topic Re: Do You Agree in Community Spirit

Do You Agree

grandmoon — Wed, 23 Apr 2014 01:07:35 GMT

Bravehearts wants indefinite detention for serious child sex offenders

A child protection group has urged the ACT to introduce severe measures cracking down on convicted paedophiles, calling for indefinite detention, public access to images of nearby sex offenders, and mandatory minimum sentencing.

But the proposal could spark heated debate over breaches of human rights, the encouragement of vigilantism, and the prevention of Canberra's judges from sentencing on the merits of each individual case.

Child sexual assault campaigner Bravehearts is behind the call to significantly toughen the ACT's approach to child sex offenders, making a submission to the current inquiry into sentencing practices in the territory.

It says that, in some cases, ''preventive detention'' is needed to protect the community.

The group argues that convicted paedophiles should not be released if they are still deemed by a court to be a risk of reoffending, regardless of whether they have served their time.

''Clearly there are some offenders who pose such a danger to the community that they must be kept in prison indefinitely,'' the organisation wrote.

''Bravehearts argue that this group would comprise all recidivists and others whose offences were so heinous as to indicate a lifelong high risk.''

Re: Do You Agree

azureline** — Wed, 23 Apr 2014 01:35:08 GMT

Instead of waiting for them to serve their sentence and then say they are a potential risk if released, sentences need to be set correctly the first time.

Re: Do You Agree

*crikey*mate* — Wed, 23 Apr 2014 03:13:53 GMT

Do i agree? Nope.

This is one group in society that I support the death sentence for, regardless of how "minor' the offfence.or at the very least transportation via a one way ticket to Manus Island once it is empty of those seeking asylum. If we have to respect their right to life, at least let us respect it whilst keeping our kids safe.

Maybe iot's a psychological condition and they can't help it, and we are trampling on their rights to "be themselves' etc, but I don't care.

Our kids need protection.

Re: Do You Agree

polksaladallie — Wed, 23 Apr 2014 04:01:32 GMT

Would you then be prepared to pay exorbitant taxes to support their families?

Re: Do You Agree

*crikey*mate* — Wed, 23 Apr 2014 04:09:01 GMT

so we should let them "run free" to abuse our children so that their families may not claim welfare? Seriously?

I would suspect that in some circumstances at least that the families or family members may be victims and in need of far more than just welfare, like maybe some counselling and other support?

and nope, I wouldn't have a problem with welfare or aid for the families if they were in need of it.

I just can't see how saving a few thousands dollars is justifcation for letting these animals free to prey on kids, so lock em up NTBR or zap em, I don't care.

just keep out kids safe.

Re: Do You Agree

polksaladallie — Wed, 23 Apr 2014 04:21:07 GMT

You didn't differentiate in your answer, so I assumed you meant all offenders. You did say "regardless of how minor the offence". But you obviously don't mean all offenders. That would be an impossiblility, as you would agree.

Re: Do You Agree

*crikey*mate* — Wed, 23 Apr 2014 10:11:44 GMT

I do mean all predators of children. No matter how minor their offence. Not sure why that needed differentiating? I did nake it quite clear in my earlier post that those feelings were felt for all members of this group.

Re: Do You Agree

polksaladallie — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 00:23:52 GMT

Well, for every Ferguson, there are 19 other predators who are working and supporting their families (in the main). You would either want them killed or jailed. Either way the cost to the taxpayer would be enormous. The only plus would be that some jobs would become available. Internationally, our penal reputation would be worse than the arabs, much worse than dubbya's Texas. Is that what you want?

Re: Do You Agree

2106greencat — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 01:22:55 GMT

@polksaladallie wrote:
Well, for every Ferguson, there are 19 other predators who are working and supporting their families (in the main). You would either want them killed or jailed. Either way the cost to the taxpayer would be enormous. The only plus would be that some jobs would become available. Internationally, our penal reputation would be worse than the arabs, much worse than dubbya's Texas. Is that what you want?

The only plus ??

Are you kidding ? I consider getting a reptile off the streets and away from kid's a pretty BIG plus!

Re: Do You Agree

polksaladallie — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 01:31:23 GMT

@2106greencat wrote:
@polksaladallie wrote:
Well, for every Ferguson, there are 19 other predators who are working and supporting their families (in the main). You would either want them killed or jailed. Either way the cost to the taxpayer would be enormous. The only plus would be that some jobs would become available. Internationally, our penal reputation would be worse than the arabs, much worse than dubbya's Texas. Is that what you want?
The only plus ??

Are you kidding ? I consider getting a reptile off the streets and away from kid's a pretty BIG plus!

Your opinion is at odds with the experts. Every effort is made to keep the families together. I refer to the 19 others, not the one that makes it into the media.

By the way, they are not on the streets, they are in our homes, or visit every Sunday afternoon.

