Man Charged over Toddler's Rape, Torture Murder.

[Auron225]

This is why we have the death penalty.

This is why we must always have the death penalty.

From someone that doesn't believe in the death penalty, I gotta say this monster is making it pretty damn hard for me to argue why we shouldnt have it...

 

[manic_depressive13]

*finds useful discussion in this thread* *eats own words*

This is interesting. It's the argument of how much or how little moral protection you assign to animals and humans of a cognitive level on par with animals. It's derived from the whole "how do you define a human being" argument. Usually this spawns from an abortion discussion but you went straight for the baby-killer. No one ever goes for the retard argument. Why does no one ever go for the retard argument?

You are correct in the sense that one cannot justify abortion or baby killing from a cognitive perspective as there are quite few animals smarter than babies and retards. Babies have the potential to become human beings. Baby killing results in the denial of a potential human being to become a human being. Denying people rights is a big thing in America. The whole rights thing is why abortion is legal here. A woman has a right to her body no matter how smart a fetus may or may not be.

Babies aren't fetuses, so they a right to life. Animals have no potential to become human beings.

Potential is a pretty arbitrary factor. We can argue hypotheticals and theoreticals all we like. The fact is that at the time of death, that child was less capable of comprehending, and by extention suffering, than your average dinner.

 

[MammothBlade]

This is why we have the death penalty.

This is why we must always have the death penalty.

No this is why there should always be a rehabilitating facility for the mentaly sick. Death penalty and other sentences that are designed to punish does nothing. You need sentences that are based on helping, not punishing to truly help society in every way.

You really want to rehabilitate scum like this? Why on Earth?

I don't want to co-exist with pedophilic child murderers, even after they are "rehabilitated". They are not the sorts society should waste time and effort helping. No-one like that deserves a second chance. All they deserve is punishment.

This bastard needs a bullet to the head.

 

[ace_of_something]

Does Australia have life sentences? If not, can they make one for this guy?

Yes, yes better mental health programs would prevent all this. But it HAPPENED now what do the justice system do?

This is why we have the death penalty.

This is why we must always have the death penalty.

No this is why there should always be a rehabilitating facility for the mentaly sick. Death penalty and other sentences that are designed to punish does nothing. You need sentences that are based on helping, not punishing to truly help society in every way.

You really want to rehabilitate scum like this? Why on Earth?

I don't want to co-exist with pedophilic child murderers, even after they are "rehabilitated". They are not the sorts society should waste time and effort helping. No-one like that deserves a second chance. All they deserve is punishment.

This bastard needs a bullet to the head.

Don't know about down under but here in the states someone that severely mentally ill and that dangerous if they actually get to go to a mental institution they tend to stay there for life.

 

[repeating integers]

The matter has been adjourned to Townsville Magistrates Court on April 12.

The matter has been adjourned to Townsville

Townsville

Should I have laughed at this? I'm not sure whether it makes me a terrible person or not.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Also I'm curious as to what the discussion value is? Are we actually expecting someone to popping in and saying "I think raping and murdering toddlers is a good thing 8D"?

Well of course it.... oh god I vomited in my mouth a little there.

everything aside, how can you find a toddler sexually attractive? I refuse to find anyone under 16 attractive, I just feel filthy otherwise.

That;s a common misconception. Murderrape, along with it's cousin regular rape, has far less to do about sex than it has to do about power and control.

 

[MammothBlade]

This is why we have the death penalty.

This is why we must always have the death penalty.

No this is why there should always be a rehabilitating facility for the mentaly sick. Death penalty and other sentences that are designed to punish does nothing. You need sentences that are based on helping, not punishing to truly help society in every way.

You really want to rehabilitate scum like this? Why on Earth?

I don't want to co-exist with pedophilic child murderers, even after they are "rehabilitated". They are not the sorts society should waste time and effort helping. No-one like that deserves a second chance.

This bastard needs a bullet to the head.

Yes, I do think he should be rehabilitated. Everyone should get a second-chance. And before you ask, yes, I would actually live next door to him if he was rehabilitated. I was neighbour with an ex-murderer once, and he was like any other person. Sure, I was a bit scared when I was told, but it quickly passed. BUT! On to the topic at hand...

Now, let us say that he does not get the death penalty, but is imprisoned for... 25 years... Yeah, let us say that... What is to stop him from doing it again? Nothing (well, except going back to jail), so nothing have been accomplished.

Now, you said he should die, yes, that is a possibility, it would stop him from doing it, no need to waste money on him, etc, just pros here right? No, the Death penalty comes with a huge price.

