Pedophiles in Politics

[Havoc]

Hey, enough is enough. Stop your fighting right now, this argument has gone far enough and it's downright stupid now. Take it to PM if you want to poke each others eye's out.

And get back on topic of the pedophiles in politics thing. >_>

[Jacob]

"You need to rethink your philosophy on life. I don't want to see you twenty years from now with a shaved head screaming obscenities on the news."

I really don't get this. Just because i want to punish people in a manner that would work - i'm going to end up as a Skin-head (and presumably) White-Supremist?

"You can actually see a lot more in their real personalities than you would in daily drabble IRL."

Heh, i'm exactly the same in real life.

[Havoc]

Jacob, what part of 'STOP' don't you understand?

[Jacob]

"Jacob, what part of 'STOP' don't you understand?"

"Stop your fighting right now"

Only OANST and Soulstice were bickering. Not i. I was discussing. Next time clarify who you're directing an order at. Besides, what's wrong with a heated debate? Okay, OANST's and Soulstice's was reduced to petty name calling, but i haven't.

[OANST]

There's nothing petty about my name calling. I make sure that I keep them as vulgar and vile as possible. Otherwise, where's the fun?

[Havoc]

It was directed to everyone involved in that discussion, as it was going around in loops.

Now I'd like everyone to either get back on topic, or continue this discussion in a mature way.

[Facsimile]

Besides, what's wrong with a heated debate?

Oh yeah, you probably haven't heard, but during the time you were away debating became a sin to certain members here.

[Wil]

I don't think it's the debate itself. It's the squabbling and idiot self-preservation that sneaks in alongside it.

[Nate]

"The laws that you would like to put into effect would have disastrous effect on your society. This is because people get carried away. The downtrodden of your country would be afraid to ever speak up because they would know that if they were arrested and went to court the judge would have the ability to castrate them."

Of course, there is always a risk it would be abused.

But then again, is having a society that is cleansed of crime with harsher punishments worse than having a society seething with crime with barely no punishments?

I'd choose the former, but that's because i'm quietly confident i wouldn't be put in a compromising position.

It would also go on a three strike system -
Get into mischief with the Police - Warning.
Get into more mischief with the Police - Sterilisation, with the chance of still having children if you reform.
Get into EVEN more mischief with the Police - Castration.

Okay, attempting to continue discussion maturely:

What worries me is that this sort of thing can be misdirected pretty quickly. You could start off giving the courts the right to castrate child-abusers but what happens when some far-right party gets into power? Pretty soon it'll be the punishment du jour for whomever the leaders don't like; be they criminals, foreigners or sexual deviants like homosexuals.

And I like my nadgers, thankyou very much.

As a great poem goes:

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller

[Rich]

You could start off giving the courts the right to castrate child-abusers but what happens when some far-right party gets into power?

*Snort* This is the UK, not the Netherlands.

And I mean that as in:

Labour and Conservative = 70% of vote
Lib Dems = 28% of vote
Anyone else (ie: afforementioned far-right party) = 2%

[Jacob]

"First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me."


I love that poem.

But yeh, i find it incredibly doubtful they'd start bounding around slapping anybody who didn't deserve it with such a punishment.

You could equally say "Why should we all drive cars - what happens if somebody gets a bit drunk one night and kills somebody in a drunk driving incident?"

I think the least that should happen is we should try it. England is becoming crappier, and probably the best way to sort that out is to go a bit Right. I mean, come on, we've been overly Left for around 30 years and look what's happened to our country?!

[OANST]

I don't know how you could possibly find it hard to believe that it could get out of hand. Especially since it's already happened before. I'm actually extremely opposed to the concept regardless of whether it gets out of hand or not.

Your analogy is ridiculous to say the least. driving a car doesn't ruin a life everytime. Everytime you castrate someone you can safely say you did some major damage to that persons life. The problem here is that you are so preoccupied by the idea that people should be more like you that you are willing to sacrifice those who stray from your exceeding wisdom. Are you able to articulate your reasons in a way where they don't sound all that horrible? Yeah. It sounds like you are. But so was Hitler. And don't play the Hitler has no place in this conversation card. He actually put in place what you are hoping for. I will not stand idly by and let someone advocate tyranny in any form. No matter if it will come to pass or not. And the fact that there are people here who know that what you are talking is horribly wrong and yet they say nothing because they don't want to offend you (a senior member) is extremely disturbing to me. Your ideas are vile, Jacob. And someone else needs to grow some courage and say the same.

[T-nex]

I really agree with OANST. I don't like these brutal forms of punishments... :S There are other effective ways of punishing..

