Roman Polanski arrested by Swiss police on 32 year old US sex charge

Onhell said:
Supposedly public safety. There is a website where you can look up sex offenders in your neighborhood or locations where "sexual offenses" took place.
Click to expand...

Why would I want to do that? Let the police (or other instances) take the law in their hands, not angry civilians.
Seriously, this stimulates witch hunt.
 
Suicidehummer said:
I don't know of any other crime where even after being released from jail, you still don't have certain rights.
Click to expand...

That does it, that was the last straw.  I couldn't post anything about Suicidehummer's prior posts without looking like a prick, in part because they were so outrageous I initially thought he was just inciting people for a lark, and in part because Onhell and LC had pretty much covered what I had to say.  I will only add the following:  comparing pedophilia and pederasty to homosexuality or any other consensual adult sexual activity is pathetically misguided, and obliterates the line between tolerance and recklessness. 

Turning to the latest gem: Virtually EVERY felony in the U.S. causes you to forfeit certain rights and lose certain privileges -- yes, even after you are released from prison.  In most if not all states, if you are a convicted felon, you can't vote.  You can't serve on a jury.  Most employers won't hire you, because they have the right to ask whether you have been convicted of a felony -- and you can't sue them for not hiring you solely on that basis, even if you otherwise are qualified.  Indeed, the stigma of being a felon is an intended part of the deterrent effect of criminal punishment, along with any prison time and/or monetary fine.  In short, Suicidehummer couldn't be more wrong about everything he has written thus far on this thread. 
 
Do murderers have a registry that the public has access to? Do murderers have to go around their neighborhood telling people they killed somebody? Do murderers have their every move watched by the police?

cornfedhick said:
That does it, that was the last straw.  I couldn't post anything about Suicidehummer's prior posts without looking like a prick, in part because they were so outrageous I initially thought he was just inciting people for a lark, and in part because Onhell and LC had pretty much covered what I had to say.  I will only add the following:  comparing pedarasty to homosexuality or any other consensual adult sexual activity is pathetically misguided, and obliterates the line between tolerance and recklessness.
Click to expand...

No, you obviously just can't tell the difference between someone who is attracted to underage people and does not act on their urges and someone who does. There is nothing evil or wrong with the former, it is no different than homosexuality. However the latter IS wrong.
 
Forostar said:
Why would I want to do that? Let the police (or other instances) take the law in their hands, not angry civilians.
Seriously, this stimulates witch hunt.
Click to expand...

"Witch Hunt," is being thrown around in this thread too much. Witch Hunts don't happen any more. Sex offenders are not dragged out of their homes by lynch mobs and beaten to death or burnt at the stake. The website is their to INFORM the public, after all many cases unless gagged (is that the right term CFH?) can be seen by anybody, "public's right to know,' and what not. There are many people, and rightly so, afraid of their children being kidnapped, molested, raped, etc. And why shouldn't they know if a potential threat lives literally next door?
Suicidehummer said:
Do murderers have a registry that the public has access to? Do murderers have to go around their neighborhood telling people they killed somebody? Do murderers have their every move watched by the police?
Click to expand...

No, because most murderers either spend the rest of their lives in prison or get sentenced to death.

No, you obviously just can't tell the difference between someone who is attracted to underage people and does not act on their urges and someone who does. There is nothing evil or wrong with the former, it is no different than homosexuality. However the latter IS wrong.
Click to expand...

You just keep digging a deeper and deeper hole for yourself...
 
Onhell said:
"Witch Hunt," is being thrown around in this thread too much. Witch Hunts don't happen any more. Sex offenders are not dragged out of their homes by lynch mobs and beaten to death or burnt at the stake. The website is their to INFORM the public, after all many cases unless gagged (is that the right term CFH?) can be seen by anybody, "public's right to know,' and what not. There are many people, and rightly so, afraid of their children being kidnapped, molested, raped, etc. And why shouldn't they know if a potential threat lives literally next door?
Click to expand...

So then the question is, why dont' murders have a similar registry? Who is really more dangerous?

No, because most murderers either spend the rest of their lives in prison or get sentenced to death.
Click to expand...

Okay, just keep telling yourself that.
 
Suicidehummer said:
Okay, just keep telling yourself that.
Click to expand...

You're kidding right? Do you also happen to know a murderer that got 5 years? In the wonderful land that is the U.S of A most murderers serve life sentences if not the death penalty. If they get any less like 17 years, 10 years, etc. They were not convicted of murder but of the lesser charge of manslaughter.

You seriously need to take a basic psych class or at least open a book for once... You love to visit this site and spout your ridiculous claims, why not use the same internet for some basic research?
 
Yes, because every person that is found guilty for a crime must be guilty, considering how well the American Judicial system works. And of course, nobody has ever gotten away with murder.

I also read an article recently about a man who was arrested for having cartoon child porn. Who is the victim there?
 
Source? 

As to the other, if one is not convicted, its difficult to build a database- talk about unjust!  "Here's a list of people that probably did commit murder but didn't get convicted."
 
