lapal_fan Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 (edited) If vengeance is a dish best served cold, then we should make them eat a bowl of dry ice, that's well cold innit? Edited January 8, 2018 by lapal_fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogso Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 (edited) Having known people who do / have worked in prisons, and having worked with an ex-con, I believe that word spreads pretty quite who the nonces are inside, and they're dealt with appropriately. Crushed up light bulbs in their food, that sort of thing. Nothing too extreme of course, but I certainly don't think they have a rosy time in clinky. Also, classic Dem :D Edited January 8, 2018 by hogso Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 Just now, PaulC said: True so is Pedophilia a mental illness and should be treated as such. Can It be cured? other than by extreme measures. The trouble is that people keep it hidden for years then the commit these offences on children and then its too late to prevent. what can be done! There's a difference between paedophilia as a mental illness and somebody who acts on their mental illness though. Somebody could be a paedophile their entire life but not commit any crime, much like somebody could have violent thoughts their entire life and never attack anybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCDAN Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 1 minute ago, hogso said: Having known people who do / have worked in prisons, and having worked with an ex-con, I believe that word spreads pretty quite who the nonces are inside, and they're dealt with appropriately. Crushed up light bulbs in their food, that sort of thing. Nothing too extreme of course, but I certainly don't think they have a rosy time in clinky. Also, classic Dem The irony of career criminals thinking they have the moral high ground over someone with a mental illness, laughable. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, AVFCDAN said: The irony of career criminals thinking they have the moral high ground over someone with a mental illness, laughable. Yes I don't agree with criminals taking it out on other criminals. the punishment should be handed out by the state not other prisoners. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 10 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: The bit about people who have been given new identities being found out and being made an example of? I can't control what motivates other peoples motives. But I also don't think the undesirables should be protected either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 8, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 8, 2018 15 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: There's a difference between paedophilia as a mental illness and somebody who acts on their mental illness though. Somebody could be a paedophile their entire life but not commit any crime, much like somebody could have violent thoughts their entire life and never attack anybody. This. It's a really tricky subject to discuss, because you run the risk of sounding like you think acting on Paedophilia is ok. It categorically is not. But people obviously are sexually attracted to children. If they don't act on that then that's ok. it seems sick to me, but there was a time when Homosexuality was treated the same way, in so much as it was seen as wrong to be attracted to the same sex and that homosexuals could be "cured". Now we rightly accept that people are attracted to whoever they're attracted to and they can't help that. So surely the same logic applies to paedophiles? Again, I am not saying ACTING on paedophilia is ok. It's one of the worst things imaginable. And neither am I saying homosexuality and paedophilia is the same thing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 34 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said: You honestly reckon she's going to want to throw acid in someone's face, regardless of what she's been through? I said given the option in my post. Poor lady just horrendous what she has had to go through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 Give the option to somebody who is already emotionally and mentally scarred by her ordeal, she takes the option as she isn't thinking rationally (and nor should she be expected to) She then commits the act, then once rational realises what she's done and she's even more mentally scarred. It's an awful idea, sorry. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 35 minutes ago, Paddywhack said: Smaller dildo then? I LOLed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 8, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 8, 2018 4 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Give the option to somebody who is already emotionally and mentally scarred by her ordeal, she takes the option as she isn't thinking rationally (and nor should she be expected to) She then commits the act, then once rational realises what she's done and she's even more mentally scarred. It's an awful idea, sorry. Even with the mentally scarring aside, the logic of "that crime is utterly horrendous... so as punishment we're going to do it to you" is ridiculous. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 22 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: me, but there was a time when Homosexuality was treated the same way, in so much as it was seen as wrong to be attracted to the same sex and that homosexuals could be "cured". Sorry to veer a bit, but when I read that, I thought "I wonder WHY, back in the day, it was so morally outrageous that 2 people of the same sex would want to have a relationship?" Just a theory, but could it be, that it was seen as pointless (or bad) because the result couldn't end with a child? Because "back in the day" there was less emphasis on sexuality/sex than there was on being a family? I just wonder where along the line someone said "hang on, being gay is TOTES not cool" and then I wonder why everyone followed suit. Gayness is all over the animal kingdom, and all throughout the history of mankind. I just wonder why and when it was seen as bad. Was it because it's less common? I dunno, never thought about it. Weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCDAN Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: I just wonder where along the line someone said "hang on, being gay is TOTES not cool" and then I wonder why everyone followed suit. Gayness is all over the animal kingdom, and all throughout the history of mankind. I just wonder why and when it was seen as bad. Was it because it's less common? I dunno, never thought about it. Weird. I'm guessing its because all religions condemn it and in reality the future of the human race depends on procreation, if we all turned gay that could be a slight problem! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 8, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: Sorry to veer a bit, but when I read that, I thought "I wonder WHY, back in the day, it was so morally outrageous that 2 people of the same sex would want to have a relationship?" Just a theory, but could it be, that it was seen as pointless (or bad) because the result couldn't end with a child? Because "back in the day" there was less emphasis on sexuality/sex than there was on being a family? I just wonder where along the line someone said "hang on, being gay is TOTES not cool" and then I wonder why everyone followed suit. Gayness is all over the animal kingdom, and all throughout the history of mankind. I just wonder why and when it was seen as bad. Was it because it's less common? I dunno, never thought about it. Weird. Unfortunately I don't think it would have been as innocent as it being pointless. I imagine religion fueled it in a lot of circumstances, but that's a whole other can of worms. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 8, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 8, 2018 (edited) Between 1973 and 2012, 140 people sentenced to death in the USA were subsequently released due to evidence of a wrongful conviction. Edited January 8, 2018 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 6 minutes ago, AVFCDAN said: I'm guessing its because all religions condemn it and in reality the future of the human race depends on procreation, if we all turned gay that could be a slight problem! Well I don't think, just because morally it's now ok to be gay, then everyone would suddenly start being gay I ent gay, that's just WRONG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted January 8, 2018 Moderator Share Posted January 8, 2018 1 hour ago, AVFCDAN said: I'd prefer it if they used the gavel but I agree with the sentiment. Judges in this country don't use a gavel. /pedant 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddywhack Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: Between 1973 and 2012, 173 people sentenced to death in the USA were subsequently released due to evidence of a wrongful conviction. That's pretty incredible. Do you think people on juries change their verdict if they know that guilty would mean sentencing the person to death? I know it's not for the jury to decide the punishment but I think I'd have a hard to time being a part of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCDAN Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 5 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said: Judges in this country don't use a gavel. /pedant My dream is over....THANKS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 8, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted January 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, Paddywhack said: That's pretty incredible. Do you think people on juries change their verdict if they know that guilty would mean sentencing the person to death? I know it's not for the jury to decide the punishment but I think I'd have a hard to time being a part of that. I'm not sure. But there's evidence that the jury are influenced by much worse things than that, or at least the judicial system itself. There's plenty of evidence that the death penalty is racially biased and also biased against the poor. At least in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts