Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > UK forums  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Steve_Sandy
Joined: 3/19/2006
Msg: 153
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts? Page 3 of 9    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
recall a bunch of chavs outing some guy who had served his sentence, the police had him under surveillance, but thanks to the chavs scaring him so much, he ran away, out of contact with the police and un-monitored.....

same sort of guys who attacked a paediatrician who had his profession on his house door and being chavs they gave up after paed...almost right :)

CC seems a good idea, if there is no sexual urge, then I guess no sexual thoughts or actions, getting them to take it all the time is the challenge
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 159
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/4/2011 4:38:01 PM
Actually I dont agree with this at all, I think its a ridiculous idea and one that is really just designed to maintain the constant state of paranoia and fear that modern government relies on to get away with whatever they want to do

If there is any "risk" from a paedophile then they shouldnt be released in the first place

If on the other hand there isnt for what ever reason any risk, then theyre no longer a paedophile, so something like this becomes ridiculous

Either theyre safe to be let back into society or they arent, which negates this as a sane and rational activity

At the very most ankle bracelets might be a decent idea, but IMO the general public doesnt and shouldnt have this information if a person is deemed by the courts to be safe for release back into society


As for the chemical castration thing from what I have read its effective.

I think the idea that its a "psychological" problem has far more to do with the limitations of the average person to think logically and objectively where certain topics are concerned, this being one of them

So claiming its purely "psychological" kind of sidesteps any need for rational thought on a topic most people couldnt be rational about if their life depended on it

I think the psychological element itself isnt that different from homosexuality or transgenderism in that their brains are genetically malformed in a way that makes all three groups have as the object of their sexual attraction something that is in a biological sense "abnormal" as it has nothing at all to do with the propogation of the species.

Where this particular cross wiring in the brain is concerned however and due to its nature we "need" to be able to seperate it from the other two, So rather than viewing it in a similar manner to any other deviation from a normal healthy sexual attraction or the other two non normal ones this particular one is presented as "purely psychological" so it can then be viewed and reacted to in a wholly different manner because the nature of the attraction means that most reasonable people want and need to react to it differently to how we have been conditioned to homosexuals or transgender folks which would be harder without some form of separation

Personally though, if it was a condition of release and the offender was required to give consent I would prefer to see actual castration rather than the chemical form. As well as perhaps treatment to lower testosterone levels too all topped off with an ankle bracelet to track movements

But if all that was carried out I dont think its a good idea to have any public notification at all, as the average person in the street tends to be lacking in the ability to think objectively or rationally on average. And being able to handle such information and react in a rational and reasonable manner is going to be beyond the cognitive capabilities of the average TV brainwashed objectivity devoid media junky
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 162
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/4/2011 5:05:20 PM

The courts have deemed many paedophiles safe for release only for them to go on and committ more abuse


That still isnt a good case for letting the unwashed majority have "grown up" information though, its just a sign that the current conditions and precautions for release arent sufficient

I would also imagine that loads HAVE been released without ever reoffending too, but they obviously wont make headline news will they


Does anyone know if women can be chemically castrated in anyway? Or would we have to keep female paedos locked up forever?
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 165
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/4/2011 5:19:19 PM
Post 171, I think you just made the point being outlined in post 168 farm more effectively than 168 actually did

Your post is why ordinary folks arent cognitively capable of handing such information and still behaving in a rational and civilised manner

And what if it was a female paedophile? Would you be equally inclined towards giving them what they "deserve"?


As for the last sentence, I read it half a dozen times and still couldnt quite figure out what you were trying to say

How does the label of paedophile "absolve" anyone?

And since when has someone being given that labelled been claimed to mean people should take the attitude they can act how they wish?

