Pedophiles and the Death Penalty

[George Costanza]

At present, with a few not relevant to this discussion exceptions, the death penalty only applies in cases of capital murder, i.e., only murders of a certain type, deemed to be more culpable than "regular" murders and hence deserving of the death penalty.

I see no purpose whatsoever in extending capital punishment to include the sick people who molest children. As it is, the punishment reserved for most sex crimes against children is Draconian. Sentences of over 400 years are not uncommon at all.

Time and time again, we hear about the authoritarian personalities of conservatives. Every time I read a thread like this one, it only serves to affirm that fact to me.

 

[Kat]

At present, with a few not relevant to this discussion exceptions, the death penalty only applies in cases of capital murder, i.e., only murders of a certain type, deemed to be more culpable than "regular" murders and hence deserving of the death penalty.

I see no purpose whatsoever in extending capital punishment to include the sick people who molest children. As it is, the punishment reserved for most sex crimes against children is Draconian. Sentences of over 400 years are not uncommon at all.

Time and time again, we hear about the authoritarian personalities of conservatives. Every time I read a thread like this one, it only serves to affirm that fact to me.

What would you want for someone that molested your child..over and again...and then other children?

 

[Liability]

The question was:

"Do you support the option, in your state's criminal law.."

There is NO option permitted, hence the question was not where all posters knew about the ruling.

You write quite unclearly.

So do you!!

Wow. You graduated 3rd grade and are already a law buff.

You're a good kid. I see you going places.

4th grade, maybe.

 

[Coyote]

I support the death penalty and would support it in this case.

Life imprisonment with zero chance of parole would also work.

The life imprisonment with no chance of parole proviso would sufficiently stop those bastards, individually (specific deterrence). But there would be a cost or two. (1) As long as the scum is alive, he can try to do such things again, perhaps to some young or tiny fellow inmate. I'm not sure that would be the right thing to do to even an inmate who has little chance for assistance from anyone else. (2) Society would be deprived of the "general deterrence" benefit of the execution of a pedophile. If some pedophile sees another child molesting piece of shit getting the death penalty, it might just make him hesitate before doing the same thing to any other victim.

I voted "no".

When it comes to crimes like this, I do not think that the death penalty is a deterrent. I don't think these people think through the consequences when determining their actions. So, I think the deterrance justification is false.

Another point is guilt - when it comes to these sort of crimes, guilt isn't always clear cut unless you can obtain actual physical evidence such as DNA. The chance that an innocent person could be executed is always possible.

A third reason is what is in the best interests of the child him/herself (assuming the child has not been murdered) - death penalty cases can go on through appeals for a long time - would a child have to testify, and how often? From what I've read, the perpetrator is often a close friend of the family or even a relative. It can be difficult for a small child to say yes - brother, uncle, father - is guilty of this, the emotions involved, the feelings of guilt this engenders, are intense and conflicting. How much more so would it be if the child sent that person to death? Would a child be able to do that? Would this in turn drive the crime further underground and make it more difficult to prosecute?

I don't think chemical castration is the answer either - from what I've heard, it's not about sex so much as it is about power over the powerless. I'd say life in prison without parole.

 

[Liability]

At present, with a few not relevant to this discussion exceptions, the death penalty only applies in cases of capital murder, i.e., only murders of a certain type, deemed to be more culpable than "regular" murders and hence deserving of the death penalty.

I see no purpose whatsoever in extending capital punishment to include the sick people who molest children. As it is, the punishment reserved for most sex crimes against children is Draconian. Sentences of over 400 years are not uncommon at all.

Time and time again, we hear about the authoritarian personalities of conservatives. Every time I read a thread like this one, it only serves to affirm that fact to me.

Right. Conservatives are authoritarian because we seek to prevent child molestors from ever inflicting themselves again on any other children.

Sometimes the knee-jerk commentary of liberals reveals what they are all about.

But, cool. Lesson learned. From now on, no more Draconian sentences for pedophiles. What would YOU recommend, Georgie?

A few months in a psychiatric facility? And when he comes out, uncured of course since there is no cure for pedophilia, we can always protect his future prospective victims from him ---

How? Or maybe asking that question is too Draconian for you?

 

[George Costanza]

At present, with a few not relevant to this discussion exceptions, the death penalty only applies in cases of capital murder, i.e., only murders of a certain type, deemed to be more culpable than "regular" murders and hence deserving of the death penalty.

I see no purpose whatsoever in extending capital punishment to include the sick people who molest children. As it is, the punishment reserved for most sex crimes against children is Draconian. Sentences of over 400 years are not uncommon at all.

Time and time again, we hear about the authoritarian personalities of conservatives. Every time I read a thread like this one, it only serves to affirm that fact to me.

What would you want for someone that molested your child..over and again...and then other children?

It really isn't a question of what I would "want." We shouldn't set state sanctioned punishments based on what the families of victims "want." Were that to happen, there would be public drawings and quarterings in the town square.

You are not going to like to hear this, but it is the truth. Child molestors are sick. That does not excuse the crimes they do but, to my mind anyway, it does mean that they should not get the death penalty. Believe me, the prison terms now provided for those who commit sex crimes against children, are more than sufficient (or should be more than sufficient) to satisfy the blood lust of outraged victims and the families of victims.

Every time society begins to pass laws based on an emotional response of its citizens to the particular crime committed, it has disaster written all over it. The laws are invariably poorly drafterd and are generally an overreaction to the problem.

 

[Kat]

At present, with a few not relevant to this discussion exceptions, the death penalty only applies in cases of capital murder, i.e., only murders of a certain type, deemed to be more culpable than "regular" murders and hence deserving of the death penalty.

I see no purpose whatsoever in extending capital punishment to include the sick people who molest children. As it is, the punishment reserved for most sex crimes against children is Draconian. Sentences of over 400 years are not uncommon at all.

Time and time again, we hear about the authoritarian personalities of conservatives. Every time I read a thread like this one, it only serves to affirm that fact to me.

What would you want for someone that molested your child..over and again...and then other children?

It really isn't a question of what I would "want." We shouldn't set state sanctioned punishments based on what the families of victims "want." Were that to happen, there would be public drawings and quarterings in the town square.

You are not going to like to hear this, but it is the truth. Child molestors are sick. That does not excuse the crimes they do but, to my mind anyway, it does mean that they should not get the death penalty. Believe me, the prison terms now provided for those who commit sex crimes against children, are more than sufficient (or should be more than sufficient) to satisfy the blood lust of outraged victims and the families of victims.

Every time society begins to pass laws based on an emotional response of its citizens to the particular crime committed, it has disaster written all over it. The laws are invariably poorly drafterd and are generally an overreaction to the problem.

Well, to begin with I didn't vote in this poll, because I am not sure how I feel.

As for emotions, well, anyone with any decency in them would have emotions over an innocent child being molested/raped. Think about it.

I don't trust prison term one iota. Why? Too many times they get out, and go right back and molest/rape another innocent child.
Think about it.

 

[George Costanza]

At present, with a few not relevant to this discussion exceptions, the death penalty only applies in cases of capital murder, i.e., only murders of a certain type, deemed to be more culpable than "regular" murders and hence deserving of the death penalty.

I see no purpose whatsoever in extending capital punishment to include the sick people who molest children. As it is, the punishment reserved for most sex crimes against children is Draconian. Sentences of over 400 years are not uncommon at all.

Time and time again, we hear about the authoritarian personalities of conservatives. Every time I read a thread like this one, it only serves to affirm that fact to me.

Right. Conservatives are authoritarian because we seek to prevent child molestors from ever inflicting themselves again on any other children.

Sometimes the knee-jerk commentary of liberals reveals what they are all about.

But, cool. Lesson learned. From now on, no more Draconian sentences for pedophiles. What would YOU recommend, Georgie?

A few months in a psychiatric facility? And when he comes out, uncured of course since there is no cure for pedophilia, we can always protect his future prospective victims from him ---

How? Or maybe asking that question is too Draconian for you?

No. Conservatives are authoritarian because they generally favor not only the death penalty, but also expanding the death penalty to include crimes other than capital murder.

No one is arguing that child molestors should be out there, inflicting themselves on other children once they have been convicted of the offense for the first time. There are ways to take care of that other than executing them.

California puts them away for a long, long time - and not for "a few months in a psychiatric facility." They go to prison. And if they are classified as violent sexual predators, they can be placed in a psychiatric facility INDEFINITELY once they complete their prison sentence. I'd say that ought to pretty much take care of the problem.

 

[George Costanza]

As for emotions, well, anyone with any decency in them would have emotions over an innocent child being molested/raped. Think about it.