Suicidehummer said:
Yes, because every person that is found guilty for a crime must be guilty, considering how well the American Judicial system works. And of course, nobody has ever gotten away with murder.
Click to expand...

Don't change the subject. We are not arguing the effectiveness of the system or the injustice of innocent people being found guilty or criminals getting away with their crimes. The original postulate was, "why isn't there a database of murderers like there is of sexual offenders."

and the reason why is because those convicted of murder (regardless of guilty or innocent) get life sentences or death... You should take a logic class while your at it.
 
Okay, let me amend my point:

I think people who were arrested for having child porn (like the kid at my school) shouldn't be included in the registry because they're not posing a danger to anybody in their neighborhood by sitting at home looking at socially unacceptable porn.

Plus, doesn't anybody else think it's more fucked up for them to throw him in jail with SERIOUSLY fucked up people, than his crime in itself? Sending a kid like him to jail will only turn out a far worse criminal IMHO.

Also, let's not forget there is way more fucked up shit going on in the world. Female genital mutilation, sex trafficking, starving kids in Africa, the development of atomic weapons, etc.
 
I never thought I'd say this, but you're right. I do think placing an allegedly "good person," among truly hardened individuals will be a scarring, likely irreversible experience. I also agree there is plenty of things to keep authorities busy.

Suicidehummer said:
Also, let's not forget there is way more fucked up shit going on in the world. Female genital mutilation, sex trafficking, starving kids in Africa, the development of atomic weapons, etc.
Click to expand...

Female genital mutilation has a LONG history and is deeply rooted int he cultures in which it exists. While much attention has been brought to it, trying to reverse it is almost like telling Americans that going to the mall is wrong. I'm not condoning it, I'm just saying it is a way of life and thinking that is highly unlikely to change.

Sex trafficking is incredibly sad and the biggest reason it happens is that the countries rife with it are incredibly corrupt. While I'm sure it happens in all countries, it is predominant in backwater third world countries. For example, a superintendent of one of the school districts here in Tucson, AZ got caught going to Nogales, Mexico to have sex with 12 year old boys. How many Americans marry mail-order brides from Russia or the East? How many "Westerners" go to Indonesia to engage in similar acts? Even "developed" nations like Japan and Korea have sex trade/abuse problems because of their incredibly misogynist culture.

Starving kids in Africa... Africa was fucked by the British and the French and has been in turmoil since. There has been TONS of aid directed there way, but the biggest problem with Africa are the Warlords. What is the use of sending money, food and medicine if it is going to get intercepted by warlords that use it as bargaining chips with western powers or other local factions? Africa is it's own worst enemy, because the world has/is doing a lot already to help it.

What I won't waver on though is what has been discussed thus far. Regardless where in the horrible chain of child pornography you lie, whether creator, supplier or consumer, it is promoting abuse, no two ways about it.
 
That's basically all I've been trying to say; that the laws are not perfect and that I feel bad for that kid because he really didn't do anything. Yes, he is creating demand, but as I said the focus should be on the creator IMO.

Also, I'm sick of politicians using "protect the children" to back whatever stupid unrelated cause they may have (like keeping drugs illegal which is a whole other discussion).
 
Suicidehummer said:
Also, I'm sick of politicians using "protect the children" to back whatever stupid unrelated cause they may have (like keeping drugs illegal which is a whole other discussion).
Click to expand...
There are a whole slew of laws that are set up as "protections", that are used as monitors and controls on our populace. For about the past 25 years both state and fedral governments have been issuing madate after mandate. I think that's why they lump someone who gets caught having sex in public as someone who preys upon children . It's to get them in the system.
 
Derek Smalls said:
There are a whole slew of laws that are set up as "protections", that are used as monitors and controls on our populace. For about the past 25 years both state and fedral governments have been issuing madate after mandate. I think that's why they lump someone who gets caught having sex in public as someone who preys upon children . It's to get them in the system.
Click to expand...

That reminds me, wouldn't a flasher have to register as a sex offender too? I mean yeah that's fucked up going around flashing people but I think most people can get over it.
 
LOL, I have several female friends with funny flasher stories (being flashed) it's a good question if it's a "sexual offense." I know it falls under indecent exposure...
 
I think it's really not as big a deal as people make it out to be. Americans in general are just so afraid of nudity. I know other countries allow breasts to be shown on cable television, whereas we don't even allow butt cracks. It's just become so ridiculous and over regulated.
 
Suicidehummer said:
I think it's really not as big a deal as people make it out to be. Americans in general are just so afraid of nudity. I know other countries allow breasts to be shown on cable television, whereas we don't even allow butt cracks. It's just become so ridiculous and over regulated.
Click to expand...

There is a HUGE difference between nudity in media and enjoying a walk in the park with your girlfriend and have some guy in a trench coat come up and flash his penis at her... It is thrill seeking behavior, nothing "normal," "acceptable," nor "artistic" about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top