A twelve-year-old boy rapes a nine-year-old girl. Who's to blame? Well, according to the judge, certainly not the boy, who indulged the boy's plea that it was the internet porn wot dun it, and those who are seeking to clamp down on the freedom of the internet are happy to let justice be sacrificed in order to back up their case.
It is indeed true that the internet has widened and facilitated access to porn, just as it has to all manner of information, but even if we accept without question that porn has a corrupting influence, we are still obliged to deal with a violent young offender, who has shown himself to be a danger to others. The judge may choose to believe that the crime was his response to viewing the porn, but this is not a usual or natural response, and if the child is capable of this crime now, what should we expect in the future?
In a humane society, there are no easy answers to how to deal with dangerous young criminals, but exonerating them of all responsibility is no answer at all.
It is indeed true that the internet has widened and facilitated access to porn, just as it has to all manner of information, but even if we accept without question that porn has a corrupting influence, we are still obliged to deal with a violent young offender, who has shown himself to be a danger to others. The judge may choose to believe that the crime was his response to viewing the porn, but this is not a usual or natural response, and if the child is capable of this crime now, what should we expect in the future?
In a humane society, there are no easy answers to how to deal with dangerous young criminals, but exonerating them of all responsibility is no answer at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment