Justices Bar Death Penalty for the Rape of a Child

leonAzul · 26th June 2008, 11:50 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/wa...qzXTHlCLfgJhdQ

Is there a difference between correction and defense of society? Is there a line over which one may not cross?

I can't type any more, because my eyes are full of tears

JoeEllison · 27th June 2008, 12:00 AM

I'm not sure that there's a way to discuss this issue rationally. Any defense of the ruling would likely be twisted into some sort of defense of child rapists... no matter that no one actually defends child rapists.

TragicMonkey · 27th June 2008, 02:29 AM

It makes sense to me, as it will reduce the motive for a child rapist to go ahead and murder the child.

lionking · 27th June 2008, 03:06 AM

I see that both Obama and McCain have rapidly opposed the decision.

As a parent, the crime is abhorrent and I would try to exact the most extreme revenge if it were one of my kids. But I agree with the ruling.

Beerina · 27th June 2008, 06:46 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

It makes sense to me, as it will reduce the motive for a child rapist to go ahead and murder the child.

Yep. If you're gonna be executed anyway, well, dead kids tell no tales.

Jumile · 27th June 2008, 06:55 AM

I live in a country that no longer kills its criminals, and I'm happy for that. Such "how much revenge is enough" questions do not apply here, and we don't have to kid ourselves that such penalty is justice. There's a lot to be said for it.

Darth Rotor · 27th June 2008, 06:59 AM

Originally Posted by leonAzul

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/wa...qzXTHlCLfgJhdQ

Is there a difference between correction and defense of society? Is there a line over which one may not cross?

I can't type any more, because my eyes are full of tears

There is no justice to be had on this earth. See Boethius for why.

DR

Jimbo07 · 27th June 2008, 11:18 AM

The state should not have the authority to execute its citizens under any circumstances...

... that said, killing child rapists would be letting them off too easily, anyway!

Safe-Keeper · 27th June 2008, 11:23 AM

Quote:

The state should not have the authority to execute its citizens under any circumstances.

What he said. Same for torture and other violations of human rights. That settles it for me.

PuckishOne · 27th June 2008, 11:25 AM

I had an interesting discussion about this yesterday online with a Canadian friend of mine. He mentioned, more than once, the notion of "jailhouse justice" - the hierarchy in our prison system by which child predators are basically everyone's bitch from the word go (to put it mildly). It's the best I could do for self-consolation, even though my Legal Brain^TM knows that the ruling is sound. It was also interesting to hear someone from a country with no death penalty rallying for it in this instance...never had that happen before.

Jimbo07 · 27th June 2008, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by PuckishOne

It was also interesting to hear someone from a country with no death penalty rallying for it in this instance...never had that happen before.

There are many Canadians who support the death penalty. I'm not one of them...

It is an intellectual position that is often hard to rationalize with my emotions. It seems like we'd be better off if some people were dead. I'd just prefer that lightning get 'em, rather than the government!

NoZed Avenger · 27th June 2008, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

It makes sense to me, as it will reduce the motive for a child rapist to go ahead and murder the child.

The policy argument is valid, but the Court (IMO) shouldn't be making those policy decisions. That's for the legislators. The Court went further than interpreting the Constitution so that their opinions about what was the better policy overrode the elected officials' opinions. Not for the first time, of course.

TragicMonkey · 27th June 2008, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger

The policy argument is valid, but the Court (IMO) shouldn't be making those policy decisions. That's for the legislators. The Court went further than interpreting the Constitution so that their opinions about what was the better policy overrode the elected officials' opinions. Not for the first time, of course.

You'd rather have the opinions of temporary, elected people who wish to be popular form the basis of law, instead of the written Constitution? It's the job of the judicial branch to interpret the Constitution. If the legislature feels that strongly about it, all they have to do is amend the Constitution. I think you'll find they aren't that motivated over this, once they take a few polls.

Moochie · 27th June 2008, 12:34 PM

As a mostly rational person, I would want to know how a human could devolve into someone who could commit such a monstrous act, in the hope that such knowledge might help us find ways to prevent such acts from occurring in the future.

