Supreme Court rules Child rapists can't be executed

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

battlefront23

Left-wing...that's why Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Ronald Reagan, John Paul Stevens was nominated by Gerald Ford, and David Souter was nominated by George Bush sr.

Republican Presidents certainly love nominating left-wing judges to the U.S. Supreme Court... :|

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are the only two judges on the court that are Democrat nominated, both by Bill Clinton.

Do you guys even think before you post?

[QUOTE="Boba_Fett_3710"]Why can't we have judges like in Judge Dredd? That would make things flow so much smoother.megagene

That's one of my all time favorite crappy movies. You know, the kind of movies that are so bad they're good.

[QUOTE="megagene"]

[QUOTE="Boba_Fett_3710"]Why can't we have judges like in Judge Dredd? That would make things flow so much smoother.Jandurin

That's one of my all time favorite crappy movies. You know, the kind of movies that are so bad they're good.

It's on Comcast On Demand so I've seen it like 4 times in the last 2 weeks :P

The comic was better.

[QUOTE="battlefront23"]

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

swamprat_basic

Left-wing...that's why Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Ronald Reagan, John Paul Stevens was nominated by Gerald Ford, and David Souter was nominated by George Bush sr.

Republican Presidents certainly love nominating left-wing judges to the U.S. Supreme Court... :|

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are the only two judges on the court that are Democrat nominated, both by Bill Clinton.

Do you guys even think before you post?

Didn't Clinton supposedly fire and appointed his own Supreme Court Judge? Or was that Attorney Generals?

[QUOTE="battlefront23"]

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

swamprat_basic

Left-wing...that's why Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Ronald Reagan, John Paul Stevens was nominated by Gerald Ford, and David Souter was nominated by George Bush sr.

Republican Presidents certainly love nominating left-wing judges to the U.S. Supreme Court... :|

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are the only two judges on the court that are Democrat nominated, both by Bill Clinton.

Do you guys even think before you post?

Murderers...rapists...paedophiles...I think they should all be killed.luke1889

The difference between those three is the third one listed can't actually help it unless you believe you can conciously choose your sexuality. The first two most likely had control over their actions.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Murderers...rapists...paedophiles...I think they should all be killed.proud722

The difference between those three is the third one listed can't actually help it unless you believe you can conciously choose your sexuality. The first two most likely had control over their actions.

It's not a matter of sexuality, it's a matter of age.

[QUOTE="swamprat_basic"][QUOTE="battlefront23"]

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

Truth_Seekr

Left-wing...that's why Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Ronald Reagan, John Paul Stevens was nominated by Gerald Ford, and David Souter was nominated by George Bush sr.

Republican Presidents certainly love nominating left-wing judges to the U.S. Supreme Court... :|

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are the only two judges on the court that are Democrat nominated, both by Bill Clinton.

Do you guys even think before you post?

Didn't Clinton supposedly fire and appointed his own Supreme Court Judge? Or was that Attorney Generals?

A U.S. Supreme Court Judge must be Impeached by both the Senate and the House in order to be removed from office. Otherwise they are only replaced when they pass-away or retire.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Murderers...rapists...paedophiles...I think they should all be killed.proud722

The difference between those three is the third one listed can't actually help it unless you believe you can conciously choose your sexuality. The first two most likely had control over their actions.

[QUOTE="proud722"]

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Murderers...rapists...paedophiles...I think they should all be killed.Boba_Fett_3710

The difference between those three is the third one listed can't actually help it unless you believe you can conciously choose your sexuality. The first two most likely had control over their actions.

It's not a matter of sexuality, it's a matter of age.

Wait what? I'm not saying I agree with them having sexual relations with children but I'm just saying that there are those that don't attempt to do anything like that but still can't help the fact they're attracted to children.

Wait what? I'm not saying I agree with them having sexual relations with children but I'm just saying that there are those that don't attempt to do anything like that but still can't help the fact they're attracted to children.

proud722

Whether or not they can help it, it's still the law. Some people can't help but murder, that doesn't make it acceptable.

I must agree with the ruling, but not his reasoning.

Death is too easy for some of these people.

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

battlefront23

So I guess upholding Civil Rights is left-wing idiocy?

