Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Webbo

Poland castrates peados

By Webbo, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Kilworthfox

Kilworthfox

Posted
Posted
BBC

I can understand why some people would want this but I can't help feeling a little bit uncomfortable about. Would anybody like to see this here?

If someone was proven guilty by DNA testing the absolutely. I can only imagine the rage & feelings I would have if someone was to do this to someone I cared about.

Personally I think that an extremely slow death would be more appropriate, something to do with razorblades & drinking sulphuric acid :thumbup:

Daggers

Daggers

Posted
Posted
Man, you got it baaaaaad!!!

It's high time the government did something about homosexuality really, it seems like loads of people are catching it these days.

Maybe, if someone thinks they might be coming down with a dose of the gay they could 'duck and cover' or 'clunk click every trip'?

Webbo

Webbo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
It's high time the government did something about homosexuality really, it seems like loads of people are catching it these days.

Maybe, if someone thinks they might be coming down with a dose of the gay they could 'duck and cover' or 'clunk click every trip'?

Personally I always wear a condom when watching Graham Norton. You can't be too careful.

Guest Mee-9

Guest Mee-9

Posted
Posted

I bet you could get your hands on some of this chemical, next you know it'll be in nightclubs.

Daggers

Daggers

Posted
Posted
Personally I always wear a condom when watching Graham Norton. You can't be too careful.

You shouldn't invite him around to your house.

Asking for trouble, that is.

Shrenchel

Shrenchel

Posted
Posted
If someone was proven guilty by DNA testing the absolutely. I can only imagine the rage & feelings I would have if someone was to do this to someone I cared about.

Personally I think that an extremely slow death would be more appropriate, something to do with razorblades & drinking sulphuric acid :thumbup:

Except there's been several cases where the DNA evidence used to convcit someone has later been shown to be incorrect. Unless you catch the nonce red-handed with his log up a schoolboy, I really don't think it's safe to use physical or biological punishment that has any measure of permanence,

BoneDog

BoneDog

Posted
Posted

After seeing something in the paper today I don't think we need to change how we deal with paedos. Here's a bit from the report : "The seven year olds victims attacker walked free from court and was ordered to pay a paltry £85 in costs - before the victim was offered theme park tickets as compensation."

Theme park tickets for the young victims, perfect solution. You couldn't make it up.

The crime in this case is very extreme and sick yet the offender hasn't even been put on the sex offenders register. But perhaps the £85 fine will work and he will turn into a lovely bloke now he's learned his lesson.

Guest MarshallForEngland

Guest MarshallForEngland

Posted
Posted
After seeing something in the paper today I don't think we need to change how we deal with paedos. Here's a bit from the report : "The seven year olds victims attacker walked free from court and was ordered to pay a paltry £85 in costs - before the victim was offered theme park tickets as compensation."

Theme park tickets for the young victims, perfect solution. You couldn't make it up.

The crime in this case is very extreme and sick yet the offender hasn't even been put on the sex offenders register. But perhaps the £85 fine will work and he will turn into a lovely bloke now he's learned his lesson.

Which paper was this? I could probably guess :rolleyes:

With regards to the OP, I think it's a draconian punishment for something about which we understand so little. I also don't like the use of the word "pedophile" when it's used to mean "child rapist". Those two things aren't the same.

BoneDog

BoneDog

Posted
Posted
Which paper was this? I could probably guess :rolleyes:

With regards to the OP, I think it's a draconian punishment for something about which we understand so little. I also don't like the use of the word "pedophile" when it's used to mean "child rapist". Those two things aren't the same.

Daily Mirror page 7 Theme Park Tickets

The crime is described about 7 paragraphs down the page.

I know all newspapers talk shit (including the 'posh' ones) but I think this story is true so it doesn't matter which newspaper it's reported in really.

I'm not sure the punishment is draconian, it doesn't seem harsh to me. A bullet would be perfect punishment for anyone who touched a kid in a perverted way in my opinion. Or if a bullet is too harsh for the majority of Englands population to take then life in prison with no perks (cos it costs us too much to give them all tv's and table tennis), just a bed, a plate of slop and a bottle of water. Surely that's not a harsh punishment for a child rapist?

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Sounds fine to me, considered to have few permanent effects, you could argue that it would give people who otherwise have such unacceptable desires a chance to lead somewhat normal lives after serving their time? And should minimise risks of reoffending, and is cheaper than prison.

