Why death penalty for sex offenders is a bad idea.

[Hedberger]

Yeah, they are bound to be the odd mistakes but we still shouldn't ruin it for the majority

How big an impact would you say that the death penalty would have? How much would it prevent?

It wouldn't prevent anything. What it WOULD do is save valuable money for the government which is used to keep thoose people in jail and well looked after.
If it warns off a few people who might be considering it, then thats great but its not what i think its there for

It's actually been proven that it's cheaper with life in prison.

http://deathpenalty.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questionID=1000

 

[NeonZombie]

Yeah, they are bound to be the odd mistakes but we still shouldn't ruin it for the majority

How big an impact would you say that the death penalty would have? How much would it prevent?

It wouldn't prevent anything. What it WOULD do is save valuable money for the government which is used to keep thoose people in jail and well looked after.
If it warns off a few people who might be considering it, then thats great but its not what i think its there for

It's actually been proven that it's cheaper with life in prison.

http://deathpenalty.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questionID=1000

Well in that case no, That is the only reason i would have considered it to be honest. You've changed my mind then.

 

[SsilverR]

The punishment should fit the crime, death is permanent, and sorry folks, although there my be psychological residue sex offenses aren't in the same way. Especially considering having underage sex is considered a sex offense.

I'm of the belief that they should be sent to prison, where they can be violated by large, brutal men on a daily basis.

won't happen, rapists and child molestors are kept in separate parts of prison ... gangs with the WORST beef will gladly call truce to fuck up a child molester or a rapist

and rapist don't rape other rapists because of the rapist code, page 466, paragraph 1 ... kidding ... mostly they're too busy cowering from single neo nazi's or mexicano that manage to get cleaning duties there for the sole purpose of getting a swing at them to attempt to rape each other

 

[Hedberger]

This is more an argument for more in-depth investigation and efficient acquiring of evidence/testimony than it is an argument against the death penalty. I do think that death row for sex offenders is a little harsh in my opinion, but if he is indeed guilty, then the sentence should be handed out as it is.

This could actually be a potent tool for anyone that want's to intimidate someone or kill someone. All you need is the wrong people at the wrong place and these things happen. According to the article the community is a bit racist hence why he could be proven guilty on such weak proof. Apparently around 2% of the people that live in the area are black. Imagine if someone would stage rapes with black people as the suspects, then tell the other black people to get out or we'll frame you too. Or just imagine a messy break-up and what could be the consequences of that.

 

[Foolishman1776]

After all, a man who has a few too many pints at the local pub and takes home a well developed 15 year old fake ID owner hardly deserves to die.

actually he would get off by virtue of her being at a pub with a forged id because it's reasonable to assume that the bouncer at the door (if there is one) and the bartender both checked her id to make sure she was of age to be in the pub. so it's reasonable to assume that she is indeed of age and not under aged. i've heard of it happening and that's exactly how the guy's lawyer argued it. it still sucked for him but at least he got off (yes i know there's a pun in there)

You'd think given the circumstances, that the guy would get off, but just that situation happened to a friend of mine, and while he didn't go to prison for the rest of his life, he's still a registered sex offender.

 

[rekabdarb]

It's bad because even one innocent death is unacceptable.
And it costs more for all the hooplah over the death penalty, then it would to sentence them for life oddly enough.

To those saying the death penalty's okay...What would you think/say/do if someone shot your best friend to death based on rumors that he screws children?

yes... but after searching through to see if the rumors are true.
if not then no

 

[Del-Toro]

Yeah, they are bound to be the odd mistakes but we still shouldn't ruin it for the majority

How big an impact would you say that the death penalty would have? How much would it prevent?

It wouldn't prevent anything. What it WOULD do is save valuable money for the government which is used to keep thoose people in jail and well looked after.
If it warns off a few people who might be considering it, then thats great but its not what i think its there for

I agree with you 100% but I do feel I should add that executing 1st offenders right off the bat would prevent repeat offenses (parole being a factor in all that), so they could only rape once instead of two or three times. If the states is really going to socialize healthcare then that money will be really useful for treating people with diseases that are genetic and not their faults anyway as opposed to feeding people who made their choices and chose to harm others for pleasure.

At any rate the OP didn't put forward the arguement against the death penalty he intended, he put forward an arguement in favour of an objective police investigation service, something I agree with. His actual position, on the other hand, can go felate a shotgun barrel.

 

[Hedberger]

Yeah, they are bound to be the odd mistakes but we still shouldn't ruin it for the majority

How big an impact would you say that the death penalty would have? How much would it prevent?

It wouldn't prevent anything. What it WOULD do is save valuable money for the government which is used to keep thoose people in jail and well looked after.
If it warns off a few people who might be considering it, then thats great but its not what i think its there for

I agree with you 100% but I do feel I should add that executing 1st offenders right off the bat would prevent repeat offenses (parole being a factor in all that), so they could only rape once instead of two or three times. If the states is really going to socialize healthcare then that money will be really useful for treating people with diseases that are genetic and not their faults anyway as opposed to feeding people who made their choices and chose to harm others for pleasure.

At any rate the OP didn't put forward the arguement against the death penalty he intended, he put forward an arguement in favour of an objective police investigation service, something I agree with. His actual position, on the other hand, can go felate a shotgun barrel.

Then what is my argument?

 

[Hedberger]

Yeah, they are bound to be the odd mistakes but we still shouldn't ruin it for the majority

How big an impact would you say that the death penalty would have? How much would it prevent?

It wouldn't prevent anything. What it WOULD do is save valuable money for the government which is used to keep thoose people in jail and well looked after.
If it warns off a few people who might be considering it, then thats great but its not what i think its there for

I agree with you 100% but I do feel I should add that executing 1st offenders right off the bat would prevent repeat offenses (parole being a factor in all that), so they could only rape once instead of two or three times. If the states is really going to socialize healthcare then that money will be really useful for treating people with diseases that are genetic and not their faults anyway as opposed to feeding people who made their choices and chose to harm others for pleasure.

At any rate the OP didn't put forward the arguement against the death penalty he intended, he put forward an arguement in favour of an objective police investigation service, something I agree with. His actual position, on the other hand, can go felate a shotgun barrel.

Then what is my argument?

Come on, don't be shy. I'd love to hear what my arguement is and why it can "felate a shotgun barrel". If you're going to argue why not do it properly?

 

[cleverlymadeup]

After all, a man who has a few too many pints at the local pub and takes home a well developed 15 year old fake ID owner hardly deserves to die.

actually he would get off by virtue of her being at a pub with a forged id because it's reasonable to assume that the bouncer at the door (if there is one) and the bartender both checked her id to make sure she was of age to be in the pub. so it's reasonable to assume that she is indeed of age and not under aged. i've heard of it happening and that's exactly how the guy's lawyer argued it. it still sucked for him but at least he got off (yes i know there's a pun in there)

You'd think given the circumstances, that the guy would get off, but just that situation happened to a friend of mine, and while he didn't go to prison for the rest of his life, he's still a registered sex offender.

i'd say he needs a better lawyer or to fight it a bit more to get it removed

 

[Del-Toro]

Yeah, they are bound to be the odd mistakes but we still shouldn't ruin it for the majority

How big an impact would you say that the death penalty would have? How much would it prevent?

It wouldn't prevent anything. What it WOULD do is save valuable money for the government which is used to keep thoose people in jail and well looked after.
If it warns off a few people who might be considering it, then thats great but its not what i think its there for

I agree with you 100% but I do feel I should add that executing 1st offenders right off the bat would prevent repeat offenses (parole being a factor in all that), so they could only rape once instead of two or three times. If the states is really going to socialize healthcare then that money will be really useful for treating people with diseases that are genetic and not their faults anyway as opposed to feeding people who made their choices and chose to harm others for pleasure.

At any rate the OP didn't put forward the arguement against the death penalty he intended, he put forward an arguement in favour of an objective police investigation service, something I agree with. His actual position, on the other hand, can go felate a shotgun barrel.

Then what is my argument?

The arguement you are trying to make is clearly that too many people are wrongfully convicted to justify capital punishment but it really comes accross more as an arguement for an objective, evidence based approach to policing, rather than the "we think it was him, to hell with forensics" approach that you described.

The problem is that you are calling out shoddy police work to justify your arguement. If you had expanded upon that and said something like "how many innocents would die if your ideas were to be put into practice" and read off some statistics involving wrongful convictions in order to put into perspective just HOW many "innocents" would die then it would carry more water and it would become more solid grounds for debate. Posting the link was a good idea but how do we know it's not an isolated case, you have to account for that in your arguement. Just a little bit of constructive criticism for the future.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

No matter the crime, torture and death are not acceptable punishments in civilized nations. Just keep them away from society. If prisons worked better all our problems would be solved.

2 words. Jeffry Dhamer
On topic i don't think sex offenders deserve to be killed. As far as I'm concerned the only singular crime that warrants the death penalty is murder. Sex offenders should get locked in a room with an armed guard and the person they molested, who gets one baseball bat and get however long they where molested for to exact their revenge, only rule being they can't kill them.

 

[Kogarian]

What it WOULD do is save valuable money for the government which is used to keep thoose people in jail and well looked after.

