The Law Should we be punished for evil desires?

Remove this Banner Ad

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,306
36,391
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
A couple of days ago thé Queensland courts said yes. We should.


no harm against humans has been caused. The judge admits that. But he has punished the person with a 2 year prison sentence because his actions may increase his propensity to commit harm against people. He has no proof that it will by the way. Some may argue that having access to dolls may reduce the likelihood of those with evil desires towards children to actually commit acts against children. This is the argument used for Ecigarettes. I.e. They don’t encourage kids to take up smoking but instead provide an alternative for those addicted to tobacco And lead to reduce cigarette use amongst this group. I.e. the E cigarette argument applied to child like sex dolls suggests child like sex dolls may reduce the propensity of sex crimes against children not increase them.

But even if the judge is right and they do increase the propensity of child abuse. A crime is still Yet to be committed. Surely we can’t punish people for evil desires alone? We have to wait for an actual attempt of those evil desires to be acted upon as until they are we just have no way of knowing if the person would act upon them. And yes this person was put on automatic probation But he is now a convicted criminal and his reputation has been ruined. he is going to seriously struggle to be à part of the community going foward. Is this fair?

who else has not had desires to commit crime but not acted upon them? I would say almost all of us. As a kid I used to wonder what it would be like to rob a bank. Played cops and robbers and even created props. Drew plans of how it would be pulled off. Statistically such a person would have a higher probability to rob a bank then the population on average. Should I have been punished for exhibiting a desire to rob a bank And therefore a higher propensity to commit such a crime?

i think this is vast overreach by the state and a violation of human rights. Does anyone else agree? The state should never pénalise us for our desires. It’s none of their business.
 

Chief

Overlord
Dec 1, 1999
95,587
73,191
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
Child sex dolls? Of course they should be illegal.

if someone has these desires they need to seek mental help, not feed the desires.

Many paedophiles have admitted that the turning point for them was using images, cartoons and other paraphernalia. It was just the path towards acting out their fantasies on kids.

No we shouldn’t normalise these acts. We should provide treatment and monitoring.
 

Royal Flush

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 14, 2008
7,994
6,253
Brisbane
AFL Club
North Melbourne
A couple of days ago thé Queensland courts said yes. We should.


no harm against humans has been caused. The judge admits that. But he has punished the person with a 2 year prison sentence because his actions may increase his propensity to commit harm against people. He has no proof that it will by the way. Some may argue that having access to dolls may reduce the likelihood of those with evil desires towards children to actually commit acts against children. This is the argument used for Ecigarettes. I.e. They don’t encourage kids to take up smoking but instead provide an alternative for those addicted to tobacco And lead to reduce cigarette use amongst this group. I.e. the E cigarette argument applied to child like sex dolls suggests child like sex dolls may reduce the propensity of sex crimes against children not increase them.

But even if the judge is right and they do increase the propensity of child abuse. A crime is still Yet to be committed. Surely we can’t punish people for evil desires alone? We have to wait for an actual attempt of those evil desires to be acted upon as until they are we just have no way of knowing if the person would act upon them. And yes this person was put on automatic probation But he is now a convicted criminal and his reputation has been ruined. he is going to seriously struggle to be à part of the community going foward. Is this fair?

who else has not had desires to commit crime but not acted upon them? I would say almost all of us. As a kid I used to wonder what it would be like to rob a bank. Played cops and robbers and even created props. Drew plans of how it would be pulled off. Statistically such a person would have a higher probability to rob a bank then the population on average. Should I have been punished for exhibiting a desire to rob a bank And therefore a higher propensity to commit such a crime?

i think this is vast overreach by the state and a violation of human rights. Does anyone else agree? The state should never pénalise us for our desires. It’s none of their business.
No body is going to agree with you, due to the nature of the act. People have no mercy for child predators.
A Bank Robbery is somewhat of a glamourous crime, with mainstream society endlessly glamourising it in film ect. Ranks highly in the prison system too.
But in principal I agree you have a point.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Chief

Overlord
Dec 1, 1999
95,587
73,191
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
No body is going to agree with you, due to the nature of the act. People have no mercy for child predators.
A Bank Robbery is somewhat of a glamourous crime, with mainstream society endlessly glamourising it in film ect. Ranks highly in the prison system too.
But in principal I agree you have a point.
If you get together guns, masks, plans of the local bank, and a getaway car it’s pretty obvious what you’re planning to do.
 

