ADK Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 If hes here as a refugee then yes, when he is deemed safe for release he should be allowed to stay here. If hge isnt saf for release he should remain in prison here.
Captain... Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Shrapnel - Whilst your point is valid and quite an admirable one at that, I tend to agree with deportation for non national criminals who have comitted serious offences in the UK and are not UK citizens. Even in cases when they are deemed no threat to society after being punished (forget about this case but in a hypothetical case) and going back to his home country would lead to torture and death at the hands of the corrupt military regime controlling the country (again hypothetical I don't know the exact details of his refugee status in this case). If you are a normal immigrant and came here in pursuit of a better life, not for asylum, and you commit crimes, then send the buggers back, I have no problem with that, although I would question the judgement of sending back a peadophile to a country where it is commonplace for children to be sold in to the sex trade, but that is a different argument. If you came to this country because your people were the victims of genocide and ethnic cleansing in your country, and you have been punished and rehabilitated for your crimes (again hypothetically) and have agreed to all the monitoring and restrictions as a home grown criminal that has been rehabilitated, I see no good in sending them back to their death when they have demonstrated they are able to live peacefully and with in the law in this country.
Daggers Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Good to hear, I hope Mr Chavez distributes his countries wealth properly, hopefully when I visit it will look like a country with those reserves available.
FoxyPV Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Even in cases when they are deemed no threat to society after being punished (forget about this case but in a hypothetical case) and going back to his home country would lead to torture and death at the hands of the corrupt military regime controlling the country (again hypothetical I don't know the exact details of his refugee status in this case). If you are a normal immigrant and came here in pursuit of a better life, not for asylum, and you commit crimes, then send the buggers back, I have no problem with that, although I would question the judgement of sending back a peadophile to a country where it is commonplace for children to be sold in to the sex trade, but that is a different argument. If you came to this country because your people were the victims of genocide and ethnic cleansing in your country, and you have been punished and rehabilitated for your crimes (again hypothetically) and have agreed to all the monitoring and restrictions as a home grown criminal that has been rehabilitated, I see no good in sending them back to their death when they have demonstrated they are able to live peacefully and with in the law in this country. If they don't reoffend, then yes, but if they do, they have shown that they are incapable of living by their new country's rules and should be returned to their home country or another that is willing to take them. Again while I do agree with the principle, I would look at how we treat our own children first before telling other countries how to look after theirs.
Daggers Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Why not just chemically castrate him then deport him? Then he's no longer a threat to children and won't get himself in trouble. Somebody fed you on pure stupid when you were little.
Guest Basildon Fox Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 You can't send him home, he is a refugee, he will get tortured and killed, how do you not get this? Do you think he came here because he was a peadophile? Do you think he came here to be cured? Did you even read the article? He is a convicted rapist ****. If the paedophile **** is killed if he is deported so what? You seem to be more worried about his safety than his potential victims. The human rights act was never set to deal with this shite. It was to try to ensure that we never had another halocaust. People who commit serious offences should not be able to hide behind this out dated law and should be subject to a new one that puts victims before offenders.
Captain... Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 He is a convicted rapist ****. If the paedophile **** is killed if he is deported so what? You seem to be more worried about his safety than his potential victims. The human rights act was never set to deal with this shite. It was to try to ensure that we never had another halocaust. People who commit serious offences should not be able to hide behind this out dated law and should be subject to a new one that puts victims before offenders. He was tried by the laws of this land, and punished as would a citizen of this country, if you accept that reformed English peadophiles can live under supervision and monitoring a normal life without endangering another human being, than what does it matter where he is from? If he was deemed a threat he would be sent back, he wasn't, if there was a convincing argument that he was still a danger to society then he would have been sent back. If you don't believe in reform, and rehabilitation, and if you believe that a peadophile can never change his spots, then that is fine, that is your perogative, I believe that most human beings are capable of rehabilitation, and if that is the case with this man then I would not agree with him being sent to his death. As I have said, this decision was made by someone with the skill and expertise to remove emotion from his decision, and look at the facts, that is their job as judges and they are much better placed to do it than you or me.
Guest Basildon Fox Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 He was tried by the laws of this land, and punished as would a citizen of this country, if you accept that reformed English peadophiles can live under supervision and monitoring a normal life without endangering another human being, than what does it matter where he is from? If he was deemed a threat he would be sent back, he wasn't, if there was a convincing argument that he was still a danger to society then he would have been sent back. Firstly I do not care where he is from. He is a Paedophile who RAPED a 12 year old girl. 3 Years? Is that even a punishment for something as disgusting as that? How much does the human rights law take into consideration the nature of his crime? I think you will find that it is about him not his victim. If you don't believe in reform, and rehabilitation, and if you believe that a peadophile can never change his spots, then that is fine, that is your perogative, I believe that most human beings are capable of rehabilitation, and if that is the case with this man then I would not agree with him being sent to his death. As I have said, this decision was made by someone with the skill and expertise to remove emotion from his decision, and look at the facts, that is their job as judges and they are much better placed to do it than you or me. But what is 3 years? Is that a punishment and then a chance to reform? What sentance to serve is that for a crime of that magnitude? Do you think that it is rightfor a Paedo rapist to serve just 3 years? Even if he was given an original 8 surely a crime like this should carry a full sentance servitude?
