Child molesting scum bags
Anyone out there in bloggerland agree with the Supreme Court's ruling that the death penalty for child rapists is illegal?
If the death penalty is legal in this country, and is now to be applied when there is a death, then why does espionage and terrorism fall under that umbrella. If someone in our government can sell secrets that MAY result in someone's death, and that person can be killed under the death penalty, then WHY doesn't the rape of a child fall under that same umbrella? Are our Democratic Supreme Court Justices now able to see into the future to determine what the life of that child will be like, and can they guarantee that the irreparable damage done to that child will not result in suicide? What about the evidence that shows that abused children will grow up to be abusers?
So in other words, these Justices have decided that they are the sole arbitrator of determining the value of life.
These scum sucking, bottom feeding, dirt bag, MF's who can rape a child have no useful purpose alive, but can send a message if killed by the most brutal means allowed by law.
Think about this in November. Look at the vote on this issue and then think of your kids before you pull that lever.
- Titan Lee's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer friendly version
- send to friend
- 407 reads
I think child molestation should be a hig priority but a death penalty I believe should only go with a child molester who has killed. If you think about it a person that is driving drunk that kills someone does't even get the death penalty. I think the penalties for a child molester should be much greater so that if they do it the courts mean business give them something to think about before they do it. I totally know you will not agree with me but hey that is what debating is all about.
I agree that the death penalty is called for.
The next best option would be for the molester to be gang-raped in prison, then if they ever get out, a parole condition should be castration prior to release.
Or is that too harsh for you bleeding-heart liberals out there? Maybe we should try to "rehabilitate" them? Maybe somehow it's not their fault? Maybe they're really the victim, not the child? If you believe that, you must be dumb enough to vote for Barak.
well said, you and TL both!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, torture first by means of gang rape, beatings, etc... then a slow, painful death so that our taxes do not have to keep these people alive in jail. That's the only justice. Death penalty is too kind. They cannot be rehabilitated and that's been proven. Yes, they are mentally ill, but our tax dollars shouldn't have to pay to keep them institutionalized for the rest of their miserable lives.
This Supreme court is legislating from the bench. Going to foreign laws to find something to grasp at. Not going back into our own history and the writings of our Founding Fathers , as Justice Scalia did for the Second Amendment question. But that will work. You rape my child, I am gonna shoot you. And I will shoot to kill.
I 2 am in *total* agreement w/ TL, Hertz, Jake & AM ...
~Faith
PS Child molesters R considered the lowest of lows at prisons (both by the guards & inmates, & usually R given the treatment (by their fellow prisoners) just as some elaborated on above & then R often killed because evidently the rest of the prison population agrees w/ TL, Hertz, Jake, AM & Me
most often get 4 - 6 years while a drug dealer may get 6 - 8 maybe longer. Tell me what's wrong with the system. These molesters ruin families, and these children forever. Forever for them should mean the death penaly not to be able to do it again.
What's wrong are liberal judges who believe that there is rehabilitation for these dirt bags. I say when approved for parole they should be let out in the communities of the judges, lawyers, psychologists that said that they are fit to return to society. If they feel that they ar ok and rehabilitated they they should have no problem having them around their own children. Agree?? Don't send them to my community. Prison life is not the way it was years ago, they are not treated the way it used to be. That was old time, now others don't really care they just care about thrmselves.
me to the 'agreement' list please
~* chanel *~
I guess I see things from another side I know all you people want to do is shoot them don't get me wrong I am all for that but I see things in reality and know that you WILL never see a child molester die for just that. I would love nothing more then for that to happen but in the real world it's not going too. Most of you are right when you say that they go to jail and be put in prision population that is one thing they don't like is child molesters. I think that is a hell on it's own.
Hey -- I put a response 2 your oh so *VERY* correct & sad synopsis wrt society's unwillingness 2 punish child molesters as many, if not most, feel they should (i.e., by the death penalty). As I expounded on the topic wrt the impact of a vote, using your post as a stepping stone, I decided 2 post it a separate blog.
~Faith
PS I hope that U'll read it & post your thoughts ... as your input is always good.
reading a follow-up article recently about 'Elizabeth Smart', she was the 14 year old who was kidnapped out of her bed by a male and female in Utah several years ago and held captive for 9 months. She chose not to seek counselling, but I can't help but think that at some point in her life she will suffer from some sort of PTSD because of her ordeal. She was found only because her 9 year old sister witnessed tht kidnapping and was able to describe the male. So the sister, too, has been majorly affected by what happened.
It just makes me sick that human beings could act in this manner by preying on children.
Rhertzers comments on consequences noted above are way too mild in my opinion when it comes to a$$holes like these two. And now the male and female are being 'tested' to see if they are competent to stand trial. Sickening!
Good blog, B!
