A solution to child rape

Actually, we want to see law enforcement behave as civilized people, and we want it to mean something when people don't commit crimes and when they do live as civilized people. The first time I see a legal public beheading in America, maybe it's already not safe to say what I would do, but I'm going to take that one out on someone.

When they were allowed to lynch people they always targeted black men who had consensual sex with white women who were of age and couldn't care less about child molesters because half of them diddled their own daughters.

You don't treat uncivilized people with civility. You give to them what they gave to others.
 
Should we use them as an excuse to turn all civilized principles into a vicious regime that ultimately winds up destroying itself? It's stuff like this that turned a lot of places in this world into useless pestholes, not to name any particular religion because a lot of them do it. Christianity actually started to drag itself out of the mud when it stopped acting like this, and you can bet your bottom dollar that not only will child molestation go on unabated under your regime, it will take more extreme forms, will be done far more secretively, and nature will build a better mouse, meaning that we will have smarter and more evil child molesters. So have at it, but I'm going to stop you.

Where do you get this stuff? I only stated, that a well-armed police force with the authorization to use deadly force and punishments to be brutal would effectively reduce, if not stop, crime, ESPECIALLY compared to the American system of policing. How is that a "vicious regime". That is far more civilized than a disgusting pedophile raping an innocent child against their will and scarring them for life in tragedy!
 
Don't you see, Sam, that strict punishments for appropriate crimes do work? Sorry if I've come off as rude, but in all seriousness, the public needs to fear their actions. Without a little fear, chaos most definitely ensues.

No my dear Kadark, it does not. Where does it work? The most severely retributional societies have the most violent crimes.
 
I actually am more on your side here than not. I think the incredible overreaction society has to a young teen being "touched" by and adult must have some deep seated roots that I am not aware of. There are a bunch of people here that do not have childern or grandchildren and have no idea at what age they become sexual. And what behaviors they engage in, directed toward adults.

You should look at the works of Wilhelm Reich, particularly The Function of the Orgasm and The Cancer Biopathy. The roots are easy to trace if someone bothers to do them, sort of like bothering to do the math. It is also rooted in a mental negativity against everything that is rooted in seeing a lot of evil in small evils.

I don't want to deal with teenage or younger sex at all, and I would love to get away from having it shoved in my face. I would especially love to get away from having it used as an excuse to screw with me and others, and I would like to be free of the worry that a false accusation might be leveled and the next thing I'm minus a job, my sanity, and maybe my home.
 
Hey, you might as well quote the whole thing. I said, should the police guard plainly see the criminal without a doubt, why SHOULDN'T he apprehend him, with deadly force if the crime is severe enough?
And who's judgement will you trust? In the heat of the moment, could you make a mistake?

And we're talking about child-rape here. Are you suggesting that a police force would be able to catch the criminal in the act?
 
No my dear Kadark, it does not. Where does it work? The most severely retributional societies have the most violent crimes.

The public gets on best by embracing the actions that are life-affirming, that are within civilized bounds, that are constructive, and so on. This is how a lot of the violence has already been solved. We will have more violence if we return to solutions to social problems that involve violence. Upside-down thinking has led people to believe that violence does anything except cause more violence.
 
No my dear Kadark, it does not. Where does it work? The most severely retributional societies have the most violent crimes.

Really? Give me an example. We all know Syria is a beautiful country, and has a fascinating history. The people are nice, the weather is fair, Latakia has plenty of ocean and beach resorts and Damascus is beautiful in it's antiquity. Tourists come from all over to admire that, and there are carnivals and fairs (I remember one not far from my house would come every year).

Yet........crime is so low. Why is that? Because we know how to stop criminals.
 
Okay, so you DON'T think that a police force should be heavily armed and authorized with deadly force, and disgusting criminals of this nature should be brutally punished?

There are so many unstated assumptions here, I hardly know where to begin. Nations are composed of people, and as such, they generally reflect human psychology. In the aftermath of WW-1, the urge to punish Germany overrode the good judgment of the victorious nations, and very punitive terms were forced on Germany. This punishment made Germany susceptible to fascism, and was at least partly responsible for WW-2. We learned better, and actually rebuilt the nation of Germany in the aftermath of WW-2, rather than let our urge for revenge lead to another war in the future.

Though we seem to have learned better than to treat nations this way, we still feel that this is the best way to make individuals behave. The idea refuses to die, in spite of all of the evidence to the contrary. The urge to punish is very strong in humans, and we seem to favor things that bring suffering on those who we dislike. Christians who get dreamy eyed while thinking about non-believers suffering an eternity of torment in hell come to mind. "Laugh at me now, but hee hee, I'll get my revenge!"

