Paedophiles should be given death penalty? yes or no?

[Pentangeli]

I just read about a sickening case in Scotland, involving 200 paedophiles:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/...st/8331388.stm

The two men at the centre of Scotland's largest known child abuse network have been jailed for life.

Neil Strachan, 41, attempted to rape an 18-month-old boy while 38-year-old James Rennie sexually assaulted a three-month-old.

Strachan was sentenced to a minimum of 16 years in prison, while Rennie was ordered to serve at least 13 years.

Police said the operation had led to more than 200 suspected paedophiles, 70 of them in the UK, being identified.

Six other men had already been sentenced for their involvement in the network.
Strachan and Rennie, both from Edinburgh, were also found guilty after a 10-week trial of conspiring to get access to children in order to abuse them, while Strachan was convicted of a further charge of sexually assaulting a six-year-old boy.

Strachan, who is HIV positive, has already served a three-year prison sentence in 1997 for abusing a boy. Rennie was the chief executive of LGBT Youth Scotland, which offers advice to young gay and lesbian people.

The judge said Rennie, a trained teacher who was found guilty of 14 charges, was at the heart of the conspiracy to abuse youngsters, and likened him to a spider weaving an electronic web to bring about his crime.

The mother of Rennie's victim, known as Child F, told BBC Scotland of the "pain and torment" the case had put their family through.

Rennie had circulated pictures of the abuse and offered a boy to other paedophiles - an offer taken up by Strachan.

Co-accused Colin Slaven, 23, from Edinburgh; Neil Campbell, 46, John Milligan, 40, and John Murphy, 44, all from Glasgow; Ross Webber, 27, from North Berwick in East Lothian; and Craig Boath, 24, from Dundee, were also convicted of various offences. They were given prison sentences of between two and 17 years.

The men had been arrested during the Operation Algebra police investigation, which uncovered nearly 125,000 indecent images of children.

The investigation was sparked by a single indecent image of a naked 11-year-old which was found on paint company engineer Strachan's computer when it was sent for repair.

Detectives discovered that Strachan and Rennie had filmed themselves sexually abusing children before distributing the images over the internet.
The two paedophiles had been trusted by the children's parents to look after the children.

One of them was HIV positive as well. And when you're talking about an assault on three month olds, I believe the culprits -- who are all adults -- are beyond saving.

My vote is YES.

[screamer581]

Eesh. I am against the Death Penalty no matter what, so I think these fuckers should rot in a jail cell for the rest of their life.


That is revolting though.

[Cronos]

Anybody guilty of a violent/invasive crime (such as rape/mugging/murder/paedophilia/robbery) should be thrown off a cliff. Their "human rights" should go out the window as soon as they are found undeniably guilty.

[Cosimo]

Originally Posted by screamer581

Eesh. I am against the Death Penalty no matter what, so I think these fuckers should rot in a jail cell for the rest of their life.

yup

[QUENTIN]

Originally Posted by screamer581

Eesh. I am against the Death Penalty no matter what, so I think these fuckers should rot in a jail cell for the rest of their life.


That is revolting though.

Yep. Based on the heinous nature of the crime, its lifelong impact on the victim, and the incredible recidivism rates, I think a sexual abuse of a child conviction should come with a mandatory life sentence to prison or high security mental facility depending on the culprit.

There's no reason to murder anyone though.

[BadCoverVersion]

I'm against the death penalty in all instances.

Nonces are generally treated with absolute contempt in prison. These horrible bastards will have to keep their eyes peeled for razor blades in their porridge for the next 13 years at least.

I agree that they should be locked up and left to rot mind you.

[Pentangeli]

Originally Posted by screamer581

Eesh. I am against the Death Penalty no matter what, so I think these fuckers should rot in a jail cell for the rest of their life.


That is revolting though.

Fair enough. I too am again the death penalty in most cases. But with sexual crimes, there's undeniable evidence. So you're not going to be in a position where you find out ten years down the line that an innocent person has been killed. But yeah, maybe rotting in jail would be a greater punishment anyway.

