How Long Should Paedophiles Get?

29th April 2014


12 months?

5 years?

5 months?

Please discuss.

Evening Andy, I assume you mean in terms of prison sentence?   

Life

As long as it takes to break their fucking necks .

It depends on what they did, if anything.

There's a lot of unoccupied Islands off the Scottish coast where  these guys could be sent to for life. Maybe take a lead from America where they can make military uniforms for a   decent wage.
Whilst there are Paedophiles that don't act  on their instincts, non has been cured as far as I know and will always be a danger to society.

I think the way to go is the construction of adult only towns within which those sexually attracted to children can live out normal lives after serving their appropriate sentence.

With the town and its surrounds residents can move freely unmonitored but if they leave then they have to have a geotag so if any child is attacked they can prove it was not them.

Life - that's it.

sphinx wrote:I think the way to go is the construction of adult only towns within which those sexually attracted to children can live out normal lives after serving their appropriate sentence.

With the town and its surrounds residents can move freely unmonitored but if they leave then they have to have a geotag so if any child is attacked they can prove it was not them.

Some non-paedophile adults might like child-free towns though, so that's not fair.   

Extinguished from the planet.

Raggamuffin wrote:

sphinx wrote:I think the way to go is the construction of adult only towns within which those sexually attracted to children can live out normal lives after serving their appropriate sentence.

With the town and its surrounds residents can move freely unmonitored but if they leave then they have to have a geotag so if any child is attacked they can prove it was not them.

Some non-paedophile adults might like child-free towns though, so that's not fair.   

They would be perfectly free to go and live in such a town.

I mean if you take someone who has never broken the law - but who recognizes and admits they feel a sexual attraction towards children are you really going to put them in prison for the rest of their lives?

Like I said have a town that includes an expanse of countryside around it and declare it child free - any adult is free to visit or live there if they wish, the only restrictions would be on convicted child molesters who would be required by law for the rest of their lives to wear a geo tracker whenever leaving its boundaries.

Obviously the biggest problem would be the construction and organization of said boundaries to make them tight enough to protect.

To me it would depend on the actual offense -- I can't see doling out the same sentence for possession of child pornography as you would for someone who committed multiple rapes, for example.

sphinx wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Some non-paedophile adults might like child-free towns though, so that's not fair.   

They would be perfectly free to go and live in such a town.

I mean if you take someone who has never broken the law - but who recognizes and admits they feel a sexual attraction towards children are you really going to put them in prison for the rest of their lives?

Like I said have a town that includes an expanse of countryside around it and declare it child free - any adult is free to visit or live there if they wish, the only restrictions would be on convicted child molesters who would be required by law for the rest of their lives to wear a geo tracker whenever leaving its boundaries.

Obviously the biggest problem would be the construction and organization of said boundaries to make them tight enough to protect.

Anyone who went to live there would be assumed to be a paedophile though.

Ben_Reilly wrote:To me it would depend on the actual offense -- I can't see doling out the same sentence for possession of child pornography as you would for someone who committed multiple rapes, for example.

I said that before, and some people never got over it - they accused me of being a paedo-sympathiser. Some of them still do.   

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:To me it would depend on the actual offense -- I can't see doling out the same sentence for possession of child pornography as you would for someone who committed multiple rapes, for example.

I said that before, and some people never got over it - they accused me of being a paedo-sympathiser. Some of them still do.   

Well, I'm a people-sympathizer, I've never been a big believer in really harsh punishments except for the worst offenders.

Don't get me wrong, for the type that rapes and murders kids, I think it would be fitting to break their limbs, bury them up to their eyebrows and let them try to dig their way out of the ground ... but not all crimes are the same, so not all punishments should be the same.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I said that before, and some people never got over it - they accused me of being a paedo-sympathiser. Some of them still do.   

Well, I'm a people-sympathizer, I've never been a big believer in really harsh punishments except for the worst offenders.

