Poll - Death penalty for repeat child molesters?

[SofaKingLiberal]

Death Penalty for Repeat Child Molesters Wins Approval in OK Senate


SB 1747 Could Be Signed into Law in Matter of Days

OKLAHOMA CITY – A bill aimed at creating a safer Oklahoma by giving juries in Oklahoma the option of sentencing repeat child molesters to life without parole or the death penalty received approval of the full Senate today.

The bill’s author, Senator Jay Paul Gumm, a Democrat from Durant, explained Senate Bill 1747 passed with a bi-partisan majority vote with the title on; meaning the bill could be signed into law as early as next week if the House agrees to fast track the measure.

"By keeping the title on the bill, we are sending it to the House in hopes of getting the bill to the Governor’s desk with rapid speed," Gumm said. "We as a Legislature should leave no stone unturned in our effort to protect the children of Oklahoma." <snip>

http://www.kten.com/Global/story.asp?S=4597682

[meganmonkey]

1. I am 100% against the death penalty

No exceptions.

[Swamp Rat]

45. Me too.

Though, my stance against the death penalty has been challenged quite a bit lately. :mad:

[Katherine Brengle]

2. My gut, emotional response would be yes, but I vote no because

I do not believe that the state has the right to commit murder, regardless of the offense.

[MadMaddie]

3. No....Hard Labor for the rest of their life..

[Sadie5]

9. There will be no one left

in the Repig party if repeat molesters are executed. Myself I don't believe in the death penalty.

[mitchtv]

14. Don't worry, they will only execute Blacks and Indians

it is, after all, Oklahoma

[sui generis]

18. all you gay black indians run! get out now!

they'll be executing you just for having nipples pretty soon.

[Nicole]

69. Not true, 63% of executions in OK were whites

30% were blacks & 3.7% were indians.

So what the hell does "it is, after all, Oklahoma" supposed to mean? How does California's percentages add up?

[liberal N proud]

4. What does killing a person achieve?

No death penalty, it is too republican mindset

[sui generis]

12. authored by a democrat

this is why we need party standards. To keep from turning into Iran.

What next, the death penalty for sex before marriage? For sex with a minor (look out 18 year olds who have been friend with bennies for longer than a year)?

Oh no, it could never happen here. :eyes:

[LibraLiz1973]

57. the difference between sex before marriage and molestation

is HUGE. You can't compare the two.


I, for one, am all for it. REPEATEDLY molesting children? Fry the fuckers.

[IsItJustMe]

5. Our court system is to screwed up to sentence anyone to death.

Look at all of the overturned death penalty cases.

[Cats Against Frist]

6. No. Jail them forever, though.

And if castration works, I'm all for that too. But they should never be set loose to prey on innocent children -- I think that ONE offense is enough.

[sui generis]

7. this is SO FUCKING NOT AMERICA

I don't care about life without parole, but the death penalty, America has lost it's fucking mind.

This Democrat is not a democrat - here's my no confidence vote. Fucking freak.

[redqueen]

10. I know... um, what if the person isn't actually guilty?

Why isn't that something death-penalty advocates consider?

Morans.

[madinmaryland]

15. Uhm, The juries NEVER make any mistakes, and

the prosecutors and police are always correct. If the person gets arrested he must be guilty.

:sarcasm:

So says Nancy disGrace.

[sui generis]

16. well I've had my tussle with DU on this topic

I'm incompatible with accepting the DP view anyway, since the original argument is "eye for eye".

I don't see those advocates arguing and "eye for an eye" here and suggesting that the perp be sexually molested by a six hundred pound gorilla, on behalf of the state.

Where do you stop once you start using the death penalty to clean up mental illness and incorrigibility? Gays and atheists and christians are incorrigible.

But this goes back to sex being the arch-demon of our society. You cannot murder your own "evil" by putting it to death in someone else. These people just love the idea of killing someone, and if they can find a bad enough person (three strikes in California maybe), it's open season. It won't stop with child molesters - that's just the first card they're playing.

