[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kazanne

So you would quite happily let this person have more children to abuse? Why do you think people who abuse and hurt kids deserve to have them?

Well the Social Services would obviously get involved, you can't justify Inhumanity as justice Kazanne. The point of the law is that we are better then the criminals and that they are punished fairly and justly, not that we torture them and become as bad as them.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

Originally Posted by kazanne

This is a 'serious debates' thread,perhaps you should go in the chat and games one as real life can be depressing unfortunately,people who don't want to hear these things,are just shutting reality out.

not really shutting reality out its just like why would you even want to talk about things like that?

lets talk about nice things like fluffy bunnies and rainbows

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Well the Social Services would obviously get involved, you can't justify Inhumanity as justice Kazanne. The point of the law is that we are better then the criminals and that they are punished fairly and justly, not that we torture them and become as bad as them.

But they are NOT punished fairly imo,that is why people get so angry at the British Justice System,it is a joke.

[Jack_]

Christ @ the mindsets of some people in this thread. Two wrongs certainly don't make a right, and the more we encourage violence and torture, the more it is going to happen. It's common sense, really. Whilst I don't agree with the ridiculously short sentences these disgusting people receive, some of the suggestions for 'punishments' made in this thread are absolutely disgusting. I don't know about most people, but I would much rather see a criminal suffer for decades on end in prison than killing them quickly. And I know that doesn't happen, but that is what needs to happen.

As far as 'inhumane' things go, the furthest I would go is leaving the criminal in a cell with no clothes, no water, no food, absolutely until they eventually die.

But as I've already said, it would then teach kids that we accept and promote violence and torture - and we'd end up with even more criminals than we have now.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by angus58

If and when you become a parent one day, you might begin to understand. Till then keep your sanctimonious, mealymouthed judgments to yourself. And for the record I was not "attempting to justify" anything, I was stating what I would actually DO if that were my baby, and the judicial system let me down. Why would I feel the need to justify myself to you or any other liberal, laissez faire idiots who, unfortunately, seem to dominate the judiciary, handing out lenient sentences for such serious crimes as these.

"All it takes for the triumph of evil is for good men to stand by and do NOTHING". Ever heard of fighting fire with fire? Paedophiles cannot be cured, they are not able to be rehabilitated, so what is your answer, oh wise one?

My answer is that we punish people for their crimes, I'm not defending them but 'fighting fire with fire' is quite frankly stupid and short sighted.

If you're a parent surely you should be setting an example to your children by showing them that fair and honest justice is the only way to go? If we go down your path we might as well execute anyone even accused of a crime as chances are in your world they are guilty. What kind of message are you sending by saying you want people murdered or tortured for commiting crimes? At the end of the day Captial punishment IS murder at the end of the day.

I'm sorry but I must have missed that essay I wrote saying that these people deserve leniant sentences, care to send it to me? I hope they get the maximum sentence but killing them or anyone else simply makes us as bad as them. Whether you liked it or not you attempted to justify your proposed actions by saying that it was justice. It's not it's thuggish behavior what you in the past have so vehemently opposed, just because the target would be a guilty party doesn't make violence right or justified.

Lastly, I'm as entitled to my opinion as you regardless if I have children or not so you can stop playing that card right now.

[Angus]

No, I am not as bad as the perpetrators of such wicked crimes, I have not exploited, abused and harmed and sometimes killed a child for my own perverted pleasure, so that argument goes out the window. Spare me the bleeding heart, "civilised" attitude which is precisely the reason why we have such grotesque inhumane monsters in our midst.

Let's face it If Venables had been dealt with properly the first time round, he would not have had the opportunity to abuse more innocent children, so the fault lies equally with the judicial system, and the bleeding heart liberals who bang on about the inhumane treatment of irredeemable scum like this. As far as I'm concerned, the moment such scum commits an act as evil as this, they have revoked any claim to be treated like a human being. Let's hope someone you love, never mind your own precious child, never becomes a victim to such acts of depravity and abuse, and if they do, god forbid, I wonder how forgiving, civilised and reasonable you would be if the perpetrator got a laughably lenient sentence.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kazanne

But they are NOT punished fairly imo,that is why people get so angry at the British Justice System,it is a joke.

That doesn't mean we can justify violence towards them, it makes us as bad as the thugs in the streets if we did that.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

I just got a warning for posting that picture of the bunny!

