Texas Considers Executing Repeat Child Rapists

sanctus

The Padre
Oct 27, 2006
4,558
48
48
Ontario
www.poetrypoem.com
Bill Also Boosts Minimum Sentences


AUSTIN, Texas -- Backers of a Texas state Senate bill to toughen punishment for child-sex offenders said they've reached a deal that would permit the death penalty for offenders who repeatedly prey on children.

The compromise bill, which was distributed to Senate members on Tuesday, would allow the death penalty only for those twice convicted of raping a child 13 or younger. It also boosts mandatory minimum sentences for a variety of sex crimes against children.

"The goals here were pretty simple: protect children, send a message to child predators. Texas is not going to tolerate these kinds of heinous crimes," said Rich Parsons, a spokesman for Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, a leader of the charge for tougher penalties for child molesters.

The House passed its version of the bill, dubbed Jessica's Law, last month. It carries a minimum of 25 years to life in prison on a first conviction and possibly the death penalty for a second offense.

The law is named after Jessica Lunsford, a Florida girl who was abducted and killed. More than a dozen states have passed versions of Jessica's Law to crack down on sex offenders and Gov. Rick Perry has deemed passage of a child sex offender bill a legislative emergency.

Staffers of Sen. Bob Deuell, R-Greenville, the bill's sponsor, said the Senate could take up the compromise bill as soon as Thursday.

"The only thing we impose the death penalty for is two (penetration) aggravated sexual assaults of a child," Deuell said.

"There's a trigger in there that if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the death penalty for nonmurder is unconstitutional, then everything will revert back to life without parole."

The compromise tones down sex-offender penalties initially supported by Dewhurst and Deuell. The original bill called for mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years for a wide variety of sex crimes against children. A second offense for any of those could have resulted in the death penalty.

The compromise bill requires 25-year mandatory sentences only for first convictions of rape of a young child. It also requires many convicted predators to serve 75 percent of their sentences.

The proposal increases sexual assault of a child from a second- to first-degree felony, pushing minimum sentencing from two to 10 years. A second conviction could bring life without parole.

The bill also increases punishment indecency with a child and for possession of large amounts of child pornography.

Defense lawyers weren't part of most of the compromise negotiations, said David Gonzalez, of the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association.

He criticized the mandatory minimum sentencing and said it's unconstitutional to sentence the death penalty for nonmurder offenses.

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
It'd be a lot easier if we just offed all habitual criminals. If it's a proven that you live to prey on others why do we question putting our communities first?
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
If only Texas didn't have more children in jail than any other state.
 

Josephine

Electoral Member
Mar 13, 2007
213
7
18
On this issue, we should take some notes from them. A minimum sentence of 10 years would a huge improvement from ours!!!
I'm not opposed to the death sentence for child rapists, the damage they do is forever.
Either lock them up for life or kill, other than that, I don't believe they will ever stop!
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Child rapists are like domestic b/e'ers and some other riffraff. The damage they do is longstanding. I don't know how we ever got in this box where we either have to institutionalize or attempt to rehabilitate those whose crimes are simply too grievous to forgive.
 

Josephine

Electoral Member
Mar 13, 2007
213
7
18
Child rapists are like domestic b/e'ers and some other riffraff. The damage they do is longstanding. I don't know how we ever got in this box where we either have to institutionalize or attempt to rehabilitate those whose crimes are simply too grievous to forgive.
Here Here!:hello1:
 

lysyfacet

Life is good!
Apr 12, 2007
258
5
18
Brampton, ON
The thing i don't understand is why would we even second think about executing this person. Why should someone that makes others lives miserable be let to live. Putting them in jail doesn't do anything, it keeps them off the streets, but they still have the facilities such as food and a place to stay aka jail cell. Think about it, do you think criminals want to be left on the streets with nothing, they don't mind the jail life. Execution is totally OK! I know some argue it but thats just my opinion, a man such as this doesn't deserve to life.
 

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
The thing i don't understand is why would we even second think about executing this person. Why should someone that makes others lives miserable be let to live. Putting them in jail doesn't do anything, it keeps them off the streets, but they still have the facilities such as food and a place to stay aka jail cell. Think about it, do you think criminals want to be left on the streets with nothing, they don't mind the jail life. Execution is totally OK! I know some argue it but thats just my opinion, a man such as this doesn't deserve to life.

the thing I dont understand is why you as a christian can endorse killing

remember moses? he had a few lumps of stone with writing on them.... one of them was rather relavent to this thread.... now what was it???

THOU SHALT NOT KILL
 

lysyfacet

Life is good!
Apr 12, 2007
258
5
18
Brampton, ON
the thing I dont understand is why you as a christian can endorse killing

remember moses? he had a few lumps of stone with writing on them.... one of them was rather relavent to this thread.... now what was it???

THOU SHALT NOT KILL

i agree...Thou shalt not kill, and i live up to that standard. But what do you do with a problem that has only one way of being delt with. You need to understand times have changed, the pitty crimes back 100+ years ago don't even compare to now. "I" as a christian wouldn't ever kill someone, but authorities already give themselves that "right" so why not use it to the completeness.
 

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
so you think it's wrong to kill but it's ok for someone ELSE to kill.

