My bad. I meant that the death penalty should apply for a soldier who commits rape, or for a cop who commits rape while in uniform or on duty.
Wow. What an offensive statement. Just for the record, my sould is just fine thanks. I’m happy, healthy and not particularly parinoid. I did choose to buy my condo off the first floor of the building, but I leave the patio doors open at night when I sleep.
Rape is a serious thing that has a profound effect on many people. To suggest that it leaves people “soulless” is absurd and misguided. It diminishes people as much as the orriginal assault, by forever casting them in the “victim” role.
Thanks, but no thanks.
Ugh - sorry for the typos. I read that post and it was like a slap in the face.
I believe that a rapist deserves death, especially if the victim is a child.
Sure, the victim still lives and can “get over it”. I speak from personal experience. The crime didn’t take over my life, but there has never been a day since(almost twenty five years ago) that at some point, however briefly, it has not crossed my mind.
Meanwhile, my attacker probably doesn’t even remember me. I was the third of six he did, in my area. He was never caught.
Can someone who wants the death penalty for rapists explain why you don’t think this will make the rapist more likely to just go ahead and kill his victim?
Its when someone is sentenced to death that the appeals really start to kick in. Taxpayers foot the bill for these appeals, which inevitably end up costing more than it would to house the person in prison for the rest of his natural life. Knowing that, and knowing that a person is not going to commit rape again while in prison (except perhaps on other “roaches or leeches” which I’m sure wouldn’t trouble you), leaves us only with revenge as a reason for sentencing rapists to death. Same applies to murder, btw.
Talk about painting yourself into a corner, dude. This distinction is absurd. I’m gonna kill the bastard in a civilised yet violent manner. There’s bad violence and then there’s good violence. Uh-huh, I understand now…
Violence is morally neutral, odd as it may sound.
Say, I shoot and kill a man. Is that in itself wrong? What if I’m in a war, and I shoot an enemy soldier? What if I shoot my shoot my wife because I want to collect the life insurance, and marry my mistress? What if I shoot a man who’s broken into my home, and coming after me with a knife? What if I shoot a someone I’ve kidnapped, just so I can watch them die? What if I shoot a man who’s about to hit an infant with a crowbar? All of those involve me using a gun to kill another person, but they’re not all automatically “evil,” and they’re not all automatically “good.” And it is my contention that executing a convicted sex criminal is not “evil.”
Great. Maybe its the rapist’s contention that rape is not “evil”.
The original post asked whether rape deserved the death penalty. Once we know that (a) a person imprisoned for the term of their natural life is not going to commit rape again (other than on other crims in prison or in the extremely remote event of his escape) and (b) it is cheaper to house someone in prison for the rest of his life than to fund endless death row appeals with your taxes, the list of reasons to kill the rapist (as opposed to imprisoning him for the term of his natural life) gets very short.
Even if society accepted your contention that executing a sex criminal is not “evil”, thats not a reason to kill him. Bearing in mind what I’ve said in this post (repeating what I said in an earlier post), what are the reasons to execute sex criminals? Remember before answering that vengeance ought not to form part of the criminal justice system and “he’s an animal and doesn’t deserve to live” is about vengeance, not justice. Anyone who plans to respond to the effect that prison is too good for the rapist better have actually been in prison for an extended period of time or else stand to be accused of not knowing what he/she is talking about.
Thank you. It’s something we’re slowly dealing with, but my sister has a long road ahead of her.
She managed to start screaming before she lost consciousness. Someone called the cops. However, from the kicks to the head and body, it’s believed that he would have killed her if he hadn’t been chased off.
And maybe he just doesn’t give a damn, because he only cares about himself. But, in the end, he’s the guy who’s harmed innocent people.
The appeals system, as it stands now, is not an intrinsic component of moral “rightness.” That’s not to say that appeals have no place in the justice system—but who’s to say that it can’t be refined, streamlined, even made cheaper? Should flaws or weaknesses in the justice system dictate what justice is carried out? Is there no room for improvement?
And even if society accepts it being cheaper to house sex criminals for life, why is that automatically a reason not to kill them?
And you talk about rapists being permenantly incarcerated—how often does that happen under our current justice system? If that was the case, the term “registered sex offender” wouldn’t even exit.
At least some of us in this discussion, myself included, are talking about the ideal of what should happen to sex criminals. And some of us, myself included, think that not only should this happen—that it would be right for it to happen—but that, perhaps, it could be done, in practice.
Why? Why shouldn’t it be part of the justice system? What is wrong with vengeance?
