Poll: Should Paedophiles be allowed a Second Chance?

[TheRealCJ]

Please Note: I am not a troll, and I'm not trying to get a knee-jerk reaction! I want to know what you think! How you feel about a sensitive subject! If you're just going to come in and throw abuse around and accuse me of being a paedophile, don't bother.

(EDIT: I did ask for no knee-jerkers, so let me reiterate: if you come in here with the intention of posting baseless threats threats of violence, feel free to FUCK RIGHT OFF)

I ask, because as of now, a convicted Paedophile named Dennis Fergurson has been in the news, AGAIN, but for what you might think. Allow me to explain:

In the late 1980s, Fergurson kidnapped and molested three children in Sydney, and he was sentenced to fourteen years Jail, which he has since completed and released. This is where it gets bad. Fergurson has been relocated a bunch of times since his release, mostly because neibourhoods don't want him in their street. Which is fair enough. But the latest bunch of people have been threatening him, leaving signs that read 'PEDOPHILE' all over his house, leaving a coffin outside his door, and even making firebombs and leaving them outside his house. Shouting at all hours, etc.

Now, I don't have children of my own, but I am a trained child carer, so I can understand where these people are coming from. and I Absolutely do not support child abuse in any form. But when is enough enough? Fergurson has already spent 14 years in jail, and he's yet to re-offend, so does he actually deserve the treatement he's getting? He still has to report all movements to police for 15 years (effectively on parole for the next 15 years), so it's not like he's going to just drop off the radar.

Personall, I'm torn between agreeing whole-heartedly with the neibourhood, and feeling sorry for Mr. Fergurson. He's in his 50s at this point, and well, his life is a pathetic mess. What with being relocated every other year, constant media attention, and of course the death threats and attacks. It's likely he's never going to have another moment's peace.

If he was a convicted murderer, most of the people on that street (and the half-dozen before this one) would probably barely bat and eyelid, because he's already been to jail for that murder. They certainly wouldn't start a hate campaign. The nature of the crime is heinous, but the whole point of Jail/Rehabilitation is that they've paid for their crimes, isn't it?

 

[Aardvark]

Once you've paid your debt to society, you're fully entitled to a second chance. That debt, however, should be a debt that in some way ensures that you will not recommit.

 

[El Poncho]

I would but the government don't seem to do a good job. I've heard a few stories where a registered paedophile is relocated next to a school.

 

[silasbufu]

children are probably in the top most sensitive topics in today's society. Almost everyone deserves a second chance but in his case I don't think it's going to happen. If I had someone like him in my neighborhood I would not like it one bit , although I wouldn't go as far as death threats and such.
Even murderers can be forgiven easier than pedofiles. Because a murder can sometimes be explained ( revenge, fear, self-defens etc ) but all pedofiles clearly have a mental problem and these issues don't just go away, even after 14 years of jail.

 

[AfterAscon]

If he was a convicted murderer, most of the people on that street (and the half-dozen before this one) would probably barely bat and eyelid, because he's already been to jail for that murder. They certainly wouldn't start a hate campaign. The nature of the crime is heinous, but the whole point of Jail/Rehabilitation is that they've paid for their crimes, isn't it?

I'm a little on the fence about this. Yes people should be given a second chance. But, we've learnt you cannot help who you're sexually attracted to and the same will apply to paedophiles. And for that reason I say no, because they're almost destined to do it again. It's incredible hard to control biological urges.

Also I wouldn't mess with the Murderer because they have killed someone! Whereas Paedophiles are generally weak and easy to pick on.

 

[polygon]

I find it very amusing that people hold such huge contempt for child molesters while murderers are just average bad guys.

You can get over being raped (I did!). You can't get over being dead.

 

[Erana]

Well, I think the point's been made that if he reoffends, there's prolly gonna be a lynching, but if the government's not gonna keep 'em behind bars, these people need to lighten up enough for him to be able to function.
I mean, he can't contribute to society if he can't work, right?

(ugh... Realism isn't fun to say at all, but the above is my rational, heartless side giving voice.
Really, I'd castrate sex offenders. I know it doesn't have that much effect on their behavior, but really, who would commit a crime if they were facing jail and a clippin'?)

 

[Motti]

The nature of the crime is heinous, but the whole point of Jail/Rehabilitation is that they've paid for their crimes, isn't it?

That was the whole point of the prison system when it was concieved in the victorian era wasn't it?
As much as it goes against my instinct to hate the bastard, he's done his time. As far as I'm concerned, that's the end of the matter.

 

[EchetusXe]

They should be given a second chance after serving their time. Unless they are have been getting away with it for so long or their crimes were particularly disturbing, in which case the death penalty.

Either:
a) Punish them with jail, treat them for their urges and then release them after a reasonable amount of time.
or.
b) Kill them.

Some people will never be rehabilitated, however those that have admitted and accepted what they have done, have been punished and undergone a treatment programme to help them control their urges should be allowed to live a normal life. Harassing them isn't going to make them less likely to re-offend.

 

[Fauxity]

I think so, yes.

I'm for the death penalty, and for use of it on murderers, serial criminals and such.

But that's where it gets more complicated. All those crimes have one thing in common: non-consensuality. And before anyone says, no, I am not implying that all child rape / molesting / other sex crimes are always consensual, I just don't agree that sexual exposure is psychologically scarring to a child. And when the sex crimes are consensual (please note that this excludes rape, which is non-consensual by definition) they are typically not scarring in any way. Of course, having a system of laws under which this is acceptable would require careful education of children about sex in a way that our current societies (for most first world countries, actually) does not provide in the slightest. Sex is taboo, and as such, so is consensual sexual activity between children and adults.

I would also like to add that as a child's age goes below a certain age, it's really never acceptable for me, because there are some ages when consensuality isn't even an understandable concept.

There are also mitigating and the opposite circumstances that all have to deal with the child's opinion of the acts, the child's understanding of the acts, (and even the adult's understanding and opinion) can sometimes have a bearing on the morality of these things.

Simply saying that all child-molesters should be put to death? That's ignorant.

EDIT: Also, it's 4:35 AM in the morning here, so if I'm not making any sense, just ignore me.

 

[Semitendon]

Please Note: I am not a troll, and I'm not trying to get a knee-jerk reaction! I want to know what you think! How you feel about a sensitive subject! If you're just going to come in and throw abuse around and accuse me of being a paedophile, don't bother.

I ask, because as of now, a convicted Paedophile named Dennis Fergurson has been in the news, AGAIN, but for what you might think. Allow me to explain:

In the late 1980s, Fergurson kidnapped and molested three children in Sydney, and he was sentenced to fourteen years Jail, which he has since completed and released. This is where it gets bad. Fergurson has been relocated a bunch of times since his release, mostly because neibourhoods don't want him in their street. Which is fair enough. But the latest bunch of people have been threatening him, leaving signs that read 'PEDOPHILE' all over his house, leaving a coffin outside his door, and even making firebombs and leaving them outside his house. Shouting at all hours, etc.

Now, I don't have children of my own, but I am a trained child carer, so I can understand where these people are coming from. and I Absolutely do not support child abuse in any form. But when is enough enough? Fergurson has already spent 14 years in jail, and he's yet to re-offend, so does he actually deserve the treatement he's getting? He still has to report all movements to police for 15 years (effectively on parole for the next 15 years), so it's not like he's going to just drop off the radar.

Personall, I'm torn between agreeing whole-heartedly with the neibourhood, and feeling sorry for Mr. Fergurson. He's in his 50s at this point, and well, his life is a pathetic mess. What with being relocated every other year, constant media attention, and of course the death threats and attacks. It's likely he's never going to have another moment's peace.

If he was a convicted murderer, most of the people on that street (and the half-dozen before this one) would probably barely bat and eyelid, because he's already been to jail for that murder. They certainly wouldn't start a hate campaign. The nature of the crime is heinous, but the whole point of Jail/Rehabilitation is that they've paid for their crimes, isn't it?

