2006-11-09 03:10:33 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Don't get them so harsh that an offender think he might as well kill the child than let if go free. If the sentence for abuse is the same (or close) to murder, he might decided to risk being hung for a sheep as a lamb.
Must keep a GOOD distance between the two pealties, MAKE the offender realise that it is in their interest to let the child live.
(Remember that they know if they let the child go there is a stronger chance of being caught than if the child cannot give evidence)
If your priority is punishment of offendors, make the law harshers.
If your priority is survival of the abused child, DO NOT give the abuser a reason to kill them
2006-11-09 03:16:01 · answer #1 · answered by Mark T 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, no, I don't.
First of all, I'm not sure what YOU mean by "harsher laws".
Now, what I am sure we do agree on is that "more should be done about adult predators having sex with minors". That's not the same thing, because there's more we could do in a lot of areas besides mere laws.
Making them harsher might mean make them stricter. You mentioned "sex with minors", well, if we really want to cut this down, we might have to outlaw "solicitation of a minor for sex", or even "graphic discussion of sex with a minor", such as what Foley did.
However, another thing we could do is have stricter enforcement. The place to start with that is by holding elected representatives to the same standard, and no, Foley was NOT the only one. There have been governors, mayors, and Foley wasn't even the first member of Congress. Some in the past have been caught in the act. That's not a matter of making the laws harsher, it's a question of applying them uniformly, even to people in power. I'm not of the opinion that making it a crime to ask a child what he's wearing is going to discourage the behavior if someone gets a pass for actually having sex with a minor if they're an elected representative from the correct party.
Where this really has to start is with the public. People have to care enough about such things that they do not re-elect these people, and expel them from their private clubs, and not patronize their businesses. How can we expect a jury of twelve to care when their own neighbors and constituents don't seem to? Yes, that should be harsher, but it doesn't take a law.
Punishment? I don't know. I think there's some pretty severe punishments available already, but are they regularly used? Published in the news?
So, yes, we could do more, but I'm not sure new laws are the answer at this time.
2006-11-09 11:24:56 · answer #2 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. The reason why is because of their youth, children being perpetrated by adults, individuals who often times are the same persons who the child looks to for their first place of safety, nuturing and security, trust and to violate that is irreprehensible and cannot be tolerated in any society. Children who suffer sexual abuse are more apt to become adults who violate children or have other serious psychological problems which cause them to be predators. Although it has been researched that punishment even the possibility of death sentence doesnt have much correlation on the front end of prevention of crime in the first place. Sex with children is the worst crime I can think of. Harsher penalties should be imposed to keep these criminals off the streets and away from the possibility of even having the chance to do such acts again.
2006-11-09 11:23:48 · answer #3 · answered by Mensa Head 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that people who have sex with minors should be punished harshly. There is no excuse for people to ever have sex with minors. Children under 17 do not have anything to offer an adult, they have absolutely no business being in a relationship with an adult, and they do not have to wisdom to make 'grown up' decisions about sex.
2006-11-09 11:15:55 · answer #4 · answered by Mrs. Jackson 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We should take drug offenders out of prison and fill those cells with child predators. I'm sick of reading about lenient (probation) sentences given to women who have sex with minors when men are thrown in prison. I think the women should be viewed equally under the law since that is what they've been fighting for.
2006-11-09 11:15:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
no, usually the minor is a willing participant. Now if you mean sexual assault of a minor the penalty should be castration or death.
Since you did not say if you were talking about rape or about a boyfriend and girlfriend having mutual sex, this is impossible to really answer.
If a girl is 18 and her boyfriend is 17 do you really think she should go to jail for them having consentual sex??
2006-11-09 11:13:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