News1 min ago
About time ?
After the abduction of that poor little girl in Portugal. Is it not time that we should adopt a complete zero tolerance on animals that prey on kids. I know it is not a foregone conclusion that it is indeed a nonce responsible, but i sadly feel it is but a matter of time until it is the case. I wish that we could bring back hanging for these b##tards. Kids should be safe all of the time. Parents should not have to worry about deviants . (Footnote) Please do not post comments regarding "why did the parents leave her there ?" as i am sure they will live with that for the rest of their lives.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Neilzulu1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Neilzulu1 "Can you please read your previous posts pippa68, you have said " fact "many times after you had said something. Please show us all where you get your FACTS from."
Can you tell me which posts you are referring to where pippa states that something is a fact.
You will note that each post has a time and date next to it to make it easy for you.
As an example:
You stated on Thurs 10/05 at 14:22 "and FACT, it is not proven that it a mental illness that causes people to do such terrible things"
You also make assertions such as:
"if we had a law for child abuse or rape meant death, that would prevent it. " which has no factual basis - as can easily be shown by the FACT that countries that do have the death sentance still have these crimes going on.
Can you tell me which posts you are referring to where pippa states that something is a fact.
You will note that each post has a time and date next to it to make it easy for you.
As an example:
You stated on Thurs 10/05 at 14:22 "and FACT, it is not proven that it a mental illness that causes people to do such terrible things"
You also make assertions such as:
"if we had a law for child abuse or rape meant death, that would prevent it. " which has no factual basis - as can easily be shown by the FACT that countries that do have the death sentance still have these crimes going on.
Please read my posts again.
I believe the only fact I delivered was regarding the term 'pervert'. That is a fact anyone can look up themselves in an encyclopedia.
I asked you if you had the facts in the first instance, regarding flashers turning into rapists. You still haven't delivered!
The rest is all my opinion ~ and you can say the same about yours, obviously.
I believe the only fact I delivered was regarding the term 'pervert'. That is a fact anyone can look up themselves in an encyclopedia.
I asked you if you had the facts in the first instance, regarding flashers turning into rapists. You still haven't delivered!
The rest is all my opinion ~ and you can say the same about yours, obviously.
What about the abuser who is a close relative - have you thought how the victim of the abuse might feel if her/his loved family member was harmed? God almighty, who gives a f#ck about him. He was not bothered how his victim felt. I bet you think he can be dealt with and then it would be ok for him to see that family again...
What about the abuser who is a close relative - have you thought how the victim of the abuse might feel if her/his loved family member was harmed? God almighty, who gives a f#ck about him
I think you had some difficulty understanding my question so I will put it a little more simply for you to understand.
Not all but the majority of abusers are relatives, this is based upon information from convictions, offenders accounts and the stories of victims. Victims frequently state words to the effect , I just wanted it to stop. So after your version of zero tolerance that you seem to need so much. What would you say to the victim THE CHILD WHO HAS BEEN ABUSED - sorry not only were you a victim but we have killed your dad/ mum/uncle/autn/older brother because that made me feel better and I wasn't interested in the slightest how this has impacted on you.
I think you had some difficulty understanding my question so I will put it a little more simply for you to understand.
Not all but the majority of abusers are relatives, this is based upon information from convictions, offenders accounts and the stories of victims. Victims frequently state words to the effect , I just wanted it to stop. So after your version of zero tolerance that you seem to need so much. What would you say to the victim THE CHILD WHO HAS BEEN ABUSED - sorry not only were you a victim but we have killed your dad/ mum/uncle/autn/older brother because that made me feel better and I wasn't interested in the slightest how this has impacted on you.
Sorry author I do not appear to be able to make my question simple enough for you to be able to answer. Try again
Victim = child who has been abused (with me?)
Victim may be related to abuser, other words nonce might be much loved mummy or daddy (still with me?)
Nonce now dead = you feel better and happy
Victim = child now may be very sad and unhappy cos loved mummy/daddy now gone
Can anyone else on this site/thread help if Neilzulu1 still not able to understand the complexity of my question and my inability to verse it in such a way that he comprehends?
Victim = child who has been abused (with me?)
Victim may be related to abuser, other words nonce might be much loved mummy or daddy (still with me?)
Nonce now dead = you feel better and happy
Victim = child now may be very sad and unhappy cos loved mummy/daddy now gone
Can anyone else on this site/thread help if Neilzulu1 still not able to understand the complexity of my question and my inability to verse it in such a way that he comprehends?
Neilzulu1
Any chance of an answer on this
When are these animals (sic) to be dealt with? Are you suggesting that the 12 year old who I worked with today who had sexually assaulted his sister is dealt with your view of zero tolerance? ie being hung until dead maybe? Or if not what is the alternative please?
