To be free or not too?

[imperialism2024]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Prisons are training grounds where preditors can improve their skills. Rehabilitation is a myth in reality. The only real benefit is seperating those that would take what you have from you for a specific period of time. Do some people change for the better - yes; however, you only have to look at the recidivism rates to realize how ineffectual our prison system are at rehabilitation.
http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/abstract/rpr94.htm
Yata hey

How is that the fault of rehabilitation? Our "criminal justice" system overwhelmingly uses the punishment philosophy. You can't blame rehabilitation as a failure until it's given a chance...

:?

As for the monetary cost, I would couple my proposal for removal of dangerous persons from society with a decriminalization of victimless crimes. I'd rather see proper rehabilitation or removal from society of violent offenders than see prisons filled with prostitutes, drug users, DUI drivers, illegal firearms possessers, black people who looked at a police officer wrong, etc. Use the money spent on prisons to pay to keep dangerous people locked up, not the guy who can't afford to pay child support. It's not a matter of increasing funding, it's a matter of re-allocating the funding that's already there. Then, cut some corners and streamline the process, and then use the savings to buy guns for living violent crime victims so they don't end up victimized again.

As much as I'm against the death penalty in practice by the government, I have no problem with someone killing an attacker in self-defense. Saves everyone a hassle, and a good deal of money...

 

[HankT]

imported post

Particle wrote:

I think we put way too much emphasis on sex in this country. As such, to me rape isn't nearly as big of a deal as other types of assaults where people are severely injured. Of course it should be a serious crime, but I do have to dissent from the popular view. (Watch me be berated for this, despite this forum being all about alternative views. *cough*)

Perspective.....what a difference perspective means to thinking in this area.

If you were female you'd think differently. If you were a father of girls, you'd think differently. If your mom, sister, or girlfriendgot raped, you'd think differently. If you ended up in prison with some really horny guys around the fresh meat, you'd think differently.

I think yours is a view of extemely limited perspective. With little, if any, sensitivity to the human psychic trauma involved in rape.

And you are way out of sync with the majority around here. Several threads show that a heck of a lot of guys here think that it is entirely appropriate to shoot/kill a rapist in the act. You wouldn't do that, would you?

 

[expvideo]

imported post

Particle wrote:

I think we put way too much emphasis on sex in this country. As such, to me rape isn't nearly as big of a deal as other types of assaults where people are severely injured. Of course it should be a serious crime, but I do have to dissent from the popular view. (Watch me be berated for this, despite this forum being all about alternative views. *cough*)

That's because you're male. I've known rape victims, and it is severly psychologically damaging. You can't understand, because it hasn't happened to you or someone you care about. Rape is a very big deal, and as far as I'm concerned, it should be a capital crime, and dealt with accordingly. I can't comprehend how anyone could say what you just said and actually mean it without some kind of sociopathic disorder, or a complete lack of understanding of what you are talking about.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

HankT wrote:

Particle wrote:

I think we put way too much emphasis on sex in this country. As such, to me rape isn't nearly as big of a deal as other types of assaults where people are severely injured. Of course it should be a serious crime, but I do have to dissent from the popular view. (Watch me be berated for this, despite this forum being all about alternative views. *cough*)

Perspective.....what a difference perspective means to thinking in this area.

If you were female you'd think differently. If you were a father of girls, you'd think differently. If your mom, sister, or girlfriendgot raped, you'd think differently. If you ended up in prison with some really horny guys around the fresh meat, you'd think differently.

I think yours is a view of extemely limited perspective. With little, if any, sensitivity to the human psychic trauma involved in rape.

And you are way out of sync with the majority around here. Several threads show that a heck of a lot of guys here think that it is entirely appropriate to shoot/kill a rapist in the act. You wouldn't do that, would you?

+1
What is this world coming to when I actually agree with HankT?

Now to try to put some of this in perspective. Our society has conditioned us to view and respond to rape and similar crimes as we do. In some societies, certain crimes against females are not crimes at all - and that works for them. Society/social groups try to protect their standards and members from injury and do so by making rules or laws. Your response to any stimuli is in part determined by who you are and your background. Example: a woman raped in Kuwait may well be put to death by her family.

