Should pedophiles be put to death?

[Faint]

I think they should. Here are four reasons:

1) Statistically, the majority of them become repeat offenders.
2) Morally, it is an unpardonable crime.
3) Fear of the death penalty might deter potential offenders.
4) Therapy and chemical castration are not working.

Here's an example of a prime candidate (remember this guy?)...

"COEUR D'ALENE, Idaho (AP) -- During six weeks on the run with an 8-year-old girl, convicted sex offender Joseph Edward Duncan III told his young victim that he had driven around her neighborhood, scouting for children, new court documents say.
He told Shasta Groene that he spotted her playing in a bathing suit with her 9-year-old brother, Dylan, and that he stalked their home for days, using night-vision goggles to learn the layout of the house.
[snip]
Shasta was insistent that Duncan was the only perpetrator, Maskell said. She said Duncan bragged to her about killing her family with a hammer and showed it to her.

Duncan was a known sex offender who had spent time in prison and was wanted in Minnesota for jumping bail on a molestation charge, but he didn't become a suspect in the Idaho slayings until six weeks later when he walked into a restaurant with Shasta a few miles from her home. A waitress recognized the little girl and called police.

[snip]
Officials have alleged that the children were repeatedly sexually molested [for six weeks] during their ordeal, and sheriff Rocky Watson has said he believes the motive for the killings was to acquire the children for sex.
[snip]
Duncan had spent more than a decade in prison for sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy at gunpoint when Duncan was a teenager in Tacoma, Washington.

After his release he moved to Fargo, North Dakota. Then, last summer, he was charged with molesting a 6-year-old boy on a school playground in Minnesota. He was released on $15,000 bail. Fargo police had been looking for him since he failed to check in with a probation agent in May."

(from CNN.com)

What do you think?

 

[Bangbang]

Only if I can watch or kill them myself.

 

[pdoel]

I don't believe in the death penalty, so I would say no.

As sick a crime as this is, keep in mind, this is a sickness. I understand that rehabilitation doesn't always work, but should we just put anyone to death who has some type of a sickness?

If someone suffers from a condition that could cause them to go into a rage, should we just kill them to keep that chance from ever occurring? Should we just put any alcoholic to death since there's a chance they could someday fall off the wagon, drink, drive and kill someone?

I prefer to reach out a hand to those in need, and do everything possible to get them the help they need.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Pedophiles need the death penalty much more than do murderers. Statisticially speaking, murderers in general are not much of a danger to society at large. Most people who kill another person in America, tend to kill someone they know personally, and with whom they have a very major problem. Once that person is dead, the murderer tends to have resolved the problem and can very often go on the rest of their lives in relative peace.

This is not in reference to career criminal types such as the recently vaunted Tookie Williams, nor does it take into account the Jeffrey Dahmer an John Wayne Gacy's of the world. The real hard fact is that most murders do not occur as a result of street crime or serial killers. Most murderers know their victims personally, and are very pissed off at them.

Pedophiles on the other hand, are, for whatever reason attracted to pre-pubescent children. You can no more make one of them desire a grown person of the opposite sex than you can force a normal healthy hetero man to become gay, or become attracted to kids. As repugnant as it is to you or me to think of having sex with a kid, it is just as repugnant to a pedophile to think of having sex with an adult instead of a kid.

There is nothing that can be done to fix them, and the harm they do to the kid, and everyone that kid will ever come into contact with cannot be expressed in words. There is nothing more vile and despicable than someone who preys on kids for their own sexual gratification. Put them to death, and do it in the town square if you ask me.

B.

 

[Bishka]

I'm don't think they should die, but I think they should be locked up for a good period of time. Say 30+ years.

 

[Faint]

Pedophiles need the death penalty much more than do murderers. . .

I got one of these messages, blast it:

You must spread some Karma around before giving it to MdmSzdWhtGuy again.

I prefer to reach out a hand to those in need, and do everything possible to get them the help they need.

And if that help hasn't been working? Then what?

I'm don't think they should die, but I think they should be locked up for a good period of time. Say 30+ years.

Is this for punishment or rehabilitation? The guy in the article I posted was in jail for ten years and then came out and commited even worse crimes than he was originally locked up for. Why do you think our taxes should be wasted on these people? If you want them out of society, why not just kill them?
​

 

[Green Gaia]

IMO, if anyone deserved to be put to death it would be pedophiles. But I do not support the death penalty for anyone, so the point is kinda moot.

 

[michel]

I don't believe in the death penalty, so I would say no.

As sick a crime as this is, keep in mind, this is a sickness. I understand that rehabilitation doesn't always work, but should we just put anyone to death who has some type of a sickness?

If someone suffers from a condition that could cause them to go into a rage, should we just kill them to keep that chance from ever occurring? Should we just put any alcoholic to death since there's a chance they could someday fall off the wagon, drink, drive and kill someone?

I prefer to reach out a hand to those in need, and do everything possible to get them the help they need.