[QUENTIN]

Originally Posted by Pentangeli

Fair enough. I too am again the death penalty in most cases. But with sexual crimes, there's undeniable evidence. So you're not going to be in a position where you find out ten years down the line that an innocent person has been killed. But yeah, maybe rotting in jail would be a greater punishment anyway.

I tend to think so. Not only is the death penalty ineffective at achieving its own goals, more costly, and morally suspect, a lifetime in jail is worse punishment in my opinion than an "easy out" of being put to sleep.

Not to dwell on the morbid revenge element, but BCV's on the money. I've visited maximum security prisons and child molesters are treated as the absolute scum of the Earth by inmates and guards alike and subject to unimaginable abuse. So it's not as though a lifetime in jail is a lesser sentence for them.

The alarming prevalence of the type of pedophile "web rings" identified in the article are why I had to restrain myself this morning in responding to that aaravan fella, but was not gonna let him be a member of a community I joined at 12 and hosts lots of 15/16-year-olds. There's a lot of creepy fuckers out there and the internet their anonymous hideout.

[RustyRazor]

I voted yes because someone that fucked up in the head doesn't deserve to breathe the same air as everyone else. Chemical castration is an option but it won't keep them from approaching these kids and maybe doing something worse.

We, as humans don't have the right to deny anyone else life.
HOWEVER, when you cross a line and are no longer a human being, all bets are off.

[Jig Saw 123]

I voted "no", not because I'm against the death penalty, because I'm honestly for it, but because I don't think the crime of pedophiles is severe enough to warrant such a punishment. I don't agree that they should rot in prison because believe it or not to some people prison is a luxury, so I think its best if they had their genitals cut off or are isolated to a room of complete silence for the rest of their lives.

[NuclearMisfit]

They shouldnt be given a private cell to rot the rest of their lives away, they should be mixed in with the general population of the prison systems then let nature take its course.

[Ratlehed]

I am for the "death penalty". Mainly because my tax dollars pay for criminals to eat for free and have a free palce to stay with a roof over thier heads. Yeah, prison isnt pretty. But they still get to live for free, not pay taxes, not work etc...

If a pedophile has more than 2 victims on his/her record. Torch'em. If its 1 or 2 throw'em in the slammer for awhile.

[BadCoverVersion]

Originally Posted by Jig Saw 123

I voted "no", not because I'm against the death penalty, because I'm honestly for it, but because I don't think the crime of pedophiles is severe enough to warrant such a punishment.

If I supported the death penalty, I believe I would think it a fitting punishment for child abusers and serious sex offenders.

I think pedophillia is possibly the most abhorrant and cruellest crime imaginable. There is such vile intent behind the act...it is simply about power and gratification and you have to be a truly manipulative, calculating individual to invade families in such a way.

It ruins many, many lives forever.

[QUENTIN]

Originally Posted by Ratlehed

I am for the "death penalty". Mainly because my tax dollars pay for criminals to eat for free and have a free palce to stay with a roof over thier heads. Yeah, prison isnt pretty. But they still get to live for free, not pay taxes, not work etc...

If a pedophile has more than 2 victims on his/her record. Torch'em. If its 1 or 2 throw'em in the slammer for awhile.

The death penalty costs you considerably more tax dollars than housing a criminal for 90 years in maximum security prison without opportunity for parole:


http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/arti...did=108&scid=7

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...7235405AAqZ8zp

http://www.ndsn.org/june93/executing.html

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~werbe20c/classweb/costs.html

[Highspeed]

Put him in a cell with an inmate that could always use another bitch...

[Ratlehed]

Originally Posted by QUENTIN

The death penalty costs you much more tax dollars than housing a criminal for 90 years in maximum security prison without opportunity for parole:

Of course. Its the government. They should just use the old fashioned firing sqaud. 5 bullets is about 5 dollars.

