Ian Watkins attacked and killed in prison [P7]

ChicagoBlue said:
Who said anything about “public”?

And, you can make the same familial argument about almost EVERY crime that would label the criminal a felon and out them inside.

People make personal choices about the crimes perpetrated against them, but, as a society, we should set a minimum standard of behavior that should not be that hard to uphold. From there, there’s a sliding scale of punishments…with torture, murder and the exploitation of children on the far end of the scale.

Hang ‘em high!
Click to expand...

No you can't except instances of physical abuse.

You are leapfrogging over the issue of complex trauma for your own blood lust, it's a shortsighted idea that incentives paedophiles to murder children.

Fortunately no serious politician would ever consider such an idea.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Ironically, that’s the same response as I have to your over emotional reactions.

It’s why you don’t have any say in how the law is applied. The same as 99% of other social media users who want most criminals put down for most crimes.
Click to expand...
“Overly emotional”?

Ever been diddled? Ass raped?

What’s “emotional” about saying society needs to remove murders and child predators from our ranks. What purpose do they serve?

If anything, the emotional ones are those looking for any reason possible to lock them up and NOT throw away the key, as if paying for them to be alive but have no life is somehow a much better solution.

If you executed every murderer and convicted child predator & rapist, I wouldn’t miss them for one second…but I’M the emotional one?

I’m the least emotional of anyone here. Just get rid of these monsters. The end.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
“Overly emotional”?

Ever been diddled? Ass raped?

What’s “emotional” about saying society needs to remove murders and child predators from our ranks. What purpose do they serve?

If anything, the emotional ones are those looking for any reason possible to lock them up and NOT throw away the key, as if paying for them to be alive but have no life is somehow a much better solution.

If you executed every murderer and convicted child predator & rapist, I wouldn’t miss them for one second…but I’M the emotional one?

I’m the least emotional of anyone here. Just get rid of these monsters. The end.
Click to expand...
Yes. Overly emotional. The rest of your post simply enforces that.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
No you can't except instances of physical abuse.

You are leapfrogging over the issue of complex trauma for your own blood lust, it's a shortsighted idea that incentives paedophiles to murder children.

Fortunately no serious politician would ever consider such an idea.
Click to expand...
I’m neither a politician, nor do I have any blood lust, but I am absolutely serious when I say there is no place in any supposed civilized society for those sentient adults that break the basic codes of our collective life together on the blue marble.

Your opinion is clearly more “serious,” because you feel you’re in lockstep with politicians. Enjoy that real estate.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
I’m neither a politician, nor do I have any blood lust, but I am absolutely serious when I say there is no place in any supposed civilized society for those sentient adults that break the basic codes of our collective life together on the blue marble.

Your opinion is clearly more “serious,” because you feel you’re in lockstep with politicians. Enjoy that real estate.
Click to expand...

No it's more serious because I'm willingly to defer to the experts who know far more about complex trauma and the psychology of criminals and victims than I could ever know.

A consideration of the behaviour of both groups seems lacking in your responses and that's why it's fatally flawed, you've let yourself get carried away with your own emotions without considering those of victims enough.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
“Overly emotional”?

Ever been diddled? Ass raped?

What’s “emotional” about saying society needs to remove murders and child predators from our ranks. What purpose do they serve?

If anything, the emotional ones are those looking for any reason possible to lock them up and NOT throw away the key, as if paying for them to be alive but have no life is somehow a much better solution.

If you executed every murderer and convicted child predator & rapist, I wouldn’t miss them for one second…but I’M the emotional one?

I’m the least emotional of anyone here. Just get rid of these monsters. The end.
Click to expand...
there is no solution, evil monsters like watkins have always existed and always will. capital punishment and life imprisonment are both equally useless as deterrents.

our justice system is responsible for many travesties - that worthless piece of filth in the m66 crash only getting 12 years for example - but binning the death penalty is hardly top of the list.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
No it's more serious because I'm willingly to defer to the experts who know far more about complex trauma and the psychology of criminals and victims than I could ever know.

A consideration of the behaviour of both groups seems lacking in your responses and that's why it's fatally flawed, you've let yourself get carried away with your own emotions without considering those of victims enough.
Click to expand...
Neoliberalism and the feelings police.

Got it.

Hang ‘em high and let it be a lesson to the next one.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
Assumes facts not in evidence.

The lust for children is not the same as the lust for the power to control life and death. I’ll grant that to you IF, and only if, you can show a recognized study that supports your claim.

Fwiw, child molestation IS almost a death sentence to the child involved. It never leaves them and it colors their view of others and life.

