W0nderland [Archive]

HarryW

Feb 14th, 2001, 02:31 PM

Aha, after much searching I found the story near the bottom of the pile of UK news at http://news.bbc.co.uk

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1169000/1169457.stm

Well I think perhaps 10 years is a little high considering what they were doing was indirectly causing exploitation of children, but the 2 or so years most of them got seems quite low. They're going to be suffering their whole lives now though, the public will see to that.

I know it's terribly trendy to say 'death penalty!' and all that, but I don't really see this as on the same scale as murder. Perhaps, though, chopping their balls off would do some good. I wouldn't recommend it otherwise.

parksie

Feb 14th, 2001, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by HarryW
I know it's terribly trendy to say 'death penalty!' and all that, but I don't really see this as on the same scale as murder. Perhaps, though, chopping their balls off would do some good. I wouldn't recommend it otherwise.
Notice how I didn't mention the death penalty? :rolleyes:

Although I think it's sick, I'm not sure that it was really that damaging to the really small ones, since they probably wouldn't remember anyway.

zmerlinz

Feb 14th, 2001, 02:38 PM

i know that this has nothing to do with our thread, but how do you make your text into that pretty little colours

cheers

BTW i voted for giving them the maximum sentance

HarryW

Feb 14th, 2001, 02:48 PM

I know Mike, you didn't (and I didn't mean to imply you did), it's just that I see/hear that opinion a lot, and it seems like jumping on the bandwagon to me. Would be nice if there weren't any paedophiles around I agree, but then you can't call yourself civilised if your solution to everything you don't like is 'kill it'.

I don't mean to point a finger at you, it's just things I've heard people say.

Merlin - use [ color="your colour name or #hexcode here>"] [ /color]

zmerlinz

Feb 14th, 2001, 03:04 PM

cheers HARRY

Pix

Feb 18th, 2001, 08:53 AM

Well I think that the death penalty should have been included in the poll. Its sick that that these kind of people - if you can call them that - exist in today's world !

Feb 19th, 2001, 04:08 AM

Regardless of how damaging people consider it actually was, the required "payment" for entry into the club was more picture than anyone in this forum could imaging (about 10,000 I think). To collect this volume of pictures, a number of the members actually made their own. Police who had to browse through these to find the victims claim the most distressing were'nt the graphic ones, but the ones that showed the expressions on their faces.

The unfortunate part is that this isnt the only ring in existence. The heartless b*stards will always be waiting in the rings. Perhaps paedophilia (the mental issue, not acting on it) is a natural and unfortunate occurence, and sufferers should be helped, but these people should not believe its ok to harm people because of it.

I'm sorry that I'm ranting, but these sort of subjects really upset me. I also apologise if anything I've said here can be misconstrued and upset people.

Rant over </rant>

PS - even the blue smilie is too happy for this topic...

Mark Sreeves

Feb 19th, 2001, 05:48 AM

...and in the same week as those sentences were handed out, a bagage handler got 15 months for stealing Victoria Beckam's luggage (returned it later as well I believe)

I defys belief!!

Paul Warren

Feb 19th, 2001, 06:27 AM

You know Mark, that's just what I was thinking whilst reading the thread. Some of these guys actually performed in front of webcams for their buddies all over the world.

How does that compare with nicking some clothes ? It doesn't. 10 years isn't enough for these people they should get life - death's too clean and easy.

Michael

Feb 19th, 2001, 10:46 AM

I vote for none of the above.

I think ten minutes alone with the parents of some of these kiddies should be enough for natural justice to prevail...

zmerlinz

Feb 19th, 2001, 11:06 AM

Why do you say that ???

Feb 19th, 2001, 11:08 AM

because they'll beat the living **** out of them, along with cutting off certain parts of their bodies...

zmerlinz

Feb 19th, 2001, 11:14 AM

And that bad because ????

