Death penalty for rapists?

[CapnAwesome]

So then - if a prisoner tells you their life has value and meaning, you won't believe them?

Well I would evaluate it for myself. Lots of people who live meaningless lives with say that their lives have meaning. I think it's unlikely that convicted rapists are going to suddenly become contributing members of a society that they both resent and are no longer a part of. It doesn't mean that I'm against life sentences though, we just need to be realistic about what we are actually doing when we lock someone away for life, and not feel that this is somehow a morally superior choice to the death penalty.

[A Theist]

I am against the death penalty primarily because I don't trust the system which decides who should receive it.

If we could be absolutely certain of apprehending the correct people, then has anyone already suggested torture? A life time of being butt fucked in jail and dismemberment were good suggestions. Going after the balls instead, in addition to cutting down future sex drive, also offers the prospect of greater pain.

New poll: should the victims of rape be offered the option of taking a hammer to their assailant's testicles? If so, should this be done publicly?

Man, for a bunch of liberals who condemn hate and violence so much, you guys are bloody vicious! (and you guys think the prisoners at Gitmo have it bad)! I couldn't be that cruel....the humane thing to do would be to end the suffering of that poor violent criminal by lethal injection.

[LastPoet]

...the humane thing to do would be to end the suffering of that poor violent criminal by lethal injection.

Or shoot him out of a catapult into a brick wall.

[A Theist]

...the humane thing to do would be to end the suffering of that poor violent criminal by lethal injection.

Or shoot him out of a catapult into a brick wall.

...see what I mean? You guys are vicious!

[Creed of Heresy]

So then they don't "deserve" to be rehabilitated? Who the fuck are you to make that judgement and condemn someone to an irreparable punishment???

That's justice for you. They commit an irreparable crime. Therefore they deserve an irreparable fate. Equal exchange. I see no reason to waste taxpayer resources on "rehabilitation" on someone. So their victim gets raped, and spends the rest of their lifetime with their emotional stability greatly suffering and their self-esteem permanently destroyed, and in exchange the rapist spends 10 years of his life in a prison cell being fed, exercising, and generally doing nothing of any kind on the taxpayer's bill...and THEN we spend MORE money on him to be "rehabilitated?" And what IS rehabilitation, hm? Do tell how exactly we just educate the rape out of a rapist, given the fact it's often a matter not of education but of mental instability.

Of GREAT comfort it must be for the woman who was violated to be told that her former assailant has been deemed rehabilitated, spent all of three years in prison because he "seems" clean, and will go on with his life while she has to live with that memory in her head for the rest of her life.

Oh yes. Do go on about "irreparable punishment," as if it's really an unjustified thing when we're talking about people committing irreparable crimes.

[Tobie]

I have no opinion either way on this; I doubt that someone who goes out of their way to rape someone will ever be able to be truly rehabilitated, although I don't believe death is a suitable punishment for what for some people is an alcohol fueled crime. If nothing will ever get a person rehabilitated, then I'm all for killing the bugger; it'll be cheaper in the long run.

[Creed of Heresy]

I agree, Tobie. This comes to another case of emotion vs. rationality. Rationally we cannot truly condemn someone to death...but emotionally, it'd be only fitting.

Thankfully, we do not need to resort to either. The crime of rape should be a life sentence in jail. But you're also correct on the correlation of it being a rape-fueled crime wherein you sleep with a woman and find out later she's drunk and she pulls the "he raped me" card when at the time she was saying "yes."

Like so much in life, there is no real easy answer to the problem.

[Something completely different]

These fantasies of torchure only prove why a independent body of justice which rejects mob rule and therefor mob law, is the best thing a sociaty can have.


I for one never felt the need to inflict pain on a criminal individual by torchuring them.

I would see it as arrogant and selfish to claim to have the right to be judge and executioner on behalf of my emotions.
And on the death penalty and as a response to popeyespappy, I can only state that a prison sentence is also a way of protecting sociaty from a criminals influence.

[KichigaiNeko]

Death Penalty is cheaper.

[Tiberius]

You don't think the confinement makes a difference? We don't send a baby to a limited prison, a baby can make whatever choices he likes.

Not in terms of the logic, no. You said a that sentencing a person to life in prison is a death sentence, just with a number of years of confinement first. I merely pointed out that using the same logic, giving birth is sentencing a baby to death, just with a number of years of life first. It's a stupid argument. You cannot sentence someone to a natural death; it's something that will already happen to them...it's not part of the punishment.

A prisoner basically lives out a meaningless torturous existence until his death.

I doubt many prisoners would agree with you there. Prison isn't a very nice place, but it certainly isn't (nor should it be) torturous. The idea is that prison should be a punishment. You are kept locked up until you repay your debt to society, or die naturally (whichever comes first). That said, a prisoner should have (and often does have) multiple ways of making their life inside prison mean something, whether that be by working for special favours, helping other inmates, or focusing on rehabilitation so that they do not commit crimes if they get out.

A number of inmates on death row have even been rehabilitated, the most obvious example in recent memory was Stanley Williams, who wrote several anti-gang and anti-violence books after his conviction for a gang-related murder. He was unfortunately executed in 2005.

What is the possible moral high ground that you see to that, as opposed to the death penalty?

Let's clarify something. I don't support the death penalty, and I don't support keeping people in torturous conditions either. I don't see a moral high ground in either of those. What I do see a moral high ground in, is keeping people locked up away from society, whilst giving them a way for them to repay their debt to that society, through work and rehabilitation.

Also prisoners have way shorter life expectancies and large numbers die in unnatural causes. A huge number die of AIDS. Is that not a death penalty?

Likewise, I am against prison rape, and think that prisoners should be protected against it as much as possible. I support conjugal visits, lots of prison guards, and secure areas of the prison for those who fear for their lives.

Is that a preferable function of the state? If my logic is faulty, your own says that the people worked to death in a concentration camp weren't killed, they were just confined until their death.

The preferable function of the state would be to keep these people away from society, whilst not allowing them to come to harm themselves. I'd like to see you explain why my own logic says that people worked to death in a concentration camp weren't killed. It seems to me that the mere fact that they were "worked to death" means they were.

I'll state it again in case you were confused: There is a difference between confining someone until they die naturally, and confining someone with the intention of killing them by unnatural means. The former is preferable and moral under the circumstances. The latter is reprehensible.