Author Topic: yes, pedophilia should be a capital offense (Read 2371 times)

Nilsen · « **Reply #45 on:** August 04, 2006, 09:33:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler
wow - so an adult can bang a 9th or 10th grader over there and everyone is alright with that?

when are you allowed to have sex in america then 20, 30??

yes.. at the age of 16 you can have sex. If an adult "bangs" her and they are both willing then yes.

moot · « **Reply #46 on:** August 04, 2006, 09:50:21 AM »

You have to admit, people hitting twenty still virgin by anything else than conviction is an odd sight.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #47 on:** August 04, 2006, 09:53:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nilsen
when are you allowed to have sex in america then 20, 30??

yes.. at the age of 16 you can have sex. If an adult "bangs" her and they are both willing then yes.

It's sort of hard to give an answer there, as various states have different laws, many of which have not been tested against the Constitution.

If you're 18 and and getting it on with a 16 year old, you'll probably get by. If you're over 18 and involved with a 14 year old, you're probably in trouble. Let's say that once the youngest is past 16, only a major age difference will draw ire, and even then it may not draw prosecution. Age disparity is as much an issue as anything. For example, a 17 year old cavorting with a 13 year old is likely to have a legal problem, where as a 15 year old and a 13 or 14 year old are likely to only piss off the parents. A year or two between two who are under 18 is not usually a big deal, but 3 or more years difference is, at least around here. Here, 18 is an adult by law, even if they can't buy booze, and adults can be busted for sex with a minor, as a general rule.

Hope that muddies the water as much as possible.

lazs2 · « **Reply #48 on:** August 04, 2006, 09:58:44 AM »

In America most states waive the statutory rape thing if the victim and the perp are within 3 years of the same age... it is still a crime but not a felony I think.

mini makes an interesting point but... I would also like to see parents who starved their children in a basement or closet as "punishment" given harsh sentances.. they do now tho. If anything... the courts react too harshly these days against parents.... In my opinion most problems with kids is that they are pampered by uncaring or lazy parents... the legal system helps to foster even more pampering and less responsibility for kids.

The kind of crime the thread talks about is the kind I would want a death penalty for. Same for any violent rape of a child.

if the recidivism rate for child molesters is not 100% then it is only because the guy died before he could get his next victim or got too old and infirm to manage.

lazs

Goomba · « **Reply #49 on:** August 04, 2006, 10:02:52 AM »

I disagree totally with the premise that there is something wrong with irate commentary concerning pedophilia vs. parenthood.

I can't even put those two thoughts into the same breath, they're so totally foreign to each other. Truly, I can't comprehend how you can connect them at all.

Nope...while I agree that truly bad parenting can have hugely negative impacts on a child, and should be dealt with very harshly (depending on the nature, even as harsh as pedophilia), I simply cannot subscribe to this idea.

Pedophilia and Parenting? You've left me in the dust on this one.

To suggest that a bad parent is actually worse than a pedophile? Our philosophies totally part company here...

Besides, bad parenting runs a very broad spectrum from mild neglect to outright abuse, exploitation and abandonment.

Pedophilia has no spectrum...hideous from beginning to end. Period.

PS: We do agree on the core concept though. Do. Not. Hurt. Babies.

**Note: Commentary for discussion only. Not flaming. Often can come off wrong in text, so I just want to clarify...nothing personal**

Nilsen · « **Reply #50 on:** August 04, 2006, 10:02:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
It's sort of hard to give an answer there, as various states have different laws, many of which have not been tested against the Constitution.

If you're 18 and and getting it on with a 16 year old, you'll probably get by. If you're over 18 and involved with a 14 year old, you're probably in trouble. Let's say that once the youngest is past 16, only a major age difference will draw ire, and even then it may not draw prosecution. Age disparity is as much an issue as anything. For example, a 17 year old cavorting with a 13 year old is likely to have a legal problem, where as a 15 year old and a 13 or 14 year old are likely to only piss off the parents. A year or two between two who are under 18 is not usually a big deal, but 3 or more years difference is, at least around here. Here, 18 is an adult by law, even if they can't buy booze, and adults can be busted for sex with a minor, as a general rule.

