Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

A Q for the bored

2

Comments

  • DerekJohnsonDerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 64,059 Founders Club
    edited July 2014
    HuskyJW said:

    I'm sure there might be some that have the sentiment "poor kid never stood a chance." Maybe even a grain of truth to it.....but you're older now and you know it's wrong.

    HuskyJW said:

    There isn't anything lower than hurting a child. But if you follow the same path and you know the pain and trauma it causes.....then I hope you DIAFF.

    That being said....My Doog quote of the day....I'd rather my 4 year old son showers at Penn State then go to UO.

    So no sympathy if the trauma caused by the molestation caused the victim to become a molester?

    What should be done with molestation victims?

    I found this in a study

    "Among 747 males the risk of being a perpetrator was positively correlated with reported sexual abuse victim experiences. The overall rate of having been a victim was 35% for perpetrators and 11% for non-perpetrators. Of the 96 females, 43% had been victims but only one was a perpetrator. A high percentage of male subjects abused in childhood by a female relative became perpetrators. Having been a victim was a strong predictor of becoming a perpetrator, as was an index of parental loss in childhood."

    bjp.rcpsych.org/content/179/6/482.full

    sounds like some university needs a grant so they can study the poasters of Hardcore Husky.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,886

    I read that Sandusky's son is going go on Oprah and tell about how he was abused by Sandusky. It got me thinking... It is known that victims of abuse often become abusers. Would there be any sympathy if any of Sandusky's victims were ever identified as molesters themselves? If Sandusky was a victim of abuse would there be any sympathy for him?

    I wonder because obviously child molesters are vilified and we wish nothing but a cruel and painful death for them, and their victims are treated very sympathetically and with great care. When victim turns into victimizer due to the abuse, is sympathy given to the victim negated?

    I agree that most molesters including the older Sandusky were molested themselves but I don't have sympathy for molesters. They need to learn how to exhibit self control over their urges, no matter how strong. Most if not all molesters know what they are doing is wrong and feel guilt to borderline suicidal after committing the horrific acts.

    After all Many of us non-molesters have about busted our waistbands when being around a hot treat whose 16 going on 25 and a little flirty. But we didn't act upon that urge because a) the potential 15-20 and b) It's just not right in our culture.

    For a molester there is help for their urges. They just need to have the guts to face up to their condition and get the help.
  • BennyBeaverBennyBeaver Member Posts: 13,346
    Damone for Governor.
  • AZDuckAZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    Serious answer: I think that evidence that a perpetrator was molested as a child should be admitted as "evidence in mitigation" on sentencing and should be considered for that purpose.

    The problem is, however, that treatment programs for pedophiles are notoriously ineffective and pedophiles have extremely high recividism rates. So, if you're looking to rehabilitate the offender or protect society, you don't really get much from mitigation for abused pedos.

  • oregonblitzkriegoregonblitzkrieg Member Posts: 15,288
    edited July 2014
    Simple solution. Amputate the penis and nutsack after the first offense. Give them to someone who really needs some balls. Problem solved.
  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,511 Founders Club
    TheGlove said:

    Damone for Governor Emperor.

  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 44,520 Standard Supporter
    Take this molestor shit to the Jesuit board where it belongs.

    http://www.guboards.spokesmanreview.com/
  • CuntWaffleCuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,499

    HuskyJW said:

    There isn't anything lower than hurting a child. But if you follow the same path and you know the pain and trauma it causes.....then I hope you DIAFF.

    That being said....My Doog quote of the day....I'd rather my 4 year old son showers at Penn State then go to UO.

    So no sympathy if the trauma caused by the molestation caused the victim to become a molester?

    What should be done with molestation victims?