I'm starting to think that democracy is NOT the natural outcome of political evolution. It is backwards authoritarian mob rule that is the natural outcome of political freedom.

[woo me with science]

36. Right. Just ask the McMartin daycare providers. nt

[sui generis]

78. well if I were going to

say the death penalty is okay for heinous crimes, not just diddling kids, (moans, wrings hands, assumes crash position), the short list will keep getting longer depending on who you ask.

I don't support the death penalty and even if I did wouldnt' support it for anything but murder. It's a disconnect from progressive values and bizarre to see supporters of it here. I'd go so far as to say it's stupid and irreconcilable with progressive values.

Every time we hear a wing nut blathering about the evils of homosexuality you hear bestiality and child molestation in the next breath. It's not a huge leap to go from child molesters to homosexuals, or to begin drawing those comparisons in spite of the fact that most child molesters, even of boys, don't consider themselves homosexual.

It creeps me out to see the blindness here on DU. I would venture to say that 90 percent of the twenty six percent of people who support the idea have no idea what child molestation is or how its defined, yet are happy to mindlessly vote for something they really don't know much more than the pap they read in the newspapers and see in the movies.

That's what's disappointing - that this democrat out there knows how to play the fear and emotion card to get attention and people are just blithely signing on the bandwagon, and feeling RIGHTEOUS about it.

[redqueen]

8. Nope... I'd prefer life in prison with no possibility of parole...

for the FIRST offense.

[Midnight Rambler]

11. Just sending a child molester to psion can be a death sentence itself

You really don't have to send them to the chair or the chamber or the gurney. Many times their fellow inmates take care of that themselves.

[FooFootheSnoo]

35. That's what I was thinking

Send them to general population. Actually, I'm against the death penalty for child molesters. They need to be locked up forever. However, if they kill a child, then I'm all for the death penalty.

[flvegan]

13. Isn't castration an effective deterrant?

I honestly don't know, but that's what the back of my mind is telling me.

Oh, and being against the death penalty, I'd have to vote "no" as well. Sounds like a certain Senator is trying to jump on the "protect the children" bandwagon without outlawing abortion.

[sui generis]

17. no castration doesn't work for women

and it presumes that testosterone and testicles is the motivator in men.

It's mental illness, with or without balls.

[flvegan]

20. I hadn't

(obviously) taken the female gender into consideration. Thank you for waking me back up on that point.

I know it's a mental illness, but I had thought that castration eliminated all sexual desire. I don't know. I don't understand the mentality behind child molestation.

[sui generis]

24. yeah it's a misconception

that having testicles is the cause of badness.

It's this weird social notion that if you cut off the gonads of a child molester you are somehow "fixing" them from being able to molest a child too. It's really creepy. Lock 'em up. They're broken. But when we start sawing parts off of humans we're being a little sick ourselves. The real solution would be to lobotomize them, but that's a "part" too.

I undertand your comment though - my opinion wasn't aimed at you :hi:

[flvegan]

26. In that case

I agree. Lock them up. I don't think the lifespan of a multi-convicted child molester in prison is very high, though. A death penalty in it's own right.

[dogday]

31. What about chemical castration?

Death is not an option.. Treatment is, but it has been proved that many of these guys never lose those feelings toward kids...

[jbnow]

76. And speaking of kids

since child molesters are so often family or family friends, you don't put the burden on kids that they killed daddy or uncle Fred because the kids told on him.

I never believe in the death penalty, it lowers us as a society and life in prison is really a heavier punishment anyway.

But no child should ever feel they were responsible for someone getting the death penalty.

[SofaKingLiberal]

21. No.

It is definitely not 100%. I don't know what the success rate is but the response I remember from previous reports is that it can be more of a psychological issue 'control', and they can offend again. Repeat offenders do not deserve a another chance. I am tempted to side with the DP, but knowing how screwed up our legal system is, life in jail without parole (hard labor) is probably the best way to go.

