New Florida law allows the death penalty for child rapists

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: PorkChop96

"If a jury won't convict a rapist, they need to be hung right next to them".

Good God. Really?

Why even bother with juries and due process?

Bread and circuses - all that is missing is the arena and free food during the executions.

A phrase used by a Roman writer to deplore the declining heroism of Romans after the Roman Republic ceased to exist and the Roman Empire began: “Two things only the people anxiously desire — bread and circuses.” The government kept the Roman populace happy by distributing free food and staging huge spectacles.

Still you're unable to justify how a child rapist will now commit murder, and because of this massive unsubstantiated assertion, the death penalty shouldn't be applied in cases of child rape.

It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: PorkChop96

Them's the breaks?

Got any examples?

Here's one.

deathpenaltyinfo.org...

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: PorkChop96

"If a jury won't convict a rapist, they need to be hung right next to them".

Good God. Really?

Why even bother with juries and due process?

Bread and circuses - all that is missing is the arena and free food during the executions.

A phrase used by a Roman writer to deplore the declining heroism of Romans after the Roman Republic ceased to exist and the Roman Empire began: “Two things only the people anxiously desire — bread and circuses.” The government kept the Roman populace happy by distributing free food and staging huge spectacles.

Still you're unable to justify how a child rapist will now commit murder, and because of this massive unsubstantiated assertion, the death penalty shouldn't be applied in cases of child rape.

It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member.

It's just a theory. It may be true under certain conditions or it may never happen but if Floridians are looking for a blood sport then you can bet that the jury will be swayed towards a certain direction to give that 'yes' vote for the death penalty.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: FlyersFan
I am generally against the death penalty except in extreme cases where it is necessary for the safety of law enforcement in the prison and the safety of other inmates.

Child predators and child rapists are given a hard time in prison from the other inmates.

Sometimes letting a person live in hell is worse than outright killing them.

I find the arguments on this thread very troubling.
It has been argued that child rapists will now decide to kill their victims so to get away with murder...

It makes you think about the motivation of such arguments.

Focus on what the victims and the victim's families want and many believe that the death penalty does nothing to deter criminal behaviour.

deathpenaltyinfo.org...

No Iam not focusing on your attempts to divert from the topic and I am not interested in these random links.

a reply to: quintessentone

I meant examples where juries have failed to convict despite overwhelming evidence, as what the other poster said?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: PorkChop96

"If a jury won't convict a rapist, they need to be hung right next to them".

Good God. Really?

Why even bother with juries and due process?

Bread and circuses - all that is missing is the arena and free food during the executions.

A phrase used by a Roman writer to deplore the declining heroism of Romans after the Roman Republic ceased to exist and the Roman Empire began: “Two things only the people anxiously desire — bread and circuses.” The government kept the Roman populace happy by distributing free food and staging huge spectacles.

Still you're unable to justify how a child rapist will now commit murder, and because of this massive unsubstantiated assertion, the death penalty shouldn't be applied in cases of child rape.

It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member.

It's just a theory. It may be true under certain conditions or it may never happen but if Floridians are looking for a blood sport then you can bet that the jury will be swayed towards a certain direction to give that 'yes' vote for the death penalty.

If it's just a theory or let's say a hypothesis then why it had been presented as a fact or nearly as a fact and whole discussion were made on the basis of an unsubstantiated hypothesis for which you argued it's best not to apply the death penalty because of this reason.

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: FlyersFan
I am generally against the death penalty except in extreme cases where it is necessary for the safety of law enforcement in the prison and the safety of other inmates.

Child predators and child rapists are given a hard time in prison from the other inmates.

Sometimes letting a person live in hell is worse than outright killing them.

I find the arguments on this thread very troubling.
It has been argued that child rapists will now decide to kill their victims so to get away with murder...

It makes you think about the motivation of such arguments.

Focus on what the victims and the victim's families want and many believe that the death penalty does nothing to deter criminal behaviour.

deathpenaltyinfo.org...

No Iam not focusing on your attempts to divert from the topic and I am not interested in these random links.

I am alluding to your question in your opening post.

CBS has called the new law 'controversial'.

Do you find it controversial or believe that those who rape children aged 12 or under deserve the death penalty.

So we are discussing the controversiality of this law, are we not?

My post about victims and victim's families not wanting the death penalty but rather societal fixes by government is addressing this particular instance of controversy.

Your lack of interest in anything else but your own narrative here is expected.

a reply to: Muldar

"It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member."

Oh dear. How sad. Never mind?

I seem to recall your good self relying on the opinions of other members to support your own?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: PorkChop96

"If a jury won't convict a rapist, they need to be hung right next to them".

Good God. Really?

Why even bother with juries and due process?

Bread and circuses - all that is missing is the arena and free food during the executions.