    I found this in a study

    "Among 747 males the risk of being a perpetrator was positively correlated with reported sexual abuse victim experiences. The overall rate of having been a victim was 35% for perpetrators and 11% for non-perpetrators. Of the 96 females, 43% had been victims but only one was a perpetrator. A high percentage of male subjects abused in childhood by a female relative became perpetrators. Having been a victim was a strong predictor of becoming a perpetrator, as was an index of parental loss in childhood."

    bjp.rcpsych.org/content/179/6/482.full

    I blame guns.
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,789
    edited July 2014
    AZDuck said:

    Serious answer: I think that evidence that a perpetrator was molested as a child should be admitted as "evidence in mitigation" on sentencing and should be considered for that purpose.

    The problem is, however, that treatment programs for pedophiles are notoriously ineffective and pedophiles have extremely high recividism rates. So, if you're looking to rehabilitate the offender or protect society, you don't really get much from mitigation for abused pedos.

    All of a sudden the rate of pedos who were molestered as children just shot up to 100%.

    It's hard enough to discern whether sexual abuse has happened recently, it's damn near impossible to go back 40 or 50 years and determine whether someone was molestered or is just playing the molestered card for a lighter sentence.

    Not to mention, the penalties for molestation are already far too soft as it is. I just can't see this being any real benefit in our current system, especially with what you've noted about recidivism.
  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,511 Founders Club
    dnc said:

    AZDuck said:

    Serious answer: I think that evidence that a perpetrator was molested as a child should be admitted as "evidence in mitigation" on sentencing and should be considered for that purpose.

    The problem is, however, that treatment programs for pedophiles are notoriously ineffective and pedophiles have extremely high recividism rates. So, if you're looking to rehabilitate the offender or protect society, you don't really get much from mitigation for abused pedos.

    All of a sudden the rate of pedos who were molestered as children just shot up to 100%.

    It's hard enough to discern whether sexual abuse has happened recently, it's damn near impossible to go back 40 or 50 years and determine whether someone was molestered or is just playing the molestered card for a lighter sentence.

    Not to mention, the penalties for molestation are already far too soft as it is. I just can't see this being any real benefit in our current system, especially with what you've noted about recidivism.
    With child predators three strikes in one too many. Try to rehabilitate them once, during their LONG prison sentence, and if they slip up again, life without parole. Done with it. No more chance of them playing hide the weenie with pre-teens. Fuckasses.
  • CFetters_Nacho_LoverCFetters_Nacho_Lover Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,733 Founders Club

    HuskyJW said:

    There isn't anything lower than hurting a child. But if you follow the same path and you know the pain and trauma it causes.....then I hope you DIAFF.

    That being said....My Doog quote of the day....I'd rather my 4 year old son showers at Penn State then go to UO.

    So no sympathy if the trauma caused by the molestation caused the victim to become a molester?

    What should be done with molestation victims?

    I found this in a study

    "Among 747 males the risk of being a perpetrator was positively correlated with reported sexual abuse victim experiences. The overall rate of having been a victim was 35% for perpetrators and 11% for non-perpetrators. Of the 96 females, 43% had been victims but only one was a perpetrator. A high percentage of male subjects abused in childhood by a female relative became perpetrators. Having been a victim was a strong predictor of becoming a perpetrator, as was an index of parental loss in childhood."

    bjp.rcpsych.org/content/179/6/482.full

    I blame guns.
    I blame Republicans.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    dflea said:

    dflea said:

    Swaye said:

    But seriously, I feel bad for you if you get molestered. Really bad. I would even offer to shoot the molester, and mean it. However, if you then go molest a child, knowing how it fucked your entire world up, then I have little sympathy for you. And, I would shoot them as well. But, I'm an asshole.

    Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

    Every motherfucker can find an excuse if they need one, and they look hard enough.
    Explaining why someone did something and feeling bad for them doesn't excuse it. You need to learn the difference.
    I don't need to do anything because I'm not a judge. The explaining part is for the sentencing phase of the trial. Let's say the perp gets half the sentence he otherwise would is he can produce evidence he was abused.