Hope that muddies the water as much as possible.

If both are under 16 here the law wont go into effect at all. If one is 15 and the other 17 then it would depend on many things but in some cases the stict 16 year rule may not be used. ITs a case by case thing... However... if one is below 16 and the other is above 18 the law will most deffinatly be used whatever the circumstances.

Jackal1 · « **Reply #51 on:** August 04, 2006, 11:18:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Absolutely let them have their rights. ALL their rights as laid down by the consitution.

Properly treated according to the law. Properly tried according to the law, with all their rights respected.

But. If they are found guilty.
they should also be properly executed

Yep. " We`re gonna give you a fair trial............then we`re going to give you a fair hangin."

mietla · « **Reply #52 on:** August 04, 2006, 11:28:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
if the recidivism rate for child molesters is not 100% then it is only because the guy died before he could get his next victim or got too old and infirm to manage.

lazs

Plus, a confirmed 100% recidivism rate would require that EVERY case is discovered. If the reported rate is 80-90%, you can be pretty sure that the real one is a 100%, it's just that some cases never surface.

Especially, that all experts seem to agree that pedophilia is incurable.

Mini D · « **Reply #53 on:** August 04, 2006, 11:52:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Goomba
I disagree totally with the premise that there is something wrong with irate commentary concerning pedophilia vs. parenthood.

You misunderstand. The comparison was to say parents are worse than pedophiles. I meant that you getting irate on a bbs about a pedophile has little impact on your children's lives.

Pedophiles can ruin children's lives. This is a given. Looking back through history, though, will show that there isn't a pedophile at the base of all of the most ****ed up personalities on the face of the earth.

I find lazs' use of the "parents that lock their children up in the basement" reference to be odd and totally indicative of my general head shaking. Take a look at custody battles some day... no cellars involved. Take a look at the vindictive nature of some parents and the use of children as a tool against the other spouse. Take a look at a parent's resentment for their children because of all the sacrifices that they have to make to bring them up. Take a look at the cool highschool friends that re-enforced the "drugs are cool" mentality (think about where those cool guys from your HS days are now).

I dunno, but when I see a bunch of people go on a tirade about something that is obviously as disgusting as child molestation I can't help but think it's a smoke screen.

Pedophilia is disgusting. But, it will happen. Getting irate about it does not help protect your children from it. Killing someone that's going to spend their life in prison does not help protect your children from it. Sentencing someone to longer jail terms did not help protect the victim prior to that. Parenting is the best defense against 99.9% of this. I'm not talking about protection... parenting.

BGBMAW · « **Reply #54 on:** August 04, 2006, 12:38:40 PM »

2- Threads should remain on topic, do not "hijack" topics.

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.

moot · « **Reply #55 on:** August 04, 2006, 12:44:07 PM »

That verb can take other meanings, too.

Nilsen · « **Reply #56 on:** August 04, 2006, 12:50:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BGBMAW
2- Threads should remain on topic, do not "hijack" topics.

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.

BGBMAW · « **Reply #57 on:** August 04, 2006, 12:55:13 PM »

great comeback..your good at those.................ROLLING EYES

Nilsen · « **Reply #58 on:** August 04, 2006, 01:00:16 PM »

Sandman · « **Reply #59 on:** August 04, 2006, 01:37:28 PM »

Whenever these discussions arise, the issue of consent always comes up as if it were relevant. Pedophiliacs aren't interested in teenagers or young adults. They're interested in children.

Teenagers may not be sexually active, but generally they either are or are beginning to become interested and attracted to it. The people that prey upon them are selfish and irresponsible, but they're not in the same league as someone that targets prepubescent children.