How much punishment is enough?

[JohnChasWebb]

He has a legal challenge to the new law being applied to him retroactively (Due Process). The new law, in this instance, is including a new element that was not in existence at the time of his offense.
This situation is like putting someone back in jail for an offense committed 10 years ago (found guilty and sentenced) because there is a new law prescribing longer incarceration for that particular offense. This type of activity is considered a violation of "Due Process" which is a violation of fundamental fairness. The new law, as applied to this situation, adds an additional punishment for a matter that has already been resolved.

 

[schlitt]

Ah, the amazing concept of a penal system.

There are four aims of a justice system's sentencing, some of which can conflict - to punish offenders, to rehabilitate offenders, to remove offenders from the community and to prevent them from harming again.

Punishment is often touted as a form of warning to prevent individuals from offending, however it is more seen to be imposed as a form of retribution to make society feel a sense of compensation. While this sits uncomfortably with me (I see no benefit other than making people feel that something is being done), I don't see it ever changing, people being what they are.

Rehabilitation seems to be fine...until it sometimes fails. Then the public gets angry. So until there is a 100% rehabilitation program it will never be the central aim of a justice system's sentencing.

Removal from society makes people feel safer. However the question is then 'how long'? Forever? If not, why just a few years? Will society be any safer when they come out, especially with a few more tricks up their sleeve? Separate from rehabilitation, removal makes little sense.

Prevention from doing wrong again through measures such as this one take into account that the person has demonstrated the potential to do harm, and this potential should be limited with respect to observing the above reasons for sentencing. Therefore it is not retribution behind the action of keeping the man's distance from children, but prevention.

Unfortunately there is no happy balance between the above reasons for a penal system, and they are what influences every decision made by a member of the justice system.

Athon

This is spot on.

 

[Travis]

He has a legal challenge to the new law being applied to him retroactively (Due Process). The new law, in this instance, is including a new element that was not in existence at the time of his offense.
This situation is like putting someone back in jail for an offense committed 10 years ago (found guilty and sentenced) because there is a new law prescribing longer incarceration for that particular offense. This type of activity is considered a violation of "Due Process" which is a violation of fundamental fairness. The new law, as applied to this situation, adds an additional punishment for a matter that has already been resolved.

I agree but the fanatics will just scream "think of the children" and call for Due Process to be violated and they will probably get it.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I think child molesters should get life*.

*Assuming that our age system is changed to allow for lower ages and/or Romeo and Juliet.

 

[Travis]

I think child molesters should get life*.

*Assuming that our age system is changed to allow for lower ages and/or Romeo and Juliet.

Should rapists of adults also get life, or do we reserve extra punishment for those that do it to children? If not, please explain your rationale.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Should rapists of adults also get life, or do we reserve extra punishment for those that do it to children? If not, please explain your rationale.

Well, there are different types of rape, but maybe.

My rationale is that child molesters seriously screw kids up. And they shouldn't be trusted to remain in society after abusing children, who are dependent upon adults.

Though I am a tad authoritarian in my punishments for crime.

 

[Travis]

Well, there are different types of rape, but maybe.

I'm referring to the type of rape where someone has forcible sex with someone else.

My rationale is that child molesters seriously screw kids up.

A 20 year old college student wouldn't get screwed up if she was raped?

Actually, I would argue the opposite. I think I would be much more traumatized if I was sexually assaulted now as opposed to how I was assaulted when I was 8 years old.

And they shouldn't be trusted to remain in society after abusing children, who are dependent upon adults.

Though I am a tad authoritarian in my punishments for crime.

You can say that again.

 

[Tokenconservative]

Not necessarily. I have a cousin who, when he was 16, made a sex tape with his 15 year old girlfriend. It was found and he was charged with possession of child pornography. He was convicted and given a ten year sentence. This November will mark his 7th year of serving that sentence. When he is eventually released he will be subject to all these new rules preventing him from living near bus stops, parks, schools etc.

It was what happened to him that fully turned me against the witch hunt of so called "sex offenders."

And there it is...of course, apologists and other feminists and leftists will shriek...link? LIIIINNNKKKKK!!!?

This happens all the time, but the apologists, feminists and fellow-travellers either ignore it or truly believe that "men" have it coming.

Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

Well, there are different types of rape, but maybe.

My rationale is that child molesters seriously screw kids up. And they shouldn't be trusted to remain in society after abusing children, who are dependent upon adults.

Though I am a tad authoritarian in my punishments for crime.

