Should rapists who rape a child be put to death?

[Undesired Walrus]

It basically comes down to math. If we could set up an equation where the rapist got his "eye for an eye" taking the size difference of him and his victim into account and dishing out the penalty according to that ratio I could live with that.

For instance: Adult male to child = large tree branch to adult male.

What is an adult and what is a child to you? A certain birthday? Puberty? First Job? Taking care of their sick mother and doing the shopping at 14 years old?

 

[KateHL]

I noticed no one responded to my other post. Perhaps it sounds a bit too far fetched?

Well then, what about an 18-year old who had sex with his 17-year old girlfriend, or an old man who grabbed a young girls arm to scold her after she ran out in front of his car. Both of these events really happened, and both of these men are "child rapists" according to the law.

Both would be executed under this hypothetical.

People who go "hell yeah" to questions like this without thinking of the consequences are the reason such travesties of justice happen.

We used to have these enormous billboards that read "STATUTORY RAPE IS A CRIME" with the pictures and names of people (always men) who had been convicted. Half of them looked no older than 18 and while it's possible the girls they slept with were prepubescent I'm sure some of them were convicted (and publicly humiliated) for sleeping with their high school girlfriends. That always makes me sad.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

No. They can be removed from society if they are placed in prison. Death is too permanent, and I think rather pointless.

 

[Sickly Crypsis]

I noticed no one responded to my other post. Perhaps it sounds a bit too far fetched?

Well then, what about an 18-year old who had sex with his 17-year old girlfriend, or an old man who grabbed a young girls arm to scold her after she ran out in front of his car. Both of these events really happened, and both of these men are "child rapists" according to the law.

Both would be executed under this hypothetical.

People who go "hell yeah" to questions like this without thinking of the consequences are the reason such travesties of justice happen.

Damn Skippy

Rape to me is too much of a he said/she said accusation to warrant something as hefty as the death penalty. Just Claims with no evidence whatsoever get a lot of attention.

Something with that much 'wiggle room' and blurred edges on its definition can't be a basis for killing another human being.

Put them in gaol for the rest of their lives and let them spend that time reflecting, developing true remorse and if their situation calls for it, trying to prove their innocence.

1) Get to work
2) Drink Coffee
3) Think heavily about child rape and execution
This is all too much, especially now that tonsillitis is setting in *pathetic cough*

 

[quixotecoyote]

I reject the concept of punishment as revenge.

I reject the concept of justice as revenge.

I endorse the concept of punishment as a deterrent to future behavior.

I endorse the concept of justice as protection and restitution.

If punishment will not deter future behavior the convict should not rejoin society.

The form of punishment is only important to its effectiveness (within a few limits). If rehabilitation programs make a convict less likely to reoffend, they should be widely used. If a program of brutal prison rape, torture, and deprivation makes a convict more likely to reoffend, it should be stopped regardless of the emotional thrill people get from their enemies' suffering.

If there is no way a sex offender, a murderer, an arsonist, a burglar, or a petty theif can reasonably be expected to exist peacefully in society (an assumption not warranted by the evidence I've seen), then that person should be either killed, permanently imprisoned, or exiled according to the options available to that society.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

I noticed no one responded to my other post. Perhaps it sounds a bit too far fetched?

Well then, what about an 18-year old who had sex with his 17-year old girlfriend, or an old man who grabbed a young girls arm to scold her after she ran out in front of his car. Both of these events really happened, and both of these men are "child rapists" according to the law.

Both would be executed under this hypothetical.

People who go "hell yeah" to questions like this without thinking of the consequences are the reason such travesties of justice happen.

Which law is it that defines an older man grabbing a younger girl's arm as "rape"?


As far as a true child rapist is concerned, just put them in the prison's general population and spread the word what his crime was. The situation will take care of itself.

 

[Sunni Man]

???

Yes in fact hell yes.

I second that!!!!!

 

[Beerina]

No. Why? Dead kids tell no tales.

If you're gonna be executed anyway...might as well remove the witness too.



But everybody else's ideas were good, too! Really! Positive strokes for the attempts!

 

[skeptifem]

there should be some sort of life long consequence, i think the death penalty isnt that great of a punishment. its only really worth a **** if you believe in an after life where people get theirs, and i dont.

 

[DanishDynamite]

It basically comes down to math. If we could set up an equation where the rapist got his "eye for an eye" taking the size difference of him and his victim into account and dishing out the penalty according to that ratio I could live with that.

For instance: Adult male to child = large tree branch to adult male.

*struggles to resist making brown eye for a brown eye joke and fails miserably*

Me too, size-wise.

 

[DanishDynamite]

We used to have these enormous billboards that read "STATUTORY RAPE IS A CRIME" with the pictures and names of people (always men) who had been convicted. Half of them looked no older than 18 and while it's possible the girls they slept with were prepubescent I'm sure some of them were convicted (and publicly humiliated) for sleeping with their high school girlfriends. That always makes me sad.

It makes me enraged. There is no rape if it is consensual sex. Claiming that an 18-year old understands "consensual" while a 17-year old or a 16-year old doesn't, is ridiculous.

ETA: And the proper definition of "consensual" seems debateable as well.

 

[Soapy Sam]

The death penalty may work as a deterrent, but not as a punishment.
It may also force someone to kill to remove a witness, or to avoid arrest.
On the other hand, sometimes it just feels right.
Honest answer? It would depend on whether I knew the kid, or the perp. It would depend how I felt on the day, on how sure I was of the evidence, on whether I liked the defence lawyer, on whether anyone in the local hospital needed a heart transplant with the same HLA spectrum, on all kinds of irelevant things.

 

[Ian Osborne]

I can't understand why people say the death penalty isn't a punishment. It might not be corrective or conducive to rehabilitation, but taking away the rest of someone's life damned sure is a punishment!

To answer the OP, no. As others have stated, three reasons:
• Possibility of executing the innocent.
• Might increase the chance of the rapist killing the victim, if the punishment is the same anyway.
• Might make juries reluctant to convict.

 

[DanishDynamite]

I can't understand why people say the death penalty isn't a punishment. It might not be corrective or conducive to rehabilitation, but taking away the rest of someone's life damned sure is a punishment!

To answer the OP, no. As others have stated, three reasons:
• Possibility of executing the innocent.
• Might increase the chance of the rapist killing the victim, if the punishment is the same anyway.
• Might make juries reluctant to convict.

Unbelievable that you didn't add: Ridiculous overkill! Equivalent to giving the death penalty for running a red light.

 

[Ian Osborne]

Unbelievable that you didn't add: Ridiculous overkill! Equivalent to giving the death penalty for running a red light.

Raping a child is the equivalent of running a red light? Have I misunderstood you, or are you trolling?

 

[Drudgewire]

What is an adult and what is a child to you? A certain birthday? Puberty? First Job? Taking care of their sick mother and doing the shopping at 14 years old?

While I like watching the busts on Dateline I have an ounce of sympathy for those idiots because let's face it, kids are growing up a lot faster than they used to and there's enticement going on. If you're asking me I'd set the bar at 12 but could be argued down to 9.

And this has nothing to do with "statutory" or any of that rot. I'm talking about a rapist who went after a kid. I'm talking clear-cut case of non-consentual violence with DNA and bruising and video if they've got it where there's no grey area.

I mean it's never going to happen so we're strictly talking hypotheticals here, but yeah I have no problem admitting I wish child rapists could be killed. Somehow I'm at peace with that.

 

[skeptifem]

There is no rape if it is consensual sex.

can an 8 year old consent?

youve said you think its ok to bang 12 year olds, so I just want to see where you draw the line.

 

[DanishDynamite]

Raping a child is the equivalent of running a red light? Have I misunderstood you, or are you trolling?

No. But requiring the death penalty for rape is close to it.

 

[DanishDynamite]

can an 8 year old consent?

youve said you think its ok to bang 12 year olds, so I just want to see where you draw the line.

Before we return to that chaotic hypocracy, let me ask you if an 18-year old can consent?

 

[monoman]

I reject the concept of punishment as revenge.

I reject the concept of justice as revenge.

I endorse the concept of punishment as a deterrent to future behavior.

I endorse the concept of justice as protection and restitution.

If punishment will not deter future behavior the convict should not rejoin society.

The form of punishment is only important to its effectiveness (within a few limits). If rehabilitation programs make a convict less likely to reoffend, they should be widely used. If a program of brutal prison rape, torture, and deprivation makes a convict more likely to reoffend, it should be stopped regardless of the emotional thrill people get from their enemies' suffering.

If there is no way a sex offender, a murderer, an arsonist, a burglar, or a petty theif can reasonably be expected to exist peacefully in society (an assumption not warranted by the evidence I've seen), then that person should be either killed, permanently imprisoned, or exiled according to the options available to that society.

I agree mostly with what you say though i'd never endorse a system of brutal prison rape and torture even if it did decrease the chances of re offence. I'd rather keep them locked up and protect society.

I never cease to be amazed at the responses i see to questions like this. Anyone who's gut reaction is to have the offender brutally raped should ask themselves the question - why do they do such things and why don't I?

(1) You don't have such urges. Then you're the lucky ones.
(2) You do have such urges but you manage to suppress them. If this is the case then kudos, but you're still a lucky one because, for whatever reason, you still have the ability to suppress those urges.

I suspect that many of the people who get angry fall into the second camp (not saying anyone here), because they think if i can do it, why can't they? It's like some 'rags to riches' people who think all poor people are lazy.