[Public_Domain]

[martin14]

llama66 llama66:

Xort Xort:

27 years seems a bit high for not killing, raping and eating people.

So... let me get this straight... you think 27 years for possessing child Porn, building a dungeon, having a child sized coffin is too harsh a sentence?

It certainly doesn't match the normal sentence for kiddie diddlers, which is
usually a joke.

$1:

Dude, it is not harsh enough. eventually the child porn would no longer do "it" for that sick fuck, and he would go and grab a child to rape, murder and eat... imagine it being your child. Imagine how terrible you'd feel.

Good on the system for being courageous enough to hand down a sentence like this.

Ok, but it still smacks of pre-crime nonsense because he hadn't done anything....

I'll grant you a big YET, though.

Our system is supposed to punish after the fact, not before.

[herbie]

So in a country where the harshest sentence given out in 50 years (40 years before parole eligibilty) was just given out, some of you think 27 years for possesing child porn and THINKING about pervo killing isn't enough.

[Brenda]

llama66 llama66:

So... let me get this straight... you think 27 years for possessing child Porn, building a dungeon, having a child sized coffin is too harsh a sentence?

Dude, it is not harsh enough. eventually the child porn would no longer do "it" for that sick fuck, and he would go and grab a child to rape, murder and eat... imagine it being your child. Imagine how terrible you'd feel.

Good on the system for being courageous enough to hand down a sentence like this.

The only thing that is illegal is the possession of child porn.

I didn't realize that we have become the thought police, throwing people in jail for what they think about.

In completely unrelated news, a 22 year old woman is sentenced to life without parole, because she didn't pull the trigger and killed a drug dealer during a robbery-going-wrong. Her friend pulled it, who has yet to be sentenced.

Ahhhh, America...

[ShepherdsDog]

There are some sick fucks out there who see nothing wrong with possessing or distributing child porn. They deserve a sharp object in the side of the neck too.

[desertdude]

This fucker was most probably going to do it and its a good thing he was stopped in his tracks but playing the devils advocate here it does sound odd to have the book thrown at someone for something he/she didn't do yet.

A lot of people talk a lot of smack, very few actually go through with it. Even when a crime is committed it has to be proved without a reasonable doubt that the person was guilty and some even guilty get away with shit like like temporary insanity or have their wrist slapped because mommy didn't hold them enough.

But being a kiddie porner 27 years is just fine with me.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

herbie herbie:

So in a country where the harshest sentence given out in 50 years (40 years before parole eligibilty) was just given out, some of you think 27 years for possesing child porn and THINKING about pervo killing isn't enough.

He didn't just THINK about it, he wrote about his desire on-line.

If someone had a basement full of firearms, ammunition and explosives and was writing on-line about his/her desire to kill a bunch of people with them, should they just get slapped on the wrist for it?

I think in instances where you not only write about your desire to commit reprehensibly illegal acts, but you have the equipment in your possession to carry out those acts as well, then you've "telegraphed" your intent.

[herbie]

So a 16 year old sexting her boyfriend is distributing child pornography according to current Candian law and should get 27 years? For flashing her tits?
Cuz when the draconian black and white Law&Odor mandatory sentence types get their way, that's what always turns out in the end.
In the headlined case the Judge made the decision and it's an incredibly stiff sentence, yet here's all the complaints that it's still not enough.
Gripe about Sharia Law in one thread and demand Biblical Justice in another?

[desertdude]

Well lets just put in this prospective, probably it will make sense to a lot of people here. A group of jihadis/islamists/fundies/obama lovers/whatever your choice of villan is talking of carrying out an act of terrorism and get caught with a lot of ammunition. Should they be allowed to go, because technically they haven't committed any crime yet or just be charged with weapon possession or charged with whatever the term is for intent to commit an act of terror etc etc.

Food for thought eh ?

[Xort]

llama66 llama66:

So... let me get this straight... you think 27 years for possessing child Porn, building a dungeon, having a child sized coffin is too harsh a sentence?

Yes. He didn't make the porn, and he has not hurt anyone.

$1:

Dude, it is not harsh enough. eventually the child porn would no longer do "it" for that sick fuck, and he would go and grab a child to rape, murder and eat... imagine it being your child. Imagine how terrible you'd feel.

Well he didn't do anything of those things, so what he should get is mental health care, not jail time. In 27 years he is going to walk free, untreated.

$1:

Good on the system for being courageous enough to hand down a sentence like this.

Yes we need to make thinking about commiting a crime carry a harsher sentance than doing the crime.

desertdude desertdude:

Well lets just put in this prospective, probably it will make sense to a lot of people here. A group of jihadis/islamists/fundies/obama lovers/whatever your choice of villan is talking of carrying out an act of terrorism and get caught with a lot of ammunition. Should they be allowed to go, because technically they haven't committed any crime yet or just be charged with weapon possession or charged with whatever the term is for intent to commit an act of terror etc etc.

They shouldn't be punished as if they had killed or hurt people.

[llama66]

Mere possession of child porn is an offence. I don't really give a shit if he directly made the shit or not. What they do to children when they make that shit, is unspeakable. But hey, he didn't hurt anyone. I've worked with children that have been sexually abused, and shit like this really, really pisses me off, so if you feel that he should have got a lighter sentence, I feel sorry for you. Because once he's out its only a matter of time before he actually carries out his plan.

[saturn_656]

$1:

Yes we need to make thinking about commiting a crime carry a harsher sentance than doing the crime.

Had he actually abducted, raped, killed, and ate a kid his sentence would have been much stiffer than 27 years.

Think life in prison, or the death penalty for places that have it.

[Brenda]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

$1:

Yes we need to make thinking about commiting a crime carry a harsher sentance than doing the crime.

Had he actually abducted, raped, killed, and ate a kid his sentence would have been much stiffer than 27 years.

Think life in prison, or the death penalty for places that have it.

So 27 years for possession of child porn (which is the only crime he actually committed and can be proven without reasonable doubt) is not a stiff sentence?

Hell, if you can't (or just don't want to) prove beyond reasonable doubt that someone shot someone else dead on purpose, they walk. Regardless of the dead person.
Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt he abducted, raped, killed and ate a kid? Nope. That part of case dismissed. Are thoughts illegal? Nope.
Is building shit in your basement illegal? Nope.
Is writing fiction on the internet illegal? Nope.

Although I am appalled by this man's thoughts, they are not illegal. I personally think that if the Court took that part into consideration, the judge should have (involuntarily) admitted the guy to a mental institution and send him to jail for the child porn.

[saturn_656]

Brenda Brenda:

So 27 years for possession of child porn (which is the only crime he actually committed and can be proven without reasonable doubt) is not a stiff sentence?

It is a stiff sentence, never said it wasn't. The punishment would be more severe had he acted on his scheme. Keep in mind this is the US, not lenient Canada.

$1:

Is building shit in your basement illegal? Nope.

Depends on what you are building.

$1:

Is writing fiction on the internet illegal? Nope.

Depends on what he is writing. He wasn't writing a fictional novel.

[Brenda]

At this point, it still is. It has not been turned into reality.