I read somewhere that even physical castration does not suppress sexual urges. It was a piece about eunuchs, IIRC.

After seeing something in the paper today I don't think we need to change how we deal with paedos. Here's a bit from the report : "The seven year olds victims attacker walked free from court and was ordered to pay a paltry £85 in costs - before the victim was offered theme park tickets as compensation."

Theme park tickets for the young victims, perfect solution. You couldn't make it up.

The crime in this case is very extreme and sick yet the offender hasn't even been put on the sex offenders register. But perhaps the £85 fine will work and he will turn into a lovely bloke now he's learned his lesson.

He hasn't just been fined.

"Laura's parents were told by police that the boy could not be put on the sex offenders' register as he was given a referral order, instead of a suspended or custodial sentence.

Referral orders are part of the Government's strategy to reduce offending in young people. They are given to first-time young offenders who plead guilty, and mean teenagers are "punished" by reporting to a panel of local volunteers to address their offending behaviour."

Like it or not, our system is not punitive but rehabilitative. The younger the offender, the less likely it is they'll be locked up.

Before someone like Thracian comes along and accuses me of defending the system, I am not. I am merely stating how it is.

BoneDog

BoneDog

Posted
Posted
Referral orders are part of the Government's strategy to reduce offending in young people. They are given to first-time young offenders who plead guilty, and mean teenagers are "punished" by reporting to a panel of local volunteers to address their offending behaviour."

Like it or not, our system is not punitive but rehabilitative. The younger the offender, the less likely it is they'll be locked up.

Before someone like Thracian comes along and accuses me of defending the system, I am not. I am merely stating how it is.

I'm not saying that young offenders shouldn't be helped and I'm not saying referral orders are a bad thing. I'd rather not chuck kids in prison.

But this 15 year old lad raped a 7 year old. It's a crime at the far extreme end of things. I don't think any amount of referral will help this one.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
I'm not saying that young offenders shouldn't be helped and I'm not saying referral orders are a bad thing. I'd rather not chuck kids in prison.

But this 15 year old lad raped a 7 year old. It's a crime at the far extreme end of things. I don't think any amount of referral will help this one.

Like I said, I'm not saying whether it's right or wrong.

lou

lou

Posted
Posted
It's a bit of a moral dilema this. Dangerous nutters are forced to take anti-psychotic drugs and I don't have a problem with that.

I just don't won't to live in a country that mutilates criminals. It's just wrong.

If it was one of my kids how would I react? I honestly don't know.

Tbf Thracian is usually surprisingly liberal on these issues.

Theres no mutiliation involved its just taking tablets isnt it?

No one can force anyone with a Psychotic illness to take any meds UNLESS they are sectioned under the Mental Health Act. If they are living out in society they cannot be forced to take anything. Not everyone with a Psychosis is a "dangerous nutter" for the record, in fact very few are. The dangerous ones are generally the ones with personality disorders which are not treatable by medication actually :thumbup:

Webbo

Webbo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Theres no mutiliation involved its just taking tablets isnt it?

No one can force anyone with a Psychotic illness to take any meds UNLESS they are sectioned under the Mental Health Act. If they are living out in society they cannot be forced to take anything. Not everyone with a Psychosis is a "dangerous nutter" for the record, in fact very few are. The dangerous ones are generally the ones with personality disorders which are not treatable by medication actually :thumbup:

[

I never meant to suggest that every one with a mental illness is dangerous. I know it's just a minority but there are cases every year, in fact there was 1 quite recently, where the patient stops taking their medicine and goes and kills someone.

As for the mutilation thing, I don't really know enough about it to know whether there are any permanent side effects, as I said I just feel uncomfortable about it.

I don't really have any strong feelings on the matter, I just thought it was an interesting subject for debate.

lou

lou

Posted
Posted
I never meant to suggest that every one with a mental illness is dangerous. I know it's just a minority but there are cases every year, in fact there was 1 quite recently, where the patient stops taking their medicine and goes and kills someone.

As for the mutilation thing, I don't really know enough about it to know whether there are any permanent side effects, as I said I just feel uncomfortable about it.

I don't really have any strong feelings on the matter, I just thought it was an interesting subject for debate.

I know, its just a sensitive subject for me. :thumbup: Not that I suffer before anyone gets the wrong idea lol

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...