Any chance of an answer on this
When are these animals (sic) to be dealt with? Are you suggesting that the 12 year old who I worked with today who had sexually assaulted his sister is dealt with your view of zero tolerance? ie being hung until dead maybe? Or if not what is the alternative please?
Is simple if they commit a sex crime under 16 they should be kept in a secure unit until they are old enough to go into a proper prison.then they should be locked up for LIFE.If they are an adult when they commit a crime,they should be locked away forever.Thats all i can say at present with the current system.As it is obvious that hanging will not come back.
Great. Now I understand your view on zero tolerance- does not mean killing someone- thanks for explaining that. However am still going to ask previous question just slightly differently in light of your last answer
Victim = child who has been abused
Victim may be related to abuser, other words nonce might be much loved mummy or daddy
Nonce now GONE AWAY FOREVER = you feel better and happy and this child protected from further sexual abuse by this abuser
Victim = child - now may be very sad and unhappy cos loved mummy/daddy now gone
Victim = child who has been abused
Victim may be related to abuser, other words nonce might be much loved mummy or daddy
Nonce now GONE AWAY FOREVER = you feel better and happy and this child protected from further sexual abuse by this abuser
Victim = child - now may be very sad and unhappy cos loved mummy/daddy now gone
I have not commented on AB for long time, but this topic is very upsetting for me so I will offer my 2 cents...
Whilst I agree that the emotion I have experienced, over the upsetting thought of what is currently happening with little Madeleine, brings me to the hasty thought of death to all sex offenders, I can also see the dangers of having such a final penalty. The opportunity for abuse of such a system and miscarriages of justice outweigh, in my mind, the benefits of having it as a deterrent to would-be paedophiles.
I am sure that there a many reason that cause paedos to commit these crimes such as those who are simply evil to perverted people with a mental disorder. However, the penalty for such crimes, I believe, in this country is far too lenient and does send a message to anyone contemplating committing one. My opinion is that a life sentence means "a culpable paedophile is imprisoned for the entire remainder of their life with no option for early release on good behaviour� (unless of course further evidence proves their innocence beyond reasonable doubt).
Finally, they should have their sexual organs removed. I am sure this will not stop some, who are just evil or want control, from re-offending, but will give me the "satisfaction" that a tangible, permanent punishment was inflicted upon them for their offence in addition to providing them with a life-time supply of free meals, free TV, free books and room service.
� my 2 cents.
Whilst I agree that the emotion I have experienced, over the upsetting thought of what is currently happening with little Madeleine, brings me to the hasty thought of death to all sex offenders, I can also see the dangers of having such a final penalty. The opportunity for abuse of such a system and miscarriages of justice outweigh, in my mind, the benefits of having it as a deterrent to would-be paedophiles.
I am sure that there a many reason that cause paedos to commit these crimes such as those who are simply evil to perverted people with a mental disorder. However, the penalty for such crimes, I believe, in this country is far too lenient and does send a message to anyone contemplating committing one. My opinion is that a life sentence means "a culpable paedophile is imprisoned for the entire remainder of their life with no option for early release on good behaviour� (unless of course further evidence proves their innocence beyond reasonable doubt).
Finally, they should have their sexual organs removed. I am sure this will not stop some, who are just evil or want control, from re-offending, but will give me the "satisfaction" that a tangible, permanent punishment was inflicted upon them for their offence in addition to providing them with a life-time supply of free meals, free TV, free books and room service.
� my 2 cents.
Also, amending to the original question about whether there should be zero tolerance on "animals *** monsters" that prey on kids, does anyone have any views on whether sentences should be harsher for convictions of female paedophiles?
I refer to the news today about a woman in the UK jailed for abducting children as young as 12, drugging them and them selling them as prostitutes in North London.
I refer to the news today about a woman in the UK jailed for abducting children as young as 12, drugging them and them selling them as prostitutes in North London.
Ruby, I make no apology. Anyone who defends the indefensible - those who prey on little children - is, in my opinion, severely lacking both in intellect and in humanity. I have also worked with cases of abuse and if your experiences are true, I fail to understand why you have shown great concern for the feelings of the abuser and yet little sympathy for the victim. However, as has already been observed, we are not all experts in psychology.
Vic, let's get back to the beginning. The question did not relate to a 19 year old having sex with a 15 year old, nor did it relate to the sex offenders register, and nor did it relate to the mentally ill. It related to an innocent 3 year old girl being abducted by a paedophile. Are you sure you're reading my posts because you're the one banging on about the mentally ill. Furthermore, to include mothers suffering from post-natal depression in that category is not only insulting, it's positively stupid. I have not called for the 19 year old who had sex with a 15 year old to be executed - you introduced that subject, but you're absolutely right in that I am calling for the likes of the atrocious monster who has taken little Maddie to be executed.