I do not think that Particle intended what is being read into his postings. I wish that society (ours) had never taught that rape was a fate worse than death. I would like for a woman to be angered at what had happened to her without being ashamed or feeling that she had somehow caused it. I greatly wish that such events would have no more effect on her than a robbery - but it just ain't so.

Yata hey

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Prisons are training grounds where preditors can improve their skills. Rehabilitation is a myth in reality. The only real benefit is seperating those that would take what you have from you for a specific period of time. Do some people change for the better - yes; however, you only have to look at the recidivism rates to realize how ineffectual our prison system are at rehabilitation.
http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/abstract/rpr94.htm
Yata hey

How is that the fault of rehabilitation? Our "criminal justice" system overwhelmingly uses the punishment philosophy. You can't blame rehabilitation as a failure until it's given a chance...

:?

As for the monetary cost, I would couple my proposal for removal of dangerous persons from society with a decriminalization of victimless crimes. I'd rather see proper rehabilitation or removal from society of violent offenders than see prisons filled with prostitutes, drug users, DUI drivers, illegal firearms possessers, black people who looked at a police officer wrong, etc. Use the money spent on prisons to pay to keep dangerous people locked up, not the guy who can't afford to pay child support. It's not a matter of increasing funding, it's a matter of re-allocating the funding that's already there. Then, cut some corners and streamline the process, and then use the savings to buy guns for living violent crime victims so they don't end up victimized again.

As much as I'm against the death penalty in practice by the government, I have no problem with someone killing an attacker in self-defense. Saves everyone a hassle, and a good deal of money...

Nice thought but.......

Our prison system is precisely the way people want it. The cry goes out to "lock them up" when a crime is committed. Then we do not want inhumane conditions for them and A/C, color TVs, weight lifting become the norm and even in some cases conjugal visits. Being incarcerated is not punishment to many. Treatment programs are limited in funds by voters/legislators. Perhaps most importantly, you cannot rehabilitate someone that does not want to be rehabilitated - no matter how much money you spend! An inside remark from our system is that when you rehabilitate a career criminal, you have fostered a better criminal - and that's not funny.

Yata hey

 

[UTOC-45-44]

imported post

massltca wrote:

Heartless_Conservative wrote:

They are all right for actual sex offenders, but the registry gets a little cheapened when they put every teen who gets a little drunk and urinates in public on it. I am all for keeping track of sex offenders, but the definition needs to be a lot tighter.

+1

Of course, the whole concept of a registry seems a little silly to me . Then again, I'm somewhat of a "bullet, back of the head, end of problem" kind of guy, so take anything I say on this matter with a large grain of salt. I'd agree with whoever suggested the "second strike and you're out...permenantly" approach.

I'm against the sex offender registry. For one it doesn't work and two it violates the constitution. If a sex offender is such a great risk to let out of prison then he should stay in prison. You go to prison and pay your debt to society and when you are let out that's it you've done your time. I think the penalty for sex offenders should be execution, not registering them for the rest of their lives.

I agree with that Any offense that once they have served their time and done the time and paid their "debt" that's it. Either they are "dangerous or not. Either they are "pardoned" by their prison/jail time or not. Either YES or NO. FREE or PRISONER

1st time...Completely free. ALL Rights back

2nd time...50/50

3rd time...is the Charm...

 

[Heartless_Conservative]

imported post

"Charm" being an affectionate nickname for a guillitine, I hope?

 

[WhiteFeather]

imported post

So what I gather (Or maybe am realizing) Is that some feel more pressure should be put on the rape-ee to protect themselves and deal with that crime via prevention?

a woman raped in Kuwait may well be put to death by her family.

I wonder if that is not an example of such thought. If the penalty for being a victim was death would the victimsbe more inclined to prevent it.

I agree that more should be done in the prevention of sexual assult. I think also that some of the prevention is just common sense. Going to partiesby yourself and getting plastered by yourself are not some of the smartest things to do. But regardless of that fact how can children prevent the unspeakable. As previously stated as much as I dislike rape it can be prevented more easily.But aside blaming the parents at every corner how do you prevent childmolestation?

