Is there punishment strict enough for this?

[sUn]

Sadly it's true. Ever heard of the Hilton family ( I don't think they're widely known outside Qc, though)? They were boxers, abeilt not really good ones, who fell face first in all the "glamour" of that lifestyle. The father's a drunken idiot, while the sons are repeat, drunk ass sex offenders. One of them raped his own 14 year old daughters... his own daughters! He's serving time in a minimum security prison, where he's having a better life condition than you and I...

They should get the smallest cell possible, without a window, no ammenities, hidden away from everyone else, without heating or A/C. Make them think about what they've done, why they're there.

PunkRock, you raise a good subject. I've always considered Canada to be low on laws. In America, something that would get a real sentence here get's nothing. Most murderers, are arrested for about 2 days then released, atleast most of the time down here in North Delta, British Columbia, Canada. 👎

The laws need to be more strict. Like American laws.

 

[vladimir]

The eye for an eye method doesn't work, eh? So what should we do, smack criminals on the back of the hand and tell them not to do it again? What do you think prison is? It's an eye for an eye - You screw up, you get screwed.

prison is not an eye for an eye. prison is not supposed to bring death or rape or tortue (even though it might happen).

did i not already say i would imprison such a person for the rest of his life under the least acceptable circumstences?

Saying the death penalty doesn't prevent crime is stupid. If someone's dead, they can't quite commit crimes, now can they? Vicious circle my ass - "Hey, if I do this, and I get caught, I could get the death penalty. I don't think I'll do this." It's the same reason why criminals aren't stupid enough to rob houses owned by people with guns. They don't want to die.

the death penalty cannot prevent crime because it is sentenced after the crime happened.
you have the death penalty in the US, but still there is much more murder than here in germany where we do not have the death penalty. you see, they don't care whether there is death penalty or not. most cases of murder are no concious actions. your amount of guns just brings more accidents and murders, because a criminal who knows that almost everyone has a gun better brings his own gun when he robs a house and shoots the owner before the owner can grab his own gun. if your theory about the death penalty or gun ownership was true, you should have less crime and less cases of murder in the US than here in germany were we neither have the death penalty nor much guns. people who rape usually have no control over themselves and people who murder usually do not think much about it first. a gun is tool that makes it easy to kill someone, so if someone has gone really mad and a gun is near, it is easy to grab it und use it, whereas it is not as easy if there is no gun to grab which gives more obstacles and more time to think and therefore prevents murder or crime.

The man needs to be sentenced to death, period. Just like the guy in WV who raped the 18 month old girl should be sentenced to death.

you cannot blame anyone else for murder or rape if you do the same...

 

[vladimir]

The pay-per-view bit would be unconstitutional in America. Killing someone like that on the other hand would not be unconsitutional here.


I argue that killing someone like this does not reduce us to his level. It is not fundamentally wrong to kill people.

I'll give you an example...

Guy breaks into your house with a gun. You shoot him dead.

That's not wrong by any stretch of the imagination.

that is not murder but defence...killing someone who is under your control, unarmed and handcuffed is not defence.

 

[Danoff]

that is not murder but defence

I didn't claim it was murder.

killing someone who is under your control, unarmed and handcuffed is not defence.

That's not necessarily true.

you cannot blame anyone else for murder or rape if you do the same...

True. I don't think anyone is arguing that.

you have the death penalty in the US, but still there is much more murder than here in germany where we do not have the death penalty

And are we to assume that it is because you don't have the death penalty that you have less crime? Are we supposed to believe from this that the death penalty in the US isn't helping? I don't see how you can draw very many conclusions from this.

your amount of guns just brings more accidents and murders, because a criminal who knows that almost everyone has a gun better brings his own gun when he robs a house and shoots the owner before the owner can grab his own gun.

It has been shown, I'm too lazy to find it, that areas where citizens have lots of guns have a tendancy toward non-violent crime. In otherwords, because burglars are scare of people who have guns, they break in to your home when you aren't there.

Stossel did a peice on 20/20 where he interviewed convicted felons about their crimes and they explain that gun control laws helped them. It didn't prevent them from getting guns, but it took care of the one thing they were worried about most (yes they said that) that the people inside the house would be armed.

 

[Anderton Prime]

AIDS takes too long. I say we kill him slowly and painfully, and sell it on pay-per-view to subsidize some of the costs of prisons.

Let's examine what you just said. AIDS takes too LONG, let's kill him SLOWLY. Aside from severely contradicting yourself, this type of comment shows your animal instincts have gotten the better of your civilized ones. Fortunately, though you say "we" when referring to killing him, you won't be doing any killing of prisoners any time soon. I bet if it were up to you you'd just go through every prison and shoot each inmate in the head. I'd shake my head at you, but it requires more energy than you're worth.

 

[Anderton Prime]

I'd also like to ask anyone in here if they actually believe it is even remotely possible to eradicate crime in any society?

 

[vladimir]

And are we to assume that it is because you don't have the death penalty that you have less crime? Are we supposed to believe from this that the death penalty in the US isn't helping? I don't see how you can draw very many conclusions from this.

no, but it shows that you cannot say the death penalty would prevent crimes as there is not more crime here without it.
surely there are a lot more reasons for the murder rate than just the death penalty, but if it would stop a large amount of potential murderers than you should see something ot this effect or you will have to admit that the situation of the american people is extremely worse for they murder still even if there is the death penalty.

It has been shown, I'm too lazy to find it, that areas where citizens have lots of guns have a tendancy toward non-violent crime. In otherwords, because burglars are scare of people who have guns, they break in to your home when you aren't there.

probably because people in the country usually have more guns, whereas in the citys were there is more crime the people have less guns?

Stossel did a peice on 20/20 where he interviewed convicted felons about their crimes and they explain that gun control laws helped them. It didn't prevent them from getting guns, but it took care of the one thing they were worried about most (yes they said that) that the people inside the house would be armed.

it did not prevent them from getting guns because gun control laws will have no instant effect in a society with so much guns. you can get an illegal gun over here as well, but because of our rigid gun control laws it is much more difficult because our country is not flooded with guns.
under these circumstances gun control laws will surely help the criminals.

as a matter of fact, we have less guns, less gun shootings, less school shootings and less accidents with guns (everything per population of course).

 

[Ghost C]

Let's examine what you just said. AIDS takes too LONG, let's kill him SLOWLY. Aside from severely contradicting yourself, this type of comment shows your animal instincts have gotten the better of your civilized ones. Fortunately, though you say "we" when referring to killing him, you won't be doing any killing of prisoners any time soon. I bet if it were up to you you'd just go through every prison and shoot each inmate in the head. I'd shake my head at you, but it requires more energy than you're worth.

Slowly, as in days, not decades. I like how you make assumptions, but whenever someone else does the same, you immediately tell them how wrong they are for making assumptions. Hypocrite.

I'd flip you the bird, but it requires more energy than you're worth.

As for vlad, I'm not even going to bother explaining why everything he said was wrong. The flaws in his logic are so glaringly obvious that they're far better at proving themselves wrong than I could ever hope to be.

 

[Anderton Prime]

Nothing you've said changes the fact that you have "mob mentality," and would apparently like nothing more than to be involved in the slow, painful death of a person you've never met.

 

[Danoff]

as a matter of fact, we have less guns, less gun shootings, less school shootings and less accidents with guns (everything per population of course).

We could outlaw cars and have less deaths due to drunken driving (per population of course) - that doesn't make it a good idea.

 

[Anderton Prime]

PLEASE can we avoid turning this into a guns vs. cars thread? We've already got one of those...

 

[Ghost C]

Nothing you've said changes the fact that you have "mob mentality," and would apparently like nothing more than to be involved in the slow, painful death of a person you've never met.

Mob mentality? Because I think punishment should fit the crime? I'm sure the family of the 7 year old girl would enjoy nothing more than to see horrible things happen to the man who raped their daughter - Does that mean they've got mob mentalities, and that they'd like nothing more than to be involved with death? I'm sure they'd like nothing more than to reverse time and stop it before it ever happened.

 

[Anderton Prime]

You don't simply think the punishment should fit the crime. You want to be part of it. Yeah, great, jump on the bandwagon and tell everyone else what you think this guy's fate should be. That you be allowed to participate in killing him. Unfortunately, you don't get to make the rules. Or maybe that's fortunate...

We all live in a supposedly civilized society; we treat those uncivilized members in a civilized way, by punishing them civilliy. Sorry, there will NEVER be a sentence of killing someone slowly and painfully, and the mere fact that you desire this - despite having NOTHING to do with this case - shows how sick you really are.

 

[Ghost C]

Puh-lease. Come back when you're done with this "post the same thing repeatedly but word it slightly differently" phase. I'm done with you.

 

[Anderton Prime]

Ah yes, there it is, the reply post which states you've decided to stop arguing because you know you're wrong. Thank-you.

 

[vladimir]

We could outlaw cars and have less deaths due to drunken driving (per population of course) - that doesn't make it a good idea.

did you already run out of arguments?

As for vlad, I'm not even going to bother explaining why everything he said was wrong. The flaws in his logic are so glaringly obvious that they're far better at proving themselves wrong than I could ever hope to be.

and you are not very convincing today either.

 

[CDailey]

I think that this guy is a sick bastard and should be sentenced to life in prison without parole. I like Famine's idea of stopping his medication, too. 👍

PunkRock, you raise a good subject. I've always considered Canada to be low on laws. In America, something that would get a real sentence here get's nothing. Most murderers, are arrested for about 2 days then released, atleast most of the time down here in North Delta, British Columbia, Canada. 👎

The laws need to be more strict. Like American laws.