No, there is no sceond chance. Now, keeping in mind that the pedophile is actually guilty of a heinous crime, certain sex offenders I would not count. In the US, in certain states there is such a thing as statutory rape, in which, a legal adult has sexual contact with a legal child. However, the age range of a legal "child" and legal "adult" is a fine line, that has a lot of room for a "relatively" innocent person to be labeled a sex offender or child molester, which in reality was an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old. This ( to me) is not evil and should be forgiven, if not ignored completely. There are other cases which I think could be forgiven, which I will not list.

In the case of a clear and obvious child molester or sex offender, it is important to realize that these behaviors cannot change. A child molester cannot be rehabilitated or "cured" of their deviant behavior. They can be controled or monitered, however this leaves a lot of room for the offender to find a way around their restrictions and find new victims. And a child molester always finds a way to do this, it might be finding a new victim, using child porn ( which financially promotes child abuse), or simply taking pictures of neighborhood children for personal use. In the end, I believe that they should be permantly locked away, since it is only a matter of time before they find a way to hurt children again.

In your specific case, I don't believe the man should have been threatened. However, the parents veiw is justified, since they don't want him around their children. Surely, a more peaceful way to get rid of the man could have been found. As for him, he should probably try to remove himself from society, move to the woods where there is no one around. He may do this anyway, as it will provide a more secluded place for his next victim. His best option would be to check into a mental hospital, and stay there for the rest of his life.

 

[polygon]

EDIT: Also, it's 4:35 AM in the morning here, so if I'm not making any sense, just ignore me.

You're making far more sense than most of the people in this thread.

In the case of a clear and obvious child molester or sex offender, it is important to realize that these behaviors cannot change.

This is complete bullshit and you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

They have not paid their debt. A few years in prison does not earn you a second chance. Not until all your victims forgive you.
Personally I believe he and all other child sex offenders should be executed. I do make the distinction in this regard between child sex offenders and normal sex offenders as well, it is sadly all too common for some ***** to cry rape the morning after because she is ashamed of herself for being a whore. Also the legal system in this aspect is a fucking joke. If both parties are drunk the man is still considered the rapist even if the woman instigated it and was on top. I would not want some poor schmuck to die for that but as children can never give consent if found guilty then kill them.

Did you know how common it is for mothers involved in a bitter divorce with their husbands using their children to further their case in getting custody?

They sometimes even go as far as telling the children to say that their father have molested them, and due to the fact that child molestation (for som reason)m doesn't hold much in the way of burden of evidence, many fathers do get convicted on pretty arbitrary grounds or at the very least have their rights to see their children taken away from them.

If we were to execute every man "found guilty" of child molestation, many innocent men would die as well.

Would it be worth killing innocent men just in order to get at the ones who are guilty?

I don't think so. Because that would make society no better than the criminals it is trying to have killed.

As for the question the OP stated. Rapists and child molesters are the scum of the earth, and most of the time their punishment is far from enough. But if people take it upon themselves to punish someone found guilty of these crimes when they have already served their time, then these people are no better than the rapist/child molester. It's not their job to punish people, and they should be arrested for the harrasment they have brought upon the ex convict in question.

That being said, I would torture and kill a person who had raped one of my sisters or my mother, or possible future children if I ever got my hands on him before the police did. Because then it would be personal, and I could relate to anyone who would do the same. However that does not give the right to people who aren't even connected to the victims in any way to harrass ex-con's. They might not be forced to embrace him with open arms, but they should at the very least mind their own fucking business and stay out of the guy's way, regardless of what crimes he has committed. They have no reason what so ever to punish him further if they don't even have a viable relation to his victims...

 

[Fauxity]

EDIT: Also, it's 4:35 AM in the morning here, so if I'm not making any sense, just ignore me.

You're making far more sense than most of the people in this thread.

Well, shucks. Thank you. I try.

