So both of you would rather curse the darkness than light a single candle. Got it. This is not about protecting children, this is about satisfying your lust for retribution.
Klaatu
I don’t know if your insults were directed at me or other previous posters. (Folks, please indicate the targets of your verbal abuse).
I only thought the OP was questionable in the sense that the boss is a bigot but has the “decency” to give a rather despicable criminal a second chance at life in the outside world. (Seems a bit incongruous to me).
You mentioned about the horrendous nature of pedophiles and their equally horrendous acts. No question in my mind of how despicable they are.
I’m sure some of you must have heard of this sleazebag puke Larry Singleton
No one has to convince me of the savagery of these crimes. The one thing that really angers me about that story is that he served 8 years for his first offense. 8 years ???!!! :mad:
You can put the words you want to hear into my mouth, and assign to me the feelings you think I have all you want. Doesn’t mean you are right.
Turn the other cheek all you want. I don’t. You smack my cheek, I’ll prevent you from getting a second chance. Don’t know and don’t care whether there is a 1% or 99% chance that you’ll do so again.
I’ve frequently stated that I would support the DP if we could be assured that there was never, ever a mistake, and that every race and socio-economic class was treated equally (and yes, I would support it for violent rapists too). Absent that unreachable goal, you take these people, you isolate them, and you keep them isolated until they roll around on a wheelchair with spittle dripping from the corners of their mouths. Then you let them fend for themselves. They turned their back on society; society can turn its backs on them.
And they reoffend without rehabilitation. The children will thank you, I’m sure.
I can only assume you’re being deliberately obtuse.
I believe the implication here is that you think that my “murderous impulses”, as you call them, are some form of chest-beating, yes? Since I’m sure that nothing I say will disabuse you of that, we’ll leave that there.
Amazing how things can change if you just use different phrasing, isn’t it? How about “Because I believe the penalties imposed by law are inadequate, I am advocating the death penalty for child molesters, a sentence that I am capable of carrying out myself.” How’s that? I mean, just because you say I’m not advocating the death penalty, doesn’t make it so. Heck, I can say things too. “I’m a fire engine!” Hmm, nope, no siren, no dalmation.
I’m sorry, perhaps that was a bad analogy. Let’s go with “I wouldn’t buy a toaster if they told me half of them might molest my children.” BTW, I have no idea how to fix a toaster.
This is the part where, if I were you, I’d say you were having fantasies about killing children. Since I’m me, I’ll just point out that executing people who have committed no crime is stupid. I’m advocating the death penalty if you do molest children. I don’t believe I’ve been unclear in this.
Boy, you’re not kidding.
This is a nice illustration at how badly you’ve missed my point. Thank you.
Let me try to clear up my position here. I believe that child molesters are not deserving of second chances, or forgiveness. I believe that when they made the choice to act on their violent sexual urges, they gave up their claim as a Human, and moved straight to Monster. I do not consider them animals. Animals act out of instinct. I consider them Evil. As such, I believe the world is better off without them.
I do not advocate vigilante justice, however I do believe that if you advocate the death penalty, you should be able to “get your own hands dirty”, as it were. Otherwise, you come off as something of a hypocrite. My “gun to the back of the head” was a simplistic and brutal way of making a point. If it helps, you can substitute “throwing the switch” or “plunging the needle”. It was simply in respons to being called an “armchair executioner”. Oops, used up all the quotation marks…
Do I have an inordinate amount of hatred for child molesters? I guess, but I doubt you’d be able to argue me out of it any more than I’d be able to argue any of you out of your opinion.
Now who is being deliberatley obtuse? The Supreme Court has said the death penalty cannot be applied for crimes of rape. Period. Full stop. So further yammering about what you would prefer is irrelevant to a discussion of what to do with child molesters who have been released. You guys yammer about the law you wish you had, instead of working within the law that is. I can only conclude you continue to do this because it makes you feel good; it certainly does nothing to reduce child abuse.
Support the DP, support life without parole, you won’t get any argument from me. Well, ok, I don’t support the DP generally, I prefer life without parole, but conceptually I’m with you.
However, the reality is that we do not apply these punishments to child rapists, or did not apply them when these crimes were committed. Therefore, child rapists will, without a shadow of a doubt, be released back into society from time to time. When these people are out of jail, it is for OUR benefit, not theirs, that I suggest we give them a chance to rehabilitate.
Do they have a more enjoyable life as a side effect? Perhaps, but I could give a shit what their life is like, just as long as they don’t hurt anyone else. No way in hell I’m going to trade off pain for another victim just so the rapist can suffer. That’s cutting off your nose to spite your face.
In the future, could you please warn me ahead of time what and what is not allowed to be discussed in threads in which you participate? Jeez, four pages long, and now you tell me I’m not allowed to talk about this? Big waste of my time…
I didn’t say you weren’t allowed to yammer; it appears it is entirely beyond my control anyway. I just pointed out is contributes nothig to the discussion, and certainly doesn’t protect children. But if it gives you a stiffy, yammer on.
If you are serious about the killing then frankly, you scare me more than the rapists.
I would rather deal with someone who rapes children and knows it’s wrong, than someone who kills people and thinks it’s right.
Fair comment, but there is a flip side to that coin. I wonder how many people calling for the death sentence have spared a thought for the mother of the perpetrator.
