No Death Penalty For Child Rape (merged)

This is a discussion on No Death Penalty For Child Rape (merged) within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; And people wonder why so many rape victims never come forward? First, they have to live through the original hell... then they have to go ...

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 63

Thread: No Death Penalty For Child Rape (merged)

  1. #31
    Senior Moderator
    Array limatunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    4,246
    And people wonder why so many rape victims never come forward?

    First, they have to live through the original hell... then they have to go through it again and again while giving their statement.

    Finally they have to face defense attorneys in court who make them not only relive it but make it sound like they wanted it, enjoyed it, asked for it, accepted it, encouraged it and started it.

    Who wants to go through that? So they just keep their mouth shut never to get legal justice for the crime committed to and against them.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Senior Member Array Rob P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In the sticks
    Posts
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by rodc13 View Post
    The death penalty is not about deterrence. It's still the right thing to do for some heinous crimes. Like for this dirtbag.

    And are you seriously suggesting, in the USA, that the death penalty can be "just another punishment"? That dog just don't hunt.
    1) Yes, the DP can be overused and lose it's effectiveness. For instance, if you can use the DP for child rape, can you also use it for child molesting w/o sexual intercourse? Child pornography? How about in cases of adult rape where there is GBI and a resulting coma? If so, then can it be used for rape with severe maiming? How about for assault with a deadly weapon? Armed robbery?

    At what point do you draw the line at killing someone for their criminal offense that doesn't result in death to the victim? You can't use the "severe harm or injury" std because that is case-by-case specific and the law MUST BE general so that everyone knows what std to conform to. And, as Taggert has said, if they are subject to the DP anyway, why not just kill the only witness and hope for lack of evidence at the trial. This defeats the deterrence effect of the DP. Now the criminal will think about killing the victim whereas before there was no need just because the punishment is the same for either. Plus the benefits of killing the victim could be a not guilty result at trial. Possibly even a conviction of involuntary manslaughter or felony murder which is not a DP offense. Thus, the death of the child could defeat the DP provision of the child rape by covering up that crime with the killing.

    And, BG's will think of things like that. Once it gets known that manslaughter carries a lesser penalty than child rape, the victim kids' lives are forfeit.

    Rape and severe emotional shock needing lifelong mental health care is not (IMO) enough to put someone to death. Be that person an adult or a child.

    2) And, as I said in my original post, most people seem to lose their reasoning ability whenever the word "child" is used in connection with a crime. Some of the posts in this thread support that opinion.

  4. #33
    Distinguished Member Array 4my sons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Out side of Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by taggart View Post
    If child-rapers are going to get the death penalty, will these dirtbags start eliminating the witnesses on a more frequent basis?
    Again, I'm not saying they shouldn't get the death penalty, I'm just throwing this out there. Discuss...

    That was mentioned in the article on CNN, I don't buy it, especially if you set some levels, I'd like to see any child repast get the firing squad, but they could have set some limits as to who would qualify for the death penalty, if that doesn't deter them, what will?
    "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." [Warren v. District of Columbia,(D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981)]
    If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand

  5. #34
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,386
    Quote Originally Posted by taggart View Post
    If child-rapers are going to get the death penalty, will these dirtbags start eliminating the witnesses on a more frequent basis?
    Based on personal observations, IMHO, this would probably not happen. A couple of thoughts....

    First, many crimes are now classified at a more serious level if now committed with a gun, i.e. misdemeanor robbery upticked to a felony if at gunpoint (or some such)....I would, by casual observation, guess this would result in either fewer robberies at gunpoint or more dead victims. Crime statistics should provide an answer here.

    To the contrary, the DFW area has suffered a huge uptick in car theft recently....does that coincide with car theft's classification down to a misdemeanor?

    Second, while not a psychologist, is the rapist a murderer, or a control fanatic with intense sexual domination as the theme?

    Ted Bundy might well have provided an answer on those.....

    Hypothetically speaking, of course, there's an old saying..."Don't mess with Momma Bear", to which I'll add "Pappa Bear" will oh so very slowly finish the pain and suffering Momma Bear starts. It will take a long time. They would wish for a Death Sentence.

    Ever read John Grisham's "A Time to Kill"?

    BTW, my kids are all adults now, but that does not affect my comments or observations above.

    I still be Pappa Bear.

  6. #35
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    Quote Originally Posted by flagflyfish View Post
    I don't care what the Supreme Court says, if you rape or molest my daughter, it's on!! I can't imagine a father that feels any different. That's as far as I can go as any other thoughts are way too strong for this forum.
    Wasn't this case where it was a step-father raping his 8 year-old step daughter? He needed killing is still a good defense at times.

  7. #36
    Distinguished Member Array 4my sons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Out side of Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    1) Rape and severe emotional shock needing lifelong mental health care is not (IMO) enough to put someone to death. Be that person an adult or a child.

    2) And, as I said in my original post, most people seem to lose their reasoning ability whenever the word "child" is used in connection with a crime. Some of the posts in this thread support that opinion.
    When it comes to children, darn skippy my reasoning ability goes out the window. I see your point, I have to disagree.