It's stupid to think the Supreme Court is part of this bi-partisan bull****. They don't seek change like libeals, and they don't seek to keep the status quo like conservatives. They seek to uphold the Constitution - and they've done a damn fine job the past 60 or so years.

[QUOTE="proud722"]

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Murderers...rapists...paedophiles...I think they should all be killed.yoshi-lnex

The difference between those three is the third one listed can't actually help it unless you believe you can conciously choose your sexuality. The first two most likely had control over their actions.

With all the stigma I don't think its that easy, coming out and saying to someone your a pedophile means you have to admit to not only someone else but your self which I doubt many of them do to quickly and I'm not sure there's really that much help to be offered. It seems to me a rather under reasearched area but I admit I can't be sure of that.

[QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"][QUOTE="swamprat_basic"][QUOTE="battlefront23"]

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

swamprat_basic

Left-wing...that's why Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Ronald Reagan, John Paul Stevens was nominated by Gerald Ford, and David Souter was nominated by George Bush sr.

Republican Presidents certainly love nominating left-wing judges to the U.S. Supreme Court... :|

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are the only two judges on the court that are Democrat nominated, both by Bill Clinton.

Do you guys even think before you post?

Didn't Clinton supposedly fire and appointed his own Supreme Court Judge? Or was that Attorney Generals?

A U.S. Supreme Court Judge must be Impeached by both the Senate and the House in order to be removed from office. Otherwise they are only replaced when they pass-away or retire.

Well maybe not judges, but US Attorneys

[QUOTE="proud722"]

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Murderers...rapists...paedophiles...I think they should all be killed.Boba_Fett_3710

The difference between those three is the third one listed can't actually help it unless you believe you can conciously choose your sexuality. The first two most likely had control over their actions.

It's not a matter of sexuality, it's a matter of age.

It's still not something they conciously chose to be - but it is their choice whether to act on them or not. Children can't understand what they are doing, so if they try anything, it's automatically illegal.

[QUOTE="proud722"]

Wait what? I'm not saying I agree with them having sexual relations with children but I'm just saying that there are those that don't attempt to do anything like that but still can't help the fact they're attracted to children.

Boba_Fett_3710

Whether or not they can help it, it's still the law. Some people can't help but murder, that doesn't make it acceptable.

*sigh* A pedophile in this context is not someone who sexually abuses children but is someone that is attracted to children. Its not actually against the law to be attracted to children and they can't help it at all, in fact some of them wish they weren't like that and want to change but there's just not much help for them. I believe there was a case like that of a priest if I can find a link.

[QUOTE="swamprat_basic"][QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"][QUOTE="swamprat_basic"][QUOTE="battlefront23"]

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

Truth_Seekr

Left-wing...that's why Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Ronald Reagan, John Paul Stevens was nominated by Gerald Ford, and David Souter was nominated by George Bush sr.

Republican Presidents certainly love nominating left-wing judges to the U.S. Supreme Court... :|

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are the only two judges on the court that are Democrat nominated, both by Bill Clinton.

Do you guys even think before you post?

Didn't Clinton supposedly fire and appointed his own Supreme Court Judge? Or was that Attorney Generals?

A U.S. Supreme Court Judge must be Impeached by both the Senate and the House in order to be removed from office. Otherwise they are only replaced when they pass-away or retire.

Well maybe not judges, but US Attorneys

The US Attorney General is a member of the President's Staff. It isn't even a comparable discussion. Every President has the power to appoint the US Attorney General. It is not a permanent position.

The Supreme Court of the United States (or Judicial Branch) is completely distinct from the President's Office (Executive Branch.)

I am actually against the death penalty, but not for any kind of moralistic view. It costs more to execute someone than to lock them up for life, and is actually a much better fail-safe for our sometimes flawed legal system.

It also would lift the extradition issues for felons who flee.

[QUOTE="battlefront23"][QUOTE="john_doe2"]

The Supreme Court ruled that child rapists cannot be executed, concluding capital punishment is reserved for murderers.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/25/scotus.child.rape/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Quotes from the story:

Anthony Kennedy -- supported by Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer -- wrote that the prohibition against cruel punishment derives its meaning from the "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society."

You gotta be kidding me? Since when does prohibition of capital punishment mark the progress of a maturing society? Especially something that is as detestable as this ruling?