Now, People know for sure he did it, with proof. But... What if he did not do it? Just hypotheticly, you would be killing an innocent man. Or maybe the next one is innocent. Is it really worth it? I do not think so.

Plus it has been shown death penalty does not act as a detergent for crime.
Why? Well, to put it like a professional; People who do these kinds of thingsare fucking crazy. Something is clearly wrong in this mans head. And as such, he needs need help. Sure, he might be locked up for 20+ years, but when he gets back out, he is (hopefully) a changed man.

Rehabilitating people acts as a better detergent than death penalty because it shows that everyone can get help.

I don't believe everyone deserves a second chance. Depends on the severity of the crime. Child murder-rape is unforgivable in my view. It's only something a very twisted and evil individual would do. Rehabilitating them doesn't make them any less of a bad person, just more "civilised". It is a disgrace to their victims to offer them another chance at life.

As for the argument that there is still a chance of killing an innocent man - this can easily be prevented with strict evidence requirements. Yes, I would rather let a guilty person go free than condemn an innocent person to death for the crimes of another... but there are plenty of innocents who have died in prison. Letting them rot in prison is just as inhumane as executing them, it wrongly ruins their life all the same. The only difference is that the victim of miscarriage of justice might be released after a few decades, when the prime of their life is behind them. The problem is with the way people are convicted without sufficient evidence, not with capital punishment.

 

[Smeatza]

Yes, I do think he should be rehabilitated. Everyone should get a second-chance. And before you ask, yes, I would actually live next door to him if he was rehabilitated. I was neighbour with an ex-murderer once, and he was like any other person. Sure, I was a bit scared when I was told, but it quickly passed. BUT! On to the topic at hand...

Now, let us say that he does not get the death penalty, but is imprisoned for... 25 years... Yeah, let us say that... What is to stop him from doing it again? Nothing (well, except going back to jail), so nothing have been accomplished.

Now, you said he should die, yes, that is a possibility, it would stop him from doing it, no need to waste money on him, etc, just pros here right? No, the Death penalty comes with a huge price.

Now, People know for sure he did it, with proof. But... What if he did not do it? Just hypotheticly, you would be killing an innocent man. Or maybe the next one is innocent. Is it really worth it? I do not think so.

Plus it has been shown death penalty does not act as a detergent for crime.
Why? Well, to put it like a professional; People who do these kinds of thingsare fucking crazy. Something is clearly wrong in this mans head. And as such, he needs need help. Sure, he might be locked up for 20+ years, but when he gets back out, he is (hopefully) a changed man.

Rehabilitating people acts as a better detergent than death penalty because it shows that everyone can get help.

I think for most people there is a big difference between a murderer and a child rapist.
The vast majority of people can conceivably be worked into a state where they would be prepared to murder another. Either for monetary gain or out of anger.
However for someone to sexually abuse a child, something has to be inherently wrong with them. Either they are biologically defective, they've had an incredibly unhealthy upbringing or most likely a combination of both.
Is it really worth expending resources and time on attempting to rehabilitate such an individual?
The humanist side of me wonders if it's dangerous to leave this individual alive and risk their defects being passed on to future generations.

 

[Aprilgold]

Potential is a pretty arbitrary factor. We can argue hypotheticals and theoreticals all we like. The fact is that at the time of death, that child was less capable of comprehending, and by extention suffering, than your average dinner.

We as humans can imagine the pain, regardless of the pain that happened. Have you ever cringed while watching something like Hell raiser or similar? Most likely its not only because it was scary but you were going "Oh that must have hurt."

Potential is a major factor if your going to want to talk about whether a cow is more valuable then a baby is to humans. A cow can supply food, give the baby 40 years and he very well could have been a life saving doctor, firefighter or cop. Give the cow 40 years and he would be munching away at the same grass patch.

Yes it is still a side factor, but a humans life is not on par with a cows, like your making it out to be.
------------------------------------

Yes, enter "OMGohmygoshdon'twanttoliveonthisplanetanymore.jpg" comment.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

This is why we have the death penalty.

This is why we must always have the death penalty.

No this is why there should always be a rehabilitating facility for the mentaly sick. Death penalty and other sentences that are designed to punish does nothing. You need sentences that are based on helping, not punishing to truly help society in every way.

You really want to rehabilitate scum like this? Why on Earth?

I don't want to co-exist with pedophilic child murderers, even after they are "rehabilitated". They are not the sorts society should waste time and effort helping. No-one like that deserves a second chance.