    Children are not as capable of defending themselves. They are trusting and Innocent. That's why the mentally challenged are treated different and crimes against them often carry stiffer penalties. They don't have the ability to say no. I'm not trying to sound like the Brady bunch saying it's for the children. There is a reason that even amongst criminals, you don't mess with the children.
    "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." [Warren v. District of Columbia,(D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981)]
    If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand

  8. #37
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,484
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    1) Yes, the DP can be overused and lose it's effectiveness. For instance, if you can use the DP for child rape, can you also use it for child molesting w/o sexual intercourse? Child pornography? How about in cases of adult rape where there is GBI and a resulting coma? If so, then can it be used for rape with severe maiming? How about for assault with a deadly weapon? Armed robbery?

    At what point do you draw the line at killing someone for their criminal offense that doesn't result in death to the victim? You can't use the "severe harm or injury" std because that is case-by-case specific and the law MUST BE general so that everyone knows what std to conform to. And, as Taggert has said, if they are subject to the DP anyway, not just kill the only witness and hope for lack of evidence at the trial. This defeats the deterrence effect of the DP. Now the criminal will think about killing the victim whereas before there was no need just because the punishment is the same for either. Plusthe benefits of k8illing the victim could be a not guilty result at trial or even a conviction of involuntary manslaughter or felony murder which is not a DP offense. Thus, the death of the child could defeat the DP provision of the child rape by covering up that crime with the killing.

    Rape and severe emotional shock needing lifelong mental health care is not (IMO) enough to put someone to death. Be that person an adult or a child.

    2) And, as I said in my original post, most people seem to lose their reasoning ability whenever the word "child" is used in connection with a crime. Some of the posts in this thread support that opinion.
    I'm sorry, I still don't buy it. The people of Louisiana, through their legislature, said that a crime that fit a particular series of facts would be liable for the death penalty. I suspect other punishments were possible, but were rejected in this case by the triers of fact (the jury) and the judge. I do not know the Louisiana law, but I find it difficult to believe there were not enough safeguards in place that this penalty would be over-applied.

    I understand what your position is...you hold that no crime that does not result in death should have the death penalty applied to it. Again, I must respectfully disagree. I have not lost my reasoning ability where children are concerned, but my reason tells me that the most vulnerable in our society deserve our society's ultimate protection against these animals, period. You disagree, as is your right.
    If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.--Samuel Adams as Candidus, Boston Gazette 20 Jan. 1772

    Veteran--USA FA
    NRA Benefactor Life
    Tennessee Firearms Association Life

  9. #38
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    A thought on the eliminating witnesses. I read a study a while back that said 86% of all criminals gave no thought to being caught while committing the crime. They worry about witnesses, death penalty or extended jail time did not really come into play as the vast majority thought they would never be caught.

    This was based on interviews and studies with hundreds of prisoners in jail for all sorts of crimes. The overwhelming constant was they thought they were too smart to ever get caught.

  10. #39
    Senior Member Array Rob P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In the sticks
    Posts
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by falcon1 View Post
    I understand what your position is...you hold that no crime that does not result in death should have the death penalty applied to it. Again, I must respectfully disagree. I have not lost my reasoning ability where children are concerned, but my reason tells me that the most vulnerable in our society deserve our society's ultimate protection against these animals, period. You disagree, as is your right.
    One last post before I quit this thread because I don't want to get tied up in it.

    Society has determined that people need protection from some of these "animals." That protection has been that if you kill a person, you are subject to the same penalty.

    Now you propose to use that same penalty on child rapists in the hopes that it will stop that behavior.

    My question to you is this: If the death penalty for murder has not eliminated murder, why do you seem to think that it will protect children? Because it will prevent repeat offenders?

    Great, now you're saying that being the first victim of a child predator is worth less than being the second (or 3d, 4th 5th etc) because the subsequent victim gets greater protection.

    As for setting std's as to when to apply the DP, isn't that what SCOTUS just did?

    And, finally, most of you seem to be missing a finer point in all of this. WE, adults and children, are all equal under the law. Women's suffereage made this very clear. Now, this thought is to create a class of citizen who deserves greater protection than everyone else. This has 2 bad effects. One is that it creates a 2-tier society which the sufferage movement showed to be improper (and which you can see in arab countries against women - oppression under the name of protection) AND which reduces the general class of citizen to second class status by the enhanced protections given to the children. Under this thought process, children will be the ruling class and all laws will be designed and created to benefit them first at the expense of the rest of the population. Again, the suffereage movement showed this to be improper legislative goals.

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array obxned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    OBX, NC
    Posts
    2,655
    James Fagan should be arrested and charged with making terroristic threats, witness tampering, and hate crimes. He should receive a nice long sentence so he can get to know some child rapists up close and very, very personal.

    Everyone who voted for him should be declared mentally incompetent.
    "If we loose Freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the Last Place on Earth!" Ronald Reagan

  12. #41
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,484
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    Now you propose to use that same penalty on child rapists in the hopes that it will stop that behavior.

    My question to you is this: If the death penalty for murder has not eliminated murder, why do you seem to think that it will protect children? Because it will prevent repeat offenders?
    I have said nothing about deterrence...others may have, but I have not. I want these scumbags punished, and I want the death penalty to be an option of that punishment if the states so decide. Deterrence be !
    If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.--Samuel Adams as Candidus, Boston Gazette 20 Jan. 1772

    Veteran--USA FA
    NRA Benefactor Life
    Tennessee Firearms Association Life

  13. #42
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    1 Because it will prevent repeat offenders?

    2 Great, now you're saying that being the first victim of a child predator is worth less than being the second (or 3d, 4th 5th etc) because the subsequent victim gets greater protection.

    3 And, finally, most of you seem to be missing a finer point in all of this. WE, adults and children, are all equal under the law. Women's suffereage made this very clear. Now, this thought is to create a class of citizen who deserves greater protection than everyone else. This has 2 bad effects. One is that it creates a 2-tier society which the sufferage movement showed to be improper (and which you can see in arab countries against women - oppression under the name of protection) AND which reduces the general class of citizen to second class status by the enhanced protections given to the children. Under this thought process, children will be the ruling class and all laws will be designed and created to benefit them first at the expense of the rest of the population. Again, the suffereage movement showed this to be improper legislative goals.

    Responses to:

    Question 1 While not the direct reason to apply the DP it sure seems like an added bonus to me.

    Statement 2 If applied there would be no second or third or fourth victim. I don't really see your point here.

    Paragraph 3 Again your logic is failing here due to reality. We already have hate crime laws. If I'm gay or a minority I already have greater protection under the law. Also police are afforded greater protection under the law (which is a good thing). Why not add another special class of people to the list IE: children.
    It is surely true that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Nor can you make them grateful for your efforts.

  14. #43
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,386
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    One last post before I quit this thread because I don't want to get tied up in it.


    I guess I just carry some feelings on my sleeves. I better quit too, before I get myself in trouble.

  15. #44
    VIP Member Array Rob72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    OK
    Posts
    3,468
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    And, finally, most of you seem to be missing a finer point in all of this. WE, adults and children, are all equal under the law.
    No, we are not. 1) Children are a "special population," as are the elderly, physically handicapped and intellectually disabled. 2) Repeat sexual offenders cannot be rehabilitated. That is well established by case analysis and research. 3) I well understand what SCOTUS stated- disenfranchised and physically and emotionally immature populations are not protected by swift, sure justice.

    Any argument regarding efficacy of the DP must address this fact: implementation of the DP routinely runs 20 years. Deterrance is lost because there is no immediate cause-effect, not because it is over-utilized (see Beccaria, "Classical School.")

    "Sociology" is poorly applied to real life (an argument I frequently have with my soc. professor.) If society cannot or will not protect those of limited ability, it is violating the implied and/or codified social contract, and cannot, therefore, hold the individual to its standards. American Republicanism is founded on the idea that society answers to and functions for the betterment of the individual, not the other way 'round.

    Edit to add:
    If the death penalty for murder has not eliminated murder, why do you seem to think that it will protect children? Because it will prevent repeat offenders?
    This is not specifically "at you," though you did make the statement. The above is arrogant ignorance. Just as there are different individuals,there are different crimes. Strictly from a utilitarian standpoint, violent child predators should be exterminated. Their violent fantasies cannot be reduced, even in extreme old age, and it may be argued that maintaing them for life is cruel and unusual since they are unable to participate in ADLs without abnormally active sexual fantasy. By the nature of the crime, child-sodomy is "aggravated." SCOTUS was simply wrong, in this instance. But very politically "progressive".....

  16. #45
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,484

    And in Rhode Island...

    Life for R.I. child-killer's 'unforgivable' crime

    Published: 6/25/08, 5:26 PM EDT
    By ERIC TUCKER

    PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) - A man who admitted raping and strangling an 8-year-old neighbor was sentenced Wednesday to life in prison without the possibility of parole after he called his actions "despicable and unforgivable."

    Joshua Davis of Woonsocket was given the maximum sentence for the abduction and death of Savannah Smith on May 7, 2006.

    Davis said drugs and alcohol had ruined his life and told the girl's family that he could not imagine the heartache he had caused them.


    See remainder of story here:
    AT&T


    Evidently, the death penalty is not an option in Rhode Island even for this crime. That is a decision that the citizens of Rhode Island, through their elected legislators, have made. I don't agree with their decision, but I respect their right to make it. SCOTUS just stripped that right from several states that already had the death penalty in these cases, and in several more that were considering it....
    If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.--Samuel Adams as Candidus, Boston Gazette 20 Jan. 1772

    Veteran--USA FA
    NRA Benefactor Life
    Tennessee Firearms Association Life

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. State seeks death penalty for man who murdered officer Phil Davis
    By fox2102 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 18th, 2009, 11:35 PM
  2. Police: Officer kills man who beat child to death--CA: MERGED
    By falcon1 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: June 28th, 2008, 05:03 PM
  3. Death Penalty in NJ
    By prawls in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: December 18th, 2007, 12:29 PM
  4. Death Penalty Deters Crime - merge
    By aznav in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: June 12th, 2007, 10:48 AM

Search tags for this page

nra courses near franklin va 23851

Click on a term to search for related topics.