No execution for child rapists

[Gonz]

Too many laws are already being modified to reflect more severe punishment for the same crime with emphasis on the victim status or occupation.

I agree. Although, as has ben pointed out, there are varying degrees of murder. Perhapsd the same can hold true of rape.

 

[jimpeel]

I agree. Although, as has ben pointed out, there are varying degrees of murder. Perhapsd the same can hold true of rape.

In my response I stated "Those laws are based on intent to kill." You could accidentally kill someone but be found guilty of murder if you were the catalyst whereby the person died.

There is no such thing as an accidental or unintentional rape. The best that could be claimed in a rape case is if the woman said "Yeah, let's fuck, baby." but she was mentally incompetent to give her consent due to chemical or physiological reasons. A woman who is retarded is not considered competent to give her consent; and one could find themselves convicted of rape even though the woman was a willing participant. Sometimes "yes" means "no". Men are expected to know the difference. The one-eyed monster, however, knows no bounds.

 

[tonksy]

Here's the thing, Jim - adult women understand what sex is. The majority of them have had sex prior to a rape. They can rally and understand that what happened to them was awful but it was not normal. They can seek help mentally, if needed, and stand a good chance of a happy life afterwards, sex included.
A raped child has their indoctrination into sexual life very forcefully and painfully. They do not understand what is happening to them nor do they understand why they would ever want to do that again. They instantly learn to fear men and to hide from their advances OR they go the other way and view sex as the only way to make men like them and become very much overly active in that arena.
All I am saying is that a child's mind is ill equip to handle the horror.

 

[Inkara1]

Yes, there are. Those laws are based on intent to kill. Gettuing in a fist fight and the guy hitting his head is far different than coming to his house late at night and shooting him to death in his sleep.

Sort of like how raping a four-year-old would be worse than raping an adult, which would be worse than an 18-year-old doing it with a 16-year-old for statutory rape, etc.

Yep. You got it.

I just don't see why someone would think, "Oh, I'm doing something that can get me executed, so let me commit another crime, which would certainly be a first-degree offense, that could also get me executed."

I don't have them handy either. All one has to do is to watch the news and notice how the incidence of child murder after abduction/rape has become the norm.

So you don't trust the liberal media to present a fair and balanced view on the economy, but you do trust them to present a fair and balanced view on the frequency of child murder?

Forensics aided by a speaking, cognizant, eye witness.

Because we all know that kids make the most reliable eye witnesses.

I don't have it and don't intend on getting it. There are those of us who are stronger mentally than others. Just a simple fact of life. Taking a "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out." tack might work but I find it unacceptable.

It's possible to be familiar with PTSD without having actually had it. It can be more than a mental thing if the nightmares keep you from lseeping every night for the rest of your life, since sleep is how the body repairs itself.

I have personally known only one who was raped in her bed by a burglar who threatened to "do" her six-year-old daughter if she didn't cooperate. She was a neighbor friend whose bedroom wall shared ours. We didn't live there any more when the crime occurred or maybe, just maybe, we may have heard something out of place and investigated.

I noticed you failed to mention how she reacted. But you've basically been saying that a woman who doesn't just "get over it" is mentally weak. I sure hope that's not what you were trying to say, because if so, you're no better than the rapists themselves.

Questions answered with questions, which are not also accompanied by an answer are unacceptable.

I was just thinking about how cool it might have been if you'd actually considered what I was saying with that question, instead of simply dismissing it for no other reason than it has a question mark at the end.

1. Somewhat agree.
2. No.
3. I don't remember saying that but I'm sure it is in there somewhere if you say it is.

You sure did imply it by saying that a rapist would commit a capital offense, murder, to get out of execution for rape. I figure that if you can infer "child molester" from someone asking if you're looking to marry a one-year-old, and that's good enough to actually be accusing you of molesting kids, then I can infer that you seem to think rapists with a surviving victim always get caught, but murderers never do.

What I think I DID say was "If the laws had called for the death penalty for the rapists, they might well have killed her and her husband." In other words, if the laws had been as strict for rape as they are for murder, what's the diff? If you leave no witnesses then you MIGHT survive. Killing them makes not a whit of difference in enhancing the penalty. Dead is dead.

There are two possibilities here:
1. Capital punishment is not a deterrent, so why not commit a second capital offense while you're at it?
2. Capital punishment is a deterrent, so don't commit either capital crime.

Remember that if you do leave witnesses, you also MIGHT survive.

 

[spike]

Let me guess; Spike just called me a child molester again?

Wrong again.

That case is still ongoing and the authorities have been mum on the subject. Says a lot about the strength of their case.

What's it say Jimbo?

 

[spike]

I don't have them handy either. All one has to do is to watch the news and notice how the incidence of child murder after abduction/rape has become the norm.

In other words you just completely made up something you're using as a basis for your aguement. Fabricated reality.

