesting a child. A week later it was six janitors. Then it was three kids. Then a teacher, a teacher's-aid, and a vice-principal were also implicated. Reports of more victims and suspects appeared. One of the janitors was beaten to death to extract a confession. Four of the other janitors were tortured to extract theirs. Crowds took to the streets demanding death penalty for the molesters. As the case came to trial it became clear there was a sex panic happening. No janitors, no teachers, assistants or principals molested any students; the entire case spiraled from the fact a boy had peed his pants in class and was too ashamed to admit it to his mother...

hmmm this sounds familiar... now where have I seen this before?? ..... Oh yes!! Salem witch trials! The American right wing paradise judicial system!

[Wilson]

Nobody can control what is sexually stimulating to him. He can only control what he does. Most of us men are lucky enough to be "normal" in this area - to have no sexual interest in prepubertal girls or boys. Most of us have the capacity for being turned on by girls who have gone through puberty and have breasts but aren't of legal age yet. It's societal pressure and the legal system and our own sense of morality that keep most of us from breaking the rules.

So for me, no one should be punished because of his urges. The issue of child pornography is a tricky one, since buying it encourages and makes possible that industry, but it seems unfair to the individual to punish him as long as he uses the material as a substitute for interacting with a youngster.

Who should be punished, and what should that punishment be? Depends on the offense. A 25 year old man who has consensual sex with a 16 year old should be punished, but not severely, because he may be one of many for her these days. A man who has sex with a 10 year old should be punished, but the degree of punishment should be commensurate with the offense; violent rape should be punished more than tender rape; penetration more than oral. I can have a degree of sympathy for someone who fights his urges and fails once, but none at all for someone who delights in dominating and hurting children. For the latter, I'd have no objection in principle to the death penalty - except that in California at least the process is so slow and lawyer-intensive that it costs a lot more to put someone on death row than life without parole, so I'd probably vote against the death penalty for anyone, unless it could be made more rational. But I have no moral objection to the death penalty per se.

[Spiral Out]

I don't believe in "victimless crime". There must be a definite victim in order for there to be any crime.

Thoughts are not crimes. Even viewing computer-generated "child porn" is not a crime in my opinion, since there are no victims. You can't hold someone criminally responsible for something they have not acted upon.

But when such thoughts and victimless activities do in fact become a crime with a real victim then the punishment must fit the crime.

So what is the "proper" punishment for a crime so grievous as the theft of innocence from a child and irreparable physical & emotional damage, especially a punishment for someone who cannot be rehabilitated since the compulsion is part of their inherent physical and psychological nature?

[Wilson]

There's no perfect answer as to how much punishment is appropriate, only opinions. You have an opinion, I have an opinion.

I don't have a hatred for every pedophile. I am sympathetic toward someone who has those tendencies and fights to control them. I have hatred for someone who disregards the damage he does to children and indulges his urges without guilt. Those in the latter category should be incarcerated forever or executed, your choice.

Spiral, what do you think would be appropriate for the following three situations.

1. A man fails to control himself once and touches a ten year old boy or girl inappropriately, and is truly remorseful afterward.

2. A man repeatedly rapes his own child from the age of six but always gently.

3. A man commits violent rape of several children who are strangers to him.

[Lacewing]

Are there any cultures that let the victim decide the punishment?

The victim (and/or their family) would best know the damage and impact of what has been imposed on them, and so they could decide what should be imposed in return. I'm not talking about an eye for an eye, but rather giving the victim more of a choice about WHICH punishment (maybe from a set of "approved/legal" punishments) THEY think is fair.

Would there be fewer crimes if perpetrators knew that the victims would decide?

[Wilson]

No. These guys already know that if they get caught, it ain't going to be pretty. So deterrence is already in place, and it doesn't prevent that kind of offense.

[Lucylu]

A 25 year old man who has consensual sex with a 16 year old should be punished, but not severely, because he may be one of many for her these days.

Nonsense. Girls mature earlier than boys. And it seems to me (although this is only my opinion) that people in general mature later these days. A 16 year old girl could be much more mature than a boy of her age and so would naturally seek the company of a 25 year old boy. If its consensual, and especially within the context of a relationship, of course he shouldn't be punished. It just depends on the individuals and how they mature.