Don't get me wrong, for the type that rapes and murders kids, I think it would be fitting to break their limbs, bury them up to their eyebrows and let them try to dig their way out of the ground ... but not all crimes are the same, so not all punishments should be the same.

The first thing to establish is what a paedophile is. I understand it to be someone who is attracted to prepubescent children. I realise that some girls (and boys) mature later than others obviously, but would a 20-year old man who is attracted to a well-developed 13-year old girl be a paedophile? I'm not saying he should have sex with her obviously.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I said that before, and some people never got over it - they accused me of being a paedo-sympathiser. Some of them still do.   

Well, I'm a people-sympathizer, I've never been a big believer in really harsh punishments except for the worst offenders.

Don't get me wrong, for the type that rapes and murders kids, I think it would be fitting to break their limbs, bury them up to their eyebrows and let them try to dig their way out of the ground ... but not all crimes are the same, so not all punishments should be the same.

The first thing to establish is what a paedophile is. I understand it to be someone who is attracted to prepubescent children. I realise that some girls (and boys) mature later than others obviously, but would a 20-year old man who is attracted to a well-developed 13-year old girl be a paedophile? I'm not saying he should have sex with her obviously.

Yeah, that sort of thing happens and while it is sleazy, it can't possibly be the same thing as a 40-year-old molesting a 10-year-old, though some people will act like it is.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

The first thing to establish is what a paedophile is. I understand it to be someone who is attracted to prepubescent children. I realise that some girls (and boys) mature later than others obviously, but would a 20-year old man who is attracted to a well-developed 13-year old girl be a paedophile? I'm not saying he should have sex with her obviously.

Yeah, that sort of thing happens and while it is sleazy, it can't possibly be the same thing as a 40-year-old molesting a 10-year-old, though some people will act like it is.

It needs to be established what motivates a paedophile. Is it the idea of innocence that they like or what? Are they afraid of adult relationships? Is it a mental illness? I think it's probably difficult to get such a person to really talk about the issue, but more research is needed IMO.

harrymuffin wrote:Extinguished from the planet.

Exactly. They serve no purpose and never will.
Kill them without preamble.

eddie wrote:

harrymuffin wrote:Extinguished from the planet.

Exactly. They serve no purpose and never will.
Kill them without preamble.

I think that might be illegal.   

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:


Exactly. They serve no purpose and never will.
Kill them without preamble.

I think that might be illegal.   

I don't care. They're scum. Erase them.  :asplodeas: 

Raggamuffin wrote:It depends on what they did, if anything.

Agree

it is still a thing of Degrees, technically a paedophile may just have been 'Looking' which is a different level to 'touching' which is a different level to Raping or Grooming for sex.

Raping or Grooming ones Life, but assessment needs to be made about the rehabilitation(and specifics of the case) of the preceding 2.

And there are still boarder line cases where both are young or it is disputed.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:


Exactly. They serve no purpose and never will.
Kill them without preamble.

I think that might be illegal.   

The molestation and abuse of children is illegal too.   I'd rather the abusers be put to death,  than have to pay for their upkeep in prison.

But once caught and sentenced he may realise he has done a bad thing and change, so giving him life or killing him is harsh is it not?

BigAndy9 wrote:But once caught and sentenced he may realise he has done a bad thing and change, so giving him life or killing him is harsh is it not?

You get life for murder, I would say penetration of a juvenile deserves the same sentence.   

veya_victaous wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:But once caught and sentenced he may realise he has done a bad thing and change, so giving him life or killing him is harsh is it not?

You get life for murder, I would say penetration of a juvenile deserves the same sentence.   

Well, life here usually means around 12 years if you behave while serving your time.

So, do people mean a life sentence, or a life spent in prison?

Sentence if they do the Multi life sentence thing  ::resmahauth:: ::resmahauth:: ::resmahauth::

I have alot to say on this but my brain doesn't seem to be working.