Yet you want George W. Bush dead? Nice one. 👍

 

[vat_man]

As for vlad, I'm not even going to bother explaining why everything he said was wrong. The flaws in his logic are so glaringly obvious that they're far better at proving themselves wrong than I could ever hope to be.

Feel free to point them out.

 

[Ghost C]

The fact that he doesn't believe that people owning guns stops crime, or that the death penalty deters criminals from murder. Both of these have been proven to be true, so there's no need to try and argue the point.

 

[ledhed]

In this case I am not sure there is a punishment to fit the crime. Rape is not a capital offense and by law the charges against this scum look to be good for 10 to 20 years in prison. but when you think about it when is the punishment in a civilized society EVER going to fit the crime ? We cant even make up our minds on giving a death sentance to a person who has MURDERED and that to me is as close as you are going to get to the punishment fitting the crime ...so what do you do with a scum bag rapist ? Jail is a start..only a start.

 

[Ghost C]

I think they should allow the death penalty for rape. Rape victims will have to live through their horrible crime which is far worse than being murdered. Rape someone? Get the gas chamber.

Edit: But only for the REAL rapes. Statutory rape where both parties consented (Whether or not the state believes a minor can) shouldn't apply. Also, I think anyone who accuses someone of rape and is caught lying should get the same punishment as the person they accused.

Here comes the part where I'm called a death mongering mob mentalitied uncivilized excuse for a human being 👍

 

[vladimir]

The fact that he doesn't believe that people owning guns stops crime, or that the death penalty deters criminals from murder. Both of these have been proven to be true, so there's no need to try and argue the point.

if it has been proven than show me those proofs and stop arguing.


on my search for these "proofs" you talk of, i found this which proves the opposite.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=167

 

[Gil]

you

the "eye for an eye" method does not work, it does not prevent any further crime nor does it change what happened. this method will lead to into a vicious circle.

It may not discourage someone else from doing the same thing. But you have to admit it does cut down on repeat offenders.

This is the type of fellow that if his heart was on fire, I couldn't find it in my heart to piss down his throat to put it out.
Might squirt some gasoline down there though.

 

[Ghost C]

There's not an efficient way to measure how many murders the death penalty deters. It's not as easy as walking up to a person and saying "Hey, did you ever think about killing someone? Did the death penalty deter you?"

I know, you're going to say "But look at the studies of blah blah". Yes, I can look at those studies, but it doesn't show how many people were actually deterred. If the death penalty deters one murder, just one, then hasn't it done it's job? As far as I'm concerned, it has.

Let's stop going off topic. If you want to debate this, we should make another thread.

 

[vladimir]

There's not an efficient way to measure how many murders the death penalty deters. It's not as easy as walking up to a person and saying "Hey, did you ever think about killing someone? Did the death penalty deter you?"

I know, you're going to say "But look at the studies of blah blah". Yes, I can look at those studies, but it doesn't show how many people were actually deterred. If the death penalty deters one murder, just one, then hasn't it done it's job? As far as I'm concerned, it has.

Let's stop going off topic. If you want to debate this, we should make another thread.

you are ridiculous...first you say there was overwhelming proof that showed the death penalty would deter people from murder and now you say that there was no way to proof that.

 

[Gil]

I agree that the death penalty may not be a deterrent.
But I repeat, it does prevent recidivism.

Any sick **** that rapes a 7-year old, and knowingly has AIDS...In some states that amounts to an ADW charge to go with the rape.
This jerkwad, took that little girl's innocence, he took her feelings of security, he took her trust in men, and ultimately he may end up taking her life.
He should be gotten rid of.

 

[Ghost C]

you are ridiculous...first you say there was overwhelming proof that showed the death penalty would deter people from murder and now you say that there was no way to proof that.

There is proof, it's called logical thought. There's no way to statistically record it - As I said, you can't very well walk up to someone on the street and ask them if the death penalty deterred them from murdering.

However, logical thought tells us that a sane person would take into consideration the fact that they could be sentenced to death if they commit murder, and from that we can in fact draw the conclusion that a percentage of people who think about that - No matter how small the percentage - Would not commit murder, because of the death penalty.

Again I say, this has nothing to do with the topic, if you want to debate this, make another thread. You won't be getting any more replies from me about it here.

 

[Anderton Prime]

Umm, it does have something to do with the topic, since the title of the thread asks what type of PUNISHMENT would suit this crime. A discussion of the death penalty and its merits is well within the topic of this thread, in my opinion.
However, bantering back and forth the same post over and over is pretty boring and since, like abortion, this issue will never be solved one way or the other, it should probably be dropped. Opening an entire thread about it will just waste more time.

 

[wheellift]

Eye for an eye But for rapists, cut off his c@ck and stick it up his @ss...

 

[Anderton Prime]

Eye for an eye But for rapists, cut off his c@ck and stick it up his @ss...

Very mature...and fortunately, highly unlikely.