[QUENTIN]

Originally Posted by Ratlehed

Of course. Its the government. They should just use the old fashioned firing sqaud. 5 bullets is about 5 dollars.

From the last link, a Mt. Holyoke study on death penalty costs:

"The only way to make the death penalty a "better buy" than imprisonment is to weaken due process and curtail appellate review, which are the defendants' (and society's) only protections against the grossest miscarriages of justice. The savings in dollars would be at the cost of justice: In nearly half of the death-penalty cases given review under federal habeas corpus, the conviction is overturned."

In order to be cheaper than life imprisonment, you have to be okay with the system killing a lot of innocent people.

[Shinigami]

Would schmoes want the death penalty in every case? This instance is sickening. Roman Polanski's crime is sickening as well, but to a lesser degree. People in possession of underage pornography is sickening as well, but to a lesser degree. Some thirty year old getting a consensual blowjob from a 16 year old is , but not sickening and not something that requires harsh penalty imo.

Ze' question is too general. If asked, Do you think pedophiles should be given the death penalty? My first response would be, No I don't think someone who is privately attracted to underage people should be killed by the government. If asked, Do you think people who commit pedophile crimes should be given the death penalty? My first response would be, What did he/she do?

This is a really sickening case, but I can only do so much generalizing with the death penalty.

edit
^I also didn't know that the death penalty would cost more than a long prison sentence. Good info

[SatansPuppet]

Originally Posted by Cronos

Anybody guilty of a violent/invasive crime (such as rape/mugging/murder/paedophilia/robbery) should be thrown off a cliff. Their "human rights" should go out the window as soon as they are found undeniably guilty.

Everyday I love you even more.........

It's my belief that if someone perpetrates a crime that sets out to make someone a victim, be it Rape, Murder, GBH, Burglary etc that actively goes out of the way to infringe on another's human rights then their rights should be brought into question and in the majority of cases VOIDED.

The PC parade has been protecting these people for far too long and although I do think harsher penalties need to be handed out here in the UK, the labour gov seems to like the softly softly rehabilitation approach.

TVs should NOT be allowed in jail, it should be basics, shitter, sink and bed... Gym's and TVs? Recreational products? NO?!?! Not on the tax payers dime who can't afford to go to the gym or own a pool table because we're too busy paying taxes to keep these muppets in jail.

The death penalty is wrong, wrong wrong but harsher sentencing is not!

Not enough room in prison? BUILD MORE!

[FireCaptain4]

I've never been a fan of pedophiles.

[Pentangeli]

Originally Posted by Shinigami

Would schmoes want the death penalty in every case? This instance is sickening. Roman Polanski's crime is sickening as well, but to a lesser degree. People in possession of underage pornography is sickening as well, but to a lesser degree. Some thirty year old getting a consensual blowjob from a 16 year old is , but not sickening and not something that requires harsh penalty imo.

Ze' question is too general. If asked, Do you think pedophiles should be given the death penalty? My first response would be, No I don't think someone who is privately attracted to underage people should be killed by the government. If asked, Do you think people who commit pedophile crimes should be given the death penalty? My first response would be, What did he/she do?

This is a really sickening case, but I can only do so much generalizing with the death penalty.

edit
^I also didn't know that the death penalty would cost more than a long prison sentence. Good info

Polanski's crime was a non-consenting act of hebephilia (attraction to very young pubescent youths, normally 11-14 year olds), and not paedophilia.

I wouldn't advocate for the death penalty for such a crime as Polanski's. For the reason that we're looking at a case where the victim is sexual. And even in a situation where both parties agree that rape took place, there is the possibility of the victim having seduced the accused. A thirteen year old should be more aware of the dangers in life, compared to a three month old or six year old. But it's still a serious crime. I believe a prison sentence would be justified, i'm not entirely sure how much time.

I think the thirty year old with a 16 yo scenario is odd, but I don't think it should have any penalty, if indeed it is consensual.

