NationStates

Omnonia wrote:Ten years sounds pretty drastic. (But then, most jail sentences in the US do. *shurg* )

But generally - good. Sends a strong signal to other parents that they can't treat their children like property without the state coming down on them, hard.

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:

New Grestin wrote:Abusing them in the womb? What? What do you think they're going to do? Prank the mom by punching her pregnant stomach?

Forced sterlization is so wildly unethical it's not even funny. The government has no right to force a medical procedure on someone, regardless of their part in a crime. These people are criminals, but denying them their fundamental right to bodily autonomy is a gross overreach of power and cruel and unusual punishment.

If they are convicted, then they are well within their fundamental human rights to have children after their prison sentences, and if they continue to abuse those children, then the state will have to intervene on behalf of the abused once again.

So it's another "police policy is that we can't step in until it's too late" thing, then?

Luminesa wrote:This wouldn't be "needless". You hurt a child like this, for YouTube views, then claim you actually love your kids, you don't deserve to get off with just community service. They need to spend the rest of their lives in prison.

Omnonia wrote:

Luminesa wrote:This wouldn't be "needless". You hurt a child like this, for YouTube views, then claim you actually love your kids, you don't deserve to get off with just community service. They need to spend the rest of their lives in prison.

What purpose is served by locking them up for live?

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:

Omnonia wrote:What purpose is served by locking them up for live?

Preventing them from re-offending, I suppose.

Then again, I still think sterilization and keeping them away from kids would achieve that more humanely than what they'll get in prison.

New Grestin wrote:Can we seriously fuck off with the holier-than-thou, "hangin's too good for them", bullshit?

Every time there's a publicized crime, everyone starts acting like maniacs. I mean, for god's sake, sterilization? Really? Why don't we start having public lynchings and breaking people on the wheel too?

They abused their children for views. They're getting punished for it. That's how the system is supposed to work.

This isn't Inquisition-era Spain, people.

Omnonia wrote:

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Preventing them from re-offending, I suppose.

Then again, I still think sterilization and keeping them away from kids would achieve that more humanely than what they'll get in prison.

Just having CPS seize any further kids as soon as they're born, and putting a ban on these folks in regards to fostering and adoption would create the same effect, with less impediment onto their human rights and on the tax payer's expenses.

Omnonia wrote:

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Preventing them from re-offending, I suppose.

Then again, I still think sterilization and keeping them away from kids would achieve that more humanely than what they'll get in prison.

Just having CPS seize any further kids as soon as they're born, and putting a ban on these folks in regards to fostering and adoption would create the same effect, with less impediment onto their human rights and on the tax payer's expenses.

New Grestin wrote:

Omnonia wrote:Just having CPS seize any further kids as soon as they're born, and putting a ban on these folks in regards to fostering and adoption would create the same effect, with less impediment onto their human rights and on the tax payer's expenses.

This.

Why should my tax dollars have to go to some criminal getting the clip and snip, an invasive and expensive procedure, when they could just as easily be spent on more useful things that aren't creepily authoritarian?

Washington Resistance Army wrote:Good.

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Wouldn't a more fitting sentence be to sterilize them so that they can never have kids again?

No, that's fucking retarded.

Infected Mushroom wrote:Seems like government interference over the rights of parents

that's how it comes across

Thermodolia wrote:

Wallenburg wrote:Only two? More like hundreds, if what I am hearing is true.

I'm assuming that one count = one kid, not one count per individual act. I'm also assuming that they only had two kids

Giovenith wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:I'm assuming that one count = one kid, not one count per individual act. I'm also assuming that they only had two kids

They had five, hence the name DaddyOFive. From what the videos show, they suffered varying degrees of abuse, with the two youngest Cody and Emma (the kids whose custody was stolen) getting the worse of it. The oldest son actually seems more like a fellow abuser, gleefully terrorizing his siblings for his parents' pranks.

If you want the full details, seriously watch the video I liked on the front page. It's long, but it really shows you everything you need to know.

Thermodolia wrote:

Giovenith wrote:
They had five, hence the name DaddyOFive. From what the videos show, they suffered varying degrees of abuse, with the two youngest Cody and Emma (the kids whose custody was stolen) getting the worse of it. The oldest son actually seems more like a fellow abuser, gleefully terrorizing his siblings for his parents' pranks.

If you want the full details, seriously watch the video I liked on the front page. It's long, but it really shows you everything you need to know.

Great just great.

I don't need to watch the videos to know what's going on. I lived it

Thermodolia wrote:

Giovenith wrote:
They had five, hence the name DaddyOFive. From what the videos show, they suffered varying degrees of abuse, with the two youngest Cody and Emma (the kids whose custody was stolen) getting the worse of it. The oldest son actually seems more like a fellow abuser, gleefully terrorizing his siblings for his parents' pranks.

If you want the full details, seriously watch the video I liked on the front page. It's long, but it really shows you everything you need to know.

Great just great.

I don't need to watch the videos to know what's going on. I lived it

Greater Cesnica wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:Great just great.

I don't need to watch the videos to know what's going on. I lived it

Aww... Do you need to talk to someone?

Luminesa wrote:

Greater Cesnica wrote:Aww... Do you need to talk to someone?

Cannot tell if this is sarcasm or not. The 'Awwwww' is suspicious.

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:

Omnonia wrote:What purpose is served by locking them up for live?

Preventing them from re-offending, I suppose.

Then again, I still think sterilization and keeping them away from kids would achieve that more humanely than what they'll get in prison.

Greater Cesnica wrote:

Luminesa wrote:Cannot tell if this is sarcasm or not. The 'Awwwww' is suspicious.

Not sarcasm. Sorry if I came out like that.

Luminesa wrote:

Greater Cesnica wrote:Not sarcasm. Sorry if I came out like that.

All good. I have a problem reading tone on the internet sometimes.

The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:Sterilization would however be cruel and pointless to female childabusers who have had Menopause or any male child abusers who have had a vasectomy prior.

Luminesa wrote:

Greater Cesnica wrote:Not sarcasm. Sorry if I came out like that.

All good. I have a problem reading tone on the internet sometimes.

Thermodolia wrote:

Omnonia wrote:Just having CPS seize any further kids as soon as they're born, and putting a ban on these folks in regards to fostering and adoption would create the same effect, with less impediment onto their human rights and on the tax payer's expenses.

Child abusers should not be allowed to live their life the way they want. They took that from their kids. They should be locked up till they die

Katganistan wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:Child abusers should not be allowed to live their life the way they want. They took that from their kids. They should be locked up till they die

I know you have plenty of reason to think this way, but the problem is this: if you get life for child abuse, and you get 25 to life for murder, then what prevents an abuser from killing their kid to get rid of the evidence of abuse? We've seen people try that before too -- calling in a missing person report to throw off suspicion, and they've killed and stowed the body somewhere.

It's the same reason rape's not a capital crime -- to prevent rapists from murdering their victims in addition to violating them in an attempt to avoid the death penalty.