M.

leonAzul · 27th June 2008, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by JoeEllison

I'm not sure that there's a way to discuss this issue rationally.

Indeed. A couple of deep breaths, and I'll try.

I admit that my first reaction is to simply off the 'tard, not out of revenge, but rather for the fear of recidivism, not to punish, but rather to defend. If I am thinking wrong, please straighten me out.

Jimbo07 · 27th June 2008, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by leonAzul

I admit that my first reaction is to simply off the 'tard, not out of revenge, but rather for the fear of recidivism, not to punish, but rather to defend. If I am thinking wrong, please straighten me out.

I'm (I think) liberal in that I am opposed to capital punishment. However, I am not liberal (I think), in that I genuinely believe that some people can't be "cured" (or at least, psychiatry does not yet possess the tools to do so, get back to me in 100 years).

At my own expense (as a taxpayer), the only resolution to my inane position is to lock people up until they die naturally...

Mark6 · 27th June 2008, 01:52 PM

I support death penalty, but only for someone who commited several unrelated premeditated murders. Some people are simply too dangerous to exist, even in prison, and should be destroyed -- not as "revenge", but for the same reason we destroy rabid dogs. Too dangerous to keep alive.

And yes, I agree with SCOTUS on this one.

Mark6 · 27th June 2008, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by leonAzul

Indeed. A couple of deep breaths, and I'll try.

I admit that my first reaction is to simply off the 'tard, not out of revenge, but rather for the fear of recidivism, not to punish, but rather to defend. If I am thinking wrong, please straighten me out.

There are no childen in prison for "tard" to rape. So no possibility of recidivism.

But I am very much with you as far as people who make murder their profession -- or hobby, -- go. They chose to become predators. It is prey species' responsibility to defend itself.

Bikewer · 27th June 2008, 02:02 PM

I suppose it may be a bit of a leap, but in general the practice of providing "more" protection to a certain class of citizens has not been seen as legally justified. A number of states have passed laws which raise the penalty for the murder of a police officer (or in some cases, other officials) above that of a typical citizen.

Appellate courts have found generally that such special protection is not justified. The rape of a child is an appalling act, and the rapist is likely a particularly vicious pedophile who presents a danger to society as long as he is free. Still, there may be a slippery slope argument here; at what point might pedophiles in general be included? Possessors of child pornography?

leonAzul · 27th June 2008, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by Jimbo07

I'm (I think) liberal in that I am opposed to capital punishment. However, I am not liberal (I think), in that I genuinely believe that some people can't be "cured" (or at least, psychiatry does not yet possess the tools to do so, get back to me in 100 years).

At my own expense (as a taxpayer), the only resolution to my inane position is to lock people up until they die naturally...

I, too, am opposed to capital punishment, on principle. The most troublesome part of it is who is qualified to make such a decision.

Yet we recognize the right to self defense. Is it proper to recognize an analogous right to defense of society at large?

"Sand boxing" the miscreants is a viable solution, removing them from the opportunity of doing harm. Yet such a twisted mind might perceive this as reward, rather than punishment.

And what are the costs?

matty.the.damned · 27th June 2008, 02:37 PM

I don't see how the death penalty could be applied justly to cases of child rape as it outweighs the severity of the crime. The child did not die. Presumably it has prospects for rehabilitation and recovery.

For the record I am opposed to the use of capital punishment under any circumstances.

MtD

leonAzul · 27th June 2008, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by Bikewer

Appellate courts have found generally that such special protection is not justified.

FWIW, I concur. The question I intend to raise is are there behaviours that can be identified as contemptuous of society at large, and how shall we cope with them?

leonAzul · 27th June 2008, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by matty.the.damned

I don't see how the death penalty could be applied justly to cases of child rape as it outweighs the severity of the crime. The child did not die.

Yes, the child still lives, yet the childhood is irrevocably dead. With guidance and strong support, the child might grow to maturity, so there is hope.