I'm only advocating for the death penalty for crimes against pre-pubescent children. Although after reading various views here, perhaps life in jail would be better.

[Shinigami]

Polanski's crime was a non-censenting act of hebephilia (attraction to very young pubescent youths, normally 11-14 year olds), and not paedophilia.

I'm not versed enough on the terminologies. I was under the impression that in the United States, which is less making my country the center of the world, more adding context... That someone of age having sex with anyone under the age limit of 18 is considered pedophelia by the courts.
Is this true or false?

[Smiert Spionam]

Originally Posted by Pentangeli

Polanski's crime was a non-censenting act of hebephilia (attraction to very young pubescent youths, normally 11-14 year olds), and not paedophilia.

Aren't you the same guy complaining about double standards in the Celeb forum?

[QUENTIN]

Originally Posted by Shinigami

I'm not versed enough on the terminologies. I was under the impression that in the United States, which is less making my country the center of the world, more adding context... That someone of age having sex with anyone under the age limit of 18 is considered pedophelia by the courts.
Is this true or false?

"Statutory rape" as a general term ("sexual assault of a minor", "carnal knowledge of a minor") is used to differentiate sex with a post-pubescent minor under the age of consent and sex with a pre-pubescent child which is generally identified as "child molestation" ("child sexual abuse") in the US. Both are "rape rape" felonies where consent is deemed impossible due to the victim's age, but the latter is a more serious crime and the former is more likely to take into account the relative ages of the two parties.

From my understanding, according to the California laws at the time, Polanski is guilty of "rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under fourteen, and furnishing a controlled substance to a minor", and would be considered a sex offender but not a pedophile/child molester since his victim was post-pubescent.

[Badbird]

Originally Posted by Pentangeli

Fair enough. I too am again the death penalty in most cases. But with sexual crimes, there's undeniable evidence. So you're not going to be in a position where you find out ten years down the line that an innocent person has been killed. But yeah, maybe rotting in jail would be a greater punishment anyway.

Try telling that to these people.

The death penalty is for barbarians. I'm against it for any crime.

[Heisenberg]

I voted yes, but only if they bring in the firing squads. Getting the lethal injection is the easy way out, let them rot in jail if that's the case.

[BakeTheMooCow]

Forget jailing them or putting them to death. The solution is right here:

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/fe5...rom-mrshow_fan

[Tagia_Romero]

I'll try not to let my passion get too far, but yes. There is no amount of rehab, counseling and conditioning that can remedy this. Once one always one, just like sex offenders in general. They took something valuable away from the victims and their families, so why not quid pro quo?

That being said, since the death penalty seems like the last resort, I say castration. Mind you, I would prefer it to be physical. They cause pain, they should receive it.

[BakeTheMooCow]

Originally Posted by Tagia_Romero

I'll try not to let my passion get too far, but yes. There is no amount of rehab, counseling and conditioning that can remedy this. Once one always one, just like sex offenders in general. They took something valuable away from the victims and their families, so why not quid pro quo?

Because we're civilized?

[Pentangeli]

Originally Posted by Smiert Spionam

Aren't you the same guy complaining about double standards in the Celeb forum?

I have no idea what you're on about. You'll have to elaborate.

[Tagia_Romero]

Originally Posted by BakeTheMooCow

Because we're civilized?

That's a subjective term, bud.

[Mr. Peanut]

I voted no, because 99% of the time or more I dont agree with the death penalty. In extreme cases, where the person has caused an immense amount of harm to society as a whole - I do advocate it. That is a very rare occasion though.

Everything I have to say on the matter has been said by the folks who already posted. To Quentin, those links are appreciated. I learned some new things and never would have guessed (on the topic) otherwise that prolonged imprisonment is actually cheaper than sending these bastards on their way.

Call me hypocritical after having said all that... but I wouldnt mind a real Dexter-type being among us...

