Do you beleive our soceity does enough to prevent the crimes of sex-offenders, is justice really served by allowing these people to sit in jail for years awaiting prosecution and then sit for more years awaiting the death penalty, and ultimately being put to death without suffering?
2007-03-07 08:34:12 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
In most cases, they don't even get the death penalty. They get a slap on the wrist, like 10 to 15 years. And then they are released back into society, where all they have to do is register as a sex offender. I don't understand why the lawmakers think that these offenders can be rehabilitated?! They have sick and twisted urges for children, and no amount of jail time is gonna take away those urges. I believe they should be CASTRATED!!! I know it's harsh, but these sickos ruin lives. I know for a fact that if anyone ever put a hand on my daughter, he would die a slow painful death, twice! Me and my husband would both torture and kill him!
2007-03-07 08:54:18 · answer #1 · answered by My_Amira_Will 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i did not understand what fee you the position talking about so i gave you both. Staying in penitentiary could likely fee more suitable. I in reality say this because you're made to pay on your consequences. in case you kill 20 ppl you are able to be despatched into the penitentiary and left there to root. penitentiary adjustments ppl. death penalty is an incentive to do issues that are in the different case no longer accepted. Whats worse death or existence in penitentiary. I say death do not you? in case you the position talking about economic prices then i imagine that staying in penitentiary could also fee more suitable. Prisoners have a funds that continually is going up. This funds now surpasses 50k for some inmates. this funds will pay for food, cloths, etc. once you kill someone you do not have that funds anymore. so regardless of the truth that if killing someone prices 2 hundred thousand it nonetheless would not volume to the projected funds of an inmate who has a existence sentence.
2016-12-05 09:21:15 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The reason the "deterrent" isn't working is that our government for the most part keeps freeing them, giving them second, third chances etc.
Violent criminals, including sex offenders, should not be freed after the first offense.
By allowing violent criminals back into society, giving them a second or third chance, you are risking the lives of the law abiding citizens, and that is completely unacceptable.
I don't care that 1% of them might improve themselves. They violated the social contract and hurt an innocent person, why should we risk further good people so that they have a second chance to improve themselves?
2007-03-07 16:57:03 · answer #3 · answered by accorn34 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think death and jail will ever be an effective deterrent for sex-offenders. It is a great way to give them justice if they've committed the crime, but won't be a good deterrent. Many sex offenders have psychological issues. Addressing these issues and helping them before they turn to crime is the best deterrent.
2007-03-07 08:40:26 · answer #4 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think they should give them all (child molesters, rapists, murderers) the death penalty, and kill them, not let them live in prison for years and years. I also think they should do "eye for an eye", and cut off theives' fingers and so forth. That would be a deterrant. This system would also lower our taxes and cut all crime rate. Thank you. Thank you.
2007-03-07 08:42:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think physical castration is a good start. And then heavily reduce thier testosterone levels with a hormone cocktail of sorts (if that's possible)...With no actual plumbing and no sexual urges, that should make them pretty much harmless. Oh and let them 'reflect' on their new situation in jail for a few years...(where they can be someones *****)
They'll not be raping anyone again...(if they live to get out)
2007-03-07 08:52:20 · answer #6 · answered by V9 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the punishments were actually used instead of just imposed. Why would someone fear a sentence if they knew it would probably never happen. give anyone who is found guilty one appeal and if lost then carry out the sentence, don't have them hanging around for twenty some odd years at the taxpayers expense.
2007-03-07 08:40:18 · answer #7 · answered by vagpenisdude 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, the death penalty is not a deterent to crime...if it was, there wouldn't be any murders...so that is a sensless activity...and is nothing more that state-sanctioned murder.
I believe a sex offender should be put in prison for the rest of his/her life - NO PAROL. Sex offenders cannot be cured. To put them back in society just allows them to re-offend.
It is cheaper to keep a prisoner for life than it is to sentence him to death......
2007-03-07 08:54:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Obviously it's not enough of a deterrent or these horrendous crimes would not continue to occur.
2007-03-07 08:37:35 · answer #9 · answered by Smitty 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that the only real answer to this question is that there really is no punishment quite appropriate to a person ruining a child's life.
2007-03-07 08:38:28 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