Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine
Absolutely appalling.
The man has committed no crime, yet this ruling effectively makes it impossible for him to lead a normal life. It is pretty much impossible for him to even leave his house during the daytime if he is to follow this restraining order.
Sure, there is something very wrong with this guy. No doubt about it. However, he has committed no crimes, and has explicitly stated that he has no intention to commit any crimes. Yet he has been placed under house arrest - because, let's face it, that's what this is.
Let's compare it to a very ugly straight guy. A straight guy so ugly that he's never gotten laid in his entire life. The only way for that straight guy to have sex with somebody might be rape. Should that guy be prevented from coming near women because he might rape them?
It's exactly the same with this guy. He's a pedophile, yes. That does not necessarily make him a (child) rapist.
I am rather surprised that so few people are opposed to the government taking away essential liberties from people who have committed no crimes. After all, if the government is given the right to do that to anyone, it has the right to do it to everyone. Where does it end? Suspected terrorists? People with rape fantasies? People writing abnormally violent fiction?
The idea that one is innocent until proven guilty (of a crime, not a fantasy) really isn't that bad. Nor is the idea that the government should be prevented from punishing the innocent.
(on a separate note: the guy should have been sent to a mental institution)
|
I'd be in favor of having him put in a mental institution, but I must say certain parts of your post leads me to wonder if you even read the cnn article at all. Did you?
I'll highlight a few of
his own comments for you and then you can come back and tell me that society has no cause to put some restraint on this guy.....
Quote:
For years, McClellan maintained a Web site in Washington where he posted photos of children he had taken in public places. He also discussed how he liked to stake out parks, public libraries, fast-food restaurants and other areas where little girls, or "LGs," congregate.
"Most libraries have frequent programs and events for children, and sometimes you can get quite close to LGs there," he said in one posting.
McClellan said his intentions are misunderstood and insisted he would never molest a child.
"I guess there is some small chance maybe someday I might be able to get some sort of friendship with a girl and maybe then I might worry would I cross the line," he said. "But right now, no. There's no doubt in my mind I wouldn't."
|
Yes, let's all uphold this fuckers "rights".
Like I said earlier, if he wanted to be treated like anyone else and have his rights and freedoms maintained maybe he should have blogged about something other than little girls, maybe he shouldn't have basically stalked people's kids and took pictures of them and put them on the wab talking about how much he is attracted to them.
Just a thought.
Sorry, his current predicament is a product of his own making. He is a risk, period. What, parents are just supposed to take him at his word that he won't offend?
Some fantasies really are best kept to oneself. I haven't the least bit of sympathy for this slimeball. He can count himself lucky that at least he is free to move, and move to a different country if need be. If he were a convicted criminal on parole there would be far more restrictive measures in place for him I'm sure.