ZOMBIE FORUMS

What about cases where someone accidentally causes a death, through no fault of their own? Is that murder?

Irrelevant, no such thing as accidental rape.

Or is there?

Okay, maybe not. But still, the same rules of morality should apply to rape as to murder. "Accidental" implies that the person had no control over whether something happened or not. But how exactly do we define "control"?

Accidental death: You opened a door and they died somehow. You didn't intend to commit the act.
Retarded rape: You intended to put your dick in her but didn't think she'd mind.

Not even remotely close. Nice try though.

Ah, but let's analyze this more closely.

Let's say you somehow kill someone by opening a door, but you did not know that opening the door would kill them. Here it does not matter whether you opened it intentionally or unintentionally. The point is that you did not mean to harm anyone. Even if opening the door led to a person's death, and you chose to open the door, if you did not know that opening the door would bring that person harm, you are not guilty.

Now, let's go back to the example of the retarded poerson raping someone. Let's say that they do not know that they are harming their victim. Perhaps they think that he or she enjoys it as much as they do. They deliberately chose to have sex with this person, but they did not know that in doing so they would bring harm to said person, just as in the above example the killer did not know that they were harming anyone by opening the door.

See the analogy now?

Nope. One you knew what you were doing and did it without realizing the consequences, one you didn't know what you were doing and did it without realizing the consequences. Just because you're retarded doesn't mean you get a get out of jail free card. But that's a discussion for another thread - should we execute 'tards.

And Tyhm shows his n00bness by falling into Icy's clever trap.

Icy that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. The disagreement was thus:

<strike>Stupid</strike> Tyhm believes that the stigma that follows pedophiles prevents more from coming forward; he contends that not only should their confidentiality be protected if they do come forward, but if they are in a job that is near children, should be allowed to keep it, the philosophy being that you do not punish the right act (identifying yourself as a potential pedophile.)

Basically everyone else said that the benefits of throwing said identified pedo out of his job outweigh the drawback of perhaps, in theory, discouraging some pedophiles from coming forward, the thought being they'd rather have 25% of the pedos identified and thrown out of said jobs rather than 50% of them be identified but 100% stay near the kids. The idea being that the potential for rape is still there and thus said pedophile-fantasizers cannot be trusted among children.

In the end, it has nothing to do with intention/act, more to do with "do you punish doing the right thing if not punishing puts children at risk, and punishing also puts them at risk" (in theory at least.)

I thought about it a bit and it seems to be a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation, because either you have (in theory) more unidentified pedos in these jobs, or more identified people attempting to get help but them ALL in "high risk" situations.

Again I'd prefer the 25% identified and rooted out to 50% identified and all of them allowed to be near kids...but that is my personal value judgement. I feel that these people are too big a risk to the kids they are with to leave them with them; not "punishing" the act of coming forward and getting help is, imo, eliminating the only use of them coming forward for society as a whole =/

Just my 2 cents.

-MiB

It was an example; not that I expect you to be literate, but I specified that several times. IF they continue to be punished for stepping forward, they will continue to refuse to step forward. Simple concept.

It's a common conflict. Democrats verses Republican, Left wing verses Right wing - Do we trust the system? Do we trust that supervised pedophiles won't rape people? Essentially, do we trust their supervisors and psychiatrists? I trust a court-appointed supervisor over the monster's conscience, you accept that civil servants fail frequently. It's tricky.

It was a little ribbing Tyhm, nothing more. Calm down.

I know where you're coming from but I disagree that the tradeoff is worth it. I just don't think its nice to have those kids around a potential pedophile (I should clarify this in the future, you're not a pedophile until you have the intent to actually do the act, in which case you obviously wouldn't come forward.)

Edit: Btw, MUCH HEART, you're a good debater Tyhm.

-MiB

Thxz. Not offended, I just insist on explaining myself. ^^

I'm not wild about the tradeoff either. I trust, naiively, that the system can better keep an identified potential-pedophile in line than protect my daughter from an unidentified, but it's just something we'll all have to agree to differ on.

Way to go Icy. Make yourself look like a moron and take the side that is obviously wrong!

