Autistic (Asperger) Student had 900 child porn collection

Post Reply New Topic

I don't see accusations of sickness coming from anyone other than you; and I don't see any jokes. There was a citation of an event in Florida that one person felt was relevant, which SM felt was taken out of context. That is entirely possible, because we each person seems to be adopting a specific preconception of what happened, the ages of those involved, etc... it makes rational discourse near impossible. Please, calm down and talk rationally. You might well be better understood if you took a moment to identify what you were talking about instead of firing in the dark.


M.

They were young minor teens. I didn't think it was possible to find the news story, but I did. Here it is.

They were mostly about 14 and 15. But zero tolerance is zero tolerance. Under your rule, we should execute these kids. Remember, child porn is anyone under 18 in a sexual situation. Video of 14 year olds having sex is definitely a sexual situation. So these kids DID produce child porn all on their own.

At this point, my response is more apathy than anything - you're ranting, using personal opinion as fact. When you're ready to talk, please do. Compulsion is an integral word to the issue - he may or may not have control over the subject of his fixations and obsessions. I don't care if it is important to you - it is essential to evaluating the situation and understanding it. You're welcome to your opinion; just don't espouse it as fact, or expect me to agree with you. There is no 'need' involved; you are angry and looking to inflict it upon someone else. That isn't justice, it doesn't help and it isn't right in my mind.


M.

Angry? No. But I think you are high. Because, according to your own words, he may not have control OVER THE SUBJECT of his fixations and obsessions... kiddie porn. So, the sick little pedophile needs to fry! And that IS a fact! I mean, come on! What if his obsession was knives or guns! Gimme a BREAK!

Nice... you won't address the issue, so you attack me. Cute.

He may not have control over it; like I said, I collected stamps rather intensely as a child - because of this potential, should I be killed to? C'mon, you've got to see further than that... he needs help - and that can take many forms - yet you prescribe death. I guess I should be thankful that you are not my doctor, then. Personally, I find your thought process sickening; given your thought process, does that mean you're under scrutiny now?



Opinion, not fact. Please learn the difference.



We have those, too... military enthusiasts, gun buffs, hunters, martial arts, war historians and collectors, and the list goes on. You must have one heck of a list.


M.

You have been very condescending towards me. Personally, I find YOUR thought process sickening! Fact, NOT opinion!

Condescending? Yes, that would probably be somewhat valid... I'm tired of your unsubstantiated raving, and your insistence that your personal beliefs are fact. You continue to hold on to the fallacious premise that your beliefs are fact. When it comes to my being condescending, it show it all the more - how we each feel about it remains purely opinion, as someone else may not read it the same way.

Enough of the hijack; back on topic.


M.

The summary execution of pedophiles & child pornographers is a bit harsh, I'll have to admit. It would be satisfying for people to know some sicko got the needle in prison, but what if he goes to his death laughing, unrepentant? No, that won't do at all. Capital punishment is, unless I'm mistaken, reserved for more capital crimes like rape, torture, murder. Maybe if the kiddie porn charges were in conjunction with homocide charges, a lethal injection may seem more appropriate.

I'm rescinding my previous posts. Amending them, really. I want it known that, given the heinous nature of child pornography, I would want the punishment to fit the crime. In other words, lengthy prison terms with no early release. Execution is overdoing it.

Is there any precedent for surgical castration of sex-offenders, or is it just chemical castration?

I can respect that, SM; thank you for your clarity and explanation. Defining appropriate punishment is beyond any desire I have; whether it be castration, incarceration, treatment or whatever else may come along. The desire I had in responding was not to incite others, but to try to make clear that when dealing with violation of behavioral codes it is vital and essential to remove the emotive response and evaluate what is effective, what is appropriate, what best serves against recidivism, what is fair on behalf of the injured party (while maintaining a level for life in the process for the offender), to seek these qualities over self-gratification is what I believe in... reactionary views manage to instigate the stubborn part of me, which can cause problems - this I can acknowledge - but I try to remain balanced while responding. If I offended during the course, I apologize as it was not my intention.

As for surgical castration, I don't know specifically of forced cases although based on the history of treatment over the decades it would not surprise me. I do seem to remember an instance in California of voluntary physical castration; will attempt to find a cited example.

