No. The death penalty would not deter the crime. Only give the rapist/child molester/pedophiles a reason to kill their victims after assaulting them. If the rapist/child molester/pedophile does not kill his victim - it should not be a death penalty crime. If he does kill his victim - then the death penalty is appropriate.
2007-12-09 02:41:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Boots 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
They should be killed, period. There is no rehabilitating these sickos. I still believe that the victims, or the victims family, should get to decide how they are slowly tortured, and castrated, before being put to death. The laws are way, way to lenient, and, in my opinion, so is the general public, in regards to these individuals. I've worked in prisons/law enforcement for 10+ years, and these dirt bags never change.
2007-12-09 02:33:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
how a lot of human beings gets wrongly despatched to penitentiary each 3 hundred and sixty 5 days? Do you fairly wan't to deliver human beings to loss of life as quickly as we gained't even deliver the marvelous human beings to penitentiary? What occurs while the incorrect guy or woman gets carried out and the actually rapist walks in to the police station day after today asserting "i've got got here upon God and that i think I could confess to this rape of a minor... you realize the single you killed the different guy for." and then components the information that he did do it... What can we are saying to the kinfolk of the guy who became wrongfully sentenced to loss of life? "Ooops, gee the place sorry we killed you husband and dragged you're kinfolk call trough the dirt yet right it truly is a few money to make all of it extra effective."???
2016-11-15 00:31:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by konen 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have a friend that was accused of child molestations after watching the kids for years (friends of the family). The bottom line was that he was coerced to believe he was going to get two counts (twin girls) if he didn't plea bargin one count. Now he's got that on his record forever. If he really is innocent, how fair is that? Death pentaly isn't much worse.
2007-12-09 02:42:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by primalclaws1974 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
...
Ok call me liberal, but 99.9% of convicted murders do not murder again.
10% of people convicted of murder are innocent.
I am pretty certain these stats are not unique to murderers, but to the groups you listed in the origional question too.
Your going to kill 10% of people wrongly conviced of a crime to prevent 0.01% of repeat offences?
The justice system isn't about revenge, it is about justice. Thats why the victim doesn't choose the sentence, an impartial and moral authority figure does.
Additionally, no-one commits a crime thinking they will get caught, they do it thinking they wont. Harsher sentences do not stop crime, they just cost the taxpayer a fortune to keep them detained.
2007-12-09 02:43:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I would agree, but what about JAY WALKERS should they not be included also, a crime of the type you are referring to is a crime that should have stiffer penalties than they do, Life should be natural life in prison but the death penalty should be reserved for murder.
2007-12-09 02:31:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
They should get the same punishment they give!!! We are way too lenient on these monsters!!!
2007-12-09 02:32:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by elaine 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
most definitely too many lawyers get these scum off with a slap on the wrist
2007-12-09 02:35:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by raiderskip 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
no really but putting does crimminals for life means I gotta pay for there *** till they die when im 18 so let them die
2007-12-10 16:09:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
death is very big punishment, life imprisonment is sufficient
2007-12-09 02:33:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Rana 7
·
0⤊
0⤋