Murder on purpose = Murder = Death Penalty

Murder by accident = Manslaughter = Prison time

Rape on purpose = Rape = Torture and Death

Rape on accident = Rape = Torture and Death


The major difference between the two, murder and rape accidently, is that with accidental murder the person realizes what they did (ie vehicular manslaughter) is wrong and will (In most cases) take steps towards not doing it again. Where as rape on accident (On purpose but not knowing its wrong) the person is soooo much more likely to just go out and do it again. Not realizing that its wrong, because in there head it isn't!

Rapists all need to die, plain and simple. Rapists can be prevented if they haven't done it yet merely by keeping them in a safe... Wait, that was pedophiles. Rapists would be a little harder to weed out and control. Because where as pedophiles you can just keep kids away from 'em, what are ya gonna do with rapists? Give 'em a little island to stay on?

No no, pre-rape rapists need to probably be dealt with if it looks like they're gonna actually go out and rape someone.

Post-rape rapists need to die. Especially if its that they were caught and not that they turned themselves in. Because that means they still don't see it as wrong and have now actually raped someone and know what it feels like. If they're allowed back out in public they will most definitely go attempt rape again.

For those that turn themselves in its a little more complex and personally, I think its one of those things that just needs a little government cover-up and a lot of killing. Bada boom bada bing, problem solved. Quick, easy, efficient. And it cleanses the gene pool.

We could use a little chlorine in the gene pool to weed out rapists, pedophiles and murderers at this point.

The reason I called you a moron Icy, is because I can not see how you could logically or morally think that just because someone's thoughts were pure that they should be treated differently.

What about the men in the airplanes on September 11. They thought that their god said it was a good thing.

What about pretty much every other religious fanatics group?

What about KKK members?

What about that MOTHER FUCKER Hitler?

Should they all be treated differently because they thought they were in the right? HUH? HUH? WHAT NOW? WHAT NOW?!?!?!

If you would like a much much longer list of people that should "get off easy" just because they didn't realize they were wrong I could fill a 20 page book and then some. Just off of the top of my fucking head!!!!

Evil acts are evil acts.

My religion says that anyone that I meet named IcyMonkey I have to slowly torture to death whilst fucking them in the ass with a zuccini. And I think there's nothing wrong with it. After all, there's no way my god could possibly be wrong. So if I slowly tortured you to death while raping you with a zuccini I should get off easy because I didn't realize it was a bad thing?

Fuck that "new millenium fashionable" happy steaming load of horse shit!

Why don't you conjure something out of the ends of your fingers that doesn't require me to get a gas mask and a shovel to deal with. Then we'll talk.

If it weren't for the fact that I need to go to sleep because I have work in the morning I would continue to ream you to the point that you felt like a useless pile of carbon and water and decided to shove your head in to your monitor so that I didn't have to read this kind of useless brain vomit until the next troll I decide to smite.

CHOKE ON YOUR OWN COCK AND DIE,
The Sinister Mother Fucking Chris

PS: This has been your TSC goes berserker (AKA: MiB Moment) post of the fucking week. Just so that you know, that was mild for berserker TSC. You will know when its true rage when your eyes bleed as you read the post.

I begin to disagree here...

I recently had a friend look this over and she officially calls us idiots.

I agree to a lesser extent. Me included in that statement.

I first want to say that I created this debate to have us examine this reaction of "Ooo. Look a paedophile, KILL KILL KILL!!!" I don't believe that I accepted TSC's solution. It's inhumane. Let's go back to the Brian example. Brian is a HUMAN!!! Before he got his teaching degree he was just like you or I. He went to parties, had girlfriends the whole shebang! I got the general idea that people wanted him at the end of a shotgun regardless. If we all lived like that, we might one day find ourselves at the barrel end of a shotgun.


Back off, Icy was only trying to fuck with you preconceived notions. Which is why I started this debate in the first place.

Continuing on that line...

Now, try this one on for size. There have been reports of paedophiles since before roman times. Same as homosexuals. Fact. It was not uncommon for a rich guy to “adopt” a young child for sexual purposes. The kid lived with the rich dude for a number of year, left when they were older with a sizable amount of money from there patron. Most continued to have contact with each other for years to come. Most of the time they were friendly. So... basically, paedophillia one was, wall, as accepted as homosexuality.