Please define "child" and "molestation" and "child molester." In the one example in here, a 16 year old "molested" his 15 yr-old girlfriend, consensually, and they even consensually videotaped the act for fun, I am sure, not evidence, and he is serving a 10 years sentence for "rape."

Did he "molest" this "child"? When I was 17, a 13 yr-old girl told me she was 15 and proceeded to seduce me. She was very sexually experienced...it became clear to me, a virgin at the time, by both her acts with me and the fact that she told me she was. Which of us was "molested"? Which was "raped"?

Tokie

 

[Dancing David]

I think that the principle of the law may be mistaken, does registration prevent future crime? But that is another thread

there are two issues i have with the registration law:

1. there are people who get labeled as 'sex offenders' that are engaging in behavior that is widely tolerated, they are just the ones that get picked out. IE consesual sex between a fiveteen and a seventeen year old. If the sex is rape then that is different.

2. The systemic inequity in the judicial system, when I say systemic I do not mean in the system itself but in the application of the system:
(These are all local anecodtes from my town they were never brought to court)

a. exchange student has non-consensual sex with another minor, football player has non-consensual sex with another minor. In short a minor has non-consensual sex with another minor. But because of inequities in the social structure (IE parents have money or social prestige), reports are made but no charges are made. No court case occurs. Rapist does not get labeled sex offender.

b. Family member molests child repeatedly and to the knowledge of other adults. Family shelters perpetrator. Rapist does not recieve label.

c. Family member gets charged with child molestation, court for reasons of money and prestige gives the offender 'court supervision' despite repeated rapes over long time period. Perpetrator is charged with crime but will never have it on their record. Convicted or pled guilty rapist does not receive the label.

d. Noted member of church (high social prestige) molests someone who is not his family member. Crime gets reproted, police do not take report, states attorney does not get chance to prosecute crime. Alleged victim harrased and leave town.

The inequities continue and abound, our system has definite advantages for people with wealth and social prestige that will keep someone who has likely committed a crime from ever receiving the label of 'sex offender'. So while they have likely done the same as the ones who have been labeled the benefits of their prestige and wealth keep them from receiving the same label.



The real issue is that we want to label (I think incarcerate or destroy) 'sexual predators' those who commit repeated sexual crime.

 

[Dancing David]

And there it is...of course, apologists and other feminists and leftists will shriek...link? LIIIINNNKKKKK!!!?

This happens all the time, but the apologists, feminists and fellow-travellers either ignore it or truly believe that "men" have it coming.

Tokie

Hmm, was it a femist that passed the law, or prosecuted the charges or a feminist jury that convicted the person?

Or was it other people? Why lay the blame at the door of the femisists any more than you would lay the commision of a rape at the door of 'male chauvinists'?

If there are inequities in the application of the system from a feminist or a male chauvinist then those are personal acts based upon a belief system. But why condemn eith men or women so broadly?

Scepticism cuts both ways.

 

[Ian Osborne]

Does anyone else wonder if Tokenconservative is really Jedi Knight in disguise? He seems to have done a reasonable job inventing a new on-screen persona, but the new one is just as predictable as the old one.

 

[Cainkane1]

I wouldn't trust him with a burnt out match.

There are hefty consequences we pay in life. Yea, it's inconvenient he has to move but this isn't being done to him based on race or gender, or anything superficial or unfair. He is being penalized b/c of the nature of his crime. It doesn't matter if it was 5,10,15,20 years ago, society and the law will never ever trust a pedo around children again. It's for the protection of the children AS WELL AS THE PERP. Sometimes ppl with sicknesses NEED(and want) boundaries in order to make the act more difficult to accomplish.

Could you honsetly say that you'd trust him with your kid, neice, nephew, whatever?

I don't care if he found God, or is the best role model citizen, it would always be in the back of my mind...therefore I wouldn't and COULDN'T trust..no matter how good he cleaned up!

Remember though he has been out of prison for ten years and hasn't committed another crime. He can never speak to a child under 18 again. If he does he'll go back to prison. His lawyers argue that since he's kept his nose clean for this length of time he ought to be allowed to stay where he is. This man is no relative or friend of mine and I'm not defending him. I only posted this for the purposes of discussion. I know where he lives and I pass his house often. I've never seen him outside in the 12 years its been since he has been released.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Please define "child" and "molestation" and "child molester." In the one example in here, a 16 year old "molested" his 15 yr-old girlfriend, consensually, and they even consensually videotaped the act for fun, I am sure, not evidence, and he is serving a 10 years sentence for "rape."

