Page 2 of 3
Posted: 08 Jan 2007, 19:40
by eotunun
That loving game is one with winners and loosers. There are good loosers and there are bad ones.
The bad loosers are most likely to produce such problems, but then there are married men, even fathers comitting such acts.
Absolutely insuspicious looking people whose relatives, partners and collegues who know them from daily life never would have had the idea that those people could ever commit such crime.
You´ll never be able to prevent the usual unsuspects that break out into such condition as to commit rape or anything alike from doing it.
There is no total security. The families themselves have to live in a way to protect themselves as well as possible which means living pretty safe nowadays, but that remaining risc can´t be eliminated.
Re: oh no, not yet another controversal topic
Posted: 08 Jan 2007, 19:57
by Brideoffrankenstein
canon docre wrote:
"Every parent should have the right to know if a dangerous sexual predator moves into their neighborhood." That is the core principle of the law: parents should know when a sex offender moves into the neighborhood so they can protect their children.
I would like to know what my fellow Heartlanders think about this law. And if you'd like to see a law like this in your homecountry too?
Yes.
If I had children I would want to know if there was a sex offender living nearby. I don't know what I would do about it, but I would just like to be
aware.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 10:47
by markfiend
mh wrote:Dunno bout youse, but it strikes me that it's not the sexual offenders that have already been caught that parents really have to worry about...
Very good point
Eldorado wrote:nick the stripper wrote:Eldorado wrote:Everyone?!
Not everyone, no, but the majority of adults.
Such a sweeping statement. This must mean that within this forum there is a number of sex offenders, whether convicted or not.
I think you're misunderstanding
nick the stripper's original post: "Everyone has impulses of a sexual nature" does not mean "Everyone is a raging pervert".
There are very few adults with no sex-drive.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 11:14
by King of Byblos
'socitey' has certain sexual boundries from normal-acceptable-illegal.
some of us may feel comfortable doing things that others would consider 'wrong' (to the extent that they may feel that they should be illegal). Other people may consider normal certain acts that society has deemed illegal... is there a right and wrong? You might think your nieghbour wierd for not doing x to their partner if you knew?
i refer the honourable congregation to the work of Michel Foucault on madness where he argued that 'Confinement' is used to remove undesirables from socitey based on accepted definitions not absolute criteria
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Fou ... .281961.29
imho, i think there is a harm&consent boundry that needs not to be crossed. Other times and places think differently; female circumcision, pre-marital prostitution, male circumcision and so on
What would knowing that there is an ex-offender living nearby change?
What about the other non-sexual ciminals who live near your house/car/personalpossessions?
What about the thousands of unsolved crimes (and therefore un-convicted criminals) around?
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 11:40
by markfiend
O tempora, o mores! 
I think you're right
KoB. People frequently forget that their societal norms are conventions, not carved in stone. I wouldn't be surprised if every sexual act ever forbidden in one time and place has been freely practised (even encouraged) in another, and
vice versa.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 11:52
by Badlander
markfiend wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if every sexual act ever forbidden in one time and place has been freely practised (even encouraged) in another, and vice versa.
Not
all Greeks in antiquity were sodomites.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 12:27
by Eldorado
markfiend wrote:mh wrote:Dunno bout youse, but it strikes me that it's not the sexual offenders that have already been caught that parents really have to worry about...
Very good point
Eldorado wrote:nick the stripper wrote:
Not everyone, no, but the majority of adults.
Such a sweeping statement. This must mean that within this forum there is a number of sex offenders, whether convicted or not.
I think you're misunderstanding
nick the stripper's original post: "Everyone has impulses of a sexual nature" does not mean "Everyone is a raging pervert".
There are very few adults with no sex-drive.
You are correct, I did misinterperate his statement
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 12:58
by Planet Dave
weebleswobble wrote:I'd want to know and I'm a parent, all parents I'm sure would want to know.
Toolbags are toolbags and all other opinions are certainly interesting but bottom line is the safety of my family. Personal liberities, society et al can go take a flying f*ck
Never saw my lips move!