Again, thank you for your thoughtful response; it shows that we can agree largely, perhaps disagree on points, and remain civil. Amazing - do you think we can repeat the feat in PPR? Jest, jest...


M

It's rare that people can be civil about their opinions in the PPR forum.

But it does happen.

I may not be forum monitor or an admin or mod, but I'm going to ask you two kindly to take this to email and stop. There is no need for personal attacks here. Both of you grow up or I will will complain, this is about a serious news incident, and as such three pages more of this is definitively not needed. I'm happy you forgave each other, but please, no more.


I'm going to reiterate what I said earlier.....though I think it's going to be another ramble.

This was in the UK and while it was a porn collection, and while he did get a "get out of jail free" card, he is going to be facing a few issues. I was looking on the net for an article on what rights a freed Ped will have after he is paroled and what he is allowed to do, and as such cannot find any.

But I'm going on hunches with what if I were a judge on what they'd be allowed to do.
1) Register with the community where you will be living, they must be adequately warned and prepared so that they know how to deal with you as a ped and a reformed convict.
2) No jobs that give you access to children, so no librarian, no teacher, no daycare or baby sitting jobs.
3) No computer with internet hookup.
4) attend mandatory rehabiliation sessions (if offered) to help you adjust to outside life again.

These are just a few that come to mind, but if someone knows where I can actually find the information on what they're allowed to do, I'd be appreciative, because trying to use Google, Ask and Wiki, isn't turning up anything, but I think legality-wise, the four things I mentioned may be what a judge may do for most if not all cases. Someone want to talk on this?

We've actually stopped arguing, MK and I.

*sigh* Please read the very message you quoted, Gamester. Your request is duly noted, and politely ignored - we've already resolved the bickering, and we've remained related to the topic through the course of the conversation. Not being flip, but expressing my reaction. I would invite you to find a personal attack, however... with the exception of perhaps a snarky response to Larree over the course of the dialogue, I do not believe you will find one. It is serious, and is being treated as such. My polite request in response: please just start talking and worry less about mediating for others when the issue is no longer at hand and was not out of control to begin with. There are flame-fests galore - do you consider this to be one? That would surprise me... while the was evident frustration on both sides, there wasn't vitriol. (Love that word, vitriol) While I appreciate your concern, I don't find it necessary.

He is restricted from contact with children; I would imagine restrictions on internet usage (either complete or intense) for a duration of time, fines, rehabilitation probable, a criminal record that would show a pattern of behavior in the future, probably community notification - but being in the US, my impression will be skewed. Instant imprisonment on the first arrest/offense doesn't make sense to me; it just seems prone to exacerbating the situation in many cases.


M.

First offense? Why allow the pedophile freak a chance at a second offense? Fry the punk!

If I were going to rob a place (in FL there is a "10, 20, life" or something like that... use a gun, fire a gun, shoot someone)), and felt it necesary to bring a gun, yes. I would take a real gun (for all I know it applies to squirt guns), and I would make sure it was loaded. It might as well be a fully automatic, or at least rapid-fire semi-automatic, with a really large clip (and extra ammo). And if I felt it necessary to shoot it, I certainly would not stop at one shot. I personally would not shoot someone, but I don't feel it's unreasonable to surmise that someone who would, would not aim to wound (they're already in for life for shooting someone).

Those who believe in "zero tolerance", please take a moment to specify what punishment (or range of punishments based on circumstances not stated) you would personally advocate for the following offences.

1) 25 yo male has consenual sex with a 16 yo female,
2) 25 yo male pays to join a "child porn" site and downloads photos,
3) 25 yo male kidnaps a 6 yo female from school, and sexually assualts her,
4) 18 yo female downloads nude picture of 17 female friend from a social networking site,
5) 25 yo female has consenual sex with a 16 yo male,
6) 25 yo male takes pictures of a 6 yo female relative (with no direct physical harm)

Last edited by roguetech on 25 Jul 2008, 9:15 am, edited 4 times in total.

He will not be able to live in close proximity to any school, church, or playground (among other places). This, for all intents and purposes, means he will not be able to live in any urban area. Not sure about Britain, but in some states in the US, the restrictions are tight enough to only allow a few places in the entire state to live.