Based on some recent threads, it seems to me that the personalities advocating castration/execution of sex offenders (the emphasis in those threads being child-sex offenders) are the same ones or types that think it's okay to chase kids into traffic.
Now I understand that logic doesn't necessarily require that one dictates the other, but quite frankly, I don't see how in one instance, someone can claim that minors are intelligent, aware, culpable, and should be victimizable..
.. whereas in the other circumstance they feel that minors are vulnerable, naive, and should be protected.
The flaw in this duality would arise, of course, if they believe that sex-offenders should be castrated/executed not because they believe it is protecting "worthy" victims, but simply due to instinctual biases.
Now, on to the poll.
For the sake of argument, let us assume that the crime is statutory, and that the victim in this case is 12 years old. We will assume that the act is "consensual" (not withstanding obvious concerns) and that the state is pressing charges because the 12 year old does not wish to.
Likewise, let us consider another 12 year old. This 12 year old has been shooting bottle rockets at cars. An occupant of a targeted vehicle has taken offense at this, and, in attempting to chase down the boy to administer a physical beating (on foot), he has chased the 12 year old smack into a passing car, resulting in rather terminal results. It would be safe to assume that the action was "non-consensual"
original offender thread
original bottle rocket thread
Now I understand that logic doesn't necessarily require that one dictates the other, but quite frankly, I don't see how in one instance, someone can claim that minors are intelligent, aware, culpable, and should be victimizable..
.. whereas in the other circumstance they feel that minors are vulnerable, naive, and should be protected.
The flaw in this duality would arise, of course, if they believe that sex-offenders should be castrated/executed not because they believe it is protecting "worthy" victims, but simply due to instinctual biases.
Now, on to the poll.
For the sake of argument, let us assume that the crime is statutory, and that the victim in this case is 12 years old. We will assume that the act is "consensual" (not withstanding obvious concerns) and that the state is pressing charges because the 12 year old does not wish to.
Likewise, let us consider another 12 year old. This 12 year old has been shooting bottle rockets at cars. An occupant of a targeted vehicle has taken offense at this, and, in attempting to chase down the boy to administer a physical beating (on foot), he has chased the 12 year old smack into a passing car, resulting in rather terminal results. It would be safe to assume that the action was "non-consensual"
original offender thread
original bottle rocket thread
Facebook
Twitter