Edit : Can't we put them all on a remote island like in the old days. I'm happy to discriminate against people trying to stick their bits up my kids backsides.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 13:28
by MadameButterfly
Planet Dave wrote:
Edit : Can't we put them all on a remote island like in the old days. I'm happy to discriminate against people trying to stick their bits up my kids backsides.
But that was back in the old days. I would hope today we could send them to another planet in the galaxy. It would cost lots I know.
Or if having them living next door to me or down the road, doesn't really bother me if their goolies have been chopped off.
Either way works for me and that punishment even if the offender is a family member.
Just trying to protect the kids.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 14:20
by King of Byblos
MadameButterfly wrote:Planet Dave wrote:
Edit : Can't we put them all on a remote island like in the old days. I'm happy to discriminate against people trying to stick their bits up my kids backsides.
But that was back in the old days. I would hope today we could send them to another planet in the galaxy. It would cost lots I know.
quote]
can't we leave them here and find a nice clean planet to inhabit?
I am just thinking back to the age when WE shipped all the criminals to Australia...who has the last laugh now
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 14:26
by Ahráyeph
MadameButterfly wrote:Planet Dave wrote:
Edit : Can't we put them all on a remote island like in the old days. I'm happy to discriminate against people trying to stick their bits up my kids backsides.
But that was back in the old days. I would hope today we could send them to another planet in the galaxy. It would cost lots I know.
Or if having them living next door to me or down the road, doesn't really bother me if their goolies have been chopped off.
Either way works for me and that punishment even if the offender is a family member.
Just trying to protect the kids.
Now there's an idea on how to keep the space exploration budget low. You don't have to pay convicted criminals and if we're lucky, they might just end up killing each other on the way to or on the way back from Mars
.
While I recognize and support the chance ex- cons should get to reintegrate into society after having payed their debt (and not going to start a whole other debate about the who's, hows and whats), I'm not particularly fond of paedophiles and other child molesters (putting it very mildly) and even less about giving them an opportunity to hurt children again. I'm actually very pacifistic in nature, but these beings deserve a slow and painful death. For one, no child molester I've heard of ever gets 'cured'. Some may have the willpower to subdue their nature, but even then they feel that the way they regard children isn't a bad one. Right.
Send 'em into deep space for all I care, just as long as they don't unintentionally stumble upon other humanoid alien life forms on whose society they'd inflict the same kind of damage.
Either way, I don't know whether I could live close to one, even if he - or she (yes, peeps, women do it too) - had his nads removed and is constantly under heavy sedation, without reacting extremely negative if I'd come across them.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 14:27
by itnAklipse
"Unfortunately" suffering is a part of life and the only reason you think suffering is terrible because you find it unpleasant and uncomfortable and entirely unsuitable for the purpose of you leading your life in complete abandon and recklessness.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 14:42
by markfiend
itnAklipse wrote:...the only reason you think suffering is terrible because you find it unpleasant and uncomfortable...
Today's prize for the bleeding obvious...
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 14:48
by Ahráyeph
The mere fact that you couldn't even grasp the idiocy of your quote in regard to children, who don't have the framework to put the concept of suffering in but hurt nonetheless just shows you're nothing more than someone who desperately wants to pass himself off as some kind of neo- darwinist/anarchist intellectual. Children already live their lives in complete abandon and recklessness, as they have yet to be subjected to all the things that make us grown ups. And which grown ups so desperately seek to reclaim, because once you've grown up, your innocense is lost. Hurt is the rite of passage into adulthood. Innoncense is the recklessness and abandon of children. Child molestation is is not just unfortunate in any way, it is inflicted and interrupts the child's normal behaviour to interact with the world. Sit back in your comfy ivory tower of pseudo intellectualism and perhaps next you can defend the right of serial killers to murder, maim and kill because this experience of unpleasantness will enable their victims to live in complete abandon and recklessness...