Depending on whose legal system you're following, it may be more expensive to execute them then it would be to house them for life. Reaching the point of making the execution valid takes up more time, money, and manpower than the alternative.

Sorry, ninja'd.

 

[Hedberger]

Yeah, they are bound to be the odd mistakes but we still shouldn't ruin it for the majority

How big an impact would you say that the death penalty would have? How much would it prevent?

It wouldn't prevent anything. What it WOULD do is save valuable money for the government which is used to keep thoose people in jail and well looked after.
If it warns off a few people who might be considering it, then thats great but its not what i think its there for

I agree with you 100% but I do feel I should add that executing 1st offenders right off the bat would prevent repeat offenses (parole being a factor in all that), so they could only rape once instead of two or three times. If the states is really going to socialize healthcare then that money will be really useful for treating people with diseases that are genetic and not their faults anyway as opposed to feeding people who made their choices and chose to harm others for pleasure.

At any rate the OP didn't put forward the arguement against the death penalty he intended, he put forward an arguement in favour of an objective police investigation service, something I agree with. His actual position, on the other hand, can go felate a shotgun barrel.

Then what is my argument?

The arguement you are trying to make is clearly that too many people are wrongfully convicted to justify capital punishment but it really comes accross more as an arguement for an objective, evidence based approach to policing, rather than they "we think it was him, to hell with forensics" approach that you described.

The problem is that you are calling out shoddy police work to justify your arguement. If you had expanded upon that and said something like "how many innocents would die if your ideas were to be put into practice" and read off some statistics involving wrongful convictions in order to put into perspective just HOW many "innocents" would die then it would carry more water and it would become more solid grounds for debate. Posting the link was a good idea but how do we know it's not an isolated case, you have to account for that in your arguement. Just a little bit of constructive criticism for the future.

In my opinon, as you may already have guessed, the death penalty is wrong because there is no way we can make up for a slip-up. This thread however is not aimed at the death penalty as it is today. This thread is aimed at the people that want to extend the death penalty to also include sex-offenders. When it comes to that i believe that the statistics is definately in my favor. I would also like to add something i said earlier in the thread.

"This could actually be a potent tool for anyone that want's to intimidate someone or kill someone. All you need is the wrong people at the wrong place and these things happen. According to the article the community is a bit racist hence why he could be proven guilty on such weak proof. Apparently around 2% of the people that live in the area are black. Imagine if someone would stage rapes with black people as the suspects, then tell the other black people to get out or we'll frame you too. Or just imagine a messy break-up and what could be the consequences of that."

In the case of blackmail just the possibility of someone being wrongfully convicted is enough for it to be a potent tool in the right hands. We would likely never even see how widespread that problem would be. At least with murder the victim can't provide a tearful testimony.

 

[black lincon]

A quick point, juries don't decide sentencing, judges do, and there's no one punishment for any crime. if your convicted for one crime you could receive several different sentences.

now there's obviously some reason this guy was convicted, but I wasn't in the court to see the arguments, and from the facts I see this guy is obviously innocent and in the end he won't just get out but also get a 6 figure settlement for wrongful imprisonment.

I still support the death penalty for sexual abusers as an option, because in the US courts there's no such thing as a set punishment.

 

[Shynobee]

I've always thought that the death penalty is overrated. Life in prison is a much worse sentence, as long as it isn't one of those cushy white collar prisons.

Now I know life sentences cost more, but, they are much less controversial and I think its probably a better crime deterant.

 

[Lord Thodin]

I think it would do litte more than deture the ones who are not realling whole heartedly into it, and create a new challenge for the phsycos who will proceed without caution.

 

[Delicious]

A lot of girls will get drunk, have sex with a stranger, regret it and then call rape.

It's sad, but it happens. Rape is very gray area; the entirely innocent victim is a rare one.

 

[Stephen Lea Sheppard]

Actually, the reason why you don't want to give sex offenders the death penalty is because most sex offenders who are caught, tried, and convicted are so because of testimony from the victim, and the actual solve rate of murders is much lower than crime TV would have you believe. If sex offenses were punishable by death, then rape would carry the same punishment as rape plus murder.

You'd see a lot more sex offenders killing their victims afterward, since they'd have nothing to lose.

Also, given the full cost of the lengthy mandatory appeal process before an execution, it costs less to keep a prisoner in jail for life than to kill him. That cost could be reduced, but you'd have to shorten the appeal process. This would result in more innocent people being executed. Executing criminals really isn't cost-effective.

 

[Grand_Poohbah]

My brother was charged with rape, a crime he did not commit, because of this he's spent several years in jail leaving several young children fatherless. More evidence needs to be used in sexual cases as it is ridiculous for them to charge on word of mouth.