Should rapists who rape a child be put to death?

[Drudgewire]

So if a man has a thing for girls who have just turned 13 years old, and manages to rape one, would you not have them then killed by the state?

But if a man has a thing for girls who are 12 years, 364 days old (People have strange fetishes), then they get put to death?

Looking at this rationally, and you are forced to conclude it isn't simply irrational, it is superfluous.

OK you win. I'm convinced.

I'm now down for all rapists being killed.

 

[Thurkon]

I doubt that's true in all (or even most) cases.

You think most rapists and killers seriously regret what they've done? You know in quite a few cases rapists and killers fantasize about their previous acts afterwards and even get off on the memories?

But that is STILL the crook committing a crime. It's better to let the occasional crook recommit crime through accident or failure than to have the state kill the occasional innocent person through accident or failure.

That's apples and oranges. Of course the justice system needs an overhaul, and the death penalty should only apply with an overwhelming amount of evidence.

But if the evidence is solid, we kill them. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent to recidivism.

I also find it funny that there are those on this board morally opposed to the death penalty, but are fine with convicting someone to a lifetime of rape...as long as the "state" doesn't do it. Now, I'm all for both, but I find that contradiction amusing.

 

[Thurkon]

I can't really express this any clearer. The act of execution is not punishment because while the prisoner is deprived of life, they are also absolved of their will to live. Up until that point I'm sure the punishment is agonizing. But if the punishment of the death penalty is limited to the time leading up to the execution and not the execution itself, why must the state actually kill the prisoner?

Well, you could take him to the Dune Sea and cast him into the pit of Carkoon, the nesting place of the all-powerful Sarlacc, where he will find a new definition of pain and suffering as he is slowly digested over a thousand years.

 

[CFLarsen]

I am saying that a punishment does not necessarily require that the subject is aware of it. You are saying, I believe, that it does. Our definitions are different.

If you do not think our definitions are different, and what I pointed out does not constitute a difference between them, I would like you to provide your definition to clarify the debate anyway.

Excuse me, but it is up to you to argue for that quite silly definition of yours. Punishment doesn't require you to be aware that you are being punished?

That completely turns the whole idea of punishment upside down.

 

[zooterkin]

Did I say or imply it was?

I also stated if the guilt cannot be questioned. Hard evidence, perhaps DNA, or somesuch.

Who gets to decide what is unquestionable evidence?

The BTK killer, for example. Just kill him.

Not someone I've heard of.

Regardless, I don't think the death penalty is acceptable in a civilised society, nor do I agree with some of the other barbaric proposals in this thread.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

OK you win. I'm convinced.

I'm now down for all rapists being killed.

Well, I'm not entirely sure if this is a victory for my side...

But at least I have made your position consistent!

 

[Rufo]

Excuse me, but it is up to you to argue for that quite silly definition of yours. Punishment doesn't require you to be aware that you are being punished?

That completely turns the whole idea of punishment upside down.

It completely turns your idea of punishment upside down. That is why I wanted to know what your idea is. I get your point - I suppose if I'm telling you that I want a definition from you, I should give you mine as well. I just thought it wouldn't be a problem to tell me how you defined the word, since I asked you politely.

I define punishment as a the causing of negative feelings, or denial of positive feelings, administered to a subject as an effect of their actions. It can be used, for instance, as a deterrent for the subject to repeat the action, a deterrent for others to commit it, or - unlike your definition - as a method of revenge. Because the purpose can be different, the subject may not necessarily be aware that they are being punished.

I make no statement here about what punishments are good or bad. Only what constitutes a punishment, in my definition.

I could try to guess from your comments what your definition is, but then I would be making a strawman. I am asking you for a definition because I think it would be the best way to express your opinion on the matter, and it might settle the argument. It was meant as a friendly request, not as a demand. How do you define 'punishment'?

 

[CFLarsen]

It completely turns your idea of punishment upside down. That is why I wanted to know what your idea is. I get your point - I suppose if I'm telling you that I want a definition from you, I should give you mine as well. I just thought it wouldn't be a problem to tell me how you defined the word, since I asked you politely.

I define punishment as a the causing of negative feelings, or denial of positive feelings, administered to a subject as an effect of their actions. It can be used, for instance, as a deterrent for the subject to repeat the action, a deterrent for others to commit it, or - unlike your definition - as a method of revenge. Because the purpose can be different, the subject may not necessarily be aware that they are being punished.