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissent, saying, "The harm that is caused to the victims and to society at large by the worst child rapist is grave." He was supported by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

In his dissent, Alito wrote that the majority ruled against the death penalty "no matter how young the child, no matter how many times the child is raped, no matter how many children the perpetrator rapes, no matter how sadistic the crime, no matter how much physical or psychological trauma is inflicted and no matter how heinous the perpetrator's criminal record may be."

Thumbs up to Justice Samuel Alito.

Death penalty opponents contend, among other things, that it could give attackers a reason to murder their victims. In Wednesday's ruling, Anthony Kennedy agreed, writing, "A state that punishes child rape by death may remove a strong incentive for the rapist not to kill the victim."

But executing them for raping a child would give them strong incentive not to commit the crime in the first place, don't you think? This ruling benefits nobody but child rapists.

yoshi-lnex

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

Well, obviously being Republican doesn't mean that your conservative, which this ruling demonstrates.

Well, obviously being Republican doesn't mean that your conservative, which this ruling demonstrates.

john_doe2

Or that they are finally learning that corporal punishment does not do what it is supposed to do.

[QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"][QUOTE="swamprat_basic"][QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"][QUOTE="swamprat_basic"][QUOTE="battlefront23"]

These Supreme Court judges are left-wing idiots.

swamprat_basic

Left-wing...that's why Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Ronald Reagan, John Paul Stevens was nominated by Gerald Ford, and David Souter was nominated by George Bush sr.

Republican Presidents certainly love nominating left-wing judges to the U.S. Supreme Court... :|

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are the only two judges on the court that are Democrat nominated, both by Bill Clinton.

Do you guys even think before you post?

Didn't Clinton supposedly fire and appointed his own Supreme Court Judge? Or was that Attorney Generals?

A U.S. Supreme Court Judge must be Impeached by both the Senate and the House in order to be removed from office. Otherwise they are only replaced when they pass-away or retire.

Well maybe not judges, but US Attorneys

The US Attorney General is a member of the President's Staff. It isn't even a comparable discussion. Every President has the power to appoint the US Attorney General. It is not a permanent position.

The Supreme Court of the United States (or Judicial Branch) is completely distinct from the President's Office (Executive Branch.)

Sure it is a comparable discussion. All I'm saying is the allegations I've heard and read about the Clintons includes that once in office, he became the first president to fire every US Attorney and summarily got rid of the FBI Director and supposedly appointed his own people, which is how they were able to get away with all the various murders they are allegedly tied to. I should lookup again what they were allegedly involved in

Either way, it's like, you're not even trying to understand what I was getting at.

Sure it is a comparable discussion. All I'm saying is the allegations I've heard and read about the Clintons includes that once in office, he became the first president to fire every US Attorney and summarily got rid of the FBI Director and supposedly appointed his own people, which is how they were able to get away with all the various murders they are allegedly tied to. I should lookup again what they were allegedly involved in

Either way, it's like, you're not even trying to understand what I was getting at.

Truth_Seekr

That sounds a heck of alot like a conspiracy theory. Murders that they were tied to?

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Murderers...rapists...paedophiles...I think they should all be killed.-Austin-

Quoted for Truth

yeah. they are a terrible part of society

[QUOTE="proud722"]

Wait what? I'm not saying I agree with them having sexual relations with children but I'm just saying that there are those that don't attempt to do anything like that but still can't help the fact they're attracted to children.

Boba_Fett_3710

Whether or not they can help it, it's still the law. Some people can't help but murder, that doesn't make it acceptable.

It's not illegal to be sexually attracted to children.

[QUOTE="Boba_Fett_3710"][QUOTE="proud722"]

Wait what? I'm not saying I agree with them having sexual relations with children but I'm just saying that there are those that don't attempt to do anything like that but still can't help the fact they're attracted to children.

MrGeezer

Whether or not they can help it, it's still the law. Some people can't help but murder, that doesn't make it acceptable.

It's not illegal to be sexually attracted to children.

Its not illegal to want to kill or maim others either. But when you act on those, its a whole different issue.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"][QUOTE="Boba_Fett_3710"][QUOTE="proud722"]

Wait what? I'm not saying I agree with them having sexual relations with children but I'm just saying that there are those that don't attempt to do anything like that but still can't help the fact they're attracted to children.