Did he "molest" this "child"? When I was 17, a 13 yr-old girl told me she was 15 and proceeded to seduce me. She was very sexually experienced...it became clear to me, a virgin at the time, by both her acts with me and the fact that she told me she was. Which of us was "molested"? Which was "raped"?

Tokie

I said in a previous post that my position depended on changing the laws.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I'm referring to the type of rape where someone has forcible sex with someone else.

There are different types. There is date rape. There is statutory rape. There is rape when the other person is under the influence, and even then, different circumstances for being under the influence. There is rape when the girls says no in the middle of it, and the guy doesn't respond.

A 20 year old college student wouldn't get screwed up if she was raped?

Actually, I would argue the opposite. I think I would be much more traumatized if I was sexually assaulted now as opposed to how I was assaulted when I was 8 years old.


You can say that again.

Don't be rude. My main argument was the second one, which you conveniently overlooked.

And I think you are a tad ignorant of the effects of molestation on children.

 

[Cuddles]

IF we are so sure, so absolutely confident, that these people will re-offend then we shouldn't be releasing them in the first place. IF we are not so sure, so absolutely confident, they will re-offend then all these restrictions are pathetic and criminal.

I'm with Travis. There is also the additional point that these measures seem completely pointless. They won't do anything to improve anyone's safety. So a child molester can't live closer than 70 yards to a bus stop? Great, I'm sure none of them would ever be capable of walking an additional 10 yards to reach it if they really want to offend again.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

The disturbing issue is not punishment itself, but retroactivity of punishment, which I thought had been established as a Bad Thing in Article 8 of the Declaration of 1789, and again in Article 11 of the Declaration of 1948.

That's what I'm thinking. He should be grandfathered in. Hopefully the ACLU is on the case.

 

[pipelineaudio]

Well, there are different types of rape, but maybe.

My rationale is that child molesters seriously screw kids up. And they shouldn't be trusted to remain in society after abusing children, who are dependent upon adults.

Though I am a tad authoritarian in my punishments for crime.

I would say a single illegal immigrant may screw up more lives than a single child molester

I KNOW a single red light runner could easily screw up more lives than a single child molester

A single activist judge could screw up more lives than a child molester

Why do sex issues get special magic status?

Ill take getting molested any day over getting mobbed everyday, yet the thugs who do the mobbing IF they get arrested just get turned right back out with no permanent record and likely no punishment.

 

[Darth Rotor]

The disturbing issue is not punishment itself, but retroactivity of punishment, which I thought had been established as a Bad Thing in Article 8 of the Declaration of 1789, and again in Article 11 of the Declaration of 1948.

Thank you.

DR

 

[ImaginalDisc]

First, no...I don't have a link--LIIIIINKKKKK!!!--but anyone who can recognize that the sun rises in the east should also be able to recognize that as the social stigma of adult-child sexual contact is steadily eroded by the left and feminism in the West, esp. America, true molestation of kids occurs more and more. Moreover, as our culture sexualizes younger and younger kids, we ALL begin to view younger and younger kids as sexually available. Frankly, when I see a physically mature 13 year old girl dressed like Brittany Spears, I have a hard time identifying her as only 13 if she is in any way out of a context that would automatically ID her as such (school, say).

So, that said...like alcoholism, this is not a "disease" but rather a choice some people make. They have poor impulse control; that, by the way, can be treated pharmaceutically. The reality is that what our hyperfeminist culture has, since the 1960s begun (and that is complete now) identified as a pathology, is simply normal human (animal) behavior in the male of the species. Men like to look at and acquire fecund-appearing younger females. It's that simple. While we look askance at this when we see some 40-something with a 20something wife of girlfriend, for some reason when Stella gets her groove back with a MAN half her age, we applaud that?

Can anyone explain this socicial dichotomy?

We put "dirty old men" in jail for this, after building a cultural milieu that tells them: teenaged girls are sexually available to you...just look how we dress them! For example, a male teacher who engages in sex with a female student (consensual, a sexually mature female, I am talking about...14-17 yrs., say) he goes to prison for 20 years. When a FEMALE teacher does the same thing, even with boys as young as 10, she gets probation.

Hey, she's just gettin' her grooooove back, right?

Tokie

Blame "leftists?" Check.

Blame feminists? Check.

Blame parents? Check.

Blame children? Check.

Blame women? Check.