The law-abiding pedophile
"Cops face a tough dilemma. If they do too little, they risk letting something horrible happen to a child -- and enraging a community that will be hard-pressed to understand why someone on law-enforcement’s radar could get away with a crime. If the police act too quickly, they might violate the civil liberties of a law-abiding citizen, no matter how repugnant to community standards his predilections might be."
If we admit it, there are times when we want the police to just "do something," even if it is unethical.
Comments (6)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
imo he'll slip up. he has a disease which only one can cure. all we can hope is that when he slips, the police will be right there to nap him and prevent any damage. pride goes before a fall...............
Posted on August 2, 2007 8:25 AM
Yeah, poor pitiful paedophile; we wouldn't want to injure his delicate self esteem or imfringe upon his stalking rights. Kids are tough, you know. They'll get over it. I mean, maybe the guy simply has that paedo gene. And if we call in the Hollywood experts and have them dress it up and present it as natural over and over and over again, people will stop being judgmental and we can all just get along. And the last thing we want to do is make somebody feel guilty for following their natural inclinations. Call a NAMBLA rep, he'll explain it all to you.
Yeah, it's a bit more controversial than some other practices that have been normalized in this way, but hey, if it feels good do it. You do your thing; I'll do mine. I mean, how can we judge this poor frustrated fellow; especially since there are no moral absolutes. Judge not, you know.
These poor, misunderstood child-lovers have been persecuted and rejected for ages: it's time to let them at last and fullfill their natural urges and live a normal life. Quirky or not, its sex, isn;t it? And everyone knows how important it is to express your libido and be free and unencumbered.
It just seems so unjust to intervene until he actaully does something. It's just like the terrorists: leave those poor innocent Imams alone on ariplanes and telephone calls. How could we even think of intervening until they actaully blow something up. You know, innocent until proven guilty. It's a good thing we have laws around to shield and protect these guys. Like I say, children are very resiliant.
(Hint - this is tongue in cheek - just tho't I better make that clear for some)
Posted on August 3, 2007 9:25 PM
Yeah, poor pitiful paedophile; we wouldn't want to injure his delicate self esteem or imfringe upon his stalking rights. Kids are tough, you know. They'll get over it. I mean, maybe the guy simply has that paedo gene. And if we call in the Hollywood experts and have them dress it up and present it as natural over and over and over again, people will stop being judgmental and we can all just get along. And the last thing we want to do is make somebody feel guilty for following their natural inclinations. Call a NAMBLA rep, he'll explain it all to you.
Yeah, it's a bit more controversial than some other practices that have been normalized in this way, but hey, if it feels good do it. You do your thing; I'll do mine. I mean, how can we judge this poor frustrated fellow; especially since there are no moral absolutes. Judge not, you know.
These poor, misunderstood child-lovers have been persecuted and rejected for ages: it's time to let them at last and fullfill their natural urges and live a normal life. Quirky or not, its sex, isn;t it? And everyone knows how important it is to express your libido and be free and unencumbered.
It just seems so unjust to intervene until he actaully does something. It's just like the terrorists: leave those poor innocent Imams alone on ariplanes and telephone calls. How could we even think of intervening until they actaully blow something up. You know, innocent until proven guilty. It's a good thing we have laws around to shield and protect these guys. Like I say, children are very resiliant.
(Hint - this is tongue in cheek - just tho't I better make that clear for some)
Posted on August 3, 2007 10:39 PM
While I am in NO WAY endorsing the crime of pedophilia, I believe that the two lawyers have infringed upon the civil rights of a person not convicted of a crime.
And the order saying that McCellan has to stay 10 yards from a child is ridiculous! Wonder how many children walked closer that that to him in LAX?
This is just a bunch of people preying upon the fear of the masses. How sad.
Posted on August 4, 2007 12:44 PM
"This is just a bunch of people preying upon the fear of the masses"..........
listen closely "(he gets a “high” from being around girls between 3 to 11 years old,)"....tic,tock, tick,tock.....this is the ticking of the bomb (i.e this pedophile).
what this is, is the masses keeping an eye on a confessed pedophile and rightly so. if the authorities knew of an individual who claimed to be a terrorist (on his blog site) and was targeting the USA but has never terrorized anyone (yet) would it not be prudent to monitor the activities of this individual or should we do as some imply....wait until he strikes ?! what some see as fear of the masses is really just a common sense approach to issues (imo).
Posted on August 8, 2007 8:54 AM
This perverted guy has ALREADY offended by dropping off the note. If a person actually has sex with a child, he/she should be tried and convicted lawfully, and then executed promptly - included priests et al.!
There is hardly any greater crime/sin; nor any more worthy of death. If this sin is so wretched and horrible, any evidence of potential offense should be dealt with VERY severely - even to the point of prosecution and doing time - with psychiatric treatment during - then monitored closely after any release - if that seems safe and feasible.
Posted on August 8, 2007 9:18 AM