 

[Tess]

imported post

expvideo wrote:

Particle wrote:

I think we put way too much emphasis on sex in this country. As such, to me rape isn't nearly as big of a deal as other types of assaults where people are severely injured. Of course it should be a serious crime, but I do have to dissent from the popular view. (Watch me be berated for this, despite this forum being all about alternative views. *cough*)

That's because you're male. I've known rape victims, and it is severly psychologically damaging. You can't understand, because it hasn't happened to you or someone you care about. Rape is a very big deal, and as far as I'm concerned, it should be a capital crime, and dealt with accordingly. I can't comprehend how anyone could say what you just said and actually mean it without some kind of sociopathic disorder, or a complete lack of understanding of what you are talking about.

Been there. Capital punishment is too good.

Castrate him with a rusty tin can cover.

 

[massltca]

imported post

HankT wrote:

Particle wrote:

I think we put way too much emphasis on sex in this country. As such, to me rape isn't nearly as big of a deal as other types of assaults where people are severely injured. Of course it should be a serious crime, but I do have to dissent from the popular view. (Watch me be berated for this, despite this forum being all about alternative views. *cough*)

Perspective.....what a difference perspective means to thinking in this area.

If you were female you'd think differently. If you were a father of girls, you'd think differently. If your mom, sister, or girlfriendgot raped, you'd think differently. If you ended up in prison with some really horny guys around the fresh meat, you'd think differently.

I think yours is a view of extemely limited perspective. With little, if any, sensitivity to the human psychic trauma involved in rape.

And you are way out of sync with the majority around here. Several threads show that a heck of a lot of guys here think that it is entirely appropriate to shoot/kill a rapist in the act. You wouldn't do that, would you?

I think its appropiate to kill a rapist in the act. I am a father so I have a different perspective. My wife knows how to use a gun so I pity anyone who trys to attack her.

 

[UTOC-45-44]

imported post

Heartless_Conservative wrote:

"Charm" being an affectionate nickname for a guillitine, I hope?

Yep...:shock:...:what:...

 

[UTOC-45-44]

imported post

massltca wrote:

HankT wrote:

Particle wrote:

I think we put way too much emphasis on sex in this country. As such, to me rape isn't nearly as big of a deal as other types of assaults where people are severely injured. Of course it should be a serious crime, but I do have to dissent from the popular view. (Watch me be berated for this, despite this forum being all about alternative views. *cough*)

Perspective.....what a difference perspective means to thinking in this area.

If you were female you'd think differently. If you were a father of girls, you'd think differently. If your mom, sister, or girlfriendgot raped, you'd think differently. If you ended up in prison with some really horny guys around the fresh meat, you'd think differently.

I think yours is a view of extemely limited perspective. With little, if any, sensitivity to the human psychic trauma involved in rape.

And you are way out of sync with the majority around here. Several threads show that a heck of a lot of guys here think that it is entirely appropriate to shoot/kill a rapist in the act. You wouldn't do that, would you?

I think its appropiate to kill a rapist in the act. I am a father so I have a different perspective. My wife knows how to use a gun so I pity anyone who trys to attack her.

It's called "Forcible Felony in the State of Utah.

We can shoot to "stop" the threat.

Utah Code Section 76-2-402




[size=-1]76-2-402. Force in defense of person -- Forcible felony defined. ... and aggravated sexual assault as defined in Title 76, Chapter 5, and arson, robbery, ...
le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_02022.htm - 5k - Cached - Similar pages[/size]

[size=-1]"4) For purposes of this section, a forcible felony includes aggravated assault, mayhem, aggravated murder, murder, manslaughter, kidnapping, and aggravated kidnapping, rape, forcible sodomy, rape of a child, object rape, object rape of a child, sexual abuse of a child, aggravated sexual abuse of a child, and aggravated sexual assault..."[/size]

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

+1
What is this world coming to when I actually agree with HankT?

Now to try to put some of this in perspective. Our society has conditioned us to view and respond to rape and similar crimes as we do. In some societies, certain crimes against females are not crimes at all - and that works for them. Society/social groups try to protect their standards and members from injury and do so by making rules or laws. Your response to any stimuli is in part determined by who you are and your background.

Does it really? Is their society better off because they do not respect a person's right not to have their person violated?