That sentence didnt seem to make any sense at all
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 167
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/4/2011 5:34:06 PM
I'm fairly sure you can get on there for taking a piss in a public place too, and someone where I used to live was stuck on it for rushing out the house in his boxer shorts to chase off kids trying to nick his car

I think there shouldnt be a "sex offienders" register, there should be various registers each titled based on the deed like a child molesters list, a rapists list etc etc as that would have many benefits over the "catch all" list at the moment

But I think one of the reasons for a collective list is that it keeps people more paranoid and scared, saying theres 20 thousand "sex offenders" on the list is far scarier than having to say theres 2 thousand paedos, 2 thousand rapists and 16 thousand people who mooned somebody while they were pissed or who took a piss up an alley outside a night club

And paranoia is the grease for many political wheels nowadays
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 174
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/5/2011 5:00:21 AM
Heres a what if

Lets suppose for a moment that every paedos whereabouts were known, and the people in the area that didnt move were more careful with their kids

Two things are still going to be the case, in areas with no paedos anyone who hasnt committed a crime YET will still live there unknown to the residents, but as theres no paedos in that area then parents will be being "less" careful

Also, the "known" paedos wouldnt be likely to get a kid in an area where everyone knows who and what they are, so what would they do? Simple, they will just drive a few miles to where parents are lapse because its a no paedo zone and where nobody would know who they are and grab a kid from there instead


So if people who still pose a risk are in society then knowing who and where they are really doesnt help much.

Its also totally inneffective for protecting against any paedo who hasnt offended or been caught YET either

So the second instance would suggest parents are ALWAYS careful to the extent they would be if they KNEW there was one living nearby, because even if they dont know that somebody who has never been caught or hasnt even acted on their desires YET might be their next door nieghbour for all they know

As for the first instance though, the current proceedure would "appear" to be inneffective so either they need to decide theyre incureable and keep them locked up permanently once identified OR find something that guarantees theyre no more risk, in which case nobody has any right nor need to know where theyre living

If though as a society we are taking the line that they have some form of "mental illness" that makes them do this so it can be distanced from homosexuality and other non majoritive sexual preferences then it should be treated like any other mental illness including women who beat their kids to death because of an illness or neglect them for the same reason and they should be kept institutionalised UNTIL deemed safe to return to society or just labelled as incureable and medicalised permanently

Its retarded to on the one hand claim they arent "right in the head" but then on the other hand to blather on about punishing them as though they WERE completely sane
 Bodiesroadie
Joined: 8/8/2006
Msg: 177
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/5/2011 10:02:41 AM

I worked in my later yrs in childcare with the victims of these monsters .
So give me the tools if its proven beyound all doubt id have no emotion in castrating him and remo0ving his arms myself .]/quote]

If you've worked in this field you must surely know some of these "monsters" are women.
 ibakecakes
Joined: 11/27/2008
Msg: 178
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/5/2011 10:26:45 AM
I think my views on this have changed since having my own children. When in the police, I worked sex offences amongst other things. In the majority of cases I worked, the suspect/offender had a history that included them being abused. While I don't make this right for them to then go on to be abusers, I think that in some given circumstances, if a child perhaps no other way, they believe that what has been done to them is the 'norm' especially if there are other factors involved. At that time, I wouldn't have risked my career and livelihood in giving a sex offender in these cases a swift smack because those that they come into in prison will do a far better job than me. I was also aware that there were cases where people were put on the SOR for offences that involved perhaps a sexual relationship with a girl under 16 (perhaps by a boy of 16/17 where they were experimenting) who had consented but her parents had pressed charges......if details of their whereabouts were released and people merely saw the fact that the male had had sex with a girl under 16, imagine the repurcussions.

Fast forward several (!!) years down the road and I have 3 children. The bond between a parent and child means that, for most, they would lay down their own life for their child - and do anything they can to protect their children. I now want my children to have a life that allows them some freedom BUT I also want to give them the safest childhood. YES, I would want to know where the offenders lived so that I could be warned to keep an eye out......as would any reasonable person I think.
 ibakecakes
Joined: 11/27/2008
Msg: 179
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/5/2011 10:43:37 AM
I agree Lusipher, people would want to know the whereabouts to deal out their own justice. What I wonder is if people who have no direct involvement in the case are prepared to serve a jail sentence for one of these offenders? After all, the law in this country frown on vigilante attacks and would not take that into account as to why someone gave another person a good kicking.........I understand the rage, well actually I have no idea how it would feel, if your child or family member was the victim of someone like this but........would it be worth it if you had no direct involvement in the case? I'm pretty sure the answer is no if we all think rationally about it.....cos will your child or family understand why mummy or daddy wasn't there to tuck the in at night??
 Bodiesroadie
Joined: 8/8/2006
Msg: 181
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/5/2011 10:46:25 AM

So I suppose it all comes down to whether people want vengeance or justice?



