Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Captain Virgil Hilts on August 03, 2006, 07:51:50 AM
-
CLEVELAND -- It was probably not a defense the court had heard before.
A suburban Cleveland man accused of sexually assaulting nine disabled boys told a judge Wednesday that his apartment was a religious sanctuary where smoking marijuana and having sex with children are sacred rituals protected by civil rights laws.
The admitted pedophile offered a surprising defense Wednesday to 74 charges of rape, drugs and pandering obscenity to minors.
Appearing in an Ohio court for a pretrial hearing, Phillip Distasio, 34, of Rocky River, Ohio, said he was a pedophile.
He told the judge, "I'm a pedophile. I've been a pedophile for 20 years. The only reason I'm charged with rape is that no one believes a child can consent to sex. The role of my ministry is to get these cases out of the courtrooms."
Distasio, a self-professed pagan friar, is representing himself on 74 charges. He said he's the leader of a church called Arcadian Fields Ministries, and that some of his congregants are among the victims in his case.
The judge told Distasio to confine his arguments to secular laws at his trial, scheduled to begin Sept. 11.
"If you want to challenge the law, that's your right to do so," Judge Kathleen Sutula said. "But we're going to follow the laws of Ohio in this courtroom."
Cuyahoga County Bill Mason said Distasio was arrested after he wanted to write a blog for the Lakewood Library. Officials noticed something was wrong and notified Rocky River police.
Distasio was arrested on charges he molested two disabled boys he was tutoring at his home. He's also accused of raping seven other autistic children at a Cleveland school for special-needs students, The Plain Dealer reported. All but one of the boys was under 13, which carries a mandatory life-in-prison sentence if he is convicted, the paper reported.
Police said they found journals at Distasio's apartment in which he described his illegal activities, along with child pornography and videotapes of him engaged in sex with boys, The Plain Dealer reported
"Not all pedophilia is bad, and sex [with boys] can be healthy," Distasio told the court.
According to the journals, two of Distasio's victims were so helpless they could never tell anyone what happened.
"The defendant describes acts in which he had autistic children and he did what I would call sadistic sexual acts with these children," said Mason.
The school he ran from his apartment was called Class Cutters. According to Distasio's Web site, students and parents chose the curriculum in the school for unique children.
But prosecutors said it was little more than a trap that snared one victim and then another.
"Like all predators, he used this one child to bring other children to him and that's what was happening, and that's how he got his second victim," said Mason.
And prosecutors believe there may be more victims.
Distasio has a history of working with children dating back 10 years.
Prosecutors said he could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted.
-
I am really 100% against the death penalty, but with pedo types my heart says yes.
I would still vote "no" if i had to vote, but.. my feelings would say "yes".
-
$5 says he tought up this defense while watching the SouthPark Super Adventure Club episode.
-
put him down.
Do the human thing and put this sociopath out of his missery and out of our lives.
lazs
-
I haven't the slightest problem with putting down child molesters. In fact, the victim's parents should get first dibs.
No sympathy, no compassion, no understanding, no empathy. We're talking about children, here.
Hang 'em high, and make it hurt.
-
I vote death. If you wish I will pull the switch. :furious
-
remove his genitalia, tie him up, and dump him in a pit with some very hungry rats.
Come back a little while later to extract the now satiated rats, and bury what's left of the pedo.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
put him down.
Do the human thing and put this sociopath out of his missery and out of our lives.
lazs
Bingo. No need for histrionics. Just put 'em down, quick and clean.
-
Couldn't bomb squads use brave guys like him?
-
Why isn't surgical removal of genitalia an option in cases like this? I've broached this question before, in threads similar to this, and some have reacted as if that was the ultimate taboo...as if those items are somehow sacrosanct.
Since this animal is so big on "consent" I wonder if he would consent to an anal probe...with a cattle prod.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
I am really 100% against the death penalty, but with pedo types my heart says yes.
I would still vote "no" if i had to vote, but.. my feelings would say "yes".
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
:rolleyes:
-
Schuckins, the cause isn't the genitals. They'd just use another object.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Why isn't surgical removal of genitalia an option in cases like this? I've broached this question before, in threads similar to this, and some have reacted as if that was the ultimate taboo...as if those items are somehow sacrosanct.
Since this animal is so big on "consent" I wonder if he would consent to an anal probe...with a cattle prod.
