Pedophile to be put to death

[theHawk]

A child rapist is set to be executed for his crime. But of course, some shitbag liberal has to argue that its a bad idea to put child molesters to death.



Death penalty opponents say Louisiana is the only state to actively pursue lethal injection for child rapists, and argue, among other things, that it could give attackers a reason to murder their victims.

"If they're going to face the death penalty for raping a child, why would they leave a living witness?" said Judy Benitez, executive director of the Louisiana Foundation against Sexual Assaults.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/15/rape.execution/index.html

Right, as if thugs like this even think of the reprecussions of their actions.

[Little-Acorn]

It's about time. Hopefully other states will follow Louisiana's lead.

[hjmick]

I've got no problem with this penalty.

[avatar4321]

good. id like to see the jurisprudence regarding the death penalty addressed by the Supreme Court now. This would likely provide that opportunity.

[glockmail]

"If they're going to face the death penalty for raping a child, why would they leave a living witness?" said Judy Benitez, executive director of the Louisiana Foundation against Sexual Assaults. What a dumbass Liberal. Maybe it will give them a disincentive to do the rape in the first place.

[manu1959]

"If they're going to face the death penalty for raping a child, why would they leave a living witness?" said Judy Benitez, executive director of the Louisiana Foundation against Sexual Assaults.

ya .... like a dead body with dna all over it won't convict they guy.....

[Hagbard Celine]

What a dumbass Liberal. Maybe it will give them a disincentive to do the rape in the first place.

No way. These animals will do whatever they can to satisfy their urges. Fear of the death penalty won't matter one iota--because there will always be "that chance" that they won't get caught. This is what they'll cling to, not fear of the green mile.
The same is true of all crimes. That's why the "deterrent" argument falls flat every time.

All that killing criminals does is put blood on the hands of the public. I'm much meaner when it comes to these savages. I say put them in solitary for the rest of their worthless, pre-worm food existence.

[JimmyAteWorld]

I've always thought the death penalty should only be used in extreme cases, and pedophiles seem pretty extreme to me. But if I had my way, I'd rather just drop the bastards in the middle of a jungle in Africa with no food or water after spraying them down with deer scent.

[actsnoblemartin]

I wanna ask a question.

what does god mean when he says, vengence is mine sayeth the lord?

would god be for or against the death penalty?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=does+god+support+the+death+penalty&btnG=Google+Search

[Hagbard Celine]

I wanna ask a question.

what does god mean when he says, vengence is mine sayeth the lord?

would god be for or against the death penalty?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=does+god+support+the+death+penalty&btnG=Google+Search

Probably against since the only time he EVER put his thoughts into human writing he commanded us not to commit murder.

[Hobbit]

Probably against since the only time he EVER put his thoughts into human writing he commanded us not to commit murder.

The how come the law, as given to Moses by God, gives the death penalty for MANY crimes that we only incarcerate for now?

Besides, you and I both know that the death penalty is not murder. Murder implies a lack of moral or legal authority to kill the person.

[glockmail]

No way. These animals will do whatever they can to satisfy their urges. Fear of the death penalty won't matter one iota--because there will always be "that chance" that they won't get caught. This is what they'll cling to, not fear of the green mile.
The same is true of all crimes. That's why the "deterrent" argument falls flat every time.

All that killing criminals does is put blood on the hands of the public. I'm much meaner when it comes to these savages. I say put them in solitary for the rest of their worthless, pre-worm food existence. That was the same argument that Mario Cuomo gave us when he vetoed the death penalty in New York State for 13 years in a row. When we fired his ass and got Pataki in, he qucikly signed it into law and the murder rate in NYC was cut by about 40%.

This pervert broke the laws of the State, and the State is simply delivering the designated punishment. Therefore the blood's on the hands of the State, not the People.

[Hagbard Celine]

The how come the law, as given to Moses by God, gives the death penalty for MANY crimes that we only incarcerate for now?

Besides, you and I both know that the death penalty is not murder. Murder implies a lack of moral or legal authority to kill the person.

Yeah right, "given to Moses by God." "Given to me by God" is a pretty compelling argument when you're making laws man. I don't buy it. Are we just supposed to take Moses' word on this one? I can't help but notice that only ten things were actually chiseled in stone. The death penalty kinda contradicts chiseled law number two.