Again, I am not arguing for revenge, nor punishment, but rather considering whether it is proper, in the defense of society, to eliminate those who have demonstrated blatantly antisocial behaviour. I am decidedly undecided on the issue, and would welcome well reasoned arguments. I well recognize the potential for abuse of such a position.

skeptifem · 27th June 2008, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

It makes sense to me, as it will reduce the motive for a child rapist to go ahead and murder the child.

i thought the death penalty didnt have any effect on crime?

anyway, a lot of pedos get away with it for decades with insane numbers of victims. I doubt this is very scary for them.

skeptifem · 27th June 2008, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by matty.the.damned

I don't see how the death penalty could be applied justly to cases of child rape as it outweighs the severity of the crime. The child did not die. Presumably it has prospects for rehabilitation and recovery.

For the record I am opposed to the use of capital punishment under any circumstances.

MtD

people can work to become 'ok' but they are never over it or all the way better. some people never make it to just being ok. I think that murder is mainly a crime against the people who loved the victim (other than the fact that its a very unpleasant way to die and was probably pretty scary). the victim is dead. they are incapable of caring about anything. putting someone through something that causes ptsd and severe emotional problems that they have to live with forever is, imo anyway, more serious. rape has ruined many lives and driven a lot of people to killing themselves. getting to live through it isnt that fantastic for the majority id imagine.

TragicMonkey · 27th June 2008, 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by nails3jesus0

i thought the death penalty didnt have any effect on crime?

anyway, a lot of pedos get away with it for decades with insane numbers of victims. I doubt this is very scary for them.

And more of them would get away with it if they silenced their victims permanently.

I had this argument after the remake of "The Fugitive" a while ago. If you were sentenced to death already, what would stop you from murdering all those sent against you? What would they threaten you with --extra death? You've got to reserve the death penalty or else they'll start thinking that they might as well be cooked for a goose as for a gander or whatever that expression is.

NoZed Avenger · 27th June 2008, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

You'd rather have the opinions of temporary, elected people who wish to be popular form the basis of law, instead of the written Constitution? It's the job of the judicial branch to interpret the Constitution. If the legislature feels that strongly about it, all they have to do is amend the Constitution. I think you'll find they aren't that motivated over this, once they take a few polls.

The Constitution is silent on this point. The opinion did not truly deal with a Constitutional issue, but instead delved into what is good policy versus bad policy. That isn't the Court's job. For good or bad, making law is the job of the legislators -- that bit *is* is in the Constitution, too.

And you can just as easily say that I would like laws made by people who are responsible and theoretically responsive to the people, not 9 people who answer to no one, are insulated from the citizenry, and who cannot be (realistically) replaced. I feel that avoiding the death penalty in this situation is probably smarter -- i do *not* feel that the outcome was mandated by the Constitution, flowery language from the Court notwithstanding.

iamivy · 27th June 2008, 08:25 PM

You Americans should get rid of death penalty and your gun culture.You could do with learning a little from your progressive Western counterpart, the noble Europeans.

leonAzul · 27th June 2008, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by iamivy

You Americans should get rid of death penalty and your gun culture.You could do with learning a little from your progressive Western counterpart, the noble Europeans.

Thank you for your well reasoned argument…

leonAzul · 27th June 2008, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger

The Constitution is silent on this point. The opinion did not truly deal with a Constitutional issue, but instead delved into what is good policy versus bad policy.

A point that I missed. Please elaborate.

iamivy · 28th June 2008, 02:24 AM

Originally Posted by leonAzul

Thank you for your well reasoned argument…

Precisely.Some archaic laws and primitive customs will never change.Just like Taliban.There is no insight though which is why West is busy pointing fingers at other countries and violations of human rights when they have never managed their own.

Originally Posted by leonAzul

Is that you?

leonAzul · 28th June 2008, 02:52 AM

Originally Posted by iamivy

Precisely.Some archaic laws and primitive customs will never change.Just like Taliban.There is no insight though which is why West is busy pointing fingers at other countries and violations of human rights when they have never managed their own.Is that you?