~* chanel *~
with TL, hertz and jake
Was the one who wrote the majority opinion, appointed by Reagan. The 5-4 decision was based on the idea that the death penalty imposed when no life was taken may constitute cruel and unusual punishment which was barred under the 8th amendment, the decision is also in concert with a vast majority of states that disallow the death penalty for that crime.
That being said, the close vote seems to indicate that there may be a shift in the dispensation of the death penalty as the sensitivity and devastation of such crimes changes in society.
That being said, before someone says that I am some bleeding heart liberal, please read waht I wrote above, which is just a synopsis of the ruling. I agree with what everyone said above.
The question here is not whether the death penalty should be allowed for child rape, the question is, and what I think was on the minds of the justices is this, are we entering a slippery slope of expanding it to crimes outside of first degree homicide.
Now that a child rapist will not face the death penalty, what is to prevent their sick mind from rationalize it by saying to themselves "I have done it before, but this time I am going to up the ante and kill the child afterwards?" BEsides, most states do have a moratorium or laws on the books regarding the death sentence. As I stated previously, If it happens to one of my family members, we will pick straws and choose who will dispense the Angrymom type of justice. I would willingly go to jail for that. You have no idea about the guilt and shame that it makes you feel. You can be told over and over again that it is not your fault, but deep down inside, you feel that somehow, it is.
Don't tell me I have no idea OK? Where did I say I agreed with waht they said? I understand the emotion of this issue, I was just trying to point out the reasoning of the SC. There is always talk amongst mostly conservatives about strict interpretation of the constitution, Kennedy striclty interpreted it, as they did about the 2nd amendment issue yesterday. That being said, the 5-4 vote I think shows there is a shift withing the courts that maybe the death penalty will be expanded.
It may be the worst crime imagineable and I know what i would do...believe me I what I would do.
What's to stop them from doing it again you ask? That is a question beyond us.
So before you open your mouth and accuse me of "not having an idea" please spend a minute and read instead of reacting.
The you have no idea was not directed at you, It was directed at anyone who has not been raped or had a loved on who has been raped.. I have read the decision, and stand corrected. The basis of the majority did rely on U.S. precedent. I still think the logic is flawed, based on the injuries this child received. If any one would like to take the time to read the decision,
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-343.pdf
HF. I think you're missing the point. The fact that the court even decided to take this case is troublesome. Only 6 states allowed the death penalty for child rapists and no one has been put to death since 1964.
I don't think there was a concern that the definition of "capital crimes" would be expanded. The court decided to define child rape as a crime that did not rise to the level of "an eye for an eye" punishment. First degree murder is punishable by death, but not second degree. The difference is the premeditation. The death penalty is a premeditated death in payment for a premeditated death. This looks like another step in eliminating the death penalty, not expanding it.
The people of Louisiana felt that the rape of a child did reach the level of an "eye for an eye". Good for them and I'm embarrassed that this state doesn't feel that way. If Federal statutes can say that the crimes of espionage and treason can be punished by death, even if those crimes did not result in any immediate deaths, then the same logic can be used for child rape. It's a question of decency and morals.
I understood exactly what you were saying and know you're not defending the scum bags. I also think AM meant that the SC cannot see what will happen to that child. She wasn't talking about you.
What's troubling is the fact on how the court was split on this issue. Kennedy has been the swing vote on a lot of issues. To claim that the death of a child rapist would be considered "cruel and unusual" is stretching logic and morality to the breaking point.
You make a valid point regarding treason et al.
Regarding the victim, I agree again. However, there are victims of other crimes that also suffer gravely their whole lives, so it becomes a matter of degree, and therein I think lies the issue. Do we utilize the death penalty based on potential or actual damage to a person even though they were not killed? I am just thinking out loud. I hate using what may be a useless analogy, but say a family is killed by a repeat offender drunk driver except for a small child...the trauma they will face will be enormous, do we put that person to death? In this case the person has both killed and traumatised a victim...and you know they will never get the chair. I'm not arguing, I am trying to find logic, and perhaps there is none, for the decision. Plus, I love arguing.
This isn't an argument, but my answer to your question.
If a repeat drunk driver kills anyone (an entire family, part of a family, whatever), then yes, I think he should die. The action of getting drunk is premeditated. The act of driving the car is premeditated. The intent to kill that person or persons was not premeditated, but using a "reasonable man" interpretation, would permit, in my opinion, the death penalty. The problem obviously is that many of us have driven after drinking. It's too easy to see where we could be in that same situation and would not want that law to be in place. Fortunately, I'm not a cop and have never had to see bodies being scraped off the streets or pulled out of a car in pieces. I do wonder how many of us would drink and drive if we saw that, or if someone from our family had been killed by a drunk driver. As someone who does drink, I can't say the death penalty is too much, only because it could happen to me. It won't happen if I'm not driving drunk.
I get the argument completely. The point is that maybe this is where some of the reasoning for the decision came from.