    Explain it all you want, I don't give a fuck. People get handed baggage every day of their lives - some of it is heavy, some isn't. Whether you carry that baggage with you is your choice. The fact that the majority of those abused DO NOT become abusers proves it. It's just like kids whose parents knocked the crap out of them are more likely to do the same to their kids...........because they're still packing the baggage from their childhood. Well, there are plenty of parents who were knocked around that DON'T knock their kids around. They are parents that set that bag down and did what they knew was right, not what was done to them.

    It's like I said...............every motherfucker has an excuse. Just ask them. If you had a kid that was abused, I think your sympathy meter might swing the other way, regardless if the abuser was abused.

    wtf? I must be half-buzzed to type all that....................
    Speaking of baggage ...

    If I've learned anything from being on these forums for 15 years or so it's you're one angry mother fucker.
    Swaye said:

    dnc said:

    AZDuck said:

    Serious answer: I think that evidence that a perpetrator was molested as a child should be admitted as "evidence in mitigation" on sentencing and should be considered for that purpose.

    The problem is, however, that treatment programs for pedophiles are notoriously ineffective and pedophiles have extremely high recividism rates. So, if you're looking to rehabilitate the offender or protect society, you don't really get much from mitigation for abused pedos.

    All of a sudden the rate of pedos who were molestered as children just shot up to 100%.

    It's hard enough to discern whether sexual abuse has happened recently, it's damn near impossible to go back 40 or 50 years and determine whether someone was molestered or is just playing the molestered card for a lighter sentence.

    Not to mention, the penalties for molestation are already far too soft as it is. I just can't see this being any real benefit in our current system, especially with what you've noted about recidivism.
    With child predators three strikes in one too many. Try to rehabilitate them once, during their LONG prison sentence, and if they slip up again, life without parole. Done with it. No more chance of them playing hide the weenie with pre-teens. Fuckasses.
    What about women abusers? Any difference?
  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,511 Founders Club

    dflea said:

    dflea said:

    Swaye said:

    But seriously, I feel bad for you if you get molestered. Really bad. I would even offer to shoot the molester, and mean it. However, if you then go molest a child, knowing how it fucked your entire world up, then I have little sympathy for you. And, I would shoot them as well. But, I'm an asshole.

    Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

    Every motherfucker can find an excuse if they need one, and they look hard enough.
    Explaining why someone did something and feeling bad for them doesn't excuse it. You need to learn the difference.
    I don't need to do anything because I'm not a judge. The explaining part is for the sentencing phase of the trial. Let's say the perp gets half the sentence he otherwise would is he can produce evidence he was abused.

    Explain it all you want, I don't give a fuck. People get handed baggage every day of their lives - some of it is heavy, some isn't. Whether you carry that baggage with you is your choice. The fact that the majority of those abused DO NOT become abusers proves it. It's just like kids whose parents knocked the crap out of them are more likely to do the same to their kids...........because they're still packing the baggage from their childhood. Well, there are plenty of parents who were knocked around that DON'T knock their kids around. They are parents that set that bag down and did what they knew was right, not what was done to them.

    It's like I said...............every motherfucker has an excuse. Just ask them. If you had a kid that was abused, I think your sympathy meter might swing the other way, regardless if the abuser was abused.

    wtf? I must be half-buzzed to type all that....................
    Speaking of baggage ...

    If I've learned anything from being on these forums for 15 years or so it's you're one angry mother fucker.
    Swaye said:

    dnc said:

    AZDuck said:

    Serious answer: I think that evidence that a perpetrator was molested as a child should be admitted as "evidence in mitigation" on sentencing and should be considered for that purpose.

    The problem is, however, that treatment programs for pedophiles are notoriously ineffective and pedophiles have extremely high recividism rates. So, if you're looking to rehabilitate the offender or protect society, you don't really get much from mitigation for abused pedos.

    All of a sudden the rate of pedos who were molestered as children just shot up to 100%.

    It's hard enough to discern whether sexual abuse has happened recently, it's damn near impossible to go back 40 or 50 years and determine whether someone was molestered or is just playing the molestered card for a lighter sentence.

