Supreme Court ruling against death penalty for child rapists

[Anonymous]

Anyone else horrified that the Supreme Court ruled against allowing states to make the death penalty an option for punishing rapists of young (under 12 in the Louisiana law's case) children. I'm sickened by this and by the crazy notion that the giving a child rapist the death penalty is a disproportionate punishment. Raping a child is one of the most horrible crimes you can commit - whatever our harshest penalty is in the US is what should be applied to such scum.

[Anonymous]

OP, come on! That decision was the best one.
When a child finds out that his/her uncle or cousin could be killed if he reports the crime, what kind of burden is placed on that child?
It is NUTTY to execute someone for that type of crime. I wouldn't put it past some States to put 16 year old boys on death row for touching their 11 year old girl/boy friend, if given the right to do so.
Thank goodness for people like Kennedy, Breyer, Souter, Ginsberg, and Stevens.

[Anonymous]

Totally agree with 8:18...

then again, I am just plain old anti-death penalty.

[Anonymous]

Think about the long term implications. Let's see, when someone abducts and rapes a child, they may as well kill that child and get rid of the evidence b/c ther is a death penalty awaiting.
Oh, and don't forget, the child who has to live with this. The one case where I've heard of retaliation by execution (vigilante), the child victim was more traumatized by the execution.

[Anonymous]

8:18, come on! Does a 2 or 3 or 4-year old who is raped actually going through the mental process of thinking, gee if i tell someone, my dad/uncle/stepdad might be killed, so i won't say anything?? Come on!!

Before I had kids, I actually might've agreed with you, but now that I do.... If some sicko raped my child, I can't think of anything better than death. He'd be lucky if I didn't kill him myself.

[Anonymous]

OP here. To the PP who suggested mere touching might qualify - I think that's absurd and surely even you recognize there's a world of difference between inappropriate touchign and RAPE of a child. The jury would still be the ones to decide if the punishment's warranted, though.

I have heard the arguments about this encouraging the rapist to kill the child. If they're inclined to commit murder, I just don't see as how the prospect of a very lengthy prison term would serve as zero disincentive but the threat of death would change these completely. yes, death is worse than a very long imprisonment, but no one wants to go to jail for decades either. I still don't think it's convincing enough an argument to warrant saying that this horrible crime does not deserve the absolute worst punishment we can give out.

[Anonymous]

To the OP -- it was a good and reasonable judgement. Let it go.

The act is horrific, but don't lose sight of the big picture.

[Anonymous]

I think some people would be changing their tune if this touched them personally, but that's the case with a lot of things...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some people would be changing their tune if this touched them personally, but that's the case with a lot of things...

YUP. Death to child rapists. A slow one too, in the electric chair for a few hours at a low voltage.

Can you visualize your little boy being sodomized and having internal injuries and hemmoraging, resulting in colon removal never being able to take a proper BM? How about your little girl being brutalized so bad that her uterus and ovaries are completely destroyed to the point that she has to have a hysterectomy before she even gets her first period?

This is not SEX, this is brutal rape. The little girl that is the center of this case had irreparable damage done to her body and mind. These people need to be killed like the vermin they are. If cockroaches invade your house, do you trap them and set them free? No you KILL them.

[Anonymous]

exactly, PP! Imagining this happening to my daughter is how I viewed the case and what made me just livid about the ruling.

[Anonymous]

I agree with the OP especially about this

I have heard the arguments about this encouraging the rapist to kill the child. If they're inclined to commit murder, I just don't see as how the prospect of a very lengthy prison term would serve as zero disincentive but the threat of death would change these completely. yes, death is worse than a very long imprisonment, but no one wants to go to jail for decades either. I still don't think it's convincing enough an argument to warrant saying that this horrible crime does not deserve the absolute worst punishment we can give out.

In crimes where there is a chance of rehabilitation, which in most there are I believe, I do not think the death penalty is fair justice. However, it has been proven that pedophiles and child rapists are not capable of rehabilitation; the recidivism rates are so terribly high. I think these people should be put to death when they rape a young child. Unlike the rape of a woman, the rape of a child is not usually just about control or rage; it’s about a deviant sexual urge. The risk to others is too high and the above argument really does not hold water. Those who want to kill will kill and those not inclined to killing will not. However, very few (if any) pedophiles are capable of controlling their urges and the one thing that can help, hormone drugs, are under the control of the perpetrator. Not a reasonable risk IMHO.

[Anonymous]

Our country's support of the abhorrent, outdated practice of the death penalty (govt. sponsored murder) is out of step with the rest of the civilized world. Look at the company we keep internationally in terms of countries that practice capital punishment.

I'm pleased that rationality prevailed over bloodthirst. Emotionally and politically it's easy to say let these subhumans fry (see McCain and Obama reax) b/c the rape of a child is about as terrible as there is. but the court did the right thing.

There is a hierarchy of crimes with murder being at the top. If a guy rapes a kid, he has no incentive to spare the kids life. He's going to get death either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our country's support of the abhorrent, outdated practice of the death penalty (govt. sponsored murder) is out of step with the rest of the civilized world. Look at the company we keep internationally in terms of countries that practice capital punishment.

I'm pleased that rationality prevailed over bloodthirst. Emotionally and politically it's easy to say let these subhumans fry (see McCain and Obama reax) b/c the rape of a child is about as terrible as there is. but the court did the right thing.

There is a hierarchy of crimes with murder being at the top. If a guy rapes a kid, he has no incentive to spare the kids life. He's going to get death either way.

He's not thinking he's going to be caught when he's doing it. You are crediting healthy though patterns to mentally sick individulas. When raping a 5 year old, all he is thinking about is how he can fit his big disgusting dick into her small vagina.

Dealth peanalty abhorrent? It is a glorious and fitting punishement that should be dished out more often.

[Anonymous]

"There is a hierarchy of crimes with murder being at the top."

This is exactly the reasoning I found abhorent about the case. Apparently many believe this, but in my view raping a young child can certainly rank worse in some instances than killing an adult, given that (not always but sometimes) such killings among adults are frequently motivated by complex reasons or done on impulse.

[Anonymous]

Wow, never thought I would get so fired up about this... I am usually very liberal on most all issues... but this one just really gets me.

I'm really shocked at one of the PP's arguments: "Oh, and don't forget, the child who has to live with this. The one case where I've heard of retaliation by execution (vigilante), the child victim was more traumatized by the execution."

Are you kidding me??? The child has to LIVE with the fact that they've been raped/tortured/brutalized! That's why they are traumatized. As that child grows up, would the child sleep better at night knowing that the person who did those horrific things to them is out there, sitting in jail, and could escape or even be set free someday??? Or knowing that the person is gone forever and could never hurt them again? I would think the latter. This is not a vigilante execution they would have to witness, so why would they be traumatized by it??? It's peace of mind that someone who hurt them could never EVER hurt them again.

And to say that the rapist is actually going through the logic of, I might as well kill this kid since I'll get the death penalty anyway... And that now they'll think-- Well since the death penalty is off the table, I'll just rape and torture this child, but not actually kill him/her, and then maybe I'll set them free.... That is just absurd! I highly doubt a child rapist has such logical thoughts, these are sick sick people and will do what they do no matter what potential deterrent awaits them. And I'm quite sure they're not expecting to get caught anyway.