Gary Glitter, paedophiles, and Jacqui Smith (described as a “Home” “secretary”)

David Davis

Tom Paine at the Last Ditch has a good roundup of thoughts about what to do about this unfortunate man Gary Glitter, and how “Jacqui” Smith’s thoughts affect general liberty. See Sean Gabb’s 1999 article about Glitter’s case earlier.

I;m not suggesting that “Jacqui”  Smith  “wants to see” paedophiles burned at the stake in public, but perhaps if “New” “Labour” wants “an eye-catching initiative” with which “the Cabinet” can “be directly associated”, then this could be it.

Anyway, this is August, so let’s fill up the firewires with stuff about sex, porn, child abuse and the like. There’s nothing else happening, after all, since Russia is all about oil, and Georgia is a faraway country of which we know llittle..

5 responses to “Gary Glitter, paedophiles, and Jacqui Smith (described as a “Home” “secretary”)

  1. Tell that to the thousands of cases of sexual abuse that was carried out throughout the care systems in the UK who the home office and every home secretary has known about yet cases backup years awaiting courts that don’t work the way they should.

    Oh they can lock up the offenders but there will never be justice for those 1000’s of kids abused and tortured by the state.

  2. see, you show why Liberty needs limits. I don’t want sexual predators roaming the streets, using their sociopathic nature, fame or money to procure the sexual gratification they are unable to get in properly formed human relationships.

    No, [b]I believe prostitution should be put on a legal footing[/b]; Paul Gadd isn’t interested in a 26 year old woman working in a Brothel. He is a kiddy fiddler whose predilection is base and frankly deviant.

    He purposefully left the UK to evade the very strict Laws which prevail; he visited a country wherein which he was well aware that the levels of poverty and the status of women lead the pederast to be able to fulfill what ever sordid little perversity his mind desires.

    Unlike mentally fit adults, David, children are not simply the playthings of adults in any civilized society. Adults make rational choices, and must live or die by them, based upon their personal life experience.

    Pederasts are scum. They take what they cannot restore, or offer any real restitution for. Give ’em the rope. Illiberal I know, but I have children, and I see the innocence in small children, and believe that innocence is special; once lost it can never return.

    The LA blog should stick to defending banana sales in Lbs. and oz. and calling for a return to the gold standard, rather than defending the indefensible; no it’s not the same as homosexuality, where yesteryear it was ‘wrong’ opinions change etc… unless that the official policy of the LA? Legalise sex with three year olds?

    Pedophile apologists give the Libertarian cause a bad name.

  3. I’m sorry if you thought I was defending him, Harry.

    But you raise an interesting point, which the bloggerati might like to rag over. What exactly is a “properly formed human relationship”?

    Can this exist between an adult and a child, or only between an adult and an adult, and if so, does it need to take sexual form?

    I’m just interested, as I don’t really know about this sort of stuff.

  4. Dave:

    All this chatter about “paedophiles” and “predators” and “lynchings” is so much crap.

    Paedophiles are people who are sexually attracted to _pre-pubescent_ children. Very few of these cases involve that.

    The overwhelming majority of abuse (including sexual abuse) occurs in the home, alas. Give the kids Emergency Radio Alarms and most of it will stop.

    Sexual attraction to sexually capable people is _normal_. Nature made us all that way, to keep the species going. Victorian myths about “the innocence of childhood” show scant regard for the facts. I remember Avedon Carol of “Feminists Against Censorship” telling us that the happiest day of her life was the discovery of the joys of masturbation at the age of five. Her body, her pleasure.

    “Harry” comes across as someone who believes in toruring kids, under the euphemism “corporal punishment.” Well, to Hell with all that…



  5. Indeed, Mr Hollick,according to the Kinsey Report, children are capable of response to sexual stimulation at the age of 18 months.

    Kinsey also reports that of all the cases he studied only about 25% cases of adult child sexual contact resulted in long term trauma. He argued tht criminalisation and the resultant hassle that came with that was the issue and that the prohibition of paedophilia was more damaging to the child than the activity itself.

    All that was needed was a child to be educated and made aware and prosecutions should only be made under the assault laws.

    Now as much as some people love to go around buggering choirboys I am not sure that it is behaviour that should be encouraged.