• Come join us for the 2022 Olympia on December 16-18, 2022!
  • musclemecca bodybuilding forums does not sell or endorse any bodybuilding gear, products or supplements.
    Musclemecca has no affiliation with advertisers; they simply purchase advertising space here. If you have questions go to their site and ask them directly.
    Advertisers are responsible for the content in their forums.

Child rapists can't be executed

Tech

Tech

Ron Paul FTW
VIP
Joined
Jul 12, 2006
Messages
10,603
Points
38
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/25/scotus.child.rape/index.html

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Wednesday that child rapists cannot be executed, concluding that capital punishment can be applied only against murderers.

The ruling stemmed from the case of Patrick Kennedy, who appealed the 2003 death sentence he received in Louisiana after being convicted of raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter.

thoughts?

as an interesting side note:

Other state and federal crimes theoretically eligible for execution include treason, aggravated kidnapping, drug trafficking, aircraft hijacking and espionage.

apparently drug trafficking is a worse crime than raping a child.

:jerkoff1:
 
SerbMarko

SerbMarko

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
3,406
Points
38
wow..

just one question.. how does the state go about making these laws and getting them passed? does this count for the whole US or just certain states.. can I get a 411 on this..
 
Tech

Tech

Ron Paul FTW
VIP
Joined
Jul 12, 2006
Messages
10,603
Points
38
wow..

just one question.. how does the state go about making these laws and getting them passed? does this count for the whole US or just certain states.. can I get a 411 on this..
Prior to this ruling, only six states even allowed the death penalty to be used on certain rapists. (Florida, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and Louisiana.) Although, in the article, it says none of them have sentenced a rapist to death in decades anyway.

Since this ruling came from the US Supreme Court, it affects every state.
 
SerbMarko

SerbMarko

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
3,406
Points
38
Prior to this ruling, only six states even allowed the death penalty to be used on certain rapists. (Florida, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and Louisiana.) Although, in the article, it says none of them have sentenced a rapist to death in decades anyway.

Since this ruling came from the US Supreme Court, it affects every state.

now my question is.. how do they go about by passing this law? and who determines what deserves death and what doesn't? I think a child that has been raped will suffer greatly in their adult life, this is a crime that needs to be punished for sure.. killing someone is clearly wrong as well.. but how do you determine which one deserves which punishment?
 
Hypocrisy86

Hypocrisy86

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
15,560
Points
48
Epic justice fail
i hope they get anally raped til they die n' rot in prison.
 
SerbMarko

SerbMarko

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
3,406
Points
38
how many times do you have to kill to get the death penalty? how does that work?
 
Tech

Tech

Ron Paul FTW
VIP
Joined
Jul 12, 2006
Messages
10,603
Points
38
now my question is.. how do they go about by passing this law? and who determines what deserves death and what doesn't? I think a child that has been raped will suffer greatly in their adult life, this is a crime that needs to be punished for sure.. killing someone is clearly wrong as well.. but how do you determine which one deserves which punishment?
in 1995, the State lawmakers in Louisiana passed a law "allowing execution for the sexual violation of a child under 12".

fast forward to 2003. Patrick Kennedy was sentenced to death in Louisiana, after being convicted of raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter. then, Patrick Kennedy's attorney's challenged Louisiana's law and their case got heard by the US Supreme Court (the highest court in the US).

fast forward to today. the nine people in the US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that child rapists cannot be executed. their rulings affect every state.

so now instead of being put to death, Patrick Kennedy will serve life in prison.
 
Duality

Duality

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
3,498
Points
38
Serb a lot of it depends on how loathsome the crime was. did a man shoot another man because he was seeking revenge for something the other man did to him? or did someone ruthlessly beat someone inches from death and then bury them alive? circumstance matters. also premeditation is a big factor as well. a crime that was "in the heat of the moment" will be judged less harshly than a planned and executed effort to kill someone. it shows more malicious intent.
 
Tech

Tech

Ron Paul FTW
VIP
Joined
Jul 12, 2006
Messages
10,603
Points
38
^ just to add onto that. after a person is convicted of the crime by the jury, the same jury must then decide if that person should be put to death or life in prison. (up until yesterday, only murderers & child rapists were eligible for the death penalty in those six states)

juries consist of just regular citizens selected at random from whichever state the crime was comitted in.

(just thought I'd point that out if that was what Serb was asking)
 
SerbMarko

SerbMarko

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
3,406
Points
38
im sitting here thinking.. im not quite 100% sure that im against or for the death penalty.. if you think with emotion then the answer would obviously be "Yes" but when you really sit and think.. i think there is more justice in other forms of punishment in certain matters.. im really confused on this issue.. and as for jury's deciding if a person deserves to die is just outrageous..
 
Duality

Duality

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
3,498
Points
38
^ you just summed up why it is so controversial overall. it's a tough situation.
 
