I had heard a while back that some jailbirds had tattooed the forehead of some kiddy fiddler with some word or another. Can't remember but I remember almost crowing about how brilliant these jailbirds were! I'd have given them all a reprieve immediately!
What would YOU tattoo?
2007-02-26 10:31:45 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Peter. Feel free kid, but you'd have to tattoo the othe 98% of the population who agree with me. I think we'd have to tattoo 'Muppet' on yours.
2007-02-26 11:04:46 · update #1
Ooh - and 'Intemperate' means 'excessive' 'not moderate - especially in the use of alcoholic beverages'. And I definitely have not been drinkin'! Did you spill my pint pal??
2007-02-26 11:09:01 · update #2
Michael S
What a perfectly Utopian Universe you must live in. Comparing the danger of 'Paedos' with the danger of 'Alcoholics' or people that don't pay taxes is laughable in the extreme. Why don't you try comparing a like for like crime...substitute 'Rapist' for 'Alcoholic' in your reasoning and you will see that you DON'T HAVE AN ARGUMENT! And the way things are headed, perhaps leaving the punishment to the people who have had the crime happen to them could be considered as the way to go. 'Justice' in this country is an absolute piss take of every single person in the UK. Rapists, Murderers, Kiddy Fiddlers let out to repeat offences again & again & again. And who is responsible? What if one of them came after YOUR family. Of course a tattoo is an EXTREME warning but do you not think it would be nice to have a warning of some sort - any sort, to enable you to do the best you can for your family? The fact is - we are not given the CHOICE as these people are more protected than we are.
2007-02-27 10:33:24 · update #3
Yes.I would like it to be obvious,so whichever word that would make it clear.
2007-02-26 10:36:20 · answer #1 · answered by christian b 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Oh, great idea. Lets also tattoo an A for alcoholic (just so people know whether it is safe to leave their kids with somebody who might relapse and pass out), a S for shoplifting, just so shopowners can see who might steal in the future, maybe a DPT (Didn't pay taxes) so we can identify those people who don't do their part and another for every crime or misdemeanour. I am sure that this wouldn't be unconstitutional (anybody ever heard of the 8th amendment?)
I completely agree, it is a brilliant idea to leave punishment up to convicts. Why bother with all those fiddly judges, lawyers and courts, when we can leave justice up to a group of criminals. They should indeed be congratlulated for viciously assaulting a person who might or might not have been guilty of a serious offence.
2007-02-26 11:09:06 · answer #2 · answered by Michael S 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Why not have them tattooed as an alternative to be locked away for LIFE? That no doubt would be considered unfair so why not allow the paedophile to choose to be 'castrated' as an alternative to being imprisoned for no less than 50 years.
2007-02-26 11:59:10 · answer #3 · answered by Whistler R 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i think its great that they did that . myself as a parent think that our children are not protected enough these days its almost asif these evil people are left free to roam around our streets , schools ect ready to choose there nxt poor victim . i think its disgusting and i could not say what i would tattoo on them as its far to bad to write ! but those women who tattooed that kiddy fiddler should get praised for doing that!
2007-02-26 10:41:32 · answer #4 · answered by jennie t 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
open your eyes, the gov want them legalised, if something is so bad one draws away from it, if one wants to take part in it one draws nearer, so why do you think tony blair faught to try and get
the age of conscent down to a younger and more vulnerable age.
their are those who want the age of conscent lifting to 18yrs, and those who want it lowering to 14yrs, thats how you tell whos side the politicians are on, we are a perverted society politicians police judges and people from all walks of life are for it but darent say so, but they lower the age and draw closer, then their are those who are fitted up by animal rights and outher secret organisations and some not so secret.
2007-02-26 18:03:16 · answer #5 · answered by trucker 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that sounds fair. If they want to mess around with children then this is a small price to pay for ruining a childs entire life.
2007-03-01 06:37:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No that would affect their human right to look like another human being. A more humane way would be to castrate them either chemically or physically. If there are ever job vacancies in this field I think that my previous experience on the butcher's slab would make me ideal for the job.
2007-02-26 10:36:29 · answer #7 · answered by BARROWMAN 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I would tattoo "Intemperate" on YOUR forehead.
PS. Do you know who else tattooed people against their will?
It was Adolf Hitler!
What else do you have in common with the fascist dictator?
You also try to silence opinions that do not agree with your own.
Regarding temperance, no you aren't drinking, but it appears you are drunk on your own self righteousness and moral outrage. Let she whose **** does not stink cast the first stone. Sit in judgement upon yourself.
2007-02-26 10:46:00 · answer #8 · answered by Peter 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
tatoo is too good for them gauge a message with a jagged piece of glass across their eyes (blinding them in the process) S I C K O !
2007-02-26 10:38:26 · answer #9 · answered by Andrew1968 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
A big "CM" for child molester, "R" for rapist works for me. I'd also be for making them have bright orange license plates for their cars so kids can spot them and stay clear.
2007-02-26 10:39:12 · answer #10 · answered by sepp55774 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