What I think I DID say was "If the laws had called for the death penalty for the rapists, they might well have killed her and her husband." In other words, if the laws had been as strict for rape as they are for murder, what's the diff? If you leave no witnesses then you MIGHT survive. Killing them makes not a whit of difference in enhancing the penalty. Dead is dead.

Your argument seems to be bases on the idea that there should be no death penalty for rape in hopes the victim won't be killed. A ludicrous stance based on nothing.

By that logic the victims would be safest if there was no penalty for rape. Or perhaps we just give them a parking ticket.

 

[BeardofPants]

All I am saying is that a child's mind is ill equip to handle the horror.

I take your point, BUT I disagree. I think it's pretty horrifying either way. Whether it be a grown woman, a virgin, a young child, a man. Rape is horrific. As far as I'm concerned, it has the same effect on all its victims - to instill fear. I can't for the life of me distinguish between child & adult here in this scenario. I will say this though, how a victim 'handles' the atrocity comes down to personality type. Some people (child or adult) deal better than others.

 

[tonksy]

Fair enough but at least a grown woman has pre-knowledge of what just occured.

 

[jimpeel]

Here's the thing, Jim - adult women understand what sex is. The majority of them have had sex prior to a rape. They can rally and understand that what happened to them was awful but it was not normal. They can seek help mentally, if needed, and stand a good chance of a happy life afterwards, sex included.
A raped child has their indoctrination into sexual life very forcefully and painfully. They do not understand what is happening to them nor do they understand why they would ever want to do that again. They instantly learn to fear men and to hide from their advances OR they go the other way and view sex as the only way to make men like them and become very much overly active in that arena.
All I am saying is that a child's mind is ill equip to handle the horror.

Nothing you have said is incorrect. All I am saying is that the death penalty should not be trivialized by sending criminals to death row for the PC du jour.

The death penalty should be used only when there is death to a victim.

 

[tonksy]

PC du jour? You make it sound as if it was not un-PC to rape a child in recent history.

I do see your point that it may push some criminal's hand to kill the child instead and maybe we shouldn't give the criminal the benefit of the mental reasoning doubt but I am thinking most modern day criminals know that their DNA is going to stick around whether or not the victim is dead and that all the killing will accomplish is riling up law enforcement.

 

[jimpeel]

Sort of like how raping a four-year-old would be worse than raping an adult, which would be worse than an 18-year-old doing it with a 16-year-old for statutory rape, etc.

Rape without murder should not be a capital crime. Yes, murder has classifications of its severity most of which are predicated on motive. Rape does not. "Well, she and I were having a fistfight when all of a sudden she fell down, her pants came off, and my dick fell in her pussy." is not the same as "Well, she and I were having a fistfight when she fell down and hit her head and died." The former has no credibility and the latter would be considered second degree murder or negligent homicide due to the mutual combat aspect.

I just don't see why someone would think, "Oh, I'm doing something that can get me executed, so let me commit another crime, which would certainly be a first-degree offense, that could also get me executed."

Who knows the criminal mind? The thought that getting caught could send one to death row could make someone try to eliminate the witness. Witnesses have been eliminated for far less. Burglary victims found murdered in their burning home. Criminals will try to cover up their crime in whatever manner available.

So you don't trust the liberal media to present a fair and balanced view on the economy, but you do trust them to present a fair and balanced view on the frequency of child murder?

Specious argument. It is the number of stories one now sees on child murder with one's own eyes regardless of the media source. The chances now are that when you see that a child has disappeared they will be found dead. This was not the norm several years ago before all of these enhancements to the laws.

Because we all know that kids make the most reliable eye witnesses.

Not always; but I would rather have their unreliable live testimony than getting that testimony from a spectrographic analysis of what is left of them in a test tube.

It's possible to be familiar with PTSD without having actually had it. It can be more than a mental thing if the nightmares keep you from lseeping every night for the rest of your life, since sleep is how the body repairs itself.

Some people are less mentally equipped than others. Just a fact of life. Two people can go through the same trauma in the same event and one goes on to a fruitful life while the other eats a 9mm. Go figure.

I noticed you failed to mention how she reacted. But you've basically been saying that a woman who doesn't just "get over it" is mentally weak. I sure hope that's not what you were trying to say, because if so, you're no better than the rapists themselves.

She now sleeps with a handgun purchased for her by her boyfriend. She says she doesn't sleeep as soundly as she used to but I don't sleep as soundly as I used to before I had kids. I once slept through a 65 car train derailment which happened 300 yerds from me. After I had kids, and my wife stressed the importance of my sleeping lighter, tghen I simply did. I didn't have to be traumatized to sleeop lighter.

I was just thinking about how cool it might have been if you'd actually considered what I was saying with that question, instead of simply dismissing it for no other reason than it has a question mark at the end.

I did consider what you said and considered it specious on its merit. Done.