'People' want vengeance....a civilized society wants justice.
 stonecastle
Joined: 2/14/2007
Msg: 182
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/5/2011 11:35:39 AM
No or else there would be a massive increase in murders by vigilantes if their addresses were published. And what if mistakes over things like exact address of the person were made it would mean many innocent people being attacked and even killed.
 stonecastle
Joined: 2/14/2007
Msg: 187
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/5/2011 12:40:58 PM
There are often wrongful convictions by the way in all crimes! That is one of the reasons that the addresses of these people should remain secret. It has been estimated for example that up to ten per cent of people in prison could be innocent of the crime for which they were convicted.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 192
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 11/5/2011 2:05:22 PM

The bond between a parent and child means that, for most, they would lay down their own life for their child


Dont you mean "some" parents?

Have you managed to live in a bubble that has stopped you ever hearing of the vast amounts of parents (male and female) who sexually abuse, neglect, beat and even kill their kids then?

Never heard of Munchausens by proxy?

Parental alienation syndrome?

Parents are just "people" with kids, not some magically different species incabable of any despicable treatment of either their own kids OR other peoples kids. And theyre far from being an insignificantly miniscule proportion of child abusers as a whole
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 196
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/24/2014 8:58:58 PM
First off sorry for having to go back in time to get a thread title. And apologies for the length of the post but its worth a read just to see what these three rodents
harman, mr harman and hewitt refuse to apologise for. Sex with 4 year olds and not condemning child pornography. I really hope these two vile bints and the
creepy dromey get slaughtered over this. Funny how every stone is to remain unturned for these three scum. But it wasnt always that way.

''Harriet Harman may be reluctant to speak out now, but when the Jimmy Savile scandal exploded in 2012, she loudly demanded a judge-led inquiry.
She toured television and radio stations proclaiming ‘we need to get to the truth’ for the sake of child abuse victims.
She flatly rejected any notion that attitudes had changed or that it was a ‘different world’ years ago, insisting even in ‘historic’ cases, there were lessons to be learnt''
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2566282/Harriet-Harman-wasnt-quiet-Jimmy-Savile-scandal-Deputy-Labour-leader-toured-TV-radio-stations.
html#ixzz2uJ1c9Jvp

''Harriet Harman has been forced to deny supporting paedophilia after she admitted that a prominent child sex group was allowed to join a civil liberties organisation
she helped run in the 1970s The Council controversially granted "affiliate" status to the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) in 1975, and put PIE's founded
Tom O'Carroll on one of the Council's working groups.
Miss Harman was the Council's legal officer from 1978 to 1982, while Mr Dromey sat on its executive committee from 1970 to 1979. Miss Hewitt was the council's general secretary from 1974 to 1983.
Crucially Miss Harman admitted that the council had allowed PIE to join the Council as an affiliate "on payment of a fee" one of nearly 1,000 such bodies''
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10659169/Harriet-Harman-admits-paedophile-group-joined-her-civil-liberties-group-in-the-1970s.html

So far all three have questions to answer imho. Below is the guardian even saying that the three rodents have to provide answers.

''More sensationally, it also reproduced a document purportedly showing that the NCCL lobbied for the age of sexual consent to be reduced to 10 and urged that incest be legalised. It also referred to the December report, stating that Harman, Dromey and Hewitt were not "eager to elaborate on the issue" at the time.
It goes on to give what it claims are examples of PIE being defended by the NCCL, even after the Sunday People published a splash [on 25 May, 1975] headlined
"The vilest men in Britain." It says that the NCCL went so far as to complain about it to the Press Council (the PCC's predecessor). But I'm with the Mail on this.
On the basis of the paper's evidence, I think Harman, Dromey and Hewitt do need to address this matter seriously.
It isn't good enough to say the world was different then (as some have been suggesting in relation to the recent crop of historic sex abuse court cases) because there has never been a time when it has been all right to advocate sex with a child''
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/feb/20/dailymail-harrietharman

Again below from the guardian. If even the liberal bible is saying the daily mail has done some great research then trully there is a problem to answer.

