Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry, in the case of rape of a child, there is NO contributing/extenuating circumstance that I am willing to listen to.
and if it is a peer? You realize it's considered rape when they are below the age of consent...even if they are playing doctor... Are you really ready for the needle for both children?
Sorry. Generally translated as "guilty mind" - as in, the accused's intent or state of mind needs to be considered when deciding on culpability.
That's where culpability comes in. Purposefully vs. knowingly vs. recklessly vs. negligently, it's a sliding scale and it is centuries-old legal tradition to keep in mind when metering out punishment, even if the harm from the crime is the same.
Intent counts, and it should - the guy who willfully murders someone to steal his wallet should be punished harder than the guy who accidentally runs over a pedestrian, even if he's willfully committed the crime of driving with an expired license.
Plus of course there's the entire causation thing to take into account - how long of a chain of events should we accept?
I stand by my opinion. We all have free will. If someone decides to commit a crime, he should be responsible for EVERY THING that happens as a result of HS actions. It is called deterrent.
IF criminals ARE held accountable for their actions, others MIGHT think twice before committting a crime IF they know THEY might forfeit THEIR life by THEIR actions.
"should be punished harder than the guy who accidentally runs over a pedestrian, even if he's willfully committed the crime of driving with an expired license."
I disagree. The person who CHOSE to drive on an expired license willfully and knowingly broke the law. ANY THING that happens as a result of him CHOOSING to break the law he should be held accountable for. HE and only he, is responsible for that death.
Again, maybe if others see the punishment is severe, MAYBE they will think twice BEFORE driving on a expired license.
The US has had the death penalty before China was an organized country or that there were other "countries"...
Hardly. The Chinese have the longest running civilization on earth. The term civilization means 'being organized' as a society. The Chinese had a fully organized government that extended to every border long before the new world was completely unknown.
I'm a cheapskate. I don't want to have to pay all the extra tax money it requires to keep a condemned prisoner on death row, so I much prefer life without parole. It is massively cheaper in the long run because of the costs of all the extra labor.
IF criminals ARE held accountable for their actions, others MIGHT think twice before committting a crime IF they know THEY might forfeit THEIR life by THEIR actions.
A high likelihood of being caught is much more of a deterrent than "forfeiting one's life". Criminals don't plan on being caught.
Quote:
I disagree. The person who CHOSE to drive on an expired license willfully and knowingly broke the law. ANY THING that happens as a result of him CHOOSING to break the law he should be held accountable for. HE and only he, is responsible for that death.
Again, maybe if others see the punishment is severe, MAYBE they will think twice BEFORE driving on a expired license.
Interesting. So the penalty for taking a life in a traffic accident with an expired license (accidentally) should be the same as the penalty for taking a life by storing unstable explosives next to a school (recklessly) should be the same as the penalty for taking a life by strangling your spouse (intentionally)?
None. Extenuating, contributing circumstances should always be considered. I'm not sure we should be modeling our criminal justice system after China and "Other countries"
A voice of such reason as very refreshing in these forums.
Why is an 11 year old's life more valuable than a 12 year old's life?
Why is a cop, prison guard, or federal agent's life more valuable than the life of a person who doesn't earn a paycheck by working in those capacities?
Why is the life of a witness in a criminal case more valuable than the life of any other person involved in a criminal case?
Why do you seem to think that some rapes are more egregious than others?
Define terrorism.
You seem to have made some entirely arbitrary decisions about what should constitute a capital crime.
I am opposed to the death penalty in all cases and appropriately voted "none".
Only in defense of your own life is it acceptable to take anothers life. No one owns your life but you. No one should be able to take it away.
I would add that it can also be done in defense of another's life if a threat is present.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
