*

Online Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 6066
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: You're a 16-year-old paedophile. What do you do?
« Reply #20 on: August 22, 2014, 02:06:26 AM »
I definitely agree that there should be more sympathy for paedophilia as a condition or illness, but we cannot forget that they are dangerous and should still be in conditions where they cannot do any harm by acting on their urges. 
What do you mean by 'condition'? Chemical castration? Should we also imprison socio/psychopaths before they hurt/kill someone? That's not an argument, it's a question. Should we?

Well, you would want to be prudent is all and as adults do, treat each situation with care and respect. But if you have someone who is diagnostically and cognitively close to offending (hypothetically naturally, I don't imagine we are capable of such degrees of accuracy) then you might want to take steps from putting them in charge of a daycare lets say. If they are the guy described in the article, who is raping and torturing 1 year olds, something more drastic like imprisonment would be appropriate until you can ensure they are not going to harm any more toddlers. If you are Adam, from the article, then some medical supervision seems appropriate, but nothing too drastic.

I am really just sounding this out as I go, but that is the gist of what I meant.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline Tau

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: You're a 16-year-old paedophile. What do you do?
« Reply #21 on: August 22, 2014, 03:58:14 AM »
Alright, I'm just wondering. I agree, for the record, with the exception that I think the guy who raped and tortured 1-year-olds can rot in prison regardless of whether or not he's going to hurt anyone else.
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

*

Offline spoon

  • *
  • Posts: 1132
  • Foxy wins
    • View Profile
Re: You're a 16-year-old paedophile. What do you do?
« Reply #22 on: August 22, 2014, 04:14:25 AM »
the guy who raped and tortured 1-year-olds can rot in prison regardless of whether or not he's going to hurt anyone else.

This is off topic, so split if you want:

Is vengeance the reason we imprison criminals? Or is it for the safety of the population? Are criminals punished or are they just removed from society in order to reduce crime?

Rape and torture is an extreme case, but if we had reason to believe that a convicted felon would no longer commit crime, would prison be necessary?
inb4 Blanko spoons a literally pizza

*

Online Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 6066
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: You're a 16-year-old paedophile. What do you do?
« Reply #23 on: August 22, 2014, 01:40:45 PM »
the guy who raped and tortured 1-year-olds can rot in prison regardless of whether or not he's going to hurt anyone else.

This is off topic, so split if you want:

Is vengeance the reason we imprison criminals? Or is it for the safety of the population? Are criminals punished or are they just removed from society in order to reduce crime?

Rape and torture is an extreme case, but if we had reason to believe that a convicted felon would no longer commit crime, would prison be necessary?

I tend to side with not keeping obviously rehabilitated felons in prison, but again this is supremely difficult to say with certainty.  The one other caveat is that if anyone touched my son, I would hunt them down myself, so these lofty ethics I am espousing do not apply to me.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline Tau

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: You're a 16-year-old paedophile. What do you do?
« Reply #24 on: August 22, 2014, 03:40:29 PM »
the guy who raped and tortured 1-year-olds can rot in prison regardless of whether or not he's going to hurt anyone else.

This is off topic, so split if you want:

Is vengeance the reason we imprison criminals? Or is it for the safety of the population? Are criminals punished or are they just removed from society in order to reduce crime?

Rape and torture is an extreme case, but if we had reason to believe that a convicted felon would no longer commit crime, would prison be necessary?

I tend to side with not keeping obviously rehabilitated felons in prison, but again this is supremely difficult to say with certainty.  The one other caveat is that if anyone touched my son, I would hunt them down myself, so these lofty ethics I am espousing do not apply to me.

I think that the importance of rehabilitation vs. punishment varies from crime to crime, although rehabilitation is always more important. When a guy robs a liquor store, we should be more focused on making sure he won't be robbing any more liquor stores. Any punishment should only exist as a part of the rehabilitation. If a guy robs thousands of people of their life savings through a Ponzi scheme, though, that's a very different story.

I don't really know what the ideal level of punishment vs rehabilitation is for people who do truly terrible things, be they Bernie Madoff (largest Ponzi scheme in history) or Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (Boston Marathon Bombing). What should we do with a man like Ariel Castro, who kept three women locked in his basement for 10 years? It doesn't seem morally correct to merely rehabilitate such people and then release them. Is that irrational? Does it even matter?
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