Thank you for your well reasoned argument…

The pigasus is you, and the pig feces that you have contributed to this thread.

I have emphatically avoided finger pointing, nor claims of blame!

Seldom do I chute a person to the ignore list. You have eminently qualified--in spades.

cyborg · 28th June 2008, 03:03 AM

Originally Posted by Moochie

As a mostly rational person, I would want to know how a human could devolve into someone who could commit such a monstrous act, in the hope that such knowledge might help us find ways to prevent such acts from occurring in the future.

If you want an answer to the question then there can be no emotional or moral judgments attached to it before one even begins.

So - Why would a human perform such a behaviour? It's always one of two really:

1) They are sexually aroused by children as a matter of their physical make-up. Our brains dictate what we are attracted to - the opposite sex, the same sex etc... and it is simply the case that the pedophile finds the sexually immature attractive - a flip of the logic which makes most others find the sexually mature attractive.
2) It is a learned behaviour. Tying into the above predisposition attraction to children may stem from an association to sex. It is the nurture half that complements the nature half above.

The highly uncomfortable fact that you will have to learn with at the end of the day is that the number of sexual behaviours that exist are incredibly large and varied and not at all limited to homo sapiens.

As Roger said recently - and I paraphrase - the first irrationality one commits when one reasons about human behaviour is that it is rational. At the end of the day it is possible - that is enough for it to happen regardless of any rationale.

leonAzul · 28th June 2008, 03:51 AM

Originally Posted by cyborg

If you want an answer to the question then there can be no emotional or moral judgments attached to it before one even begins..

And in two words:

***** happens.

TragicMonkey · 28th June 2008, 04:29 AM

Originally Posted by iamivy

You Americans should get rid of death penalty and your gun culture.You could do with learning a little from your progressive Western counterpart, the noble Europeans.

For a continent that can't seem to go ten years without one of its countries invading another, Europeans sure are an odd lot to be against guns.

leonAzul · 28th June 2008, 04:35 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

For a continent that can't seem to go ten years without one of its countries invading another, Europeans sure are an odd lot to be against guns.

Word.

kedo1981 · 28th June 2008, 04:58 AM

Oh boo hoo, I just want to know what makes em tick.
WAA WAA, they’re just misunderstood.
Sniffle sniffle, no one has the right to take a life.

What bunch of hypocritical P****s

All violent felons, ALL, should be executed.
The person that commits an assault has probably committed other crimes, each one more violent than the last.
The type of behavior that manifests as violence and sexual assault weaves a thread through humanity and propagates itself in an almost viral fashion.

Executions will never be pretty or nice.

leonAzul · 28th June 2008, 05:14 AM

Originally Posted by kedo1981

Oh boo hoo, I just want to know what makes em tick.
WAA WAA, they’re just misunderstood.
Sniffle sniffle, no one has the right to take a life.

What bunch of hypocritical P****s

All violent felons, ALL, should be executed.
The person that commits an assault has probably committed other crimes, each one more violent than the last.
The type of behavior that manifests as violence and sexual assault weaves a thread through humanity and propagates itself in an almost viral fashion.

Executions will never be pretty or nice.

Thank you for your well reasoned argument…

Who shall be the judge…

kedo1981 · 28th June 2008, 05:31 AM

"who wil be the Judge?"
Why not you
Why not your wife
or the guy you went to high school with
It’s yours and mine and their responsibility to be the judge

cyborg · 28th June 2008, 05:40 AM

Ah, a good old fashioned witchhunt.

26th June 2008, 11:50 PM	#1
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Justices Bar Death Penalty for the Rape of a Child http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/wa...qzXTHlCLfgJhdQ Is there a difference between correction and defense of society? Is there a line over which one may not cross? I can't type any more, because my eyes are full of tears

27th June 2008, 02:29 AM	#3
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,114	It makes sense to me, as it will reduce the motive for a child rapist to go ahead and murder the child.
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

27th June 2008, 03:06 AM	#4
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 29,688	I see that both Obama and McCain have rapidly opposed the decision. As a parent, the crime is abhorrent and I would try to exact the most extreme revenge if it were one of my kids. But I agree with the ruling.
	__________________ A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill

27th June 2008, 06:46 AM	#5
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: A floating island above the clouds Posts: 23,835	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey It makes sense to me, as it will reduce the motive for a child rapist to go ahead and murder the child. Yep. If you're gonna be executed anyway, well, dead kids tell no tales.
	__________________ "Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

27th June 2008, 06:59 AM	#7
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,282	Originally Posted by leonAzul http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/wa...qzXTHlCLfgJhdQ Is there a difference between correction and defense of society? Is there a line over which one may not cross? I can't type any more, because my eyes are full of tears There is no justice to be had on this earth. See Boethius for why. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

27th June 2008, 12:00 AM	#2
JoeEllison Cuddly Like a Koala Bear Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Posts: 7,276	I'm not sure that there's a way to discuss this issue rationally. Any defense of the ruling would likely be twisted into some sort of defense of child rapists... no matter that no one actually defends child rapists.

27th June 2008, 06:55 AM	#6
Jumile Student Join Date: May 2008 Location: Reading, UK Posts: 49	I live in a country that no longer kills its criminals, and I'm happy for that. Such "how much revenge is enough" questions do not apply here, and we don't have to kid ourselves that such penalty is justice. There's a lot to be said for it.

27th June 2008, 11:18 AM	#8
Jimbo07 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,419	The state should not have the authority to execute its citizens under any circumstances... ... that said, killing child rapists would be letting them off too easily, anyway!
Jimbo07 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,419	__________________ This post approved by your local jPac (Jimbo07 Political Action Committee), also registered with Jimbo07 as the Jimbo07 Equality Rights Knowledge Betterment Action Group. Atoms in supernova explosion get huge business -- Pixie of key

27th June 2008, 11:23 AM	#9
Safe-Keeper Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sogndal, Norway Posts: 7,124	Quote: The state should not have the authority to execute its citizens under any circumstances. What he said. Same for torture and other violations of human rights. That settles it for me.

27th June 2008, 11:25 AM	#10
PuckishOne Scholar Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Twisted granola hell Posts: 85	I had an interesting discussion about this yesterday online with a Canadian friend of mine. He mentioned, more than once, the notion of "jailhouse justice" - the hierarchy in our prison system by which child predators are basically everyone's bitch from the word go (to put it mildly). It's the best I could do for self-consolation, even though my Legal Brain^TM knows that the ruling is sound. It was also interesting to hear someone from a country with no death penalty rallying for it in this instance...never had that happen before.

27th June 2008, 11:39 AM	#11
Jimbo07 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,419	Originally Posted by PuckishOne It was also interesting to hear someone from a country with no death penalty rallying for it in this instance...never had that happen before. There are many Canadians who support the death penalty. I'm not one of them... It is an intellectual position that is often hard to rationalize with my emotions. It seems like we'd be better off if some people were dead. I'd just prefer that lightning get 'em, rather than the government!
Jimbo07 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,419	__________________ This post approved by your local jPac (Jimbo07 Political Action Committee), also registered with Jimbo07 as the Jimbo07 Equality Rights Knowledge Betterment Action Group. Atoms in supernova explosion get huge business -- Pixie of key

27th June 2008, 12:03 PM	#12
NoZed Avenger Bitter Whiner Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 11,313	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey It makes sense to me, as it will reduce the motive for a child rapist to go ahead and murder the child. The policy argument is valid, but the Court (IMO) shouldn't be making those policy decisions. That's for the legislators. The Court went further than interpreting the Constitution so that their opinions about what was the better policy overrode the elected officials' opinions. Not for the first time, of course.

27th June 2008, 12:22 PM	#13
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,114	Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger The policy argument is valid, but the Court (IMO) shouldn't be making those policy decisions. That's for the legislators. The Court went further than interpreting the Constitution so that their opinions about what was the better policy overrode the elected officials' opinions. Not for the first time, of course. You'd rather have the opinions of temporary, elected people who wish to be popular form the basis of law, instead of the written Constitution? It's the job of the judicial branch to interpret the Constitution. If the legislature feels that strongly about it, all they have to do is amend the Constitution. I think you'll find they aren't that motivated over this, once they take a few polls.
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

27th June 2008, 12:34 PM	#14
Moochie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 5,495	As a mostly rational person, I would want to know how a human could devolve into someone who could commit such a monstrous act, in the hope that such knowledge might help us find ways to prevent such acts from occurring in the future. M.
Moochie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 5,495	__________________

27th June 2008, 12:38 PM	#15
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Originally Posted by JoeEllison I'm not sure that there's a way to discuss this issue rationally. Indeed. A couple of deep breaths, and I'll try. I admit that my first reaction is to simply off the 'tard, not out of revenge, but rather for the fear of recidivism, not to punish, but rather to defend. If I am thinking wrong, please straighten me out.

27th June 2008, 12:41 PM	#16
Jimbo07 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,419	Originally Posted by leonAzul I admit that my first reaction is to simply off the 'tard, not out of revenge, but rather for the fear of recidivism, not to punish, but rather to defend. If I am thinking wrong, please straighten me out. I'm (I think) liberal in that I am opposed to capital punishment. However, I am not liberal (I think), in that I genuinely believe that some people can't be "cured" (or at least, psychiatry does not yet possess the tools to do so, get back to me in 100 years). At my own expense (as a taxpayer), the only resolution to my inane position is to lock people up until they die naturally...
Jimbo07 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,419	__________________ This post approved by your local jPac (Jimbo07 Political Action Committee), also registered with Jimbo07 as the Jimbo07 Equality Rights Knowledge Betterment Action Group. Atoms in supernova explosion get huge business -- Pixie of key

27th June 2008, 01:52 PM	#17
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,178	I support death penalty, but only for someone who commited several unrelated premeditated murders. Some people are simply too dangerous to exist, even in prison, and should be destroyed -- not as "revenge", but for the same reason we destroy rabid dogs. Too dangerous to keep alive. And yes, I agree with SCOTUS on this one.
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,178

27th June 2008, 01:54 PM	#18
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,178	Originally Posted by leonAzul Indeed. A couple of deep breaths, and I'll try. I admit that my first reaction is to simply off the 'tard, not out of revenge, but rather for the fear of recidivism, not to punish, but rather to defend. If I am thinking wrong, please straighten me out. There are no childen in prison for "tard" to rape. So no possibility of recidivism. But I am very much with you as far as people who make murder their profession -- or hobby, -- go. They chose to become predators. It is prey species' responsibility to defend itself.
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,178

27th June 2008, 02:02 PM	#19
Bikewer Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: St. Louis, Mo. Posts: 9,540	I suppose it may be a bit of a leap, but in general the practice of providing "more" protection to a certain class of citizens has not been seen as legally justified. A number of states have passed laws which raise the penalty for the murder of a police officer (or in some cases, other officials) above that of a typical citizen. Appellate courts have found generally that such special protection is not justified. The rape of a child is an appalling act, and the rapist is likely a particularly vicious pedophile who presents a danger to society as long as he is free. Still, there may be a slippery slope argument here; at what point might pedophiles in general be included? Possessors of child pornography?

27th June 2008, 02:10 PM	#20
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Originally Posted by Jimbo07 I'm (I think) liberal in that I am opposed to capital punishment. However, I am not liberal (I think), in that I genuinely believe that some people can't be "cured" (or at least, psychiatry does not yet possess the tools to do so, get back to me in 100 years). At my own expense (as a taxpayer), the only resolution to my inane position is to lock people up until they die naturally... I, too, am opposed to capital punishment, on principle. The most troublesome part of it is who is qualified to make such a decision. Yet we recognize the right to self defense. Is it proper to recognize an analogous right to defense of society at large? "Sand boxing" the miscreants is a viable solution, removing them from the opportunity of doing harm. Yet such a twisted mind might perceive this as reward, rather than punishment. And what are the costs?