[Abbey Marie]

Probably against since the only time he EVER put his thoughts into human writing he commanded us not to commit murder.

Jesus himself willingly submitted to the death penalty, and did not speak out against it.

[theHawk]

No way. These animals will do whatever they can to satisfy their urges. Fear of the death penalty won't matter one iota--because there will always be "that chance" that they won't get caught. This is what they'll cling to, not fear of the green mile.
The same is true of all crimes. That's why the "deterrent" argument falls flat every time.

All that killing criminals does is put blood on the hands of the public. I'm much meaner when it comes to these savages. I say put them in solitary for the rest of their worthless, pre-worm food existence.

Its not just "fear of the death penalty" to prevent it. The main purpose is to KILL the fucking pedophile so he never has the chance to do it again. Many pedophiles in prison admit they won't be able to control themselves and that they'll just do it again, but they are freed anyway. And I say fuck keeping them in prison for their whole lives on the taxpayer's expense. Hang 'em high and be done with it.

[Hagbard Celine]

Jesus himself willingly submitted to the death penalty, and did not speak out against it.

How else would he get into hell and steal the keys so that he could free all the souls worthy of heaven? :poke: He totally played the system.

[diuretic]

A child rapist is set to be executed for his crime. But of course, some shitbag liberal has to argue that its a bad idea to put child molesters to death.




http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/15/rape.execution/index.html

Right, as if thugs like this even think of the reprecussions of their actions.

It's obvious that if the penalty for murder is the same as for rape then the offender may as well commit murder. Stand by for a spate of rapes and murders.

[diuretic]

"If they're going to face the death penalty for raping a child, why would they leave a living witness?" said Judy Benitez, executive director of the Louisiana Foundation against Sexual Assaults.

ya .... like a dead body with dna all over it won't convict they guy.....

First you have to be able to find something with DNA. Secondly you have to be able to match it. Does the US have a national database of DNA samples of every citizen yet?

[diuretic]

No way. These animals will do whatever they can to satisfy their urges. Fear of the death penalty won't matter one iota--because there will always be "that chance" that they won't get caught. This is what they'll cling to, not fear of the green mile.
The same is true of all crimes. That's why the "deterrent" argument falls flat every time.

All that killing criminals does is put blood on the hands of the public. I'm much meaner when it comes to these savages. I say put them in solitary for the rest of their worthless, pre-worm food existence.

Funny thing about deterrence, we sort of don't know if it works or not. But you're right, the idea of deterrence is predicated on the rational criminal.

[diuretic]

That was the same argument that Mario Cuomo gave us when he vetoed the death penalty in New York State for 13 years in a row. When we fired his ass and got Pataki in, he qucikly signed it into law and the murder rate in NYC was cut by about 40%.

This pervert broke the laws of the State, and the State is simply delivering the designated punishment. Therefore the blood's on the hands of the State, not the People.

And I would assume the people of a state get to vote for a legislature that approves or disapproves of the death penalty.

[diuretic]

Its not just "fear of the death penalty" to prevent it. The main purpose is to KILL the fucking pedophile so he never has the chance to do it again. Many pedophiles in prison admit they won't be able to control themselves and that they'll just do it again, but they are freed anyway. And I say fuck keeping them in prison for their whole lives on the taxpayer's expense. Hang 'em high and be done with it.

Keeping them in in for life - natural life - is the answer, not the death penalty.

[avatar4321]

No way. These animals will do whatever they can to satisfy their urges. Fear of the death penalty won't matter one iota--because there will always be "that chance" that they won't get caught. This is what they'll cling to, not fear of the green mile.
The same is true of all crimes. That's why the "deterrent" argument falls flat every time.

All that killing criminals does is put blood on the hands of the public. I'm much meaner when it comes to these savages. I say put them in solitary for the rest of their worthless, pre-worm food existence.

They will be caught. and by killing them we dont have to worry about them getting out and hurting more people.

[Abbey Marie]

How else would he get into hell and steal the keys so that he could free all the souls worthy of heaven? :poke: He totally played the system.

