Fair point . So lets just go for the convicted ones .


Why ?

Just my opinion . Anyone GUILTY of tampering with , or abusing children , should be tortured before they are killed . No excuses , no second chances .

Since when did 2 wrongs make a right though?

Generically I've never understood that saying.

It assumes that the reaction of the second event is always wrong. I'd call that justice. In some cases.

e.g. Man A punches Man B. Man B punches Man A (harder hopefully!!)

Sounds ok to me!!

Answer this one then .
Would you be happy to see the person/persons that had sexually abused your child freed after a short custodial sentence ?

Aye we all know how watertight a guilty verdict is. Not like there's ever been a successful appeal in the history of the British legal system is it?

"Oh, by the way, we've just discovered that your Dad didn't do that crime we had him brutally executed for and that a bent copper made all the evidence up. Still, never mind eh?"

Probably not, but that is why we have a (hopefully!) impartial court system in place in this country so emotion doesn't come into it just the facts of what has happened.

On the other hand do you think your child would want to see there father in prision for battering/killing the person? would that really help them through the difficult time? Does responding with violence really send the right message out?

You didn't say that, you said...



The idiots in that story I linked to didn't bother to check whether the target in their street was convicted of anything, they simply heard the words " pediatrician/paedophile/nonces etc" and decided that they wanted blood, its just a shame that none of them knew what a pediatrician was, still "it sounds like paedophile" so thats good enough eh ?

Fortunately we have extensively written laws, judges and juries to deal with accusations, vigilantes and bent coppers in an impartial setting with guidelines to stick to - its called civilisation, you might like it.

Andy.. re-read the above . Where did I say 'anyone found guilty' ? I mean people who are guilty .
We all know how unsound convictions can be . I am doubting wether anyone would be fitted up by a bent copper on noncing charges though .



By allowing them a second chance you may as well say you condone their actions . I guess you don't have kids of your own .



No . That is why my opinion is that the law should allow the 'vigilantes' to take such actions . That or just hang the barstards upon conviction .

Nobody is condoning it, infact you are the one condoning something that is illegal by encouraging people to be allowed to take the law into their own hands.

I think they should be dealt with lawfully. Dealing with them in that manner ruins your own life too.

Giving them a second chance is condoning it . I'd rather condone violence towards child abusers than against children .


I would more than willingly 'pull the trigger' to lawfully end the life of a paedophile .

Who is giving them a 2nd chance?

why is it condoning it?

Anyone who has the opinion that they shoulnd't die is condoning it . And before you start changing tact and applying it to burglars/robbers/shoplifters/drunk drivers etc etc etc .. I specifically mean it should only be applied to paedophiles .

It is condoning it because they are allowed out to re-offend . Kill them and they will not re-offend .

I will be collecting my two youngest kids ( ages 3 and 5 ) from school at 3:15pm . Do you want me to do a quick survey of a few parents to see if they think paedophiles should die . Would you be surprised if the majority say yes ?