HarryW

Feb 19th, 2001, 11:21 AM

... it's not bad, that's the point.

Feb 19th, 2001, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by zmerlinz
And that bad because ????

well 10 minutes of torture from how many people would that be?

zmerlinz

Feb 19th, 2001, 11:25 AM

sorry not fully awake and not too well either, didn't fully understand what was being said, i am also playing with my new web cam

logitech quick cam express

Ellie

Feb 19th, 2001, 04:50 PM

"Although I think it's sick, I'm not sure that it was really that damaging to the really small ones, since they probably wouldn't remember anyway."

Sorry Parksie but that is rubbish. Although a friend of mine was only "mildly" abused in comparison, and at a young age she still had horrific flashbacks when she got older.

Your mind can bury stuff to protect you, but the memories are still in there somewhere.

I feel very strongly that there should be much longer sentences for these types of crime. Basically the victim has been given a different type of life sentence, why should the criminal deserve any less?

HarryW

Feb 19th, 2001, 05:15 PM

It sounds like you see punishment as a method for retribution rather than a deterrant or maybe chance for correction. Is retribution important?

It's an honest question.

Ellie

Feb 20th, 2001, 11:07 AM

Should people who have chosen to live outside the rules of society be allowed to escape unpunished? Almost everyone knows the difference between right and wrong, if they choose to ignore this and prey on innocent children thus disregarding the victims right to an untarnished existence, then how can they possibly "deserve" justice from the society whose rules they have deliberately ignored?

Rather deep for a Tuesday afternoon.

HarryW

Feb 20th, 2001, 02:17 PM

Surely by that reasoning, nobody who breaks the rules deserves justice... besides, you didn't answer the question. Is retribution the important part of punishment for crimes?

Nobody is stupid enough to suggest they should escape unpunished.

barrk

Feb 20th, 2001, 02:18 PM

I think deterrent is the most important part of punishment. If you know there are consequences you may think twice before going outside the societal rules.

HarryW

Feb 20th, 2001, 02:49 PM

I'm strongly inclined to agree. That's productive.

parksie

Feb 20th, 2001, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by Ellie
Sorry Parksie but that is rubbish. Although a friend of mine was only "mildly" abused in comparison, and at a young age she still had horrific flashbacks when she got older.

Your mind can bury stuff to protect you, but the memories are still in there somewhere.

I feel very strongly that there should be much longer sentences for these types of crime. Basically the victim has been given a different type of life sentence, why should the criminal deserve any less?
Okay, fair enough. I think you're right on that one. What I actually meant was not the toddlers and stuff, but the actually REALLY young ones...but I expect that's the same.

Paul Warren

Feb 21st, 2001, 02:42 AM

HarryW - Deterrents are what we need to discourage people from doing stuff like this BUT what about those people who ignore the threat of punishment and go ahead and rape young children anyway ? Society has a right to retribution in these instances because that in itself is a deterrent. Unfortunately we can't dole this out ourselves so we rely on the justice system to deal with it. In this case I feel let down as do most people I think. The death sentence isn't the answer but life away from temptation ( i.e. in prison ) and some form of rehab. treatment is.

For example - the guy they interviewed on TV didn't think the children were being harmed and that they might actually enjoy it. He couldn't see that a 6 year old doesn't have the life experiences to make those kind of decisions and that in 10 years those young adults will be considering suicide. People like him will not be ready to return to society in 18 months. He needs a lot longer to understand why he's being punished.

Phew, for 8:30 in the morning that was a bit deep. Hope this makes you think about why people should be locked up for much longer in cases such as this and why people feel let down by the sentances that have been handed out in this case.

Ellie

Feb 21st, 2001, 04:04 AM

Paul, you said exactly what I was trying to say in my last post, I totally agree.