Once again, for those in the back rows:
I AM NOT ADVOCATING VIGILANTISM OR ANY ACTIONS OUTSIDE THE LAW! I AM EXPRESSING A BELIEF THAT CHILD MOLESTATION AND RAPE SHOULD BE AN OFFENSE PUNISHABLE BY DEATH!
Would you rather deal with a child rapist, or an executioner? Because there are such people. They are employeed in prisons.
Would you rather deal with a child rapist, or a jury member who has recommended the death penalty?
It appears that no matter how clear it’s made, anything pro-DP argument will be met with a variation of “you are worse than they are”, in various incarnations. I think I’ve learned my lesson here.
Oh, Dante, now that I know you’re harmless I can call you for merely being a spineless prick instead of worrying about you being a homicidal maniac. I feel much better now.
You’re talking about forcing a man to his knees and shooting him in the back of the head. Where other than China and in your little tiny head is that the death penalty?
Stay with this one. It makes no less sense than “I’m the avenger of small children!” and is liable to do less damage.
But executing people who have already been legally punished and committed no further crime is just part of your day’s work. Okay, Tex. You’re the one who said future dangerousness is part of the mix.
You’re asserting your willingness to shoot ex-offenders, who have already served their legal sentence, in bizarre circumstances. Why you continue to confuse this with the death penalty is a job for a qualified professional, but I’ll take this opportunity to call it nutso-sadistic-misplaced-aggression-keep-away-from-me-psycho-I’m-not-kidding time.
Okay, the area directly behind you is clear of obstructions.
That was clear to begin with, along with your contempt for the idea of redemption, the possibility of a wrongful conviction, and humane punishment.
Oops. Someone forgot to tell Dante there are no monsters. Had he been taught to consider evil acts rather than seek out evil people, this tragedy of a personality need never have happened.
Yes, you do. I showed how a while ago, and you can’t do anything with it but beg me to stop.
Now you’ve done it. Prove you’re actually capable of shooting a man through the head who has a 50% chance of being no threat to you or yours, and a smaller but measurable chance of being innocent altogether. If you can’t, you’re the hypocrite. If you can, well, we’ll let that speak for itself.
I can’t see inside your head, thank God, but no it wasn’t. Anybody who can instantly come up with that detailed a staging for killing somebody by forcing them to their knees, helpless, and then shooting them through the head, isn’t thinking in terms of statutory executions.
As I said before, and no one has seen fit to dispute, the violent impulse exists independently of any justification for it. There’s no better proof of it than this thread.
Is that really the case? It seems to me that the UCMJ still has death as the maximum penalty for rape.
Look, I honestly couldn’t agree with Dante much less on this issue*, but he’s quite plainly advocating execution as part of the legal punishment, and not as some extrajudicial jolly for wannabe vigilantes. And while I found his phrasing distasteful, his point about being prepared to be the executioner is a reasonable one to make, albeit one I don’t think can carry too much weight until one is actually put in that position. Either way, your paraphrasing of his position is way off.
*although I’d like to know how long the guy in the OP served. You’ll see no argument against longer sentences from me…
The Bold is mine. The solution is obvious. These people are broken, defective, so far maladjusted that standard correctional philosophies cannot address their social deficiency. For my money, if you have sex with a young child, and you either admit it or are convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, you check the fuck out of society. No chemical castration, no “paid your debt” incarceration (Hell, even the killers and rapists in Jail/Prison have their own form of retribution for kiddie rapists). You can take a needle, a bullet or be flung via giant catapult into a big brick wall…
You can choose the way you die, but die you must.
And Wheelie good luck on the job hunt.
I’d just like to be another small voice telling TKoS that his arguments have gone way beyond crappy on-line psychoanalysis and ructio absurdo (or however it’s spelled) and into bad ad hominems (same disclaimer).
This one’s my favorite:
Your first 6 words disprove the rest of the quote. You can’t see into his head, but you’re willing to make a judgement on Dante that he’s a homicidal manic? Sorry bub, does not compute.
Instead of arguing that Dante is the son of satan or an invertebrate, I would think your arguments would carry more weight with substance behind them.
IMHO it because as a culture we are more concerned with punishment than anything else. If the goal is to punish them, then you have them serve a sentence and release them, If the goal is to keep them from harming others, you’d keep them confined until they are reformed to our satisfaction or dead of old age.
Even ignoring the barbarity of that, what if he was falsely convicted ?
Child molestors are often victims of molestation themselves; how many children could we save if we shot the kids too ?
Much more sensible.
And if they are falsely convicted ?
Would you worry, even a little bit, that the system got it wrong and you executed an innocent man ?
They are human, like it or not. And I fail to see how not letting them transition back into society does anything but push them back into criminal behavior.
Nowhere do I advocate “shoot(ing) ex-offenders, who have already served their legal sentence”. I do advocate the death penalty instead of a prison sentence. Perhaps I was unclear about that. My claim of not advocating vigilanteism stems from the fact that the death penalty would be handed down from a court.
You’ve really attached yourself to the kneeling down image, but honestly, if you read my post, the preface was “It doesn’t have to be cruel, just…”. It was a way of saying they don’t have to suffer, they just have to be dead. Whatever interpretation you’re attaching to that is your own.
And check your local newspaper. There are monsters.
BTW, I like the part where you tell me you can’t see inside my head, and then tell me what’s inside my head.
Again.
It would suck just as bad as when an innocent is convicted for another crime and executed. I would expect the same standards of care to apply as any other death penalty case.