SpruceCaboose

Whether or not they can help it, it's still the law. Some people can't help but murder, that doesn't make it acceptable.

It's not illegal to be sexually attracted to children.

Its not illegal to want to kill or maim others either. But when you act on those, its a whole different issue.

The fact still remains that murder and rape are still illegal, while pedophilia is NOT illegal.

[QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"]

Sure it is a comparable discussion. All I'm saying is the allegations I've heard and read about the Clintons includes that once in office, he became the first president to fire every US Attorney and summarily got rid of the FBI Director and supposedly appointed his own people, which is how they were able to get away with all the various murders they are allegedly tied to. I should lookup again what they were allegedly involved in

Either way, it's like, you're not even trying to understand what I was getting at.

SpruceCaboose

That sounds a heck of alot like a conspiracy theory. Murders that they were tied to?

Well, the alleged conspiracies was or is that some of the more famous dead friends of Clintons (Vince Foster - Mary Mahoney - Ron Brown - James McDougal - Ed Wiley etc.), were involved in one way or another in scams such as the WhiteWater scandal and alleged sexual advances by Bill Clinton on many White House staffers and lets not forget how they screwed over SpiderMan's creator Stan Lee. I guess the Clintons have a lot of "friends" who have mysteriously ended up missing or dead and have a lot of questions to answer.

[QUOTE="-Austin-"]

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Murderers...rapists...paedophiles...I think they should all be killed.freshgman

Quoted for Truth

yeah. they are a terrible part of society

Wait a minute. What about a paedophile who confines himself to possessing kiddie porn and who never rapes or molests a child?

Are you suggesting that he should be killed merely for possessing pictures that you find objectionable?

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"]

Sure it is a comparable discussion. All I'm saying is the allegations I've heard and read about the Clintons includes that once in office, he became the first president to fire every US Attorney and summarily got rid of the FBI Director and supposedly appointed his own people, which is how they were able to get away with all the various murders they are allegedly tied to. I should lookup again what they were allegedly involved in

Either way, it's like, you're not even trying to understand what I was getting at.

Truth_Seekr

That sounds a heck of alot like a conspiracy theory. Murders that they were tied to?

Well, the alleged conspiracies was or is that some of the more famous dead friends of Clintons (Vince Foster - Mary Mahoney - Ron Brown - James McDougal - Ed Wiley etc.), were involved in one way or another in scams such as the WhiteWater scandal and alleged sexual advances by Bill Clinton on many White House staffers and lets not forget how they screwed over SpiderMan's creator Stan Lee. I guess the Clintons have a lot of "friends" who have mysteriously ended up missing or dead and have a lot of questions to answer.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

Bull junk.

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"][QUOTE="Boba_Fett_3710"][QUOTE="proud722"]

Wait what? I'm not saying I agree with them having sexual relations with children but I'm just saying that there are those that don't attempt to do anything like that but still can't help the fact they're attracted to children.

MrGeezer

Whether or not they can help it, it's still the law. Some people can't help but murder, that doesn't make it acceptable.

It's not illegal to be sexually attracted to children.

Its not illegal to want to kill or maim others either. But when you act on those, its a whole different issue.

The fact still remains that murder and rape are still illegal, while pedophilia is NOT illegal.

Where is pedophilia not illegal?

[QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"]

Sure it is a comparable discussion. All I'm saying is the allegations I've heard and read about the Clintons includes that once in office, he became the first president to fire every US Attorney and summarily got rid of the FBI Director and supposedly appointed his own people, which is how they were able to get away with all the various murders they are allegedly tied to. I should lookup again what they were allegedly involved in

Either way, it's like, you're not even trying to understand what I was getting at.

SpruceCaboose

That sounds a heck of alot like a conspiracy theory. Murders that they were tied to?

Well, the alleged conspiracies was or is that some of the more famous dead friends of Clintons (Vince Foster - Mary Mahoney - Ron Brown - James McDougal - Ed Wiley etc.), were involved in one way or another in scams such as the WhiteWater scandal and alleged sexual advances by Bill Clinton on many White House staffers and lets not forget how they screwed over SpiderMan's creator Stan Lee. I guess the Clintons have a lot of "friends" who have mysteriously ended up missing or dead and have a lot of questions to answer.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

Bull junk.