Because the sickness is in his head not his genitalia?
-
I belive chemical castration has worked well for all kinds of sex offenders. Convicted people and those who know they have serious problems controlling their urges can do it here and the results have been good.
The reason I dont belive in the death penalty is simple and two-fold. One, if you are convicted and they later find out you are not guilty you cant undo a death sentance that has been implemented. The second reason is that I dont think animals like the one mentioned in this thread should get off so easy.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Why isn't surgical removal of genitalia an option in cases like this? I've broached this question before, in threads similar to this, and some have reacted as if that was the ultimate taboo...as if those items are somehow sacrosanct.
Since this animal is so big on "consent" I wonder if he would consent to an anal probe...with a cattle prod.
The problem is that the crime isn't a sex crime, it's a power crime. Deprived of the ability to "get it up", sexual predators simply use a substitute. It is just like rape, the perp just has a different preference in victims.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Bingo. No need for histrionics. Just put 'em down, quick and clean.
Agreed. Standard execution of death sentence, by standard method. No more, no less.
-
I've come to the conclusion that many such cases of "mental illness" are actually calculated perversion.
Following the example of the gay and lesbian civil rights groups, pedophiles are organizing politically and have as their goal the passage of laws LOWERING the age of consent for sex. Some want it to go as low as the age of ten. The proponents of this movement can be surprisingly intelligent and persuasive...at least to those easily swayed by spurious civil rights arguments.
Their numbers are growing...and given the tendency of some Americans to be taken in by trendy, politically correct, civil rights fads, this movement could...could, mind you...pose a long term threat to the laws which protect our children.
Don't dismiss the idea out of hand. Child sexploitation and prostitution are legal in many foreign countries. The key to the modern pedophile argument for legalization of sex with children is that they are "individuals" and are fully capable of making their own choices in such matters. If they repeat this often enough and long enough they will begin to convince those who have a weak moral compass.
As to castration...why not? The sickness "may" be in their heads, but in many if not most cases they are simply sexual predators who know exactly what they are doing and that it is illegal. Their predation may be the result of an abnormally high testosterone level, which heightens their sexual drive, leading to the predation. Surgical castration brings about a permanent reduction in these levels, ending the predatory lusts of the perpetrator.
Chemical castration isn't a proper control for the problem because it requires, in most cases, a willingness on the part of the perpetrator to "take his medicine." Many refuse to take it regularly because they WANT the sexual high and the thrill of sexual conquest.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Chemical castration isn't a proper control for the problem because it requires, in most cases, a willingness on the part of the perpetrator to "take his medicine." Many refuse to take it regularly because they WANT the sexual high and the thrill of sexual conquest.
That may be true.. i thought it was a one time deal.
I still think its a good idea for those who recogize their problems and wants to do something about it... there are alot of people like that.
-
nope nelson.. chemical castration is simply continued use of drugs to keep down libido.
Plain ol crank will negate it as will some other drugs. There have allready been cases of chemical castration patients re-offending.
Dead ones have never re-offended. I am not aware of any person in modern America being executed wrongly.
lazs
-
Why isn't surgical removal of genitalia an option in cases like this?
Because if you open up the door on a case like this
Next the prosecutor will want to cut the nuts off an 18 year old kid playing with his 17 year old girlfriend
Or even a 15 year old kid experimenting with this 14 year old girlfriend.
Every time you let the prosecutors do something different, Even if it is only for extreme cases, They always end up trying to do it for everyone.
-
trell... what you say is true but.... what sandie says is also true.... it is in the head not in the nuts.
lazs
-
I only recommend the physical castration as part of the punishment before death, not as a rehabilitation.
I don't think cruel and unusual punishment should apply to child molesters.
-
sry Nilsen - u just sounded wishy washy with your yes but no but yes answer
as for the sick kid lovers, isn't it accepted in many parts of the world as normal?
wonder why all the pervs that get caught are usually low end creeps?
the ones with the dough just fly to countries where they can choose their 9 year old from a menu ...
as for punishment, karma will see to that - what goes around, comes around
-
Originally posted by Nifty
I only recommend the physical castration as part of the punishment before death, not as a rehabilitation.
There's little point in punishing sick people. Deterrance isn't a cure.
-
The second reason is that I dont think animals like the one mentioned in this thread should get off so easy.
I agree completely.