A phrase used by a Roman writer to deplore the declining heroism of Romans after the Roman Republic ceased to exist and the Roman Empire began: “Two things only the people anxiously desire — bread and circuses.” The government kept the Roman populace happy by distributing free food and staging huge spectacles.

Still you're unable to justify how a child rapist will now commit murder, and because of this massive unsubstantiated assertion, the death penalty shouldn't be applied in cases of child rape.

It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member.

It's just a theory. It may be true under certain conditions or it may never happen but if Floridians are looking for a blood sport then you can bet that the jury will be swayed towards a certain direction to give that 'yes' vote for the death penalty.

The death penalty applied in some cases of child rape is not a 'blood sport'.

You seriously need much better arguments and I am really impressed with the kind of arguments you have made here trying to argue against the death penalty for child rapists.

You could easily say I am against the death penalty in general rather than try (as the other poster did) to come with some bizarre but nonsensical arguments on why child rapists cannot be sentenced to death.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: FlyersFan
I am generally against the death penalty except in extreme cases where it is necessary for the safety of law enforcement in the prison and the safety of other inmates.

Child predators and child rapists are given a hard time in prison from the other inmates.

Sometimes letting a person live in hell is worse than outright killing them.

I find the arguments on this thread very troubling.
It has been argued that child rapists will now decide to kill their victims so to get away with murder...

It makes you think about the motivation of such arguments.

Focus on what the victims and the victim's families want and many believe that the death penalty does nothing to deter criminal behaviour.

deathpenaltyinfo.org...

No Iam not focusing on your attempts to divert from the topic and I am not interested in these random links.

I am alluding to your question in your opening post.

CBS has called the new law 'controversial'.

Do you find it controversial or believe that those who rape children aged 12 or under deserve the death penalty.

So we are discussing the controversiality of this law, are we not?

My post about victims and victim's families not wanting the death penalty but rather societal fixes by government is addressing this particular instance of controversy.

Your lack of interest in anything else but your own narrative here is expected.

There is nothing controversial about child rape.

I haven't come across many who want the child rapist not to be imprisoned or even sentenced to death.

Again you're trying hard to argue against it but with the wrong arguments.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

"It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member."

Oh dear. How sad. Never mind?

I seem to recall your good self relying on the opinions of other members to support your own?

You're mistaken.

There is nothing controversial about this law and it's not a hypothesis or a speculation but a law of the State of Florida.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: FlyersFan
I am generally against the death penalty except in extreme cases where it is necessary for the safety of law enforcement in the prison and the safety of other inmates.

Child predators and child rapists are given a hard time in prison from the other inmates.

Sometimes letting a person live in hell is worse than outright killing them.

I find the arguments on this thread very troubling.
It has been argued that child rapists will now decide to kill their victims so to get away with murder...

It makes you think about the motivation of such arguments.

Focus on what the victims and the victim's families want and many believe that the death penalty does nothing to deter criminal behaviour.

deathpenaltyinfo.org...

No Iam not focusing on your attempts to divert from the topic and I am not interested in these random links.

I am alluding to your question in your opening post.

CBS has called the new law 'controversial'.

Do you find it controversial or believe that those who rape children aged 12 or under deserve the death penalty.

So we are discussing the controversiality of this law, are we not?

My post about victims and victim's families not wanting the death penalty but rather societal fixes by government is addressing this particular instance of controversy.

Your lack of interest in anything else but your own narrative here is expected.

So what if CBS has called it a controversial law? Reporters can say whatever they want.

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: PorkChop96

"If a jury won't convict a rapist, they need to be hung right next to them".

Good God. Really?

Why even bother with juries and due process?

Bread and circuses - all that is missing is the arena and free food during the executions.

A phrase used by a Roman writer to deplore the declining heroism of Romans after the Roman Republic ceased to exist and the Roman Empire began: “Two things only the people anxiously desire — bread and circuses.” The government kept the Roman populace happy by distributing free food and staging huge spectacles.

Still you're unable to justify how a child rapist will now commit murder, and because of this massive unsubstantiated assertion, the death penalty shouldn't be applied in cases of child rape.

It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member.

It's just a theory. It may be true under certain conditions or it may never happen but if Floridians are looking for a blood sport then you can bet that the jury will be swayed towards a certain direction to give that 'yes' vote for the death penalty.

The death penalty applied in some cases of child rape is not a 'blood sport'.

You seriously need much better arguments and I am really impressed with the kind of arguments you have made here trying to argue against the death penalty for child rapists.

You could easily say I am against the death penalty in general rather than try (as the other poster did) to come with some bizarre but nonsensical arguments on why child rapists cannot be sentenced to death.

The controversy of the death penalty is the topic is it not?