The relevant fact remains that Jesus' willing submission to the death penalty and choice not to speak out against it, proves you were wrong about the Bible and the death penalty.

[Hobbit]

Yeah right, "given to Moses by God." "Given to me by God" is a pretty compelling argument when you're making laws man. I don't buy it. Are we just supposed to take Moses' word on this one? I can't help but notice that only ten things were actually chiseled in stone. The death penalty kinda contradicts chiseled law number two.

You mean "Do not make unto thee any graven image?" Yeah, makes sense.

In any case, it was "Thou shalt not murder," not "Thou shalt not kill," at least if you look at the original Hebrew. Later in the Bible, when executions are being performed, a different word is used, as murder implies an unlawful act.

[glockmail]

And I would assume the people of a state get to vote for a legislature that approves or disapproves of the death penalty.
Regardless, if the People wrote the law themselves, they still aren't responsible for the guy's death, since they wrote the law before he chose to commit the crime. Same for the Jury who are simply following the sentencing required. Same for the hangman who is doing his job. Only the criminal is responsible for his death.

[diuretic]

They will be caught. and by killing them we dont have to worry about them getting out and hurting more people.

Their chances of being caught are enhanced if the victim is still alive to give information to the police. Their chances of being convicted are enhanced if the victim is still alive to give evidence. Their being locked up until they die in prison will ensure they don't get to do it again.

[diuretic]

Regardless, if the People wrote the law themselves, they still aren't responsible for the guy's death, since they wrote the law before he chose to commit the crime. Same for the Jury who are simply following the sentencing required. Same for the hangman who is doing his job. Only the criminal is responsible for his death.


There's no direct responsibility, that's true. But in a democracy, as opposed to an authoritarian or a totalitarian state, the people are able to say yes or no to the death penalty. One can only assume that in a state with the death penalty the locals are fine with it.

The criminal isn't responsible for his or her death though. I'd have to take issue with that. It would be like arguing that the criminal is responsible for his or her term of imprisonment. If they're considered responsible then it implies a decision about it. They're responsible for their crime and they suffer their sentence, whatever it is. If the state has decided that the criminal will be executed then that's the responsibility of the state which decided that execution is a penalty available to the courts.

[DragonStryk72]

Yeah right, "given to Moses by God." "Given to me by God" is a pretty compelling argument when you're making laws man. I don't buy it. Are we just supposed to take Moses' word on this one? I can't help but notice that only ten things were actually chiseled in stone. The death penalty kinda contradicts chiseled law number two.

Um, number five actually.

anyhoo, as you reap, so shall ye sow.

Moving right along here to my end of the point, my thought has always been that rape is worse than murder. Murder is the destruction of the shell, after which, all pain is gone, while rape is the desecration of a person's body and soul, forever haunting them in some way.

The death penalty should be employed, I believe, because, in the end, if he would do this despicable crime, then he will commit other atrocities later if released. beyond this, I believe that a death penalty would be preferable to a life imprisonment, a more humane way to handle it.

[DragonStryk72]

Keeping them in in for life - natural life - is the answer, not the death penalty.

So that I can pay for them for the rest of my life? So that his victims can pay for his upkeep for the rest of his life? Our tax dollars at work.

As well, and as said before, I believe the death penalty to be a better, and more humane, solution than life imprisonment.

[emmett]

Probably against since the only time he EVER put his thoughts into human writing he commanded us not to commit murder.

But supposedly demanded that Abraham slay his son to "prove" his devotion to him. Hmmmm!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[emmett]

Their chances of being caught are enhanced if the victim is still alive to give information to the police. Their chances of being convicted are enhanced if the victim is still alive to give evidence. Their being locked up until they die in prison will ensure they don't get to do it again.

A little squirt of the good bye juice is a way to insure that they don't do it again either. Cost = minimal (19 or 20 bucks American)

The cost of keeping their ass in prison for 30 some odd, maybe 50 some odd years is excrusiating.

Personally I don't want them to deal with them anymore. Toast em for all I care. I don't want to "study" them to see why or any of that. I don't care. Give em the juice and justice is served. You don't have to worry about some molestor in the Prison library getting on the net and flirting with your kid. What if they break out?