Unfortunately, we have no immediate means to sentence him to a life of unending, hideous torture...so lights-out it must be.
If we cannot rehabilitate, chemical castration is unreliable, and we accept the premise that deterrence doesn't work (I'm not sure I subscribe to that idea, BTW)...exactly what is left? Harsh language?
A pedophile knows his actions are reprehensible, and actively finds a way to rationalize and justify. However, they never acknowledge that, before their unforgiveable crimes, they could have chosen celibacy. BUT...they did not. They actively chose to tear up an innocent child's soul, to abuse the inherent trust of n innocent...purely to get themselves off.
I'm sorry, but there are certain transgressions which simply exceed the bounds of society to cope with. Transgressions which are so heinous as to absolve society of the responsibility of figuring it out.
Pedophilia is the penultimate one.
Simple Rule: Do. Not. Hurt. Babies.
-
First offense, chemical castration with extensive incarceration. Second offense, game over put them down.
-
As a mother, I can honestly say the first offense should be instant death, no jail time waiting for it either, the day of conviction should be the day of death. Theres no circumstances whatsoever that justify having sex with children. And I really doubt that somking pot and having sex with children is a sacred religious thing in any religion.
-
You all do realize what happens to child molestors in prison, right?
Just give him life in prison. Let the scum deal with the scum. :aok
-
Originally posted by Maverick
First offense, chemical castration with extensive incarceration. Second offense, game over put them down.
why on Earth would you let the perp harm a second victim?
-
I think pedophiles should be put in the custody of people with families who think pedophiles are curable.
The pedophile should be put under house arrest and should be made to babysit the children of such folk at no charge.
-
Horrible, sick, disgusting and just downright wrong. I hope this guy gets shanked and bleeds to death painfully. He has probably screwed up all those kid's lives for good and thinks its "right" to do. Sick.
-
Originally posted by mietla
why on Earth would you let the perp harm a second victim?
Well first I guess you missed the extensive incarceration part. Secondly not all pedophiles re offend. They have among the highest recidivism rate but it is not 100%.
I do like Toad's suggestion as well with a possible addition. In addition to that idea add the defense lawyers (liars) who help to put them back on the street.
-
Defense lawyers are a necessary evil.
-
I didn't say they weren't ....... evil....or necessary. I just think they should be rewarded at times with the custody of some of their clients.
This brings up one of (IMO) flaws of the current legal system. That is the lack of requirement that the lawyers, on both sides, to actually deal with the unvarnished truth. I know the "truth is supposed to come out in the trial" but neither attorney is sworn to restrict themselve to it.
-
Originally posted by Vudak
You all do realize what happens to child molestors in prison, right?
Yep. For the most part they are put into special units for protection against general population and pampered..................... ..........at our added expense.
They also, for some reason, seem to be some of the most early released, with more than their share of repeat offenders.........over and over.
I`m not really interested in feeding, clothing and pampering the SOBs. Rope is cheap and there are lot of oak trees standing.
-
While I am all in favor of the death penalty, pedos are usually not facing a cheerful stay in prison.
-
Rope is cheap and there are lots of oak trees
I just plain like that. Might be sig quote quality!
Toad..you have an interesting idea, but that would condemn more innocents to abuse while trying to teach their parents a lesson.
Mav...I suppose I might accept your approach, so long as they don't get 'protective incarceration'. General Population, where they can be subjected to the tender mercies of the rest of the cons, or mind-crushing solitary. Slowly going quite insane seems a fitting punishment.
-
The guy is going to get life in prison without chance for parole. He should get the option to just be executed as a matter of course. No state would vote it in, though. That is unfortunate.
I find a few things ironic in this case and the replies. The first ironic thing is the pedophiles argument that "children are individuals capable of making their own choices" when this person preyed on handicapped children that were incapable of making the choice. The other is the use of the term "pedophile" and "death penalty" as if there's some test that can be done to confirm this.
Pedophilia is absolutely wrong and disgusting, make no mistake in my beliefs there... but I always get the feeling that these tirades against it reflect a social glitch in human nature. If you were to weigh the impacts of pedophilia against the impacts of parenthood... well... I think the parenthood side of the house would completely dominate the "who ****s children up the most" side of the house with "childhood friends" being a close second and drugs being 3rd. Pedophilia might be in the top 10.