Tech

Tech

Ron Paul FTW
VIP
Joined
Jul 12, 2006
Messages
10,603
Points
38
and as for jury's deciding if a person deserves to die is just outrageous..
it's the only fair way of deciding. but the death penalty is so rarely used nowadays. and people can sit on death row for like 20 years before they're executed.

I guess if the legal system was perfect, we'd have more room in prisons and we probably wouldn't even need the death penalty. :dunnodude:
 
Duality

Duality

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
3,498
Points
38
tech is right. there is no other fair alternative to deciding if someone should be put to death. remember the jury is making there decision based on fact and they must believe beyond resonable doubt a person committed the crime. it's the fairset way to go about convicting people really.
 
SerbMarko

SerbMarko

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
3,406
Points
38
this is a very touchy subject and in all respect im just not knowledgeable enough to have a good comment on this issue.. Tech, every consider running for office?
 
Deathmaggot

Deathmaggot

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Sep 24, 2006
Messages
1,306
Points
38
today in spain a famous child molester is on a trial (nanysex)

he himself, and with his own "hands"... (disgusting), he molested more than 100? childs, took vids and uploaded worldwide

now i ask you serb:

was it " in the heart of the moment "????
can we rehabilitate such monster??????
can the society accept him again?????
will he become useful for the society? must i pay the food he will eat in prision??? the special security he will have to not to be killed in jail?

whats the point to maintain a monster 60 years in jail till his death?
so, does he deserve life? NO, he is a mistake of the nature, a mad mind, and that must be ERASED

its very clear for me than inside of some people, there is like an evil gen, something that jail cannot rehabilitate, they dont kill/steal/whatever for necesity, or because they are in extreme situations, its their nature to do "bad" acts, you can put them in jail for the rest of his life, or just erase them from this world and save that money for more valuable projects

when a case is as clear as this one, death penalty should be a must without a doub
 
SerbMarko

SerbMarko

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
3,406
Points
38
^ in this case.. a man should die.. thats an easy one.. but its not always this easy..
 
Tech

Tech

Ron Paul FTW
VIP
Joined
Jul 12, 2006
Messages
10,603
Points
38
its very clear for me than inside of some people, there is like an evil gen, something that jail cannot rehabilitate, they dont kill/steal/whatever for necesity, or because they are in extreme situations, its their nature to do "bad" acts, you can put them in jail for the rest of his life, or just erase them from this world and save that money for more valuable projects

when a case is as clear as this one, death penalty should be a must without a doub
I see your points, but I have to disagree.

Prison isn't always about rehabilitating criminals. certainly in the US, the majority of prisoners never get "rehabilitated". they just do their time and go back to society.

If we didn't arrest and imprison non-violent offenders, there'd be probably 50% more room for violent offenders....people who are a real threat to normal society. Also, the money we spend locking up non-violent offenders could then be spent on locking up the violent offenders for longer amounts of time.

In short, if we'd stop locking up people for drug offenses, we'd have the funding to extend the sentences of real bad guys like rapists, murderers, and robbers. So if we have the money to keep these guys locked up for the rest of their lives, then we don't really need to kill them.

I'd rather see one child molester locked up for 60 years, than 30 drug offenders locked up for 2 years.
 
Skeptic

Skeptic

I am god.
VIP
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
7,616
Points
38
its true... they dont deserve death (such an easy death anyway)

They deserve long, arduous torture. The kind where the torturer ventures to keep the tortured alive as long as possible... or even revives him/her every now and then, just to keep the festivities going :xyxthumbs:

but no... we're too civilised for this :disgust:


Edit: i hadnt read anyones replies before i wrote this... this is purely towards all manner of rapists not just child rapists.
 
El Freako

El Freako

LIFT OR DIE
VIP
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,244
Points
38
im sitting here thinking.. im not quite 100% sure that im against or for the death penalty.. if you think with emotion then the answer would obviously be "Yes" but when you really sit and think.. i think there is more justice in other forms of punishment in certain matters.. im really confused on this issue.. and as for jury's deciding if a person deserves to die is just outrageous..

And further, to be truly deserving of the death penalty you'd hope that the person actually committed the crime yet there have been many documented cases of people being executed then new evidence arising that proved that they were innocent.

Luckily, in prison, most child rapists get what's coming to them anyway.

If we didn't arrest and imprison non-violent offenders, there'd be probably 50% more room for violent offenders....people who are a real threat to normal society. Also, the money we spend locking up non-violent offenders could then be spent on locking up the violent offenders for longer amounts of time.

In short, if we'd stop locking up people for drug offenses, we'd have the funding to extend the sentences of real bad guys like rapists, murderers, and robbers. So if we have the money to keep these guys locked up for the rest of their lives, then we don't really need to kill them.

I'd rather see one child molester locked up for 60 years, than 30 drug offenders locked up for 2 years.

Definitely agree with you there!
 
Deathmaggot

Deathmaggot

Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
Joined
Sep 24, 2006
Messages
1,306
Points
38
well you tech went deeper into the problem than me, and you are right, the law is rotten here and in your country, and looks like no goverment want to fix it
 
Top