What about snopes? There are links that support the allegations as well...

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"]

Sure it is a comparable discussion. All I'm saying is the allegations I've heard and read about the Clintons includes that once in office, he became the first president to fire every US Attorney and summarily got rid of the FBI Director and supposedly appointed his own people, which is how they were able to get away with all the various murders they are allegedly tied to. I should lookup again what they were allegedly involved in

Either way, it's like, you're not even trying to understand what I was getting at.

Truth_Seekr

That sounds a heck of alot like a conspiracy theory. Murders that they were tied to?

Well, the alleged conspiracies was or is that some of the more famous dead friends of Clintons (Vince Foster - Mary Mahoney - Ron Brown - James McDougal - Ed Wiley etc.), were involved in one way or another in scams such as the WhiteWater scandal and alleged sexual advances by Bill Clinton on many White House staffers and lets not forget how they screwed over SpiderMan's creator Stan Lee. I guess the Clintons have a lot of "friends" who have mysteriously ended up missing or dead and have a lot of questions to answer.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

Bull junk.

What about snopes? There are links that support the allegations as well...

It goes through the "list" and does a good job dispelling the fantasy veil over the whole issue.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"][QUOTE="Boba_Fett_3710"][QUOTE="proud722"]

Wait what? I'm not saying I agree with them having sexual relations with children but I'm just saying that there are those that don't attempt to do anything like that but still can't help the fact they're attracted to children.

SpruceCaboose

Whether or not they can help it, it's still the law. Some people can't help but murder, that doesn't make it acceptable.

It's not illegal to be sexually attracted to children.

Its not illegal to want to kill or maim others either. But when you act on those, its a whole different issue.

The fact still remains that murder and rape are still illegal, while pedophilia is NOT illegal.

Where is pedophilia not illegal?

Umm...everywhere.

Whenever pedophiles go to jail, they go to jail for things like rape, sexual assault against a minor, or tax evasion. No one is ever convicted of "pedophilia", because pedophilia is not a crime.

[QUOTE="Truth_Seekr"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

Bull junk.

SpruceCaboose

What about snopes? There are links that support the allegations as well...

It goes through the "list" and does a good job dispelling the fantasy veil over the whole issue.

Well I can't just disregard the allegations because of snope, but it does make interesting notes.

Execution ends up costing the tax payers more than life in prison anyway.famicommander

It would be a lot cheaper if all they did was shoot them in the back of the head. Otherwise they waste time and money going thru procedings and such.

well, think of it this way, they have to spend the rest of their lives in a prison cell (prisons don't take kindly to paedophiles, guards and inmates alike). Not only that, they will be well reported by the media, there life will be ruined too.

But i am not against the death penalty for child rapists, there isnt an excuse for it. Murder maybe (self defense etc), but definatelt not this.

I agree with it.

Most people in prisons take care of people who do that to kids. :)

Yuppitt

Why would you execute someone for something that didn't even result in another's death? Especially when that act was brought about by something that the person in question might not have been able to help. Starting to execute people for whatever crime we think is "really bad" isn't a good precedent to set. I agreee with the decision. Plus, as others have said, it's less costly and ultimately more punishing to simply put the person in jail.bman784

Agreed. I personally think that the death penalty should be reserved only for cases where a person caused extaordinary damage. So, imo that would only cover heinous mass murderers (BTK for example), crimes against humanity, and high treason (since you harmed an entire country). And even then I'm hesitant to include mass murderers since a lot of those guys have mental problems that precluded them from being able to use sound judgement and/or caused them to commit the crimes in the first place.

Personally the dumbest thing about these laws and the people saying that they should have been upheld, imo at least, is that the same punishments don't exist for adult rapists. I really don't understand what society's fetish with children is all about, but can someone please explain to me how a crime suddenly becomes much worse when a kid is a victim instead of an adult? I get it, kids are cute and for the most part relatively helpless, but that doesn't make a crime involving one worse, especially not to the point that a person deserves death if his victim happens to be a kid rather than an adult (and even more so when said crime doesn't even result in the death or attempted murder of the victim).