Death Penalty

Remove all ads!

but most of the family raised the child(suprise) and that is a small wage when someone elses life have been destroyed... but i think that childrapers and "normal" rapers should die on the spot but not all murderers...

See Ya

 

Assuming a responsibility of the parents for their grown-up children's deeds is ridiculous - eventually most criminals are *adult* and, at least theoretically, able to decide what's allowed and not.

Irrelevant is the acusation that the parents raised him wrong. They don't have anything to do with the deed.
It is irrelevant too that the criminal actually did the deed, indicating that he had either problems to recognise that difference or simply didn't care - but who cares? - it's sufficient that he must have known.

You reach that point of "must-have-known" with 18 years. Every adult is fully responsible for what he does and when an adult eventually kills someone, you cannot bill the parents too.

Control thought:
-When you're speeding - should the police give you and your driving teacher a ticket?

[ November 14, 2002, 09:22: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

 

Ragusa, most of your posts make sense but that last comment is really quite a bad example.

Consider this:

Six men gang rape a six month old infant. As a trend and as initiation to some gangs, it happens more and more frequently. The children mostly survive, scarred as infants, their internal organs severely damaged for life, and not able to live a normal life ever.

The rapists get caught, witnesses testify, but the law will not hold them for longer than a few years when they do it again. In and out of prison they are protected as part of a gang. When they get out its just a matter of upping the score again.

These cases have taken a higher priority than murder many times, since the victim has to live scarred for life. Our constitution is against the death sentence though.

What do you think the solution should be?

[ November 14, 2002, 11:22: Message edited by: Astin X ]

 

Lock'em away. Forever. Fullstop.

Btw, would there be a difference if they rape a just as defenceless 90 year old granny? I mean, she would just have much less years to live, scarred ... The age of the victim shouldn't make the difference - it's a terrible crime anyway.

Most notably the majority of child abuse cases are *family interna* and do not end up with a killing but sadly continue over a long time. These are the cases you usually don't hear from. The ones you do hear from are the ones with outsiders - they are most atractive to the media.

The loud cry for revenge is to a good point media made - and well understandeable. Abusing a child is sick. People nowadays have seen about anything on the media - various wars, cathastrophies, atrocities - you name it, directly transmitted into their comfy living room. There isn't much that can lure them out of their comfortable slumber - except the fear for their own children.

Of course child abuse is a terrible crime, committed by sicko criminals who are too dangerous to be allowed to ever be released again. But interestingly the number of the cases of child abuse-killings is sinking (in Germany at least), yet they are about the most strongly perceived crimes comitted.

[ November 14, 2002, 11:50: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

 

Off Topic

@ Ragusa,

In South Africa we have one of the highest rape rates in the world. All ages, and its not exactly something that gets broadcasted. The prisons are always very full, and Cape Town has even been given the title by media as the "Cape of rape".

I do believe that raping or killing anyone is a horrific deed, but there is no one more innocent than a child. That is all they have. There is nothing else you can take from them.

There is no other reason (theft etc) but having a completely sick individual who will rape a defenceless infant. Six months is sadly not the youngest case. It has happened to babies of three months and younger.

Send them away for death or life, but something that works.

[ November 14, 2002, 13:41: Message edited by: Astin X ]

 

yes Ragusa but when they are in prison nothing can happen to them couse we say it like this:
ten other men in the same jail have been wrongely punished to jail... all of them would like to kick the arse af those f*ckers but nooo... the law stoppes this and if they do... ITS SHOCKING TIME... this even happens in sweden becouse one of my uncles was in a fight in a jail and got shocked 12 times after that... so i just say... KILL ÈM ALL...
Slowly

See Ya

 

Astin X,

We're getting a little off topic here but alas:

iirc the high rape rate in south africa, rape of youngest children especially, is a cultural/ educational problem to some point, strongly related with the problem of AIDS in south africa - I remember that I read about the widespread fairy tale that some people down there seem to believe in getting rid of AIDS by having sex with a virgin .... since nothing is more virginal than a young child .... Of course that is insane, irrational and sick.

There was some harsh international critic about the pretty insane perception of AIDS, in that it is not a infectious desease but something else, by the head of the actual south african government, namely by US foreign minister Colin Powell ....

I found this, searching Google, on BBC News

If I understand this particular issue rightly death penalty wouldn't be a solution here, since it wouldn't adress the actual problem.

 

@ Ragusa, Off topic again.

I was not arguing with you.
It seems that your reply was off topic to my off topic post. I do not agree however with some of the details you have, but I won't rant about it. You have pretty much hit the nail on the head with some of the info. Well researched.

Lets get... On Topic

All I am saying regardless of the sentence, it has to be something effective, which as discussed all through this thread seems to put both life and death sentences on equal footing as not an effective deterrent.

I will agree that with the death sentence, there can be no margin of error as exists today in all countries.
In my opinion only however, I do still believe that in an open and shut case of the greatest severity, and where evidence is absolutely concrete, the death sentence will be effective as it removes a sick person like that from existence rather than allow him to continue behind bars or influence others as well. - Just my personal non political opinion.

 

*sigh*

The argument that pops up on this board all the time is that an execution costs more than imprisonment for life.

But I know from years ago (figure, around 1993), this number was reached by looking at the cost of ONLY the inmate's physical needs.

It did not take into account prison maintenance. Or water purification. Or sewage, or prison guard salaries, pay raises due to inflation and strikes, or weapon replacement, or electrical plant failures (and the need to build a new power planet).

There's a whole SLEW of things that didn't come into play. Because the numbers involved would push the "logical" argument right out the door, and the anti-captial punishment people wanted numbers they could use.

I'm not trying to bust anyone's little fantasy world here, I'm just throwing my $.02 out.

And I'll say just this, and then I'll be quiet, because there's nothing else for me to say.

All this stuff with imprisonment is fun to talk about. But people (I'm talking about Joe Schmoe living in Metropolis, and working from 9-to-5, not Jack Funk politician that sits in the capital behind a considerable number of armed policemen and federal agents) just don't consider the few times when there's a catastrophe. Like an earthquake or a flood, or a power outage due to ice. Whatever.

And just a few prisoners escape.

And they break into YOUR home in the middle of the night, duct tape you, and rape your 4 year old daughter and 32 year old wife. Then let them bleed to death right in front of you.

And then people say "that doesn't happen", or "that happens once every 10,000 years".

And then the whole issue changes when it happens to YOU.

 

While the situation you describe is cause for rage, I have a hard time seeing it as a rationale for the death penalty.

 

What does it cost to send up a space shuttle? Come on. Discussing prisoner costs is like discussing where to put the fork. On the left or the right side of the table. irrelevant

What else?
We don't have the right to live. We have the responsibility to prove that we don't deserve death. Repeat that last phrase to yourself.

[ November 14, 2002, 23:51: Message edited by: Nobleman ]

 

"While the situation you describe is cause for rage, I have a hard time seeing it as a rationale for the death penalty."

My God.

This was my point, exactly. Thank you, Shralp.

 

<removed link to brutal execution of russian soldier by chechen rebels>

yeah ok it has nothing to do with the death penalty, we kill our humans humanely

[ November 17, 2002, 00:27: Message edited by: Riddley Walker ]

 

That is pretty bloody (no pun intended) sick. Not perhaps a link for your average punter on these boards!

Also totally irrelevant.

 

"this is ded oh yeadflfsdjfgjl "

I'm not sure about all that.

But that's exactly what I'm talking about. Pretty gruesome. Ogrish has some very non-politically correct stuff.

Good call.

 

Well, I said I wasn't going to post again here, but I just want to chime in to concur with Viking, that was a totally irrelevant link. I'd advocate that in the future irrelevant links take you to a supermodels homepage. Can I get a second?

I also liked how post 90 or so in the thread asks if anyone has ever thought about the cost of keeping someone in prison? I'm surprised that people hadn't thought about that earlier in the thread and come up with some real data comparing the costs.

 

I'm all for it. You take a life, you pay with your own. It's simple, an eye for an eye.

 

Riddley,

Thank you for removing the link.

If you want to debate how people are killed if that's fair enough, just not relevant to the death penalty debate?

Also keep in mind that this is not an over 18's show. It was grotesque.

Either way, thanks.

[ November 17, 2002, 02:41: Message edited by: Viking ]

 

Some of you are speaking of the disportionate amount of males and minorities on death row as opposed to others. While I will not argue this fact, consider which demographic tends to commit the most violent crimes. I don't remember the exact numbers, but IIRC, nearly 75-80% of serial rapists and murderers were black or hispanic males. So you're complaining that they make up the same percentage of the people on death row.

I'd be more apt to scream "racism" if the numbers were grossly out of proportion to the demographics of these criminals. They are not, and I will not.

 

Rastor, like I said in my post at the top of this page, the real interesting statistic regarding race is the greater likelihood you will be killed for killing a white than a minority (81%). The implication is.....

And that, I vow, is my final final post on the subject (fingers crossed.)