Would there be fewer crimes if perpetrators knew that the victims would decide?

I see your point but I don't think this is feasible in reality. We appoint judges, hopefully, on the basis that they possess a balanced and advanced combination of intellectual and emotional intelligence- if we allow just anyone to decide the punishment I fear we would transgress in to the dark ages.

I am sympathetic toward someone who has those tendencies and fights to control them. I have hatred for someone who disregards the damage he does to children and indulges his urges without guilt. Those in the latter category should be incarcerated forever or executed, your choice.

I do agree but in practice, the same could be said for rapists etc so where would we draw the line? What would society be like if we just killed anyone who was violent?

So for me, no one should be punished because of his urges. The issue of child pornography is a tricky one, since buying it encourages and makes possible that industry, but it seems unfair to the individual to punish him as long as he uses the material as a substitute for interacting with a youngster.

Child pornography is not a victimless crime, as children are still being made to pose in sexual positions and offered sweets etc in order to smile for the photos. It is a disgusting violation even if the child is unaware of it at the time.

Would you feel comfortable leaving your child alone in the care of a known pedophile, even if they had never acted on their deviant desires? Why or why not?Do you have any other comments to the numerous facts I've provided about pedophiles and their traits, behaviors and physiology?

Sorry, Im not sure whether this was an open question or directed at me specifically. I don't have children myself, so I assumed that my opinion was 'invalid'.

To answer your question, nonetheless...I don't know what the answer is. If a percentage (albeit a very small percentage) of the population are naturally attracted to children then at least we are becoming ever more aware of the dynamics of it.

I'm not sure how I feel about the death penalty. This isn't the Hunger Games. If we want to be civilised then we have to be civilised ourselves. Humanity is the means as well as the end, as Kant says.

If the question is about how much money it costs to keep these people in humane conditions away from society, then really that is more a question about the world economy and why such a small percentage of the world's population is uber rich and the vast majority are poor. It would be a terrible shame if we behaved liked animals for the sake of money(temporary insanity).

[Wilson]

A 25 year old man who has consensual sex with a 16 year old should be punished, but not severely, because he may be one of many for her these days.

Nonsense. Girls mature earlier than boys. And it seems to me (although this is only my opinion) that people in general mature later these days. A 16 year old girl could be much more mature than a boy of her age and so would naturally seek the company of a 25 year old boy. If its consensual, and especially within the context of a relationship, of course he shouldn't be punished. It just depends on the individuals and how they mature.

I kind of agree with you but a society has the right to set an age of consent and punish those who break the law. Maybe the age of consent should be reduced, because young girls nowadays are so different from 50 years ago - but there's still the risk of an older man using his authority unfairly.

With regard to consensual sex between an older female and a 16 year old boy, that's a victimless crime, if I was the boy.

[Lucylu]

With regard to consensual sex between an older female and a 16 year old boy, that's a victimless crime, if I was the boy.

I didn't mean to jump down your throat, I think I just took offense to the 'one of many these days' bit. Trust me, young boys are different too these days!

A lot of girls at 16 could pass for 20, so its all relative. Naturally, a girl is in more of a vulnerable position as she cant necessarily leave unless the man allows it, so maybe the age could be different for boys vs girls.

[Teralek]

Naturally, a girl is in more of a vulnerable position as she cant necessarily leave unless the man allows it, so maybe the age could be different for boys vs girls.

Let's take the average 16 year old woman today. The "average" still has friends and family, plus a law and order, cultural perception that often sees a rapist in every other man (thanks to the newspapers). She can very easily cry for help if she needs to and put her "lover" in a very difficult position.

Her "lover" is not in a better position just because he is older. An educated 16 year old can and know what to do.

She is inexperienced yes, for sure. However it is arguable if she can learn better with another inexperienced boy or an older guy.

I think she is much more likely emotionally abused by another teen than by an older guy. I base this opinion on what I observe around me, not in anecdotal newspaper evidence.

Emotional abuse is also part of life, weather you are a teen or an adult. To learn how to protect yourself from it is part of the growing process. So basically too much sheltering of teens goes against this learning process.

[Newme]

So what is the "proper" punishment for a crime so grievous as the theft of innocence from a child and irreparable physical & emotional damage, especially a punishment for someone who cannot be rehabilitated since the compulsion is part of their inherent physical and psychological nature?