[China_cat]

19. I'm not only against the death penalty

on principle but here in SC we have learned that the death penalty for rape (which often included that against children) that didn't lead to murder rarely led to conviction (unless the accused was black and the victim white). Juries were loathe to send someone to death for rape so rapists walked.

When we finally got the laws changed, degrees of rape and molestation written in, we finally started getting some of the animals off the streets and behind bars where they belonged.

Oklahoma is going to find they end up with more problems than they have now.

[madokie]

22. life without parole would be fine with me.

those lifers in prison need some booty

[Warren DeMontague]

23. If you're going to give anyone the death penalty, people who hurt kids

should be the ones to get it.

(But let's stop having a two-tiered system for child molesters and those who cover up their crimes, shall we? Meaning, one tier for the dirty guy in the overcoat with the candy and the van, and another tier for the guy with the white collar who recites in latin on Sunday)

But generally, I think a better solution would be to stop filling up our prisons with non-violent drug offenders, and use the space to lock up ALL violent criminals for good- rapists, murderers, and most certainly child molesters.

[Nutmegger]

25. Killing somebody doesn't solve a thing. [nt]

[Zinfandel]

27. How about the death penalty for repeated drunk drivers? They kill people..

How about the death penalty for drug dealers with repeated offenses, they also kill people?

How about the death penalty for politicians that lie about the war and send children off to die for corporate profits?

I don't believe in the State killing people, (or anyone else killing).

[MamaBear]

28. Life without Parole, Okay

Repeat sexual offenders do need to be segregated from the general society, and child sex offenders more so, for the safety and health of the general population.

I am against the death penalty, however. It serves no purpose other than revenge, it demeans everybody, and it can't be undone.

Isn't a life sentence barbaric enough?

[MrSlayer]

29. I'm all for it.

Which should come as no surprise to most people as I've often advocated this position. This is one issue where I break ranks with the majority here and I make no apologies for it. Pedos are scum, the lowest scum there is and death is too good for them really. But they'll never get what they truly deserve so execution will suffice. I can't see why anyone would argue to keep such vile filth alive.

[Cronus Protagonist]

30. Skeletons in the closet?

Just asking... :evilgrin:

[MrSlayer]

58. Is that supposed to be funny?

Because I'm not seeing the humor. "Hee hee, maybe you were raped." What are you a fucking sicko? To answer your question, no I do not have any "skeletons". I just fucking despise anyone who would take advantage of the weakest people in our society. There is nothing more vile, nothing more heinous, nothing more deserving of death.

[Warren DeMontague]

62. Yeah, that was kind of a weird response on your part, man.

I don't think that anyone should have anything to explain with regards to wanting to protect kids. Anyone who hurts a child is the absolute lowest of the low, in my estimation.

edit: for the record, I'm against the DP, mostly because I don't think the justice system is perfect enough to be sure innocent people won't be put to death. But I have no problem with separating violent criminals, particularly those who hurt kids, from society for good.

[sui generis]

34. because everyone has a pet cause

for determining what vile filth is.

Me - if I were going to add to who I thought should be defecated on and then executed it would be anyone convicted of a hate crime.

After that it would be tax evaders and deadbeat parents.

Then shoplifters.

Then people who break wind in public.

Other people might have a problem with atheists or gays or compulsive gamblers.

[redqueen]

41. The reason I'd like them kept alive... is in case they're not guilty.

You know that does happen, right? Sometimes, innocent people get convicted for things, but it's not until they're sentenced... sometimes years or even decades later, that we find out that they're actually innocent.

[MrSlayer]

54. I'm talking about the John Evander Couey and Joseph P. Smith types.

Caught on tape, confessed, no doubt about it. People like this should be killed immediately. If there is even a shred of doubt that the person might be innocent, life in prison is fine until guilt or innocence can be proven. So many of these people are patently guilty though and almost all of them have been convicted of past molestations. If they had just killed this Couey fucker the first time, Jessica Lunsford would still be alive today. And this is only one example. How about Kenneth Rodger Hardy who videotaped himself raping a 15 month old baby? Do you remember that story? There is no defense for keeping him alive, none at all. There is no chance he is innocent. None. He should have been dragged out and shot in the head instantly. And there are hundreds of cases just like it. The fact that somewhere along the line an innocent person may be convicted does not mean that these others are not guilty. They are absolutely guilty and they should be killed.