Re: Do You Agree

*crikey*mate* — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 02:24:33 GMT

@polksaladallie wrote:
@2106greencat wrote:
@polksaladallie wrote:
Well, for every Ferguson, there are 19 other predators who are working and supporting their families (in the main). You would either want them killed or jailed. Either way the cost to the taxpayer would be enormous. The only plus would be that some jobs would become available. Internationally, our penal reputation would be worse than the arabs, much worse than dubbya's Texas. Is that what you want?
The only plus ??

Are you kidding ? I consider getting a reptile off the streets and away from kid's a pretty BIG plus!
Your opinion is at odds with the experts. Every effort is made to keep the families together. I refer to the 19 others, not the one that makes it into the media.

By the way, they are not on the streets, they are in our homes, or visit every Sunday afternoon.

well, there is not one in my home, and I don't see why any other child should have to have one in theirs either.

I even consioder the despots that "do no more" than look at poor taste kiddy pictures to fit into this category, because whilst ever there is a market, even for the voyeurs, there will be evil twisty minds prepared to abuse our children.

and as for the experts pfft - they've been wrong before

and what possible benefit is there for any child in "keeping the family together" if they can't go to sleep at night without the risk of interference?

That's just twisty.

Re: Do You Agree

polksaladallie — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 03:36:10 GMT

@diamond-halo wrote:
well, there is not one in my home, and I don't see why any other child should have to have one in theirs either.

I even consioder the despots that "do no more" than look at poor taste kiddy pictures to fit into this category, because whilst ever there is a market, even for the voyeurs, there will be evil twisty minds prepared to abuse our children.

and as for the experts pfft - they've been wrong before

and what possible benefit is there for any child in "keeping the family together" if they can't go to sleep at night without the risk of interference?

That's just twisty.

Twisty or not, that't what is done, and has been for decades.

I consider it "twisty" to kill these 95% (of all predators) or jail them and rip society apart when rehabilitation and treatment have proven to be effective in keeping the families together, and enabling these past offenders to be productive members of society.

Again I ask, who is going to pay for hundreds of jails to be built, and thousands of families to be provided for?

Re: Do You Agree

*crikey*mate* — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 04:46:24 GMT

well, if the boats remain stiopped, that will eventually free up some money as those currently in the detention centres are processed, so that will pay for a few. Heck, if the families want to stand by the sides of these despots, then let them move to Manus with them and all of the others of their ilk.

The OP asked "Do you agree". I gave my opinion. I am sorry if it differs from yours. Just because "it is done" and "that's how it is" doesn't mean I have to agree with it, regardless of how long "they have been doing it".

However, having never put a price on the safety or security of a child, nor would I ever consider doing so, I couldn't care less how it was payed for or what I had to go without to pay for it.

And able to be rehabilitated? Then this suggests that it is not a biological occurance and only strengthens my resolve that those with persuasions such as this have no place in the same society in which I am trying to raise my children.

Rehabilitated???? ONCE is too often, in my books.

Re: Do You Agree

azureline** — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 05:05:51 GMT

Oh please, for every one caught, there are probably 100 who haven't been. At least half of them will never be. Know where your children are, know the people they are with, listen to your children and don't let them have sleepovers with people you are not 100% certain of.

Re: Do You Agree

lind9650 — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 05:32:06 GMT

Azure. it does not have to be sleepovers or visits to fmily or friends.

Mum is working night shift, Dad is at home, raping the children and threatening them with murdering them / or their mother. Nobody will know until years later when those children are grown up, have psychological problems or even commiting suicide.

I deeply hate and detest child abusers for the rest of my life.

Erica

Re: Do You Agree

azureline** — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 05:35:45 GMT

no, of course it doesn't but people just don't think "ordinary" people do these things, they think it is only the ones who have been caught, tried, convicted and released.

Re: Do You Agree

polksaladallie — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 05:56:23 GMT

@azureline** wrote:
no, of course it doesn't but people just don't think "ordinary" people do these things, they think it is only the ones who have been caught, tried, convicted and released.

That is why the "stranger danger" lessons (without anything else) lead parents and children to believe that they are safe with everyone else. While I admire the well-known couple who go into schools with their message, this danger to children is extremely rare, and concentration on this results in apathy about other dangers.

Re: Do You Agree

*crikey*mate* — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 06:05:03 GMT

@azureline** wrote:
Oh please, for every one caught, there are probably 100 who haven't been. At least half of them will never be. Know where your children are, know the people they are with, listen to your children and don't let them have sleepovers with people you are not 100% certain of.

that helped all of the kids who were abused by scout leaders, teachers, priests, family friends and relatives, didn't it?

we might never know them all, but at least we can get the ones we do know about away from our kids.

but I will never be an advocate for letting those who we do know about to go free just because there are more out there that we don't know about.

Re: Do You Agree

*crikey*mate* — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 06:09:41 GMT

I can't believe that people are defending pedophiles.

That's beyond twisty, it's sick.

Re: Do You Agree

love*today — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 06:12:10 GMT

makes me sick too