Gary Glitter

I guess there is no point of starting a debate with you because you will keep going and going...

But either way, you are probably one of these conservatist that are running around here and there.

I have to ask you Phil, what's the point of having a penalty if it doesn't have the effect of keeping people on the right side of the law? Well of course, prison doesn’t stop people from being criminals either, but it's still more democratic. My point is that they only motivation for the state to use a punishment such as death penalty is to (at least to me) able to say that it lowers the crime figures.
Death penalties are an undemocratic way of reasoning, so there have to be huge benefits from a penalty like that, which there as far as I know aren’t.

But, if it makes you feel safer when you are out on the streets too know that the state will kill a person who might kill you (of various reasons), well that’s all right with me, but I truly hope that such a law never will exist in my country.

And, if you can't respect mine or Allwyns opinion in these matters, don't share that with us, it only makes you look like fool.

I can totally respect your opinion, infact in my first post I said you make an excellent argument for not having the death penalty. However in some extreme cases, that are absolutely cut and dry, I think it is a good punishment to have.

I wouldn't call for the death penalty because I think it will reduce serious crime, it may deter some people but it certainly wont deter pedophiles, they can't help themselves. The reason I'm in favour of the death penalty in cases like this is to protect the public from future crimes. Murderers, rapist and pedophiles go to jail, serve their time and are released back into society completely unrehabilitated are free to commit their crimes again. How is this right? If it was a case of putting the person in jail for the rest of their lives and they'd never get out, then I'd be in favour of that. Unfortunately that is not the case. The only thing that garauntees animals like this will not destroy anymore lives is to have theirs taken away.


Phil

Or girls. It's a misguiding amalgam to consider all pedophiles are homosexual.
Not saying that's what you said, just clearing that up.


Except with no sexdrive there is no impulsive need to rape... therefore no frustration. Wanting to be with someone is different than wanting to have sex with someone.


The reason they couldn't perform wasn't a lack of sexdrive, or so I would be ready to bet, otherwise they wouldn't have wanted to rape in the first place... unless you've got a solid source to share for that statement.


Ponrauil

It's actually not that simple. People sentenced for such crimes get out after their time but they still have to report their moves and still have some rights restricted for some years.

I get your point though I wouldn't put murderers, rapists and pedophiles all in the same basket.


Animals don't sexually assault their little ones. These criminals are as human as you and I, as disturbing as it sounds, that's what we need to accept before asking to kill someone because of our own failures as a society.


Ponrauil

Completely right. In this case regarding Gary Glitter, he apparently has raped little girls. There's just been so much media coverage over here about the Catholics priests abuse of little boys at the moment that I guess I'm focusing more on that. But your right, girls are at risk aswell.

Yes, but pedophiles don't rape children just because they fell attracted to them. There's much deeper physcological reasons. Some pedophiles do it because they think they're showing the children love, some do it because they hate them, some do it for reasons beyound my comprehension at the moment, but it definitely is not just about physical attraction, so taking away sex-drive dose not diminish their danger or desire to abuse children.

To be honest I can't really direct you anywhere from here, I just read alot about criminal profiling, watch documentaries and get info from lots of different sources but there are cases of gay men who have hated the fact that they are gay, in most cases because they are deeply religious and have been led to believe homosexuality is a sin, so they kidnap women, attempt to rape them to prove they are not gay but cannot perform sexually because they are disgusted at what they are doing. All this anger at what they cannot except about themselves and their inability to perform sexually gets directed towards their intended rape victims. At this stage they are so deluded they continue to try and rape women but can never peform and become serial killers.
There was no sexual desire to start with in these cases, so similar dangers would hold true for a pedophile who has no sex drive.

Oh yeah, I'm well aware of probation and tagging but all you have to do is look at the figures of criminals, especially pedophiles, murderers and rapists who re-offend as soon as they are released. These measures are totally ineffective at combating criminals from re-offending.

Of course I know they're as human as you and I, and that's what's so disturbing but I don't think we can blame their action on the failures of society. They're responsible for their own actions, society can fail in implement measures that deal with these people but the only ones who are responsible for their actions is themselves.


Phil

Well if you agree impulsive sex needs are part of the motives, you must agree that getting rid of them would diminish the danger.
It wouldn't eliminate it though, for the other reasons you said.



For that example yes.
But for another maybe the sexdrive would be the reason. Then if getting rid of it would rule out any chance to reoffend, surely it wouldn't be worth it to kill them, would it?



Is that really the case when their psychological problems are due to a **** up from their parents/neighbours/friends/teacher/priest/... ?

I don't believe so.


Ponrauil

the latest from teletext is Glitter is denying all charges , he remains in custody but has still not been charged . Concerning they havent charged him and its been 2 days now, maybe they dont have enough evidence.

If he is found guilty for molesting an under 12 yr old Vietnam he can face a firing squad or will remain in jail for the rest of his life. You can bet he is screaming to the British Consulate for support now.

I thought in certain countries they did castrate men for this type of crime however it was found that this did not stop them abusing children .

As for the death penalty I dont agree with it , I have wrestled with my feelings over this subject, but at the end of the day I dont feel I can judge to end someones life. I think it is our right to protect ourselves from the person by taking them away from society and putting them in jail. Saying that I dont really think our prison system is harsh enough.

I hope Glitter remains in jail, cant see them being able to shoot him as he is a British citizen.

Dawn

how so? It's the law of the country one offends in that dictates the punishment, not the laws of the country the offender is a citizen of.

Plenty of Mexicans/French, you name it receive capital punishment in the US.

I don't think it would diminish it enough to put it into practice, I'm not sure it would diminish it all as sexual gratification is not the driving force behind a pedophiles behaviour.


But that example clearly proves that sexual desire is not an integral part of a rapists behaviour and since sexual gratification plays a very minor role a pedophiles behaviour it would hold even more true, As I've said before, from what I know about the reasons for a pedophiles behaviour, castration simply would not work in removing the danger they pose. Prison sentences do not work because as is clearly evident, re-offending is all too common. I would support life imprisonment with absolutely no chance of ever being released back into society, not even for a day. Unfortunately that will never happen and there will always be a danger to children in society as long as that person is alive. The final question is: Is it justified to take the life of a convicted pedophile so no child should ever face the danger he poses. My answer to that is, yes.


Well this is a whole other subject but the fact is, at the end of the day everybody is responsible for their own behaviour. Society dose play a massive role in what we believe, value, what we think, how we feel and ultimately what we do, but it is our responsibility to question everything and take control of ourselves. You cannot blame anybody else for the things we do ourselves. We are responsible for everything we do.


Phil

I agree the law of the country should dictate how the criminal is punished, but quite often this is not the case. The country will fight to get its citizen to be punished at home or at least a reduced sentence abroad. It happens all the time with British citizens especially those on drug charges in Eastern countries, citizens of their own countries are punished far more severely , the english citizen freedom is fought for and often won, usually they are home within 2 yrs. Its not fair but thats how they seem to work .

The only people who do not seem to barter in this manner as much is US, for example recently a dual citizen was on death row, british people/gov fought to have him returned to UK. USA stood their ground and he was executed.

Dawn