I agree pdoel,

You and I seem to be the only two here, but what the heck! I'm used to being in a minority group

I agree that this is a sickness, and I feel that for society to punish a person for being sick is wrong; here is a case of a cured case:-
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2943
Brain tumour causes uncontrollable paedophilia

• 10:00 21 October 2002
• NewScientist.com news service
• Charles Choi

Related Articles

• <LI class=colspacer>Teen angst rooted in busy brain <LI class=highlight>16 October 2002 <LI class=colspacer>'Seek and destroy' stem cells kill brain tumours <LI class=highlight>15 October 2002 <LI class=colspacer>Angry outbursts linked to brain dysfunction <LI class=highlight>27 May 2002 <LI style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px">Search New Scientist
• Contact us

Web Links

• <LI class=colspacer>Neurology, University of Virginia <LI class=colspacer>Primer on brain tumours, Harvard <LI class=colspacer>Brain tumours and personality changes, Duke University <LI class=colspacer>Sexual issues, University of Missouri
• The Phineas Gage case

The sudden and uncontrollable paedophilia exhibited by a 40-year-old man was caused by an egg-sized brain tumour, his doctors have told a scientific conference. And once the tumour had been removed, his sex-obsession disappeared.

The cancer was located in the right lobe of the orbifrontal cortex, which is known to be tied to judgment, impulse control and social behaviour. But neurologists Russell Swerdlow and Jeffrey Burns, of the University of Virginia at Charlottesville, believe it is the first reported case linking damage to the region with paedophilia.

"We're dealing with the neurology of morality here," says Swerdlow. Since the area does not affect physical health, "it's one of those areas where you could have a lot of damage and a doctor would never suspect something's wrong," he says.

"He wasn't faking," says Burns. "But if someone argues that every paedophile needs a MRI, the difference in this case was that the patient had a normal history before he acquired the problem. Most paedophiles develop problems early on in life."

Massage parlours

The man, a schoolteacher, began secretly visiting child pornography web sites and soliciting prostitutes at massage parlours, activities he had not engaged in previously. Swerdlow says while the man felt that his new behaviour was unacceptable, "in his words, the 'pleasure principle' overrode his restraint".

When the man's wife found out he had made subtle sexual advances towards young children, he was legally evicted from his house, found guilty of child molestation and medicated for paedophilia.

The judge ruled that he had to pass a 12-step Sexaholics Anonymous rehabilitation program or face jail time. But the man was expelled after he failed to restrain himself from asking women at the program for sex.

The evening before his prison sentencing he took himself to a hospital complaining of headache and saying he was afraid he would rape his landlady.

Balance problems

After he was remanded to psychiatric care, he complained of balance problems and a MRI scan revealed an egg-sized brain tumour. Further tests found the man was also unable to write or copy drawings and was unconcerned when he urinated on himself.

But seven months after the tumour was removed, and after successfully completing the Sexaholics Anonymous program, the man returned home. In October 2001 he complained of headaches and secretly collected pornography once more. But after a MRI scan revealed tumour regrowth and it was removed, the behaviour again disappeared.

Swerdlow suggests that physicians who see personality changes coupled with an inability to write or copy pictures may now want to consider brain disease as a possible cause.

Behavioural neurologist David Rosenfield, of the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, says: "They have an interesting patient. I would wonder whether the tumour caused hormonal changes." Rosenfield thinks further research should investigate whether other problems with the orbifrontal cortex can be linked to paedophilia.

Burns and Swerdlow presented their findings in New York at the annual meeting of the American Neurological Association.

Of course that is one case; but it does leave the door open for possibilities........

 

[Sunstone]

I'm in favor of life in prison without parole for pedophiles, but I'm not in favor of the death penality for them. It seems that only life in prison (or death) will protect society from them generally speaking.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I think they should. Here are four reasons:

1) Statistically, the majority of them become repeat offenders.
2) Morally, it is an unpardonable crime.
3) Fear of the death penalty might deter potential offenders.
4) Therapy and chemical castration are not working.

Here's an example of a prime candidate (remember this guy?)...

"COEUR D'ALENE, Idaho (AP) -- During six weeks on the run with an 8-year-old girl, convicted sex offender Joseph Edward Duncan III told his young victim that he had driven around her neighborhood, scouting for children, new court documents say.
He told Shasta Groene that he spotted her playing in a bathing suit with her 9-year-old brother, Dylan, and that he stalked their home for days, using night-vision goggles to learn the layout of the house.
[snip]
Shasta was insistent that Duncan was the only perpetrator, Maskell said. She said Duncan bragged to her about killing her family with a hammer and showed it to her.

Duncan was a known sex offender who had spent time in prison and was wanted in Minnesota for jumping bail on a molestation charge, but he didn't become a suspect in the Idaho slayings until six weeks later when he walked into a restaurant with Shasta a few miles from her home. A waitress recognized the little girl and called police.

[snip]
Officials have alleged that the children were repeatedly sexually molested [for six weeks] during their ordeal, and sheriff Rocky Watson has said he believes the motive for the killings was to acquire the children for sex.
[snip]
Duncan had spent more than a decade in prison for sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy at gunpoint when Duncan was a teenager in Tacoma, Washington.

