Poll: Should Paedophiles be allowed a Second Chance?

[EchetusXe]

Yes, they are. Our ancestors were ape-like creatures. They were animals, we are animals.

There's this thing called evolution, and...

Humans are animals. We didn't evolve out of the animal kingdom.

We eat, drink, shit and die.

A tiger might be offended if you were to tell him he is under the same classification as an earthworm. But there we are.

Humans may seem 100 times more advanced than cats. Cats may seem 100 times more advanced than worms.

Still, all animals.

 

[Kajin]

What worries me is that, at the time of this post, the second chance option has the most votes.

Why though? It's people's opinions, and if they believe that they should get second chances then that's what they believe. I too am on the side of the second chancers. I believe that life in prison is reserved for murderers (take a life, take a life) and that paedophiles deserve help. In all likelihood they weren't given enough help in the first place, and that's what led them to do what they did.

What if you give someone a second chance and they slip? What if they go back on the prowl? That would mean any number of children that would be traumatized for life. What if that child was your child?
I have to be honest, I really do believe that there are some things where people should not be given second chances. The risk could be too great. But whatever, opinion doesn't equal fact and my own belief on the matter is certainly not fact.

 

[EchetusXe]

Humans are animals. We didn't evolve out of the animal kingdom.

Yes we did. There's a reason why "human" and "animal" are separate concepts and groups. An animal wouldn't even think about these things.

Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but no we didn't.

Perhaps one day we will become a "singularity", rays of energy, artificial machines with human brains. Whatever. Then we will have evolved out of the animal kingdom.

Thinking about these kind of things doesn't mean we are no longer animals.

Your looking at this far too philosophically. In scientific terms we are 100% animal.

 

[Xvito]

I don't even think that he should have been thrown into jail.

And people who do things like that to people that have been to jail, they're lowest form of life on this planet.

Also, it's frightening to see that so many of you seem to think that branding a person for the rest of his/her life is a proper way to act... It is also quite sickening...

 

[A random person]

I don't even think that he should have been thrown into jail.

And people who do things like that to people that have been to jail, they're lowest form of life on this planet.

Also, it's frightening to see that so many of you seem to think that branding a person for the rest of his/her life is a proper way to act... It is also quite sickening...

And you, sir, have demonstrated yourself to be less terrifying than most people in these types of threads. As a result, I welcome you aboard my floating doom fortress.

 

[Yonnick19]

I voted yes, just because I know what it's like to live behind closed doors (I wasn't in prison by the way).

 

[Xvito]

I don't even think that he should have been thrown into jail.

And people who do things like that to people that have been to jail, they're lowest form of life on this planet.

Also, it's frightening to see that so many of you seem to think that branding a person for the rest of his/her life is a proper way to act... It is also quite sickening...

And you, sir, have demonstrated yourself to be less terrifying than most people in these types of threads. As a result, I welcome you aboard my floating doom fortress.

What? Seriously!? The floating doom fortress... Of doom!

*starts dancing*

 

[EchetusXe]

In scientific terms we are 100% animal.

Except we're not.

Well we are.

Human beings are animals, mammals and primates.

A superior brain and intelligence doesn't take us out of those classifications.

 

[A random person]

I don't even think that he should have been thrown into jail.

And people who do things like that to people that have been to jail, they're lowest form of life on this planet.

Also, it's frightening to see that so many of you seem to think that branding a person for the rest of his/her life is a proper way to act... It is also quite sickening...

And you, sir, have demonstrated yourself to be less terrifying than most people in these types of threads. As a result, I welcome you aboard my floating doom fortress.

What? Seriously!? The floating doom fortress... Of doom!

*starts dancing*

The one and only. You are hereby welcomed onto my ship by my world class crew, who I will now introduce to you:

Spoiler: The crew of the Floating Doom Fortress.

Yuki Nagato

Signum

Mrs. Frizzle

Picard

L (or Maxi)

And now prepare for adventure as we explore different universes every week and fend off the cast of High School Musical.

Spoiler: I believe these are good exploring songs.

And for when things get epic:

 

[barryween]

No.
He MOLESTED THREE KIDS
no one's giving those kids a second chance at sexual innocence, why should he get a second chance at normal life?
(Note: I'm referring to the case the OP describes, but this holds true for ALL cases of pedophilia.)

 

[Hitman 43]

I dunno.

 

[Del-Toro]

Yes, if they are the type of person that should be tagged as a sex-offender for the rest of his/her life, then DO NOT LET THEM OUT OF JAIL. Prop. 38 needs to be annexed, big-time. A friend of mine went to prison for 3 years and is still labeled as a sex offender, and here's the kicker, he was and still is, here's the magic word: INNOCENT.

There is no such thing as innocence, just varying levels of guilt.

That does not make any sense, think if the police walk up to your house one day and say that you are guilty of some crime, and you had nothing to do with that...assault on main street, or that mugging in the park for example. Well, like you said there is no such thing as being innocent, so I guess that you are guilty then, even though there is no forensic evidence, and it's an election year for the judge. Nope! You're guilty, because EVERYONE is, at least a little bit, no matter what, yay, guess what? that means that you are going to jail now. Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense.

