Only judges and lawmakers seem happy to ignore the rates of recidivism among rapists and pedophiles.
I can nearly, but not quite, understand why some people object to capital punishment. After all, if they’re unaware that Thou Shall Not Kill is a bad translation of Thou Shall Not Murder, you can see where they might wind up believing that the execution of a serial killer is as sinful as the original crime. Of course I happen to think that, at this late date, there’s no excuse for a grown-up not having bothered to find out what the sixth commandment actually says. That’s especially the case if he’s going to carry on as if he has dibs on the moral high ground, and accuse those who disagree with him of being blood-thirsty thugs.
That said, what I can’t begin to fathom are the people who seem to have the same tender feelings for sexual predators that the rest of us have for our pets. Unfortunately, these aren’t the same mushy-headed simpletons holding candlelight vigils outside San Quentin. Instead, they’re judges and legislators.
Each time I hear any of these people discuss how many feet away from a school playground or a park some pedophile should be allowed to live, I’m reminded of those nuts in the Middle Ages who whiled away their days arguing over how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. It’s as if I had just awakened in Oz to discover that my farmhouse had landed smack dab on top of a witch named Common Sense.
For what reason would any sane society ever release such a person from jail? The notion that kids are safe if the creep lives 2,000 feet away from where they play is perfectly loony. What about the kids walking to and from those parks and playgrounds? Are we supposed to take the freak’s word that he’ll behave himself? If so, why not release all the bank robbers, making certain that none of them lives closer than two blocks away from the nearest branch of First National? I can absolutely guarantee you that robbers can control their desire to knock over a bank a heck of a lot better than perverts can be counted on to control their degenerate urges.
Only judges and lawmakers seem happy to ignore the rates of recidivism among rapists and pedophiles. Is there anyone else, aside from defense attorneys, who would argue that a man who’s raped a six year old child deserves a second chance?
Whenever I read about the problems of resettling these creeps and then trying to keep track of them until the day they die, I can only shake my head. Why should anyone be able to destroy the life of a child and the child’s family and ever be allowed to see the light of day again?
So far as I’m concerned, the only place they belong isn’t 700 yards from the nearest see-saw, but in a dungeon or in Hell. Next best would be having them move in with a politician or a judge.
Man O man, have you hit this problem on the head! Liberals are more interested in looking good that actually doing good. If they were really interested in doing good, they would steep themselves in all the knowledge about the effects of certain crimes on their victims and seek to end their suffering and prevent the victimization of others. Instead, they get PC ideas about their power over all things, based on fantasy of course, and do actions based on how any action they do may look to others with their same illness (Liberalism). They don’t promote a harsh action because they don’t want to look mean and ignore the fact that enabling someone to do that despicable an act again is, in itself, cruelty in it’s debasest form. Humility is the only thing that can cure liberalism. They are so convinced of their own wonderfulness that they can’t see how truly mean and cruel they really are.
It’s the cross over effect I worry about in the Neo Conservative approach to perverts.
The Neo Con would have us embrace the concept of one strike and your dead when it comes to perverts. Neglecting to point out the same precept will also apply to other
“crimes” when they become popular topics of feel good legislation.
Ironic, isn’t it, that the liberals have unending compassion and sympathy for the perptrators of the crime, but none for the victim? I used to live in Washington state, the sex crimes capitol of the United States, so I’m well familiar with this issue and the lunacy of the courts in dealing with it. In Washington, a few months before I moved out of the state, a man convicted of raping two boys, ages 10 and 6, received a 2 year prison term. Yep, that’s right. He’ll be all “rehabilitated” in just 24 months, ready to be out on the streets in our “diverse” and happy society. 24 months is a reasonable cost for completely distorting a childs view of sex and sexuality, ruining their sense of innocence and any trust they had in society, destroying any sense of security and safety they once had, and twisting their entire lives irrevocably. That’s not mentioning the physical damage done to a 6 year old child who was forced to engage in anal sex with a fully-grown man. If he’d only been merciful enough to kill them while he was at it, he would have served a harsher sentence and the children would have been 10 times better off. It’s ridiculous. You cannot “rehabilitate” someone who likes to have sex with little kids anymore than you can “rehabilitate” an Islamic terrorist who wants to blow up infidels, or a serial killer who compulsively murders people. The only difference is that it’s apparently socially acceptable to rape kids.
There needs to be mandatory sentencing for the sexual perpetrators of children and those who sit idly by and protect them. For all that Fox News does to show the dfference in conservative vs liberal media, this may be Fox’s shining star. They came out strongly against the attractive rapist who happens to be a school teacher. They attacked the bishops of the Catholic Church who looked the other way as rapist were passed from one congregation to another. We live in a strange world when we cannot agree that those who hurt our weakest and most vulnerable deserve more than slaps on the wrist for their sins. As Hollywierd makes sympathetic movies like “The Woodsman,” teacher student sexual abuse is exposed, and priests and bishops are shown as collaborators of sins against humanity, one wonders how low the moral compass of America can go. Mr. Prelutsky defines this low with the saddest thought of all, acceptance by the legal and social system of this country of inexplainable behavior. We may never know what drives these people to perversion, but to accept this facet of the population as equal or deserving of anything once they have been exposed is horrid.
If I was against the Death Penalty, I would use these cases as proof of bigotry and racism in our legal system. I believe in penalizing all who break the law, but imagine for a moment if “attractive school teacher convicted of sexual involvement with a minor” was changed to “large black woman rapes boys at her own daycare.” I do not think we would have the same sentencing. Consider Bishop Whoever hides and secures Priest Misc., is changed to Gang leader X protects suspected rapist Anon.” Would we really be having this conversation? I doubt it.
I see a glaring double standard in these crimes. One that needs to be stopped, good post Bert.
David! David! What you said makes NO SENSE (What else is new?) If a harsh punishment is exacted against a monster like a child rapist, it does not logically follow that the same punishment has to be done for every other crime! I mean, REALLY!!!
Honker, do you think there should have been mandatory sentencing for Catholic bishops who covered up the predatory crimes of priests? Or, for that matter, anyone who knowingly allows this evil to go on?