 

[theCrusher1234]

i think that chemical castration and maybe even computer chip implants to keep them from going near schools, playgrounds etc would be a passive way of still allowing them to live in peace. i shy away from the kill them or let them rot in jail because of an old saying i read somewhere "be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one"

 

[TheRealCJ]

Please Note: I am not a troll, and I'm not trying to get a knee-jerk reaction! I want to know what you think! How you feel about a sensitive subject! If you're just going to come in and throw abuse around and accuse me of being a paedophile, don't bother.

I ask, because as of now, a convicted Paedophile named Dennis Fergurson has been in the news, AGAIN, but for what you might think. Allow me to explain:

In the late 1980s, Fergurson kidnapped and molested three children in Sydney, and he was sentenced to fourteen years Jail, which he has since completed and released. This is where it gets bad. Fergurson has been relocated a bunch of times since his release, mostly because neibourhoods don't want him in their street. Which is fair enough. But the latest bunch of people have been threatening him, leaving signs that read 'PEDOPHILE' all over his house, leaving a coffin outside his door, and even making firebombs and leaving them outside his house. Shouting at all hours, etc.

Now, I don't have children of my own, but I am a trained child carer, so I can understand where these people are coming from. and I Absolutely do not support child abuse in any form. But when is enough enough? Fergurson has already spent 14 years in jail, and he's yet to re-offend, so does he actually deserve the treatement he's getting? He still has to report all movements to police for 15 years (effectively on parole for the next 15 years), so it's not like he's going to just drop off the radar.

Personall, I'm torn between agreeing whole-heartedly with the neibourhood, and feeling sorry for Mr. Fergurson. He's in his 50s at this point, and well, his life is a pathetic mess. What with being relocated every other year, constant media attention, and of course the death threats and attacks. It's likely he's never going to have another moment's peace.

If he was a convicted murderer, most of the people on that street (and the half-dozen before this one) would probably barely bat and eyelid, because he's already been to jail for that murder. They certainly wouldn't start a hate campaign. The nature of the crime is heinous, but the whole point of Jail/Rehabilitation is that they've paid for their crimes, isn't it?

No, there is no sceond chance. Now, keeping in mind that the pedophile is actually guilty of a heinous crime, certain sex offenders I would not count. In the US, in certain states there is such a thing as statutory rape, in which, a legal adult has sexual contact with a legal child. However, the age range of a legal "child" and legal "adult" is a fine line, that has a lot of room for a "relatively" innocent person to be labeled a sex offender or child molester, which in reality was an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old. This ( to me) is not evil and should be forgiven, if not ignored completely. There are other cases which I think could be forgiven, which I will not list.

In the case of a clear and obvious child molester or sex offender, it is important to realize that these behaviors cannot change. A child molester cannot be rehabilitated or "cured" of their deviant behavior. They can be controled or monitered, however this leaves a lot of room for the offender to find a way around their restrictions and find new victims. And a child molester always finds a way to do this, it might be finding a new victim, using child porn ( which financially promotes child abuse), or simply taking pictures of neighborhood children for personal use. In the end, I believe that they should be permantly locked away, since it is only a matter of time before they find a way to hurt children again.

In your specific case, I don't believe the man should have been threatened. However, the parents veiw is justified, since they don't want him around their children. Surely, a more peaceful way to get rid of the man could have been found. As for him, he should probably try to remove himself from society, move to the woods where there is no one around. He may do this anyway, as it will provide a more secluded place for his next victim. His best option would be to check into a mental hospital, and stay there for the rest of his life.

This is a problem, he actually tried to move out to a rurual homestead a few years ago, but the police/ neibouring towns had him removed, because they couldn't keep proper tabs on him without having a permanant officer at his house at all times (considering rural australia, being very remote).

 

[EchetusXe]

I think we should, for the purposes of this thread, classify paedophiles as those who attempt to have sexual encounters with children of age 12/13 and below. Agreed?

Those who attempt to have sexual encounters with teenagers (and are say 25+) are usually sexual predators and should be stopped and punished if they attempt to seduce young teens. But the media tends to classify say a 30 year old who has sex with a 15 year old as a paedophile, which is inaccurate. I wouldn't condone that behaviour but its not paedophilia.

Also, having sex with a person age 12 or below is by definition rape.