I think that people should have to endure the crimes they've committed... Rapist? Someone rapes you... With razor wire. Killer? You die like your victim. Car thief? You get run over with the car you stole. Everyone dies!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That sounds like Dante's Inferno. Also, that last one isn't really the man enduring the crime he committed.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I know... I just wanted all the criminals to die in my hypothetical.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You forgot to go anon.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It happens. I just find that people are more accepting of the things I say when they're unaware if who I am.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What about people who are wrongfully convicted, or severely mentally disabled? I'm not a big supporter of the death penalty in general, and I don't think the military needs to be committing any more human rights violations than it already does. 'A eye for an eye and soon we shall all be blind', right?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

We must remember that quote comes from a guy that basically threw a temper tantrum to get what he wanted.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Go fuck yourself, you ignorant cunt.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I approve of this word choice.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What horrifies me is that someone actually "loved" his comment.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Assuming there is sufficient evidence, then yes, these people should be punished.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The phrase "an eye for an eye" came from Hammurabi's Code. Back in the day, if you got into a fight with someone and knocked out his or her eye, his or her family would come after you and punish you even more severely like burning down your part of the village. "An eye for an eye" just means that your punishment will be equal to, or at the very least, no more than, your crime. Unless of course, the other person chooses to forgive you. Otherwise, yes I agree completely with your sentiment.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Courtney- i sometimes feel like we go to the same school- we were JUST talking about that in history.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Rapists: Sent to prison where they'll most likely be raped. Pedophiles: Same as rapists. Theft: An item worth the amount that was stolen will be taken away from the thief and given to needy children. If thief doesn't have anything of value, he/she will work it off doing community service. Murder: Death. NOTE: There must be absolute evidence that person committed the crime.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

In some cases, if a pedophile is outed as a child molester in prison, it's possible he'll be killed by the other inmates. Criminals seem to frown on anything bad happening to kids.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I love how people will hop on the Gay Rights bandwagon, because gays can't help who they are, but pedophiles are automatically labeled as sick fucks. What happened to "they can't help it"?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Because gay isn't hurting anyone it's consentual between two adults. Pedophiles hurt children, family, everyone and yes they CAN help it, there's nothing forcing them to steal a child's innocence. So yes they are sick and vile and disgusting. Comparing homosexuals to pedophiles is really stupid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

you can be a pedophile without raping a child, what if someone is open about being attracted to children without doing anything to a child? then it invalidates your entire argument. if that is the case they aren't hurting anyone, it would be just the same as homosexuality, just a harmless sexual abnormality.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I honestly can't believe there are people on here supporting pedophiles....

by Anonymous 12 years ago

it's not about supporting pedophiles, those people are fucking sick and disturbed. it's that your arguments for why pedophilia is wrong, but there being nothing wrong with homosexuality is hypocritical and based purely on the circumstance of what a pedophile has done to a child without considering that they possibly have not done anything at all.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I watched a movie once and one of the characters was a guy who kept having sick thoughts about children. He never did anything, but because of that when he turned himself in, they couldn't arrest him or anything. He eventually castrated himself. It was really interesting. I think that in a situation like that, when someone hasn't done anything and is actively trying not to, they should be able to have a place they can be put. Otherwise, someone will get hurt. On the whole though, the act of pedophilia is nothing like homosexuality. The main thing missing is consent. That goes for beastiality as well (which I've heard comparaed to homosexuality in the past).

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Asylum

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I concur, that would be a good place for them.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Perhaps not the typical insane asylum, but asylum is always nice.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Somewhere they can be away from the general public (which includes children).

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Separate community type thing? Or a compound designated for people like that?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, they should be alone...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

consent is not required if nothing is being done, they are just thoughts. someone can fantasize about something while actively knowing that they would never do it. they are not a like but they are both sexual preferences which I think most people would agree is not something that is under your conscious control.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"... the act of pedophilia," is what I said. I also then went on to say that people who are pedophiles but have never acted on those urges should be able to go to authorities and be put somewhere away from children. The people who actively try NOT to hurt someone should be helped.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

well if such communities were to be made then it would be better for them to create it themselves. government regulated communities are never a good thing.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, because it should be regulated. Other wise you'll get communities of pedophiles living freely and (though I'm sure not every community would do such, you can almost guarantee some would end up being a community of active pedophiles, bringing kids in). They should be regulated and they should be removed from the general public.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