I'm not christian but i do appreciate the sense in "thou shalt not kill". I dont want anyone killing anyone. It's not right.

Ive had this debate before on CC so maybe you can search the threads and find what i said before. I'm too emotionally drained for a fight today and i expect if i kept it up tamarin would come in and state that it's my weak-livered leftyism that's causing the downfall of the entire universe and then I'd have to break my own rule and kill someone.
 

lysyfacet

Life is good!
Apr 12, 2007
258
5
18
Brampton, ON
so you think it's wrong to kill but it's ok for someone ELSE to kill.

I'm not christian but i do appreciate the sense in "thou shalt not kill". I dont want anyone killing anyone. It's not right.

Ive had this debate before on CC so maybe you can search the threads and find what i said before. I'm too emotionally drained for a fight today and i expect if i kept it up tamarin would come in and state that it's my weak-livered leftyism that's causing the downfall of the entire universe and then I'd have to break my own rule and kill someone.

i don't want to fight with you on this matter...i have no intensions of doing that. I understand you have your views on "killing" and i have mine. And i'm not making it ok that someone else does the killing, but our societies have already come to that. Here in Canada there is no such thing as the death penalty, which i think is great. But go down the in USA and see, certain states do have it.
Ok so besides teh "tho shalt not kill"...what is another reason they "authorities" shouldn't kill a criminal of such offences. Those incharge, are not christians such as "me". They're views are completely different...and besides taht one comanment they have no other doubts or reasons not to execute.
 

Pangloss

Council Member
Mar 16, 2007
1,535
41
48
Calgary, Alberta
Ten Penny:

Stop and think for a moment. Is raping a child really the worst crime imaginable? It is truly horrible, but I bet you can think of worse.

If by "worst" you mean "most damaging," which might be a good place to start, then murder is worse. Here's why: it is conceivable for someone to come to terms with being raped, and go on to lead a good life, to enjoy love, eat good food, be a friend - well you get the idea.

Someone who is murdered is just dead. No coming to terms, no possibility of any future pleasures or pains, well, no future at all.

Rape is horrible - the repercussions of the attack and violation stay with the victim for a very long time, maybe all their life. But they have a life. And being alive is better than being dead. At least most of the time.

So perhaps child rape isn't the worst crime imaginable.

Pangloss
 

Josephine

Electoral Member
Mar 13, 2007
213
7
18
Ten Penny:

Stop and think for a moment. Is raping a child really the worst crime imaginable? It is truly horrible, but I bet you can think of worse.

If by "worst" you mean "most damaging," which might be a good place to start, then murder is worse. Here's why: it is conceivable for someone to come to terms with being raped, and go on to lead a good life, to enjoy love, eat good food, be a friend - well you get the idea.

Someone who is murdered is just dead. No coming to terms, no possibility of any future pleasures or pains, well, no future at all.

Rape is horrible - the repercussions of the attack and violation stay with the victim for a very long time, maybe all their life. But they have a life. And being alive is better than being dead. At least most of the time.

So perhaps child rape isn't the worst crime imaginable.

Pangloss
Child rape may not be the worst crime imaginable, but it still deserves extremely harsh punishment. The effects on the child are much different than the effects on an adult. If you're a child and you're raped, or molested, that is your introduction to sex, to intimacy, and it is the worst violation. As a child you have no preconception of this, this experience shapes your view, your idea of sex. The damage is life-long, for after that moment you will forever be a different person than you would have been had you not been violated.
I'm a lefty in politics, but on this, my pity is with the victims. The rapists and molesters should be locked away where they have no more opportunitites to destroy innocent lives.
 

Pangloss

Council Member
Mar 16, 2007
1,535
41
48
Calgary, Alberta
Child rape may not be the worst crime imaginable, but it still deserves extremely harsh punishment. The effects on the child are much different than the effects on an adult. If you're a child and you're raped, or molested, that is your introduction to sex, to intimacy, and it is the worst violation. As a child you have no preconception of this, this experience shapes your view, your idea of sex. The damage is life-long, for after that moment you will forever be a different person than you would have been had you not been violated.
I'm a lefty in politics, but on this, my pity is with the victims. The rapists and molesters should be locked away where they have no more opportunitites to destroy innocent lives.

Josephine, again - I have no real argument with anyone on this thread, except for the hyperbole. ". . .it is the worst violation." No it's not - murder is probably the worst violation. Or perhaps sustained torture and mutilation.

Save the biggest language for the biggest ideas. Because if you say it is the worst violation, and it's not, then what do you call a worse violation? You run out of language.

Pangloss

Pangloss
 

Josephine

Electoral Member
Mar 13, 2007
213
7
18
Josephine, again - I have no real argument with anyone on this thread, except for the hyperbole. ". . .it is the worst violation." No it's not - murder is probably the worst violation. Or perhaps sustained torture and mutilation.

Save the biggest language for the biggest ideas. Because if you say it is the worst violation, and it's not, then what do you call a worse violation? You run out of language.

Pangloss

Pangloss
It's only my opinion. To use your analogy...I do believe that raping a child is a worse violation than torturing an adult...but then I could be biased, as I only have knowledge about one of them.