This bastard needs a bullet to the head.

Yes, I do think he should be rehabilitated. Everyone should get a second-chance. And before you ask, yes, I would actually live next door to him if he was rehabilitated. I was neighbour with an ex-murderer once, and he was like any other person. Sure, I was a bit scared when I was told, but it quickly passed. BUT! On to the topic at hand...

Now, let us say that he does not get the death penalty, but is imprisoned for... 25 years... Yeah, let us say that... What is to stop him from doing it again? Nothing (well, except going back to jail), so nothing have been accomplished.

Now, you said he should die, yes, that is a possibility, it would stop him from doing it, no need to waste money on him, etc, just pros here right? No, the Death penalty comes with a huge price.

Now, People know for sure he did it, with proof. But... What if he did not do it? Just hypotheticly, you would be killing an innocent man. Or maybe the next one is innocent. Is it really worth it? I do not think so.

Plus it has been shown death penalty does not act as a detergent for crime.
Why? Well, to put it like a professional; People who do these kinds of thingsare fucking crazy. Something is clearly wrong in this mans head. And as such, he needs need help. Sure, he might be locked up for 20+ years, but when he gets back out, he is (hopefully) a changed man.

Rehabilitating people acts as a better detergent than death penalty because it shows that everyone can get help.

I support the death penalty under a few VERY strict conditions:

1. Evidence 100% points to the fact it would be impossible for the individual NOT to have commited the crime. All circumstances make ZERO sense and no alabis can account for the weight and accuracy of evidence proving beyond any doubt the person is the perp. If any doubt exists a life in prison is given.

2. The crime has NO motive, no matter how selfish, other than to bring serious pain and misery to another human being personal enjoyment. EI hitmen are payed, people in anger can murder, even theft. These motives indicate rational, if not sometimes fucked up, thought and as such these people can be helped and given a second chance. If the motive is a purely sadistic and inhuman display of brutality and torture no excuse can be given. No rational or even emotional mind can come to any conclusion in which this is a sensable course of action.

These people should be killed. Not for vengeance. You dont put down a dog thats rabid for "revenge". You COULD lock it away forever but why would you? Its fundamentally broken and its entire existance is spent in loathing and wishing to do violence unto other people for no real reason. Its broken. Its not a selfish act to destroy it, its a sad half existance that benefits no one and makes the world a worse place for its existance.

We kill them because they are a cancer on society. Criminals are an infection, it can be treated and controlled. These sociopaths are a cancer. It can only be destroyed. When another persons reason to be is just to hurt others in the cruellest ways imaginable why let them live?

I remember talking to you before and you said you had no empathy for anyone ever. I think? If this is true why do you care about this person at all? You surely wouldnt care if anyone was killed out of hand for any reason? I believe the example used was theft and you thought it was alright? Do you even view these actions as "wrong"? Sorry if this wasnt you, my memory is poor :S

 

[Woodsey]

This is why we have the death penalty.

This is why we must always have the death penalty.

It was in Australia, and this is not a reason why anywhere should have the death penalty anyway.

Casey Anthony killed her kid

She was found innocent.

OT: If he's proven guilty, then what a ****.

 

[manic_depressive13]

We as humans can imagine the pain, regardless of the pain that happened. Have you ever cringed while watching something like Hell raiser or similar? Most likely its not only because it was scary but you were going "Oh that must have hurt."

Potential is a major factor if your going to want to talk about whether a cow is more valuable then a baby is to humans. A cow can supply food, give the baby 40 years and he very well could have been a life saving doctor, firefighter or cop. Give the cow 40 years and he would be munching away at the same grass patch.

Yes it is still a side factor, but a humans life is not on par with a cows, like your making it out to be.
------------------------------------

Yes, enter "OMGohmygoshdon'twanttoliveonthisplanetanymore.jpg" comment.

One cow isn't going to sustain a person for 40 years. Someone who eats cows would end up eating many cows, although they wouldn't need to eat any at all. I doubt the cow cares if a baby grows up to be a doctor. That just means more people who probably eat cows. You're using an anthropocentric justification to validate your anthropocentric view.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

This is why we have the death penalty.

This is why we must always have the death penalty.

I'm inclined to agree there.
Some criminals don't deserve a second chance, and they don't deserve to exist.

EDIT: and in case someone says "what if he's innocent", I'm just saying that the person who DID THIS shouldn't be allowed to live.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

Casey Anthony killed her kid

She was found innocent.