''Where the NCCL's dealings with PIE are concerned, the Mail has certainly done its research, making it clear that its information is garnered from official archives.
Then again, helping a paedophile group lobbying to lower the age of consent so drastically (and the rest) – what could they have been thinking? If what amounted to an almighty contest of progressive thought went too far, and the NCCL in any way legitimised a gruesome group such as the PIE, then this needs to be addressed''
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/23/harriet-harman-patricia-hewitt-pie-nccl-paedophile-claims

The article below beggars belief and shows just how mad the labour party were embracing odious scum like harman, hewitt and dromey. Lower the age of consent to 4!!!!
The nccl argued child pornography should not be banned. Who was the legal officer? Horrible harriet harman.

''In 1975, NCCL had granted PIE official “affiliate” status. It put O’Carroll on one of its working groups, it made him a platform speaker at an NCCL conference in spring 1977, and it strongly defended paedophiles against “hysterical and inaccurate” newspaper attacks
But such voices were a minority; for most of the Seventies and early Eighties, the “right” to sleep with children was one of the “civil liberties” that NCCL supported and the policy differences with PIE were ones only of degree. PIE favoured lowering the age of sexual consent broadly to four (as they generously allowed,
a baby below that would “lack the verbal skill to communicate its consent”). The comparative moderates of NCCL backed a reduction merely to 10, so long as it could be demonstrated that consent “was genuinely given”

''NCCL vigorously opposed new cornerstone child abuse legislation. In a letter to the Home Office in April 1978, it argued fiercely that child pornography should not be banned as “indecent” unless it could be shown that the child depicted had been harmed. The NCCL official who wrote this letter was its legal officer, Harriet Harman
For NCCL was far from alone in its views. In 1977, the social workers’ trade paper, Community Care, published a sympathetic spread, headlined “Should we pity the paedophiles”, talking of the “liberation of children to enjoy their natural sexuality” and reassuring readers that most paedophiles preferred only over-10s,
making them “less frightening than [PIE’s] campaign implies”. In 1979, the National Council for One-Parent Families called for abolishing the age of consent
In the Eighties, an official inquiry found, Islington’s children’s homes were riddled with abuse, sex and paedophile rings. Dozens of sexual predators worked for
the council and were, found the inquiry, protected by misplaced “equal opportunities” policies which enabled them to cry “discrimination” if anyone tried to rein in their activities. (One key member of the NCCL executive in the paedophile period, the lawyer Henry Hodge, was married to the then Islington council leader, Margaret Hodge,
now reinvented as the chairman of Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee. Unforgivably, those organisations included a hard-Left London council, Islington,
with thousands of vulnerable children directly in its care''
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10653944/The-right-to-sleep-with-children-was-one-civil-liberty-that-NCCL-supported.html

And the icing on this cake? The ridiculous milliband says that harman has huge decency and integrity. Unlike that twat.

''After calls from the tabloid for the Labour leadership to speak out on the issue, Harman was backed by Ed Miliband, who praised her "huge decency and integrity"
and said he does not "set any store by these allegations"
Last year, Shami Chakrabarti, the current director of Liberty, who joined the organisation in 2001, issued an apology about the links between the NCCL and the PIE''
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/24/harriet-harman-daily-mail-paedophile-campaign-allegations
 Justanotherchap
Joined: 12/4/2013
Msg: 198
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/25/2014 3:42:07 AM
But should there be a limitation on anything? Germany has just arrested more Auschwitz prison guards. DLT is up before the courts again as have a fair few celebrities. Isn't the character and background of a politician fair game. Another 3 people who don't seem to have done anything in life other than sit on committees and be politicians.
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 199
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/25/2014 3:57:59 AM
Here light your spot on. Course its political. Do you think the mirror, guardian, independent
etc wouldnt have done the same if it was tories?
As for dragging from 30 years ago mate harperson was saying no stone unturned about saville.
No matter how long ago. So why exempt her?
Na harman deserves it mate. She is a spiteful trout who needs a good slapping down. Not literally
of course. Well......

Na these arseholes ruined and are still ruining lives and abusing power. Look up the wiki on dromey
and see the cash for questions cash for peerage that sleekit rodent was involved in.
And hewitt? Nae wonder her heads down. So the shadow deputy prime minister wont answer about
embracing sex with 10 year olds. Bet she would shreik loud if a prominent tory was a former member
of the national front. Demanding answers and no alibi of oh it was years ago.