Firstly men who fancy well developed 13/14 year old girls are not paedophiles,they would be immoral to engage in any sort of sexual activity with them but peado's they are not as paedophiles are attracted to the female/male form before puberty i.e a child.

Once it is established an individual actually is a paedophile and wants to engage in sexual relations with children they are a predator and children need protection from them.

Keeping disturbing child porn obviously should hold a lesser jail sentence than actually the rape/murder or molestation of a child which is probably the worst crime an individual can commit.

I would give child murderers and rapists life and it would mean life.Forever.

For hoarding child porn but not acting on it I honestly wouldn't know what to do with that person.A few years in jail yes but then what,counselling? Can a paedophile be cured of their sick desires?I don't think they can,no one would choose to be that way inclined.

Paedophiles cannot be rehabilitated, end of.

These that molest babies and toddlers, should get death. There is no excuse for behaviour like that.

As for 13-14 year old girls. These girls are normally the ones that are chasing after the older men 18-25 years old.

Don't let these teen girls fool you. They find the attention from an older man, albeit only in their 20s, to be quite the compliment.

Not understanding in their simple little brains that these men will only be using them for their own sexual desires.

When a man goes after a 13-14 yr old girl, that is in some way mentally handicapped or for whatever reason, extremely naive and has been groomed by that man, he then should definitely spend a long length of prison time.

The molesters of infants-toddlers, no question, they should be extinguished.

I asked some time ago whether a racist or homophobe can change on here - most said yes they can.

Is it the same for these men then?

Is it the same for any criminal?

harrymuffin wrote:Paedophiles cannot be rehabilitated, end of.  

These that molest babies and toddlers,  should get death.   There is no excuse for behaviour like that.

As for 13-14 year old girls.  These girls are normally the ones that are chasing after the older men 18-25 years old.  

Don't let these teen girls fool you.  They find the attention from an older man, albeit only in their 20s,  to be quite the compliment.

Not understanding in their simple little brains that these men will only be using them for their own sexual desires.

When a man goes after a 13-14 yr old girl,  that is in some way mentally handicapped or for whatever reason, extremely naive and has been groomed by that man,  he then should definitely spend a long length of prison time.

The molesters of infants-toddlers,  no question,  they should be extinguished.

Er being a teen girl myself once many moons ago who received attention from men at age 13 I can assure you I was not chasing after them.An uncomfortable truth is men love schoolgirls.

The most male attention I received was with my friends from age 13-16,wolf whistles,comments like 'oh i wish i was at school' etc. Yes my friends and I liked the attention and thought it was a giggle but we weren't interested in older men,we had 'crushes' on boys in our school.So i'm not sure what the 'don't let teen girls fool you' comment is supposed to mean.If you think its only men in their early 20's that look at schoolgirls you are mistaken,men of all ages do.

As for your other comments,those who molest infants and toddlers are the scum of the Earth.But no i would not kill them,I would give them a life sentence and life really would mean life.

BigAndy9 wrote:I asked some time ago whether a racist or homophobe can change on here - most said yes they can.

Is it the same for these men then?

Is it the same for any criminal?

i don't think a paedophile can ever truly change his innate perverted preference but he can learn not to act on his desires and lead a pretty dismal existence.

FluffyBunny wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:I asked some time ago whether a racist or homophobe can change on here - most said yes they can.

Is it the same for these men then?

Is it the same for any criminal?

i don't think a paedophile can ever truly change his innate perverted preference but he can learn not to act on his desires and lead a pretty dismal existence.

Now, that's what i thought about a racist and homophobe.

Most on here say it's not true though.

BigAndy9 wrote:But once caught and sentenced he may realise he has done a bad thing and change, so giving him life or killing him is harsh is it not?

Andy, baby rapists never change , the urge and want is with the fuckers forever, these are the lowest type of scumbag , as well as baby killers.

Jimmy Savile who molested dying children escaped punishment, and when I see you defend that scumbag it pisses me right off.

People who sexually abuse children should either spend their entire life in prison (but then why should we pay taxes so they can keep breathing oxygen?) or be executed,they serve no positive purposes in life.

Erase them.

FluffyBunny wrote:

harrymuffin wrote:Paedophiles cannot be rehabilitated, end of.  

These that molest babies and toddlers,  should get death.   There is no excuse for behaviour like that.

As for 13-14 year old girls.  These girls are normally the ones that are chasing after the older men 18-25 years old.  

Don't let these teen girls fool you.  They find the attention from an older man, albeit only in their 20s,  to be quite the compliment.

Not understanding in their simple little brains that these men will only be using them for their own sexual desires.

When a man goes after a 13-14 yr old girl,  that is in some way mentally handicapped or for whatever reason, extremely naive and has been groomed by that man,  he then should definitely spend a long length of prison time.

The molesters of infants-toddlers,  no question,  they should be extinguished.

Er being a teen girl myself once many moons ago who received attention from men at age 13 I can assure you I was not chasing after them.An uncomfortable truth is men love schoolgirls.

The most male attention I received was with my friends from age 13-16,wolf whistles,comments like 'oh i wish i was at school' etc. Yes my friends and I liked the attention and thought it was a giggle but we weren't interested in older men,we had 'crushes' on boys in our school.So i'm not sure what the 'don't let teen girls fool you' comment is supposed to mean.If you think its only men in their early 20's that look at schoolgirls you are mistaken,men of all ages do.

As for your other comments,those who molest infants and toddlers are the scum of the Earth.But no i would not kill them,I would give them a life sentence and life really would mean life.

Stick Kelly Brook in a uniform and i'm happy   

Christina Aguilera in that navy uniform   

Surely it would be a good thing to find out why paedophiles are that way. After all, prevention is better than cure.

Joy Division wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:But once caught and sentenced he may realise he has done a bad thing and change, so giving him life or killing him is harsh is it not?

Andy, baby rapists never change , the urge and want is with the fuckers forever, these are the lowest type of scumbag , as well as baby killers.

Jimmy Savile who molested dying children escaped punishment, and when I see you defend that scumbag it pisses me right off.

People who sexually abuse children should either spend their entire life in prison (but then why should we pay taxes so they can keep breathing oxygen?)  or be executed,they serve no positive purposes in life.

Erase them.

Don't bring taxes into it,it cheapens your argument.Who cares about bloody taxes with an emotive subject like this.

I agree they should spend their entire life in prison and life should mean life,no arguments.

They can't change their perverted desires but they can learn not to act on them and as I stated above lead a pretty meaningless existence.

FluffyBunny wrote:

harrymuffin wrote:Paedophiles cannot be rehabilitated, end of.  

These that molest babies and toddlers,  should get death.   There is no excuse for behaviour like that.

As for 13-14 year old girls.  These girls are normally the ones that are chasing after the older men 18-25 years old.  

Don't let these teen girls fool you.  They find the attention from an older man, albeit only in their 20s,  to be quite the compliment.

Not understanding in their simple little brains that these men will only be using them for their own sexual desires.

When a man goes after a 13-14 yr old girl,  that is in some way mentally handicapped or for whatever reason, extremely naive and has been groomed by that man,  he then should definitely spend a long length of prison time.

The molesters of infants-toddlers,  no question,  they should be extinguished.

Er being a teen girl myself once many moons ago who received attention from men at age 13 I can assure you I was not chasing after them.An uncomfortable truth is men love schoolgirls.

The most male attention I received was with my friends from age 13-16,wolf whistles,comments like 'oh i wish i was at school' etc. Yes my friends and I liked the attention and thought it was a giggle but we weren't interested in older men,we had 'crushes' on boys in our school.So i'm not sure what the 'don't let teen girls fool you' comment is supposed to mean.If you think its only men in their early 20's that look at schoolgirls you are mistaken,men of all ages do.

As for your other comments,those who molest infants and toddlers are the scum of the Earth.But no i would not kill them,I would give them a life sentence and life really would mean life.

From my own experience, I can assure you that teen girls of that age do chase after the older boys or men whichever you prefer to call them.

I see Mums that let their 10 year old girls dress as though they were 22. It's disgusting parenting tbh. I'm not saying that ALL teen girls develop the behaviour I spoke of, but a lot of them do. You happened to not be one of the Fluffybunny, well done.

Yes, I know that men of all ages look at school girls/teens. But, then again, not ALL men do.

That's true - some girls chase after men, some men look at young girls.

Some men look at old girls too   

I don't believe for a minute that they can learn not to act on their desires.  

Molesting children is not a learned behaviour.  I do think their minds just aren't wired correctly.  So in saying that,  they can't unlearn something that they've never learned in the first place.

I agree with Joy Division, why should the victims pay to feed this scum and house them? That's what happens, the victims have to pay to feed and house them. The victims have no rights. The laws should be changed so that the victim doesn't have to pay the tax to house these monsters.

So what about racists and homophobes?

Can they learn not to act on their desires?

At very least Paedophiles should all be housed within the same area with gun patrols and tagged and fed off left overs in a town named Paedos R Us.

harrymuffin wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

Er being a teen girl myself once many moons ago who received attention from men at age 13 I can assure you I was not chasing after them.An uncomfortable truth is men love schoolgirls.

The most male attention I received was with my friends from age 13-16,wolf whistles,comments like 'oh i wish i was at school' etc. Yes my friends and I liked the attention and thought it was a giggle but we weren't interested in older men,we had 'crushes' on boys in our school.So i'm not sure what the 'don't let teen girls fool you' comment is supposed to mean.If you think its only men in their early 20's that look at schoolgirls you are mistaken,men of all ages do.

As for your other comments,those who molest infants and toddlers are the scum of the Earth.But no i would not kill them,I would give them a life sentence and life really would mean life.

From my own experience,  I can assure you that teen girls of that age do chase after the older boys or men whichever you prefer to call them.

I see Mums that let their 10 year old girls dress as though they were 22.  It's disgusting parenting tbh.    I'm not saying that ALL teen girls develop the behaviour I spoke of,  but a lot of them do.   You happened to not be one of the Fluffybunny,  well done.

Yes,  I know that men of all ages look at school girls/teens.   But,  then again,  not ALL men do.  

Fair enough Harry but an overwhelming amount do.

And that is what they are meant to do,simple biology dictates this.The younger the female the more likely she is to be healthy and carry a man's child to term successfully.

The physical traits of female beauty associated with youth,long hair,good skin, etc are all indicative of good health which ensures a healthy pregnancy so the man can further his genes. Men are SUPPOSED to find 13/14 year old females sexually desirable but modern day society has demonised natural desires.

BigAndy9 wrote:That's true - some girls chase after men, some men look at young girls.

Some men look at old girls too     

Well they need to be done away with   

harrymuffin wrote:I don't believe for a minute that they can learn not to act on their desires.  

Molesting children is not a learned behaviour.  I do think their minds just aren't wired correctly.  So in saying that,  they can't unlearn something that they've never learned in the first place.

I agree with Joy Division,  why should the victims pay to feed this scum and house them?    That's what happens,  the victims have to pay to feed and house them.  The victims have no rights.  The laws should be changed so that the victim doesn't have to pay the tax to house these monsters.

Quite right Harry, only filth comes from them and as you say the victim had no choice but to suffer the abuse at their hands...they know right from wrong , their is no excuse.

BigAndy9 wrote:So what about racists and homophobes?

Can they learn not to act on their desires?

While that is also wrong too Andy, it's not in the same league as child molesting.

harrymuffin wrote:I don't believe for a minute that they can learn not to act on their desires.  

Molesting children is not a learned behaviour.  I do think their minds just aren't wired correctly.  So in saying that,  they can't unlearn something that they've never learned in the first place.