[redqueen]

56. So there should be unequal punishment?

One for the ones you KNOW are guilty, and ones for the ones you're only pretty sure are guilty?

Sounds fundamentally unfair. Why should those who got caught on tape pay a higher price than those who managed not to get caught? You're in effect rewarding sneakier criminals.

[MrSlayer]

60. No. I'm just saying if they don't have the DNA, eyewitnesses or the like.

Then they can't execute you but they can hold you indefinitely if you are convicted without it. If there comes a time when they do have the absolute proof, then the execution can go on or the person can go free. I'm not rewarding anyone, least of all a pedo. I'm just being fair.

[Greyhound]

52. But what if you're wrong?

[Cronus Protagonist]

59. Gotta get these skeletons fed

They eat away at you and still want more... when will they have their fill? After how many innocent people have been killed by a flawed justice system?

[jbnow]

77. Why would anyone argue?

How about the guilts that kids would feel-and they would. Tell them all you want that it's the law, they were right for telling, but they would feel such heavy guilt. It is rarely strangers that commit the crimes, more often family members or those close in other ways.

I've worked with abused kids. They can feel bad enough about them being sent to jail because they are often people that the child loved (even if they also hated them). I can't imagine how the death penalty would affect the kids...and their good is way more important then a sense of revenge carried out by killing.

[woo me with science]

32. If the penalty is the same for killing versus not killing the child,

I wonder how many sociopaths would choose to just get rid of the evidence.

I don't know about this.

[moobu2]

39. Yes, if this passes, it will cost more children their lives

Usually the only witness to the crime is the child, so the harsher the penalty is for that crime, the more the perpetrator will be motivated to kill the child *witness*.

I voted no for many reasons.

[Connie_Corleone]

33. I would like to see the death penalty abolished...BUT...

Personally speaking, I wouldn't give a damn if a child molester is put to death. They're just as bad as murderers as far as I'm concerned, because they're "murdering" a child's innocence and some of those kids grow up and have a lot of screwed up problems.

[sui generis]

37. yeah some of them become molesters themselves

so we should execute the children right along with them.

I mean, after they turn eighteen.

It's just not what modern society does - and really weird to see support for it on DU. Beyond weird.

[Connie_Corleone]

43. And some child victims DON'T become molesters.

What's your point? There is no excuse for molesting a child, even if it was done to them. That doesn't give them to right to do it to someone else.

On edit: When I mentioned "a lot of problems", I wasn't referring to just growing up to become molesters. I'm talking about emotional problems.

[redqueen]

44. Beyond weird?

I wish I could agree. :(

[yurbud]

38. problem: if they get death anyway, wouldn't they kill kid to avoid

getting caught?

Without the eyewitness, it would be harder to find them, and there would be nothing to lose if they knew they already faced the death penalty.

[redqueen]

46. Yes... this will cause more perps to just kill the victim. n/t

[Endangered Specie]

49. I dont buy this...

Child molestors don't want to get any kind of punishment (be it jail, or execution), changing the sentence won't affect whether or not they choose to kill their victims.

Also, since so many child molestors are repeat offenders who go at it again as soon as they are released (either by parole, prison too crowded, or what not), executing them will mean they WON'T get released. I believe its been shown that sex offenders are by far the most likely to continue their crimes once released.

[yurbud]

51. washington and other states solution: civil commitment to mental inst.

[redqueen]

53. Of course they don't want any kind of punishment...

however if they know they're going to be executed for molestation, then why not eliminate the evidence? It's not like they'd face a harsher punishment.

[sui generis]

79. keeping them in prison means they won't get released either

we're not helpless about these things.

[MuseRider]

40. No

not ever.

[VelmaD]

42. The jokes about what happens in prison...

to child molesters are in poor taste. Prison rape is not funny.