You call my feelings “blood lust,” but it’s the exact opposite. I abhor personal violence. I think it is a human societal cancer. Accordingly, I strongly favor strict enforcement of societal penalties on those that seek to exploit others for THEIR blood lust.

An eye for an eye is not a new sentiment. In many ways, I support that, especially when the first eye is taken in an outrageous, sickening act.

I draw a sharp distinction between manslaughter and murder, but feel like child molestation (especially in a sadistic or physical domineering manner) is almost on a par with murder.

You knew the rules, especially the most serious ones. YOU get to choose your path. If that path destroys others, by choice, then my choice is to remove you from society. Permanently.

I understand some of the pitfalls, and believe there should be safeguards and checks & balances, but I’ll never believe these types of individuals deserve my grace or mercy.
Click to expand...
I don’t need to provide any studies - what I am stating is wholly rooted in logic and common sense.

It’s nothing to do with a lust to control life and death; it’s a lot more mundane than that. In your world paedophiles would murder their victims in order to destroy primary evidence and the eye witness to their crime. Why not, if they are going to be executed if convicted of sexual offences against the child?

In your world, they may as well take their chances as they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by killing the child. It would also mean destroying the body was the most effective MO, thus further compounding the parents’ grief.

Your statement that being subject to sexual abuse as a child is akin to a death sentence will certainly be true in many instances, but not all, and certainly not the case for those around them. Some people who are sexually assaulted/abused as children go on to have happy lives. Others it completely ruins. However, in your world many of the former will have their lives snuffed out in a horrible and brutal way because it greatly reduces to odds of the abuser being executed. In your world far more paedophiles would be walking free because there wasn’t enough evidence to convict them, and/or no-one alive knew of their crimes.

The world you crave is rooted in emotion not logic, and it would be an even unhappier one for the victims of abuse and those that love them, both of whom I don’t doubt you are seeking to help.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I don’t need to provide any studies - what I am stating is wholly rooted in logic and common sense.
Click to expand...
Oh well, then, why didn’t you mention it earlier…logic and common sense and the law! Blow me down with a feather!

In my world, they would pre-emptively know they could seek the help they need before acting on their sexual impulses. If not, then they get the ultimate punishment for destroying the life and sanctity of another human being.

Why does one assume child molesters & paedophiles are murderers? The two crimes are wholly different, are they not? And, where they might overlap, it’s doubly offensive.
 
Last edited:
ChicagoBlue said:
Oh well, then, why didn’t you mention it earlier…logic and common sense and the law! Blow me down with a feather!

In my world, they would pre-emptively know they could seek the help they need before acting on their sexual impulses. If not, then they get the ultimate punishment for destroying the life and sanctity of another human being.

Why does one assume child molesters & paedophiles are murderers? The two crimes are wholly different, are they not? And, where they might overlap, it’s doubly offensive.
Click to expand...
The law has to broadly operate within the confines of logic and common sense. It’s why banning guns in the US would never be feasible, however desirable that may be. I’m surprised you fail to appreciate this.

Double digit sentences don’t modify their behaviour now, why do you assume the death penalty would deter them from committing these offences? Based on the murder rate in the US, the presence of the death penalty palpably does not deter people from killing others. Why do you therefore think it would serve to control someone’s extreme sexual urges?

What do you mean ‘are murderers’? Are you suggesting that people are either murderers or they are not? That doesn’t make any sense. Many people are driven to kill others because of circumstance (provocation, anger, concealment of other crimes) which they could not foresee and over which they had little or no control as events overtook them.

Talking of the two crimes (sexual offences against children and murder) as being wholly different fails to appreciate the nature of the many of the offenders who perpetrate these crimes. They are only concerned with themselves and will do what it takes to preserve themselves. That is their motivation, and different labels for different manifestations of that behaviour are not really the point.

So of course, many paedophiles, having acted on their desires, and faced with the reality of the aftermath would contemplate and act upon killing the child who had been the subject of their urges. It’s what Ian Huntley did, and faced with the possibility of being executed for that offending of course many would go down that route for reasons of self-preservation. Abusing a child is the ultimate act of selfishness; to suggest that significant numbers of people who are prepared to act in such an antisocial and inconsiderate way towards innocent children wouldn’t be prepared to kill those children even though they have nothing to lose by so doing, is utterly preposterous.

In your world the murder rate against victims of sexual abuse would unquestionably rise.
 
wasn't his password on his laptop something like..
"ifuckkids"

he knew exactly what he was doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top