|
At the bottom of this is punishing someone for something that's out of their control which is the definition of injustice and stupidity.
Also,
I totally support this sentence. If it was possible I'd sentence him to death. No need to have freaks running around with their mutant genes reproducing more human waste like themselves. Not to mention that just because he hasn't yet hurt a child directly (which might not be the case) is no indication that he won't ever. In fact I'd say that if he is collecting images of child abuse that he is likely at some point to abuse a child himself. Anyone who disagrees with me can really f*ck off I don't care. Obviously the judge agrees with me and that's all that matters. I hope he likes being abused in prison for the rest of his pathetic life.
This is an incredibly, incredibly stupid point of view. I have no idea about you're beliefs but from the way you say "If it was possible I'd sentence him to death. No need to have freaks running around with their mutant genes reproducing more human waste like themselves." Leads me to believe you're a lot more mentally handicapped than the guy being charged. Also, saying that collecting images of child porn means he is likely to molest a child is incredibly stupid. That's like putting a kid in prison for stealing his friends toy, just in case he turns out to be a bank robber when he grows up.
Anyone who disagrees with me can really f*ck off I don't care. Obviously the judge agrees with me and that's all that matters. I hope he likes being abused in prison for the rest of his pathetic life.
Grow up.
|
Everyone making the argument that he only got sentenced because we think child porn is "gross" is stupid.
Child porn is the lowest of the low. It's has nothing to do with "ickyness" or "fetishes" or any of that. The people on here equating homosexuality with pedophilia are the stupidest people. One involves two consenting adults, the other involes raping children.
If you launder money that you know was stolen, you're in trouble.
It's the same concept, only with the worst, vilest, most souless crime in the world: violating a child in a way that he/she will probably never recover from. They should punish people who possess child porn and punish them harshly.
However, I think this is too harsh. This is over the line.
|
On November 06 2011 18:01 mud123 wrote:
I totally support this sentence. If it was possible I'd sentence him to death. No need to have freaks running around with their mutant genes reproducing more human waste like themselves. Not to mention that just because he hasn't yet hurt a child directly (which might not be the case) is no indication that he won't ever. In fact I'd say that if he is collecting images of child abuse that he is likely at some point to abuse a child himself. Anyone who disagrees with me can really f*ck off I don't care. Obviously the judge agrees with me and that's all that matters. I hope he likes being abused in prison for the rest of his pathetic life.
Have you ever watched porn? How soon after watching porn did you start raping women?
|
Turkey3059 Posts
This is overkill. Sentence is not proportional to the offence at all.
|
ppl are irrational over crime and punishment and always have been. obv the US justice system should strongly deter people from hurting (or enabling the suffering of) ppl who cannot defend themselves. we still have problems with human trafficking in the western world. this is really just beyond stupid, tho. people who DO worse, who act more maliciously than this, get better treatment and protection by the law. just another example of the US court laying equal or more hurt on nonviolent offenders as it does for violent offenders, who are imo far more dangerous and destructive.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 06 2011 10:29 heyoka wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2011 10:14 Jonoman92 wrote:
Um... wtf? There is a kid in my school who killed someone driving drunk, and after 3 years in prison he is back in school and his life relatively uninterrupted. The justice system sucks so bad.
Child porn is wrong, but giving the guy life in prison just sounds absolutely absurd. Reading the article now. I don't know about this specific case but this kind of scaling for sex crimes is pretty common, at a certain level of offense you're no longer considered able to be rehabilitated so the rationale is that life in prison is the only choice. I guess people think that isn't true for violent crimes, I can't speak for how true any of that is though.
This is a good point. So the question becomes is this guy so deviant as to never be rehabilitated? The article doesn't shed any light on this, but I suspect that he would be able to be rehabilitated =/
|
On November 06 2011 18:01 mud123 wrote:
I totally support this sentence. If it was possible I'd sentence him to death. No need to have freaks running around with their mutant genes reproducing more human waste like themselves. Not to mention that just because he hasn't yet hurt a child directly (which might not be the case) is no indication that he won't ever. In fact I'd say that if he is collecting images of child abuse that he is likely at some point to abuse a child himself. Anyone who disagrees with me can really f*ck off I don't care. Obviously the judge agrees with me and that's all that matters. I hope he likes being abused in prison for the rest of his pathetic life.
