Thread: Even sex offenders need a home.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21  
    Goldwater
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    That's awful but all adult women should know better than to let anybody they don't know into their homes. You can always call for somebody. Ditto for rides in the car. This is why Colt is a woman's best friend. God made Adam and Eve but Colt made them equal. ;)
    Come on, lets not be that blunt headed, is she to answer the door with a gun in her hand? If so isn't there just the possibility of him overpowering her anyway? Although to be honest her blowing him away with one makes me less skeptical of the idea.

    There are some situations even Samuel Colt can't fix.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    That's awful but all adult women should know better than to let anybody they don't know into their homes. You can always call for somebody. Ditto for rides in the car. This is why Colt is a woman's best friend. God made Adam and Eve but Colt made them equal. ;)
    Kind of missed the point. The rape wasn't the fault of the victim, it was the fault of the rapist.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Senior Member marinejcksn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Penn State
    Posts
    1,820
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    Because then they will feel no compunction about killing their victims. Not all sexually abused children are killed in the act. Most live to put their lives back together. While I'm all about the death penalty, it doesn't help in cases where the criminal is motivated by sexual urges. If you get killed for raping a child, you might as well kill the witness. It's easier. The same is true for raping adults.
    Ginger, I highlighted the portion to display what I feel is a grave error in your response. I'm not arguing your main point, however I'm suggesting that many victims of child rape never truly "put their life back together". I recall a recent story of a caller on Dr. Savage's show who described how her stepfather raped her repeatedly from the time she was 10 throughout her teenage years and she explained how it's destroyed her entire life since. She even said he writes her threatening letters from prison to this very day. I've personally heard so many stories like this, and every one of them is heartbreaking. I'm for personal responsibility, equality for all people and the like....but something deep to the center of my being makes me want to personally take out these warped individuals. The very liberal arguement used by groups like NAMBLA that it's just a "psychological urge" which is "natural" because it may have been tolerated generations ago (such as during the Roman Empire) is not only grossly outdated but simply delusional. There is nothing, ever, that is "normal" about being sexually attracted to children.
    "Don't vote. It only encourages the bastards." -PJ O'Roarke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    John
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    That's awful but all adult women should know better than to let anybody they don't know into their homes. You can always call for somebody. Ditto for rides in the car. This is why Colt is a woman's best friend. God made Adam and Eve but Colt made them equal. ;)
    You are going to get an Amen from this bloke. You see, my wife likes to go dancing....me, I don't like dancing so much. I feel like a flailing idiot when I stand on a flat surface for the sole purpose of wiggling. It's a good thing she has girlfriends though, so she can go out and wiggle with them instead of me. While she's out dancing with her girlfriends I take great solace in the fact that Mr. Heckler and Mr. Kotch have made my 5'7", 110 lb wife just as big and powerful as any Andre the Giant she may encounter. I'd say the presence of a team like Heckler & Kotch coached by Mr. Concealed Carry Permit gives her a great advantage over the Giants who might want to hurt her. With that sort of team, the bad guys won't even know she's just as powerful and probably better trained than they are. Does this make her 100% safe and cozy? Hell no! Does it give her a greater chance of being a survivor instead of a victim? Hell yes!

    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Kind of missed the point. The rape wasn't the fault of the victim, it was the fault of the rapist.
    I don't think anyone is saying that the rape is the fault of the victim. However, I'm saying that sometimes a victim choses to be a victim even when they don't know it. It may not even apply to this case, but sometimes people just don't think about their own safety. It sounds cruel and it sounds harsh but it is what it is. People make their own choices. Sometimes that choice is to be oblivious to the world around them, sometimes that choice is to chat on the cellphone while walking through a dimly lit parking garage in the early morning hours. Sure, a moral western society dictates that those who choose to behave as sheep should be free and safe to do so...and I agree with this notion of idealism completely. However, morality and wishful thinking aside, people are not safe just because they should be safe. People are only safe because they, or someone they rely on, makes it so.

    You are absolutely correct when you say the blood is on the hands of the rapist, or perpetrator of the crime. However, you shouldn't say people don't have a responsibility to protect themselves and their families anymore than you should say that society has the ultimate responsibility to protect people and their families. So when stories like this pop up, it's absolutely correct to blame the criminal. However it's also correct to learn from those who didn't take adequate steps in securing their own safety so that you may better your personal safety. There's no reason to toss aside a perfectly good learning curve in the name of reverence for the victim when it's usually a given that the victim wouldn't want anyone else to become like themselves. I'm willing to bet, dollars to donuts that if victims had a voice, their voice would be used to educate other people on how not to be a victim. I know it's just a hunch, but it makes sense to me. Therefore there is nothing wrong with using the scenarios and circumstances that a victim endured as examples of what not to do.