true, but if this is a community for those who have not committed a crime then the government has no right to control them. that is a power the government should never be allowed to have. people are allowed to form there own communities and if people form communities around a malicious intent then all members of that community can be convicted if they commit a crime. but the government should not have the power to control that community.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm speaking specifically for people who bring themselves in because they know they can't control their urges. They will willingly agree to this. Like, people who check themselves in to a mental institution. Also, if the government had more control over communities like that, we wouldn't so often be hearing of children being raped and molested while nobody did a thing about it. Maybe those communities SHOULD be better controlled.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

when you give government the power to control your community then you bring us that much closer to a totalitarian state. you should not be so willing to hand over your freedom.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not saying "hand over your freedom," I'm saying shit shouldn't be ignored like it is. People pay LESS attention to those communities (generally) than to regular communities, and it should not be like that. Also, like I said, the pedophile thing wouldn't be just a happy little community, it would be more like a centre where they can go and be removed from the general public.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

the reason is because people form smaller communities away from the rest of society so they can live in a way they wish to live. we have a right to do this. if crimes are discovered to have occurred there they can still be prosecuted. but in the U.S. the 4th amendment protects us from home invasions by the government. I personally do not want to live in a country were the government has the power to bust into your home and check up on you just because you live outside city limits.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, you don't have the right to do that if you're hiding huge and terrible crimes. The government should be as active in those communities as any other community. I'm not saying we should just break down doors for the sake of it, I'm saying the law shouldn't be less active in any community.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

you have the right regardless of what you do with it. the only way to know for sure who is hiding terrible crimes is to restrict everyone's rights. personally I don't want cops constantly patrolling my private property like I'm some kinda suspected terrorist. then you couldn't do fun shit that is illegal for no reason like make Molotov cocktails and toss them at a broken down car. if you have private property then you should be able to do whatever the fuck you want on it (as long as it doesn't deprive someone else of their rights) without the fucking government breathing down your neck.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I mean you don't have the right to live how you want if how you want to live involves heinous crimes. Not that you don't have the right to live in a separate community. The cops should treat all communities the same. Also, that's fucking stupid. It's illegal. You shouldn't be doing it. And it's not illegal for no reason.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I know, but the government doesn't just have the right to come check if you are committing heinous crimes without probable cause. if your community is on your private property then they should not be able to just come in and start snooping around until they find something illegal. if there is a reason then what is it? why should I not be able to mix up some napalm and have some fun? I am not using it on anybody, so why is there a problem?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Communities should have police. Plain and simple. You shouldn't do illegal things. That's also simple.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

a community can often times police themselves. not all laws make sense.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You could easily hurt someone. Also, that's the biggest problem with some of these communities where the rape and molestation is happening is that the people "policing" aren't paying attention (or are ignoring it). There should be police in communities.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

you shouldn't constantly worry about the possibility someone might get hurt, if you know what you are doing it is not very likely. someone could get hurt driving down the street, someone could get hurt swimming in the pool, someone could get hurt shopping at walmart. why is it a problem in this circumstance? rape is far more common in regular cities than in smaller communities. most small communities have little to no crime problems. there are a select few that have such issues, but an isolated incident should not drive you to infringe on everybody's rights.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Obviously enough people have been hurt or it wouldn't be illegal. Almost every other example you gave are things governed by laws. I'm not saying any rights should be infringed on. I'm saying the opposite, actually. All communities should be treated the same, not given special law ignoring privileges because they're small communities.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

the reason why making most explosives is illegal is because the government fears that the bombs will be used against them. far more people are killed in cars than by explosives, so why are they not illegal? the reason why smaller communities are not policed by the government is purely from logistical reasons, they don't want to pay for more police to patrol on people's private property. it would be incredibly expensive and would also anger citizens greatly. answer me this, say you bought a few acres of nice land outside of city limits. this land is your property and you can do what you please on it. so the government hires a few new FBI agents and their job is to just stay on your property all day and night to make sure your not doing anything illegal. you build a new fence, but it is in violation of a county ordinance so you get fined. you want to build a shack out back but the way you have laid the foundation violates a county ordinance. so tell me you would be completely fine with this?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Just because more people are hurt by something else doesn't make it ok. Also, there are tons of driving laws that people break, thus get hurt. Did I say we should have people poking in backyard and violating privacy? No, I said it should be the same for everyone. You could have a small police force for several towns near each other (this is done and it works).