[EFerrari]

47. Why is it okay to kill people? n/t

[Endangered Specie]

48. Agree...

and the same thing for serial rapists.

[DanCa]

50. If you can assure me that there guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt

than I'd vote ya. I believe in exceptions in all things. Of course, if you put a child molester in prision and let the other inmates know what he'd did that's another story. Somehow I don't think they'd give him a warm welcome.

[SmokingJacket]

55. No death penalty, ever. nt

[The Straight Story]

61. Naw, I got a simple and easy money making idea for em

Put em in a well lit cell with camers on em, and you can buy pay per view to watch them 24x7. The money raised can go to education and victims. Put in some extras too where you can call a 900 number and push a different button to do different things - like a loud horn and such - or do a pay web site and have a monitor (huge) on cell wall they cannot cover and people can type about the idiots and a speaker reads the text out loud to em.

Raises money, no one dies, and we can rotate molesters weekly or something.

[sproutster]

63. Agree in my dark heart - but in the reality of day - NO

To start justifying DP for this, is horrible, the cases are emotional and they allow a lot of questionable and frankely inflammatory evidence in.

[radio4progressives]

64. "repeat child molester" by definition means they should have served

life in prison the first time, then they wouldn't be a "repeat" child molester.

that isn't to say that there are many many child molesters who are have committed the crime repeatedly, but were never caught or prosecuted and convicted in the first place.

as soon as they are caught, charged, prosectued and convicted - they should then serve the rest of their remaining years in prison.

we used to do that you know.

[helderheid]

65. Just cut the nuts off the men who do this.

[OneBlueSky]

66. interesting that you assume all child molesters are men . . . n/t

.

[helderheid]

71. interesting you assume I assume all child molesters are men. I specified

men because I'm not sure what to do with the women who do this but have a clear answer as to what to do with the men.

[SteelBird]

67. No but only because I oppose the death penalty

The life without parole aspect is fine with me. I should add that life in prison should be the first opinion for a convicted pedophile.

[stevietheman]

68. I used to be pro-death penalty until I realized three things...

1) I wondered: How is an execution actually punishment, except for the family of the person executed? I'd rather the person sit in prison the rest of their lives and think about the crime(s) they committed. Now, that's punishment.

2) I've heard that the cost of death penalty appeals exceeds the costs of paying the imprisonment costs.

3) An execution will not actually bring closure to the victims -- I think that's nonsense. If their loved one was murdered, they will stay dead no matter what happens. Closure can only come with the passage of time.

[fujiyama]

70. I'm uncomfortable

with the death penalty in the first place, and as I went through the thread I started questioning what I believed, but I came to the original conclusion.

Pedophiles are truly some of the lowest people on earth and should face an automatic lifetime incarceration without perole - even just for one offense, along with rapists, and other violent criminals (ie those convicted of murder but without DNA evidence). As we know pedophiles cannot be rehabilitated. It's stupid to believe that they can, but death is irreversable. If there is any evidence later on that shows even a shred of doubt, then the state has illegally murdered someone.

The only instances in which I can see the DP being justified is serial murderers, killers of children, and terrorists that actually took part in an act of murder.

But even in those cases, I am uncomfortable with the death penalty for several reasons - mainly because of how many people on death row are exonerrated by DNA. And in other cases, sometimes evidence is handled improperly.

Ideally the DP would not exist, but understandably, retribution does play a role in justice, and if we are to keep it, it should be carried out only in the worst circumstances. While child molestation is close to the bottom, I would rather there not be any repeat child molestors out there in the first place. If there is even one case, that person should be imprisoned.

[Beelzebud]

72. How about life in prison. Don't let them out!

Don't let the sick bastards out of their jail cell, and they won't be able to do this anymore.

[sui generis]

73. well since gays are often associated with child molesters

I wonder where this could be going . . . :shrug:

[baby_mouse]

74. NO, sigh, death penalty for NOONE. nt.

[Raydawg1234]

75. I am against the death penalty in all cases.