U.S. Supreme Court Gives the OK for the Worst Crime Ever

Nope.

It is like hitting your child for hitting someone else.

Capital punishment is so backwarded and shouldn't be applied in a civilized society.

Peace,

 

I disagree. I am not hugely pro death, in most cases I will actually side with those who are anti death penalty.

I however do feel some individuals need the death sentence.

I get this stance from thinking deep inside myself, what would I do or want happen to someone who did X to my child, my wife, my friends and family.

I do not believe killing someone alone should trigger the death penalty, nor do I think murder is the only thing that should bring the penalty about.

In my eyes it should.

Be no doubt at all that the accused is guilty, via video evidence, extremely strong dna evidence, direct eye witness testimony, a strong case with absolutely no doubt at all.

The worst possible offense. Not just simple child molestation for instance. Not that it is simple before anyone twists that, however there is a difference from a sick molesting SOB compared to that of someone who mutilates while violently raping an under aged child.

For starters.

 

He was talking about killing people not capital punishment. They are two distinct topics. My reply to him, which you quoted, is dealing with his premise.

There are many examples of self defense where killing is not wrong.

Would you agree that it is morally acceptable to use lethal force in self defense of your own life if required?

 

I guess that a more appropriate Title for this thread would have been -
"Do You Believe In Capital Punishment?"

Many posters seem willing to bypass the "heinous, depraved nature" of the crime, and the "helpless child victim" part of the argument. To me, this is the "crux of the biscuit".

As Alito suggested, "Some crimes are worse than standard murder."

 

Why is rape of a child worse than rape of a teenage girl? Or an elderly woman?

Or a middle aged man?

I realize we all know that children are naive, innocent and relatively defenseless against predations, but the constant hiding behind "it's the children!" gets old.

It's the children, you have to raise taxes!

It's the children, you have to do X or y!

How could you do (or say) that, what about the children!

etc

We don't necessarly value the life of a child more than an adult most of the time in our society, it really gets me going when I read "but it's the children".

The problem with society today, is that it is ok to kill Muslims, but normally it's not ok to kill. It's ok for Kobe Bryant to rape and get away with it, but if someone rapes a child, it's punishable by death. We're constantly applying all sorts of subjective evaluations to brutal, violent crimes, and then not treating them with equal seriousness or gravity, which translates into not applying the law in a consistent manner.

So please, spare me the children. We killed 500,000 kids in Iraq during the 90s. No child, anywhere should be subjected to rape or violence. No child, without exception.

Btw, it always surprises me when people get worked up with stuff like this.

The death penalty is an after-the-fact punishment. It isn't applied until a child is raped. That's how f**ked up we are. We are more concerned with retribution, than we are with prevention.

And if you seriously think that someone sick enough to rape a kid might be turned off by the death penalty vs. a life of being gang raped in prison, you're really naive.

 

While all are disgusting it is worse as children are in no way capable of protecting themselves, we are their protectors.

A middle aged man, an elderly woman, a teenage girl, they have some form of defense that a child does not have.

---
That being said, I am for the death penalty for a man who rapes and disfigures a woman, teenager, or even middle aged man just the same. If the case is the worst of the worst, if it is w/o a doubt the accused did the crime.

 

I agree to a degree. Certainly I can sympathize with a parent or family member's additional emotional attachment. But if someone raped a member of my family, I would want it treated with just as much gravity as people would expect the rape of a child to be treated. You know what I mean?

 

I hardly think pedophillia can be considered a mental disease. At the same time I do not really think the death penalty is needed for this crime. I could go either way. Its not the worse case by the SC in history.

 

Yes I know what you mean, when it directly effects anyone they are going to want the case taken with the utmost seriousness as any other case, if not more so.

 

I think you have pretty much articulated my feelings. A murder does not equal a death sentence and likewise, there are crimes short of murder, which are so vile, so cruel, that the perpetrator forfeited his right to live in civilized society. I view this as retribution, punishment, and a deterrence.

