[Discussion] Do You Support The Death Penalty For Rape?

[Avani]

The fact that you support murder does, kid.

You have no right to impose your very personal belief and to belittle others based on it.

Murder =/= death sentence given by law. A killing is labeled a murder only and if only it's done without legal sanction.

 

[V h o]

No. Disagree with death penalty in general, especially in America where the system can railroad innocent people into prison. Rather not risk killing someone because of some screw up. Also disagree with rape being worse than murder.

 

[Sir Francis Drake]

You have no right to impose your very personal belief and to belittle others based on it.

Murder =/= death sentence given by law. A killing is labeled a murder only and if only it's done without legal sanction.

If you intend to punish someone for muder, doesn't it become hypocritical when you meet the act of ending life with ending their life? How does that translate to "killing is wrong" when the law decides to take life? It only keeps the person in question from learning their lesson and becoming remorseful. And in America, prison can be considered actual suffering. You'll be treated like a animal for years to come.

 

[Avani]

If you intend to punish someone for muder, doesn't it become hypocritical when you meet the act of ending life with ending their life? How does that translate to "killing is wrong" when the law decides to take life? It only keeps the person in question from learning their lesson and becoming remorseful. And in America, prison can be considered actual suffering. You'll be treated like a animal for years to come.

Nope. the difference lies in legal sanction. Your country has an army and police force doesn't it? What's an army suppose to do if an enemy attacks? Gives them a rosary and donuts? Isn't it hypocritical to take such a rigid stand and get offensive towards who are fine with a legal death penalty in serious cases in such a scenario?

 

[Sir Francis Drake]

Nope. the difference lies in legal sanction. Your country has an army and police force doesn't it? What's army suppose to do if an enemy attacks? Give them a rosary and donuts? Isn't it hypocritical to take such a rigid stand and get offensive towards who are fine with a legal death penalty in serious cases in such a scenario?

Matters of national security during war and the regular murderer are different. Of course there's times when the government has to be forceful with another group to preserve itself as the government is a super organism, and is under the assumption that another group of people will cause massive damage to both land and life, disrupt it's sovereignty and freedoms ,and thus is acting in self-defense. A murderer is usually a lone person with their own agenda's for their actions, a criminal. If the law intends to teach that killing is bad, it shouldn't go about taking life to demonstrate such.

 

[Avani]

Matters of national security during war and the regular murderer are different. Of course there's times when the government has to be forceful with another group to preserve itself as the government is a super organism, and is under the assumption that another group of people will cause massive damage to both land and life, disrupt it's sovereignty and freedoms ,and thus is acting in self-defense. A murderer is usually a lone person with their own agenda's for their actions, a criminal. If the law intends to teach that killing is bad, it shouldn't go about taking life to demonstrate such.

So you are supporting killing after all- You are not against it - you are only trying to define the term and conditions according to your personal whim/belief. That's what I was reminding you.

Government also has a responsibility towards the people and society it governs. Crimes hurt the society and threaten it's members and the government has a responsibility to penalize the criminal on behalf of it's member who was victimize and ensure protection of the rest of it's members from the danger within too.

Some punishments are reformative, some also double up as deterrent for the rest. What system is used in which country is up to them. Suggesting caution and due process and a system that reduces chances of errors, unfairness and corruption is one thing but getting all high and mighty because a country applies death penalty and yours doesn't, is silly.

 

[Callypigia]

People are confusing Murder and Killing.
Killing is the act of taking a life.
Murder is the legal term for taking a life. It may or may not be justified in a court of law or declaration of war.

They are both the act of taking a life though. However you choose to justify or condemn it is purely subjective and based on a large amalgamation of socio-economic/cultural/religious beliefs.

 

[Sir Francis Drake]

Matters of national security during war and the regular murderer are different. Of course there's times when the government has to be forceful with another group to preserve itself as the government is a super organism, and is under the assumption that another group of people will cause massive damage to both land and life, disrupt it's sovereignty and freedoms ,and thus is acting in self-defense. A murderer is usually a lone person with their own agenda's for their actions, a criminal. If the law intends to teach that killing is bad, it shouldn't go about taking life to demonstrate such.[/QUOTE

So you are supporting killing after all- You are not against it - you are only trying to define the term and conditions according to your personal whim/belief. That's what I was reminding you.

Government also has a responsibility towards the people and society it governs. Crimes hurt the society and threaten it's members and the government has a responsibility to penalize the criminal on behalf of it's member who was victimize and ensure protection of the rest of it's members from the danger within too.