If it doesn't make sense to you then you're an idiot. Innocence is freedom from sin, so even though I may not be responsible for assault or mugging doesn't mean I'm innocent, it simply means I am not guilty of assualt or mugging, maybe I stole something in the past, or did something else I'm not proud of. Maybe I'm a liar, a cheater, whatever, if any of those conditions, or something similiar, is true, then I'm not innocent, I simply don't carry any guilt in the areas in which I am being charged, why do you think the phrase "Not Guilty" is used in lieu of "innocent" in the court system? Because they aren't innocent, they just didn't do that particular crime. Try to think a little more before you make yourself sound like a jackass. By the way, odds are your friend wasn't just sitting at home watching TV when the crime happened, maybe he didn't do it, but if he was in a position where he could have reasonable been considered somehow involved, then he was in no way innocent as I described it.

 

[Blood_Lined]

Yes, if they are the type of person that should be tagged as a sex-offender for the rest of his/her life, then DO NOT LET THEM OUT OF JAIL. Prop. 38 needs to be annexed, big-time. A friend of mine went to prison for 3 years and is still labeled as a sex offender, and here's the kicker, he was and still is, here's the magic word: INNOCENT.

There is no such thing as innocence, just varying levels of guilt.

That does not make any sense, think if the police walk up to your house one day and say that you are guilty of some crime, and you had nothing to do with that...assault on main street, or that mugging in the park for example. Well, like you said there is no such thing as being innocent, so I guess that you are guilty then, even though there is no forensic evidence, and it's an election year for the judge. Nope! You're guilty, because EVERYONE is, at least a little bit, no matter what, yay, guess what? that means that you are going to jail now. Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense.

If it doesn't make sense to you then you're an idiot. Innocence is freedom from sin, so even though I may not be responsible for assault or mugging doesn't mean I'm innocent, it simply means I am not guilty of assualt or mugging, maybe I stole something in the past, or did something else I'm not proud of. Maybe I'm a liar, a cheater, whatever, if any of those conditions, or something similiar, is true, then I'm not innocent, I simply don't carry any guilt in the areas in which I am being charged, why do you think the phrase "Not Guilty" is used in lieu of "innocent" in the court system? Because they aren't innocent, they just didn't do that particular crime. Try to think a little more before you make yourself sound like a jackass. By the way, odds are your friend wasn't just sitting at home watching TV when the crime happened, maybe he didn't do it, but if he was in a position where he could have reasonable been considered somehow involved, then he was in no way innocent as I described it.

If that is what you mean then what you were talking about is completely irrelevant to what I was talking about myself, you're talking about being guilty/innocent involving the soul, yes, in that sense, of course you are correct. I'm talking about being innocent/guilty about a crime that they did not commit. Which is very self explanatory when it comes to a specific crime, in actuality, did s/he commit the crime that s/he is accused of? Next time you want to call someone an idiot, make sure that you are on topic.

 

[teisjm]

He kidnapped and raped 3 children... why would anyoen want him within a hundred miles of their children.

Honestly, if i had children or young siblings, i would seriously consider killing a person like him if he moved in next door. I would be fucking scared every single day, i would never dare leave my kids/siblings out of sight.

He chose to act like a beast, and now he's whiny cause he gets treated like one.

Of all offenders, child-rapists are prolly those i think deserves the most to die slow and painfully.

Thieves are criminals as well, but sometimes a need for the money they steal (though many are just greedy fucks)

Even murderers can sometimes have reasons that adds some empathy to their actions (NOT that it justifies them)

Rapists (whether or not we're talking pedo's or not) are not excusable in any way.
"Uhm, i was like horny and stuff, so i decided to go and screw someones life over to get off"

(i'm talking real rapists here not people who slept with someone who later regret it cause she had a boyfriend, and doesn't wanna admit that she willingly cheated on him)

If they should have any form of second chance, i think there should be made a "secured town" for them, where there was no children or women, only other rapists. That way they're not gonna end up raping anyone besides other rapists.

I'm confused. First you condemn rape, but then you support it.

I fail to see how I support rape. Please explain.

 

[Pifflestick]

I have to say that I agree with the people trying to firebomb him. Pedophiles are not human. Once you have commited pedophilia you are no more than an animal. In fact, I strongly support the death penalty for pedophiles.

Sorry to disappoint you, but pedophiles are humans. And all humans are animals. We are not fallen angels or something, we are just animals - granted, smart ones. We should rather try to heal them. Would you kill someone beause he had a mental illness? I don't think so.

That depends. If that mental illness made that person fuck children than yes I would kill them. What people seem to be forgetting here is these people are destroying a persons life. Its no different than murder or rape which also should warrant the death penalty. These pedophiles are causing not only physical damage but mental and emotional. Making these people suffer for most of their natural lives. If that dosn't warrant the death penalty than what does other than genocide? And if you don't support the death penalty even in the case of genocide than your just as sick as they are.

 

[Max-Vader]

I have to say that I agree with the people trying to firebomb him. Pedophiles are not human. Once you have commited pedophilia you are no more than an animal. In fact, I strongly support the death penalty for pedophiles.

Sorry to disappoint you, but pedophiles are humans. And all humans are animals. We are not fallen angels or something, we are just animals - granted, smart ones. We should rather try to heal them. Would you kill someone beause he had a mental illness? I don't think so.

That depends. If that mental illness made that person fuck children than yes I would kill them. What people seem to be forgetting here is these people are destroying a persons life. Its no different than murder or rape which also should warrant the death penalty. These pedophiles are causing not only physical damage but mental and emotional. Making these people suffer for most of their natural lives. If that dosn't warrant the death penalty than what does other than genocide? And if you don't support the death penalty even in the case of genocide than your just as sick as they are.

What is the point in killing them? It doesn't help the child. It doesn't bring dead people back to life. Learning what causes such actions might help preventing it in the future. They didn't even kill Josef Fritzl. Why just kill them? Do you have some sort of bloodlust?