Lots of guilty people are found innocent.

 

[Woodsey]

Yes, I do think he should be rehabilitated. Everyone should get a second-chance. And before you ask, yes, I would actually live next door to him if he was rehabilitated. I was neighbour with an ex-murderer once, and he was like any other person. Sure, I was a bit scared when I was told, but it quickly passed. BUT! On to the topic at hand...

Now, let us say that he does not get the death penalty, but is imprisoned for... 25 years... Yeah, let us say that... What is to stop him from doing it again? Nothing (well, except going back to jail), so nothing have been accomplished.

Now, you said he should die, yes, that is a possibility, it would stop him from doing it, no need to waste money on him, etc, just pros here right? No, the Death penalty comes with a huge price.

Now, People know for sure he did it, with proof. But... What if he did not do it? Just hypotheticly, you would be killing an innocent man. Or maybe the next one is innocent. Is it really worth it? I do not think so.

Plus it has been shown death penalty does not act as a detergent for crime.
Why? Well, to put it like a professional; People who do these kinds of thingsare fucking crazy. Something is clearly wrong in this mans head. And as such, he needs need help. Sure, he might be locked up for 20+ years, but when he gets back out, he is (hopefully) a changed man.

Rehabilitating people acts as a better detergent than death penalty because it shows that everyone can get help.

I think for most people there is a big difference between a murderer and a child rapist.
The vast majority of people can conceivably be worked into a state where they would be prepared to murder another. Either for monetary gain or out of anger.
However for someone to sexually abuse a child, something has to be inherently wrong with them. Either they are biologically defective, they've had an incredibly unhealthy upbringing or most likely a combination of both.
Is it really worth expending resources and time on attempting to rehabilitate such an individual?
The humanist side of me wonders if it's dangerous to leave this individual alive and risk their defects being passed on to future generations.

I wouldn't exactly describe the side of you that would consider putting down a potential victim of abuse and mental disorders as your 'humanist side', even if it is in an effort to protect their offspring, 'just in case'.

"Is it really worth expending resources and time on attempting to rehabilitate such an individual?"

If someone has suffered all of their life and they have some dangerous mental health issues, then they should be allowed the opportunity to rid themselves of it.

'For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean, and wrong.'

 

[Aprilgold]

One cow isn't going to sustain a person for 40 years. Someone who eats cows would end up eating many cows, although they wouldn't need to eat any at all. I doubt the cow cares if a baby grows up to be a doctor. That just means more people who probably eat cows. You're using an anthropocentric justification to validate your anthropocentric view.

That is a good one, a really good one. Yes, maybe I am being anthropocentric with putting a human over the life of a cow, but that doesn't mean that I do not love animals more then humans. I do love my dog more then I love many people. If I had to choose between saving a random stranger or saving my dog, then I will save the dog since that stranger could have very well been a serial killer.

I am open to killing a cow and then eating it since that cow could have very easily been a wolves meal, and the wolf wouldn't have been as kind to take it out in one hit. Humans are very important to other humans, were anthropocentric from birth. I bet that a wolf cares more about other wolves then a human, so it really is just natural to be more caring towards the same species.

 

[Woodsey]

Casey Anthony killed her kid

She was found innocent.

Lots of guilty people are found innocent.

I dare say the jury and judge on the day were far more aware of the inner workings of the case than you or I. You could make the case if she was acquitted based on a technicality, or if there was evidence of corruption, but as far as I'm aware, she had the trial, the jury found her innocent, she went free. So she's innocent.

We don't have the judicial process so that people's innocence can be determined by public consensus.

 

[manic_depressive13]

One cow isn't going to sustain a person for 40 years. Someone who eats cows would end up eating many cows, although they wouldn't need to eat any at all. I doubt the cow cares if a baby grows up to be a doctor. That just means more people who probably eat cows. You're using an anthropocentric justification to validate your anthropocentric view.

That is a good one, a really good one. Yes, maybe I am being anthropocentric with putting a human over the life of a cow, but that doesn't mean that I do not love animals more then humans. I do love my dog more then I love many people. If I had to choose between saving a random stranger or saving my dog, then I will save the dog since that stranger could have very well been a serial killer.

I am open to killing a cow and then eating it since that cow could have very easily been a wolves meal, and the wolf wouldn't have been as kind to take it out in one hit. Humans are very important to other humans, were anthropocentric from birth. I bet that a wolf cares more about other wolves then a human, so it really is just natural to be more caring towards the same species.

What if you had to choose between a random dog and a random stranger?