Would you sentence to death a man who got drunk, started a fight, and beat him violently with a weapon?
Clearly the guy's an alcoholic scumbag of little positive value to society, I would agree. He's a potential drunk driver who could kill someone, or he might cripple or kill someone in another fight, or he might get drunk and beat his wife... after all, his crimes have been escalating since he first got that drunk in public charge.
1) Would you honestly sentence this man to life imprisonment or death?
2) If so, is that because you're in favor of far stricter punishment for crime all across the board? Or is it just a case of "this guy seems like a loser and has no positive future anyway, so fuck him"?
My guess is you'd be far more lenient on the drunk guy, and tell me "I was only referring to the sicko pedophile guy"... in which case you're admitting the "ewwww" factor (and not justice) is the reasoning for your decision.
The more I think of it, the "ewwww that's fucked up, get that guy away from me" factor is a larger part of this situation than I first thought. It's not so much about protecting the children... there are no special extra-harsh laws about physically harming a child. I don't think the punishment for kidnapping a child is much harsher than the punishment for kidnapping an adult, if at all. And if an adult punched a child in the face, he'd receive a significant punishment for it, but nothing drastically worse than if he attacked an adult.
|
Life sentence for possession of child porn for a guy with no previous record? That's 6 months in my book, one year tops. Most offenses where actual financial or physical damage is caused get much less than a life sentence, and by downloading free pictures the man didn't actually harm anyone.
|
On November 06 2011 15:18 Kamais_Ookin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2011 15:07 PH wrote:On November 06 2011 14:48 Kamais_Ookin wrote:I am deeply sad and embarrassed about the justice system of U.S. A more severe injustice has occurred and it's not the viewing of CP, it's the ridiculous life-time jail with no chance of parole. Absolutely sickening how more heinous crimes get less duration of punishment, Back in the day many, many people thought being gay is horrible but now people are more respectable towards it. I hope one day pedophiles will be viewed the same way. Pedophile is the same thing as being gay, you can't change it so why is only one of them being condemned? Of course, I'm not talking about the act of molesting the child but rather the viewing of a realistic portrayal of it. For example: On November 06 2011 14:05 Hiroruby wrote:
Yes, we can all agree that child exploitation is wrong. What I can't understand, is the unconditional condemnation of people aroused by it. Think for a moment with me. Think (not to hard mind you!) about whatever it is that gets you aroused. Did you ever in your life make a concious decision to be turned on by that? ( cumshots, anal, big breasts, whatever).
I think in most cases, the answer is no. You were attracted to it, and you always have been, to some extent. An obvious example here are gay people, they don't make a choice to become aroused by other men or women. They simply do. Now please, take that principle and apply it to child porn. These people shouldn't be chemically castrated, exiled, or even "treated", whatever that means, seeing as you can't get rid of an innate desire.
In my opinion there should just be an open market of lolicon hentai for those people. Call me crazy, but I think satisfying their demands in a way that harms absolutely no one, and hell, will even provide employment, can't be a bad thing. Artists are pretty ingenious. Make movies that are realistic, make shit that looks appealing. If it is good, then demand for the "real" product will be negated among people willing to control their desires. These are people you don't want to lock up, because they can keep their shit together.
No, this won't stop the other people from attacking real children. Nothing can, much like you can't stop people from murdering others once they get the idea. What it will do is sate the desires of otherwise contributing members of society, who just have an obtuse fetish.
In summary: Give an outlet for pedophiles who don't want to break the law. Don't look down on them because they have urges, look down on people who actually harm others with those urges. Prison is for people who damage the world, not people who want ot have an orgasm quickly so they can get back to browsing reddit, go to work, or read a book.
Pedophilia in and of itself isn't bad when you put it that way, sure. But in NO way should it ever be viewed the same way as homosexuality is now. It should not ever be encouraged in any way. You're going way too far off the opposite end. Why should the fetish of underage children be punished but not of gay? I understand that if you stick your cock in a little girls ass you deserve to be locked away for a long time but I simply can't understand why viewing some CP can induce jail time let alone life in prison. Anyone with a fetish of big tits or anal etc etc can watch all the porn they want but pedo's can't watch cp, where is the freedom? I don't agree with the bs arguement of watching = supporting. First of all he's not even paying for the damn thing and whether he watches or not it's still going to be uploaded. Does watching a violent horror movie with a axe smashed between the eyes mean you support murder? A rape scene!? User was temp banned for this post.
