Child Rapists Should Not Receive the Death Penalty
Posted by Joe Rivett on 06.25.2008
The Supreme Court correctly interpreted the Constitution and made logical sense...
It is not often I agree with the Supreme Court but today they got it right. It is cruel and unusual punishment to kill a child rapist. Now I know what some of you may be thinking: "But Joe, what if someone raped your child?" I do have a daughter. If someone raped her, I'd be pissed. I might try to kill the person or better yet, I'd sodomize the rapist with a baseball bat so they get an idea of what real pain is, then I'd kill them. But I'm not the state. The state is not supposed to enact revenge. That is why no cruel and unusual punishment is in the Bill of Rights.
Another reason I agree with the Court's ruling is that if I had to pick between my daughter getting raped or my daughter getting killed, I would pick rape. If she is killed, it is robbing her of life whereas if she gets raped, she will obviously have psychological issues but she can still make a good life. Drew Carey was raped and he turned out to have a good life. Ask yourself whether you'd be raped or murdered? Clearly, murder is worse, much worse.
Another reason I agree with the court's ruling is the pressure the death penalty will put on the child. For example, let's say my daughter is raped by an uncle. She may be less inclined to report it if she knows her uncle may die as a result. Not only does she have to deal with the stress of rape but now she'll have to deal with the stress of death.
Another reason I agree with the court's ruling is that the life of an adult and a child are equal. Both are human beings and enjoy equal protection under the law according to the 14th amendment.
I've also worked in a prison and believe me, prison can be hell for a child rapist. It isn't exactly a picnic to be in jail for 25 years or in the case of the man in the Supreme Court the rest of his life for the crime of rape.
Don't get me wrong I support the death penalty. To get the death penalty, at minimum you should have to cause someone else to die; an eye for an eye. The death penalty is a good way to make sure people don't escape prison and kill again. I don't know what to do with child rapists but I'll leave it to a judge's discretion.
We all know as soon as the inmates finds out what the child raper has done, he'll be a dead man anyway.
Posted By: GC (Guest) on June 25, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Liberalism truly is a mental disorder. The correct answer is "I'd rather my daughter not be raped or killed." How do you prevent that? You get rid of perverts like this child rapist. Of course, I'm sure you think this kind of people are able to be rehabilitated huh?
Posted By: John (Guest) on June 25, 2008 at 10:46 PM
Joe, I know that you are going to get a lot of flame email from people, but i wanted to let you know that at least one person, me, agrees with you.
Posted By: Mikel (Registered) on June 25, 2008 at 10:47 PM
"To get the death penalty, at minimum you should have to cause someone else to die; an eye for an eye."
Isn't that some sort of revenge on the state's part. The Death Penalty is cruel punishment that should have been done with a long time ago.
Posted By: Sean B. (Guest) on June 25, 2008 at 11:06 PM
Agree entirely.
What if a person kidnaps a child to rape them, and then murders them? There should be a difference in the punishment there versus the rapist who doesn't kill their victim. If a rapist knows he will get the death penalty, he may be more inclined to murder the child to cover it up since the punishments would be the same anyway.
Besides, you're right. The punishment has to fit the crime, and a traumatic life is still a life. My preferred punishment would either be castration and a mandatory 20 year prison sentence or life without the possibility of parole.
Posted By: Zack (Guest) on June 25, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Joe Rivett=idiot
You would rather see your child raped then killed? I don't want to see either happen, and I suggest we do everything possible to make sure that dosen't happen. If that means death, so be it.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on June 25, 2008 at 11:49 PM
While I can see why an action that does not kill anyone, or is not intended to kill anyone, can be said to not merit a death penalty, the Court's majority opinion leaves a LOT to be desired, that's for sure! OsiSpeaks.com
Posted By: KYJurisDoctor (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 12:18 AM
I agree with the Supreme Court as well and moreover oppose the death penalty in all cases.
However, if NAMBLA members were put to death, it would show the gay marriage cultists how popular their cause is.
Posted By: John Bryans Fontaine (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 12:32 AM
GC said it best. A child rapist could only receive one year in prison as punishment, but as soon as the other inmates find out what he is in for, his ass is FAIR game and he will find out what REAL pain is. He will most likely end up dead within that year also.
Posted By: natedoggcata (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 12:54 AM
Anyone who sexually abuses or rapes a child should get the death penalty. Period.
Posted By: OmegaSox (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 01:03 AM
Whatever the sentence maybe.. I think its more the message we want to send out to the masses on what it means to do something as heinous as raping a child. And I believe "death" should not be opted out. The person who committed this crime took away from the victim, a chance for leading a normal life, which may or may not end up in suicide etc. So why allow the person to live? And i agree with GC... he's a dead man either way once inmates know what he's in for.
Posted By: Srikanth (India) (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 01:34 AM
Plain and simple, someone who rapes a child is mentally ill. To subject the death penalty to the mentally ill opens up precedence for a lot of other crimes being worthy of death penalties as well. I feel the death penalty in and of itself should be abolished, no "Hammurabi's Code" as suggested in this article. Yes, child rape is an atrocious crime, but it is also a crime of someone mentally ill. Also, something else to consider, from Wikipedia, most executions carried in 2007, by country, as follows: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, USA, and Iraq. Not a list I am proud to say that we are on. Most of the "civilized world" abolished it years ago including most of Europe, so why are we so far behind?
Posted By: Joe (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 03:38 AM
What if its satutotry? What if one party didnt know the others real age ? Theres alot of factors to consider...
Posted By: Guest#5714 (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 03:39 AM
I would most certainly want to kill someone who raped my daughter. Would that be right? No. But no one is going to shed a tear for the rapist. The fact is, the punishment must fit the crime. Some may argue that death is the suitable punishment, and others will argue that castration, or a life sentence in jail is the way to go.
How do you know exactly how a rape will effect a person in the long run? Some people cope, while others do not cope. There is no certainty as to the fall-out of a violation like that, other than devastation and humiliation.
Personally, I'd have no problem voting that castration be a suitable punishment. Death, in my opinion, is pushing it. I would most likely want to kill the man who raped my daughter (while the incident is still fresh in my consciousness), but I might live to regret it.
You have to remember that, rape does not solely effect the victim, but the victim's loved ones. I'm opting to lend my favor to castration, and a life doing public service. Why public service? What would a child rapist be doing in jail? Eating 3 square meals a day, doing laundry, and perhaps get shived one day? I like the shiv part, but it's of no use to society. It costs the tax payers money to feed and cloth his sick arse, and pay the guards to watch him. Why not cut his franks and beans off, and get him to clean highways for a living. Some thing...
I certainly wouldn't loose any sleep over him dying. But when you execute some one, their worries are over. Where as if you take away their genitalia, as a constant reminder of their evil deeds, that person must live the rest of their life in shame. Add to that a life of servitude for the betterment of the community, I'd say that's fair.
Posted By: Guest#3971 (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 05:02 AM
death penalty is what most people want, but what about castration? or forced impotancy? shit, they chop thieves hand off in some countries. it works, u wouldn't try it again for sure.
Posted By: shaydee (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 07:29 AM
Last I looked, the poll on MSN showed that 85% of Americans disagreed with this ruling.
In my opinion, the death penalty is not a good enough punishment for a child rapist. Eye for an eye right? If the state can kill a murderer, then the state should be allowed to rape a child rapist. That's the flaw in the "eye for an eye" theory.
To me, there's not a much more unforgivable crime than child rape. Child rapists deserve the worst punishment possible, and if the state has decided that the worst punishment is death, then so be it. I have no compassion for animals who would do such a thing, and the fact that people actually support this ruling is a little disgusting to me.
Posted By: Alan Kay (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 08:13 AM
I agree with you Rivett on the grounds that death is too good for these individuals. Perhaps some bat sodomy, as you said, and a side of castration.
While death is not the answer to everything, torture has its merits :).
Posted By: Chris Vicari (Registered) on June 26, 2008 at 08:14 AM
Exactly. The liberals on this board are more worried about this pervert instead of the child he harmed and other children that could now be potentially harmed by other perverts. Had the Supreme Court sent the correct message to child rapists, it would've done a world of good to prevent it from happening as much again.