InOne hold me

[BB_Eye]

The thing is, a mere deterrent is insufficient. Delivering capital punishment for crimes such as this doesn't stop abusers who are wired to treat children as objects with psychological disorders that are untreatable. Following the duration of their prison sentence, they should be placed under constant psychiatric supervision for the remainder of their lives. Given their inability to empathise on the most basic level and to differentiate between right and wrong, they cannot be released back into society. This is both humane and protects anybody else that the offenders might target in the future.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by simonsays

I just got a warning for posting that picture of the bunny!

InOne hold me

It was underage

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

Originally Posted by BB_Eye

It was underage

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by angus58

No, I am not as bad as the perpetrators of such wicked crimes, I have not exploited, abused and harmed and sometimes killed a child for my own perverted pleasure, so that argument goes out the window. Spare me the bleeding heart, "civilised" attitude which is precisely the reason why we have such grotesque inhumane monsters in our midst.

Let's face it If Venables had been dealt with properly the first time round, he would not have had the opportunity to abuse more innocent children, so the fault lies equally with the judicial system, and the bleeding heart liberals who bang on about the inhumane treatment of irredeemable scum like this. As far as I'm concerned, the moment such scum commits an act as evil as this, they have revoked any claim to be treated like a human being. Let's hope someone you love, never mind your own precious child, never becomes a victim to such acts of depravity and abuse, and if they do, god forbid, I wonder how forgiving, civilised and reasonable you would be if the perpetrator got a laughably lenient sentence.

Yeah you're not a bad as someone who's commited a violent act for wanting them murdered too...

We'll do things your way, how about we get rid of prisons and kill everyone instead? They might reoffend so we might as well off everyone with a criminal record and save us the time and bother. That would surely lead to a happy, safe and rosy world for all children wouldn't it?

We can't judge others if we commit violent acts ourselves, it's hypocrtical and it's wrong. The thing that SHOULD seperate civilians from criminals is our morality but where's the morality in torturing and murdering people and calling that justice? We need to be BETTER then the criminals we punish and murder and torture regardless the motivations is not rising above it.

The law system isn't perfect but it's better then what you're proposing. What's completely hilarious is that what you're proposing is a lot closer to something like the Shariah law, something you've argued against in other threads.

Call me a bleeding heart liberal all you like, it sums up your argument that you've had to insult me instead of arguing the points properly.

[InOne]

Originally Posted by angus58

No, I am not as bad as the perpetrators of such wicked crimes, I have not exploited, abused and harmed and sometimes killed a child for my own perverted pleasure, so that argument goes out the window. Spare me the bleeding heart, "civilised" attitude which is precisely the reason why we have such grotesque inhumane monsters in our midst.

Let's face it If Venables had been dealt with properly the first time round, he would not have had the opportunity to abuse more innocent children, so the fault lies equally with the judicial system, and the bleeding heart liberals who bang on about the inhumane treatment of irredeemable scum like this. As far as I'm concerned, the moment such scum commits an act as evil as this, they have revoked any claim to be treated like a human being. Let's hope someone you love, never mind your own precious child, never becomes a victim to such acts of depravity and abuse, and if they do, god forbid, I wonder how forgiving, civilised and reasonable you would be if the perpetrator got a laughably lenient sentence.

No matter what way you look at it, you'd still be taking pleasure out of someone suffering and death. It's almost like a warped logical of what is right and wrong.
Killing off one Paedophile won't stop them all or worry them. They will do what they do, and make it harder for us to detect them. Shoving it more underground is worse for children. Has Capital Punisment ever worried serious criminals in America? No. All you want them dead for is so you can take pleause in their death, no matter how you try and dress it up.

[Shaun]

I find the people who get so emotionally invested in these stories worrying. There's of course no denying that a disgusting wrong has happened - but why does this provoke so much vitriol and violence in some of you? I think these kinds of stories are thrust into the limelight with the intention of blinding everyone to rationality.

I'd agree that the justice system isn't perfect. The leniency on some sentences [for example, a man who stabbed my cousin who consequently died was given a manslaughter charge that saw him serve 4 years] is incredibly unfair - it does to an extent give criminals a kind-of buy-out clause. But even that, a personal bias, shouldn't sensationalise the debate.

