Comments on: Shut Him Down?

By: Janet Manko

Janet Manko — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:41:27 +0000

Have to agree, Doug - always better to tend toward openness

By: Doug Richardson

Doug Richardson — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:30:25 +0000

Making an internet “regulation” only let’s the camel’s nose under the tent. Give this administration–and their Fundie supporters –one inch, and kiss internet freedom goodbye.

History proves that censorship never (ultimately) works.

By: Janet Manko

Janet Manko — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:51:11 +0000

I’ll make the argument that since McClellan has “outed” himself, revealed himself to be a pedophile to all the world, he is less of a threat to children than those predators who are trying to entice youngsters to meet with them posing as something they are not. His threat is in providing information online to those who are not known, so can use the knowledge to harm children.
This would seem to fall into the same category as terrorists providing the information for building bombs or structuring a terrorist attack online.
So, should there be some regulation set on what is openly available online?

By: Michael J. Flint

Michael J. Flint — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:45:03 +0000

McClellan’s story is at minimum disturbing.

The unfortunate part of this story is the dilemma it causes
when it comes to both Freedom of Speech and Freedom on the Internet.

As much as I would like to see this person locked away for
life, the fact is he has done nothing more than express himself, as sick as his
expression may be.

Part of our problem is the lack of real laws with unmistakably
stiff and mandatory penalties for crimes such as those committed against the
young and innocent.

We watch while sex offenders (of all types) are paroled for ‘good
behavior’, only to go out and do it again.
Good behavior … in an environment (jail) that ENFORCES good behavior,
and we let them out.

Want some alarming statistics … http://www.cpiu.us/statistics.php

It is not for us to limit Free Speech or Freedom on the
internet … to do so would be criminal on our part. What we need to do is write strict and
unbending laws when it comes to any type of sex crime, but especially sex
crimes against those under 16.

Think for a moment … what type of punishment did all the
pedophiles in the Catholic Church receive?
Forgiveness? Paid off some folks
with money??? Great example!

Solid law is the answer to these crimes. If they all knew they would be locked up for
life without any chance for parole, then we might have something. Sounds cold and cruel?

Having been party to raising a child who had been tormented
by this type of filth, putting them away for life is mild compared to what they
have did to the child.

We should not lose our focus on a person like this and waste
our time curtailing Free Speech and Free Internet.

We should focus on making the punishment meet the crime and
MEANING IT!!

By: Terry

Terry — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:35:25 +0000

Duncan and Doug,

I couldn’t support using hate crimes legislation to cover this type of behavior. Hate crimes statutes essentially criminalize thought (or prosecutors use it as a way to get a longer prison sentence for convicts, which has the same effect).

Here’s what might work (albeit after the fact). If it can be shown that McClellan’s instruction and encouragement caused a pedophile to commit a crime, then perhaps McClellan could be prosecuted for incitement to pedophilia.

By: Duncan

Duncan — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:01:08 +0000

Doug,
Perhaps putting “pedophile speech” under “hate crimes” laws would allow fellows like this to be punished for encouraging perverse, immoral and illegal behavior. It is certainly “hateful” behavior

By: Doug Richardson

Doug Richardson — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:31:51 +0000

We ought to lock up people for vocalizing violent and perverse thoughts and then encouraging others to act on them. This piece of human garbage is instructing and encouraging those of his ilk to act.

By: Duncan

Duncan — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:34:53 +0000

We cannot lock people up for their thoughts. Certainly, Hollywood movies are often filled with violent pyschopaths whose behavior is immoral and illegal. What dangerous minds create these characters? And all those murder mysteries being read on beaches from coast to coast, aren’t they primers in how to commit crimes? We don’t lock up authors and directors, do we? Pedophiles are scary people, but I don’t see how we can preemptively lock them up.

By: Doug Richardson

Doug Richardson — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:28:38 +0000

This would be a perfect place for me to launch into one of my all-time favorite diatribes–the inefficacy of The Law. I could suck up all of your bandwidth going on about what a travesty this is; getting one’s intllectual arms around this is like wrestling a Sequoia.

The very short version–

In 21st century America, The Law and Justice have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

We’ll put handcuffs on and incarcerate a driver who is .02 over the legal alcohol limit at 3 in the morning but we tolerate child molesters stalking our kids; we jail shoplifters and tax cheats but let axe murderers take a walk if the police mess up the evidence chain; let your dog run free and you’re in Bantam court but stalk a child and nothing happens.

I’ve written extensively about legal inequities on my own blog, and will continue to further this discussion whenever and wherever I can. I’ll leave with one question:

What does a sane, rational individual do when the Law is impotent?

In this case, my true conservative self shows up: hunt this creep down like a rabid weasel.

I think (hope) you have a very long thread on your hands here, Terry.