After his release he moved to Fargo, North Dakota. Then, last summer, he was charged with molesting a 6-year-old boy on a school playground in Minnesota. He was released on $15,000 bail. Fargo police had been looking for him since he failed to check in with a probation agent in May."

(from CNN.com)

What do you think?

We used to kill folks in Texas for that kind of thing (rape) until recently. I wish that they still had it on the books.

Now we take care of it the o'l fashion' way. People like this die in prison or on their way to trial here.Knockout

 

[jeffrey]

I'm not in favor of the death penalty for any reason. For the one's that it's a sickness, AND CAN BE PROVEN, such as what michel posted, treatment. For the ones that are not sick, death is to good, to easy. Give them life in a pod with hard-core inmates that have kids of their own.

 

[Mike182]

I think they should. Here are four reasons:

1) Statistically, the majority of them become repeat offenders.
2) Morally, it is an unpardonable crime.
3) Fear of the death penalty might deter potential offenders.
4) Therapy and chemical castration are not working.

What do you think?

i disagree with premises 2 and 3

first of all, i do not think there is anything that cannot be forgiven providing the person truely repents, and secondly we can see through the crime rates that capital punishment has no affect as a deterant

 

[Fluffy]

I don't think that pedophiles should be put to death because:
The majority of criminals involved in sex offenses with children are not pedophiles
The majority of pedophiles do not commit sex offenses

Regardless I only ever support the death penalty when it is physically impossible to prevent a crime in any other way.

 

[Valjean]

This hatred of pedophiles is a new thing. It is the outrage du jour, and I fear we are in danger of going completely overboard in our reaction to it.
Burglars and armed robbers also have high recidivism rates, and prey upon a larger portion of the population, but they receive relatively light sentences when caught, and, essentially, are completely forgiven and free to start their lives over again when released from jail.
Please don't get the impression that I'm trying to excuse these crimes. I've just observed an increasingly severe and intolerant reaction to pedophilia of late, to the extent that there is no opportunity afforded pedophiles to reform and re-integrate into society as productive citizens.

 

[jeffrey]

Michel, you may be right. I wonder how I would feel if it happened to one of mine? Sickness or not..... I hate to think how I would react.

 

[Flappycat]

These guys aren't just pedophiles. There's a difference between wanting sex with kids and actually being willing to use force and murder to get it. The difference between pedophilia and pure, plain insanity is as distinct as the difference between black and white. The relatively sane ones aren't great, but they're just gross. The others are clearly mentally unstable, often incapable of being treated, and should be treated as such.

I think that severity and circumstances of the crime should be taken into account. A woman once told me she seduced a man when she was twelve, so do you think that a kid who goes up to the stand cynically complaining of premature ejaculation is talking about someone who should necessarily be treated as a felon? If a thirteen year old rapes a middle-aged woman, should the woman be held guilty of a crime? It's hard to judge these things.

I'm not aiming to get pedophiles off easy, and I've been accused of this before simply because I think it's imbecility to refuse to distinguish between crimes that are superficially similar but are really as different as black and white. The law should learn to distinguish between truly dangerous and warped individuals and dirty, old men. The former should be held indefinitely, but the latter should be treated as what they are: irresponsible idiots who feel the law doesn't apply to them.

Edit :::: For the record, anyone who bothered any kids of mine wouldn't get anything worse than a swift kick to a sensitive area. Kill them? Unless the child was harmed severely or manipulated cruelly, absolutely not. Even then, I wouldn't expect the law to carry out my personal wish to deflate a person's skull.

 

[Jaymes]

Paedophiles should not be put to death, no. And neither should anyone else.

 

[standing_alone]

I am opposed to the death penalty, so therefore no. Perhaps I can speak with some experiece here. When I was twelve, I had a "wonderful" encounter with a pedifile (a family member, as well) and it has resulted in some issues with me, some of which I feel may possibly be permanent. Now, the animal, revenge instinct in me makes me want to bash this man's brains in, but I realize now that it is an illness and, although this man shouldn't just be walking the streets (as he still is), I don't think he should be put to death for it. However, if he comes near me, let me tell you, he will be sorry! Knockout

 

[Snowbear]

There is nothing that can be done to fix them, and the harm they do to the kid, and everyone that kid will ever come into contact with cannot be expressed in words. There is nothing more vile and despicable than someone who preys on kids for their own sexual gratification.

Unfortunately this is all too often the case. Death is too good for such people. Locking them up for 30 years only protects their future victims until they are released. If the only option is locking them up, it needs to be for their lifetime, unless of course the unrepentant and unrehabilitated molester's right to freedom is more important than some child's right to not be molested.....:149:

 

[standing_alone]

If the only option is locking them up, it needs to be for their lifetime

For some it may need to be a lifetime, but if they show signs of being rehabilitated, they should be able to get out (assuming this is a first offence). If they molest again, life without parole!