Mandatory Death Sentence for Homicidal Child Molestors

So I’m generally not in favor of overly punitive measures in the criminal justice system mostly because it wastes money and usually doesn’t promote healing for the aggrieved party. Criminals who are allowed to remain on probation or suspended sentence can keep their jobs and have been shown to be more capable of paying down restitution than incarcerated folks.

But there is a time when we should be hard on crime. The reality is that chomos generally take a long time to rehabilitate and are much more difficult and dangerous than the average criminal, even the average violent thug. A criminal justice system that fully rejects retribution probably won’t see any significant decreases in sentences for perpetrators of sexual assault on children. In Norway for example which avoids excessive sentencing generally will lock up chomos for as long as America does, which is a very long time. In Norway, murderers (that do not have aggravating circumstances) and chomos generally get the same sentence which is between 8-12 years or so.

I’m personally OK if America decides to adopt the sentencing regime for murder to be ~10 years as long as there are no aggravating circumstances. And I do think we lock up people for too long, and are not looking at alternatives to incarceration. But if we decide murder is ~10 years, and we decide to keep the sentences for chomos the same as it is now, ie about 10 years imprisonment, what is stopping a sexual predator to decide to kill the child so the child cannot testify?

This is why I support a mandatory death sentence for homicidal child molestors. It’s to deter the chomo sicko from killing the child. Many arguments against capital rape statues is that it would encourage the predator to kill the victim in hopes that she would not be able to testify against him. But a capital rape statue in which I set forth here would discourage the sexual predator from killing the victim.

The following statue I am advocating for goes as follows:

Whoever commits Rape against a child under the age of 14, and subsequently kills the child, shall be subjected to the mandatory minimum of surgical castration and the Death Penalty be Firing Squad. Execution shall be done in the public eye.

You’ve had a series of fantasies of death and mutilation couched as legal recommendations, but bear in mind your country, like mine, is a signatory of this document https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/, including article 5. There’s also an 8th amendment of your constitution. Clearly, you’ve been through something traumatic, but relief of the rage you’re experiencing won’t likely be achieved by the state-ordered mutilations or mandatory murders. It could possibly be achieved through therapy.

6 Likes

Actually in several states in the US, mandatory surgical castration has yet to be ruled by the supreme court. The supreme court OK’ed the death penalty as long as some type of murder is involved in the crime. There was a case involving capital child rape statue, and the supreme court did rule it illegal. However that is because it did not involve actual murder.

Considering this, I don’t think the statue I am proposing would violate the 8th amendment in a way that would be very obvious. I’m suggesting a statue that is kind of a grey area. It might be illegal, but it might not be. Either way, I’m proposing this as part of a broader criminal justice reform bill that involves reducing prison sentences for the vast majority of criminal statues either by using probation as an alternative, or simply eliminating some of the excesses in sentencing that exists which are not cost effective or even counter productive. As well as rehabilitation programs for those on probation and in prison.

I do include mandatory death penalty by public/televised executions and mandatory surgical castration which will also be public/televised, both delivered with a MINIMUM of 4K resolution for a very small number of subhuman creatures: the homicidal child rapist. I will admit I am doing this mostly out of desire for vengeance. But on the whole, this hypothetical bill will make our criminal justice system as a whole far far less vengeful. Even criminal justice reform advocates and borderline-prison abolitionists most staunchly opposed to the death penalty would find it difficult to oppose such a bill.

Almost everyone has been through something traumatic. It’s a part of life even if it shouldn’t be. Darwinian evolution is profoundly cruel. In my case, I was quite extensively emotionally and physically abused as a child between the ages of 7-12. For a COVID-19 worker, seeing death constantly, US soldiers have to deal with PTSD associated war. Animals in factory farming (some of the worst atrocities humans are guilty and by extension, almost all of us are guilty of) likely also deal with extreme suffering. Policy suggestions aren’t really based on anyone’s trauma, but rather, based on rational thought as well as a willingness to have a little bit of fun every now and then.

Nope, they wouldn’t, I think you would find that if you understood their views. That’s kind of the whole point, they wouldn’t be opposed to the death penalty if they thought “well, I guess it’s okay for some people I really don’t like”. No matter what a person has done, they are still a human. Even if we don’t consider the death penalty inherently unethical your proposal is without question cruel and unusual punishment. You fully admit to your motivation not being for the benefit of humanity and to decrease overall suffering but for your personal vengeance.

We don’t decrease cruelty and suffering in the world by causing cruelty and suffering, even to those who have caused suffering themselves.

2 Likes

I think you would find that if you understood their views. That’s kind of the whole point, they wouldn’t be opposed to the death penalty if they thought “well, I guess it’s okay for some people I really don’t like”.

I know how they think. Which is part of why I’m lumping in a bunch of criminal justice reform and restorative justice stuff so they would never be able to vote it down. The hypothetical bill I am proposing will improve the well being of millions on probation and prison at the expense of maybe a few hundred a year who I really want to execute and castrate. They will weight the pros and cons and ultimately vote in favor of it even if they oppose the mandatory public death sentence + surgical castration for HCM (homicidal child molesters). They get what they want (mostly) what they want. Any “criminal justice reform” advocate or “prison abolitionist” who votes against this will have reveled who they really have sympathy for. And it will expose their true colors. They will be exposed as a phony activist who is not serious about reform.

I looked up how ancient justice systems work. It’s a lot less inhumane than people think. In the Akkadian Empire for example, the vast majority of criminals are sentenced to restitution. It’s a significant amount given the income back then, but it’s far more humane than throwing someone in a cage for 4 fucking years. Their death sentences are generally far less humane, but from what I’ve read, it’s usually aimed at Homicidal Rapists, Homicidal Child Molesters and treason offenders aka people who attempt to overthrow the Akkadian Empire. But from what I’ve read, historians believed 60-90% of executions then are done to murderous contact sex offenders and almost always involve torture to death unless they “plead guilty” or something. But their overall sentences for crimes are generally far more humane than what goes on in modern day america. Having torture as an option in the criminal justice system does not make the entire system inhumane, as long as it’s applied only to the truly worst of the worst of the worst.

There’s nothing I need to say, this says it all.

3 Likes

Other people have already commented on the flaws in your proposal, but it is also usually the case that when an exceptional measure is justified for “one group”, it ends up expanded and used on other groups. If we got to the point where we did do such things without blinking an eye, it would be a truly horrifying criminal justice system.

The sex offenders register wasn’t always the joke it was today with people being put on it for ridiculous things like public urination. It was created as a response to the worst of the worst. Child killers. And some of the worst offenders. But, it didn’t remain such for long. It ended up getting expanded to a plethora of other offenses, until now it is casually tossed out for the most minor of offenses, so long as they’re vaguely related to “sex”. The restrictions associated with it operate in a similar way.

3 Likes

Ok maybe the surgical castration idea is bad. But the mandatory death sentence however still has merit. The Supreme Court outlaws the death penalty for any crime that does not involve murder. Since I’m advocating for mandatory death sentence for HCM, there is no risk whatsoever we will expand mandatory death sentences to non-homicidal sex offenses since it would be illegal. I don’t believe the supreme court has ruled on public executions, so I’d make it public for all to see. It’s also been ruled executions don’t need to be completely painless so deliberate infliction of suffering before death could be legal. Or at least one can hope.

This thread is now closed. No more threads about taking pleasure in executing people, please.