The issue with child pornography is that it exploits children sexually. Pedophilia is sexual attraction to persons who have not yet developed secondary sex characteristics. These are kids way below the age of consent who can't even be held accountable for first degree murder by law in most US jurisdictions. To be frank, there's no way to produce child pornography without manipulating and exploiting the underdeveloped mental capacity of a child. It's a safe assumption to say that nearly all, if not all, child pornography that's ever existed and will likely exist in the future will have been produced as a byproduct of the sexual assault and molestation of the children featured.
That's a very good reason why child pornography is problematic.
The possession of child pornography should definitely be a serious offense. However, no, I don't believe the convicted in this case was fairly punished. At most, he should have gotten a few years in jail, paroled, and have had his name input into the national registry. He's not a violent offender, after all. The viewing of child pornography, however, creates support for it in a similar way YouTube content creators were supported by their viewers before YouTube began monetarily compensating traffic. You produce content others enjoy and consume, and you're driven to make more of it. There's pride to be taken in that. Further, the sharing of content creates community where individuals with common interest of one kind or another can communicate and support each other. If you still vehemently disagree, then I really don't know what else to say. I can't argue against delusion.
Now keep in mind that I don't think all pedophiles should be hunted and curb stomped or anything. I don't believe their fetish was a choice of theirs like you say. I do believe that there's no acceptable way for them to indulge in their fetish, and that that's something they'll have to deal with for the rest of their lives. Life sucks.
|
:/
This seems more like one of those "let's send all the child porn guys a message" cases. Every time they do this I feel a little sad for the guy receiving the punishment, but I mean it technically is illegal and the guy did have a whole shit ton of it. He also helped distribute it a lot (p2p). I'm kind of on the fence with this one. They're punishing one guy so severely that people will have second thoughts before downloading child porn because of the risks involved. This is only a good thing, the decision will inevitably help the war on child porn, but at the cost of this one guy.
As bad as I feel for the guy, he went in knowing the consequences. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, yeah? The children come before the guys that watch/distribute the child porn.
|
On November 06 2011 10:49 scarper65 wrote:
Thank goodness. There are some people that are just fucked up and do not deserve to be in society
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
|
I hate the american judicial system. File sharers, encryption breakers, small-time hackers, weed smokers and these people, who cause indirect harm at best, are hit with absurd punishment, while murderers, baby killers, drug lords, cult leaders walk freely. Hey, let's punish the weak and the nonviolent, they won't fight back anyway, but leave alone the psychopaths, they are still human or something.
Mr. Hollander said Mr. Vilca had consistently said he did not know the images were on his computer. He refused a plea bargain of 20 years in prison, after which the state attorney increased the charges. The sentence will be appealed, Mr. Hollander said.
And it's quite possible said images were planted on his computer by a third party. Accusing someone of being a rapist or a pedophile is the easiest way of getting rid of him. They should investigate it properly, at the very least they should look at the timestamps of the files.
Paul Cassell, a former federal judge who is now a law professor at the University of Utah, said there was no question that “consumers of child pornography drive the market for the production of child pornography, and without people to consume this stuff there wouldn’t be nearly as many children being sexually abused.”
If we can believe the music and movie industry, piracy actually helps in killing the industry.
|
On November 06 2011 18:24 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2011 10:29 heyoka wrote:On November 06 2011 10:14 Jonoman92 wrote:
Um... wtf? There is a kid in my school who killed someone driving drunk, and after 3 years in prison he is back in school and his life relatively uninterrupted. The justice system sucks so bad.
Child porn is wrong, but giving the guy life in prison just sounds absolutely absurd. Reading the article now. I don't know about this specific case but this kind of scaling for sex crimes is pretty common, at a certain level of offense you're no longer considered able to be rehabilitated so the rationale is that life in prison is the only choice. I guess people think that isn't true for violent crimes, I can't speak for how true any of that is though. This is a good point. So the question becomes is this guy so deviant as to never be rehabilitated? The article doesn't shed any light on this, but I suspect that he would be able to be rehabilitated =/
Sex offenders have relatively low rates of committing another sex crime after being caught, only 5.3% in a 2002 study. (Thieves are in the 70-80% range). I assume some of them got quite a shock when they were caught, realize "oh shit I let myself take things way too far", and make an effort to avoid letting it happen again... some of them, anyway, maybe not so much with the ones who plan out rapes like a thief plans out a robbery.
