|
On November 06 2011 12:45 Stress wrote:
He deserves to go to prison, child porn is one of the most fucked up things you can do, imo. But if this happens to be his first offense regarding kiddie porn then I don't think he should get life. On the other hand, if he was a repeat offender I would have no sympathy for him for getting a sentence like life in prison.
Since when has something being "fucked up" been justification for a life sentence? Even for repeat offenses, you're going to have to come up with something better than that. There are lots of things in society that are perceived by most as "fucked up" and are still legal.
|
I think it's wrong that he got such a bad sentence. I think the justice system is also unbalanced in the way it gave this sentence. I still can't find myself caring that much because he's still a criminal receiving a punishment. I'm always in favor of higher rather than lesser punishments. I think the real disappointing part is that child molesters and murderers get such low punishments, not that this guy got such a harsh one.
that being said, considering this guy hasn't directly hurt someone, isn't it more appropriate to give him therapy like a lot of other countries do? The whole punishment thing works as intimidation and a representation of consequence when criminals have the choice of committing a crime, but this guy clearly has a mental problem/fetish, so it doesn't seem like the crime of possession of child porn is being helped on the general level.
|
Whoever that judge is should be put in Jail.
Horrific abuse of power.
|
On November 06 2011 12:32 Capped wrote:
Sick fucking bastard. Deserves it.
Put it this way, its your child who he has pictures of. Now how does it sound?
C
It sounds like he is a man that needs to be helped to deal with his sexual deviancies since they including things that are not ok. He should be helped to be able to control his urges and if he fails that be deprived of the means to get a hold of said pictures. What he shouldn't be is thrown in a cell and then throw away the key. CP is horrendous and people making CP is some of the worst people on the planet, but have you ever stopped to consider that some of these guys suffer really badly from this? Nobody starts their life going "When I grow up i wanna be a pedo!"
|
This seams a little harsh to me...I am glad that there is one less creep who may have some day acted on his "urges" but I really dont think that he should lose the rest of his life over this. He should be in prison for a looooong ass time but not this long
|
On November 06 2011 12:48 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I really think what's messed up here is that someone who actually commits murder or rape of a child gets LESS punishment than someone who just watches it, which is what the article makes it sound like. At the very least the punishments should be equal, if not more severe for the person actually committing murder/rape.
I've seen so many people say DERP PEDO DISGUSTING MAN, HE DESERVE SENTENCE, which is pretty ignorant
and I've also seen many people say what GGTeMpLaR said, and the former don't even read that. Add above Q.F.T. to OP maybe?
|
On November 06 2011 12:53 MuATaran wrote:
This seams a little harsh to me...I am glad that there is one less creep who may have some day acted on his "urges" but I really dont think that he should lose the rest of his life over this. He should be in prison for a looooong ass time but not this long
A little harsh?
The consequences of his actions are small and in the form of an expectation. They're not large actualized consequences, like raping or killing.
Yet he's in jail for life and drunk drivers that recklessly kill people get like 3 years. completely stupid
|
So are you currently saying his sentence is too harsh.
Or that the sentences for other things are too lenient?
|
Life, at 26, for that? It's wrong, but not that wrong.
I bet if he had barged into a locker room full of kindergartners and molested them all, he'd have gotten off much much easier.
|
there's more and more of jailing people for thoughts and not for acts
did any of his acts actively contribute to child molestation? this is the real question, if he didn't give people money or spurred them into making pictures then you are jailing someone for something that they think and that is stupid
also, he was given 5 years for each of the 454 pictures found on his computer. what if he had been a bit more tech/law savvy and condensed them all into one .bmp? then he'd only get 5 years?
it's become a sport to see who can hate pedophiles more. people who are actively hurting children, lock them up and throw away the key. but don't jail people for thoughts, and find a better way to judge the severity of crimes instead of counting pictures, jesus christ.
|
On November 06 2011 12:58 Happylime wrote:
So are you currently saying his sentence is too harsh.