Captain... Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Firstly I do not care where he is from. He is a Paedophile who RAPED a 12 year old girl. 3 Years? Is that even a punishment for something as disgusting as that? How much does the human rights law take into consideration the nature of his crime? I think you will find that it is about him not his victim. But what is 3 years? Is that a punishment and then a chance to reform? What sentance to serve is that for a crime of that magnitude? Do you think that it is rightfor a Paedo rapist to serve just 3 years? Even if he was given an original 8 surely a crime like this should carry a full sentance servitude? Very different argument and irrelevant to the original point about his deportation, I agree it seems very lenient, but then I don't know the facts of that case nor the judges justification for his sentencing, I can only speculate that it was not as serious as some cases of child rape (which can include touching and molestation and not just violent forced penetrative sex, which is what we immediately think of when some one says rape). The article which is clearly geared towards shock and outrage, is very scant on details of the original case, which is surprising when a detailed account of the incident would get the moral outrage flowing, unless the details aren't as juicy as the headline. Like I said, I don't know why it was only a 3 year sentence, and the implication in the article is that he was only sentenced to 3 years, and served the full term, but that seems unlikely, but the fact is he was tried, convicted and punished, including being on the sex offenders register, and if he has been rehabilitated, he should have his civil rights returned to him. Is there such a thing as a cured paedophile? Dunno, but are human beings capable of change and rehabilitation? Yes.
Guest MattP Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Dunno, but are human beings capable of change and rehabilitation? Yes. Can you change your sexual preference though? Surely if someone is aroused and turned on by kids that's it, I don't think you can rehabiliate that.
Captain... Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Can you change your sexual preference though? Surely if someone is aroused and turned on by kids that's it, I don't think you can rehabiliate that. Honestly, I don't know but what I find sexually attractive has changed as I got older. Peados may not be solely attracted to kids, or it maybe that it is the power and control over someone that turns them on and not necessarily the sexual gratification. This has been argued often about rape that it is not about the woman being attractive, it is about the control and power exerted over her. For example the woman sitting opposite me is very attractive but I can control myself put a newspaper over my lap and crack one off, no harm done, so I don't think it is necessarily about sexual preference.
stix Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Is there such a thing as a cured paedophile? I'm not sure if this is what you mean but.... ...it should be standard procedure.
sphericalfox Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Honestly, I don't know but what I find sexually attractive has changed as I got older. It may not be a case of being solely attracted to kids, or it maybe that it is the power and control over someone that turns them on and not necessarily the sexual gratification. This has been argued often about rape that it is not about the woman being attractive, it is about the control and power exerted over her. For example the woman sitting opposite me is very attractive but I can control myself put a newspaper over my lap and crack one off, no harm done, so I don't think it is about sexual preference. You first sentence was impactful. Your second sentence was worrying. It took your third sentence to work out that you were returning back to topic!
Guest MattP Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 For example the woman sitting opposite me is very attractive but I can control myself put a newspaper over my lap and crack one off, no harm done, so I don't think it is necessarily about sexual preference. But it's easier for the rest of us, we can still get off by shagging another woman or worst comes to the worst whack up a porn site to get rid of some sexual tension, I don't think you can compare it to a kiddy fiddler.
Captain... Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 You first sentence was impactful. Your second sentence was worrying. It took your third sentence to work out that you were returning back to topic! Edited for clarity.
Captain... Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 But it's easier for the rest of us, we can still get off by shagging another woman or worst comes to the worst whack up a porn site to get rid of some sexual tension, I don't think you can compare it to a kiddy fiddler. Like I said there may be other ways for them to get off, or with help and therapy there may be other ways to curb their urges, I don't know. It has been linked to abuse as a child and maybe helping people deal with their abuse can get them through it.
Jon the Hat Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 The crime he committed has no bearing on his deportation as far as I can see. You either served your time or you didn't. If you are allowed to stay in the UK because the powers that be decide sending you home will expose you to torture or death then you get to stay regardless. This has **** all to do with the victims, deportation is not a punishment for a crime already punished, it is and should be a separate decision based on a different set of facts. If the basis on which you are in the UK is a limited term visa, then you can and should be deported, because frankly we dont need your type. If however the alternative is torture and death, then you stay, because this country does not and should not condone those evils. Sometimes the outcome is unsavoury, sometimes it will disgust us, but the principle is sound, and the principle is a fundamental of our and any civilised society.
rico Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 I'm not sure if this is what you mean but.... ...it should be standard procedure. i was thinking more along the lines of this......
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 People who commit crime, should forfeit their human rights. End of.
purpleronnie Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 People who commit crime, should forfeit their human rights. End of. Moron.
AdamN Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 People who commit crime, should forfeit their human rights. End of. Death to all criminals then. Right, show's over folks! Nothing left to see here.
Rincewind Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Don't get another speeding ticket unless you want to lose your human rights.
ADK Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 I thought i had some human rights but then i remembered that song i downloaded illegally when i was 15.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.