There's something called nuance. I don't support outright violence or killing without a good reason. Obviously a country has to defend itself, thats fine. A war is much more complicated than "Billy stabbed Joe in his gut 50 times". Soldiers don't have the time to arrest their invaders and if you're being invaded you probably don't have the resources to just start incarcerating these people to hold them like you would a normal criminal. While criminals as you pointed at cause harm to society, its not on the scale of what a invading army would do, therefore a criminal should be punished in accordance with the degree of the crime they committed. Like you said, the government has the responsibility to protect its citizens and punish wrongdoers, murderers shouldn't be give the death penalty if the goal of punishing them is to show that killing is wrong.

 

[Avani]

There's something called nuance. I don't support outright violence or killing without a good reason. Obviously a country has to defend itself, thats fine. A war is much more complicated than "Billy stabbed Joe in his gut 50 times". Soldiers don't have the time to arrest their invaders and if you're being invaded you probably don't have the resources to just start incarcerating these people to hold them like you would a normal criminal. While criminals as you pointed at cause harm to society, its not on the scale of what a invading army would do, therefore a criminal should be punished in accordance with the degree of the crime they committed. Like you said, the government has the responsibility to protect its citizens and punish wrongdoers, murderers shouldn't be give the death penalty if the goal of punishing them is to show that killing is wrong.

@ Bold 1: Most people don't. Don't think otherwise.

Law and legal principles are based upon accepted customs, traditions, beliefs, philosophy prevalent in a country and enacted by the state accordingly. The definition of justice is not universal either. Different persons can interpret it differently. And your views are very narrow in that regard. You are trying to impose your reasoning of how serious a crime is and isn't, which is affected by your religious convictions or cultural convictions which are rooted in that belief system, on others.

@ Bold 2: Exactly and it the seriousness of the crime demands it, the criminal should be ready for death penalty.

People are confusing Murder and Killing.
Killing is the act of taking a life.
Murder is the legal term for taking a life. It may or may not be justified in a court of law or declaration of war.

They are both the act of taking a life though. However you choose to justify or condemn it is purely subjective and based on a large amalgamation of socio-economic/cultural/religious beliefs.

True. I just disagree about the being "confused" - I believe they use the word "murder" deliberately ignoring the meaning and definition of the word because if they don't, they lose at least half the footing to emphasize their disdain for the idea.


OT: In general I do not demand death penalty for all rape case - but it shouldn't be off limits either.

If the rape victim ends up dead - it should be dealt as a' rape+ murder' case regardless of rape laws having that option of sentence or not.

 

[Hexuze]

Yes, it's disgusting. Like this recently...
[video=youtube;-RUWeSnT2hE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RUWeSnT2hE[/video]

 

[HashiraMadara]

Yes, but not in the way a death-penalty is handled, like.. first sitting X-years in prison and then be executed in a very expensive way.

Rapists, child-abuser and murderer should not sit on their asses in prison for dozens of years, while being kept alive by the tax money of innocent citizens. Many of these monsters don't learn from their mistakes and releasing them is not an option. So why keeping them in a cage where there is still the chance that they escape or harm anyone else inside the prison? Just speed things up and end their lives. One bullet between the eyes is enough, no need to waste thousands of dollars to kill them with a poison-cocktail.

You're monster

 

[HashiraMadara]

Murder =/= death sentence given by law.

Why then teach that life is important when it could be ended just because of a sexual experience?

 

[Avani]

Why then teach that life is important when it could be ended just because of a sexual experience?

Because it's wasting time, money and resources on criminals who think of such crimes in such retarded terms as you described and it's risking the whole society to keep them in as a member. It can do without such cancer and save itself from destruction.

 

[HashiraMadara]

Because it's wasting time, money and resources on criminals who think of such crimes in such retarded terms as you described and it's risking the whole society to keep them in as a member. It can do without such cancer and save itself from destruction.

It can do without such cancer? Remind me of a being that ever survived a lengthy period on tumour removals only :|

The fact remains, killing solves nothing.

 

[Avani]

It can do without such cancer? Remind me of a being that ever survived a lengthy period on tumour removals only :|

The fact remains, killing solves nothing.

A young rape victim has been given euthanasia drugs by doctors in the Netherlands who agreed that the woman in her 20’s had nothing left to live for.

The unnamed *** abuse victim says she suffered abuse from the age of five to 15 and had decided she wanted to end her life via lethal injection.

You must be registered for see links

A 17-year-old girl has killed herself after four boys raped her and spread a photograph of the assault, causing classmates and friends to taunt and cyber-bully her, her mother has said.

Rehtaeh Parsons from Nova Scotia, Canada hanged herself in her family's bathroom on Thursday after months of torment and, on Sunday night, her parents took her off life support.

Questions are now emerging over whether authorities and her friends did enough to help Rehtaeh, who relatives said quickly slipped from an A-student to a moody, unpredictable teenager.