[used:)]

In my opinion, if someone commits a serious offense (child molestation, senseless murder), then they should not be executed or tortured, they should be completely removed from society and be locked up until the end of their days. Soeciety only sinks themselves to the level of the offenders once they execute someone.

[T-nex]

So true.... I never liked the thought of torturing someone. It's nasty, and the people who get the job to do it must be insensitive bastards.


Locking them away would be the best... I really don't see any better solution.

[Jacob]

I'm against the death penalty - but for all the wrong reasons.

Death is the easy way out, it's a relief. Whereas living in a 4 x 4 cell, in your own waste, devoid of any social interaction for as long as you live is much more of a punishment.

"No matter if it will come to pass or not. And the fact that there are people here who know that what you are talking is horribly wrong and yet they say nothing because they don't want to offend you (a senior member) is extremely disturbing to me."

As do i. I don't think people should limit what they say/think in case they offend somebody. Everybody has an opinion about something that's bound to offend, and if we all crept on egg-shells where would we be then, eh? WHERE?!?!? ...etc.

"Everytime you castrate someone you can safely say you did some major damage to that persons life."

Yes. And? If they're willing to re-offend after being warned twice of the consequences, then it says to me that they have accepted what's going to happen to them. Will there be psychological consequences afterwards? Probably. But i'm sure they can be dealt with.

"The problem here is that you are so preoccupied by the idea that people should be more like you that you are willing to sacrifice those who stray from your exceeding wisdom"

It's that sort of wording that makes it sound worse than it is. You make out as if i'm trying to create a super-race of people with infinite intelligence, lush looks and sharp, Jacobian wit *Cough* No, i'm not. I just feel that when certain people have children, they put them under great strain, both mentally, psychologically and emotionally. Now, one could argue that by stopping these people from having children, you're stopping child abuse.

"And don't play the Hitler has no place in this conversation card. He actually put in place what you are hoping for"

I wasn't going to. Hitler had some amazing ideas. ...he also had some pretty bad ones. I hate the fact that you're classed as a 'Neo-Nazi' or 'Crazy-foo'' if you say that, but meh, such is life.

"There are other effective ways of punishing.."

Such as?

One of the main reasons why i advocate the things i do, is because i see England slowly crumbling into a pit of it's own waste. Prison is no longer a deterrent, the streets are no longer safe to walk at night, cities are turning into Ghetto's. We're slowly turning into America. And i don't want to see that.

If it were a choice between a Right-Wing country, where abortion, homosexuality, sex out of wedlock and the like were frowned upon, but criminals got treated as such and society as it is now, i'd choose the former anyday.

Of course, a happy mix would be more than welcome. But, alas, it seems like that's never going to happen.

It's worth noting, however, that the chances of the castration thing ever happening in a society that it was practiced in would be rare. There'd probably be only a few 100 cases, as people would quickly realise what would happen to them if they did stray from the laws of society too many times. Coupled with experimentation upon people who'd committed heinous crimes, crime rates would drop. Prisons would become less crowded. Taxes would go down. And people would be merry.

Sometimes bad things need to happen for good reason. I don't see why you can't see that.

[OANST]

You really think that the world is worse off than it used to be? That Britains crime rate is higher than it used to be? You have a very short sighted view of history if that's true. Look to your past. You will see public hangings, beheadings and torture. And you will also see that crime was far more rampant then. I hate this world is going to shit attitude that everyone has. Because it doesn't make any sense. Crime was far more prevalent 100 years ago then it is now. And the punishments were much more severe. That should clue you into the fact that punishments like what you are spouting is not a deterant in the first place. The only person it does anything for is the sadist who gets the joy of putting them in place.

As for bad things creating good things well, you're right. Sometimes when bad things happen good things come of it. But that doesn't mean that there wasn't another way to get the same result. A way that doesn't damage the soul so much.

[Jacob]

"You will see public hangings, beheadings and torture. And you will also see that crime was far more rampant then."

You have a point. The same can be said with America as well. You have the Death penalty in some of your states, yet you still have quite a high crime rate.

But my theory is that it's like that because people are used to it. And if you're used to something you become inured to it.

Bring such things into this country, however, and crime will go down (i'm guessing that if you threaten somebody with being fully castrated and put into prison, crime would go down more than if you just threatened death).

We haven't had the death penalty for...erm...a while now. So if it were to be brought back and a mass of offenders were suddenly culled, it'd be a big shock to the would-be-offenders who may like having their head and neck attached.

EDIT -

"But that doesn't mean that there wasn't another way to get the same result."

I'm open to suggestions. Like i said, i only got to this way of thinking because i saw the punishments and i saw the crimes and they didn't add up and the filth were (are) beginning to think they could get away with it.