Loss of freedom - they need to be kept away from those they feel compelled to hurt.

Currently, there is the sex offender registry - but few people seem to check it at all, and even less check for updates. They are not allowed to be within a certain area of schools, I think - but I think this seems too easy. I wonder what pnishment would "fit the crime" better. Maybe monitored janitorial work at a psychiatric hospital or prison? Hypnosis to learn to associate previous disorder with something aweful, so they avoid it the rest of their lives?

[GaianDave51]

A couple of points; maybe germane, maybe not....

Spam snailmail is a very odd duck. Out of the blue, week before last, an American Girl catalog arrived in my mailbox. (how I got on that mailing list, I'll never know...) This, for those of you unaware, is a catalog of VERY high-priced, VERY high-quality female dolls, with a plethora of similarly high-priced, early-1900's-style outfits for them. Before I threw it into the recycling bin, a thought occurred to me: girl-oriented peds would swoon over this! Could some kind of intensive therapy re-direct their attention to collecting and playing with these dolls? Just a thought....

When I (briefly) taught 8th grade Earth Science in middle school some years ago, I had a couple of 13 year old female students who acted as though they had crushes on me. One day, as I was prepping a lab, alone, in the resource closet, they appeared, and offered to "f**k me senseless" in return for A's. Horrified, I told them I'd report them to the Principal. They said if I did, they'd claim we "did it" anyway. Then they demanded A's or they'd claim attempted rape. Now, I didn't just roll off the turnip truck. I knew very well that, facing such a completely false allegation, I would nevertheless be judged guilty by the entire school system.

Well, I sent the two little "pre-sluts" to the Office, then went there myself as soon as my class was finished. By great good luck, or so I thought, I saw the Principal before they did, and told him what happened. He said those two had made the false allegation before, the previous year, and the teacher had to be let go due to the inevitable parental uproar. He then offered me half-year severance pay if I resigned "for personal reasons", and would not pursue any investigation of their claims. What else could I do? Be found guilty by crowd hysteria? I took the money and left.

I relate this in order to point out that the harm peds do extends into every aspect of modern society. If they can't be cured, they ought to be isolated from the rest of us for life.

[Teralek]

When I (briefly) taught 8th grade Earth Science in middle school some years ago, I had a couple of 13 year old female students who acted as though they had crushes on me. One day, as I was prepping a lab, alone, in the resource closet, they appeared, and offered to "f**k me senseless" in return for A's. Horrified, I told them I'd report them to the Principal. They said if I did, they'd claim we "did it" anyway. Then they demanded A's or they'd claim attempted rape. Now, I didn't just roll off the turnip truck. I knew very well that, facing such a completely false allegation, I would nevertheless be judged guilty by the entire school system.

Well, I sent the two little "pre-sluts" to the Office, then went there myself as soon as my class was finished. By great good luck, or so I thought, I saw the Principal before they did, and told him what happened. He said those two had made the false allegation before, the previous year, and the teacher had to be let go due to the inevitable parental uproar. He then offered me half-year severance pay if I resigned "for personal reasons", and would not pursue any investigation of their claims. What else could I do? Be found guilty by crowd hysteria? I took the money and left.

Is more like the hysteria about peds is going into stupidity levels and teens know it and use it. A ped is just a ped, I think a killer is much worse, specially if he is a mass murder. There are so many false claims, like the one you mentioned (because of hysteria), we now believe there are molesters everywhere when the truth is far from it

That a ped leaves such a horrendous psychological mark, even worse than those who endured first person war in Vietnam is complete social stupidity. And we see this stupidity in the way we treat war veterans, specially in the USA.

Did I say I hate hypocrisy?

It's only the fear and threats that make the psychological harm even worse. If we say often enough, sexual touch is an abomination victims will be even worse. It's the same phenomenon which happened in the middle ages with victims of witchcraft; the victims would really developed symptoms of illnesses made by the devil. (mass hysteria).

I would like to see this upheaval against dictators and war. Children in Gaza or in Sudan right now are being subjected to a much worse psychological stigma than the majority of all sexually abused children.

Having that said, I do think we should criminalize sexual practices between adults and pre teens. I am just against the hysteria and lack of common sense.