Feb 21st, 2001, 04:19 AM

I think the concept is that these people do not know the difference between right and wrong. its fine for us well balanced (or nearly) members of society to say whats right and wrong, but in previous cases of sex offence and suchlike, the attacker claims the victim was consensual. Thats why we have age laws and so forth. However, if somebody breaks societies rules but claims not to understand those rules, have they still done wrong?

Of course they have, but how would you go about punishing them? Deterring them won't work, because they don't see how they have wronged...Rehabilitating them won't work because they consider themselves acceptably habilitated...The only thing society can comprehend is a lack of people like this, either by the death penalty, or by locking them up forever. I'm not arguing for or against either of these. I just realise that its all so sad... The true victims of this were the children, and no amount of words will change that, but society still suffers because these people exist, and because attitudes towards these people allow them to exist.

I don't know what the solution is, but while cases like this still exist, we still need to look for one.

Again, I apologise if my views could be misconstrued as offensive towards anyone. I just realise I'm not responsible for a decision like the sentence of these people. I'm not cut out for it...

Feb 21st, 2001, 04:20 AM

sorry, I'm ranting again. Perhaps I shouldn't post here...

Ellie

Feb 21st, 2001, 06:14 AM

Your'e not ranting Behemoth, I think that you are right when you say that we cannot understand how people can be so cruel. We have laws to protect victims of crime but somebody has to enforce those laws and people are fallible. I guess that it is why it hard to get the right balance sometimes.

Feb 21st, 2001, 06:25 AM

Thanks for your support. I always feel really awkward discussing subjects like this, but we can't avoid the issue...

Jamagei

Feb 21st, 2001, 06:29 AM

But surely the whole point of rehabilitating, is the the fact that it is RE-habilitating, changes the way that they are. Basically, there are four type of sentence applied to all crimes,

Retribution - actaul punishment, in the form of a fine or just a straight prison sentence or community service
Rehabiltaion - teach them they are wrong, and change the way they act in the real world
Deterrent - for them and everyone else, usually involving big fines or long sentences
then i can't remember the name for the last but basically it is to protect society, they are kept away from "normal" people.

I personally think that they need rehabiliting, and also to be kept away.

But the Law is an Ass and f**k ups will always happen.

I think also that all peadophiles should be castrated at birth

Paul Warren

Feb 21st, 2001, 06:33 AM

Behemoth, I agree with your argument and it's good that these things can be discussed in a place like this. It shows that we actually care about what goes on in the world.

Feb 21st, 2001, 06:48 AM

firstly, retribution is not straightfoward punishment, the concept of retribution is that of revenge - an eye for an eye. The idea is to avenge the victim or their relatives.

secondly, to castrate anybody from birth is still cruelty to children. People can grow up to be anything. A far more humane idea would be "paedophiles should be educated from birth"

rehabilitation is a dangerous area concerning dangerous people like these. How could you change a person to have "normal" pastimes instead of such behaviour? how would you know when they were successfully rehabilitated?

Jamagei

Feb 21st, 2001, 07:29 AM

Firstly, the castrating thing, it was a joke, because how would you know at birth whether or not someone was a paedophile. *slaps forehead*

Also the retribution defintion was pretty much what the law sees at retribution, not just the dictionary definition. I know what it means. Plus pysciatrists rehabilitate people all the time, they would rehab these people and they can decide whether or not they are sorted, they should know how to do it, it is their job after all. They change the way people think and act. It is as straight forward as that.

The law i think, does not believe in revenge, it believes in justice. If i had my way i would leaves these people to the mobs of parents. But that would not be fair justice. Every man (no matter what he has done) has the right to a fair trial, and punishment. It is a concept that society is based on.

Feb 21st, 2001, 08:41 AM

I agree that the idea of leaving them to the mobs of the parents is an appealing course of action, yet irresponsible. I believe that the "justice" system is inherently flawed. Whatever people say, the sentences handed out were too lenient. Also, "rehabilitation" is often unsuccesful, because those who are responsile do not know when it has worked or not. After all, to these people, the rehabilitation of criminals is simply a job. 9 to 5, Monday to Friday (ok, I may have the working hours wrong but - the principal is the same). These people will have an unbiased view of the attackers, but will not necessarily feel the revulsion society will have placed on these high profile offenders.