by Anonymous 12 years ago

we are not talking about actual towns though, we are talking about small communities on peoples private property. such as say a militia compound or hippie commune. small village like communities that people form together. every town is already policed. but the government should not be policing people on their private property.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I guess. But I still think the government should be wary, given the past terrible things that have happened.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

any smaller communities that known criminals live at are already monitored by the government, but without probable cause they have no right to police people on their private property.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well good on the first part. What bothers me is that often times it takes so long to have reason to look into a community because people don't report what's going on (in the specific communities where such things happen, I mean). I dunno, I can't think of a way to prevent this outside of policing the communities.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

sometimes there are just things that are out of your control, the only way to have true control over crime is to live under a totalitarian government, and personally I would rather live in a state of anarchy than under totalitarian control.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I just think some things are too terrible to let continue. There has to be some way to fix these problems.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

like I said some things are just out of your control. you can't prevent heinous crimes from happening without stripping peoples rights to make sure you can control them. and even then people will still find a way to commit crimes.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm hating humanity in this moment :(

by Anonymous 12 years ago

don't hate humanity, usually it is only about 2% of society that just makes it worse for the rest of us. if you want to make a difference then become a cop or something, you might not be able to stop most crimes but the few crimes that you do you will feel satisfied that you were able to help someone.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

this whole argument is horrifying. get off your computers and stop coming up with these grandiose plans that would never actually work in real life. i'm glad you are so intelligent and reasonable, but seriously, come on now. that's not how the world works.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

There's a difference between being a pedophile and being a sex offender, you fucking dunce. I'd rather associate with pedophiles than people who automatically demonize pedophiles for something they can't help. Pedophilia is not synonymous with child molestation, and you'd be completely retarded to think otherwise. And now is pointing out the difference between two parties supporting one? I don't support pedophiles, it's just not their fault.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

yeah it is quite hypocritical, but their reasoning is that homosexuals can be 2 consenting adults. but a pedophile could be openly attracted to children without actually doing anything to one so that logic doesn't really work. they are both just sexual abnormalities that people develop for whatever reason, neither are a choice, neither are genetic, it's just something that happens.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I fully support eye for an eye, but the problem with using it is that it gives the judicial branch the right to kill people, including people that have been wrongly convicted. it is very difficult to prove someone has beyond the shadow of a doubt committed a crime, and unless that is the case they should not be punished in such a way.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Why is this positive? Pedophiles, correct me if I'm wrong, don't choose to be attracted to kids and rapist most likely have mental issues. Torturing people for things they can't control?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm really tired of people defending these old men having sex with little kids... Saying that they can't help it, they can , they're just sick

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not defending that! The OP never said pedophiles that have sex with kids, he said pedophiles. You're right, they shouldn't act on their sexual whatevers but how does using them as target practice make you better?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not even saying I agree with the post though?? I was just appalled at how many people think pedophiles should be accepted just as gays are, gays are accepted because it's not hurting anyone even if they do act on it. Comparing that to pedophilia is ridiculous

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If you don't agree with the post, why are your comments green?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

May I ask why your comment says, "...these old men having sex with little kids", implying only old 'men' commit the act?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

one of my teachers in high school said he thought anyone who hurt a kid should get tied up and have their balls cut off with a rusty kitchen knife, & that he'd volunteer to do it. personally i think they get their just desserts in prison with the assrape & such.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I agree. Along with the druggies.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Drug use is a victimless crime. A crime without a victim is a pretty silly concept, no?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Victimless?! Hah! Yeah right! Tell that to all us kids who have had there dads basically throw away their families for drugs. Spending 200 dollars a week on weed? You wannna tell me it's victimless?! Well come walk in my shoes bud.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

lol that explains why you seem like a total slut on here .... daddy issues much?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yeah it's real hilarious isn't it? Wtf?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Haha, you said "bud"! But seriously, not caring about one's family isn't the drugs' fault, your dad is just a bad person. And how does somebody feasibly smoke 200 dollars worth of weed in a week? That's fucking ridiculous.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You are a fucking idiot. You know what's worse than people over conservative who hate on all drugs no matter what and condem people for using? Over liberal close minded ass hats who think legalizing them would be fine. Would legalizing weed hurt the world? Not really. Would it help? Not even a little bit. That's why it's not legal. It's like trying to legalize necrophelia; victimless? Yes? Should it be legal? No because it's still destructive to society. I'd like to see a single valid argument for why heroine, coke, speed, and other homewrecking life destroying drugs should be legal that doesn't make you look like an idiot. Go ahead, give it a shot. You are the kind of person who would major in something stupid like medieval literature and then sit on the street smoking pot telling people why it's the governments fault you can't get a job. Grow up, or at least learn your shit before opening your mouth.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You're a funny one. I'm pretty sure you're a troll, but I will humor you anyway. Let's check out the reasons for legalizing drugs. There's a market for them, and if that market doesn't exist in the legal world, the black market gets all the profit. Cartels get the biggest cut of the profit, and that takes money right our of our economy. Don't worry, though, we get it back when they use that money to illegally purchase firearms from North of the border and use them to shoot our troops and police. They use all that funding to kill their own cops, judges, lawyers, and anyone that gets in the way of their money. They capture people and force them to work on manufacturing plants for virtually no money in inhumane conditions. These people are trapped, because the cartels will kill their families if they try to leave. Think of all the people killed in the name of black market profit, and think of how that would all disappear if drugs were legalized. Cartels and dealers would never be able to compete with the price and quality of drugs created by factories that are regulated and inspected. Organized crime would be eliminated because their biggest source of income would be cut off comple...

by Anonymous 11 years ago

And that's just one reason. I have more if you want to be educated.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That reason is much less valid than you are trying to make it sound. If it's legal, more people are going to use drugs, that simple. The illegal drug groups won't go 'oh no! We've been smited! Good try guys.' they will make drugs cheaper and sell them to the demographic that needs them, they can make them cheaper because they don't need to pay for inspections, worker rights, or healthy conditions. So the drugs from illegal sources will be cheaper and better. The demographic for these cheaper drugs will be everybody, but primarily kids because of the age limit for these legal drugs. P.s. If you think there should be no age limit you are one sick fuck. North of the border? You are saying we need to legalize drugs to prevent buying guns from Canada? The hell is wrong with you? So to sum up, what you say is retarded, the illegal drugs would be cheaper and easier to get, buying illegal drugs does not equal killing police with guns from Canada. Give me another reason, try again

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Guess what drug gets used more! Cannabis! There's no problem with that. Places like Portugal and Holland are examples of places we can look where drugs are legal. They have an overall increase in drug use, but that's not a problem. They have decreased rates of problematic drug users, adolescent drug users, and less incidents of domestic violent crime. They can't make drugs cheaper, you obviously don't understand economics. Drugs are so incredibly expensive because people risk their lives and freedom to get them across borders and to sell them. Take away the risk by making it legal, and illegal manufacturers will never be able to compete with the prices that a legitimate company could sell them at. Again, there's the purity factor. A factory with standards will always produce a better product than people making drugs illegally and cutting them with whatever they want. That also makes drugs safer for the users. Simple economics. Besides, the police forces will have more resources to go after illegal manufacturers and illegal dealers. You're the sick fuck, keeping drugs unregulated takes away the age limit. If they were sold in stores that required ID, kids couldn't purchase them.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's illegal dealers that sell to kids, because they don't care. And no, there won't be a market for illegal drugs anymore due to the aforementioned better prices and product offered by industries. Do you see people buying and selling illegal cigarettes or alcohol? No, because they are regulated. And I didn't mean Canada, you idiot. I said "cartels". That is almost exclusively used to refer to Mexican and Colombian drug gangs. They kill off judges and police in Mexico/Colombia in order to keep their workers out of jail and smuggle drugs into the U.S. They then use the money to buy guns from gun-runners in the U.S. to use back in Mexico. They also kill American troops trying to stop them from crossing the border. This means that Colombia and Mexico also have bad relations with the U.S. because we buy the drugs from their criminals and fund the cartels' war on their own country, and on us. If you want to TRULY sum it up: Drugs would be safer for consumers, black market would be wiped out, soldiers/police/judges would stop being killed, money would stay in our economy, international relationships would be more positive, and you don't understand economics. Want more reasons? Okay.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

How about the economic factor? The government doesn't get any of the hundreds of billions of dollars floating around in the black market. If we legalized drugs and cut the funding to gangs, we would get all that money. We'd save money from not having to pay for trials for drug-related charges; which make up a vast majority of legal trouble, we wouldn't have to fund privately owned prisons; as the vast majority of prisoners in incarcerated for drug-related charges, we wouldn't have to fund the War on Drugs, and we wouldn't have to provide so much medical care for soldiers and cops injured by gangs in shootouts. We'd gain a massive amount of money as well by taxing drug sales, there would be many more jobs as far as working in factories or farms to produce drugs, and people wouldn't have to worry about losing their jobs due to drug tests. All that money could be put to use lowering taxes, building hospitals, building schools, providing healthcare, increasing the quality of our education, etc. Violent crime would go down because people wouldn't be hurting each other over territory or robbing to pay dealers. There would be a lot more man-power on the police force to take on criminals.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

How about other reasons? If drugs were legal, we'd have less to worry about in the area of the corruption of politicians. Politicians can get easy lobbying money if they support the War on Drugs. Cartels, who, again, make money from prohibition will support them. Alcohol and cigarette companies who don't want competition will support them. Cops who get funding specifically to bust drug users will support them. It doesn't matter about their other values, there's money for them just for that reason. Police officers will also regularly take money they seized from drug busts. If that money isn't there, cops won't be tempted to steal it. If drugs are legal, corrupt politicians can't use that as a platform for lobbying. It's also a stepping stone for corrupt politicians to take away other civil liberties. The more that are taken away, the easier it is to keep taking them away. Face it, you have no idea who you are arguing with or what you are arguing about. Think about your position on the subject. Everything I've said is true, and you'd have to be completely insane to deny it, it all stands up to reason. You're wrong, but you won't be if you switch sides.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's funny that everything you say has such a tinge of arrogance, when so much of it is wrong. I read what you say and start to evaluate just what I should refute first, then I realize that I am in fact arguing about whether all drugs should be legal and I gotta wonder if I'm talking to someone with autism and a narcissism complex. Try not to think you're special, being one of a group of way to many druggies that kill bits of there life every day and tries to validate makes you kind of people a dime a dozen. The fact of the matter is, there's a reason the world doesn't agree with your position, it's fucking stupid. Saying things like it will actually help our economy or out weigh the down sides actually make me pity you a bit. You want to throw your life away? Knock yourself out, no one cares. But then just let natural selection happen and die off, stop trying to destroy other people too

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yet you can't even point out what's wrong. I believe you meant you evaluated what to refute first, but realized you couldn't refute any of it. Why do you assume I'm a druggie? Do you have any evidence to suggest I'm a druggie? You're just showing your ignorance by assuming I'm a big drug user, but I'm not. I just know what I'm talking about. That's not the reason at all, it's because people as a whole are lied to and aren't educated on the topic. Funny, the world used to disagree with the Earth being round. The world used to disagree with women's rights, and colored people's rights. Does that make those concepts fucking stupid, too? It doesn't even matter what we're arguing about, just look at our behavior. I listed a large amount of facts that stand up to reason. You haven't listed a single logical fact, nor have you refuted ANY of mine. You've resorted to calling me names and trying to invalidate what I say by claiming I'm autistic or narcissistic. Any way you slice it, you've officially lost this argument. It's not even an argument anymore, it's me being right and you calling me names. You should rethink your position. You're one of the most ignorant people I've encountered.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I'm not even going to argue with you anymore. I'm going to let the police officers, DEA officers, judges, and politicians of the organization Law Enforcement Against Prohibition do it for me. You can't even begin to know as much about the War on Drugs as they do. People that have actually fought it, seen the destruction first hand. People who hate drugs, too, still want them legal. http://www.leap.cc/about/why-legalize-drugs/

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So so sad. Probably one of the most childish things you can do in an argument is start saying 'Im right I've won you lost and there's nothing else.' the thing is, the argument as a whole is absurd and I can't take it seriously, it's as if you were trying to argue that gay people should be put to death, as many points you may bring up and think are justified, you're simply wrong. Drugs kill; death trumps putting money into our economy. I can tell you think you're smart, but you just aren't good at this

by Anonymous 11 years ago

The thing is, though, that's exactly what you've been doing this whole time. The argument IS absurd; your side, that is. No, see, that's what your side of the argument basically is. You can't even point out a specific point of mine you think is wrong; and even if you did, you could never actually refute it with sound logic. It's funny you say death trumps putting money in the economy, because the Drug War causes a lot of deaths. Impure drugs cause deaths, armed robbery causes deaths, dirty needles cause deaths, gang violence causes deaths, etc. Deaths would go down as a whole if drugs were legal. I truly can't believe how ignorant you are, which brings me back to my original point that you're trolling. I'm not good at this? I just won this argument beyond any and all reasonable doubt. You haven't brought up a single point or counterpoint since three comments ago. You haven't brought up a single logical point at any time during this whole argument. Give up.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I cannot believe you are not grasping this concept. Do a little research, come back and apologize

by Anonymous 11 years ago

@Mike_Hawk I love you

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Why, because I'm bored enough to actually keep an argument with this person going? Haha.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

haha because you actually know what your talking about when it comes to drug use.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

K

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If there was a hell, rapist and pedophiles would be sent to the worst place they could imagine..their own personal hell.

by Anonymous 12 years ago