I wonder about being rehabilitated. Can they just find another way to get off, so that urges to do illegal stuff don't get too strong? From TV I've heard about chemical castration.
Looking at recidivism rates, I guess it's not as easy to get rid of the urge to steal something or the urge to use drugs. Fun fact I just learned from wikipedia- the average male in the US will be arrested twice by age 65. Seems crazy, but I guess the ones who get arrested 20-30 times skew the numbers.
|
On November 06 2011 18:35 youngminii wrote:
:/
This seems more like one of those "let's send all the child porn guys a message" cases. Every time they do this I feel a little sad for the guy receiving the punishment, but I mean it technically is illegal and the guy did have a whole shit ton of it. He also helped distribute it a lot (p2p). I'm kind of on the fence with this one. They're punishing one guy so severely that people will have second thoughts before downloading child porn because of the risks involved. This is only a good thing, the decision will inevitably help the war on child porn, but at the cost of this one guy.
As bad as I feel for the guy, he went in knowing the consequences. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, yeah? The children come before the guys that watch/distribute the child porn.
The trouble is this same logic would justify life sentencing for an individual who tax evades, steals, drink drives, speeds, gets caught dealing drugs, in some places prostitutes themselves, commits fraud, perjury, assault, vandalsim etc.
What about this specific example means that it is acceptable to give an extreme life penalty to an individual, and treat them as a means to an end, on the basis that it would dissuade others, where in the different (and many unmentioned) examples above it would not?
Or would you similarly defend life sentences for all of the above, on the same basis?
|
Downloading something without paying for it is supporting the industry? If I were ever on trial for piracy, I would love to have a judge who thinks like that.
|
And it's not that long when they still legally and actively made child porn around here. The wind has changed direction quite quickly.
I don't even understand that sentence. If this fetish is a sickness of mind you shouldn't be thrown to jail for it, but somewhere where you can get help. If it is not, the easier it should be to "cure" him. I don't know how "throwing a guy into a cell forever" is a humane option, especially when he hasn't actively hurt anyone. Right now I'm more disgusted by the legal organ.
|
On November 06 2011 18:40 Frigo wrote:
If we can believe the music and movie industry, piracy actually helps in killing the industry.
To be fair, it's comparing apples and oranges. Music piracy is widespread and many people do it specifically for the reason of getting what they want without having to pay for it. It's a large industry with billions of customers.
The underground file sharing of illegal porn among criminals is a totally different situation that probably no one can analyze accurately. I think it's very safe to say that it's -possible- that the spread of these files is creating interest in the subject matter, including some of them who are willing to pay for its creation or even go out and create it themselves.
|
I don't understand why there's any debate here. If instead of downloading pictures, he would have kidnapped and kept a child as a sex-slave for a year he would have received a shorter sentence. This is crazy. I understand the moral outrage, but as far as I'm concerned, this is equivalent to saying watching porn is equivalent to (or worse than) raping prostitutes. Anyone supporting this should be checked into an asylum.
|
On November 06 2011 18:01 mud123 wrote:
I totally support this sentence. If it was possible I'd sentence him to death. No need to have freaks running around with their mutant genes reproducing more human waste like themselves. Not to mention that just because he hasn't yet hurt a child directly (which might not be the case) is no indication that he won't ever. In fact I'd say that if he is collecting images of child abuse that he is likely at some point to abuse a child himself. Anyone who disagrees with me can really f*ck off I don't care. Obviously the judge agrees with me and that's all that matters. I hope he likes being abused in prison for the rest of his pathetic life.
I wonder what genes have you inherited.
|
Anyone who thinks this man deserves this punishment is actually a complete moron. It is not necessary to explain why. If you are stupid enough to believe that this man deserves life in prison for this, then you are too stupid to understand why you are stupid, and it would therefore be a waste of time to explain why you are so completely fucking stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