I agree with Joy Division,  why should the victims pay to feed this scum and house them?    That's what happens,  the victims have to pay to feed and house them.  The victims have no rights.  The laws should be changed so that the victim doesn't have to pay the tax to house these monsters.

No its not a learned behavior,it's an innate preference.
It's a perversion of course,but it is natural TO THEM.

If you are going to kill paedophiles then all convicted murderers should be killed.All life is equally precious.

FluffyBunny wrote:

harrymuffin wrote:

From my own experience,  I can assure you that teen girls of that age do chase after the older boys or men whichever you prefer to call them.

I see Mums that let their 10 year old girls dress as though they were 22.  It's disgusting parenting tbh.    I'm not saying that ALL teen girls develop the behaviour I spoke of,  but a lot of them do.   You happened to not be one of the Fluffybunny,  well done.

Yes,  I know that men of all ages look at school girls/teens.   But,  then again,  not ALL men do.  

Fair enough Harry but an overwhelming amount do.

And that is what they are meant to do,simple biology dictates this.The younger the female the more likely she is to be healthy and carry a man's child to term successfully.

The physical traits of female beauty associated with youth,long hair,good skin, etc are all indicative of good health which ensures a healthy pregnancy so the man can further his genes. Men are SUPPOSED to find 13/14 year old females sexually desirable but modern day society has demonised natural desires.

Couldn't agree more - there are many many natural things man could do - fighting being one that springs to mind which has been outlawed, but will always be impossible to stop altogether - same with men having sex with 13 - 16 year olds, hence why we understand it, and sentence appropriately.

Joy Division wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:So what about racists and homophobes?

Can they learn not to act on their desires?

While that is also wrong too Andy, it's not in the same league as child molesting.

Agreed - what i'm asking is - if paedophilia is an in-built urge - attraction to those under 12 - isn't racism and homophobia in-built?

And, if paedophilia can't be tamed, according to some...

Why do those same people believe racism and homophobia can be tamed?

BigAndy9 wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

Fair enough Harry but an overwhelming amount do.

And that is what they are meant to do,simple biology dictates this.The younger the female the more likely she is to be healthy and carry a man's child to term successfully.

The physical traits of female beauty associated with youth,long hair,good skin, etc are all indicative of good health which ensures a healthy pregnancy so the man can further his genes. Men are SUPPOSED to find 13/14 year old females sexually desirable but modern day society has demonised natural desires.

Couldn't agree more - there are many many natural things man could do - fighting being one that springs to mind which has been outlawed, but will always be impossible to stop altogether - same with men having sex with 13 - 16 year olds, hence why we understand it, and sentence appropriately.

But we don't understand it do we because men who have sex with 15 year old's are put on the sex offenders register when if the girl had been just a couple of months older it would have been totally legal.

That man is immoral and wrong to have had sex with a 15 year old girl but he is not a peadophile and shouldn't be labelled so yet he is.

I don't think the current legal system is sentencing appropriately at all.

FluffyBunny wrote:

harrymuffin wrote:I don't believe for a minute that they can learn not to act on their desires.  

Molesting children is not a learned behaviour.  I do think their minds just aren't wired correctly.  So in saying that,  they can't unlearn something that they've never learned in the first place.

I agree with Joy Division,  why should the victims pay to feed this scum and house them?    That's what happens,  the victims have to pay to feed and house them.  The victims have no rights.  The laws should be changed so that the victim doesn't have to pay the tax to house these monsters.

No its not a learned behavior,it's an innate preference.
It's a perversion of course,but it is natural TO THEM.

If you are going to kill paedophiles then all convicted murderers should be killed.All life is equally precious.

No, I'm sorry Fluffybunny, but not all life is equally precious. We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

I'm a staunch supporter of the Death Penalty. Nothing would ever change my views on that.

I have no problem with convicted murderers being put to death. As long as it was intent to kill and not accidental.