"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"

[Escapee]

With the In-justice system we have in this country, I believe that people are sent to prison far too late.

The lefties claim prison is for reform, but in my opinion criminals are usually past the point of reform by the time they are sentenced to prison.

Prison is the most effective method available to keep the public and their property safe.

[Osem]

I've heard reports that the lad in question has Aspergers Syndrome. If this indeed the case, it might go some way to explaining why the first judge acted as he/she did but it doesn't explain why sufficient supervisiory conditions weren't applied in order to keep him from reoffending. Where a crime is committed by someone who's mentally ill, I think it should be incumbent upon the authorities to ensure that the punishment imposed is intended first and foremost to protect the public and then to assist that individual, if possible, to modify/control their behaviour. This latter goal may well have been behind the initial decision not to jail the lad but tragically, in the absence of effective supervision/controls, he was able to reoffend.

[nomadking]

If someone has been found to have an untreatable medical condition and that condition is alleged to have played a part in them committing a serious crime, that is all the more reason to lock them up, as they are certainly going to commit another offence.

The Gay Mafia are always using the phrase 'its their sexuality', so applying that 'principal', if someone has raped a child who is that young, they should never be even considered for release, as that is 'their sexuality'.

"The Gay Mafia"?

We are too damn soft on too many criminals in this country and it's getting worse because we seem unable to build more prisons so things will sadly continue to go downhill.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by nomadking

If someone has been found to have an untreatable medical condition and that condition is alleged to have played a part in them committing a serious crime, that is all the more reason to lock them up, as they are certainly going to commit another offence.

The Gay Mafia are always using the phrase 'its their sexuality', so applying that 'principal', if someone has raped a child who is that young, they should never be even considered for release, as that is 'their sexuality'.

I really don't disagree with keeping such people out of harm's way but the punishment needs to fit the crime and the situation. This lad should certainly not have been allowed the freedom to commit another offence but if he is a genuine Aspergers sufferer, the sentence should not just be banging him up in a prison cell.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

I have a strong policy on crime;
MURDER - EXECUTE BY HANGING

KNIFE CRIME / MUGGINGS 5/10 YEARS

CHILD SEX OFFENDERS - LIFE, TO SERVE A MINIMUM OF 25 YEARS.

Community service is a waste of time, send them to prison, teach thugs a lesson, to respect other people health and property.

[nomadking]

If someone is never going to be 'cured'(Aspergers or 'their sexuality') of thinking it's ok to rape 5 years old kids, then they shouldn't be out roaming the streets.

Re "their sexuality" - you appear to be confusing paedophilia with homosexuality, or at least hinting that they are one and the same thing.

Or am I misinterpreting your posts?

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Or am I misinterpreting your posts?

I think so.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Re "their sexuality" - you appear to be confusing paedophilia with homosexuality, or at least hinting that they are one and the same thing.

Or am I misinterpreting your posts?

Yes, you are(as usual). The claim is always being made that homosexuality is something that people are born with, as it is 'their sexuality'. If that is the mantra/principal to be followed, then if someone's sexuality means raping 5 year old kids(male or female), then that means they can never be 'cured'. If homosexuals cannot be 'cured', then paedophiles(and other sexualities) cannot be 'cured'.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Yes, you are(as usual). The claim is always being made that homosexuality is something that people are born with, as it is 'their sexuality'. If that is the mantra/principal to be followed, then if someone's sexuality means raping 5 year old kids(male or female), then that means they can never be 'cured'. If homosexuals cannot be 'cured', then paedophiles(and other sexualities) cannot be 'cured'.

I have to admit. it sounds logical

Originally Posted by Gary L

I think so.

Which is why I asked the question - thank you, however, for answering on his behalf.

---------- Post added at 08:49 ---------- Previous post was at 08:49 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

Yes, you are(as usual). The claim is always being made that homosexuality is something that people are born with, as it is 'their sexuality'. If that is the mantra/principal to be followed, then if someone's sexuality means raping 5 year old kids(male or female), then that means they can never be 'cured'. If homosexuals cannot be 'cured', then paedophiles(and other sexualities) cannot be 'cured'.

Thank you for clarifying that - my confusion was that you appeared to be stating that "Aspergers" or "their sexuality" made them think it was OK to rape 5 year olds, whilst the raping of young children (part of the paedophilia syndrome) has nothing to do with sexuality, and all to do with "power".

[Osem]

Originally Posted by nomadking

If someone is never going to be 'cured'(Aspergers or 'their sexuality') of thinking it's ok to rape 5 years old kids, then they shouldn't be out roaming the streets.

Which is pretty much what I've said.

None of us have any idea what aspect(s) of this lad's personality have caused him to behave in this way. The Aspergers may be a significant part of the reason in this case but that will be up to experts to determine. If that is indeed found to be the case and deemed a mitigating factor than punishing this lad in the same manner as a cold, calculating paedophile with no such 'mitigating' conditions would seem to me to be unfair.

Protecting the public is however a different issue and clearly this lad must be held in custody for that reason. Prisons are not the place for mentally ill people yet many such people are languishing inside them. IMO secure units which can offer whatever remedial treatments there may be or at least provide a seccure environment which is less likely to cause the offender's behaviour to spiral out of control are a far better option.

[nomadking]

So he should be locked because he allegedly has Asperger's?

On 4 July 2009, the second victim, who is now six, was playing outside near his home when he was lured away to look for a lost football but was actually taken to the teenager's house and abused.

How do those sort of actions square up with having Asperger's?
National Autistic Society

Asperger syndrome is mostly a 'hidden disability'. This means that you can't tell that someone has the condition from their outward appearance. People with the condition have difficulties in three main areas. They are:

• social communication
• social interaction
• social imagination.

He seemed not to have enough of a problem imagining a ruse of a lost football, communicating and interacting with a young boy about that, in order to achieve his aims.

---------- Post added at 10:14 ---------- Previous post was at 10:10 ----------

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Which is why I asked the question - thank you, however, for answering on his behalf.

---------- Post added at 08:49 ---------- Previous post was at 08:49 ----------


Thank you for clarifying that - my confusion was that you appeared to be stating that "Aspergers" or "their sexuality" made them think it was OK to rape 5 year olds, whilst the raping of young children (part of the paedophilia syndrome) has nothing to do with sexuality, and all to do with "power".

If it is just about "power", would there be such a thing as paedophilia? Wouldn't it just be a case of wanting "power" over young/old, male/female, human/animal or any combination of those with no specific preference for a single group.