Raping children = death

dreamcastrocks · June 25th, 2008, 08:10 AM

Should you be put to death if you are convicted of raping a child?

Supreme court says no.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080625/..._co/scotus_rdp

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court has struck down a Louisiana law that allows the execution of people convicted of a raping a child.

In a 5-4 vote, the court says the law allowing the death penalty to be imposed in cases of child rape violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

"The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion. His four liberal colleagues joined him, while the four more conservative justices dissented.

There has not been an execution in the United States for a crime that did not also involve the death of the victim in 44 years.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday also cut the $2.5 billion punitive damages award in the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster to $500 million.

The court ruled that victims of the worst oil spill in U.S. history may collect punitive damages from Exxon Mobil Corp., but not as much as a federal appeals court determined.

Justice David Souter wrote for the court that punitive damages may not exceed what the company already paid to compensate victims for economic losses, about $500 million compensation.

Exxon asked the high court to reject the punitive damages judgment, saying it already has spent $3.4 billion in response to the accident that fouled 1,200 miles of Alaska coastline.

A jury decided Exxon should pay $5 billion in punitive damages. A federal appeals court cut that verdict in half.

Kolo · June 25th, 2008, 08:28 AM

I'm against the death penalty entirely. But if it is applied at all, child rapists should be first on the slab.

D-Dogg · June 25th, 2008, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kolobotomy

I'm against the death penalty entirely. But if it is applied at all, child rapists should be first on the slab.

Totally agree.

Mulli · June 25th, 2008, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donald

Totally agree.

Kind of agree. Just couldn't resist the

PortlandCardFan · June 25th, 2008, 08:47 AM

I was going to vote 'NO' but my vengeful side took over.

Linderbee · June 25th, 2008, 08:47 AM

Stupid liberal judges.

Gaddabout · June 25th, 2008, 08:54 AM

I can't justify the death penalty, but I'm less against it in the case of violent rapists. I think you have to be careful how you frame this argument. I think our statutory rape laws are a bit out-dated in this current culture. While I'm not FOR teenagers having sex, I find it hard to believe we still imprison 18-year-olds who have sex with their 16-year-old girlfriends. Charges filed in those cases ... that's just a parent who's in denial about the part their daughter played.

Violent rape against anyone? No sympathy for the guilty. In many cases it's a worse offense than murder because it can kill the will of the victim while forcing them to live with the trauma.

DWKB · June 25th, 2008, 09:00 AM

Chemical castration would be a more preferable method to execution.

PortlandCardFan · June 25th, 2008, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaddabout

I can't justify the death penalty, but I'm less against it in the case of violent rapists. I think you have to be careful how you frame this argument. I think our statutory rape laws are a bit out-dated in this current culture. While I'm not FOR teenagers having sex, I find it hard to believe we still imprison 18-year-olds who have sex with their 16-year-old girlfriends. Charges filed in those cases ... that's just a parent who's in denial about the part their daughter played.

Violent rape against anyone? No sympathy for the guilty. In many cases it's a worse offense than murder because it can kill the will of the victim while forcing them to live with the trauma.

Rivercard · June 25th, 2008, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DWKB

Chemical castration would be a more preferable method to execution.

Cheaper too.

Southpaw · June 25th, 2008, 09:29 AM

Can someone explain

No- killing them is not justice.

Is that a qualified choice?

dreamcastrocks · June 25th, 2008, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallyburger

Can someone explain

No- killing them is not justice.

Is that a qualified choice?

The question was about using capital punishment. The options are yes and no. People often say that using capital punishment isn't "justice."

I thought it was pretty clear. Go figure.

earthsci · June 25th, 2008, 10:03 AM

I voted no because I'm opposed to the death penalty but I do find child rape a much more heinous crime than simple (no rape, torture, terror involved) murder.

They'll get their justice when they hit the general population.

D-Dogg · June 25th, 2008, 10:12 AM

Now, I am completely in favor of publishing prison directories for all prisoners to access that tell exactly what each person is "in for." And not allowing any special treatment. General population for all. Let the prisoners mete out their brand of justice.

I also am in favor of letting the father have 30 minutes alone with the scum before he his shipped off to prison, no questions asked and no repurcussions on anything that happens.

Kolo · June 25th, 2008, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamcastrocks

The question was about using capital punishment. The options are yes and no. People often say that using capital punishment isn't "justice."

I thought it was pretty clear. Go figure.

Whether capital punishment imparts "justice" is a question I've never really resolved. But even if it did, if capital punishment exists, there's no way to ensure that innocent people aren't executed. The U.S. has obviously executed innocent people, and probably a hell of a lot, and probably pretty recently. I don't see how anybody can argue to the contrary, especially with the Innocence Project and other such groups proving that some on death row are innocent. And that's the main reason I'm against capital punishment, and I suspect at least some opposed to the death penalty agree.