[Lemmy]

romanP romanP:

Intent is not enough. The person committing the crime has to understand what they are doing. That is why, when a schizophrenic man cuts off a kid's head on a Greyhound bus, he goes to a mental hospital for the rest of his life and not a regular prison. He did not know what he was doing, as he was having a psychotic break while he murdered the person in the seat next to him. A child who commits a single act of murder is not much different.

I know how the system works and that's a flaw in our system. I don't care what ailment causes someone to kill. We accept schizophrenia as a defence to murder but we don't accept paedophilia as a legal, mental disorder defence. So our legal system arbitrarily chooses what mental disorders funnel killers into prisons as opposed to hospitals. That's wrong. A killer is a killer, regardless what flavour of crazy he/she is.

romanP romanP:

And where is the surviving parent in all of this anyway? Does he bear absolutely no responsibility for putting a gun into his child's hands?

That's a different matter altogether. Anyone complicit in the killing should also stand trial. But that doesn't mitigate the murder in any way.

romanP romanP:

Since you've verified that the basis of your argument here is purely emotional, based on dehumanisation and turning a blind eye to how this situation happened at all, I see no reason to continue discussing this with you. Our laws should not be based on what angry people with torches and pitchforks want.

Utter nonesense. I'm not angry and I'm certainly not on a witch hunt. I'm suggeesting that dangerous people be segregated in such a manner that they cannot ever cause harm again. That's not turning a blind eye to anything. It's placing the priority where it SHOULD be: on public safety. If you'd rather just throw your hands in the air and scream "Psycho" or "Witch Hunt" than deal with the realities of violent crime, then shame on you when a killer kills again.

[BeaverFever]

Well Lemmy, if your thesis is simply that dangerous people be segregated, why advocate for prison instead of a mental health care facility? And how young is too young in your opinion? 3 years old? 4 years old? And paedophilia is not a disorder, its behaviour that may be driven by a disorder, in which case, I believe the offender is placed in treatment instead of and/or in addition to any criminal punishment.

And what level of understanding do you think is necessary? Is it enough that he should understand that "you're not supposed to do something?". Because you're not supposed to talk with your mouth full or put your elbows on the table, yet kids see people breaking that "rule" all the time, and probably don't get punished that severely themselves when they do it. Up to a certain age, a child can't understand that some infractions are more serious than others and they can't put those things into context. NOW I'M NOT SAYING THAT NORMAL 11YO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THIS I'll wager this kid has some type of psychological or developmental disorder, which doesn't mean that he's a permanent menace.

Yes, some people are fucked up for life, but I think we've also learned that some pretty fucked up and disturbed children can also grow up to be healthy, productive, well-adjusted adults. Figuring out which future lays ahead for these kids can't simply be determined by what actions they committed, you have to assess and observe the person as a whole.

I'll also wager that harsh criminal punishment probably makes it even more unlikely that a troubled kid will reform and probably only reinforces an unhealthy "me against the world" outlook.

[Lemmy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Well Lemmy, if your thesis is simply that dangerous people be segregated, why advocate for prison instead of a mental health care facility? And how young is too young in your opinion? 3 years old? 4 years old? And paedophilia is not a disorder, its behaviour that may be driven by a disorder, in which case, I believe the offender is placed in treatment instead of and/or in addition to any criminal punishment.

I'm not advocating for prison, but I honestly don't care whether they're housed in a hospital, a prison or a crypt so long as they're not declared "not guilty by reason of ______." And I already said there is no arbitray "too young". Each case is unique and should be judged as such. Cite me the case of a 4 year-old killing someone and I'll give you my opinion on sentencing. In the case of this 11 year old, I'd execute him.

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

And what level of understanding do you think is necessary? Is it enough that he should understand that "you're not supposed to do
something?".

I need to cut this here. Too many questions at once. There is no minimum level of understanding. Knowing right from wrong is inconsequential. The intent is the issue.

[Khar]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

And paedophilia is not a disorder, its behaviour that may be driven by a disorder, in which case, I believe the offender is placed in treatment instead of and/or in addition to any criminal punishment.

Pedophilia is defined as a mental disorder by the NLM and has a WHO ICD (International Classification of Disease) identifying number as a psychiatric disorder.

Since the term is used on those pages, paraphilia is an unusual form of sexual arousal which could be problematic for the person or those around them, up to and including harm.

Indeed, the Canadian criminal code outlaws both real and imaginary (such as lolicon, fan fiction) forms of pedophilia in Canada. The following is an oft quoted and well known portion of the Canadian legal code added with the support of professional, medical opinion on the topic:

"Interpreting "person" in accordance with Parliament's purpose of criminalizing possession of material that poses a reasoned risk of harm to children, it seems that it should include visual works of the imagination as well as depictions of actual people. Notwithstanding the fact that 'person' in the charging section and in s. 163.1(1)(b) refers to a flesh-and-blood person, I conclude that "person" in s. 163.1(1)(a) includes both actual and imaginary human beings."

There is no precedence that I know of for someone to be sent in for counseling instead of criminal punishment, although there are many cases where they have been sent in addition to criminal punishment, as it is a recognized mental disorder.

As a side note, I just noticed I managed my 500th post! Only took me almost a year.

[BeaverFever]

Khar Khar:

Pedophilia is defined as a mental disorder by the NLM and has a WHO ICD (International Classification of Disease) identifying number as a psychiatric disorder.

Well, I did not know that, kudos for doing the homework. A +1 to go with post 500!