My viceral reaction is to just shoot em.

But having said that, If you DON'T just shoot em, and if they ARE NOT in prison, I'd rather have em housed with a minder (Yes, you ARE your pervert brother's keeper....)

But I'd still like to see em locked up or dead.

IMPORTANT NOTE: The above applies to convicted offenders, who, be definition, have FAILED to control their urges. Its the PRACTICING pedophiles that should be skinned alive. A pedophile who recognizes the evil of his/her desires and does NOT carry out anything is probably a person of good character cursed by a perverted mindset.

DIBBLDA

You are an idiot, and you know exactly why.

Its obvious you FIRMLY BELIEVE that if a 40 year old pervert with candy has his way with a 12 year old child, YOU think it is ok.

I have PROOF you believe that.

Your question to me makes your logic obvious.

I'm serious.

You KNEW "EXACTLY" what I was talking it. Yet, KNOWING THAT, you still made clear that the 40 year old raping 12 year old I was talking about was, IN YOUR MIND, no different than an 18 year old and 17 year old on a date.

BIBBLDA thinks it is OK for grown adults to rape small children. He thinks its the same as an 18 year old and 17 year old on a date. Doubt me? Read above.

In your defense, there are places with crudely written laws that draw a blind line at 18, but their number is shrinking, and MORE IMPORTANT, such flawed laws are NOT the topic, and YOU KNOW IT.

DIBBLDA thinks raping small children is good fun, read above to see him confess it.

DIBBLDA

You KNEW I was talking about grown adults raping children. You say otherwise, and you are a stinking lying sack of shit.

You then drew a moral equivalence line between me wanting to skin practicing pedophiles alive, and a couple of teenagers on a hot date.

Read your own words you pervert, or confess that you made a highly insulting and FLAWED comparison.

Until you do, I'll take you at your word.

DIBBLDA

If you had said:

"While I would debate your venom against actual child raping perverts, a related issue of concern is making sure the anti-pedophile laws don't ensnare teens on a hot date."

....then I would have AGREED with you, becuase I AGREE that some of the laws in question get VERY poorly applied to teens.

DIBBLDA

Yes, you've managed to piss me off.

Wanting to skin 40 year old child raping NAMBLA members is NOT the same as teens on a hot date, and implying that someone who wants to skin the perverts also wants to skin the teens is the statement of an idiot who needs to have their nose rubbed in their stupidity.

DONNERBOY

My position here is ENTIRELY based on ACTIVE CHOICES made by the person who has the violent and/or perverted sexual desires.

When a pervert makes the deliberate choice to carry out his/her perverted desires, that is when they choose to flush their own humanity down the sewer. I merely respect THEIR CHOICE.

It aint me playing God, its merely me respecting a CHOICE made by a pervert to BECOME a sub-human piece of shit, and treating them accordingly.

On the other hand, a person cursed with such desires who recognizes their evil (yes, EVIL, no other concept fits), and refuses to carry out those desires is showing evidence SUPERIOR humanity, good character and good ethics. Most ethical decisions people have to make are not this dire, but in the case of those who have desires to rape children, the ethical decision IS this dire.

As for what DIBBDLA was doing, you are partly correct, and partly incorrect. Bottom line: It is NOT reasonable NOR PROPER to expect people discussing an obvious subject to make an aside comment for every damn vaguely related exception under the sun. Further more, when people accuse, or even IMPLY, something nasty about a speaker who did not make 20+ asides to cover every damn exception that everyone ALREADY IS AWARE OF, the person making the unfounded insult should be brutally dragged through his own mud.

When I talk about skinning perverts who rape children, everyone, including DIBBLDA, knows I'm not talking about two teens on a hot date, even if one is 19 and the other 16. For him to even VAGUELY imply I can't tell the difference is an UNFOUNDED INSULT. If he must address the subject of morons poorly applying laws (such as the child porn laws being applied to two teens sending love notes with improper picture), there are PLENTY of less insulting ways to do it.

Its all about Free Will and individual responsibility.

DONNERBOY

I can see how you might think I'm all "Kill Kill Kill" on criminals.

Thats because most of the stuff that makes headlines (and gets discussed here...) is pretty heinous stuff.

My position is pretty simple: when such extreme heinous stuff happens because someone CHOOSE to make it happen, I respect their CHOICE to flush their own humanity down the toilet and become, by their own choice, sub-human shit. I advocate treating them accordingly.

Some crimes don't warrent rehabilitation, or comfortable life time confinement at tax payer expense.

If a 40 year old pervert rapes and kills a 10 year old, I want that pervert DEAD.

But if a typical wife beater gets put in front of a judge, while he is clearly low life shit, he is also clearly not in the same league of trash as the murdering child molester. For the wife beater, I like the idea of him being miserable, but what is NEEDED is "rehabilitation" even if the process of rehabilitation is not miserable, for the simple reason that he will not be locked up for life.

As much as I like the idea of the wife beater being made to suffer, his suffering is a DISTANT 2nd priority to making sure that when he is released, he does not do such crap again. (On a related note, I "DO" believe some misery inflicted on such a wife beater, if done with some intelligence, could do a world of good towards rehabilitation, but I'm willing to let the headshrinks try other methods too.....). I might not LIKE being nice to a wife beater, but if the shrinks can get results.....