But were not dealing with then, were dealing with NOW.

I once heard (I have no source, which is why I haven’t brought it up yet) that a porn ring was crashed that had about 2000 members in Ontario. That’s a big fucking number!!! Clearly this is not a new problem or is it a small one. What cris is talking about is genocide, and genetic cleansing. (And he has the fucking balls to fling the audacities of Hitler around.)

Remember my views onthese type of things being genetic. When given free reign, these things will die out. Even if you killed every single paedophile out there, it would still pop up. That means NO SOLUTIONS!!!! We will deal with this till judgment day comes and the trumpet sounds.

Most of what were talking about it MOOT!!!

If I want to rape you daughter, I’M GOING TO FUCKING DO IT!!! There’s not much you can do about it. As long as we keep this killkillkill attitude towards it, there won’t be much prediction as to who it will happen too.

Actually... perfect point.

Who has seen Bowling for Columbine?

Good flick, ending kinda bugged me but the message was great. The only reason that America has for the high number of shootings is it’s fear. Fear and paranoia rarely solves the problem. If you remove fear you get my original statements Class 2 paedophiles have broken the law, and this societies wishes. Class one however, should not be feared nor shunned. They should be supported in the way AA supports alcoholics.

Now, one final note. Read Piers Anthony’s Firefly. Piers is always a good author who can fuck with preconceived notions.

- Chaos

P.S. Read TSC’s fucking disclaimer, substituting CD for TSC

I must point out again, if pedophilia is a fetish-type thing, and cannot be wiped out, only suppressed, in a person, its kinda equavalent to someone who is likely to do harm to his fellow human beings due to a mental condition.

Also CD, and everyone else, a study shows that there has been no hate crimes against identified pedophiles in the states that list their addresses, pictures and cars on the 'net. =/ So it isn't quite "kill-kill-kill" as you imply.

It is more of a "keep away from me you freak."

The scenario was someone who just wanted to be a pedophile, I think few if any people would be much more than disgusted by that (like say, uh, BDSM) and keep their kids away from said person.

And if someone becomes psychotic (due to whatever reason) are we to "help" them, too, and keep them in our communities dispite his risk at, oh, KILLING someone, just because they are humans?

I don't "fear" pedophiles, I dislike them immensely and think they get off easy if they don't get shot in the forehead after convicted. The thought of diddling a little person- as long as you don't do it, not my business and not something I care about.

And I think thats the concensus of society, fear leads to hate crimes and the like, so far nothing from those people who are VERY publically shown as pedophiles, so I think its safe to say that most of society just wants pedophiels to *stay the fuck away from them.*

-MiB

All pedophiles, child fondlers, kiddie pornography makers/users must FUCKING DIE!

I have special loads for my personal weapons just for those type of scum.
The local sherrif and local/state police know they have to lock up any of the above listed for their protection, as I will expend ammo into their useless carcasses if I catch them around. Fact. Idon't hunt them, but I will seek them out if they are around my town.
Am I overblown in my reaction? Don't care! I have seem many poeple, kids and adults whose lies have totaly fucked up by these sub-humans.
They are not, by all the available studies, capable of being 'rehabilitated'.
They are a threath to the very lives of children. Over 50% of the child rapes/sexual attacks in the last 10 years have resulted in the death of the victim.

All pedophiles, child fondlers, kiddie pornography makers/users must FUCKING DIE!

I have more simpathy for drug addicts than pedophiles. At least they have a chance for getting better.

Just my 2 bits, and a rant!

Uhm, TSC, I wasn't actually saying anything about whether rapists should die or not. That wasn't the point of my argument. My point was whether a retarded rapist, who perhaps didn't know that the person they were raping was not liking it as much as they, was actually evil. I believe that all rapists should be imprisoned for life (not killed, because it actually costs more to kill them than to jail them for the rest of their lives, and why waste the money?).