Example: a woman raped in Kuwait may well be put to death by her family.

Does it work for her? Or just for "society"?

I hold that the right not to be violated, assaulted, killed, stolen from, or otherwise harmed is a universal right, and that societies which respect it are better off than those that don't. I also hold that the rights of the individual outweigh the needs of the many, and that includes ladies from Kuwait,Mr. Spock and whomever he was quoting be damned.

I'm not an interventionist, but that doesn't mean I have to look the other way when some filthy animal murders an innocent woman because some other filthy animal raped her. It makes me sick to my stomach to think that a human being could even think of doing such a thing.

 

[massltca]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

+1
What is this world coming to when I actually agree with HankT?

Now to try to put some of this in perspective. Our society has conditioned us to view and respond to rape and similar crimes as we do. In some societies, certain crimes against females are not crimes at all - and that works for them. Society/social groups try to protect their standards and members from injury and do so by making rules or laws. Your response to any stimuli is in part determined by who you are and your background.

Does it really? Is their society better off because they do not respect a person's right not to have their person violated?

Example: a woman raped in Kuwait may well be put to death by her family.

Does it work for her? Or just for "society"?

I hold that the right not to be violated, assaulted, killed, stolen from, or otherwise harmed is a universal right, and that societies which respect it are better off than those that don't. I also hold that the rights of the individual outweigh the needs of the many, and that includes ladies from Kuwait,Mr. Spock and whomever he was quoting be damned.

I'm not an interventionist, but that doesn't mean I have to look the other way when some filthy animal murders an innocent woman because some other filthy animal raped her. It makes me sick to my stomach to think that a human being could even think of doing such a thing.

+1

 

[imperialism2024]

imported post

WhiteFeather wrote:

So what I gather (Or maybe am realizing) Is that some feel more pressure should be put on the rape-ee to protect themselves and deal with that crime via prevention?

a woman raped in Kuwait may well be put to death by her family.

I wonder if that is not an example of such thought. If the penalty for being a victim was death would the victimsbe more inclined to prevent it.

I agree that more should be done in the prevention of sexual assult. I think also that some of the prevention is just common sense. Going to partiesby yourself and getting plastered by yourself are not some of the smartest things to do. But regardless of that fact how can children prevent the unspeakable. As previously stated as much as I dislike rape it can be prevented more easily.But aside blaming the parents at every corner how do you prevent childmolestation?

Eh, you don't have my opinion there. I don't seek to blame the victim of rape, nor do I propose to decriminalize rape. I'm of the opinion that rape should be treated like any other violent assault, and that the sexual aspect of it does not give it a special category, much like how I feel that "hate crimes" shouldn't make penalties any worse than the crime that was otherwise committed. Yes, I acknowledge that rape is very emotionally scarring, but then again so are other assaults. Does a POW who was tortured not have emotional scarring? Surely that scarring is less than that of a rape victim. The point is, really, that our society perpetuates an opinion that rape is a fate worse than death. Would I like to see the humiliation and degradation in a rape brought up in trial and used to make penalties harsher? Of course. But I feel that there is no good reason, other than vengence and religious taboos about sex, for making rape categorically much more severe than other violent assaults.

We must ask ourselves why female rape victims are the only group of crime victims who are allowed to exact revenge virtually unchecked from male rapists through our legislative system. Is it, perhaps, something so simple as affirmative action on steroids? I typically see rape punishment as an argument either from feminists who wish to use rape penalties to make up for millenia of abuse by men, or by conservative parents who want to use rape penalties to make up for the making "unpure" of their daughters. Is this what our criminal justice system should be? A political tool for pushing an agenda? I think not. Others disagree.

 

[imperialism2024]

imported post

Looks like those sex offender registries are working...

