Vigilante launching paedophile naming website

[manic_man]

Yeah i see your point entirely..i think we should tell that to all little children who have been gangraped on almost daily occasion for years on end.

"look sweetheart, dont be angry at your stepdad because he had fun with you with his friends since you were 6y.old until your 14y.old, it's such a base emotion to be angry or afraid, forgive and forget right love?"

Anger and fear are perfectly acceptable emotions to such actions perpetrated on someone. While I don't condone the move to set up a website I can't find any shred of common sense in what you said. I guess I'm just a pleb and simple minded though so don't bother with me.

I'm not convinced you did see my point.

I opened with the idea of a lynch mob, which are fuelled by uncontrolled anger and fear.

What you are describing is anger towards somebody who has repeatedly raped a child. Of course I feel anger towards them, I use that anger to understand and cement why I know what they did was horribly wrong and why we need to continually find ways to fight the problem, both causal and response. But I also know that without any form of analysis, my anger could easily just be a base response... such as putting up a website that names and shames a list of people who, potentially, might in fact be victims of an imperfect justice system...

 

[ntg]

I'm not convinced you did see my point.

I opened with the idea of a lynch mob, which are fuelled by uncontrolled anger and fear.

What you are describing is anger towards somebody who has repeatedly raped a child. Of course I feel anger towards them, I use that anger to understand and cement why I know what they did was horribly wrong and why we need to continually find ways to fight the problem, both causal and response. But I also know that without any form of analysis, my anger could easily just be a base response... such as putting up a website that names and shames a list of people who, potentially, might in fact be victims of an imperfect justice system...

I totally agree with that, sorry for misunderstanding your previous post.

 

[jp_bl_68]

Let's see, have you known many heterosexuals or homosexuals who suddenly "changed" preferences after any given amount of time? What? No? there's your answer.

As someone else has already pointed out; paedophilia is not a crime. A child abuser might still find children sexually attractive but that doesn't mean they are going to act on those urges again.

It's not the same as switching from heterosexuality to homosexuality. It would be more similar to taking a vow of celibacy.

If you are suggesting (and I'm not saying you are, but whoever is) that it does change then what would your answer be to having a convicted child abuser babysit for your young children after spending 20y in jail? If you feel uneasy with this proposition then you are a hypocrite.

No more so than if you refused to employ a convicted thief.

 

[Zodar]

Pedophilia is just a sexual orientation - go back just a couple of decades and homosexuality was viewed as a mental illness too.

Most mental health professionals do not believe there is a "cure" for pedophilia, as little as there is a "cure" for homosexuality.

The actions of some pedophiles against children should most certainly be condemned however, just anyone who abuses innocents should be.

 

[ntg]

As someone else has already pointed out; paedophilia is not a crime. A child abuser might still find children sexually attractive but that doesn't mean they are going to act on those urges again.

It's not the same as switching from heterosexuality to homosexuality. It would be more similar to taking a vow of celibacy.

You are playing semantics now aren't you? How do we know someone is a peadophile then unless they actually abuse a child? I have never heard/met/seen a paedophile who hasn't acted on it before, have you?

I think that paedophile for the majority of the population is used to refer to people who have abused children, and that's the context I am using it. If you prefer using child molester or child abuser that's fine with me, I'll know which terminology to use then.

Also, vow of celibacy? Who has ever kept a vow of celibacy? catholic priests perhaps?? What you are saying is that because a criminal has vowed he won't do it again, that's equal to having been rehabilitated? (or anything akeen or similar to that effect, just using the "vow" as an illustration of the importance/strength of the rehabilitative impact). I 100% disagree with any such notion.

My point is that jail will not rehabilitate sexual problems no matter what; yes it is punishment but it doesn't act towards rehabilitating such issues. I also strongly doubt any use of psychological treatment for these things - I can't accept they work any more than they would work in turning heterosexuals to homosexuals and vice versa.

No more so than if you refused to employ a convicted thief.

Well that's my point, while many people would consider (myself included) to employ a convicted thief who has come out of jail (and many employers do, where do you think all released prisoners who were convicted of theft work? or people with criminal records), I don't think anyone would employ a released child abuser to watch over their kids. Why? I think it's because people accept deep down inside them that these people cannot be rehabilitated.

 

[Ahleckz]

kgi, do you put someone who has had unconsenual (or at least unwanted) sex with someone under the age of 16 in the same camp of someone who has perhaps unconsentually fondled someone?

 

[Jono8]

What happens when someone who once, when they were 16 years old ,was convicted for having (consenting) pictures of his 15 year old girlfriend on his phone ends up on his list/website? Will it say what their crime was or just that they are considered, by law, a paedophile?

This is the danger in this sort of thing.

 

[ThomasTheTankEngine]

Chris Wittwer is a paedophile.

I wonder if it gets said enough it makes it true?

No smoke without fire eh?

If we google it enough, then it'll come up in the suggestions box.

Chris Wittwer is a paedophile.

 

[Tefal]

*adds steve's name to the list* ¬_¬

 

[Mr Jack]

Let's see, have you known many heterosexuals or homosexuals who suddenly "changed" preferences after any given amount of time? What? No? there's your answer.

Most child abusers are not paedophiles, though. That's just sloppy language usage. There are a subsection of the child abuser population for whom their primary sexual attraction is towards children; the majority, however, are using children as an available source to get their rocks off. Doing so no more makes them paedophiles than a quick trip to palmville makes you gay.

As a matter of fact, child rapists actually have a relatively low rate of recidivism; the primary reason for this is because most child abuse is carried out by close relatives of the child, or by step relatives, and they simply never get the opportunity again.

If you are suggesting (and I'm not saying you are, but whoever is) that it does change then what would your answer be to having a convicted child abuser babysit for your young children after spending 20y in jail? If you feel uneasy with this proposition then you are a hypocrite.

So, because I would trust an accountant convicted of fraud less as my accountant I'm a hypocrite if I think they should be allowed to continue their lives without harassment after they've served their time? Really?

 

[ntg]

kgi, do you put someone who has had unconsenual (or at least unwanted) sex with someone under the age of 16 in the same camp of someone who has perhaps unconsentually fondled someone?

Why would I put in the same basket someone who has raped an underage person with someone who has groped someone who might as well be an adult? Even if the latter were not an adult I wouldn't put them in the same basket but it seriously depends on age in my opinion. E.g. I would consider the same someone who has raped a child with someone who was found groping a child.

 

[jp_bl_68]

You are playing semantics now aren't you?

Not at all. The people on this list will be convicted paedophiles (presumably). We know they have offended, we know they are paedophiles, none of that means they will offend again.

Also, vow of celibacy? Who has ever kept a vow of celibacy?

Me

What you are saying is that because a criminal has vowed he won't do it again, that's equal to having been rehabilitated?

It's not the criminal but rather the criminal justice system that determines whether or not they have been rehabilitated.

My point is that jail will not rehabilitate sexual problems no matter what; yes it is punishment but it doesn't act towards rehabilitating such issues. I also strongly doubt any use of psychological treatment for these things - I can't accept they work any more than they would work in turning heterosexuals to homosexuals and vice versa.

I don't think prison/therapy is designed to irradicate any paedophilic desires. Instead they try to teach the offender how to deal with those urges and avoid acting on them in much the same way that therapists treat drug addicts. An alcoholic is an alcoholic for life but that doesn't mean he's going to have another drink.

I don't think anyone would employ a released child abuser to watch over their kids. Why?

Because it violates UK law?

 

[ntg]

Most child abusers are not paedophiles, though. That's just sloppy language usage. There are a subsection of the child abuser population for whom their primary sexual attraction is towards children; the majority, however, are using children as an available source to get their rocks off. Doing so no more makes them paedophiles than a quick trip to palmville makes you gay.

As a matter of fact, child rapists actually have a relatively low rate of recidivism; the primary reason for this is because most child abuse is carried out by close relatives of the child, or by step relatives, and they simply never get the opportunity again.

Not having the opportunity to repeat a crime is not the same as been rehabilitated though is it? And I do not necessarily agree with the assertions you have made with regards to paedophiles and child abusers.

So, because I would trust an accountant convicted of fraud less as my accountant I'm a hypocrite if I think they should be allowed to continue their lives without harassment after they've served their time? Really?

I think you have misunderstood me. What I said was in the context of rehabilitation. I said that someone cannot say that paedophiles can be rehabilitated through doing jail time unless they are comfortable having one as a babysitter after their release from prison.

I never suggested that anyone should be harassed after they are released from prison and I already said I do not condone (and I add here that I do not agree even in theory as well) with the actions of the said person who is setting up the stupid website.

 

[Ahleckz]

Why would I put in the same basket someone who has raped an underage person with someone who has groped someone who might as well be an adult? Even if the latter were not an adult I wouldn't put them in the same basket but it seriously depends on age in my opinion. E.g. I would consider the same someone who has raped a child with someone who was found groping a child.

