Originally posted by StarhawkLets looks at a few holes in your logic, you first say that you want to change “beyond a reasonable doubt” to “beyond any doubt” when trying someone for a capital crime. It is hard enough to convict someone under the reasonable doubt and would be even harder under any doubt so that would lead to less people being convicted of the crime and either getting a lessened sentence or released completely which would be against what you say you want to do.
In cases where it is kiddnapping, they will 90% of the time kill the child anyways. In cases of Molestation and prolonged sodomy they will just scare the child and as sick as it sound get infatuated with the child and want to keep the "relationship" going.I understand that you guys feel sympathy for these things, misguided as that is.
But if we stick to the original question of this thread, then I dont know.
Alot of child rape victims go onto self destruction later on in life. And the number of suicides amoung them is pretty high.
On the other hand as far as the families of the victims go, Murder is worse cause at least if their kid is sodomized they can try and do some healing and the parents pain is lessend.
The next would be that, as you claim, you would push this change through and would be the driving force on this and your life’s goal. Now how would you feel putting an innocent man to death because he was wrongly convicted because of your agenda? Now I know you will say that this wouldn’t happen under the “beyond any doubt” but there have been numerous cases where people have claimed to commit the crime because they want attention or fame, one case already mentioned in this thread, and if the evidence (or lack of) supports his claim and with a confession there wouldn’t be any doubt. No matter how hard you try there still will be human error, there is no way around this so in principle it was you that killed them, does that make you any better?
If you simply say that this is just for revenge for their crime that is understandable and that I think most of us can agree on but when you try and justify the reasons with baseless claims and say that it will stem the tide or help the problem is where you are sadly mistaken. The facts that you try and back up your claims are bogus to say the least; I don’t know where you get this 90% figure at all. In the United States about 800,000 children reported missing each year, 99% are found through law enforcement efforts, according to FBI statistics. Now granted this includes everything from the classic case of kidnapping to runaways but only 200 to 300 are under the classical kidnapping. Another 3,200 to 4,600 are taken for shorter periods, have something done to them, often a sexual assault of some type, and are then released according to National Incidence Study of Missing, Exploited, Runaway and Throwaway Children (NISMART).
Originally posted by StarhawkSo you would put that person to death that has a mental defect and confessed to a murder that they didn’t commit, does that make you any better?
I never said it was a perfect solution, and who on earth would cop to a capital offence for the publicity?And if they do then as the expression goes "they are too stupid to live"
And don't you agree that the Borg Queen is hot (The one from Voyager)
As for an example the Jon Benet Ramsey case, everyone pretty much thought that he did it and why in the world would someone confess to the crime. It was only later that they found the evidence to clear his name, and this is only one of many.
Originally posted by ThePittman
So you would put that person to death that has a mental defect and confessed to a murder that they didn’t commit, does that make you any better?As for an example the Jon Benet Ramsey case, everyone pretty much thought that he did it and why in the world would someone confess to the crime. It was only later that they found the evidence to clear his name, and this is only one of many.
If a person is mentally disabled then that SHOULD (even though I know it's not) be considered the same as insanity.
And if that fool want to admit to a crime he didn;t commit for the publicity then he deserves what he gets.
Originally posted by StarhawkYou have just proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are no different than any other person that would take a life. You would be willing to kill someone for something that they can not control just because they are not to your level of “normal” you would put them to death. What makes the person that doesn’t know right from wrong OK to spare and the one that has a problem with reality and admits to a crime not worth the air that they breath?
If a person is mentally disabled then that SHOULD (even though I know it's not) be considered the same as insanity.And if that fool want to admit to a crime he didn;t commit for the publicity then he deserves what he gets.
Originally posted by StarhawkNo it means that there probably something mental wrong with him, what is dumb as hell is that you think it’s not. People all the time claim things that they didn’t do or even hurt themselves such as Munchausen syndrome but you wouldn’t know about psychological conditions.
If a person admits to a captial offence just to make people take notice of him then he is dumb as hell.