[diuretic]

So that I can pay for them for the rest of my life? So that his victims can pay for his upkeep for the rest of his life? Our tax dollars at work.

As well, and as said before, I believe the death penalty to be a better, and more humane, solution than life imprisonment.

Funny you should mention humane. John Stuart Mill once argued in a speech to the British parliament that the death penalty was more humane than life imprisonment - but then English prisons were pretty terrible places back then, he might not feel the same today.

If the cost of keeping someone in prison is a worry then why not execute everyone instead of sending them to prison? Think of the savings.

[diuretic]

A little squirt of the good bye juice is a way to insure that they don't do it again either. Cost = minimal (19 or 20 bucks American)

The cost of keeping their ass in prison for 30 some odd, maybe 50 some odd years is excrusiating.

Personally I don't want them to deal with them anymore. Toast em for all I care. I don't want to "study" them to see why or any of that. I don't care. Give em the juice and justice is served. You don't have to worry about some molestor in the Prison library getting on the net and flirting with your kid. What if they break out?

Breaking out is a concern. But if they're in prison and they do a runner they're going to get caught. The paedophile offenders in our prisons (some of our states have indefinite imprisonment orders - they might be unconstitutional in the US but they squeezed in here - are in pretty tight though. They have to be, the "rock spiders" (prison slang) would last 30 seconds in general. They don't get the usual privileges in maximum security. They're under 24 hour visual and cctv, they can't even take a crap in private.

[glockmail]

There's no direct responsibility, that's true. But in a democracy, as opposed to an authoritarian or a totalitarian state, the people are able to say yes or no to the death penalty. One can only assume that in a state with the death penalty the locals are fine with it.

The criminal isn't responsible for his or her death though. I'd have to take issue with that. It would be like arguing that the criminal is responsible for his or her term of imprisonment. If they're considered responsible then it implies a decision about it. They're responsible for their crime and they suffer their sentence, whatever it is. If the state has decided that the criminal will be executed then that's the responsibility of the state which decided that execution is a penalty available to the courts.
The criminal chose to break the law. As long as the laws are reasonable, it’s no different then the criminal breaking a natural law and suffering the consequences. No one would blame the cliff if someone fell off of it.

[diuretic]

Our laws are human-made. Our punishments are human-made. Our laws are based on human rationality.

When it comes to the laws of nature, those we know about from physics, we defy them all the time but every now and again we're called to account.

[glockmail]

Our laws are human-made. Our punishments are human-made. Our laws are based on human rationality.

When it comes to the laws of nature, those we know about from physics, we defy them all the time but every now and again we're called to account. If you are going to make the case that there is a religious basis for being against the death penalty, then you shoud recognize that there is a religious basis for having it.

[diuretic]

If you are going to make the case that there is a religious basis for being against the death penalty, then you shoud recognize that there is a religious basis for having it.

Since I'm not religious I'm probably not doing so. I'm happy to contest the religious case for it though.

[glockmail]

Since I'm not religious I'm probably not doing so. I'm happy to contest the religious case for it though. If you’re not religious than what difference does it make to you if a person gets punished for a heinous crime with death?

[diuretic]

If you’re not religious than what difference does it make to you if a person gets punished for a heinous crime with death?

Why would I need religion to advise my sense of morality?

[glockmail]

Why would I need religion to advise my sense of morality?Why is it immoral to inflict a punishment fitting the crime?

[retiredman]

As I have said many times, I am against the death penalty, but have absolutely no problem with confining people convicted of capital offenses in small solitary cells and never letting them come out. I think the cells should be furnished with a sink to wash and get drinking water, a hole in the corner to urinate and defecate, a mat to sleep on, a trap door in the main door to pass food into, and a coil of rope hanging on the wall and a strong pipe running across the ceiling in case the occupant chooses to "end his miserable existence' on his own ahead of God's schedule.

[diuretic]

Why is it immoral to inflict a punishment fitting the crime?

Well, for a start the question isn't much chop because it assumes that inflicting a punishment "fitting the crime" is moral in the first place. I believe that's called assuming the premises.

The discussion was, should a paedophile be executed for raping a chld?

You're re-framing it as, "why is it wrong to execute a paedophile for raping a child?"