You sure did imply it by saying that a rapist would commit a capital offense, murder, to get out of execution for rape. I figure that if you can infer "child molester" from someone asking if you're looking to marry a one-year-old, and that's good enough to actually be accusing you of molesting kids, then I can infer that you seem to think rapists with a surviving victim always get caught, but murderers never do.

Again, a specious argument on your part. The FBI victim stats show clearly that you are wrong; and my being familiar with same belies your contention. The solve rates for rape are less than those for murder mainly because the victims are less willing to tell their story before a courtroom full of strangers.

There are two possibilities here:
1. Capital punishment is not a deterrent, so why not commit a second capital offense while you're at it?
2. Capital punishment is a deterrent, so don't commit either capital crime.

Remember that if you do leave witnesses, you also MIGHT survive.

1. If the penalty has no enhancement then it is a parallel opunishment. You can't get any worse so why not simply off the victim? The penalty is the same.

If the death penalty is not a deterrent, then why don't more people commit murder? Why haven't you? Why haven't I? Because we know we would get caught and spend the rest of our lives outside of society. But sometimes the psyche takes over and emotions rule the day and thatr is when people find themselves behind bars. There are also those who get qa thrill out of committing crimes and do not care a whit what happens to them after they get caught. They do care before they get caught, however.

2. If it were a deterrent then Islamic countries would be crime free.

 

[jimpeel]

I take your point, BUT I disagree. I think it's pretty horrifying either way. Whether it be a grown woman, a virgin, a young child, a man. Rape is horrific. As far as I'm concerned, it has the same effect on all its victims - to instill fear. I can't for the life of me distinguish between child & adult here in this scenario. I will say this though, how a victim 'handles' the atrocity comes down to personality type. Some people (child or adult) deal better than others.

Marking my calendar now ...

 

[jimpeel]

PC du jour? You make it sound as if it was not un-PC to rape a child in recent history.

I was speaking of these types of enhancements:

Too many laws are already being modified to reflect more severe punishment for the same crime with emphasis on the victim status or occupation. Gay, woman, child, minority, police officer, mail carrier, disabled, aged, etc.

Some politician gets up and starts screaming aboiut "We must protect our <insert segment of society here>." because some lobbying group walked into his office yesterday and started telling him horror stories or he just plain read it in this morning's paper.

I do see your point that it may push some criminal's hand to kill the child instead and maybe we shouldn't give the criminal the benefit of the mental reasoning doubt but I am thinking most modern day criminals know that their DNA is going to stick around whether or not the victim is dead and that all the killing will accomplish is riling up law enforcement.

Agreed. now they try to get rid of the evidence through destruction of the body. DNA has also caused most rapists to use condoms and take then with them whet they are finished.

Even at that, what if the rapist has been going from men's room to men's room pulling little curly hairs out of the urinals to leave at the crime scene? Can you imagine a crime scene with ten or twenty suspect DNA signatures? that alone would be probable cause for dismissal even if they did get the right guy.

 

[BeardofPants]

Marking my calendar now ...

I'm not sure what you're saying here - can you please clarify?

 

[BeardofPants]

Fair enough but at least a grown woman has pre-knowledge of what just occured.

I understand what you are saying, I'm just not convinced that this is so (re: pre-knowledge making it better or worse for the victim), and children are lot more resilient than people give them credit for.

 

[Gonz]

The death penalty....

A deterrent or a punishment?

I vote for punishment.

 

[jimpeel]

I'm not sure what you're saying here - can you please clarify?

For the first time we agree on something. Mark your calendar.

Maybe you've never heard that saying.

 

[jimpeel]

I understand what you are saying, I'm just not convinced that this is so (re: pre-knowledge making it better or worse for the victim), and children are lot more resilient than people give them credit for.

ie: Sexual knowledge is no more comforting to a woman being raped than prior knowledge of violence is a comfort to a boxer. There is no sex in rape. There is only violence, or the threat of violence, used to exert power over another person.

I don't care if the woman is a prostitute who has had a thousand customers, she is no less likely to be insensibly shocked at rape than any other woman. She may be more equipped mentally to "lay there and take it" than most women but that does not negate the horror of the violence being exerted against her.

 

[jimpeel]

The death penalty....

A deterrent or a punishment?

I vote for punishment.

The death penalty is vengeance pure and simply. It is making the perpetrator pay the ultimate retribution.

If it were punishment it would last a lot longer and would be far more painful.

 

[BeardofPants]

No, hadn't heard that particular saying (but have heard similar). Thanks for explaining.

ie: Sexual knowledge is no more comforting to a woman being raped than prior knowledge of violence is a comfort to a boxer. There is no sex in rape. There is only violence, or the threat of violence, used to exert power over another person.

I don't care if the woman is a prostitute who has had a thousand customers, she is no less likely to be insensibly shocked at rape than any other woman. She may be more equipped mentally to "lay there and take it" than most women but that does not negate the horror of the violence being exerted against her.

I agree.