I don't trust prison term one iota. Why? Too many times they get out, and go right back and molest/rape another innocent child.
Think about it.

I loathe child molestors.

If they are getting out and molesting again, then we simply need to tighten up on the parole procedure in order to prevent that. See my response to Liability, above, regarding what California does in this regard.

 

[Kat]

As for emotions, well, anyone with any decency in them would have emotions over an innocent child being molested/raped. Think about it.

I don't trust prison term one iota. Why? Too many times they get out, and go right back and molest/rape another innocent child.
Think about it.

I loathe child molestors.

If they are getting out and molesting again, then we simply need to tighten up on the parole procedure in order to prevent that. See my response to Liability, above, regarding what California does in this regard.

Okay, I hear ya. So what about castration for repeat offenders? Doesn't stop them though. It is the mind that is warped. I am not sure you can rehap a sicko like that anyway.

 

[jillian]

Some of us oppose a death penalty for any reason.

Some of us endorse a death penalty for some reasons.

It is a given that there is no "cure" for pedophilia.

So, the question is:

Do you support the option, in your state's criminal law, of the possibility of the imposition of a death penalty for pedophiles?


EDIT: I voted "yes." I am not a particularly strong proponent of the death penalty in general, but for the protection of society, that option needs to be on the table for pedophiles, imho.

i understand why you'd want the death penalty for pedophiles. but i always hesitate to see the death penalty imposed because of uncertainty in identification and unreliability of witness testimony.

there's a reason the innocence project exists.

The Innocence Project - Home

and exonerations by state, etc...

http://www.innocenceproject.org/news/National-View.php

 

[Yukon.]

Child molestation is a crime, as are several thousand other actions, deserving of punishment. I do not support the death penalty for any reason whatsoever.

The current Holy Father in Rome was appoined by the previous Pope to cover up sexual abuse by Priests. In this case he was part of a conspiracy which in my opinion is equally as bad. This is why I left the RC Church and will never set foot inside it again. It is an evil organization, plain and simply evil.

 

[George Costanza]

As for emotions, well, anyone with any decency in them would have emotions over an innocent child being molested/raped. Think about it.

I don't trust prison term one iota. Why? Too many times they get out, and go right back and molest/rape another innocent child.
Think about it.

I loathe child molestors.

If they are getting out and molesting again, then we simply need to tighten up on the parole procedure in order to prevent that. See my response to Liability, above, regarding what California does in this regard.

Okay, I hear ya. So what about castration for repeat offenders? Doesn't stop them though. It is the mind that is warped. I am not sure you can rehap a sicko like that anyway.

If castration worked, I would be able to set aside my High Liberal Principles () and agree that it could be utilized, but ONLY if it worked and ONLY for repeat offenders.

 

[jillian]

If castration worked, I would be able to set aside my High Liberal Principles () and agree that it could be utilized, but ONLY if it worked and ONLY for repeat offenders.

true pedophiles (and i'm not talking about teenagers dating) are always recidivist. they should be assumed to be repeat offenders. no?

 

[George Costanza]

If castration worked, I would be able to set aside my High Liberal Principles () and agree that it could be utilized, but ONLY if it worked and ONLY for repeat offenders.

true pedophiles (and i'm not talking about teenagers dating) are always recidivist. they should be assumed to be repeat offenders. no?

I have never seen any studies on this, but it sounds logical to me.

 

[Kat]

I loathe child molestors.

If they are getting out and molesting again, then we simply need to tighten up on the parole procedure in order to prevent that. See my response to Liability, above, regarding what California does in this regard.

Okay, I hear ya. So what about castration for repeat offenders? Doesn't stop them though. It is the mind that is warped. I am not sure you can rehap a sicko like that anyway.

If castration worked, I would be able to set aside my High Liberal Principles () and agree that it could be utilized, but ONLY if it worked and ONLY for repeat offenders.

Now that I think about it...what good would a law like that be? Men aren't the only molesters..

 

[Liability]

At present, with a few not relevant to this discussion exceptions, the death penalty only applies in cases of capital murder, i.e., only murders of a certain type, deemed to be more culpable than "regular" murders and hence deserving of the death penalty.

I see no purpose whatsoever in extending capital punishment to include the sick people who molest children. As it is, the punishment reserved for most sex crimes against children is Draconian. Sentences of over 400 years are not uncommon at all.

Time and time again, we hear about the authoritarian personalities of conservatives. Every time I read a thread like this one, it only serves to affirm that fact to me.

Right. Conservatives are authoritarian because we seek to prevent child molestors from ever inflicting themselves again on any other children.

Sometimes the knee-jerk commentary of liberals reveals what they are all about.

But, cool. Lesson learned. From now on, no more Draconian sentences for pedophiles. What would YOU recommend, Georgie?

A few months in a psychiatric facility? And when he comes out, uncured of course since there is no cure for pedophilia, we can always protect his future prospective victims from him ---

How? Or maybe asking that question is too Draconian for you?

No. Conservatives are authoritarian because they generally favor not only the death penalty, but also expanding the death penalty to include crimes other than capital murder.

No one is arguing that child molestors should be out there, inflicting themselves on other children once they have been convicted of the offense for the first time. There are ways to take care of that other than executing them.

California puts them away for a long, long time - and not for "a few months in a psychiatric facility." They go to prison. And if they are classified as violent sexual predators, they can be placed in a psychiatric facility INDEFINITELY once they complete their prison sentence. I'd say that ought to pretty much take care of the problem.

Your daffynition of "authoritarian" really needs to be set free so it can die a natural death. It is a pathetic form of cheesy dishonest rhetoric.

If you maintain that sentences for child molesters are Draconian (as you did maintain) because they have gone as high as 400 years, then by necessary implication you are clearly of the opinion that some significantly lesser time would be more appropriate. You are now waffling. If a lifetime behind bars amounts to no more time served (in reality) than a 400 year sentence, then it must also be true that you view as Draconian the prospect of a life sentence for child molesters.

What's the principled difference between a lengthy sentence followed by a lifetime in a psychiatric facility and a life sentence?

Where DO you come down on this one? Obviously you oppose the Death Penalty. Fair enough. How much TIME should one of those sick fucks get?

 

[Liability]

Some of us oppose a death penalty for any reason.

Some of us endorse a death penalty for some reasons.

It is a given that there is no "cure" for pedophilia.

So, the question is:

Do you support the option, in your state's criminal law, of the possibility of the imposition of a death penalty for pedophiles?


EDIT: I voted "yes." I am not a particularly strong proponent of the death penalty in general, but for the protection of society, that option needs to be on the table for pedophiles, imho.

i understand why you'd want the death penalty for pedophiles. but i always hesitate to see the death penalty imposed because of uncertainty in identification and unreliability of witness testimony.

there's a reason the innocence project exists.

The Innocence Project - Home

and exonerations by state, etc...

The Innocence Project - News and Information: National View

I am not a fan of the innocence project in many cases. They do, however, sometimes serve a legit purpose.

That matter aside, your first objection is interesting. You seem to be saying (and it is a fairly common theme with a great deal of rationality supporting it) that you are opposed to the death penalty because we cannot always be certain of guilt. And that's true. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt (of guilt) is not the same as proof beyond any possibility of doubt. And if an innocent person gets convicted of a crime (one he didn't commit at all), that is tragedy enough. But to compound that tragedy by executing the innocent should send a tremor up our spines. Up to that point, I cannot and do not disagree with you.

But what about those cases where there is absolutely zero doubt. The criminal leaves his dna deposit behind, for example. The very young child's ID of the evil bastard is then NOT the only way of establishing his guilt and his identity. It really admits of no doubt of any kind whatsoever. To a scientific certainty, the pedophile defendant is established to have done the monstrous deed.

With that kind of absolute certainty, assuming that the evil fuck has a record of such behavior, if the SCOTUS were to suddenly reverse course and determine that it's not cruel or inhumane to execute such scumbags for that kind of crime, would you still oppose the possibility of a sentence up to and including capital punishment?

 

[Liability]

Child molestation is a crime, as are several thousand other actions, deserving of punishment. I do not support the death penalty for any reason whatsoever.

The current Holy Father in Rome was appoined by the previous Pope to cover up sexual abuse by Priests. In this case he was part of a conspiracy which in my opinion is equally as bad. This is why I left the RC Church and will never set foot inside it again. It is an evil organization, plain and simply evil.

So, by reputation at least, you are a pedophile but you denigrate the RC church because they have covered up for pedophiles?

Puke-on, you scumbag, just shut the fuck up. Reasonable people are discussing things that you wouldn't have any possibility of comprehending. Go fuck yourself and be quiet about it.

 

[2Parties]

No. Against the death penalty for every person for any reason.