Specop 007
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2005
- 9,454
- 0
- 0
No you dont. I dont think anyone would actually wish that on a child.
But I do hope the parents get raped.
No you dont. I dont think anyone would actually wish that on a child.
But I do hope the parents get raped.
No, you didn't read the article because you said the prison treatment laws were LEGISLATED, not set by the Head of the Dept. of Corrections. A very major factual mistake, and one that affects the judge's decision on how to get the policy changed.
IF it had been legislated, there would have been other ways to change the policy. Since the policy is set by a guy trying to minimize the costs of running his prisons without a wider view of public welfare, the judge had to make a strong case for it. People always do what they are compensated to do - the Head of the Dept of Corrections is compensated with running adequate prisons at the lowest cost - even if that means returning un-treated "low-risk" (which I do not believe exist, BTW) sex offenders. Since we can't/won't kill them outright, treatment is the ONLY option, and they weren't getting any if they were defined as "low-risk". Now everyone that is a sex offender will get treatment, at least in Vermont. Sure it costs more money, but again, if it even saves a few children from second offenders then it's worth it.
Nice attempt to schmere me, btw, too bad your factual basis is lacking. You misread it, if you read it at all, not me.
Future Shock
BTW - as an rather prolifigate chess player in my youth, I have noticed that quite a bit that I learned in chess has applicability to the real world...especially the insight about planning many moves ahead.
Once again - it is NOT A LAW. It is a POLICY set by one (or a few) men: The Head of the Dept of Corrections and maybe his staff. I have posted direct, VERBAL quotes from said individual in the original article proving that fact, and yet you still walk around saying it is a law.
And then you wonder why I say you didn't read the article, or simply misread it. Let me foster a further theory - that your background on government and civics is SO WEAK that you don't know the difference between a departamental government policy and a legislated law.
If you will claim to know the difference, then please explain how you can keep misquoting it. The differences are many and varied, and have direct implications as to how the judge could approach this case.
Future Shock
I have kids. I want them as safe as possible. If I lived in Vermont, it would scare the HELL out of me that the current system was returning "low-risk" sexual offenders back into society WITHOUT ANY TREATMENT.
Despite the posturings of raildog, specops, etc., there is no way that these people will NOT get released someday. I think we are all adult enough to know that's the reality.
So if the judge has to force the issue on one case to get the rules changed so that EVERYONE get's treatment, I think that my children are safer in the long run. Yeah, so what if treatment only helps at least 5-10%...it's still better than zero percent. Because even that 5-10% will save some children from undergoing rape and abuse.
Whining about how you would preffer to kill them is really counter productive, because it ISN'T going to happen.
Lastly, there ARE a fair number of abuse cases where it is later shown that the charges were "surfaced" by mis-guided and leading psychologist or even investigators: "Did he touch you there Johnny? Didn't he?". Young children are (unfortunately) not the most reliable witnesses, and are prone to being led by those they percieve in power. What are you going to tell the family of the acussed after you have executed him, only to have the victim recant upon reaching maturity and understanding what they have done? Frankly, the thought of sexual abuse becoming a capital crime would well scare off many people from working with children in professional roles...too much risk, too little reward.
Future Shock
Specop 007
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2005
- 9,454
- 0
- 0
230 grains of lead has a 100% rehabilitation rate.
Assuming of course you just want to talk about the safety of the children of course. I know I'd feel my children were safer....
As for freliable witnesses and whatnot, theres a big damned difference between grabbing a kids ass in a sexual manner and raping someone for 4 damned years!! To be 100% letter of the law, I myself should be a registered sex offender. In fact, chances are a goodmajority of us are.
But theres obviously different levels of sex offender. I just get tired of people committing horrible crimes and the PC legal system turning them right back out again and again and again. This grown hippie society of compassion and tolerance is killing us 1 murder at a time.
And a year later the kid would say: "The doctor kept telling me that the man touched me, so he must've touched me, and I didn't remember..."
So in your view, how many innocent people is it OK to torture to death, in order to exact this punishment on the guilty?
Originally posted by: Specop 007
230 grains of lead has a 100% rehabilitation rate.
Assuming of course you just want to talk about the safety of the children of course. I know I'd feel my children were safer....
As for freliable witnesses and whatnot, theres a big damned difference between grabbing a kids ass in a sexual manner and raping someone for 4 damned years!! To be 100% letter of the law, I myself should be a registered sex offender. In fact, chances are a goodmajority of us are.
But theres obviously different levels of sex offender. I just get tired of people committing horrible crimes and the PC legal system turning them right back out again and again and again. This grown hippie society of compassion and tolerance is killing us 1 murder at a time.
SpecOp,
There have been NUMEROUS cases where child rape and abuse has been charged, with NO physical evidence, and the accused was convicted and sent to jail, only to have the "victim" recant when they got older. You can't undo your 230 grains of lead - or doesn't that bother you?
As for a grown hippie society of compassion, well, you are IMHO nuts. The US has the highest percentage of their population in jail of any civilized society, not by a little, but by a LOT. Our jails are literally bursting at the seams, and cost containment is most likely the reason that Vermont wasn't forcing treatment of "low-risk" sex offenders. Hardly sounds soft or wimpy to me...
FS
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
That's definity true too. I've seen numerous cases where state "child welfare" agents essentially brainwashed the children into damming testimony, only to reveal later, usually after the guy was already in prison for 5 years it was all bunk. Happens in divorce cases too where mother coaxes children into damning revelations. Women scorned and all that.
One case I saw in 60 minutes a few years back a ethic iranian Dr. in houston while attending his daughters JrHS basketball game gave her a smootch in the lips after she scored a basket - which is evidently common in that culture. Well that game was recordered by a "good samaritan" turned over the tape to state agents. When the state got done with his daughters - he lost his medical licence, his three daughters - only to find out all was brainwashing after a couple years in the pen. Wife was stalwart defender though.
I assume 007 and myself are talking about fragging a dude where there is physical evidence and we are proof positive of guilt. Not some "she said" senario, after 3 months internment by state psychologists and no physical evidence.
Future Shock:
while there were many cases of people being railroaded in child molestation cases (particularly in the 80s ie McMartin), the difference with those is that the child psychologists interviewing the 'victims' used intimidation and leading questions to elicit desired outcome. And also important, the stories many recited were so detailed and so inconceivable (one of my favorites was a car wash restroom which was a BUSY location) that they couldn't have happened. Of course there was also no DNA or medical evidence despite lots of kids supposedly being buggared.
That was a deplorable time, but time (and laws) have changed. I sincerely doubt that given DNA science and awareness of the things that lead to railroaded convictions (ie lack of medical evidence), it would be widespread though admittedly not inconceivable.
I'm quite confident that IF the suspect was the culprit, there would be alot of evidence to indicate abuse (you cannot sexually abuse a small child for *years* and not have any evidence). Conversely if he was innocent there would be an obvious lack of evidence.
Still, even despite the innocent, that is by no means a significant number of people. You proposed to use 'treatment' which has been proven to be VERY INEFFECTIVE, and seem not to understand that pedophilic urges are akin to alcoholism; once an alcoholic always an alcoholic. Were it not for that, i would agree with the treatment, but that is the present reality.
while there were many cases of people being railroaded in child molestation cases (particularly in the 80s ie McMartin), the difference with those is that the child psychologists interviewing the 'victims' used intimidation and leading questions to elicit desired outcome. And also important, the stories many recited were so detailed and so inconceivable (one of my favorites was a car wash restroom which was a BUSY location) that they couldn't have happened. Of course there was also no DNA or medical evidence despite lots of kids supposedly being buggared.
That was a deplorable time, but time (and laws) have changed. I sincerely doubt that given DNA science and awareness of the things that lead to railroaded convictions (ie lack of medical evidence), it would be widespread though admittedly not inconceivable.
I'm quite confident that IF the suspect was the culprit, there would be alot of evidence to indicate abuse (you cannot sexually abuse a small child for *years* and not have any evidence). Conversely if he was innocent there would be an obvious lack of evidence.
Still, even despite the innocent, that is by no means a significant number of people. You proposed to use 'treatment' which has been proven to be VERY INEFFECTIVE, and seem not to understand that pedophilic urges are akin to alcoholism; once an alcoholic always an alcoholic. Were it not for that, i would agree with the treatment, but that is the present reality.
what if the at the trial the kid didnt know and the guy got off and went and raped another kid?
the guy was found GUILTY we're discussing his punishment, not innocence
That would only make sense if the system of proving a man's guilt was infallible. Since it is not, the punishment must reflect the degree of that uncertainty.
Wow...
So you're saying this is to help the cause of opening the eyes of others? Why not put him in jail for 10 years and then fight for those 10 years via showing statistics of other offenders that were "rehabilitated" to convince them?
okay. Judge. Good Idea. TERRIBLE EXECTUTION. Seriously. Lock the dude up for as long as its possible, then try to change the rehabilition laws/reguations and crap.
I'll tell you what Mr. "prolifigate chess player" - if you *are* so intelligent, then why do you keep insisting that treatment *will* cause every sex offender to not act again?
I swear - if your intellect were as massive as your ego, people that disagreed with you would actually be in trouble.
BTW - perhaps people would listen to you if you didn't come off as such an pompous arrogant a-hole. Of course, I'm sure that you don't care.
If the punishment for sexual assault was death then a sexual assaulter woukld be a fool to not kill the victim afterwards to avoid being caught. Then murders would be alot more common. Just as if the punishment for speeding was death and I got pulled over for speeding I would shoot the officer and hope to get away with no witnesses.
When the punishment is death you have nothing to lose by killing and everything to lose by leaving a witness alive. Making death the punishment for anything but murder makes no sense.
When the punishment is death you have nothing to lose by killing and everything to lose by leaving a witness alive. Making death the punishment for anything but murder makes no sense.
except the arguement that the dealth penalty is a deterent for crimes. It's not 100% fool proof, some people are crazy enough to think they can get away with anything, but IMO, it does work.
Let me clear up your memory on where I stand about treatment efficacy with a direct quote of mine from page 4 of this discussion:
Then I said this on the page before this one:
I only sound "pompous" because you can't read, don't read, or don't comprehend. Not just once in this thread, but repeatedly, you have shown a complete disregard to the stated facts in the OP, and misquoted others.
Future Shock
Awarding a marriage certification of any sort recognizes the relationship between 2 homosexuals, does it not?
The full quote for those who want "the rest of the story".
So, what does sex between consenting adults have to do with child rape?
waggy
No Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
I can understand why the judge did it. but that does not make it right. This judge should be thrown off the bench (and ran over with a mac truck).
His goal of getting sex offenders help is admirable. but how he went about it was wrong. All he did is wrong to do for this family. how would you feel knowing the person that raped your daughter was getting out in 60 days? I wouldn't want that scumbag living next to me rehabilitation just does not work.
His goal of getting sex offenders help is admirable. but how he went about it was wrong. All he did is wrong to do for this family. how would you feel knowing the person that raped your daughter was getting out in 60 days? I wouldn't want that scumbag living next to me rehabilitation just does not work.
Actually, I haven't, but *you* choose not to read it that way.
I refuse to discuss this topic anymore with you, because you *obviously* have made up your mind that anyone that disagrees with you is an idiot. Good luck with that attitude in life, 'cause you aren't as bright as you think.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
The full quote for those who want "the rest of the story".
So, what does sex between consenting adults have to do with child rape?
That is a good question.
bigdog1218
Golden Member
- Mar 7, 2001
- 1,674
- 2
- 0
I don't understand comments like these. You, and many others in this thread, act like you're a bunch of knights in shiny white armor because you can call for people to be murdered or raped on an internet forum. It's not impressive in any way, its actual sad and disgusting. Saying you want someone to be raped, even the man on trial here, sounds absurdly hypocritical. What kind of sick person wishes rape on anyone?
And speaking of parents, why hasn't anyone questioned why this child was even allowed to be assaulted for 4 years. Where were the parents or whoever was taking care of her? How does something like this occur for 4 years?
As for the issue at hand, no one has provided any information saying that rehabilitation doesn't work, saying "Everyone knows rehabilitation doesn't work lets kill him" isn't a viable source. Neither is "Sex offenders repeat at somthing like 80%, pedophiles repeat at something like 98%." What is this make up numbers day?
Some interesting info here, Statistics, More
Some stuff i pulled
78.8% of car thieves were rearrested for stealing another car
1.2% who served time for homicide were arrested for another homicide
2.5% Rapists were rearrested for rape within 3 years
3.3% child molestors were rearrested within 3 years
40% of sex offenders who repeat, repeat within a year
10% of rapists were previously convicted for rape or sexual assualt
17% of child molestors...
12% of other sexual assualt...
On average sex offenders served 3.5 years of their 8 year sentence
Prisoners have increased by 7.6% since 1980 (to 1995)
Sexual assualt prisoners has increased by 15%
In same time period the average sentence didn't increase, but the average time served increased from 6 months to 3 years.
13.7% of all prisoners were sexually abused, 11.8% as children
20.8% of rapists were sexually abused, 19.3% as children
34.9% all other sex offenders were sexually abused, 34% as children
Ok enough stats everyone can read more if they want.
What I basically take away from this is like any criminal it's difficult to determine if they're going to repeat. But by only treating 14% of prisoners and then sending them back on the street the current laws aren't helping. Looking at the stats it shows the majority of sex offenders were first time sex offenders, and the majority don't repeat out of prison. Who knows what the percentage of repeat offenders would be if 100% of inmates recieved treatment.
And treatment + stiffer laws is what this judge is pushing for. Obviously 60 days plus treatment isn't the right sentence for this rapist, and the judge is making an example of how ridiculous current laws are. But does no one find it scary that if the case occured in another court the guy could be living next door to all you shiny knights after getting his 10 year sentence reduced to 5 years? Do you actually think that would make any difference? But all you heros were happy with it and living with it.
KK and homerboy love kids so much they would only let untreated rapists live next to them after 5 years. Heros, a bunch of heros. Hopefully some people with a head on their shoulders sees what this judge pointed out and ensures sex offenders fulfill their sentences with treatment, and save some kids.
The courts have the implied constitutional athority to review a law against the constitution to see if there is a conflict. This is not that case. The judge has NO authority to be reviewing treatment guidelines unless a lawsuit on that specific subject was brought before them. He exceeded his bounds of authority, he placed a dangerous and violent offender back in the community who will more than likely reoffend (98%). He should be impeached from the bench.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter