Should we bring back the death penalty for paeds etc?

Question

I am in two minds between extermination of evil minds and actions and the book dead man walking by Helen Prejean.

my personal fave - tied naked to a fence with steak wrapped around genitals while guards let loose starving rottweillers.

im not espousing an idea - just asking folks opinions - the dog thing is obviously not serious, it reflects my anger at these heinous crimes.

Answer 1

I don't believe in the death penalty. I do not believe it is a deterrent, as the best way of avoiding identification by a victim, and thereby avoiding the death penalty, is to kill your victim - after all dead men tell no tales!
To those who advocate the death penalty by spouting 'an eye for an eye' I would respond 'Vengeance is MINE sayeth the Lord'
My answer is - lock 'em up, throw away the key and they will get their reward in "Heaven"!

The cost of keeping these beasts in prison is a small price to pay to keep our children safe.

I have a granddaughter and if anyone did ANYTHING to her I would forget all about my 'good catholic upbringing' and my belief that God takes his vengeance on the wrongdoers and I would KILL THE B^STARD!!!!!!!!! then throw myself on His mercy.

Answer 2

The big problem with a death penalty is the chance of executing someone who was wrongfully convicted of a crime - this has happened several times in the USA and historically happened several times in the UK back in the days when we had the death penalty.
If we accept that killing potentially a small number innocent people is a small price to pay for being able to kill guilty people then we must decide what proportion is acceptable. If we had say a room with 99 murderers and 1 innocent then is it ok for me to shoot them all? If so then what about 98 to 2. Or 97 to 3. Eventually we get to the point of killing everybody in case one person is guilty which is obviously just crazy.
Also rich people can get better lawyers and therefore are more likly to be found innocent and as such will be more likly to get off with crimes they have comitted so a death penalty statistically could be seen as a kulling of the poor.

Personally the only thing that would persuade me to vote for a death penalty is that if the first person to be killed was selected 100% at random from the populace as this would mean that everyone would have a small chance of being executed while innocent not just those unluck enough to be wrongfully convicted. I think that any other way would be a total hipocracy.

Finally I would introduce a corporate crime death penalty as companies can commit atrocities and get away with only fines while a single person comitting a similar crime would suffer a very harsh punishment.

Answer 3

When things like this are mentioned I always think about Myra Hindley and Ian Brady. The death penalty in England was abolished in 1962 and Hindley and Brady did what they did between 1963 and 1965.

I think if the death penalty wouldn't have been abolished in 1962 that Hindley and Brady would have thought long and hard before committing them atrocious crimes, and maybe some of the children they killed would still be alive today.

I think the death penalty shouldn't have been abolished because just knowing the death penalty was there would act as a huge deterrent.

Yes I know mistakes made with the death penalty cannot be reversed e.g. Derek Bentley 1959, but in my opinion the death penalty would be generally beneficial.

Answer 4

Unfortunately there are many people who reckon the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime.In South Africa an executive was shot in the head and had his cellphone stolen(today).The killers did not take anything else not even the car he was sitting in.No win such a case I am very glad not to be a judge.Should the killers ever be caught they would probably get a 3-7 year sentence.Live is cheap nowadays especially if you are not black.This is not a racist remark.Let me tell you another story.A farmer phoned the cops and reported that there were blacks breaking into his packing shed.Cops replied that there were no vehicles to respond to his complaint.After 3 minutes he called back and said that they can take their time as he shot the robbers.Within 5 minutes there were 6 police cars on his property with a helicopter circling overhead.The robbers were caught and were fined a pittance.The farmer was charged with obstruction of justice and fined R30000.About USD5000.

Answer 5

you suggest this because these people are sexual deviants. But, what does that mean? People who deviate from the accepted norm. Well, so do queers. Should we execute them as well? All these "moral" rules are made by society and can change over the years. Mohommed married a pre-teen girl - perfectly normal then. On a different tack, it was once the "RIGHT" of a gentleman to carry a sword. Nowadays he gets arrested for carrying an offensive weapon. So, the answer is -- that there is no answer. The circumstances must rule the judgement. We tend to use the term paedophilia to cover child cruelty, murder etc. Then yes, a long drop and a short stop! what about the 15 year old boy and his 14 year old girlfriend? Technically the same but you'd kill them???

Answer 6

No!. What would you do with the female paedophiles?Paedophilia, in any event, covers far too wide a spectrum of offence, ranging 18 year old having sex with 15 year old with consent, with an adult having sex with a child. The two are not comparable. Bad as it is, it will never be as bad as murder, and cruelty to children in all its forms.

Have you considered that these people might just be ill? Who are you to be deciding who has, has not, got an evil mind. And also who shall live or not. Why, for example, are you fixated on Paedophiles, and what should be done to them. I have never read the book By Helen Prejean, and I don't intend doing so.

I see that you have got the usual knee jerk reactions above.

Answer 7

No, studies have shown that if the death penalty were introduced for sex offenders they would be far more likely to murder their victims to stop them giving evidence.
Second conviction should mean automatic life sentance with no parole.

And yes, it is a fact not a belief that the death penalty is no deterrant to crime. Criminals don't believe they'll get caught so it doesn't deter them. You are thinking like an ordinary person, of the consequenses.
Texas has the highest rate of death penalty and the highest rate of violent crime. Check the facts.

Answer 8

I totally agree! Bring back the death penalty. Too many sickos are being let out and re offending, often sadly ending in death. We should have the same system as America! People might think twice about doing anything bad then!!

Answer 9

What is the point of keeping them in jails. They CANNOT be rehabilitated...it is in their 'make-up' to abuse children. Whilst they are in prison, they swap their sick & evil notions between each other. When they are eventually released they WILL re-offend & cause misery to a child and their family who will serve their own life sentence.

The only way is to exterminate this scum elemet, but in what way?

1. Letal injection?
2. Hanging?
3. Gilloutine?
4. surrounded by a roomful of angry mother's & father's (Ooh, that would be a painful death!)
5. Gassing
OR

6. My personal favorite: Put them in say, a wooden shed, put their genitalia in a workbench vice, snap off the handle & give them a blunt(ish) knife. They will say "please dont cut my knob off" & I would reply, No, you can do that, I'm going to set the fcuking shed on fire!"

Answer 10

It would be great to know they can't live out the rest of their lives, yes. But I think chain gangs would be a better idea - at least they would be useful that way. I admire the way the Chinese do it (not necessarily agree, but certainly admire) - shoot the convict, and send the bill for trial/prison/bullet to the family...