Basil Fawlty, British television's hotelier from hell created by the immortal John Cleese, was at the end of his tether when his car broke down and wouldn't start. He gave it fair warning, counted to three, gave it one more chance, and then acted. "Right! I warned you. You've had this coming to you!" He got out of the car, seized a tree branch and set about thrashing the car within an inch of its life. Of course we laugh at his irrationality. Instead of beating the car, we would investigate the problem. Is the carburettor flooded? Are the sparking plugs or distributor points damp? Has it simply run out of gas? Why do we not react in the same way to a defective man: a murderer, say, or a rapist? Why don't we laugh at a judge who punishes a criminal, just as heartily as we laugh at Basil Fawlty? Or at King Xerxes who, in 480 BC, sentenced the rough sea to 300 lashes for wrecking his bridge of ships? Isn't the murderer or the rapist just a machine with a defective component? Or a defective upbringing? Defective education? Defective genes?

Concepts like blame and responsibility are bandied about freely where human wrongdoers are concerned. When a child robs an old lady, should we blame the child himself or his parents? Or his school? Negligent social workers? In a court of law, feeble-mindedness is an accepted defence, as is insanity. Diminished responsibility is argued by the defence lawyer, who may also try to absolve his client of blame by pointing to his unhappy childhood, abuse by his father, or even unpropitious genes (not, so far as I am aware, unpropitious planetary conjunctions, though it wouldn't surprise me).

But doesn't a truly scientific, mechanistic view of the nervous system make nonsense of the very idea of responsibility, whether diminished or not? Any crime, however heinous, is in principle to be blamed on antecedent conditions acting through the accused's physiology, heredity and environment. Don't judicial hearings to decide questions of blame or diminished responsibility make as little sense for a faulty man as for a Fawlty car?
http://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_9.html
 
Where do you get this stuff? I only stated, that a well-armed police force with the authorization to use deadly force and punishments to be brutal would effectively reduce, if not stop, crime, ESPECIALLY compared to the American system of policing. How is that a "vicious regime". That is far more civilized than a disgusting pedophile raping an innocent child against their will and scarring them for life in tragedy!

Like I said, the only thing that should be done with such a police force is to kill them down to the last person.
 
Really? Give me an example. We all know Syria is a beautiful country, and has a fascinating history. The people are nice, the weather is fair, Latakia has plenty of ocean and beach resorts and Damascus is beautiful in it's antiquity. Tourists come from all over to admire that, and there are carnivals and fairs (I remember one not far from my house would come every year).

Yet........crime is so low. Why is that? Because we know how to stop criminals.

Hmm so where do you stay?
 
Really? Give me an example. We all know Syria is a beautiful country, and has a fascinating history. The people are nice, the weather is fair, Latakia has plenty of ocean and beach resorts and Damascus is beautiful in it's antiquity. Tourists come from all over to admire that, and there are carnivals and fairs (I remember one not far from my house would come every year).

Yet........crime is so low. Why is that? Because we know how to stop criminals.

Syria is one of the countries that the CIA sends innocent people to to be tortured for information that they do not have.
 
And who's judgement will you trust? In the heat of the moment, could you make a mistake?

And we're talking about child-rape here. Are you suggesting that a police force would be able to catch the criminal in the act?

No, because the police force would take EXTREME caution. As I said, only the most plain and open criminals. For all others, an effective chase would do. It all centers around arming and permitting the police to do their job.


As for catching a molester.....it would be tough and the child would be at risk, so such a strategy wouldn't work. But I guarantee you people would be alot more worried and think twice when they know that the police will toast their ass if they are caught.
 
Post #48.

Anything you'd like to add?

Crime is reduced in the ME? Child molestation is, but its not because of any punishment. In fact, your example of the ME is an excellent one for what I am thinking.

Why do you think child molestation is so low in the ME? Why are children not sexualised there?
 
Syria is one of the countries that the CIA sends innocent people to to be tortured for information that they do not have.

Do they? I wasn't aware. They get enough at Guantanamo Bay, though, don't they? And innocent people wouldn't need to be tortured for information: so if they send anyone, it's terrorists and they DESERVE to be tortured.
 
REPO Man, consider how responsibility might be taught. Thrashing a child may teach a child not to do one thing, but then were do skills come from? Beat a person enough and they don't understand anymore the reason why they should care for themselves. I taught myself that staying away from drugs, alcohol, violence, and of course crime was a good way to take care of myself. Now if I had only taken care of my money, which is a skill that can be taught. I wasn't taught that skill.
 
Hmm so where do you stay?

Latakia and Damascus but Latakia is my home city and I love it beautiful too....would you like some pics? Anything else you would like to add? Perhaps a video on how good life is in Syria and how beautiful?

Yet murder, robbery, etc is very low now why is that?
 
Back
Top