It's just easier to point at a pedophile and call him/her a freak than to acknowledge any fault as a parent, friend or "drugs don't hurt people" proponent.
The laws are in place, the man has been arrested and will serve life. It's the commentary I find odd.
-
I dont even need to read the story.
Yes Pedophillia SHOULD be a capitol offence.
I'd even be willing to be the one who flips the switch...proudly
-
bah, we have laws so the powerful won't exploit the powerless; at least that's the theory.
while I can't say I like child molesters, defense lawyers exist to prevent the power of the state from exploiting the powerless individual. Yes, it seems disgusting to have help out an apparent child molester, but just because the guy is brutal and unicivilized doesn't mean our system for dealing with him has to be.
After all, the recidivism rate for child molesters may be pretty high, but for the coercive apparatus of the state, it's 100%.
I say, let those who believe we should through away the rights of the accused be forced to raise their children in a state that does so.
Besides, this freak is representing himself.
-
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
-
Wow, I agree with MiniD :confused:
Demons must be snowboarding in hell right now....
-
Originally posted by Eagler
sry Nilsen - u just sounded wishy washy with your yes but no but yes answer
as for the sick kid lovers, isn't it accepted in many parts of the world as normal?
wonder why all the pervs that get caught are usually low end creeps?
the ones with the dough just fly to countries where they can choose their 9 year old from a menu ...
as for punishment, karma will see to that - what goes around, comes around
I belive there are very different laws on how young you can be. I guess it depends on how far a country had progressed. Many years ago folks got married and had kids at a much younger age than now, prolly because people usually didnt get as old as now. This is still happening in poor countries with limited health care. They start earlyer and have more kids to compensate for the loss they are bound to have with some of their kids. They also rely on their kids when they get old to support them.
Unfortionatly some of these people carry on that tradition when they get here and spawn like crazy. Ususally you see them on the street with a fresh baby in the trolly and another on the way plus a hurd trailing them... Some of them are no more than 18 years old and the father is in his 30-40-50s and they have been married for 5 years already.
Here the minimum age of _consentual_ sex is 16.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Here the minimum age of _consentual_ sex is 16.
wow - so an adult can bang a 9th or 10th grader over there and everyone is alright with that?
-
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.
-
You have to admit, people hitting twenty still virgin by anything else than conviction is an odd sight.
-
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.:D
-
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
-
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**
-
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.:D
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.
-
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."
:aok
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
That verb can take other meanings, too.
-
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.
-
great comeback..your good at those.................ROLLING EYES
-
Thx
-
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.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Here the minimum age of _consentual_ sex is 16.
It is here too so long as the adult in question is not in a position of authority of or responcability of the person
Meaning a 40 year old person can legally have sex with a 16 year old person so long as they arent in a position of authority over them. Teacher, step parent, Scout leader etc
I dont agree with it. But that is the way it is
-
mini... I assume that you mean that life screws people up and sometimes.... in some people... events not sexual do more harm than a childhood molestation?
Perhaps that is true but if we believe that sex is the most important drive and the one that affects our personalities the most (especialy durring the formative years)... then we should be careful how children are formed in regards to it.
I believe that most mollesters were mollested as children themselves so... this is a practice that not only damages the child itself but is self perpetuating. I gave the example of parental brutality because I believe that only that (parental brutality) approches the damage that a mollestation of a child does and I think that harsh penalties for either act are warranted.
All forms of brutality against helpless children shoul carry harsh punishments... the child mollester is a very sick person who can never be cured.
We may not be able to do anything about friends leading adolecents astray or parents with weird ideas but...
We can do something about the mollester and the extremely abusive parent when we catch em..
We should do what we can instead of saying.... "well... they are no worse than other abusers."
In the case of child mollesters... we have the opportuniy for some good old black and white justice and..... in my opinion... mercy... the mercy to put em down.
lazs
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
It is here too so long as the adult in question is not in a position of authority of or responcability of the person
Meaning a 40 year old person can legally have sex with a 16 year old person so long as they arent in a position of authority over them. Teacher, step parent, Scout leader etc
I dont agree with it. But that is the way it is
If say the teacher, the doctor, the minister or anyone like that would have sex with someone over 16 then there may be consequenses for them here too, but it would not fall under the same law. No good way to translate the name of the law im afraid.