I just don't understand how all of these people on a keyboard can spit out such threats and bile. It's counter-productive, if anything.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

My answer is that we punish people for their crimes, I'm not defending them but 'fighting fire with fire' is quite frankly stupid and short sighted.

If you're a parent surely you should be setting an example to your children by showing them that fair and honest justice is the only way to go? If we go down your path we might as well execute anyone even accused of a crime as chances are in your world they are guilty. What kind of message are you sending by saying you want people murdered or tortured for commiting crimes? At the end of the day Captial punishment IS murder at the end of the day.

I'm sorry but I must have missed that essay I wrote saying that these people deserve leniant sentences, care to send it to me? I hope they get the maximum sentence but killing them or anyone else simply makes us as bad as them. Whether you liked it or not you attempted to justify your proposed actions by saying that it was justice. It's not it's thuggish behavior what you in the past have so vehemently opposed, just because the target would be a guilty party doesn't make violence right or justified.

Lastly, I'm as entitled to my opinion as you regardless if I have children or not so you can stop playing that card right now.

pointless arguing, so I won't waste my time. Try getting your nose out of a book and face reality - no wonder this country is in the mess it is with people like you trying to take the moral high ground over emotive issues about which you have no understanding, experience or empathy. I can assure you I have NO need to justify myself to the right on brigade. Of course you're entitled to your opinion, that doesn't mean I have to accept its validity or relevance.
As to your last sentence, I beg to differ since you can have NO idea of what you would do if you were a parent of an abused child whose abuser got a laughably light sentence.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by angus58

No, I am not as bad as the perpetrators of such wicked crimes, I have not exploited, abused and harmed and sometimes killed a child for my own perverted pleasure, so that argument goes out the window. Spare me the bleeding heart, "civilised" attitude which is precisely the reason why we have such grotesque inhumane monsters in our midst.

Let's face it If Venables had been dealt with properly the first time round, he would not have had the opportunity to abuse more innocent children, so the fault lies equally with the judicial system, and the bleeding heart liberals who bang on about the inhumane treatment of irredeemable scum like this. As far as I'm concerned, the moment such scum commits an act as evil as this, they have revoked any claim to be treated like a human being. Let's hope someone you love, never mind your own precious child, never becomes a victim to such acts of depravity and abuse, and if they do, god forbid, I wonder how forgiving, civilised and reasonable you would be if the perpetrator got a laughably lenient sentence.

Oh ffs, would you stop with the "bleeding heart liberal" rhetoric, it's getting old now.

If you ask me, there should be a mix of reformation and retribution in prisons - they should serve time for their crime but they should try and be reformed at the same time, and shouldnt be released until they are considered to have done so. That's where we went wrong with Venables, it isnt that we didnt kill him.

The death penalty solves nothing, it is not an effective deterrent, and it just brings us down to their level.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by angus58

pointless arguing, so I won't waste my time. Try getting your nose out of a book and face reality - no wonder this country is in the mess it is with people like you trying to take the moral high ground over emotive issues about which you have no understanding, experience or empathy. I can assure you I have NO need to justify myself to the right on brigade. Of course you're entitled to your opinion, that doesn't mean I have to accept its validity or relevance.
As to your last sentence, I beg to differ since you can have NO idea of what you would do if you were a parent of an abused child whose abuser got a laughably light sentence.

Back to getting personal with me again... this is dull Angus. keep it to the subject please.

Like Shaun said, Personal bias shouldn't sensationalise the debate and he has more reason then most to be spewing vitriol but he's not.

I agree that I probably wouldn't know what I'd do in that situation but I'd hope i'd keep some sense of rationality and realise that obsessing over it and attacking people would help no one, least of all my hypothetical child. I think I'd be more focused on trying to help my child get over such an horrific event rather then acting out the Saw series on the person that commited the crime.

It's not perfect but I prefer the law system we have now to your Tarrantino version of what should happen.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Oh ffs, would you stop with the "bleeding heart liberal" rhetoric, it's getting old now.

If you ask me, there should be a mix of reformation and retribution in prisons - they should serve time for their crime but they should try and be reformed at the same time, and shouldnt be released until they are considered to have done so. That's where we went wrong with Venables, it isnt that we didnt kill him.

The death penalty solves nothing, it is not an effective deterrent, and it just brings us down to their level.

