[WhiteDesire]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p ... 538657.stm

[Bob]

Presuming he goes back to England, I hope they nail the bastard again and give him another 10 or 20 years.

3 years for molesting an 11-year-old and a 12-year-old? Vietnam was much too kind to the creep.

[homintern]

Presuming he goes back to England, I hope they nail the bastard again and give him another 10 or 20 years. 3 years for molesting an 11-year-old and a 12-year-old? Vietnam was much too kind to the creep.

Presumably you think he's not mentally ill then, Bob? Any human being is capable of such actions should they so choose?

[Bob]

Presumably you think he's not mentally ill then, Bob? Any human being is capable of such actions should they so choose?

What's your point, Homi? You trying to assert he is mentally ill? If so, how would you know?

I don't accept the concept that diddling kiddies equates to mental illness.

[homintern]

I don't accept the concept that diddling kiddies equates to mental illness.

So any adult can choose to be a kiddy-fiddler - there's something innately attractive about it?

[Marsilius]

The man has been punished in law once. Why ever should he be punished again? We don't do that to any other people who break the law.

[homintern]

The man has been punished in law once. Why ever should he be punished again? We don't do that to any other people who break the law.

If he has a mental condition there's an argument for on-going treatment, where in principle I agree with Bob. Where we differ is that I believe a paedophile acts under a compulsion and thus the use of emotive language is entirely inappropriate, just as I don't condemn schizophrenics or indeed drug addicts including alcoholics. What people like Bob want is a bet each way - they want paedophiles locked up for life but they're not prepared to admit the corollary - in a civilised society we lock people up for life where there's no potential for cure, therefore paedophiles are sick. If they're not sick then anyone (including Bob) could choose to be a paedophile. However Bob and I have crossed swords before on this sort of issue - Bob believes that prisoners, for example, should be punished while they are in prison, rather than prison itself being the form of punishment, by depriving them of the generally-accepted minimum standard of accommodation

One of the benefits of religion (which generally I abhor in its popular forms) is its fostering of compassion and the understanding that we are all sinners (however you want to define that, and I prefer the Buddhist one - we all suffer through a failure to face reality)
I suppose I should stop wittering on and get back to the Mem'sahibs (and the gin)

[Chao Na]

I think you have to have a mental condition to take someone else's life, too. But that doesn't mean we should put them back on the street after a couple therapy sessions.

[Bob]

I suppose I should stop wittering on and get back to the Mem'sahibs (and the gin)

Hell, a lot of your posts would suggest you've already been there!

You don't accurately state my views and I realize that's difficult to do with one-liners on a message board. Your suggested analysis (through your questions, I suppose) is rather simplistic. Everybody could do anything (rob a bank, diddle a kid, whatever) but applying that rationale to the Glitter situation is about as useful as asking somebody what his/her favorite color might be.
I have no reason to believe Glitter is mentally ill - at least to the degree that it ought to fully or partially exculpate him for
responsibility for breaking laws in place. If you have such information, spit it out (it's apparent you know diddley about the topic and are just in the usual mode of rib poking).
My comment is that I find it inappropriate that somebody only gets 3 years for molesting a 9-year-old and a 12-year-old (and Mr. Glitter ought to feel lucky that it didn't happen in his home country or mine). I also have no problem with one's home country re-prosecuting as it is the home country's right (you may not like it and may spout some theoretical babble why it shouldn't occur but it is the law and it does occur). In this particular case, I'm all for it. Go England!

[homintern]

I have no reason to believe Glitter is mentally ill - at least to the degree that it ought to fully or partially exculpate him for responsibility for breaking laws in place.

So, logically, Garry Glitter = sane adult = Bob ??

[Bob]

I have no reason to believe Glitter is mentally ill - at least to the degree that it ought to fully or partially exculpate him for responsibility for breaking laws in place.

So, logically, Garry Glitter = sane adult = Bob ??

Sure, to the same extent you believe 2 + 2 = 5; besides, when did I ever claim to be either sane or an adult?

[homintern]

when did I ever claim to be either sane or an adult?

Quite

[WhiteDesire]

In the above UK paper, it says when he is released he is entitled to go anywhere he pleases, he will sent to the airport in Vietnam and can go anywhere, according to his lawyer.

[Brad the Impala]

In the above UK paper, it says when he is released he is entitled to go anywhere he pleases, he will sent to the airport in Vietnam and can go anywhere, according to his lawyer.

Yes, that's what being released means!

[WhiteDesire]

... that he could be allowed to go anywhere upon his release.