A bullet is cheaper than prison. And also the 3 things you mentioned are not mutually exclusive.
Fred - 03:05pm on 05/30/2008
Why was his child molesting ass not executed?!?!????
2Hotel9 - 04:05pm on 05/30/2008
It’d be an ex post facto punishment (and hence unconstitutional) to send him back to prison. So we just exile people. How courts find that those restrictions aren’t punishment is beyond me, but whatever.
jpe - 06:05pm on 05/30/2008
jpe,
I believe Rob’s point was to keep him in prison in the first place. To send him back to prison would require another crime, another trial, another guilty verdict, and of course, another victim.
Bat One - 07:05pm on 05/30/2008
A city councilwoman stopped by last week. She was fuming because a local 61 year old man had just died and the local paper announced his death while mentioning that he was a pedophile and couldn’t just let the man die in peace.
She asked me what I thought and I said that since the 16 year old girl that he raped 20 years ago is still undoubtedly suffering, perhaps we could have a parade through town holding a banner and cheering that, “The Pedophile is Dead!” “That might ease her pain a little.” “Maybe she will even join us.” “I can get some news trucks down here for that.” “Maybe the whole country will celebrate.”
“You’re heartless”, she said. “No. He was heartless”, I said.
ews48 - 10:05pm on 05/30/2008
I got it Bat, but the state can’t just extend the sentence if the guy’s already serving the max. So, the state gets around that by punishing via restrictions on where the guy can live.
It’s the ex post facto nature of that that bugs me. I’d be fine w/ child molesters getting a needle in the arm, as long as its pursuant to a duly passed law.
jpe - 01:05am on 05/31/2008
So you are happy to allow child molesters to leave jail and continue molesting children.Perhapsw you should volunteer to have them live next door to you and your children.
2Hotel9 - 08:05am on 05/31/2008
So you are happy to allow child molesters to leave jail and continue molesting children.
Just because someome is interested in the law being applied as written and fairly, does not mean he likes child molestors or rapists. If we want child molestors to get a life sentence, then let’s change the law and keep them incarcerated for life. If we want to apply the death penalty in cases where the perpetrator is to be executed for child molestation, then change the law. But, be prepared for thousands of them being executed every year. Plus, are we going to include those found guilty of statutory rape of a minor, because the man marries his 16 year old girl friend, and execute him? I am not arguing for or against these more severe penalties, only pointing out that we as a people need to be clear about such crimes, to make the law accurately reflect those desires and apply the law equally and fairly to all of them.
EWS48:
perhaps we could have a parade through town holding a banner and cheering that, “The Pedophile is Dead!” “That might ease her pain a little.”
I certainly do not want to be viewed as in any shape, manner or form supporting or defending child molestors; but I must ask you, is it the job of the law to make the victim and relatives feel better, to ease their pain? Then, if that is your goal, hell why not let the family choose the punishment, castration, public stoning, use them as targets or whatever will ease their pain? I just didn’t understand that the law was about easing pain and making people feel better.
The emotional reaction to child molestors is understandable, but surely law should not be based on our emotions, but on some higher, more objective standard.
I know some idiot here, just because I asked some questions, will accuse me of defending child molestation and molestors - if so, you are absoluetly wrong.
Neiman - 08:05am on 05/31/2008
So you are happy to allow child molesters to leave jail and continue molesting children.
I’m just pointing out that Constitution bars increasing punishment after-the-fact. Ergo, people come up with these residency restrictions to de facto exile ex-cons.
So Rob asks: why can’t we just put ‘em back in jail? The answer is that the Constitution forbids it.
jpe - 11:05am on 05/31/2008
TO REWARD THESE MENTAL MONSTROSITIES WITH FREE ROOM AND BOARD, MEDICAL CARE, AND ENTERTAINMENT?
A bullet is cheaper than prison. And also the 3 things you mentioned are not mutually exclusive.
Why was his child molesting ass not executed?!?!????
It’d be an ex post facto punishment (and hence unconstitutional) to send him back to prison. So we just exile people. How courts find that those restrictions aren’t punishment is beyond me, but whatever.
jpe,
I believe Rob’s point was to keep him in prison in the first place. To send him back to prison would require another crime, another trial, another guilty verdict, and of course, another victim.
A city councilwoman stopped by last week. She was fuming because a local 61 year old man had just died and the local paper announced his death while mentioning that he was a pedophile and couldn’t just let the man die in peace.
She asked me what I thought and I said that since the 16 year old girl that he raped 20 years ago is still undoubtedly suffering, perhaps we could have a parade through town holding a banner and cheering that, “The Pedophile is Dead!” “That might ease her pain a little.” “Maybe she will even join us.” “I can get some news trucks down here for that.” “Maybe the whole country will celebrate.”
“You’re heartless”, she said. “No. He was heartless”, I said.
I got it Bat, but the state can’t just extend the sentence if the guy’s already serving the max. So, the state gets around that by punishing via restrictions on where the guy can live.
It’s the ex post facto nature of that that bugs me. I’d be fine w/ child molesters getting a needle in the arm, as long as its pursuant to a duly passed law.
So you are happy to allow child molesters to leave jail and continue molesting children.Perhapsw you should volunteer to have them live next door to you and your children.
Just because someome is interested in the law being applied as written and fairly, does not mean he likes child molestors or rapists. If we want child molestors to get a life sentence, then let’s change the law and keep them incarcerated for life. If we want to apply the death penalty in cases where the perpetrator is to be executed for child molestation, then change the law. But, be prepared for thousands of them being executed every year. Plus, are we going to include those found guilty of statutory rape of a minor, because the man marries his 16 year old girl friend, and execute him? I am not arguing for or against these more severe penalties, only pointing out that we as a people need to be clear about such crimes, to make the law accurately reflect those desires and apply the law equally and fairly to all of them.
EWS48:
I certainly do not want to be viewed as in any shape, manner or form supporting or defending child molestors; but I must ask you, is it the job of the law to make the victim and relatives feel better, to ease their pain? Then, if that is your goal, hell why not let the family choose the punishment, castration, public stoning, use them as targets or whatever will ease their pain? I just didn’t understand that the law was about easing pain and making people feel better.
The emotional reaction to child molestors is understandable, but surely law should not be based on our emotions, but on some higher, more objective standard.
I know some idiot here, just because I asked some questions, will accuse me of defending child molestation and molestors - if so, you are absoluetly wrong.
I’m just pointing out that Constitution bars increasing punishment after-the-fact. Ergo, people come up with these residency restrictions to de facto exile ex-cons.
So Rob asks: why can’t we just put ‘em back in jail? The answer is that the Constitution forbids it.
TO REWARD THESE MENTAL MONSTROSITIES WITH FREE ROOM AND BOARD, MEDICAL CARE, AND ENTERTAINMENT?