> Behalf Of Ronn!Blankenship
>
>
> >Pesonally, I think that the sentences for molestation/pedophillia
etc.
> are
> >entirely too light. Time and again we end up with these creeps back
on
> >the street not only molesting again but raping and killing their
victims
> -
> >like the guy in Idaho a few weeks a go. If it costs us money to keep
> them
> >off the street, so be it.
>
>
>
> Was it here or on another list that I recently suggested that the
chemical
> used in "chemical castration" ought to be either liquid N2 or H2SO4?
>
>
> -- Ronn! :)
>
I know I am treading on complex moral ground here, but the girl was 16,
in a prison. Somehow I doubt that she was an angel, she apparently
consented (albeit, as the judge said, from a position of relative
weakness, being a prisoner - unlike him who was perhaps a prisoner of
something less obvious than bars) and participated of her own free will.
And it appears that actual penetrative sex was not involved just a
little touching and watching. It worries me how it's become very PC to
jump on this sort of thing and condemn the people to hell. Do you really
think this guy should have his balls frozen off?
How many of you have touched the genitals of 16 year olds or younger?
Perhaps you were 17, or 18, 20 maybe. How often does this happen in
reality. Do we want all their balls cut off? Plenty of girls are
sexually and emotionally mature before age 18, and plenty still aren't
at 21.
Actually, from what I can see the age of consent is 16 in Ohio. If so he
is not a child molester at all, just a guy who broke the trust placed in
his by his prison.
I am not condoning his actions, clearly he deserves to be punished, but
his balls burnt off? I am just looking at the mote in my own eye, and
wondering how we make a law that protects the innocent, but not based on
arbitrary age limits.
Andrew
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