[Pentangeli]

Originally Posted by Shinigami

I'm not versed enough on the terminologies. I was under the impression that in the United States, which is less making my country the center of the world, more adding context... That someone of age having sex with anyone under the age limit of 18 is considered pedophelia by the courts.
Is this true or false?

I'm not sure of the American terminology.

In Europe, paedophiles are those who have commited a crime against a child, or pre-pubescent. That is to say, Europe goes by the definition of the word.

In that penultimate sentence of your post, if you're correct that a 19 year old is considered a paedophile for having consensual sex with a 17 year old, then America needs to sort itself out immediately.

[Mr. Peanut]

Originally Posted by Pentangeli

I'm not sure of the American terminology.

In Europe, paedophiles are those who have commited a crime against a child, or pre-pubescent. That is to say, Europe goes by the definition of the word.

In that penultimate sentence of your post, if you're correct that a 19 year old is considered a paedophile for having consensual sex with a 17 year old, then America needs to sort itself out immediately.

Thats actually pretty much the case, depending on the state. As far as I know, here in UT - if a 19 year old has sex with a 16 year old or under, chances are theyre going away for a while. At 16 the parents are allowed to consent for the minor if they so choose to. The person that is intimate with the 16 year old must be no older than 5 years (18-21) though, as I understand it (and only if consented by the parents, otherwise it's still statutory).

[Pentangeli]

Originally Posted by Tagia_Romero

I'll try not to let my passion get too far, but yes. There is no amount of rehab, counseling and conditioning that can remedy this. Once one always one, just like sex offenders in general. They took something valuable away from the victims and their families, so why not quid pro quo?

That being said, since the death penalty seems like the last resort, I say castration. Mind you, I would prefer it to be physical. They cause pain, they should receive it.

Castration for male paedophiles, but what about female paedophiles. What would be the solution for them?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6872494.ece

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8022861.stm

[APzombie]

Life Sentence. I'm against Capital Punishment.

I hate the argument- "we are paying taxes to keep them alive"

no, we are paying taxes to keep them off the street.

[FireCaptain4]

Well, one major problem is that there aren't enough prisons to hold all of those that belong behind bars. That's why so many pedophiles (and others responsible for other criminalities) get out early for good behavior.

Pedophilia is, in my opinion, one of the sickest and most demented forms of evil on the planet and it disgusts me. I don't necessarily agree with the death penalty, but I hate that so many responsible for the crime are allowed to roam the streets/live in suburbia. If they were permanently locked up, that's one thing.

"More than 1/2 of all convicted sex offenders are sent back to prison within a year. Within 2 years, 77.9% are back."

Source

^Which is why I believe we should throw away the key after we send them behind bars. Sorry if that sounds extreme.

[Cosimo]

Originally Posted by Pentangeli

Castration for male paedophiles, but what about female paedophiles. What would be the solution for them?

female paedohiles?



nice!

minimum security, as in my house

nah. hard lockdown for them too, sicko's!

[FireCaptain4]

Wilfred Creighton, 47, pleaded guilty to three counts of rape, four counts of gross sexual imposition, and one count each of importuning and pandering obscenity involving minors.

He was sentenced to 12 years in prison in a Franklin County Common Pleas courtroom. He had faced a maximum of 32 years behind bars.

Creighton, of Union Avenue, was arrested in February 2007 for allegedly soliciting sex from an undercover deputy posing as a teen online.

That was when detectives said he confessed to molesting as many as 30 local boys since the early ’80s.

Detectives said that investigation led to the discovery of child pornography in his home, some of which was homemade.

He was charged with the rape and gross sexual imposition of three neighborhood juvenile victims in January 2008.

Source

A monster like this destroys the lives of 30 children and causes immeasurable damage and gets off with just 12 years? If this "person" ever gets out, they'll commit the crime again. 30+ victims -- there’s no sign that this individual has any intention of ever stopping.

[countchocula]

Killing people is bad, even if you kill bad people. Child molestors aren't evil; they're sick. Now cancer patients...THEY are evil.