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 15:12
by MadameButterfly
King of Byblos wrote:MadameButterfly wrote:Planet Dave wrote:
Edit : Can't we put them all on a remote island like in the old days. I'm happy to discriminate against people trying to stick their bits up my kids backsides.
But that was back in the old days. I would hope today we could send them to another planet in the galaxy. It would cost lots I know.
can't we leave them here and find a nice clean planet to inhabit?
I am just thinking back to the age when WE shipped all the criminals to Australia...who has the last laugh now
Why should we have to leave our beautiful mother planet earth for fuckwits like that? I know what you mean though although we should continue that conversation in the thread for how to save what's left of our beautiful mother planet earth.
How far back does your thinking go as when you say criminals and Australia in one sentence, the first thing that jumps to mind is that prison called OZ?
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 15:27
by MadameButterfly
Ahráyeph wrote:MadameButterfly wrote:Planet Dave wrote:
Edit : Can't we put them all on a remote island like in the old days. I'm happy to discriminate against people trying to stick their bits up my kids backsides.
But that was back in the old days. I would hope today we could send them to another planet in the galaxy. It would cost lots I know.
Or if having them living next door to me or down the road, doesn't really bother me if their goolies have been chopped off.
Either way works for me and that punishment even if the offender is a family member.
Just trying to protect the kids.
Now there's an idea on how to keep the space exploration budget low. You don't have to pay convicted criminals and if we're lucky, they might just end up killing each other on the way to or on the way back from Mars
.
Man, so you mean this idea could actually keep the budget low! Good idea then, it should be politically discussed.
Ahráyeph wrote:While I recognize and support the chance ex- cons should get to reintegrate into society after having payed their debt
Yeah society needs people to experiment on in the medical field, testing of certain drugs to see if they would work and what nots, these ex-cons you speak of should go through the system in that kind of way too maybe.
Ahráyeph wrote:I'm not particularly fond of paedophiles and other child molesters (putting it very mildly) and even less about giving them an opportunity to hurt children again. I'm actually very pacifistic in nature, but these beings deserve a slow and painful death. For one, no child molester I've heard of ever gets 'cured'. Some may have the willpower to subdue their nature, but even then they feel that the way they regard children isn't a bad one. Right.
Send 'em into deep space for all I care, just as long as they don't unintentionally stumble upon other humanoid alien life forms on whose society they'd inflict the same kind of damage.
Either way, I don't know whether I could live close to one, even if he - or she (yes, peeps, women do it too) - had his nads removed and is constantly under heavy sedation, without reacting extremely negative if I'd come across them.
That just needs a
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 15:47
by King of Byblos
MadameButterfly wrote:
Why should we have to leave our beautiful mother planet earth for fuckwits like that? I know what you mean though although we should continue that conversation in the thread for how to save what's left of our beautiful mother planet earth.
How far back does your thinking go as when you say criminals and Australia in one sentence, the first thing that jumps to mind is that prison called OZ?
you mean there is one...let me at it and i'll have a good rant
i was a goldfish in a previous life and have a 4 second
i was a goldfish in a previous life and have a 4 second
memory, a prison called OZ? is this i.r.l. or TV.land ?
.
how can you be a pacifist and then want someone to die a slow and painful death?
Perhaps it would be easier if all UK citizens who had been to prison for sex offences had to wear a big red 'P' on their chests or a yellow star...oh, hasn't that been done?
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 16:00
by Ahráyeph
King of Byblos wrote:how can you be a pacifist and then want someone to die a slow and painful death?
Perhaps it would be easier if all UK citizens who had been to prison for sex offences had to wear a big red 'P' on their chests or a yellow star...oh, hasn't that been done?
I don't think abusing and molesting children is the same as being persecuted for being a certain race or having a certain religion. Don't twist my words; I don't support racism or discrimination of any kind (unlike some people who post stuff about 'unfortunate' unpleasantness and living in reckless abandon because of it). And as for being a pacifist : Wanting these people to die a slow and painful death IN SP�TE of being one is an illustration of how much I detest people who inflict harm on children. And with good reason. Nuff said...