And tell us, buns, have you been in prison for an extended period of time, yourself?
OK.
I’m sorry but I do not understand what you are saying here.
I never said the system was perfect. I am only talking in terms of the current realities of the system.
I’m not saying rapists are permanently incarcerated under the current system. I’m simply saying there is no point in killing a sex criminal in preference to imprisoning him for the rest of his life - other than vengeance, of course. I don’t have to put up a reason not to kill the rapist until you have put up (a sensible) one to kill him.
Again, I’m not sure what you mean. It “could be done, in practice”?
What is right with it? The reason vengeance does not form part of our criminal justice system is that we live in a civilised society. And what about the execution of people who were wrongly convicted and who are innocent? Is that a price worth paying for incorporating vengeance into our criminal justice system as far as you are concerned?
No, which is why I don’t pretend to know anything about what it would be like.
Like many of you, I am opposed to the death penalty under any circumstances.
From what I have read about castration, it may solve the problem of rape, but it does nothing to solve the underlying cause which is the urge toward violence. The castrated male may beat a woman to death instead of rape her.
I’m for permanent incarceration of serial or child rapists, and long prison sentences for other rapists.
I’m also for changing some of the drug laws to ease over-crowding so that violent crimes can be dealt with more intensely.
I am opposed to all forms of torture – even for serial child rapists. Just keep them away from everyone else forever.
Or use other objects to rape her.
Serious question to all who think that rape is so much worse than other types of assault.
Why do you think this? Why (for those of you who do) do you think it’s worse than death?
Heloise - I’m so sorry to hear what has happened 
I hope your sister’s recovery goes well. It’s a long road ahead, but she’s well surrounded, and that’s half the battle right there.
This brings up my wish (as a trainer) that all young ladies who make use of a guide dog get guide Rottweilers, trained in basic protection work.
Difficult - maybe because it is a pollution and perversion of a pleasurable and tender act? maybe because rather than material gain the objective seems to be the humiliation and subjugation of the victim - it’s about power and, while we might be able to understand someone who steals to feed a drug habit for example, the compulsion to rape is thankfully beyond most people’s understanding.
I don’t think anyone who has not been in the situation can or should answer your second question.
So far this thread seems to have been implicitly focussing on male/female & adult/child rape. I’d be interested to know if any of those advocating the Death Penalty would change their views if we were talking male/male rape ?
Please forgive this minor hijack, but because a trainer posted, is there a minimum age before a blind person can get a guide dog?
As in do they have to be ‘old enough’ to handle the dog’s care and proper working relationship with the dog?
I think maybe I wasn’t clear enough in my original post. What I was trying to say was that I don’t think that someone, once sentenced to death, should be permitted to appeal and appeal and appeal. It clogs the courts, costs money, and the prisons are already filled to overflowing. I think I mentioned it earlier, but I’ll mention it again anyway: I realize that this is not necessarily practical. After all, there are still people on death row who really are innocent, and there probably will continue to be people on death row who are innocent. I just wish there were some way to convict someone, conclusively in every single case. Then, once they’re put on death row, they’re immediately exterminated, or given a far more limited number of appeals (however, I have to admit that I don’t know what the appeals process is like now - I only worked in a criminal law firm for a very short time, and never with the guys on death row).
And, yeah, I know that a person who has received life in prison will not commit rape again, provided he stays in prison and is not let out; however, I would honestly prefer they were dead. Yes, I’m a rape victim. I recognize that part of this is motivated by revenge. And yes, I got therapy. No, I’m not fucked up - it took me a long time to get my act together. But now, I’m quite functional, lead a very happy life and am very happily married. But I tend to see these things very black and white - you commit a cold-blooded murder, you die. You commit a violent rape and it has been proven that you will likely continue to do so in the future if allowed to go free, you die. You have proven that you do not consider other’s lives sacred, so yours is no longer sacred. It’s a simplistic view, yes, and one that would never work in real life. But that’s just the way I think.
What about someone who commits a violent stabbing or beating and will likely continue to do so in the future if allowed to go free?
Kill them too?
I’m curious as to what you think the point of the prison system is. If it’s a correctional system, then any rapist or other violent criminal would be released as soon as he/she were rehabilitated. Any imprisonment beyond that would fall into the category of vengence, would it not? If the purpose of prison is to remove violent people from society so that they may never do harm again, the death penalty would accomplish this much more effectively since there could be no more criminal on criminal, criminal on guard, or criminal on visiting family member (it happens) violence.