Remember, these people (and their unfortunate victims) were famous/infamous because of the number of images and members involved. Cases of abuse are far more frequent than the media would have us believe.

Jamagei

Feb 21st, 2001, 08:53 AM

where did you get the fact that rehab is often unsuccessful? how many people do you think go through rehab? ok sure a few escape the net, but to the people who do it as a job, i am sure do not see it merely as 9 til 5, i am sure some do, but on the whole these people want to help others, so don't slag them off.

Do you know how long it takes to become a good pysciatrist, years and years of studying the human behavior and mind patterns. They usually can tell if they are still messed up or not. It is good that they wouldn't feel the revulsion. They are there to help people not alienate them even more. I am by no means saying that what happened was right, far from it. I do believe that the sentences were too short. And yes the law is flawed, there is no such thing as the perfect justice system. But it is the best we have, you can't change it without rewriting the whole lot.

And i don't think the media are trying to cover anything up, not in this case, i am sure there are more cases they just haven't come to light yet. no other reason.

Justice will happen though, these people are going to be hounded for the rest of their lives now. In fact they don't really have lives anymore. just fear.

Feb 21st, 2001, 09:13 AM

Sorry, I think my last post was badly worded. It's just a very sorry story...Please, don't believe I'm here to slag people off. It's really not my way...

Jamagei

Feb 21st, 2001, 10:04 AM

Sorry, i was going on a bit as well. But yes you are right it is a sad story, it should never happen in a civilised society.

Feb 21st, 2001, 10:31 AM

If you're referring to ours, make that "civilised"...

Jamagei

Feb 21st, 2001, 10:34 AM

good point, well made.

parksie

Feb 21st, 2001, 12:32 PM

This thread's turned into some pretty heavy stuff :eek:

As far as the arguments given go, I'd go for the ones on "education" rather than punishment. Surely it must be society that's failing if it's not impressed on people that you don't do things like this?

HarryW

Feb 21st, 2001, 07:21 PM

I would just like to say that in my initial posts on the subject I had no idea how much they had done, it wasn't explained in the news report I read.

Paul - I don't quite understand the point you're making here:
HarryW - Deterrents are what we need to discourage people from doing stuff like this BUT what about those people who ignore the threat of punishment and go ahead and rape young children anyway ? Society has a right to retribution in these instances because that in itself is a deterrent.
If deterrants don't work on these people, how is retribution a deterrant?

Paul Warren

Feb 22nd, 2001, 02:12 AM

HarryW - The point I was making was that the kind of person who commits a crime such as this isn't deterred by the possibility of 18 months ( probably 12 with parole ) in jail. The judge might as well have said "Look, you've been naughty so we're going to have to do something but it's not that serious really." whereas crimes like this should have the possibility of a life sentence/death penalty ( your preference here ). This would send out the message that what they are doing is abhorrent and that society will not stand for people who do these things. Now that's a deterrent. So yes, I agree that these people need both educating and deterring but lets not make a half ass job of it.

I hope that clears up where I'm coming from.

HarryW

Feb 22nd, 2001, 08:22 AM

Ahhhh I seeeeee. Well I'm inclined to agree.

Jamagei

Feb 23rd, 2001, 05:55 AM

I think no matter how hard society tries there will always be deviants. Unless it all goes the way that is portrayed in 2000ad (excellent comic :) ) where all babies are genetically screened to see if they are going to have deviant genes.

Then that begs the question is it nurture or nature. Were these people (WOnderland) bought up to believe that this was an acceptable way to behave, or something that was done to them early in there lives that made then become paedophile or is it something that is innherrent and cannot be avoided. Or is it a bit of both.