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 17:04
by nick the stripper
Such a sweeping statement. This must mean that within this forum there is a number of sex offenders, whether convicted or not.
No, I don't think you understood what I meant (which is probably my fault for not stating it clearly).
Surely you admit that the majority of adults become sexually aroused, yes? And that when they do, they have the self-control, decency and rationality to not rape, molest or whatever the person nearest to them that fits the description of whatever it is that arouses them too, right? Even though everyone has a fetish of some sort - whether it be legs, breasts, feet, fishnet stockings, or corpses - this is the case, because they know that non-consensual acts are wrong.
So, this arousal, this "inner-impulse", they can control and ignore; rather easily, too, I expect, for the majority.
Simply put, paedophiles have all the abilities needed to not do what they know is wrong - to act on this impulse and severely screw up a child's life. They have the self-control, and if it is weak, then they should learn to strengthen it, to take some responsibility and seek help for their predisposition. But they don't, they put all the blame on the inner-impulse, even though it's up to them to choose how they act on the inner-impulse.
Hence my statement in the original post:
I'm fed up with modern society. No one wants to take responsibility for their actions anymore. "Yes, I murdered all my schoolmates - but I was beaten as a child." "Yes, I sexually molested that two year old girl, but it's just an impulse, mister!"
I hope that makes it clearer.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 17:15
by markfiend
One slight problem with your thesis (which on the whole I thoroughly agree with) is that one outlet (for some men at least) for fetishistic release is through pornography. This release is unavailable for people with a fetishistic desire towards children who wish nevertheless not to act upon their fetish.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 17:22
by nick the stripper
markfiend wrote:One slight problem with your thesis (which on the whole I thoroughly agree with) is that one outlet (for some men at least) for fetishistic release is through pornography. This release is unavailable for people with a fetishistic desire towards children who wish nevertheless not to act upon their fetish.
This is on the contrary in several countries(Japan is the only when that comes to mind currently), where computer generated child pornography is in existence. I personally find this utterly disgusting and despicable - but I don't believe in censorship of any kind, so I have to accept that there will be some things I find horrid released.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 18:36
by Badlander
markfiend wrote:This release is unavailable for people with a fetishistic desire towards children who wish nevertheless not to act upon their fetish.
Japan indeed comes to mind. They have a very high level of tolerance as regards pornography involving children - one might say paedophilia. And still they have some serious issues to deal with.
I do think that pornography serves some kind of social function, but it's not a protection against sexual violence either. In the end it all comes to personal responsibility : if you're sane and well balanced, pornography will help you to deal with your personal issues (whatever weird sex fantasies you may have). On the other hand, if you're a sick mind, it will only make things worse. But then is pornography really to blame ?
All in all, same as video-games and violence in motion pictures I guess.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 18:41
by Planet Dave
itnAklipse wrote:"Unfortunately" suffering is a part of life and the only reason you think suffering is terrible because you find it unpleasant and uncomfortable and entirely unsuitable for the purpose of you leading your life in complete abandon and recklessness.
Yeah, something like that.
Posted: 09 Jan 2007, 19:24
by mh
itnAklipse wrote:"Unfortunately" suffering is a part of life and the only reason you think suffering is terrible because you find it unpleasant and uncomfortable and entirely unsuitable for the purpose of you leading your life in complete abandon and recklessness.
I don't think suffering is part of life.
In fact life in general is very enjoyable, pleasant and fun, so much so that I'm inclined to believe that the whole purpose of life is to enjoy being alive.
I also happen to believe in total personal freedom to do whatever you want,
so long as doing so doesn't impact on anybody else's similar freedom.
Obviously, sexual offenders do impact in this way, so some of the suggestions here are rather intriguing.
Posted: 10 Jan 2007, 06:09
by weebleswobble
Nanananana
Nanananana (all together now)
Nanananana
Nanananana