    After all, it will be a sad day when the study and discussion of what made a victim a victim is so immortalized in dogma and reverence that the lessons the victim payed for aren't adequately taught.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldwater View Post
    Come on, lets not be that blunt headed, is she to answer the door with a gun in her hand? If so isn't there just the possibility of him overpowering her anyway? Although to be honest her blowing him away with one makes me less skeptical of the idea.

    There are some situations even Samuel Colt can't fix.
    Why not answer the door armed? I won't answer an unexpected doorbell unarmed, that's for sure. The way things are in this day and age, if I'm not home and my wife is answering the door unexpectedly, she's packing a concealed HK P2000 with my eldest daughter right up the stairs, out of sight, holding a Mossberg 500 that she knows how to shoot. It's our family standard doorbell drill, which is practiced right along side our standard fire safety drills. It's a horrible state of affairs when this is viewed as a necessity, but if paranoia makes a victim a survivor then paranoia is the way to go. Make believing this procedure isn't a necessity only turns potential survivors into victims.
    Last edited by John; 07-09-2008 at 05:56 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    John
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    The problem we have is in differentiating between sex crimes in general and child attacks in particular. Adults (well, adult women) know that there is always a risk of being sexually attacked and they know how to minimize that risk and take evasive or offensive action. Children don't know these things and need a higher level of protection.

    We need to winnow out the real child sexual attackers and give them life instead of releasing them into a limbo of zoning laws.

    All the the rest: exhibitionists, peeping Toms, unlucky drunks, teen lovers, etc., need to be charged with less anxiety-provoking labels.
    I agree whole heartedly, an inebriated man taking a leak at a bus stop is breaking the law. However, he's no 'sexual predator'. He's just a drunken asshole, and drunken assholes, while common, aren't worth the resources we commit when we treat them as sexual predators. Those resources would be better used if not wasted on the drunken assholes, exhibitionists or teen lovers. There's a few honest to goodness dangerous people out there, and I like to think that if we were to stop wasting resources on unlucky drunks and put those resources behind disposing of real pedophiles and rapists some things might get solved.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    John
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by marinejcksn View Post
    Ginger, I highlighted the portion to display what I feel is a grave error in your response. I'm not arguing your main point, however I'm suggesting that many victims of child rape never truly "put their life back together". I recall a recent story of a caller on Dr. Savage's show who described how her stepfather raped her repeatedly from the time she was 10 throughout her teenage years and she explained how it's destroyed her entire life since. She even said he writes her threatening letters from prison to this very day. I've personally heard so many stories like this, and every one of them is heartbreaking. I'm for personal responsibility, equality for all people and the like....but something deep to the center of my being makes me want to personally take out these warped individuals. The very liberal arguement used by groups like NAMBLA that it's just a "psychological urge" which is "natural" because it may have been tolerated generations ago (such as during the Roman Empire) is not only grossly outdated but simply delusional. There is nothing, ever, that is "normal" about being sexually attracted to children.
    If you arguing for stricter, mortal, penalties, than you are arguing against her main point. If a governmenal agency were to "toughen up" the penalties associated with these crimes, than the punishment for these crimes would become nearly the same as the punishment for murder. While I'm not opposed to giving the chair to criminals who commit these types of crimes there will blowback, unintended consequences, that must be considered.

    As Ginger pointed out, if our states were to offer death or life in prison for these crimes those who commit these crimes will be more likely to kill and dispose of their victims. After all, the punishment doesn't increase but the likelihood of being caught decreases. These career pedos' aren't stupid rednecks who have graduated to this life spontaneously...they are hard calculating killers who know the legal system at least as well as the average voter, maybe more so. I believe the state has the right to choose crime and punishments, but state's should realize that offering death to those who abduct and rape children only offers further incentives to kill the children who have been abducted. In the game of statistics these sickos play, a death is equal to 10 years less sentencing when it aids a clean escape. Harsher penalties will likely only lead to more 'bodies found' instead of more 'victims found'. I don't like it anymore than you do, but there's really not much that can be done about it at the moment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member AlmostThere's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    A Great Red State
    Posts
    1,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    The perv may have a point. There are a couple of problems with the way we are doing it in terms of sex offenders. First, there are too many ways to become a "sex offender". Peeing in public, dating an underage girl when you are 6 months older, paying for a whore who lies about her age, etc. A lot of those people aren't pervs or child molesters.
    This guy has been convicted of sexual assault. He's at least a perv.

    Secondly, you have to be practical. You can't condemn someone to some kind of hovering existence because it's illegal for them to live anywhere. It's ridiculous that we have people living under bridges because it's illegal for them to live anywhere else. If you have served your sentence, that should be it.
    Do you know of any rehabilitation program for sexual offenders in this country that can rightly claim to be successful? I'm not an authority on this subject, but I know of none. I've also read that sexual offenders have the highest rate of recidivism of any offender.

    With that said, I think it would be practical for sexual offenders to live under bridges that span water.
    Last edited by AlmostThere; 07-11-2008 at 10:53 PM.
    Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •