Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Hero dad charged with murder

13»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 7,975 ✭✭✭Hitchens


    Maphisto wrote: »
    Your position is quite simple then? But there are degees of paediphila:

    - what about the person (because there are women too) who never acts on their "perversion"?

    - the person who just looks at a few pictures, never goes near children?

    Kill them all?

    now that's just the old 'whataboutery', 'one size fits all' fallback


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Maphisto wrote: »
    Your position is quite simple then? But there are degees of paediphila:

    - what about the person (because there are women too) who never acts on their "perversion"?

    - the person who just looks at a few pictures, never goes near children?

    Kill them all?

    If they never act on it (as in no child is actually harmed) then he won't turn up on anybody's radar ........

    But if he looks at "a few pictures" then he is guilty of harming a child ........ somebody took those pictures of that real child to sell/share with other paedophiles


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,014 ✭✭✭Maphisto


    Hitchens wrote: »
    now that's just the old 'whataboutery', 'one size fits all' fallback

    I am not the one advocating

    One size fits all = execute pedophiles
    MadDog76 wrote: »
    If they never act on it (as in no child is actually harmed) then he won't turn up on anybody's radar ........
    But if he looks at "a few pictures" then he is guilty of harming a child ........ somebody took those pictures of that real child to sell/share with other paedophiles

    I appreciate that children were harmed but they should still be put to death?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭The King of Moo


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    We all have our roles in life .......... some we choose and some we find ourselves in out of circumstances ......... a soldier during wartime for example.

    If I was ever unfortunate enough to knowingly come into contact with one (because of my children or a young relative) then that role may become mine and I wouldn't shy away from it .............

    Good man yourself Maddog. So if you saw Rolf Harris in the street (assuming he's found guilty) would you murder him, or leave him for the family of one of his victims to murder?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Maphisto wrote: »
    I am not the one advocating

    One size fits all = execute pedophiles



    I appreciate that children were harmed but they should still be put to death?

    Yes they should .......... paedophilia is some sort genetic malfunction and the afflicted are too be pitied, there doesn't seem to be any known cure for this disease which is also tragic .......... however my sympathy ends when harm comes to our most vulnerable members of society ....... if a paedophile is killed (by whoever for whatever reason) and that prevents any number of children being harmed in the future then it can only be seen as a good thing.

    Let me ask you something .......... why defend them?? Are you or do you know anybody who is (on some "level") a paedophile?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Good man yourself Maddog. So if you saw Rolf Harris in the street (assuming he's found guilty) would you murder him, or leave him for the family of one of his victims to murder?

    The honest answer is I don't know what I would do ............ but I do know that I wouldn't shed a tear if he was "murdered" .......... if the law won't lock a convicted paedophile away for life to protect children then his victims (family and friends of victims are also victims) may feel obliged to take the law into their own hands and I can't/won't condemn them for it


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,014 ✭✭✭Maphisto


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    Yes they should .......... paedophilia is some sort genetic malfunction and the afflicted are too be pitied, there doesn't seem to be any known cure for this disease which is also tragic .......... however my sympathy ends when harm comes to our most vulnerable members of society ....... if a paedophile is killed (by whoever for whatever reason) and that prevents any number of children being harmed in the future then it can only be seen as a good thing.

    Let me ask you something .......... why defend them?? Are you or do you know anybody who is (on some "level") a paedophile?

    Wow MadDog Nice Fucking try mate.

    I'm not defending them I'm merely trying to hi-light the holes in the "Kill them All" camp's argument. I notice as well that you have rather skirted round the issue there saying if they're killed by happenstance, good luck.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Maphisto wrote: »
    Wow MadDog Nice Fucking try mate.

    I'm not defending them I'm merely trying to hi-light the holes in the "Kill them All" camp's argument. I notice as well that you have rather skirted round the issue there saying if they're killed by happenstance, good luck.

    I'll take it your answer is a no then?

    I'm not skirting the issue, I'll say it clearly .......... I don't care who kills a paedophile or why he kills one, the ends justify the means, the result is the same and it's the results I applaud.

    Bad people sometimes (accidentally even) do great things!!


Advertisement