Who knows.
You would argue with my boobies if they talked back!
When they are presented...I never argue.
another reason for the decision is that if the death penalty was used for this crime the perpetrator would just kill the victim after the rape because he/she would know the punishment would be the same and they might as well kill the victim to keep the potential witness from testifying against them. I personally feel this kind of crime is far worse than murder and the criminal should be placed in the general population of the prison and let the inmates know why that person is there. They can then decide the fate of the criminal because he/she will be judged buy a vote of their peers.
Hey --
I gotta, gotta disagree w/ this ... the death penalty -- if consistently applied would be a DETERRANT.... this is my personal opinion -- & I'm not going 2 do the IMHO or JMHO ... because though it is my opinion ... I am not shy about speaking up about this.
All that said I do realize from well documented research that individuals who are child predators have, more often than not serious psychiatric conditions that may or may not be treated even if they can B treated at all. BUT, BF, I DO *NOT* CARE .... This is an EXPLANATION ….. not an EXCUSE 4 the behavior …. I JUST DO *NOT* CARE
& I realize this is a public blog but I feel very *strongly* wrt this topic.... So here goes.... In the Middle East the eye 4 an eye real time implementation thing as punishment *IS* *DEFINITELY* over the edge (i.e., it being overused).... Just 2 make certain that I tried 2 communicate what I am saying, I'm going 2 say it again, In the Middle East the eye 4 an eye real time implementation thing as punishment *IS* *DEFINITELY* over the edge... BUT if someone steals & is caught, their punishment is getting their hand cut off -- && guess what, they rarely steal again &&&&& if they do they lose the 2nd & only remaining hand that they have -- & then they just can’t steal anymore … not using their hands, right? And those in their town see that the government is serious about seeing thru the consequences of violating the boundary of stealing – THEY actually do it … they don’t appeal it 2 ‘death’... that is a fact wrt the Middle East & punishments & another fact is that this mechanism of laying down a boundary w/ clear cut consequences && then actually seeing them through, in a very short period of time …. It proves out factually, that indeed this method acts as a deterrent 2 other would B thieves....
Now child molestation involves a child -- that is undisputable ... a child, whether 2 years of age or 12 years of age or 17 years of age ... & obviously the younger they are, the stronger the argument wrt this next statement in terms of being argued as TRUTH: The child MUST be protected!!! The child CANNOT defend themselves!! U have children, BF, I have met U && can tell that U love, take care of & protect your children... we MUST as a society && extend the concept of PROTECTING all of our children as we do our very own ... in fact it is only by taking that mind set && personalizing it, will it come 2 pass that we as a society see this heinous crime 4 what it is & we will then take it as seriously as it should B, & as it actually is.
I have been very fortunate 2 only have known a few individuals who suffered such abuse && let me tell U that those adults who violated those children - had they been given the death penalty -- well BF ... my thinking is, if even ONE child is saved from the horrific experience ... then that is a much more than a really good thing --- it is a great thing – it is a victory!
~Faith
PS BF ... sorry this is a hot button w/ me ... it is difficult enough 2 recognize that the courts simply do not punish these people along w/ rapists – 4 unless it is one of the very own who is the victim, they simply do NOT comprehend the pervasive damage 2 the/a victim .... But I realize that it is simply easier 4 anyone wrt anything 2 B cold, clinical & logical – 2 see things as good or bad, black or white, a dead body versus a dead soul, yes? Doing the right thing is *never* easy … that’s why the path is narrow & not very crowded & easy 2 fall off …
PPS BF – please I am not picking on U personally & feel just as strongly wrt each individual having & stating their own opinion.
No way can the justice system in the middle east be called anything but savage and in fact is downright butchery. This is also the society that stones people. If you think they have it "right" by cutting off the hands of people who steal and in fact are doing their society a favor by "deterring" these criminals by lopping off body parts, well, I think that is crazy. (Ever see how they treat their women? Especially our "allies" in Saudi Arabia?) No thank you for comparisons to the Mid East.
If I am the "victim" of theft, I'd want that person in prison for 50 years, but that is emotion, that is vengeance, that is not justice. And Justice is what this blog is about and most important, justice is what this country is about.
I apologize if I misinterpreted your comments, but reading between the ***'s it seemed like what you were getting at.
I am sorry? I can't hear you! My Burka is covering my ears, and most of my face! Okay, Only my left ear. My right ear was chopped off due to me being a nasty woman. I will never again greet a man with the saying " Hello!"
I will def answer your reply ... but I'm running late 2 go out ...
~Faith
PS I am not offended by what U wrote, but perhaps that is because I haven't fully read &/or parsed it, LOL
PPS I do know of the treatment of women & the savage nature of their justice system ... but I want 2 give your reply the time & due justice it deserves -- as U always do the same 4 me, yes? :=)