Originally Posted by stevenglish1

The weakness in your plan, that 'almost' word, we're gambling with our kids safety every time we let one of these people free, that's a fact not an opinion. These bracelets are still reactionary. If it wasn't for very timely police intervention, Paedo Pete would've claimed my 11 y/o brother as one of his victims, and he never spoke of how far it actually went, he was lucky enough to be a resilient little bugger who bounced right back. now that wouldn't have come close to happening if there had been measures in place would it?



That's the problem, until they've offended we don't know who the paedophiles are, and you can't go accusing people just cos they're a bit odd, or look at kids funny. We have however got the control over convicted offenders should we choose to take it. We could dissect afew brains to see if they have some hormonal imbalance in common or something (but I doubt that'd go down at all well), but failing that reactive is all we have at the moment.

Originally Posted by Sally Redux

You can't shoot people for having a hormonal imbalance.

Originally Posted by stevenglish1

The weakness in your plan, that 'almost' word, we're gambling with our kids safety every time we let one of these people free, that's a fact not an opinion. These bracelets are still reactionary. If it wasn't for very timely police intervention, Paedo Pete would've claimed my 11 y/o brother as one of his victims, and he never spoke of how far it actually went, he was lucky enough to be a resilient little bugger who bounced right back. now that wouldn't have come close to happening if there had been measures in place would it?



That's the problem, until they've offended we don't know who the paedophiles are, and you can't go accusing people just cos they're a bit odd, or look at kids funny. We have however got the control over convicted offenders should we choose to take it. We could dissect afew brains to see if they have some hormonal imbalance in common or something (but I doubt that'd go down at all well), but failing that reactive is all we have at the moment.

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

Firstly, I wasn't defending anyone who had child porn on their computer. It obviously creates a demand that fuels the availability of it. Very wrong and disgusting. Is it the same as actually abusing a child? No, it can't be.

I very strongly disagree with that, on so many levels you have no idea what you're talking about, these 'people' are equally culpable

Dismissing wearable technology (and by that I mean sometjingn that can be worn by a child) would mean you accept these things will happen and we need to address it after the fact. Why not empower parents with technology that decreases the amount of offences?

Originally Posted by stevenglish1

Ah right, bracelets or whatever worn by the kids, that's fine, that tells us where the kids are, but it denies them the civil liberties that you argue in favour of the paedos having, I'd say that's unbalanced. Anyhow, what would be the use of them unless they tell us if they're in the proximity of a paedophile? A paedophile that will only be tagged if he has a previous conviction. I would say it's you that should come up with a viable alternative, something that will guarantee zero repeat offenders.

Originally Posted by BEVS

Compulsory chemical castration.

A long article.

Originally Posted by BEVS

.

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

I never claimed to know what I'm talking about on this matter. Happy to say I'm under educated on it. But I don't think you know a lot either. But let's not fight about it. It's all about opinion at the end of the day.

I know enough to realise that we have to put a stop to repeat offending, we need them out of the equation. I would be thrilled if there were a prevention measure that went hand in hand.

The wearable technology in mind was to monitor location, perhaps upload images and maybe even audio. If it was common practice for kids to wear these things, the likelyhood of a child being abucted would descrease. I don't have a solution that eliminates child abuse but I think we could try and attack the problem at the prevention stage rather than accepting defeat.

Originally Posted by stevenglish1

I'm not admitting defeat, consider this, how many released offenders recruit like minded guys with no record to supply them with what they want? I don't know, but it would seem perfectly reasonable that these people would surround themselves with those not under suspicion, almost training the next batch for want of a better term. I do understand that some people don't feel the same animosity towards this scum, and my view isn't going to change that. The flip side of that coin is that less drastic view points will not be changing mine, and I refuse to accept any criticism for it, as do they


The second thought on my mind after 'Jesus Christ' is alway 'what if that were my child' it always will be, and it stirs up utter hatred inside me. If someone had got to my kids, I would gladly end his life, that's how I was brought up, and I flatly refuse to budge or apologise.

Originally Posted by mikelincs

Steve, you seem to have some deep seated issues about this, more than most people, which would seem to indicate that you have some personal experience with this in your family or close friends. If this is so your judgement will always be clouded and less rational than people with no personal experience. This may well be why your posts are coming over as very extreme and therefore endendering the reactions they are getting. I have thought about making this post for quite a while, but held off in case you decided that you would really leave the subject, however your posts are inflammatry to many people and making this thread into a Steve against the rest argument, and I fell it might be a good idea for you to back off and let the thread dies a natural death, of continue on topic. We all know your views now, and while we amy have some sympathy, the vast majority on here do not agree with your extreme ideas.

Originally Posted by BadgeIsBack

No point getting worked up about something that may not happen to you or your child but how likely is it? Statistically quite likely. I'd be more worried about boyfriends/girlfriends and peer pressure at school.

Punish/protect/ educate. Repeat.

Originally Posted by stevenglish1

The flip side of that coin is that less drastic view points will not be changing mine, and I refuse to accept any criticism for it, as do.

Originally Posted by stevenglish1

I'm not admitting defeat, consider this, how many released offenders recruit like minded guys with no record to supply them with what they want? I don't know, but it would seem perfectly reasonable that these people would surround themselves with those not under suspicion, almost training the next batch for want of a better term. I do understand that some people don't feel the same animosity towards this scum, and my view isn't going to change that. The flip side of that coin is that less drastic view points will not be changing mine, and I refuse to accept any criticism for it, as do they


The second thought on my mind after 'Jesus Christ' is alway 'what if that were my child' it always will be, and it stirs up utter hatred inside me. If someone had got to my kids, I would gladly end his life, that's how I was brought up, and I flatly refuse to budge or apologise.

Originally Posted by mikelincs

Steve, you seem to have some deep seated issues about this, more than most people, which would seem to indicate that you have some personal experience with this in your family or close friends. If this is so your judgement will always be clouded and less rational than people with no personal experience. This may well be why your posts are coming over as very extreme and therefore endendering the reactions they are getting. I have thought about making this post for quite a while, but held off in case you decided that you would really leave the subject, however your posts are inflammatry to many people and making this thread into a Steve against the rest argument, and I fell it might be a good idea for you to back off and let the thread dies a natural death, of continue on topic. We all know your views now, and while we amy have some sympathy, the vast majority on here do not agree with your extreme ideas.

Originally Posted by Beoz

In the case of Rolf, his crimes were committed decades ago, in a different time. As he didn't commit a crime against a minor in recent times, you could say he was rehabilitated. Of course he needs to pay for his crime, no doubt about it, but after he has done that do you think he will continue to be a danger to society? Unlikely based upon his age and his recent history. Not long term history. He'll probably die in prison anyway so we'll never get to find out.