Exactly, I agree completely.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Shaun

I find the people who get so emotionally invested in these stories worrying. There's of course no denying that a disgusting wrong has happened - but why does this provoke so much vitriol and violence in some of you? I think these kinds of stories are thrust into the limelight with the intention of blinding everyone to rationality.

I'd agree that the justice system isn't perfect. The leniency on some sentences [for example, a man who stabbed my cousin who consequently died was given a manslaughter charge that saw him serve 4 years] is incredibly unfair - it does to an extent give criminals a kind-of buy-out clause. But even that, a personal bias, shouldn't sensationalise the debate.

I just don't understand how all of these people on a keyboard can spit out such threats and bile. It's counter-productive, if anything.

The reason sentences are so lenient is because the prison system currently has 85,000 prisoners and counting whilst there are only enough space for around 60,000. They're vastly overcrowded. A prison infrastructure is also far too expensive to justify yet more tax payers money on to piss in the ocean at a time when cuts are being made across the board. It might seem unfair but there is a lot of practicality behind it.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Yeah you're not a bad as someone who's commited a violent act for wanting them murdered too...

We'll do things your way, how about we get rid of prisons and kill everyone instead? They might reoffend so we might as well off everyone with a criminal record and save us the time and bother. That would surely lead to a happy, safe and rosy world for all children wouldn't it?

We can't judge others if we commit violent acts ourselves, it's hypocrtical and it's wrong. The thing that SHOULD seperate civilians from criminals is our morality but where's the morality in torturing and murdering people and calling that justice? We need to be BETTER then the criminals we punish and murder and torture regardless the motivations is not rising above it.

This is all well and good if you see violence, in and of itself, as morally wrong and human beings, irrespective of their actions, as inherently valuable and deserving of rights. But really, in a democracy, it is civilians who have rights, not humans. When people lose their citizenship, they have effectively broken a social contract and lose many of the rights they would have enjoyed as civilians. Under a custodial sentence, it would be a right to vote, freedom of movement and a right not to be held against your will. This is totally fair given that criminals are convicted for violating other people's rights. While I am not in favour of capital punishment, I strongly disagree with and resent the notion that people who advocate the execution of the worst criminals are "just as bad".

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by BB_Eye

This is all well and good if you see violence, in and of itself, as morally wrong and human beings, irrespective of their actions, as inherently valuable and deserving of rights. But really, in a democracy, it is civilians who have rights, not humans. When people lose their citizenship, they have effectively broken a social contract and lose many of the rights they would have enjoyed as civilians. Under a custodial sentence, it would be a right to vote, freedom of movement and a right not to be held against your will. This is totally fair given that criminals are convicted for violating other people's rights. While I am not in favour of capital punishment, I strongly disagree with and resent the notion that people who advocate the execution of the worst criminals are "just as bad".

I just believe we shouldn't have to lower ourselves with it, we should be better then that, not so much that I think criminals deserve all the rights they enjoy now. I think it was MTVN that said that capital punishment isn't a deterrent and that's completely correct. We need to look into deterrents and look at the state of our prisons before we dust off our executioner cowls. I can see the merits of capital Punishment don't get me wrong but I just can't agree with it.

To me it's murder.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Christ @ the mindsets of some people in this thread. Two wrongs certainly don't make a right, and the more we encourage violence and torture, the more it is going to happen. It's common sense, really. Whilst I don't agree with the ridiculously short sentences these disgusting people receive, some of the suggestions for 'punishments' made in this thread are absolutely disgusting. I don't know about most people, but I would much rather see a criminal suffer for decades on end in prison than killing them quickly. And I know that doesn't happen, but that is what needs to happen.

As far as 'inhumane' things go, the furthest I would go is leaving the criminal in a cell with no clothes, no water, no food, absolutely until they eventually die.

But as I've already said, it would then teach kids that we accept and promote violence and torture - and we'd end up with even more criminals than we have now.

This coming from one who thought the 'jokes' made about the toddler taped to a wall were ok to laugh at,lol,oh dear and as it happenes I would prefer to see a criminal be behind bars for decades,but they don't do they?they get a cushy ride,so you can't wonder why people get angry,so stop pontificating and TRY and understand where some of us are coming from,so do you think leaving one to die of cold,thirst or starvation is more humane than ,chopping their hands off or steralizing them?Why should we be humane to things that harm our kids,Would you feel the same if it was YOUR child?