[line]Body Found Burned, Beheaded Identified as Sex Offender

Friday , November 09, 2007

NORTHVILLE TOWNSHIP, Mich.— Residents along a cul-de-sac told police they saw a small fire near the spot where the burned and beheaded body of a convicted sex offender was found.
Police said the fire was seen Wednesday night near Hidden Ridge Drive about 20 miles northwest of Detroit in Northville Township, the Detroit Free Press reported Thursday.
The body of Daniel Gene-Vincent Sorensen, 26, of River Rouge, was found about 9:30 a.m. Thursday at the end of the cul-de-sac by a township sewer and water department crew, according to the Free Press and The Detroit News.
He was identified by the Michigan State Police through a fingerprint taken from his burned hand. The print also revealed Sorensen had been a registered sex offender in Illinois.
Sorensen's head has not been found and a cause of death has not been released.
"Who would do something like this to my son? It's not real to me right now," said his father, Jim.
Sorenson, of River Rouge, worked as a bar bouncer, his father told WJBK-TV.
The criminal sexual conduct charge stemmed from a relationship the younger Sorenson had had with an underage girl, his father said. His sex offender status was "a cloud that hung over his head," his mother Kim told WXYZ-TV.
"He was a good person ... but he had a rough life," Kim Sorenson said.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,309777,00.html

[line]
Something to watch, perhaps?

 

[kimbercarrier]

imported post

In my opinion I believe that child molesters should be executed the first time they do it . There is no such thing as accidentaly molesting a child so, if you do your just sick and 250,000 volts of electroshock therapy will cure your urges.

The harm they do to kids is irrepprable and they should not be given a chance to do it a second time.

 

[imperialism2024]

imported post

kimbercarrier wrote:

In my opinion I believe that child molesters should be executed the first time they do it . There is no such thing as accidentaly molesting a child so, if you do your just sick and 250,000 volts of electroshock therapy will cure your urges.

The harm they do to kids is irrepprable and they should not be given a chance to do it a second time.

Because we all know that there is no such thing as a wrongful conviction in the criminal justice system. Surely, no one is ever motivated in a custody battle to tell their kids to call the police and say "daddy touched me in my special place." It has also never happened that relatively minor differences in age led to a conviction, either. I can't help but agree further that beating a child with a belt everyday is trivial compared to molestation. The same thing with neglecting children... hey, they don't need food as long as they don't get molested.

/rant

I'm just amazed, not just about this particular topic, but in general the amount of people who are willing to aid the government's struggle for even more of a monopoly on the restriction of freedom for an individual. So far, public emotion seems to support the "death penalty" for: terrorists, "suspected" terrorists, child molesters, rapists, drug dealers, atheists, gays... am I missing anyone?

Emotional response is what got us the PATRIOT Act and how many firearms laws. Issues need to be examined objectively, not through the lens that the media wants us to view them. That is the path to freedom is objectivity and truth, not violently murdering anyone that gets a finger pointed at them by the public a la Salem witch trials.

 

[Heartless_Conservative]

imported post

So far, public emotion seems to support the "death penalty" for: terrorists, "suspected" terrorists, child molesters, rapists, drug dealers, atheists, gays... am I missing anyone?

You forgot teh joos...curse them and their beady little eyes...

Anyways, Ifind it ironic that while the people you're disagreeing with brought up the issue that rape is a far more invasive and personal crime than most other forms of assault (and btw you're the only one who made any mention about torture, which I think most people would agree is in a different catagory) you dismiss them entirely with "you're just saying that cause you're a dirty Christian theocracyphile who's obsessed with sex." (which is especially ironicconsidering that you're the only one giving much thought to the sexual aspect of it).Every time you bring up your rabid anti-Christian bigotry you seriously undermine the credibility of your points, even the ones that are otherwise excellent in their own regard.

 

[Cue-Ball]

imported post

I find it interesting that when the act of rape is discussed, most people here immediately focus on the worst possible acts such as child molestation. Let us not forget that other "rape" and "sexual predation" acts are completely non-violent and consensual. I hope that the people who are demanding castration and execution didn't get past first base when they were 16, because all of you were likely guilty of statutory rape.

There are a lot of people in this country who have had their lives completely ruined by the sex criminal registry. If your name is on that list, I imagine it's nearly impossible to find a place to live, much less get a fruitful job and lead a normal existence. Many of the people on that list are there for having sex with their girlfriend or doing other consensual acts.

Let's also not forget cases like the Duke lacrosse team. These guys were deliberately failed by their teachers, they received death threats, years of their lives were taken, and they weren't even guilty.

Let's not be too quick to demand castration and execution of these people.