But the law, and the imprisonment/execution that follows as a consequence of breaking the law, does not exist to keep people from being "evil". It exists to ensure that everyone remains as safe as possible. Whether the people who are being imprisoned or executed are "good" or "bad" is irrelevant. As such, I suppose my comments about the ethical status of the rapist in special cases was a bit of a tangent and unrelated to the thread as a whole, which is mainly concerned with policy rather than ethics. Nevertheless, please don't misinterpret me.

MiB - good point, I'll get to that in a minute.



That's what I've been saying for a while. The ones that step forward are the least of the evils. The ones that don't step forward are the middle of the road, though nearly as evil as those who have actually done it; the only variance is time. Might as well lump them together, those who are about to and those who have, as people who need to be executed as soon and as painfully as possible, if just as a deterrent to anyone else. Despite that they can't be deterred, they should at least dread what will come.



My point from the beginning - until now I had only MiB's "I will kick them in the nuts!" to go off of, which has since moderated into "I hate pedophiles, and will keep them the fuck away from my children" - which is fair. This, however, can't possibly be helping. Might not be hurting, but I'll get to that in a minute.
First, let's analyze what you're saying. All pedophiles, child fondlers, kiddie porno makers/users must die. Fair enough, but how do you identify them? Really, you're saying all those who have been convicted (in which case I'll ask to borrow a few rounds and be right there alongside) OR those who have stepped forward. If you guarantee death to those who identified themselves and have yet to actually hurt anyone, you might scare them off. As much as I'd like death and destruction to them, I'm diametrically opposed to you scaring potential sex offenders out of stepping forward - particularly if, as MiB said, they stay in control when they're properly identified. Say for the sake of argument there are 1000 potential rapists who know it's wrong and want to step forward as a service to the community - if you express your hatred for them and even one of them chickens out of stepping forward, that's one rapist that you don't get to shoot until after he's raped your niece. AND THAT WOULD BE BAD! You want to shoot him BEFORE he rapes your niece!
The difference is this: You want to shoot him BEFORE he rapes your niece, and I don't think it's all that necessary that he be shot if, in fact, he never rapes your niece. If I know two blocks down in the retirement community's a potential sex offender that works at the telemarketing firm downtown, and he drives a red el dorado, and the police regularly drive by his house with their windows down on their way to and from their patrols just to make sure, and his neighbors check up on him twice a week, and my daughter knows NEVER to talk to strangers, particularly 5'8 black-haired men who drive red el dorados...if he's adequately strapped down, I don't need to do anything else to him. If doing anything else would stop his cousin from coming forward and living out his life under lock and key, why do anything else? On a visceral level I agree, I want to make them all pay, but on a logical level it's just not worth the price.

There's also the possibility that it doesn't hurt. If we're still assuming they can't be treated, can't be encouraged to identify themselves, then they can't be deterred from identifying themselves either. In that case it doesn't matter what the punishment is for coming forward, and by all means, hang them by their scrotum over a tank of hydrochloric acid that they may have their manlies torn away an instant before they're subjected to a slow, burning demise. Or that old favorite, screw-nail (so it can't be pried out) their cock to a stump full of red ants, set the stump on fire, and give them a dull, rusty knife. Then shoot 'em if they escape. Just so they think they have a chance in hell if they castrate themselves. Lift the constitutional protection from inhumane treatment for inhuman offendors.

To elaborate: we do not "encourage" psycopaths to come out of the woodwork- when they are identified, for whatever reason, we stick them in a place away from the rest of society.

Should pedophiles be treated the same way?

-MiB

If that'll work, yeah, that's the idea. Neutralize the threat in such a way that it does not discourage others from walking into the same trap.
If however untreatability implies determinism to the degree that they can't be deterred or encouraged from their present path, then fuck relocation, kill 'em all. It's not like it'll scare anyone else away, apparently. For the religious, their soul is safe as they didn't do anything wrong yet and didn't commit suicide. For the nonreligious, you can save face and money by doing it yourself. It just depends on the environment we're arguing in, which has yet to be nailed down by facts or agreement.

Morals would be defined by the people surounding the mentally retadred person. Evil is in the intent.

-Kitten