Oh well. We must look out for the rights of child rapists though. Ah, the wonderful America of Obama to look forward to. I guess this was the change he was alluding to?
Posted By: John (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 09:15 AM
True about what happens in prison, but in some cases if there is a fear that the inmate would be killed, he can be put in a different wing than gen pop, and he can have a nice, comfortable time. Well, as comfortable as prison is, anyway.
Posted By: T-Bag (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Nany pelosi attended a parade that honored the founder of nambla. and we conservatives are crazy right?
Posted By: no obama (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 11:20 AM
A few years ago in my home state of Illinois, a man was tortured for hours on end until he falsely confessed to raping and murdering his four year old daughter. Even when the truth came to light the authorities still fought his release all the way. The primary point here is that the government, be it state or federal, should not be trusted with the power to kill except in extreme circumstances. The death penalty should be reserved for the worst of the worst. If they find body parts in the guy's freezer, execute him. But when they have circumstantial evidence and a shaky witness account, no way should a punishment be administered that's impossible to take back. Morally I'd say take the child rapists out in the street and shoot them. But practically we'd have to be insane to further empower a "justice" system which has perpetrated so many injustices.
Joe, what rape takes from a child is akin to killing them. I strongly disagree with your assertion that there's a big difference.
Posted By: Shockmaster (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 12:07 PM
You see this is why we need Obama to get win. We need him to change the way the country works and get rid of Congress, the activist judges of the Supreme Court, and the Constitution so we can have justice.
Posted By: David (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM
I agree Joe.
Difficult subject but you hit it on the head.
I have been in a similar situation when my sister was raped. As sick as it sounds, my immediate reaction was "Thank God she's still alive."
She's had a few issues a trials since and the guy got off, because there was trace amounts of alcohol in her system.
She's doing fine though, living life getting her PhD.
Sorry about the tangent, but your points are valid in my opinion.
Posted By: Hey yo (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 12:30 PM
I'd honestly rather they be executed. I am deeply liberal, at least socially. But some men you just can't reach.
Posted By: Vallejo (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 01:50 PM
Drew Carey wasn't raped.
Posted By: D (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 01:51 PM
Wait, Drew Carey was raped? The comedian Drew Carey?
Posted By: Vallejo (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 01:52 PM
You know...that's a fairly broad interpretation of the "cruel and unusual punishment" bit for the court. Very broad scope there - who wants to bet this ruling's going to be cited to abolish the death penalty for a lot of other things?
Posted By: WillScott (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 03:41 PM
"Oh well. We must look out for the rights of child rapists though. Ah,
the wonderful America of Obama to look forward to. I guess this was
the change he was alluding to?"
Worng, dude. Obama said he disagrees with the Supreme Court on this.
I think the Supreme Court is on a roll lately....I agree with this and the gun issue.
Posted By: Guest#9176 (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 03:59 PM
Drew Carey was raped in the 2001 Royal Rumble by Kane!!
Posted By: Satan (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 04:00 PM
John- I'm as liberal as humanly possible yet I believe human trash such as this deserves to be incinerated, at the very least, and I know several lefties that feel the same way. Heck, I heard Obama on TV yesterday slamming this yesterday, where as I didn't hear peep one from McCain. Don't let yourself be fooled into thinking this is a liberal vs consevative issue.
Posted By: Michael O (Registered) on June 26, 2008 at 04:44 PM
It's you liberals with your "Rights" and your beleif in the scantity of life and bs that's ruining america.
The Death Penalty system in america is wrong, people actually live on death row for years fed and entertained by the state before they are killed in a "non-painful way" And more people especially those who pray on the innocent and children, should get the death penalty.
In a real society where there was good law and there was security after being convicted guilty of child rape or murder or any other number of crimes A criminal should be Killed in the courthouse! roughly 10 minutes after the verdict is reached, be it by rope, shot by the bailfee of Guituine then his worthless corpse is chopped up into bits and used to feed the city's K9 dogs, or if he's a really big fat guy, used to feed inmates.
That's what should happen to these people (using the term people very loosely) , guilty killed, and used to feed Dogs!
Posted By: HARDCORE (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 05:36 PM
Drew Carey was raped in the 2001 Royal Rumble by Kane!!
LOL'd SO hard!
but seriously Drew Carry was raped?
Posted By: natedoggcata (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 07:47 PM
The only thing that annoys me more than child rapists are the retards who think "epic fail" is cool/funny.
Posted By: Propagandhi (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 08:43 PM
"For example, let's say my daughter is raped by an uncle. She may be less inclined to report it if she knows her uncle may die as a result. Not only does she have to deal with the stress of rape but now she'll have to deal with the stress of death."
I thought that was a very good point. My knee - jerk reaction to the headline for this article was "of course they should die". However, your point above is a very valid point which had never even entered my mind until I read it. I'm not sure how much legit progress could really be made for castration, but that one sounds good to me.
Posted By: Tammy (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 09:23 PM
Title and opening of the article: Child Rapists Should Not Receive the Death Penalty
The Supreme Court correctly interpreted the Constitution and made logical sense...
It is not often I agree with the Supreme Court but today they got it right. It is cruel and unusual punishment to kill a child rapist.
Last sentence of the article: I don't know what to do with child rapists but I'll leave it to a judge's discretion.
How did the author get from the bold, confident opening to the acquiescent, opposite close?
How does the death penalty, which the author supports for "causing the death of another", differ from revenge, which the author says the state ought not exact?
Why is lethal injection cruel and unusual for convicted child rapists, but not for convicted murderers?
How does the author leave "what to do with child rapists...to a judge's discretion", but applaud the overturning of death sentences already handed out to convicted child rapists at the discretion of state judges?
There was much more to disagree with in this article, but I'll leave it with these questions.
Posted By: Ian (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 10:36 PM
A poster said, "Plain and simple, someone who rapes a child is mentally ill. To
subject the death penalty to the mentally ill opens up precedence for
a lot of other crimes being worthy of death penalties as well."
First, how do you know he's mentally ill? You're saying that child rape means mental illness. It means moral illness, but not necessarily mental illness.
Second, mental illness should only be a factor in someone's ability to stand trial to answer to charges in the most competent way. The insanity plea is insanity. Even the Lord Jesus said of His murderers, "Forgive them, Father, FOR THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY DO". Even though they didn't know what they were doing (the staple of the insanity plea), God in the flesh Himself said they were sinning needed divine forgiveness.
Using your own words, making mental illness a legitimate defense opens up precedence for
a lot of other crimes going unpunished as well.
Posted By: Ian (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 10:51 PM
Love the feedback people.
Couple things...
1. I believe in executing the mentally ill because if Hitler was found to have a mental illness, i don't think he should have been sent to a psych ward. The fact that a mental illness caused a murder is more scary than someone who had a bad day.
2. This really isn't a liberal or conservative issue. I'm not showing compassion for a child rapist by saying they should do 20-25 years in prison.
3. Keep in mind most murderers do not get the death penalty.
4. Sorry, Drew Carey was molested, not sure if he was raped. He revealed this on the Howard Stern Show. Regardless, he was sexually assaulted and has done okay for himself
Posted By: Joe Rivett (Registered) on June 27, 2008 at 12:49 AM
Ba Ba Boo Hi!!!!!
Posted By: Ta Ta Toothey (Guest) on June 27, 2008 at 11:40 AM
As a child who was raped, I have a strong opinion on this. I am educated and have had a very hard life so far. My view is that they need to go to jail. I know how they are treated in jail and I know they are raped repeatedly amoung other things. I also believe that if they are a serial rapist they should be put to death. If you don't learn your lesson the first time, second time, third time, what are we doing. 1 in 4 americans are in jail and the rest of us are struggling with our failing economy. We have got to get tougher on crime and start looking at how some of the other countries around the world deal with their criminals.
Posted By: Tonya (Guest) on July 27, 2008 at 12:22 AM
STAY CURRENT