What sort of people are you to defend child abuse at any level? Can you imagine what a small child suffers at the hands of such people? Your mentality is simply unbelievable. I don't know if you have children, but somehow I doubt it. If you do, I sincerely hope this never happens to them because if it did you may well think very differently. There's no point in arguing this any more. You know the old saying - "Where there's no sense there's no feeling".
Vic, let's get back to the beginning. The question did not relate to a 19 year old having sex with a 15 year old, nor did it relate to the sex offenders register, and nor did it relate to the mentally ill. It related to an innocent 3 year old girl being abducted by a paedophile. Are you sure you're reading my posts because you're the one banging on about the mentally ill. Furthermore, to include mothers suffering from post-natal depression in that category is not only insulting, it's positively stupid. I have not called for the 19 year old who had sex with a 15 year old to be executed - you introduced that subject, but you're absolutely right in that I am calling for the likes of the atrocious monster who has taken little Maddie to be executed.
What sort of people are you to defend child abuse at any level? Can you imagine what a small child suffers at the hands of such people? Your mentality is simply unbelievable. I don't know if you have children, but somehow I doubt it. If you do, I sincerely hope this never happens to them because if it did you may well think very differently. There's no point in arguing this any more. You know the old saying - "Where there's no sense there's no feeling".
Yes I have children ~ four of them.
Postnatal depression is a mental illness.
We still don't know if Maddie IS with a paedophile. As far as I am aware that is only a guess?
I haven't for one second defended child abuse. What I will defend is the right for every person to receive the medical help & counselling they need IF they are mentally ill. Mental health units are severely lacking...as I mentioned earlier my father was here this afternoon telling me stories of people needing psychiatric help only to be turned away due to lack of space and staff. Two of those people thought they would rather set fire to themselves in the hospital garden than be turned out on to the streets again.
One of those people was a sex offender, so that should make you happy ;o)
You are right about one thing though ~ there is no point in debating this any longer.
Postnatal depression is a mental illness.
We still don't know if Maddie IS with a paedophile. As far as I am aware that is only a guess?
I haven't for one second defended child abuse. What I will defend is the right for every person to receive the medical help & counselling they need IF they are mentally ill. Mental health units are severely lacking...as I mentioned earlier my father was here this afternoon telling me stories of people needing psychiatric help only to be turned away due to lack of space and staff. Two of those people thought they would rather set fire to themselves in the hospital garden than be turned out on to the streets again.
One of those people was a sex offender, so that should make you happy ;o)
You are right about one thing though ~ there is no point in debating this any longer.
-- answer removed --
This is my final word also - it seems that some contributors do not wish to be troubled by reason, facts or the benefit of the experience of someone who has worked in the field for over 20 years. People who abuse children are not some sort of alien creatures with 3 heads - they are among all of us, they are far more likely to be a relative or friend than a stranger. As Ruby has pointed out, taking an abuser away and hanging them / imprisoning them for life would not necessarily be in the best interests of the child - every case needs to be considered on its own merits. Remember also that the abuser may well have been abused themselves, so surely they deserve a chance at getting help, being rehabilitated, and given a chance at rebuilding their lives. There are certainly cases where an offender is never safe to be released back into the community, in these cases I wholeheartedly agree that they should be detained for life. What we are saying is that every case of abuse is different, never acceptable or condonable, but different, and will need a different approach to ensure the best outcome for the victim and the community.
Naomi, Naomi, Naomi. Bless you.
But no-one on this board is defending paedophiles or paedophilia. And you know that, because you can read.
Your cries of 'Anyone who defends the indefensible - those who prey on little children - is, in my opinion, severely lacking both in intellect and in humanity' are cheap point-scoring.
Just because we're not frothing at the mouth demanding violent death for child abusers doesn't mean we condone what they do. In fact, our priority is finding a solution that will stop any children getting harmed again.
Is that your priority though? Or does that come after second retribution?
But no-one on this board is defending paedophiles or paedophilia. And you know that, because you can read.
Your cries of 'Anyone who defends the indefensible - those who prey on little children - is, in my opinion, severely lacking both in intellect and in humanity' are cheap point-scoring.
Just because we're not frothing at the mouth demanding violent death for child abusers doesn't mean we condone what they do. In fact, our priority is finding a solution that will stop any children getting harmed again.
Is that your priority though? Or does that come after second retribution?
Latest Posts
Starmer Said Diane Abbot Can Run...
News8 mins ago
News10 mins ago
Crosswords10 mins ago