No charges were ever brought against Rehtaeh's alleged attackers following the assault in 2011; an investigation was launched but authorities concluded they did not have enough evidence. They didn't even interview the boys until much, much later,' To me, I’d think you’d get the boys right away, separate them.”

Relatives said they saw the photograph but could not determine who had taken it, so were unable to charge the teenagers - even though the picture legally constituted child pornography.

You must be registered for see links

A teenage rape victim has committed suicide after an agonising court ordeal testifying against her attacker.

Lindsay Armstrong, 17, was 'torn to shreds' by a defence lawyer and made to hold up the g- string underwear she had been wearing at the time of the attack.

'She said it was like being raped all over again,' said her distraught father Frank last night.

The 14-year-old accused was found guilty and is awaiting sentence. Lindsay took an overdose and was found dead in bed by her mother on Tuesday morning.

Last night her parents said the ordeal in court was as much to blame for their daughter's suicide as the rape itself. ...

She was furious that they focused on her underwear and never mentioned that she wore jeans, a top, a jacket and boots. T...

You must be registered for see links

The men then dragged Jyoti to the rear of the bus, beating her with the rod and raping her while the bus driver continued to drive. Medical reports later said that she suffered serious injuries to her abdomen, intestines and genitals due to the assault, and doctors said that the damage indicated that a blunt object (suspected to be the iron rod) may have been used for penetration.[16] That rod was later described by police as being a rusted, L-shaped implement of the type used as a wheel jack handle.[19][20][21]

According to police reports Jyoti attempted to fight off her assailants, biting three of the attackers and leaving bite marks on the accused men.[22] After the beatings and rape ended, the attackers threw both victims from the moving bus. Then the bus driver allegedly tried to drive the bus over Jyoti, but she was pulled aside by her male friend. One of the perpetrators later cleaned the vehicle to remove evidence. Police impounded it the next day.

And one of the accused in above incident is already out back on the street.

You must be registered for see links

The way you described rape as a mere sexual encounter - such attitude and terminology are extremely ignorant, insensitive and disrespectful towards rape victims and their families. It only support the lowly rapists. People who behave like that are part of the problem and they simply have no place in discussions that talk about solutions.

 

[HashiraMadara]

The way you described rape as a mere sexual encounter - such attitude and terminology are extremely ignorant, insensitive and disrespectful towards rape victims and their families. It only support the lowly rapists. People who behave like that are part of the problem and they simply have no place in discussions that talk about solutions.

I put it in an ignorant fashion purposefully because killing someone > rape :|. I will continue to do so. I feel sorry for those families and wish condolences but killing makes the situation worse, it starts a cycle of un ending hatred. Saudi Arabia has the highest number of executions yearly and the number is increasing steadily showing you that beheading and stoning to death these guys solve nothing...

Mahatma Gandhi started as a racist juggernaut
Nelson Mandela started as a violent prick
Malcolm X started his preaching in prison

etc. Everyone deserves a second chance to realise their actions and help others, your hatred solves nothing you're even emo right now :|

 

[nefraiko]

no, but I'm for the making of a "take his testicules away" judgment.
he takes the womanhood of the woman then his manhood should be taken.

the judge: SILENCE (hits three times the table), in the name of the state..., and for the raping of *****0342^, I condemn you for losing your testicules and being penetrated by an officer penetrator type BBC for a duration of three mounths. this duration can be shortened if good behaviour is shown. smiling, moaning or fellation will be noted as good behaviour. END OF THE JUDGEMENT MEETING, god bless.

 

[Dannie]

Why then teach that life is important when it could be ended just because of a sexual experience?

Sexual experience? You make it sound like the person enjoyed being raped.

 

[Avani]

I put it in an ignorant fashion purposefully because killing someone > rape :|. I will continue to do so. I feel sorry for those families and wish condolences but killing makes the situation worse, it starts a cycle of un ending hatred. Saudi Arabia has the highest number of executions yearly and the number is increasing steadily showing you that beheading and stoning to death these guys solve nothing...

Mahatma Gandhi started as a racist juggernaut
Nelson Mandela started as a violent prick
Malcolm X started his preaching in prison

etc. Everyone deserves a second chance to realise their actions and help others, your hatred solves nothing you're even emo right now :|

I's sure you will continue to do so- you also have a very shallow approach towards the whole issue and still insist on dragging the argument and that's why I put you in the category of problem.

Your analogy is false and isn't applicable here.

And you still are erroneously fantasizing about my mental state to make up for lack of sound argument.

 

[HashiraMadara]

Sexual experience? You make it sound like the person enjoyed being raped.

No I was doing a scale propaganda to show DEATH > RAPE. Nothing = Death, there should be nothing punishable by death, (not sure about murder) about justice is a delicate one. There are things such as lawyers, prosecutors etc.