Imagine if millipede wins the election then bores himself to death. That harpie would be running the
country mate. Islington was and still is a chatteratti and issues driven place. The socialist republic
of islington. How many working folks lives did that entity and harman and her paedophile rights
gang destroy?

All the bint has to do is give answers mate. But she either cannot or will not. She is as corrupt as her
former leader the war criminal blair.

MPs' expenses[edit]

In January 2009, Harman proposed a rule change to exempt MPs' expenses from the Freedom of Information Act.
Her parliamentary order aimed to remove "most expenditure information held by either House of Parliament from the
scope of the Freedom of Information Act". It meant that, under the law, journalists and members of the public would
no longer be entitled to learn details of their MP's expenses. Labour MPs were to be pressured to vote for this measure
by use of a three line whip. Her proposal was withdrawn when the Conservative Party said they would vote against,
and an online campaign by mySociety.[61] The failure of the motion led to the disclosure of expenses of British Members of Parliament.
In December 2010 it emerged that Harman was amongst 40 MPs who had secretly repaid wrongly claimed expenses between 2008 and 2010.
In November 2010 Harman's parliamentary private secretary Ian Lavery had blocked a motion designed to allow the repayments to be made public
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Harman
 Justanotherchap
Joined: 12/4/2013
Msg: 200
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/25/2014 4:35:15 AM
Politicians do live in too much of their own world. Yesterday it was reported that a Baroness wanted equality in the use of titles. If a male receives a peerage his wife get's to use thetitle "lady" but if a woman gets a similar title her hubbie stays just plain old Mr. You'd think they would have more important things to discuss though to be fair i think most of theLords were more amused than persuaded. here's the text from the BBC

"Entitling the wives of knights and lords to be called "lady" is discriminatory, an independent member of the House of Lords has said.

Crossbencher Baroness Deech suggested the husbands of dames and baronesses could also be accorded a title.

"Equality has to start in this House," she said of Parliament's upper chamber.

The government's Lord Wallace of Saltaire recognised that there were "anomalies", but said there were no plans to rectify them.

"While the government recognises the equality issues surrounding the use of courtesy titles," he explained, "we have no plans to alter their use, due to the complexity of the system and the likelihood of confusion arising from alteration to the long-standing custom and practice governing this matter."

'Not urgent'
Baroness Deech replied: "I can assure the noble lord the minister that having looked into the issue, it is not as difficult as he imagines and there could be change.

"The use of the title 'lady' by the wives of knights and noble lords is discriminatory unless a title of some sort is also accorded to the husbands of noble ladies and dames.

"Either the title should only be used by those to whom it was awarded, or husbands, wives and partners have to be treated equally."

Lord Wallace: Not urgent to change rules now
Lib Dem Lord Wallace said: "The statement that equality must start in this house is one which would be received with surprise by a number of those outside.

"The use of courtesy titles, and the titles for the spouses of peers - which are apparently legal titles and not courtesy titles - has grown up over the last 500-600 years.

"The rapid changes in the relationship between the sexes and marriage and so on over the last 50 years has of course left us with a number of anomalies of which the government is well aware, but we are not persuaded that it is urgent to adjust them now."

Crossbencher Baroness Howarth told Lord Wallace: "I was rather concerned by your reply that it was too complex. Do you remember that it was too complex to give women the vote at one time?

"The British constitution is extremely complex. If we were to attempt to redesign the British constitution on a rational basis this House would certainly not exist, and whether or not the monarch would exist are equal questions.

"We live with odd elements of tradition which are part of the rich tapestry of this country and they do evolve."