    Not to mention, the penalties for molestation are already far too soft as it is. I just can't see this being any real benefit in our current system, especially with what you've noted about recidivism.
    With child predators three strikes in one too many. Try to rehabilitate them once, during their LONG prison sentence, and if they slip up again, life without parole. Done with it. No more chance of them playing hide the weenie with pre-teens. Fuckasses.
    What about women abusers? Any difference?
    Never compared the two mentally. I guess I feel child molesters are worse than women abusers. So maybe the abusers get three strikes. Who knows? But fuck the child molesters. Or something.
  • sarktasticsarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    edited July 2014

    I read that Sandusky's son is going go on Oprah and tell about how he was abused by Sandusky. It got me thinking... It is known that victims of abuse often become abusers. Would there be any sympathy if any of Sandusky's victims were ever identified as molesters themselves? If Sandusky was a victim of abuse would there be any sympathy for him?

    I wonder because obviously child molesters are vilified and we wish nothing but a cruel and painful death for them, and their victims are treated very sympathetically and with great care. When victim turns into victimizer due to the abuse, is sympathy given to the victim negated?

    You never mentioned what political connection the "victim" or victim's family is part of. That's a key detail before we can fairly pass judgement on the question of public punishment/forgiveness of any potential victim/prep don'tcha think?
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    Swaye said:

    dflea said:

    dflea said:

    Swaye said:

    But seriously, I feel bad for you if you get molestered. Really bad. I would even offer to shoot the molester, and mean it. However, if you then go molest a child, knowing how it fucked your entire world up, then I have little sympathy for you. And, I would shoot them as well. But, I'm an asshole.

    Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

    Every motherfucker can find an excuse if they need one, and they look hard enough.
    Explaining why someone did something and feeling bad for them doesn't excuse it. You need to learn the difference.
    I don't need to do anything because I'm not a judge. The explaining part is for the sentencing phase of the trial. Let's say the perp gets half the sentence he otherwise would is he can produce evidence he was abused.

    Explain it all you want, I don't give a fuck. People get handed baggage every day of their lives - some of it is heavy, some isn't. Whether you carry that baggage with you is your choice. The fact that the majority of those abused DO NOT become abusers proves it. It's just like kids whose parents knocked the crap out of them are more likely to do the same to their kids...........because they're still packing the baggage from their childhood. Well, there are plenty of parents who were knocked around that DON'T knock their kids around. They are parents that set that bag down and did what they knew was right, not what was done to them.

    It's like I said...............every motherfucker has an excuse. Just ask them. If you had a kid that was abused, I think your sympathy meter might swing the other way, regardless if the abuser was abused.

    wtf? I must be half-buzzed to type all that....................
    Speaking of baggage ...

    If I've learned anything from being on these forums for 15 years or so it's you're one angry mother fucker.
    Swaye said:

    dnc said:

    AZDuck said:

    Serious answer: I think that evidence that a perpetrator was molested as a child should be admitted as "evidence in mitigation" on sentencing and should be considered for that purpose.

    The problem is, however, that treatment programs for pedophiles are notoriously ineffective and pedophiles have extremely high recividism rates. So, if you're looking to rehabilitate the offender or protect society, you don't really get much from mitigation for abused pedos.

    All of a sudden the rate of pedos who were molestered as children just shot up to 100%.

    It's hard enough to discern whether sexual abuse has happened recently, it's damn near impossible to go back 40 or 50 years and determine whether someone was molestered or is just playing the molestered card for a lighter sentence.

    Not to mention, the penalties for molestation are already far too soft as it is. I just can't see this being any real benefit in our current system, especially with what you've noted about recidivism.
    With child predators three strikes in one too many. Try to rehabilitate them once, during their LONG prison sentence, and if they slip up again, life without parole. Done with it. No more chance of them playing hide the weenie with pre-teens. Fuckasses.
    What about women abusers? Any difference?
    Never compared the two mentally. I guess I feel child molesters are worse than women abusers. So maybe the abusers get three strikes. Who knows? But fuck the child molesters. Or something.
    I meant women child molesters. Any difference in how they should be punished vs. male? Should a 25 female abuser of a 13 year old boy get the same punishment as a 40 year old male abuser of a 13 year old boy? What if the victim is a 15 year old girl? Or a 15 year old boy? Does it matter?

    I say no.. Any adult having sex with someone under the age of consent in the state should get be treated the same way regardless of the age or gender or them or their victim?

    I say guys who wish a 25 year old female teacher would have had sex with them when they were 14 don't have any idea the long term damage that can be caused by that. Nice fantasy, but in reality not so much...
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,789

    Swaye said:

    dflea said:

    dflea said:

    Swaye said:

    But seriously, I feel bad for you if you get molestered. Really bad. I would even offer to shoot the molester, and mean it. However, if you then go molest a child, knowing how it fucked your entire world up, then I have little sympathy for you. And, I would shoot them as well. But, I'm an asshole.

    Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

    Every motherfucker can find an excuse if they need one, and they look hard enough.
    Explaining why someone did something and feeling bad for them doesn't excuse it. You need to learn the difference.
    I don't need to do anything because I'm not a judge. The explaining part is for the sentencing phase of the trial. Let's say the perp gets half the sentence he otherwise would is he can produce evidence he was abused.

    Explain it all you want, I don't give a fuck. People get handed baggage every day of their lives - some of it is heavy, some isn't. Whether you carry that baggage with you is your choice. The fact that the majority of those abused DO NOT become abusers proves it. It's just like kids whose parents knocked the crap out of them are more likely to do the same to their kids...........because they're still packing the baggage from their childhood. Well, there are plenty of parents who were knocked around that DON'T knock their kids around. They are parents that set that bag down and did what they knew was right, not what was done to them.

    It's like I said...............every motherfucker has an excuse. Just ask them. If you had a kid that was abused, I think your sympathy meter might swing the other way, regardless if the abuser was abused.

    wtf? I must be half-buzzed to type all that....................
    Speaking of baggage ...

    If I've learned anything from being on these forums for 15 years or so it's you're one angry mother fucker.
    Swaye said:

    dnc said:

    AZDuck said:

    Serious answer: I think that evidence that a perpetrator was molested as a child should be admitted as "evidence in mitigation" on sentencing and should be considered for that purpose.

    The problem is, however, that treatment programs for pedophiles are notoriously ineffective and pedophiles have extremely high recividism rates. So, if you're looking to rehabilitate the offender or protect society, you don't really get much from mitigation for abused pedos.

    All of a sudden the rate of pedos who were molestered as children just shot up to 100%.

    It's hard enough to discern whether sexual abuse has happened recently, it's damn near impossible to go back 40 or 50 years and determine whether someone was molestered or is just playing the molestered card for a lighter sentence.

    Not to mention, the penalties for molestation are already far too soft as it is. I just can't see this being any real benefit in our current system, especially with what you've noted about recidivism.
    With child predators three strikes in one too many. Try to rehabilitate them once, during their LONG prison sentence, and if they slip up again, life without parole. Done with it. No more chance of them playing hide the weenie with pre-teens. Fuckasses.
    What about women abusers? Any difference?
    Never compared the two mentally. I guess I feel child molesters are worse than women abusers. So maybe the abusers get three strikes. Who knows? But fuck the child molesters. Or something.
    I meant women child molesters. Any difference in how they should be punished vs. male? Should a 25 female abuser of a 13 year old boy get the same punishment as a 40 year old male abuser of a 13 year old boy? What if the victim is a 15 year old girl? Or a 15 year old boy? Does it matter?

    I say no.. Any adult having sex with someone under the age of consent in the state should get be treated the same way regardless of the age or gender or them or their victim?

    I say guys who wish a 25 year old female teacher would have had sex with them when they were 14 don't have any idea the long term damage that can be caused by that. Nice fantasy, but in reality not so much...
    agree
Sign In or Register to comment.