-
Lazs... you always fail to realize that examples are just those: examples. There is no example that explains pedophilia. You act as if "child molester" is a quantifiable statement. How would you define it exactly? What acts would/wouldn't fall into that category? Would spanking a child put you into that category? Would carrying someone else's child on your shoulders? Would sitting on a park bench with your arm around a child do it?
I'll also comment that when I see someone spending more time worrying about the punishment a child molester is getting than talking with their kids it makes me think.
Let me give you an example, since that's the language you seem to understand: A man sits and talks about his 13 year old daughter: "Well, I had to bail her out of jail last night again. She was arrested for prostitution. I kicked the ***** out of the house afterwards."
I don't think killing child molestors will rid the world of pedophilia. I suppose you'd have to also kill thier victims just to be sure. I think there's alot more to the equation than "child molesters were molested as children."
-
Mini... I would reserve the death penalty for a child molester who kidnaped or sexualy penetrated a child or did a violent sexual offense. Lesser offences would fall under a 3 strikes law I would say or.. in first or second offences.... let the judge and jury decide.
I only worry about examples because yours are so lame.
I don't understand your example at all with the 13 year old. Why would the man "bail her out"? she is a minor in any case... How did she get there? You said "again" are you saying that any crime that a kid commits it is the parents fault? Do you know about drugs? Are you familiar with them?
There is no amount of parental talking that will stop an addict from becomeing an addict. If that is the case in your example then the parent needed to allow the "child" to go to jail.
I could see you "talking" your head off as she walks out the door to meet her "friends" and you don't hear from her till the cops call.
Soooo.. you have one example of a 7 year sentance for slapping a womans butt and another of a teenage prostitute to explain how the whole penalty thing is a huge gray area that only a judge can understand?
A better example would be helpful.
lazs
-
The guy is going to get life in prison lazs. That's the way it goes with that. Thump your chest all you want, it won't change the vote on that one. But remember, you're now defining a child molestor as someone who "kidnaped or sexualy penetrated a child or did a violent sexual offense". You can say that and sound all just and right with yourself, but differentiate that from any other sexual assault charge from touching to virtually anything. You cannot anywhere but in your mind. It does not translate to law.
The example was just of a ****ed up parent that is every bit as responsible for his childs ****ed upedness as any child molestor would be. Somehow, a brutal sexual act is worse than continued brutal behavior by a parent. I mean, you believe that... right? Instead of tirades and chest thumping, it seems a time to focus on being a better parent... no matter how perfect of a job you think you're doing or have done.
-
Toss that joker in General Population. Then he can learn a new game called survival. He'll end up dead soon enough.
-
mini... how is the example you gave any indication of brutal treatment by a parent?
I told you how it could have gone down and I have seen it in person. I have seen families with one teen as you show and one who is just fine... both raised exactly the same. the difference is the addiction factor.
Some people are just born with flaws. addicts are born with flaws that very few overcome. most cause a lot of harm durring their life.
child mollesters are born with a much more serious flaw or... are made... once they aquire that flaw tho.... they can't be cured and they will only cause more and more harm while living a life of missery.
It is simply the humane thing to to do to put them down.
If you can't cure it and you can't moderate it and they are a danger to others... you need to make sure that they aren't amung us... the only way to assure that is to execute them.... the only humane thing is to put em out of their missery.
lazs
-
Wow lazs, on top of your "kill all pedophiles" rant, you actually have to go back and attack THAT example? Are you serious?
And while I'm confident you think you have all of the social science skills necessary to identify the root causes of pedophilia and use that knowledge to justify their extermination... I'll have, once again, to point out that the rest of society lacks your clarity of vision, you're crystal clear definitions and your noble intentions.
Should someone that victimizes children be put down? Define victimizes. You seem to think sexually is the standard by which all that is measured. I believe that is an inherant social flaw.
-
sooo mini. are you saying that sexuality is not one of most powerful... if not the most powerful drives? That our sexuality has a large part in defining us?
Perhaps you can show me the evidence of pedophiles being "cured"?
As for examples... I take em as the come at me. If you can't come up with good examples then don't blame me.
Our sexuality is so important to us as human beings that.. when it is broken.. we are permanently damaged in a very fundamental way.
I do not think that you will find any socialogist or shrink that would dissagree with that....
We simply can't allow those who are damaged in such a fundamental way to continue to do damage to others.
lazs