If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Originally posted by Kermit
In a random tangent, and again its asked in the same spirit as Skive's question:
What is preferable? seeing your child molested or seeing your child killed by a speeding driver? And that questions to everyone, really.
Put it another way. What if a parent allowed their toddler to wander out on the street in his nappy (as I have seen happening in Southmead, Bristol, when visiting my wife's folks) and that child was run down and killed as they ambled out from behind a parked car? Would you think it reasonable for the parent concerned to blame the driver, and 'be on their back' till they die? Would the fact that the parent had very strong views about separating paedophiles from their testacles (or otherwise) excuse that parent from failing to protect his/her child from another avoidable danger?
Perspective = perversion, I guess :rolleyes:
Correct me if I'm wrong here (and I'm sure everyone will) but the point of this thread is that parents tend to obsess about the relatively remote threat of 'stranger danger', while not taking steps to safeguard their kith and kin from more immediate, potentially fatal, threats. And then, in the very remote instance that their kids are molested, it happens practically under their nose, and almost invariably not at the hands of a stranger at all.
Originally posted by Skive
Do you not think it's important to distinguish between manslaughter and murder?
Murder is taking someones life with intent. However stupid death by dangerous driving is - I still don't think it equates to murder.
I think 99% of us read your post right first time, Becky.
You seem to have a real problem with disagreement.
Well come on you know thats a totally different kettle of fish, of course the parent is to blame :rolleyes:
We are not actually debating the subject of toddlers roaming, but if you would care to start a topic of that nature then im sure we would have the same opinion on that.
Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Put it another way. What if a parent allowed their toddler to wander out on the street in his nappy (as I have seen happening in Southmead, Bristol, when visiting my wife's folks) and that child was run down and killed as they ambled out from behind a parked car?
Not so much a different kettle of fish as a different way of looking at the way parents view threats to their children. We certainly can't assume that parents who allow their kids to roam the streets are as concerned about the risk from paedophiles as you are, but if asked, they would probably say they are, and tell you in graphic detail about what should be done to nonces. But if you asked them if they worried about traffic, which is a much bigger threat to wandering tykes, you would probably go away with a flea in your ear, if not a bleeding nose.
I think sometimes some of you get defensive when all you are being asked to do is clarify your argument for someone or make a point more, well, pointed.
It's not just repetition for the sake of it, and its not because you are not making sense, it is just to stop unneccesary misunderstandings.
Not everyone wants to shoot your argument down in flames, sometimes people are just interested to hear more of what you have to say.................
Please show me where I disagreed. Please, itd make for interesting reading. Just because I think that paedophilia is given too much hysterical attention for the amount of victims that there are doesnt mean that I think paedophilia is good.
And I read the thread in Anything Goes. Never have I read such verbal excrement. Maybe if someone could show me WHY 0.017% of the population needs so much attention given to them when 30 times as many children are harmed by parental negligence and by other avoidable dangers I might change my tune a bit.
Well you are if all you are going to do is repeat to me how horrible paedophilia is. Being blown up in a nuclear explosion is quite quite terrible too, it doesnt mean thats its rational to build a nuclear bunker to protect your kids then let not bother buying a smoke alarm to protect them from domestic fires. Or to campaign for the removal of speed-prevention cameras or traffic-calming measures (speed is one of the biggest killers of children) whilst demanding the death penalty for a tiny number of offenders who attack children.
We arent, but thats not the point. We are just as equally not debating how awful padeophilic crimes can be for the victim, yet both you and Morroccan Roll seem determined to keep raising this irrelevant point over and over again. Paedophilia can be devastating for the victim and his or her family, thats not in question. Understand that and stop telling me how awful paedophilia can be.
What the debate is about is whether or not the HYSTERIA regarding paedophilia is warranted or not. Do you think it is reasonable for the media to be campaigning that theres a pedo on every street corner when at the very most 0.017% of the population is a pedo or has pedo tendencies? Do you think that the media attention for 0.017% is merited when the very same media is campaigning for the removal of speed cameras and traffic-calming measures, devices which have been proven to save hundreds of childrens lives and livelihoods each year?
Do you think it is reasonable to ban a parent taking naked baby pictures of their child because someone, somewhere, might find it sexually attractive? Do you think it reasonable to stop primary school nativity plays being filmed, to stop a perv wanking over it? Do you think this is reasonable when train safety and the Green Cross Code is barely taught in school any more, depsite the fact 10 children have been killed or injured on the railways this year alone, and probably a hundred more been killed or injured by speeding drivers or failing to cross the road properly?
Do you think pedos are a bigger danger than house fires; so much so that all parents are scared about perverts yet only about 45% of homes have working smoke detectors- something that costs £7 to buy, and can save lives? So much so that parents are scared about perverts yet only about 30% of homes with young children have stair-gates and electrical socket covers? So much so that parents are scared about perverts yet bottles of bleach and medicine are still left in reach of children?
At the very most 10 children are killed each YEAR either by or because of perverts. 10 children a WEEK are injured or killed by speeding drivers or drunk drivers. 10 children a WEEK are admitted to Casualty after eating or drinking bleach, cleaning fluid and prescription medicine left in their reach?
Are you seriously telling me that 10 children warrant all the attention, yet 1040 children warrant none? Thats the persepctive I mean, its not an argument about how horrific paedophilia can be because there isnt anyone on these boards who doesnt find paedophilia disgusting and horrific.