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Tom

The reason sentences are so lenient is because the prison system currently has 85,000 prisoners and counting whilst there are only enough space for around 60,000. They're vastly overcrowded. A prison infrastructure is also far too expensive to justify yet more tax payers money on to piss in the ocean at a time when cuts are being made across the board. It might seem unfair but there is a lot of practicality behind it.

Shows the 'soft' option isn't working then!

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by angus58

Article from The Independent today:

"Girlfriend 'took lead role in sexual abuse of baby'


Wednesday, 6 October 2010


A paedophile said in court today he was told what to do by his then girlfriend as the pair sexually assaulted and took photographs of a five-month-old baby.


Colin Blanchard said it was Tracy Dawber, 44, who took the lead in the abuse.


Dawber, formerly of Bedford Road, Southport, Merseyside, denies the assault and permitting Blanchard to take the five indecent pictures.


Blanchard, 40, formerly from Rochdale, Lancs, is in custody awaiting sentence after admitting his involvement in the alleged assault by Dawber.


He told the jury at Winchester Crown Court today that Dawber had lifted the child's clothes to show it had no nappy on and he said Dawber told him to look at the child and to take the photographs.


"I was quite passive in the whole thing. I was taking the photographs as instructed," he said.


"I took a photograph and she asked me to show it to her and then I took another and I showed it again and she repositioned the child accordingly."


He said there had been sexual talk during the taking of the images but not much was said afterwards.


The pair had first had normal sex when they met in 2007 before moving on to what Blanchard described to the jury as an "A to Z of sexual desires and fantasies" and the pair discussed child sex.


During cross-examination by Deborah Gould, Blanchard admitted he was selfish and arrogant, that he lied to police and had tried to blame others.


He admitted he had been involved with many other woman including two named in court as Vanessa George and Tracy Lyons.


He had also sent images of child sex to two unnamed women, he admitted to the jury.


He said before his arrest he had been living a "double life".


Miss Gould asked: Did you know what the truth was at that time?"


Blanchard: "No".


Miss Gould: "But you know now?"


Blanchard: "Yes, as strange as it may seem."


Earlier the jury heard Dawber admitted it was her holding the baby in the photographs but denied the alleged wrongdoing.


In interview Dawber told police she could not remember the pictures being taken, but Simon Morgan, prosecuting, told the jury the Nokia phone always flashed when it took the pictures.


He said some had been taken from only about 9in away on August 20 2008.


"The Crown say the defendant was able to see the phone being used," he said.


Mr Morgan said the pair met in 2007 and had a sexual relationship and that she had "linked herself to his grossly unacceptable activities".


She described him as a sociable person but said she had been "disgusted when she heard on the news what he had been involved with".


Blanchard was caught in June 2009 when a work colleague discovered child pornography on his computer, the court heard.


He was arrested at Manchester airport and a connection via a Facebook account was made with Dawber.


Officers also uncovered the mobile phone from Blanchard's Volvo that contained the images of the baby, which were shown to the jury. It also showed Dawber in explicit poses.


When arrested in November 2009 Dawber would not confirm it was her holding the baby but she later admitted it.


Officers found child pornography on her computer that was the same as that discovered on Blanchard's and search words on her machine linked to child porn such as "Lolita". A PDF file containing stories about incest was also found. "




I just can't get my head around this story - but the thought of it just makes me sick to my stomach. The perpetrators can't possibly be part of the human race - I know what I would like to do to them, and it involves a chainsaw and a noose. Sadly under our useless justice system they will get just a few years in jail before being released to do it all over again.

what about the parents that strapped the toddler to a wall? they should be dead and so should these.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Well the Social Services would obviously get involved, you can't justify Inhumanity as justice Kazanne. The point of the law is that we are better then the criminals and that they are punished fairly and justly, not that we torture them and become as bad as them.

The Social services,Oh yes like the ones who saved baby Peter,Victoria Climbie,Kyra Isshak,Jessica Randal,Brandon Muir,I could reel a page off.I don't think we ARE better than the criminals if we sit back and do nothing,I am not saying lets have a mass slaughter,but at least let the punishment fit the crime,some people are evil,simple as.