[used:)]

Bring such things into this country, however, and crime will go down (i'm guessing that if you threaten somebody with being fully castrated and put into prison, crime would go down more than if you just threatened death).

But what happens to the way of life for citizens? Things will be alright for the people in power and people like you who keep to their pondering, but the people will be living in fear. Which would lead to totalitarianism (sp?). Humans aren't perfect, your system of governement may work for a time, but not every politician in charge would be someone who would maintian the line between justice and dictatorship. I would refer to live in a country slowly sinking down in its own crap rather than a tyrrany.

[OANST]

[I]"I'm open to suggestions. Like i said, i only got to this way of thinking because i saw the punishments and i saw the crimes and they didn't add up and the filth were (are) beginning to think they could get away with it.

I'm going to be honest, Jacob. I don't know what will work. We don't disagree on the problems. I live five miles from Detroit, for gods sake. We have the highest violent crime percentage in the U.S. What we disagree on are methods of solution. But I honestly don't know what will work. And I don't feel any shame in that. A lot of things have been tried. Many of them to no avail. And all we can do is continue to try. But one thing that I refuse to do is give up. And I believe that the easy solutions (like the ones you are talking about) not only will not work but will destroy us as a people. I think that your views are very defeatist. I agree that it is difficult to have faith in humanity. In fact it might also be foolish. But I would much rather be a fool than a tyrant. I will not degrade my soul in that way.

[Jacob]

"I would refer to live in a country slowly sinking down in its own crap rather than a tyrrany."

Yeh, try living in a country that's just like that. Not like England, 'cos we're not even that bad. People go on about Fascism being "oh-so-bad", but which country was better off after it's leaders lost power? Germany or Russia? The Fascist or the Communist?

"A lot of things have been tried. Many of them to no avail."

Then why not try this? It's not giving up, it's treating the cause, not the symptom of the cause.

"Things will be alright for the people in power and people like you who keep to their pondering, but the people will be living in fear."

Do you live in fear that you'll be put in jail? No. It's no different. Be a criminally un-just w*nker and get sorted. Simple.

"But what happens to the way of life for citizens?"

It gets better. Crime goes down, along with taxes. More people are merrier and richer, and as wealth goes up, poverty goes down, destroying yet another cause for crime.

"Humans aren't perfect, your system of governement may work for a time, but not every politician in charge would be someone who would maintian the line between justice and dictatorship"

That would, of course, be a problem. That's why i said only to make it a temporary solution. Of course, i could always do what you lot seem to be doing and have faith in humanity, putting faith in the next guy to take over that he won't misuse such power.

On another Nazi-esque issue (and one that'd i'd introduce, also) - what're your views on human experimentation?

[used:)]

Yeh, try living in a country that's just like that. Not like England, 'cos we're not even that bad. People go on about Fascism being "oh-so-bad", but which country was better off after it's leaders lost power? Germany or Russia? The Fascist or the Communist?

I have lived in a country like that before, for three months. And I am not saying there should be some kind of revolution of the people, I am saying you should act to improve the government you have at the time rather then start form scratch.

Do you live in fear that you'll be put in jail? No. It's no different. Be a criminally un-just w*nker and get sorted. Simple.

I would be living in fear of having my balls cut off.

It gets better. Crime goes down, along with taxes. More people are merrier and richer, and as wealth goes up, poverty goes down, destroying yet another cause for crime.

But when you put somehting like the very ability to reporduce on the line, then people get hectic. It doesn't matter if it's "three strikes, you're out." Poeple only think of the bad, and castration is pretty damn bad. That would lead to riots and treasonous crimes.

On another Nazi-esque issue (and one that'd i'd introduce, also) - what're your views on human experimentation?

No. Humans have no right to control the life of another human being for any sort of purposes. Unless the person agreed to it.

[Nate]

*Snort* This is the UK, not the Netherlands.

And I mean that as in:

Labour and Conservative = 70% of vote
Lib Dems = 28% of vote
Anyone else (ie: afforementioned far-right party) = 2%

That's a rather naive view of the world - do you think in 1923 that the average German could have anticipated that Hitler would become chancellor just ten years later?

This is probably just something I'm sensitive about, being Jewish, but we're always on the lookout for the next nazi party so as to nip it in the bud before we're taken by surprise like the jews of Germany were.

Sidenote: in the second half of the 19th century and the early 20th century, Germany was considered the centre of contempory Jewish culture and the country where Jews were most accepted and integrated into wider society. No-one would have believed that the holocaust could happen there of all places, which is why few people left even when the signs were going bad.

[Jacob]

"I would be living in fear of having my balls cut off."