Sorry, I was meaning that they were of same age and everything was the same minus the nature of the 'abuse'.
The law states that you can't have sex with a girl under the age of 16, and I've been present in cases (in a legal manner, I didn't mean I was there when he did it. I was present in the court room) where a adult man has essentially fondled a 15 year old girl and was thus made to sign the sex offenders register. I think someone like this, whilst should be made to ensure that these things don't turn more heinous, is in a different league to someone who has unwilling sex with someone under legal age. I don't think it's fair to put both of these sex offenders together.
It's possible to argue that by doing this (as this bloke is, in my opinion) it could undermine the severity of many sex offenders.

 

[ntg]

Not at all. The people on this list will be convicted paedophiles (presumably). We know they have offended, we know they are paedophiles, none of that means they will offend again.

Well, within the space of expressing my opinion, I do not believe that a convicted child abuser will not repeat his actions if given the opportunity, regardless of whether they have served jail time or not.

Me

The problem with vows of celibacy is that it is uncertain what will happen in the future. Just because you have been celibate so far doesn't mean you'll stay so in the future. You are something like a mutual funds' returns, past performance doesn't guarantee future returns!!

It's not the criminal but rather the criminal justice system that determines whether or not they have been rehabilitated.

We don't necessarily have to agree with whatever the justice system does. In my opinion it is not a flawless system, it may be the best we've got but it's not flawless by a mile - hence the many differences between justice systems across the world, which one of all the justice systems has got it "right"? The fact that judge has judged that a child rapist is rehabilitated after 10y in jail means 0 to me really, my life experience suggests otherwise and I cannot take that at face value. Can you?

I don't think prison/therapy is designed to irradicate any paedophilic desires. Instead they try to teach the offender how to deal with those urges and avoid acting on them in much the same way that therapists treat drug addicts. An alcoholic is an alcoholic for life but that doesn't mean he's going to have another drink.

I understand what you are saying but if an alcoholic has another drink it's not a big deal, whereas in the child abuser's case it's a whole different ballgame. In other words you can show different levels of trust according to the risk involved, so you can't compare everything as if like-for-like.

Because it violates UK law?

That's not what I meaaaaantttt, come onnnnnnnnn! you know better than that.

 

[^TANK^]

There should be no list, it just leads to violence and in nearly all cases on innocent people. they are in jail or have paid their debt.

Taken from link...........

He spent ”every waking hour” for three years gathering police mugshots of registered sex offenders to compile the gallery of sex offenders.

I hope they all get physically turned inside out, no sympathy here .

 

[Biohazard]

And you will, of course, have an evidential basis for that claim, yes?

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

 

[ntg]

Sorry, I was meaning that they were of same age and everything was the same minus the nature of the 'abuse'.
The law states that you can't have sex with a girl under the age of 16, and I've been present in cases where a adult man has essentially fondled a 15 year old girl and was thus made to sign the sex offenders register. I think someone like this, whilst should be made to ensure that these things don't turn more heinous, is in a different league to someone who has unwilling sex with someone under legal age. I don't think it's fair to put both of these sex offenders together.
It's possible to argue that by doing this (as this bloke is, in my opinion) it could undermine the severity of many sex offenders.

I agree with what you say and I would consider the fact that a groper has to sign a sex-offenders register (which seems to weigh the same as for a rapist) a flaw of the system.

Again, I reiterate my previous assertion that I think the whole website idea is completely stupid and no one should act like that. I tend to think that (wishfully) it might be a tactical ploy to get the issue of child abusers and disclosing information back to the surface for political discussion and not a serious attempt to do such a thing by an individual.

 

[platinum87]

"almost 10,0000 paedophiles." lolwuthowmany?

+1

I know how you feel..

Car advert for 12 thousand written like $12.000,00

Yea sure, i'll give you $12.00 though im not sure why you need to go into 3 extra decimal places


I dont understand vigilantes, why would you do something to another person when that person has not done something to you or others you know (revenge).. Or unless you stand to profit from it?

 

[LordSplodge]

Yeah i see your point entirely..i think we should tell that to all little children who have been gangraped on almost daily occasion for years on end.

"look sweetheart, dont be angry at your stepdad because he had fun with you with his friends since you were 6y.old until your 14y.old, it's such a base emotion to be angry or afraid, forgive and forget right love?"

Anger and fear are perfectly acceptable emotions to such actions perpetrated on someone. While I don't condone the move to set up a website I can't find any shred of common sense in what you said. I guess I'm just a pleb and simple minded though so don't bother with me.

Biggest Straw Man ever...