27th June 2008, 02:37 PM	#21
matty.the.damned Scholar Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 98	I don't see how the death penalty could be applied justly to cases of child rape as it outweighs the severity of the crime. The child did not die. Presumably it has prospects for rehabilitation and recovery. For the record I am opposed to the use of capital punishment under any circumstances. MtD
matty.the.damned Scholar Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 98

27th June 2008, 02:41 PM	#22
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Originally Posted by Bikewer Appellate courts have found generally that such special protection is not justified. FWIW, I concur. The question I intend to raise is are there behaviours that can be identified as contemptuous of society at large, and how shall we cope with them?

27th June 2008, 03:18 PM	#23
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Originally Posted by matty.the.damned I don't see how the death penalty could be applied justly to cases of child rape as it outweighs the severity of the crime. The child did not die. Yes, the child still lives, yet the childhood is irrevocably dead. With guidance and strong support, the child might grow to maturity, so there is hope. Again, I am not arguing for revenge, nor punishment, but rather considering whether it is proper, in the defense of society, to eliminate those who have demonstrated blatantly antisocial behaviour. I am decidedly undecided on the issue, and would welcome well reasoned arguments. I well recognize the potential for abuse of such a position.

27th June 2008, 03:44 PM	#24
skeptifem is not beauty 2K compliant Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 3,259	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey It makes sense to me, as it will reduce the motive for a child rapist to go ahead and murder the child. i thought the death penalty didnt have any effect on crime? anyway, a lot of pedos get away with it for decades with insane numbers of victims. I doubt this is very scary for them.
	__________________

27th June 2008, 03:50 PM	#25
skeptifem is not beauty 2K compliant Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 3,259	Originally Posted by matty.the.damned I don't see how the death penalty could be applied justly to cases of child rape as it outweighs the severity of the crime. The child did not die. Presumably it has prospects for rehabilitation and recovery. For the record I am opposed to the use of capital punishment under any circumstances. MtD people can work to become 'ok' but they are never over it or all the way better. some people never make it to just being ok. I think that murder is mainly a crime against the people who loved the victim (other than the fact that its a very unpleasant way to die and was probably pretty scary). the victim is dead. they are incapable of caring about anything. putting someone through something that causes ptsd and severe emotional problems that they have to live with forever is, imo anyway, more serious. rape has ruined many lives and driven a lot of people to killing themselves. getting to live through it isnt that fantastic for the majority id imagine.
	__________________

27th June 2008, 07:34 PM	#26
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,114	Originally Posted by nails3jesus0 i thought the death penalty didnt have any effect on crime? anyway, a lot of pedos get away with it for decades with insane numbers of victims. I doubt this is very scary for them. And more of them would get away with it if they silenced their victims permanently. I had this argument after the remake of "The Fugitive" a while ago. If you were sentenced to death already, what would stop you from murdering all those sent against you? What would they threaten you with --extra death? You've got to reserve the death penalty or else they'll start thinking that they might as well be cooked for a goose as for a gander or whatever that expression is.
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

27th June 2008, 08:20 PM	#27
NoZed Avenger Bitter Whiner Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 11,313	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey You'd rather have the opinions of temporary, elected people who wish to be popular form the basis of law, instead of the written Constitution? It's the job of the judicial branch to interpret the Constitution. If the legislature feels that strongly about it, all they have to do is amend the Constitution. I think you'll find they aren't that motivated over this, once they take a few polls. The Constitution is silent on this point. The opinion did not truly deal with a Constitutional issue, but instead delved into what is good policy versus bad policy. That isn't the Court's job. For good or bad, making law is the job of the legislators -- that bit is is in the Constitution, too. And you can just as easily say that I would like laws made by people who are responsible and theoretically responsive to the people, not 9 people who answer to no one, are insulated from the citizenry, and who cannot be (realistically) replaced. I feel that avoiding the death penalty in this situation is probably smarter -- i do not feel that the outcome was mandated by the Constitution, flowery language from the Court notwithstanding.