There is a recent case in NY where a man was found guilty of raping and torturing a woman over (I think) a 19 hour period. It was really sick stuff. I don't know enough of the details or enough about his prior crimes but to me this type of crime has two outcomes that I are approprite. Life in prison or death penalty. That's it, no second chance for these type of defective people. Why? Why should the rest of us just trying to get by and enjoy life with our families be subjected to the depravity of humans like these?

(Some case details below. It describes some violent acts, so please don't read it if it with bother you.)

details of that case:

It happened on April 13, 2007 when Williams allegedly burst into her New York City apartment.

He's accused of forcing her to have oral sex and raping her seven times during that ordeal, but that wasn't the worst of it.

He allegedly scalded her with boiling water from a kettle, forced her to take massive doses of painkillers, used a knife to mutilate her face and slice her eyelids and ordered her to gouge out her own eyes using the same blade.

. . .

By the time her attacker poured a second kettle of boiling water on her open wounds, the woman was pleading for him to kill her so the pain would stop.

"I was screaming and crying and in so much pain and agony," she testified. "I said, 'Just kill me. You know you're going to kill me anyway. Just kill me.'"

But she claims he refused. "No, you're not good enough for that," she said he told her. When he ordered her to gouge out her own eyes a second time, she took the blade, ready to commit suicide. ​

 

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Midwest/02/11/abducted.family.ap/

This would be a case of someone IMO deserving the death penalty even though nobody actually died, as would yours above.

 

Exactly. Do you know how that case turned out?

I think one of the reasons we have a messed up justice system / society is that we do not punish crimes in proportion to their gravity. We put people in jail for life for growing pot and let murderers and rapists out in years.

I would be much harsher with violent crimes against other people. I would be firm, but forgiving with serious financial and physical crimes. I would be lenient/decriminalize victimless crimes like simple drug use and prostitution. There are some crimes where the person might get some leniency for a first offense, but stiff sentence for any repeat behavior - like drunk driving.

 

Would you let a rabid tiger live in your house? Even if it was caged? Would you put your disobedient marijauna eating dog in the cage with it? I personally would have it put down. A true monster shouldn't be let free. And as far as why children should be treated differently? They are undeveloped in many ways that make such a crime much more devastating on the rest of their lives.

 

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/20736609.html

It's all over the news by me, she was just awarded 3 million 'which she'll more than likely never see'

He got only 37 years! People get more time off of drug offenses!

I'm not so sure I agree with the decision of this lawsuit however, the bold in particular, plus it really means nothing.

100% Agreement.

 

earthfaze - It's late and I am drunk, but
aside from the marijuana-eating dog,
I agree with every other word that you said.

I'm sure you're right about the dog, too, but I just can't grasp it right now.
.
.
I have upgraded this morning's original page, should anyone give a hoot -
http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/politics/us-supreme-court-summary.htm
All opinions stated are those of the author alone.
We have lots of opinions on this one.

<edit> Dang, GRIM! You beat my slow a$$ AGAIN! By 1 Minute. After OVER 2 hours! Oh, well.
We are not too far apart.
.
Dear Reader, Please place this post, logically, above the one you just read.
Good Lord.
I'm outta here.
.
.
.

 

I was feeling a little cantankerous this morning. Sorry for the harshness of my first post.

 

Being sometimes necessary != right.

It's fudging the issue to blur the lines between killing someone in self defence and killing them because 5 years ago they done something illegal.

 

browntwn, i thought you would like this...

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/021708.html

 

That is why I 'and I believe browntwn from what I have read' have a stance of extreme evidence, some form 'video proof for example' that would make it next to impossible for an innocent to be sentenced to death.

It is a good point, so many have been railroaded in the past, present and I'm sure future.

 

The death penalty can not be abused to follow our emotions. It is the ultimate punishment, reserved for the most hideous of criminals that commit murder. If we make “just one exception” for this crime, then this can, and would be used as a catalyst propelling us into other crimes that do not result in death to allow the ultimate and final punishment . - From My Blog.

I also go on to say that it is unfortunate that the constitution protects a few dirt bags every now and then, but it protects all of us every single day.