Or that the sentences for other things are too lenient?
I think that's causing a lot of confusion in this thread. I'd probably say a little of both though.
|
On November 06 2011 12:58 Happylime wrote:
So are you currently saying his sentence is too harsh.
Or that the sentences for other things are too lenient? That's a good point; I'm glad someone brought it up.
Personally, I think his sentence is definitely too harsh, but a number of people have said "It's absurd that he gets X while other people get Y", and as you point out, that leaves an important question open.
edit: and once again, when I quote someone to reply to him, somebody else gets there first!
|
Let me put it this way:
No one's going to stand up for pedophiles.
Whenever you have a situation in which no one will stand up for you, in which no one will defend your rights, in which no one will even dare to say a good word for you because of the social stigma attached to pedophiles...
Yeah, you have a situation ripe for legal abuse.
In the US, this is how it is.
|
It may not even matter what the sentence is, to be honest.
Unless the prison he is put into a special section of the prison set aside for those who have committed statutory rape, child molesters, or cops, it is likely that he will be killed in prison.
In that case, it wouldn't matter if he had a lighter sentence.
|
Seems like a too harsh of punishment to me.
I think its a pretty serious charge, I mean, by viewing child porn he basically ensures that people keep making it, but even so it seems like a really harsh sentence. It would be kind of like giving someone life in prison for smoking pot on the grounds that their habit lets the violent cartels keep running.
|
I can't imagine a large number of porn addicts aren't headed this direction eventually; the out of control types are always looking for some new rise. As wrong as child porn is, it's unbelievable to me that in a way some people are acknowledging that regular porn is "acceptable," at least in the sense that they differentiate it so much. What's one of the biggest highlights of a porn site? "Barely 18!" or "Teens!" (with the 18+ assumption). My concern is that eventually the low age limit will just be pushed lower and lower. Wasn't there a thread awhile back about 16 year old girls making their own softcore porn images on their cell phones?
And specifically about the issue, yeah the guy's punishment is too harsh, will probably be reduced, and hopefully he gets help and more so the children being abused. It looks to me like the justice system really wanted to punish someone badly and went after the butt end of the problem instead of the source--likely the only thing they could go after. My question is, who do they think they impressed? Are these elected judges? Is the guy more easily a scapegoat because of his ethnicity? They're just making themselves look like self serving bigots, unless of course I'm just wrong.
|
Perhaps a poll is in order?
Polling solves everything mathematically!
|
On November 06 2011 12:58 Happylime wrote:
So are you currently saying his sentence is too harsh.
Or that the sentences for other things are too lenient?
Not sure how much harsher you can go after "sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole".
|
You'll excuse me if I don't exactly get up in arms for this. Ignoring the fact he can and most likely will appeal the ruling I just don't see a problem here.
He's a grown man wanting to get off on images depicting the sexual exploitation of children. Rather he paid for them or not doesn't make it any less harmful to the children in the content. So yeah, overly harsh? Maybe, but I am not going to be terribly upset by it. Let him rot.
If that makes me a tea partying nutcase give me my flag and fancy hat.
|
On November 06 2011 13:07 Parnage wrote:
You'll excuse me if I don't exactly get up in arms for this. Ignoring the fact he can and most likely will appeal the ruling I just don't see a problem here.
He's a grown man wanting to get off on images depicting the sexual exploitation of children. Rather he paid for them or not doesn't make it any less harmful to the children in the content. So yeah, overly harsh? Maybe, but I am not going to be terribly upset by it. Let him rot.
If that makes me a tea partying nutcase give me my flag and fancy hat.
Can you explain why exactly you have such an irrational hatred for him that you're okay with just "letting him rot"? Some guy who just finds a way to satisfy his sexual urges without having to go out and molest children? I really don't get it.
In his position, imagine that you had natural, uncontrollable sexual urges toward children like you do now for adults. Would you abstain from all porn and sexual activity out of principle? I really doubt it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