I've already answered that question.

[theHawk]

Keeping them in in for life - natural life - is the answer, not the death penalty.

Why, just because you say so? Sorry I don't have a soft spot for child molesters. They should all be executed to send a clear message throughout our country that it won't be tolerated. Most pedophiles are repeat offenders, if we can execute them after their first offense it will stop many further rapes. The only thing a life sentance will do is announce to this sickos that if they start raping children they can live the rest of their lives with three meals a day without ever having to work again, all at the taxpayer expsense. I might be willing to go for life sentences but only if we make prisoners work to pay for their own imprisonment. But of course liberals would scream at that idea.

[Hagbard Celine]

You mean "Do not make unto thee any graven image?" Yeah, makes sense.

In any case, it was "Thou shalt not murder," not "Thou shalt not kill," at least if you look at the original Hebrew. Later in the Bible, when executions are being performed, a different word is used, as murder implies an unlawful act.

Whatever. You'll find any way you can to excuse your support of the death penalty. It doesn't matter to me anyway. The 10 commandments aren't what I use to navigate morality. I was just using them for the sake of argument in this debate. I don't have the power to change society's policy on this matter but what I can do is express my opinion, which is that I disagree with it. There are much worse ways to punish people for heinous crimes than putting them to death (basically giving them a free pass out of this life) and being a member of society, I would rather the state, which represents me, not take it upon itself to kill people. There's also the issue/chance of falsely executing an innocent person. That's where I stand on the issue.
I would rather punish these scumbags for the rest of their miserable lives than I would have their blood on my hands.

[mundame]

I like the Chinese system much better than our own.

They periodically take condemned criminals judged guilty of serious crimes in a group out to an execution area and tie each one to a post and then shoot them. Very efficient, and it certainly is cheaper and doesn't put criminals right back into the breeding population.

One problem nowadays is that because we do go after pedophiles severely, they usually kill the child. In the old days they just terrorized the child --"If you tell what I did I'll kill your mommy."


Nevertheless, I think they should all be killed. Then there wouldn't be so many.

[DragonStryk72]

Funny you should mention humane. John Stuart Mill once argued in a speech to the British parliament that the death penalty was more humane than life imprisonment - but then English prisons were pretty terrible places back then, he might not feel the same today.

If the cost of keeping someone in prison is a worry then why not execute everyone instead of sending them to prison? Think of the savings.

The logical fallacy in that is that there is a difference between crimes, it is an unconcious attempt to use an improper analogy for the purpose of putting my in a defensive corner.

Now, as to smaller crimes, I believe that they should worked off, sitting in prison waiting for the time to pass is completely useless. They should all be getting put to work if they are not in for a capital crime. It isn't as though they have anything better to do with their time, and some solid physical work will keep them from having the energy for prison riots and such.

See, the fallacy is in believing it must be option A or option B, when in truth, the answer is to create option C.

[DragonStryk72]

Whatever. You'll find any way you can to excuse your support of the death penalty. It doesn't matter to me anyway. The 10 commandments aren't what I use to navigate morality. I was just using them for the sake of argument in this debate. I don't have the power to change society's policy on this matter but what I can do is express my opinion, which is that I disagree with it. There are much worse ways to punish people for heinous crimes than putting them to death (basically giving them a free pass out of this life) and being a member of society, I would rather the state, which represents me, not take it upon itself to kill people. There's also the issue/chance of falsely executing an innocent person. That's where I stand on the issue.
I would rather punish these scumbags for the rest of their miserable lives than I would have their blood on my hands.

Except that we're running out of places to do that, hence why you're seeing articles about prisons having to release prisoners simply because they have nowhere to keep housing them, so obviously, that system isn't working.

Unless you want the government to start employing inhumane imprisionment, there is little more we can do without using capital punishment. As well, when is the last article you read of an innocent man having been put to death? It's much like the stories of nuclear meltdowns, they don't really happen with any regularity. There's a chance that the DNA evidence, surveillance footage, and 5 eye witnesses are all wrong, yeah, there's a chance, about equal to that of getting struck by lightning twice in a row.

We have an appeals process, it's not like "Okay yer gonna receive the death sentence!" BANG!