I look forward to your replies.
In the small village/town I live in just outside Aberdeen they have lowered the speed limits to 20mph between 8:15am till 9:15am and again at 2:30pm till 4pm. This is to enable a safty-zone for kids walking to and from school. What worries me is the number of people who ignore this temp speed limit and hurtle past at 30, 40 and sometimes higher.
Infact a couple of months back some lady was stopped in her BMW doing 58mph. Her excuse. The kids were late for school!!
At my Son's school they are taught about stranger danger and I would like to think that Ryan is smart enough to know the dangers. He is also taught about road danger, dangers in the house and stuff but that doesn't come from the school. That is "in-house training".
I remember when I was a kid there was always ads on the TV for Raod Safety (The Green Cross Code, Tufty Club), Stranger Danger (Charlie Says........), danger of fire and others including swimming in rivers, flying kites beside pylons and climbing into electrical sub-stations to get your footie back. Where have all these adverts gone? We are constantly being told that children these days are watching more and more TV so surely this is the medium to get these safety points across.
Its a real threat in that its a threat that actually exists, but its a threat that too much emphasis IS placed on. As Ive said, even if there were ONE MILLION pedos in this country, this represents only about 0.017% (1/60th) of the population. Its a threat, sure, but not one that should hog the limelight in the way that it does. To read the newspapers and listen to the views of some on here, youd think 50 kids a week were being killed in this country by some mad child-rapist, when in fact in the last two years I can think of only two deaths off the top of my head- Sarah Payne and a 27-year-old woman who killed herself because of the abuse she had suffered. Two deaths that shouldnt have happened, but still only two deaths. Though obviously more will have happened.
That's were I disagree with you. Where is the problem in over-emphasising the danger? The problem, as you have rightly raised, is the under-ephasis on the other dangers.
LOL here goes
I think yes the hysteria against peadophilia is warranted. Im not gonna go over the same road as its horrible etc, but as far as any crime goes rape/sexual offences be it woman/man/child is one of the worst ones to live with, thats why I feel so strongly on this subject.
As far as traffic calming etc then yes I have to agree its stupidity to not have them, speed cameras etc. They can and I presume DO save lives, so if they save any life then why get rid ? Stupidity in my opinion.
I think a lot more needs to be done like teaching in schools of green cross code etc, also having more adverts on T.V re fires, I also think we should have T.V adverts showing horrific car accidents (like they do in some other countries) because its not till you actually see a crash scene does it actually hit home.......that could save a life. But again im not talking just children this could affect adult or child, where as peadophilia is a crime against children.
One more thing you have given me many examples here which yes I agree with what you are saying but one thing I would like to repeat when a peadophile gets his/her pleasure it is NOT an accident, many things you have said are and could happen to anyone be they 2 years old or 100 years old.
Im not arguing, why do people think I am. Im not brilliant at getting my point across and you lot are taking me the wrong way. Im not sat here calling you a *cough, cough* , really im not
Going back to safety in the streets I think some parents need a lot more education. Children should not be allowed to roam the street as you say there are many dangers in the outside world.
Im quite strict with my Daughter, I have certain rules and regulations which she must stick to otherwise she is for the high jump, but at the end of the day its her welfare that concerns me.
Is that for my benefit
hehe
0.017 as a fraction or 1.7% to be accurate.........
Paranoid!! You should give yourself more credit BeckyBoo. No, I think it happens to all of us, especially when we are passionate about what we are saying and get swept along by it.......
So why do we have such situations where parents can't film school plays anymore?
what angers people so much is that these people are planning and plotting their next move, wether it be lust or proffit.
It's pathetic aint it.
What harm can come of videoing a child at a nativity play ? They are fully clothed, ludicrous.
I know we have taken videos of most big events at school, basically anything our Becks is performing in we video. Its a keepsake for when she is older and also great videoing kids because if they make a boo boo it might get shown on you been framed
And thats the point Ive been getting at for two days.
And its the same situation with Julia Somerville's fiance, who took pictures of his stepdaughter playing in the bath (admittedly not *his* but still) and was then banged up in a police station for 24 hoursd before they realised that a two-year-old in the bath WASNT pornography.
Purely out of interest, what is your take on the use of child models in clothing catalogues, in particluar when modelling nightwear and swimwear? Should it be banned because paedophiles get off on it- one extremely dangerous pedo, in particular, had subscriptions to all the catalogues when he was arrested, and was in the process of cutting out the pictures and putting them in a scrapbook.
I feel if anyone is getting off at looking at children in catalogues then they should stop children from modelling in them....full stop. Maybe its the parents responsibility to not allow their child to do modelling ? Im not sure really.
You say this guy is extremely dangerous so I dont think the pictures these type of people want should be available. Having said that, I suppose if they cant get it in catalogues they will get it from somewhere.
Some pedos go to swimming pools and watch children swimming, and get off by looking at them. Care to ban swimming too?
He raped several young girls, I think, sometimes with violence, and hes serving life with no possibility of parole. Because hes an evil sick fuck.
But pedophilia is being sexually attracted to children- it need not be naked children, though it obviously helps. From what Ive read, them seeing a pretty eight-year-old walking down the street would arouse them in the same way a normal straight man seeing Keira Knightley in the high street would be aroused.