The controversies are many, some lie with the victims/victims families feeling killing the perp does nothing to address the underlying problems nor does it provide any avenues of healing for the victim; the fed government saying it's unconstitutional; Florida politicians throwing meat to their voter base (political reasons), polluting jury members, etc.

The point or question is, does the death penalty really deter crime?

a reply to: Muldar

I'm not mistaken. You said this:

"Other members here who are compatriots of yours have said OFCOM is not independent and they have backed up their claim. You only parroted official lines without any evidence."

You are mistaken, or perhaps confused, as I have never claimed this law was "controversial".

a reply to: Muldar

The death penalty applied in some cases of child rape is not a 'blood sport'.

Of course it is! And, "blood sport" is all the rage these days.

Kill rapists!
Kill migrants!
Kill Shoplifters!
Kill General Milley!
Hang Mike Pence!

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: PorkChop96

"If a jury won't convict a rapist, they need to be hung right next to them".

Good God. Really?

Why even bother with juries and due process?

Bread and circuses - all that is missing is the arena and free food during the executions.

A phrase used by a Roman writer to deplore the declining heroism of Romans after the Roman Republic ceased to exist and the Roman Empire began: “Two things only the people anxiously desire — bread and circuses.” The government kept the Roman populace happy by distributing free food and staging huge spectacles.

Still you're unable to justify how a child rapist will now commit murder, and because of this massive unsubstantiated assertion, the death penalty shouldn't be applied in cases of child rape.

It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member.

It's just a theory. It may be true under certain conditions or it may never happen but if Floridians are looking for a blood sport then you can bet that the jury will be swayed towards a certain direction to give that 'yes' vote for the death penalty.

If it's just a theory or let's say a hypothesis then why it had been presented as a fact or nearly as a fact and whole discussion were made on the basis of an unsubstantiated hypothesis for which you argued it's best not to apply the death penalty because of this reason.

It was always presented as opinion just as all that you present is just opinion. Here at ATS that is all there is, opinion.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: PorkChop96

"If a jury won't convict a rapist, they need to be hung right next to them".

Good God. Really?

Why even bother with juries and due process?

Bread and circuses - all that is missing is the arena and free food during the executions.

A phrase used by a Roman writer to deplore the declining heroism of Romans after the Roman Republic ceased to exist and the Roman Empire began: “Two things only the people anxiously desire — bread and circuses.” The government kept the Roman populace happy by distributing free food and staging huge spectacles.

Still you're unable to justify how a child rapist will now commit murder, and because of this massive unsubstantiated assertion, the death penalty shouldn't be applied in cases of child rape.

It's really troubling to me you have adopted the lines of another member.

It's just a theory. It may be true under certain conditions or it may never happen but if Floridians are looking for a blood sport then you can bet that the jury will be swayed towards a certain direction to give that 'yes' vote for the death penalty.

The death penalty applied in some cases of child rape is not a 'blood sport'.

You seriously need much better arguments and I am really impressed with the kind of arguments you have made here trying to argue against the death penalty for child rapists.

You could easily say I am against the death penalty in general rather than try (as the other poster did) to come with some bizarre but nonsensical arguments on why child rapists cannot be sentenced to death.

The controversy of the death penalty is the topic is it not?

The controversies are many, some lie with the victims/victims families feeling killing the perp does nothing to address the underlying problems nor does it provide any avenues of healing for the victim; the fed government saying it's unconstitutional; Florida politicians throwing meat to their voter base (political reasons), polluting jury members, etc.

The point or question is, does the death penalty really deter crime?

You are wrong.

There is a federal death penalty. So your assertion that the feds say it's unconstitutional is objectively false.

Now to your last question. Does the penalty deter crime? If the threat of being put to death is only in the abstract of a perpetrators mind, then no. However, if executions were publicly held then it would real and tangible to all but the most dense of people and, I believe, would be a deterrent.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Muldar

The death penalty applied in some cases of child rape is not a 'blood sport'.

Of course it is! And, "blood sport" is all the rage these days.

Kill rapists!
Kill migrants!
Kill Shoplifters!
Kill General Milley!
Hang Mike Pence!

Sad, so very sad because it's true.

a reply to: quintessentone

a reply to: Sookiechacha


And who exactly is calling to hang Mike Pence, kill migrants, and kill Gen Milley?

Still not sure why you have such an opposition to killing dangerous criminals. Guilty consciousness maybe? Do something that would put you on that list to be put down?

a reply to: Muldar

You're mistaken!

Everything about this law is controversial!

First and foremost, it's controversial because it's unconstitutional, according to SCOTUS.

It's controversial merely because "The Death Penalty" is controversial.

Rape, in and of itself, is a controversial subject, and drawing the killing line at 12 year old victims, not 13 year olds, or 70 year olds, is controversial.

I could go on....