I make no statement here about what punishments are good or bad. Only what constitutes a punishment, in my definition.

I could try to guess from your comments what your definition is, but then I would be making a strawman. I am asking you for a definition because I think it would be the best way to express your opinion on the matter, and it might settle the argument. It was meant as a friendly request, not as a demand. How do you define 'punishment'?

Where do you have this definition of yours from?

 

[Ian Osborne]

How do you define 'punishment'?

Where do you have this definition of yours from?

It's started...

 

[Rufo]

From? It's my experience of how the word is used. When I say punishment, I mean this. I may not exactly fit a dictionary definition, although it is close, but I'm not trying to prove my definition is objectively right. I just want to discover the differences. Your definition might be better, if using it will help me communicate more efficiently.

What is the reason that you refuse to respond to my inquiries about your definition of the term? Is there some specific reason why you do not want me to know about it, or are my questions just not worth your time? Or is it something else?

 

[Drudgewire]

Well, I'm not entirely sure if this is a victory for my side...

But at least I have made your position consistent!

It's Miller time.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Arthur Miller? He's dead you know (And as it turns out, a massive bastard in his personal life).

 

[fuelair]

I actually know of a woman who was raped and strangled and left for dead when she was 5 years old. She was injured so badly that she was never able to have children of her own. Her assailant was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 30 years. Thirty years rolled by and she went before the parole board and brought her medical records showing her injuries caused by the assault with her and showed them to the parole board. He was denied parole and had to wait another seven years before he was eligible again. Last I heard he was still in prison.

for her for him(with the proviso I would prefer he have no parole (eating, breathing)needs.

 

[fuelair]

You think most rapists and killers seriously regret what they've done? You know in quite a few cases rapists and killers fantasize about their previous acts afterwards and even get off on the memories?



That's apples and oranges. Of course the justice system needs an overhaul, and the death penalty should only apply with an overwhelming amount of evidence.

But if the evidence is solid, we kill them. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent to recidivism.

I also find it funny that there are those on this board morally opposed to the death penalty, but are fine with convicting someone to a lifetime of rape...as long as the "state" doesn't do it. Now, I'm all for both, but I find that contradiction amusing.

I kind of agree - it's like you can pretend he's just in jail but can gloat about what will really happen. I prefer making sure it happens (or worse).

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Out of interest Drudgewire, do you think there are things worse than death?

 

[DanishDynamite]

Can/Should are different things, obviously.

An official policy of torture of any kind generates serious problems above and beyond the question of whether the perpetrator deserves it. For some that seems to be the only thing they care about.

Even if the "torture" is simple an eye for an eye?

 

[DanishDynamite]

I am opposed to the death penalty. I also believe that incarceration is primarily for the purpose of protecting society, not for the purpose of punishing criminals.

Thanks for your, uh, input.

 

[DanishDynamite]

Life imprisonment is cruel, but how can we ever be totally sure someone will not re-offend? Killing prisoners might work, but what would that do to our society?
There are no good solutions after the fact. We need to focus on prevention. Do perfectly normal people just get up one day and decide to rape some kid? There must be some warning signs that friends and family could be educated about.

Excellent post!

 

[DanishDynamite]

It seems to me that the OP intended "what if someone who rapes a child" not "is accused of raping a child" ie there is exceedingly little if any doubt of their guilt.

I also think it would assume you're not dead-set against the death penalty in general, but then there's that thing about assuming (ie if you are then the crime is moot).....

So, if someone "raped" a child, statutory or not, you would rightsouly seek the death penalty, no matter the facts of the case?

 

[CFLarsen]

From? It's my experience of how the word is used. When I say punishment, I mean this. I may not exactly fit a dictionary definition, although it is close, but I'm not trying to prove my definition is objectively right. I just want to discover the differences. Your definition might be better, if using it will help me communicate more efficiently.

What is the reason that you refuse to respond to my inquiries about your definition of the term? Is there some specific reason why you do not want me to know about it, or are my questions just not worth your time? Or is it something else?

Why on Earth do you think anyone should spend time on your self-invented definition?

Do you think we can just make up our own definition of every word there is?

Don't waste my time.