Yep. The more brutal the better. Right?I couldn't agree more. When such a criminal does such an inhumane, disgusting thing as rape an innocent child, scarring them for life! OF course they deserve only the most brutal punishment.
Yep. The more brutal the better. Right?I couldn't agree more. When such a criminal does such an inhumane, disgusting thing as rape an innocent child, scarring them for life! OF course they deserve only the most brutal punishment.
What humanity is left when a child has been raped? The only solution to people who have transgressed all limits of possible forgiveness is death. I think your problem is that you value life too much. If one violates or ends another person's life, then he has no right to live. Besides, are you more likely to commit a crime in your world or mine? Look no further than global statistics when it comes to passive laws regarding these types of barbaric crimes.
There is a difference between a desire to reduce crime and the desire to punish an individual for committing it.
IMO and from what we see in the world, punishment does not work to reduce crime, the reverse, because a threat of punishment makes the criminal more extreme. A man who kidnaps a child is more likely to kill him/her if he anticipates a severe punishment. So your method would result in more dead children, not less child abuse.
Yep. The more brutal the better. Right?
Both desires are in one: make the criminal think twice.
Punishment does not work when it is as such as passive as that in the United States. But a brutal punishment, an effective police force authorized to use deadly force if necessary, then where would that man be? He wouldn't even kidnap the child in the first place.
The punishment for horse theiving and cattle rustling in the early american west was death.Both desires are in one: make the criminal think twice.
Punishment does not work when it is as such as passive as that in the United States. But a brutal punishment, an effective police force authorized to use deadly force if necessary, then where would that man be? He wouldn't even kidnap the child in the first place.
....is there any real science behind the idea that child molestation is that bad for children? ...
Do give me an example of a place where proactive punishment results in reduced crime.
How are we doing the same thing? Look, let me point it out: we are punishing the man who made a child's life hell, that is bad?
With such a strong police force, who is the victim? The criminals, as they should be.
This is all imaginary presupposition. None of it reflects reality.
SERIOUSLY?!
...I would far rather that Uncle Perv thinks, every time he thinks "I'm going to tap my 14 year old niece", that instead "I can do it with an animal in private and not have to worry about anyone bothering me." ....
The punishment for horse theiving and cattle rustling in the early american west was death.
Horse theivery and cattle rustling remianed rampant and the perpetrators were some of the most violent people alive.
Both desires are in one: make the criminal think twice.
Punishment does not work when it is as such as passive as that in the United States. But a brutal punishment, an effective police force authorized to use deadly force if necessary, then where would that man be? He wouldn't even kidnap the child in the first place.
The punishment for horse theiving and cattle rustling in the early american west was death.
Horse theivery and cattle rustling remianed rampant and the perpetrators were some of the most violent people alive.
How would you propose to conduct such a study?Seriously. When was a sober scientific evaluation done?
The reality is, or at least would be using common sense, is that any man would be deterred from committing crime if he knew what terrible punishment await. And secondly, with an effective police force authorized to use deadly force, I'd say alot of criminals would be stopped in their tracks while making drug trades, robbing a bank, etc
And who's to say it wouldn't work with rape? It would, far more than "27 years for the rapist" like it is today. I think a rapist would fear brutal torture and execution more than 27 years. And I think should the rapist be seen, and confirmed, he would be taken out with much more ease by simply shooting him to pieces rather than chasing him for hours and days.
Since when are pedophiles attracted to animals? That will not stop the sexual urge to rape a child.
That's like telling a straight guy to have sex with another man. Its not what he wants.
You haven't the slightest idea how to heal a child after such trauma, do you? You also don't believe the ones who say that they weren't traumatized, I am sure.
There is a lot of stupid stuff that goes on in the so-called normal course of a child's life that is also scarring, and we single out sex to be worse than the continual abuse of the type that I and millions of others did suffer. Over and over again, on a continuing basis, deliberately, my body and my hopes for a future were used as weapons against me to inflict as much pain against me as several people could figure out how to do. I also saw this done to several others in the same small class, so I am speaking about there abuse, too. Being raped would have been more like a change of pace. It is well established, also, that the response of a child's caretakers helps make the negative effects on the child a lot worse. Who do we blame, the person who inflicted the wound, or the person who poured salt and excrement into the wound afterward?
And, no, I don't believe that it is abusive for humans to have sex with animals if they can do it without physical harm to either party. Animals do it rough. They play rough with each other. Many of them have much larger penises than humans do. They won't "suffer."
It really is a shame that all of the criminologists in the world have never thought of this. Crime solved.
May we hear your solution to wars and famines next please?