Why, though? Unless you're upto something lawfully dodgy and socially heinous, you'd be fine. It's no different than being arrested and thrown into jail, everything goes through the same proceedure, it just takes away a persons ability to spread their nasty, little ways throughout society.

"It doesn't matter if it's "three strikes, you're out." Poeple only think of the bad, and castration is pretty damn bad. That would lead to riots and treasonous crimes."

What are you basing this on? We had the death penalty, and okay, sure, there were protests about it, but not riots of treasonous crimes. Now, to me, taking somebody's life is worse than taking their ability to bare children.

"No. Humans have no right to control the life of another human being for any sort of purposes."

Ugh. So you have 100 of the worst, most vile criminals ever to walk the Earth all lined up, and Scientists say "If we experiment on these people - we'll be able to cure Cancer" are you saying you'd say "Nope. Sorry. But i'm not willing to harm the bad minority for the good majority!"

"do you think in 1923 that the average German could have anticipated that Hitler would become chancellor just ten years later?"

From what i understand of it, and i may be wrong, but Hitler would've never gotten into power if it wasn't for the Wall Street crash. In fact, i'm sure i read somewhere that he was some kind of joke before the depression - meaning he only got to power through pure chance.

"This is probably just something I'm sensitive about, being Jewish, but we're always on the lookout for the next nazi party"

You say that as if they're not around or in power, there're some countries that are exactly like that - Africa, for example, with the mass culling of the Hudu's (or...some random Black race).

"in the second half of the 19th century and the early 20th century, Germany was considered the centre of contempory Jewish culture and the country where Jews were most accepted and integrated into wider society"

Well, that's what happens when you kill God's son. Out of all the Son's you could've had killed - you had to go and choose God's.

One word, my Jewish friend, one word - Karma.

[soulstice]

No. Humans have no right to control the life of another human being for any sort of purposes. Unless the person agreed to it.

And do you think murderers, rapists and paedophiles share that view?

No.

What goes around comes around.

[used:)]

As I said before, we only sink ourselves to their level once we perform such horrible things upon them.

[Jacob]

"As I said before, we only sink ourselves to their level once we perform such horrible things upon them."

Ugh, the whole "We can't do bad things to them, 'cos it makes us just as bad as they are" is such a crap argument.

Imagine, back in the day where humans were only just evolving, if somebody had that attitude, instead of the attitude that meant people like that were killed. Do you have any idea what that would mean? Do you have any idea of the repercussions that would have throughout History?

It'd mean that eventually the decent people of early man's society would be no more, 'cos the scum would've done away with them.

Like i said, bad things need to happen for good things to blossom. It's the whole purging forest fire argument. It's natural.

[used:)]

Ugh, the whole "We can't do bad things to them, 'cos it makes us just as bad as they are" is such a crap argument.

No it's not, it's a perfect argumnet for this. Where do human morals go once we take the life of another we know can handle in a controlled environment?

Imagine, back in the day where humans were only just evolving, if somebody had that attitude, instead of the attitude that meant people like that were killed. Do you have any idea what that would mean? Do you have any idea of the repercussions that would have throughout History?

Back in the day, humans were only Neaderthols (sp?). Back in the day, humans used chamber pots and lived in a feudal system. It's silly to try and gain reason from times like those.

[Jacob]

"Back in the day, humans used chamber pots and lived in a feudal system. It's silly to try and gain reason from times like those."

Not really. Back then we didn't have Human Rights and the like interferring, and it seems we, as a society, are much better off than we would've been if we just said "Ah, okay, yeh...you do that to that child! You want to what? Kill him, too? Oh...sure, yeh, great!"

"Where do human morals go once we take the life of another we know can handle in a controlled environment?"

Wait, why're you arguing with me about the death penalty? I said i was against it...just for the wrong reasons.

But, say, if they were to be killed whilst advancing Medical Science, i wouldn't have a qualm. They serve no purpose to the good of society in life, they may as well serve that purpose in death, whether death.

[used:)]

Not really. Back then we didn't have Human Rights and the like interferring, and it seems we, as a society, are much better off than we would've been if we just said "Ah, okay, yeh...you do that to that child! You want to what? Kill him, too? Oh...sure, yeh, great!"

I really can't see your reasoning when you describe Human rights interefering. Nor when you describe the legal systems being too easy. If you've seen other cases like child molestation and murder, then you should know we aren't giving them so much as a "hello and welcome!" I will admit thing like rpisons are getting too comforting for such vile people, but at least we can isolate them away from society.

But, say, if they were to be killed whilst advancing Medical Science, i wouldn't have a qualm. They serve no purpose to the good of society in life, they may as well serve that purpose in death, whether death.

If you mean to say without them knowing or with donating their bodies to science or something similar. Then no, I wouldn't have a problem with that.