But Lord Wallace insisted: "When we are worried about the weakness of social mobility in Britain I'm not sure that concerning ourselves with the subtle finesse of social stratification is something we should spend too much time on.""
 GeordieColin
Joined: 10/18/2012
Msg: 201
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/25/2014 4:04:34 PM
Typical Mail making labour squirm. Fair play to them on this one. But I do feel so sorry for people who have made bad choices when younger when it comes back to haunt them.
I can not believe that Harmen ever championed peado's or any form of child abuse at any stage of her life.
But given the Mails links to the Tories and their backers. For every smear they can find on Labour I wonder how many they suppress on the Tories,the churches and finance ?
 imanorangetiger
Joined: 12/29/2011
Msg: 202
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/26/2014 6:46:51 AM
Personally I'm not in favour of publicing ex offenders whereabouts after they've been released because it's not only the ex-con who could be targeted by lynch mobs but family, friends and workmates as well. However, I am in favour of sentences which favour long term detention where there isn't a clear sign that the perpetrator won't re-offend and I'm in favour of chemical castration of offenders who commit crimes where physical contact has been proven.
 Nottinghamfellow
Joined: 4/5/2012
Msg: 203
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:55:17 AM
And for a female pederast when physical contact is proven?
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/27/2014 7:20:30 AM
Viscerally speaking, I think it FEELS like the sensible, rational thing to do though, however, ultimately I think publicizing details of such offenders can generate more problems than it cures.

How so?

Well...let's see now:

-More scope for vigilantism (which I don't have any great problem with generally..but, such activity almost always affects innocents as opposed to guilty moreso). Both in terms of innocents being targeted & the PARANOIA such attention can breed.
-Very, very low scope for reformed offenders ever going straight/leading a normal productive if EVERYONE knows about their past.
-Naming & shaming IMO shifts the focus away from the biggest problem ie: Unconvicted child sex offenders, it just feeds the: If we all know who & where the boogie men are we are safe, which is counter-productive/can lead to a false sense of security!

In short, I think we should either keep the worst sex offenders locked up indefinitely OR if we are going to release them back into society OR give them at least a half chance of re-intergrating.

Also educating young kids on how to deal with & or report sex offennders is key.
 try1more
Joined: 12/16/2007
Msg: 206
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/27/2014 10:07:15 AM
^^^^
had to consult a dictionary as it never made sense.
it still makes no sense???
 Nottinghamfellow
Joined: 4/5/2012
Msg: 207
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:08:52 AM
sorry yes, I was wrong to use the term pederast. What I meant was if the tiger is in favour of chemical castration for paedophiles then what would be a punishment in addition to imprisonment for female paedophiles as castration is for men only.....

I mistakenly believed that the term 'pederast' applied to both sexes.
 imanorangetiger
Joined: 12/29/2011
Msg: 208
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/28/2014 1:58:41 AM
I don't deny that female paedophiles exist.

http://www.child-safety-for-parents.com/female-pedophile.html#.UxBY3M498Z4

I also wouldn't differentiate between male and female if it came to necessary hormone treatment as part of a programme to lower sexual desire, or any sentencing provisions for that matter.

This week, there was yet another story in the news of a 30 something married female teacher being struck off for having sex with a 16 year old boy at her school. Invariably, the comments ran to "Cor! Why didn't I have a teacher like that?" If the teacher had been male, a good many comments would have accused him of grooming the girl.

Each situation should be taken on a case by case basis. Whilst cases such as the one above fall into a bit of a greyer area when it comes to public opinion, no-one can deny that sexual desire towards minors who clearly don't exhibit any attributes that make them anything more than children is abnormal behaviour that would warrant an individual's removal from any society.
 kinkygoldfish5445
Joined: 6/7/2013
Msg: 209
view profile
History
Paedophiles...Should We Be Publicising Their Whereabouts?
Posted: 2/28/2014 6:14:31 AM
We have pedos running our country, I spend hous a week with friends exposing this on twitter, the media cover it up at the head of the police and government say so. This has been going on decades but top powerful people are controlled buy this sick dirty habit and that's the way the queen likes it. You can manipulate a lot of powerful people if you know this about them. Why do you never see the reall scale to this type of abuse? Or the arrests? Or if you do get a little justice coz your family are well to do, it's a pathetic sentence. The powers that be are riddled with child sexual predictors. I for one came out with a child protection device. Was stopped from bringing it out because it detected the attacker. The police squashed it suppressed it to save your tv instead. I got told it may harm covert operations ha seriously what a joke. They could send them to a self Sufficient island and make sure they are not able to have children and let them and us live out our lives in peace, but do they ? Now ask your selves why why are pedos protected yet our kids are not
Show ALL Forums  > UK forums  >