Death penetly for child rape

Kat

Kat

Heart & Soul
2 2 2 1 1
15 Year Club Notable
article link


WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether a state can execute someone convicted of raping a child, one of the few remaining crimes that does not require the death of the victim to result in capital punishment.


Patrick Kennedy, 43, was sentenced to death for the rape of his 8-year-old stepdaughter in Louisiana. He is the only person on death row in the United States for a rape that was not also accompanied by a killing.


The Supreme Court banned executions for rape in 1977 in a case in which the victim was an adult woman.


Kennedy's lawyers say the death penalty for child rape violates the Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment.
The justices will hear arguments in the case in April.


The last executions for rape or any other crime that did not also include the victims' death were in 1964.


Forty-five states already ban the death penalty for any kind of rape and among the other five states that in theory allow it for child rapists. Kennedy's case is the only time a state has sought to execute someone. Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas allow executions in such cases.
Click to expand...
I happen to think this is a serious enough crime to earn a quick ticket to death row.
 
I agree and disagree .. they take the life of the child .. and leave a different person behind most of the time effectively killing the "child" so to speak .. BUT .. once they allow this action .. when a child is abducted now you probably won't get them back. The offenders are going to end up killing more kids, in fear of getting caught or for the simple reason "well I might as well, if/when I get caught I'm getting death row anyways".

A canumdrum 4 real.
 
ok the women wont understand the concept of blue balls........i wouldn't kill him......i'd eunochise him.......he'd still have some genetalia so would still get the urge.....but no equipment to release that urge.......he'd have a life of hell
 
SRC said:
I agree and disagree .. they take the life of the child .. and leave a different person behind most of the time effectively killing the "child" so to speak .. BUT .. once they allow this action .. when a child is abducted now you probably won't get them back. The offenders are going to end up killing more kids, in fear of getting caught or for the simple reason "well I might as well, if/when I get caught I'm getting death row anyways".

A canumdrum 4 real.
Click to expand...
Thats true also...but on the same hand...sometimes you dont get the kid back at all to begin with. Also...if you execute them...theres no way theyd ever be released to do it again.
 
skyblue said:
ok the women wont understand the concept of blue balls........i wouldn't kill him......i'd eunochise him.......he'd still have some genetalia so would still get the urge.....but no equipment to release that urge.......he'd have a life of hell
Click to expand...

The ones that are on the injections that render their gentalia useless .. usually just use inanimate objects .. to do what their genetalia won't perform.
 
I wouldn't kill them .. then I'd go to jail and leave my child without a parent to comfort them ina time they REALLY need a parents understanding.

I might want to .. but I wouldn't.
 
SRC said:
I agree and disagree .. they take the life of the child .. and leave a different person behind most of the time effectively killing the "child" so to speak .. BUT .. once they allow this action .. when a child is abducted now you probably won't get them back. The offenders are going to end up killing more kids, in fear of getting caught or for the simple reason "well I might as well, if/when I get caught I'm getting death row anyways".

A canumdrum 4 real.
Click to expand...

Interesting take. So, in your opinion, is there a chance that having death penalty in place will deter the crime?
 
HisHoliness said:
Interesting take. So, in your opinion, is there a chance that having death penalty in place will deter the crime?
Click to expand...

In some cases it probably would .. a stiffer penalty for a crime will usually be enough to make some think twice (like the 3 strike law) .. but then again you have some that just simply do it anyways (obviously if they are raping anyone .. much less a child .. knowing they will get in trouble).

Just seems like the kid is usually the one who tattles and gets them in trouble for raping them .. a mouth that doesn't talk .. isn't gonna tell on you. :(
 
This is just a late night idea, but what not force these people into slave labour instead of killing them? IMO it's just as civil/uncivil.
 
skyblue said:
ok the women wont understand the concept of blue balls........i wouldn't kill him......i'd eunochise him.......he'd still have some genetalia so would still get the urge.....but no equipment to release that urge.......he'd have a life of hell
Click to expand...

Women do understand the concept of blue balls, fyi.
I like the idea of making them a eunuch. Removal of the testicles effectively wipes out most of their testosterone production. Problem solved.
 
Breath said:
Women do understand the concept of blue balls, fyi.
I like the idea of making them a eunuch. Removal of the testicles effectively wipes out most of their testosterone production. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

I've watched many a show on Discovery and the Health channel that takl about men who have been castrated for repeat rape offenses .. they say it works 50/50.

Some of them still think about it, but just can't do anything (with their own body) but still think about it (just like a male dog that is fixed but will still hump your leg) and since they cannot do it themselves .. they'll just use objects instead.

Most rapists don't rape for sexual pleasure alone .. it's usually a dominance/power/violence thing.
 
Back
Top