27th June 2008, 08:25 PM	#28
iamivy Thinker Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 136	You Americans should get rid of death penalty and your gun culture.You could do with learning a little from your progressive Western counterpart, the noble Europeans.
iamivy Thinker Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 136

27th June 2008, 08:42 PM	#29
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Originally Posted by iamivy You Americans should get rid of death penalty and your gun culture.You could do with learning a little from your progressive Western counterpart, the noble Europeans. Thank you for your well reasoned argument…
	__________________ "Sometimes I sits and thinks, and sometimes I just sits." - Satchel Paige

27th June 2008, 09:10 PM	#30
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger The Constitution is silent on this point. The opinion did not truly deal with a Constitutional issue, but instead delved into what is good policy versus bad policy. A point that I missed. Please elaborate.
	__________________ "Sometimes I sits and thinks, and sometimes I just sits." - Satchel Paige

28th June 2008, 02:24 AM	#31
iamivy Thinker Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 136	Originally Posted by leonAzul Thank you for your well reasoned argument… Precisely.Some archaic laws and primitive customs will never change.Just like Taliban.There is no insight though which is why West is busy pointing fingers at other countries and violations of human rights when they have never managed their own. Originally Posted by leonAzul Is that you?
iamivy Thinker Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 136

28th June 2008, 02:52 AM	#32
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Originally Posted by iamivy Precisely.Some archaic laws and primitive customs will never change.Just like Taliban.There is no insight though which is why West is busy pointing fingers at other countries and violations of human rights when they have never managed their own.Is that you? Thank you for your well reasoned argument… The pigasus is you, and the pig feces that you have contributed to this thread. I have emphatically avoided finger pointing, nor claims of blame! Seldom do I chute a person to the ignore list. You have eminently qualified--in spades.
	__________________ "Sometimes I sits and thinks, and sometimes I just sits." - Satchel Paige

28th June 2008, 03:03 AM	#33
cyborg deus ex machina Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 4,974	Originally Posted by Moochie As a mostly rational person, I would want to know how a human could devolve into someone who could commit such a monstrous act, in the hope that such knowledge might help us find ways to prevent such acts from occurring in the future. If you want an answer to the question then there can be no emotional or moral judgments attached to it before one even begins. So - Why would a human perform such a behaviour? It's always one of two really: 1) They are sexually aroused by children as a matter of their physical make-up. Our brains dictate what we are attracted to - the opposite sex, the same sex etc... and it is simply the case that the pedophile finds the sexually immature attractive - a flip of the logic which makes most others find the sexually mature attractive. 2) It is a learned behaviour. Tying into the above predisposition attraction to children may stem from an association to sex. It is the nurture half that complements the nature half above. The highly uncomfortable fact that you will have to learn with at the end of the day is that the number of sexual behaviours that exist are incredibly large and varied and not at all limited to homo sapiens. As Roger said recently - and I paraphrase - the first irrationality one commits when one reasons about human behaviour is that it is rational. At the end of the day it is possible - that is enough for it to happen regardless of any rationale.
cyborg deus ex machina Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 4,974	__________________ The phrase deus ex machina (literally "god out of a machine") describes an unexpected, artificial, or improbable character, device, or event introduced suddenly in a work of fiction or drama to resolve a situation or untangle a plot...

28th June 2008, 03:51 AM	#34
leonAzul Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 3,734	Originally Posted by cyborg If you want an answer to the question then there can be no emotional or moral judgments attached to it before one even begins.. And in two words: ***** happens.
	__________________ "Sometimes I sits and thinks, and sometimes I just sits." - Satchel Paige

28th June 2008, 04:29 AM	#35
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,114	Originally Posted by iamivy You Americans should get rid of death penalty and your gun culture.You could do with learning a little from your progressive Western counterpart, the noble Europeans. For a continent that can't seem to go ten years without one of its countries invading another, Europeans sure are an odd lot to be against guns.
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.