Strong point,and I liked your earlier point as to life being life in Prison then no one would need to worry that particular 'vile' abuser would ever harm a child again.

Yep, I agree. The way that parents are being put on a pedastol above those without children makes no sense. Surely those who are not parents are more able to approach an issue like this with more rationality, without being guided purely by heightened emotions.

But the point is you didnt really form your own opinion, you just agreed with kazanne and angus, and then because they were glad to see somebody taking their side they heaped a whole load of praise on you.

If somebody murders someone then they are a killer. If you then execute that murderer you too are a killer. And then the only thing to differentiate between the two of you is a misguided and misplaced concept of "justice".

well you have got to do something to pedophiles and killers because prisons are getting overfilled with them,so if you dont want them dead chop there hands off so when they do come out they cant commit crimes again,or you kill them so they never can hurt anybody again.

That is exactly what Kazanne said. And could YOU yourself chop somebodys hands off?

i agreed with angus58 and kazanne because i also believe that they should be dead so i did form my own opinion.

and what your saying is that soldiers,the police and the secret service are all bad because they murder criminals.

So body mutiliation is a legitimate punishment now is it? Christ, imagine what this country would be like if you were in charge :joker:

if it was personal then yeah i would gladly do it,but if it was from a netural perspective then im not sure.

Even if it was personal, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't. You'd have to have some kind of disorder yourself to be able to commit such an act and not bat an eyelid.

yeah crime rate would drop because people would be to scared to commit a crime,which would be better than what you would do to the country.

Correct again kazanne, I guess if a constructive point cannot be made then its just easier to attack someone who is making constructive points, even if with a bit of stronger passion.
Jedward fever talks loads of sense, he has a wisdom that defies his years,he alsways makes me think when I read his posts,he has the ability to make a point in few words which is something I certainly have not got the ability to do.
By you kazanne, Angus58 and myself he has been rightly praised for his contributions to this debate. Very highly deserved praise too.

One thing I cannot get my head round on this debate are when the arguments of 'understanding' the abuser is made.
Why understand them, what can be understood as to such a filthy 'vile' act against a baby, toddler or any child, how about really trying to understand the fear, the hurt, the trauma of the child while it goes on, and then in cases the poor child loses its life.
Understand that,or try to by all means, show understanding to the abusers, no way.

InOne made a strong point as to finding out from the abuser what makes them put thought into action,that was a strong valid point, and that should be done anyway,however, the punishment for child abuse in my view and clearly many others too, should be the severest penalty possible and its time the law was changed to make that so.

That was I think the whole point of the start of this thread,evryone is entitled to their own opinions but in coming to that opinion,please never forget once this happens some adult or older person who should know right from wrong, has grossly abused a child that likely cannot speak for itself,if we don't then take up the fight for that Child then what does that make us.

The police dont murder criminals only when they're own lives are in immediate danger are they forced to use the last resort of gunfire.

And with soldiers, they're fighting a war, they shoot at the enemy and the enemy shoots at them, but they would not kill someone defenceless.

im sorry but if somebody done something to my family i would kill the bastard no problem.

actually alot of countries have the police carry guns incase the criminal is about to kill someone else.

I doubt it would be that effective as a deterrent, and besides we are human beings, we dont mutilate someone for a crime. We live in a civilised, 21st century society, you seem to want us to be thrust back to the middle ages, I'm sure you would like what they did to criminals back then.

Yes, it's only a last resort and are only used when someone life is in immediate danger as I said, and when it is the only way to prevent a murder happening before their eyes.

Easy to say on the net.

if you chopped a killers hands off they wont be able to kill anybody again,also if you chopped a pedophiles hands off they wont be able to rape children again.

dont you actually think that would make us a better country if we did chop pedophiles hands off or just killed the ****ers?

In truth, if it happened to someone in a family then I have little doubt just about all of the rest of that family would take in thoughts as you stated here,jedward.

There was also a comment before by some as to jedward fevers statements not meaning that he is intelligent, well, I consider him very intelligent but whether he is or isn't in some people's view,one thing is certain you do 'not' need to be intelligent to be 'right' and he is right.

Wrong,I said what I did about Jedward because that is what i feel about him,it was nothing to do with him 'agreeing with us' as a few people agreed with us not just Jedward,I have known him for a while now,we have always got on but not always agreed,so you see imo,Jedward makes some great points and for his age shows more knowledge than some of the older people on here

Jesus Christ.

What knowlegde has he shown?

that i actually aint trying to continue the mistakes of this stupid soft countries laws.

You have not shown that at all. You've shown you can agree with people and that you have a worrying lust for mutilation and murder.

so i cant agree with people now then?:joker: and im sure im not the only one that believes in murdering the bastards.

Christ, what kind of a country would we live in when it's considered acceptable, even moral, to mutliate another human being because he has done wrong!?

You may be entitled to an opinion, but it's a completely vile and abhorrent opinion if you ask me.

ok then let the soft laws let them out so they can re offend.

Don't mess about Jedward,CUT THEIR DICKS OFF!!!!:joker::joker::joker:

Or how about they get given an appropiate sentance, they can serve their time, and while they do that they can be rehabilitated so that they are no longer a threat to society. That's what should happen if you ask me, and they should not be released until they are no longer likely to reoffend.

i may aswell not because the lefty brigade will class me as bad as them.:joker:

they should never be released but we know life never means life so i say kill the scum.

What,you mean like Jon venables was:joker::joker::joker:

Who cares,be yourself,your as good as anyone else,better than some.:wavey:

No, Venables shouldnt have been released as soon as he was because it seems that he had not yet been fully rehabilitated. That was the problem, although you would probably want him killed for something he did when he was 10 years old.

Life can mean life. Plenty of criminals have spent their lives behind bars, Peter Sutcliffe, for example, will never be freed.

If you thing that the solution to all the crime being committed in this country is simply to "kill the scum" then you need to take a reality check, and take into account the bigger picture.

Kepping to the topic.Can InOne or anyone just tell me this, InOne has made some really strong points that I agree fully with late last night and through the night too. So can he or anyone with his thoughts on this just tell me,
How could anyone even a Doctor,be 100% sure that an abuser who had been sent to prison, if he/she was let out, how could it be certain beyond all doubt that no abuse could ever be done again.
If they can tell me how that could be done with 100% surety, then lets hear it, if not then surely at least being locked away for life,whole of their life, has to be the minimum to protect all Children.

that. is. sick.:eek:

you cant thats why its a waste of time.

in your opinion we were all wrong like in my opinion and other peoples aswell you and other people on this forum are wrong.

If you know the law, they have risk assessments. Also there are certain levels of risk. Which means some offenders will have to be checked on daily or check in to the police. They don't let them roam free when they are released, they are monitored.

just not monitored good enough.