Cluggage

shitposter
Jun 3, 2014
7,008
8,210
Tweed
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Arsenal, Chargers, Hawthorn, Padres
Should someone caught training to be a terrorist not face any legal consequence?
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,306
36,391
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Should someone caught training to be a terrorist not face any legal consequence?
they should probably be punished because that is exhibiting thé intention to commit a harmful act. although that’s not necessarily clear cut. Each case would have to be assessed individually.

having a sexdoll does not exhibit an intention. all it exhibits is a desire.
 

Chief

Overlord
Dec 1, 1999
95,587
73,191
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
they should probably be punished because that is exhibiting thé intention to commit a harmful act. although that’s not necessarily clear cut. Each case would have to be assessed individually.

having a sexdoll does not exhibit an intention. all it exhibits is a desire.
Nah. Having any paedo material should put someone on an exclusion and treatment path.
 

owen87

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 23, 2016
10,824
13,785
AFL Club
Essendon
There's a difference between having a desire and indulging it in some form though.

Buying a sex doll isn't simply 'having a desire' - it's taking an action to indulge that desire. Sure, it's not actually having sex with a minor, but it's not just having the desire either.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,306
36,391
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Child sex dolls? Of course they should be illegal.

if someone has these desires they need to seek mental help, not feed the desires.

Many paedophiles have admitted that the turning point for them was using images, cartoons and other paraphernalia. It was just the path towards acting out their fantasies on kids.

No we shouldn’t normalise these acts. We should provide treatment and monitoring.
I agree on the need to seek mental help. but thats not what has happened here. He has been convicted of a crime and public shaming even though no children have been harmed nor any evidence or even an assertion of an attempt to harm. Encouraging such a person, who should of been kept anonymous, to seek mental help is all that should of happened.

and using sex dolls doesnt normalisé the act if it’s kept hidden. Parading a child like sex doll through a shopping centre probably should be punished as it’s normalising child sex abuse which encourages mistreatment by others. But if it’s kept hidden from view then I don’t see how it normalisés it. What informed adults willingly consent to in their own private bedrooms does not harm anyone Outside the bedroom as no one knows about it.

and a couple of pedophiles saying use of cartoons or dolls lead them down the path to committing acts is Not proof That they actually lead to child sex abuse. it sounds more like an excuse used to deny responsibility. nor is it a statistical analysis Of a large sample. Even if true for some it still doesn’t mean the overall outcome leads to less harm. Again the ECigarette argument. There does not seem to be proper analysis on this. Certainly not enough to make it a crime.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,306
36,391
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
No body is going to agree with you, due to the nature of the act. People have no mercy for child predators.
A Bank Robbery is somewhat of a glamourous crime, with mainstream society endlessly glamourising it in film ect. Ranks highly in the prison system too.
But in principal I agree you have a point.
Just so it’s clear I have no mercy for child predators either.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ShanDog

Super Moderator
Aug 12, 2012
20,189
38,941
sv_cheats 1
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Edmonton Oilers
He has been convicted of a crime and public shaming even though no children have been harmed nor any evidence or even an assertion of an attempt to harm.
The article said he was convicted for possessing child exploitation material, so it wasn't just "harmless" stuff he was guilty of.

I'd be interested to see if there's research about whether accessing things like child sex dolls (or perhaps even fake child sex imagery) reduces the likelihood of pedophiles abusing a child.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,306
36,391
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
The article said he was convicted for possessing child exploitation material, so it wasn't just "harmless" stuff he was guilty of.

I'd be interested to see if there's research about whether accessing things like child sex dolls (or perhaps even fake child sex imagery) reduces the likelihood of pedophiles abusing a child.
True. Although who knows whether they were just cartoons or actual photos. Let’s presume they were photos. this thread is not about the child exploitation charge. It’s about the other charges which he was convicted for.
 

Jason mp

Premium Platinum
Aug 31, 2015
22,168
44,952
By the Gabba.
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Valleys. Chelsea.
Why? One is photos of actual children who have been violated. What children have been violated with a plastic rubber Doll?
Good point, is it an offence to be in possession of photo shopped child pornography, ie adult images photo shopped to look like young children.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,306
36,391
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Good point, is it an offence to be in possession of photo shopped child pornography, ie adult images photo shopped to look like young children.
It probably is but I don’t think it should be. Cartoons are the same. Harm to children should absolutely be punishable By a court of law. But not things that simply remind you of harm to children.
 

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
36,271
33,598
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
no harm against humans has been caused.
Then downloading and watching child abuse material should also be legal.

Which is what he also did by the way.

The fact of the matter is that doing so creates a market for the scumbags that make it. Just like buying kiddie dolls to shag also creates a market (and thus contributes to more child abuse).
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
52,608
58,218
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
I believe Australian law classes flat chested women as children when the intention is to depict them as such.

So large breasts on a child like doll would be fine, weirdly.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad