Should killers with young children be executed?

alonzomourning23

alonzomourning23

CAGiversary!
Feedback
26 (100%)
Assume that the death penalty is justified and should be in place. Should the killers children be given consideration? For example, if a killer has young children and his family still keeps in contact with him, or her (compared to a family that cuts off all contact when they realize what he did), should he be spared the death penalty so that his children don't also have to deal with his death?

The guy is already locked up and no longer a danger to society, so should this be given any consideration when deciding either death or life in prison?

If the children are adult, or he has no children, then I don't think this should be given any significant consideration. But it seems that if by subjecting young children to this death would be creating more victims (and children wouldn't understand it on the same level as an adult) and, since the person is already off the street, it's not a necessity like imprisonment.
 
I voted depends on the crime, cuz while you gave us multiple circumstances there are many things left open. Like is the imprisonment of life without parole assured? Was the killing premeditated? Were other crimes involved (kidnapping, torture, sexual abuse, etc.)? Does the killer show any remorse? Are we talking like one dead as opposed to a serial killer? I could go on...

All those would play an important role in the sentencing along with he killer's relationship to his family, which legally while maybe considered should take a backseat to his actual crimes.
 
If he's convicted in a court of law and found guilty of murder one then he needs to be punished appropriately. The law isn't written to protect the feelings of children, it's written to issue justice as fairly as it possibly can.

Then again, if the judge deems it appropriate that he only serve life in prison, then that should be respected as well.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']What made you think of this?[/quote]

The case of joseph smith in florida, who asked for the judge to spare his life for the sake of his children. It's not the first time I thought of it, as one of the reasons I'm uncomfortable with the death penalty is the effect on innocent family members. But this case is what made me think of it again.

He was convicted of raping and killing an 11 year old girl, but has three girls of his own. I can't find their ages (though it appears they're young), or whether they're still in contact with him. But, my question is based on if a killer were to have young children, still in contact with him, would that matter? And if it does, is it an overriding concern, or does it only spare some would be death row inmates, but not ones convincted of more grotesque crimes.

The law isn't written to protect the feelings of children, it's written to issue justice as fairly as it possibly can.
Click to expand...

Yes, but what about the psychological impact on the children? Is it fair to subject them to that, or are you just making more victims? By killing the person you may bring some satisfaction to the victims family, but does the death of a young childs father offset that? Which is greater?

It's not about grief at the moment, which both children and adults will have. But long term, adults are better equipped to deal with it.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']Thats nutty, how do you rape and kill eleven year olds if you have kids of your own?[/quote]

Raping kids is wrong. It's just the way I feel.
 
First of all, I just want to say that we're doing this arguement with the assumption that captial punishment is just.

[quote name='alonzomourning23']TYes, but what about the psychological impact on the children? Is it fair to subject them to that, or are you just making more victims? By killing the person you may bring some satisfaction to the victims family, but does the death of a young childs father offset that? Which is greater?

It's not about grief at the moment, which both children and adults will have. But long term, adults are better equipped to deal with it.[/quote]

You have a noble cause but it's also a pandora's box. Who's to say some child couldn't be coerced into saying that they don't want their dad to die when, in fact, they're scared to death of him. What if the person killed more than one person? Ten? Twenty? Fifty? A hundred? Would he still be given a pass? If you prevert the law to protect someones feelings then who's to say how far that will go from then on? What if a wife has an undying love for her husband that was proved in court? I know you may not support some of these, but all it takes is a good lawyer and a lenient judge to set precendent from that point on.

On another note that's some crazy mother to let her children see a "father" that could even think about raping and killing an 11 year old girl. My God, that's no father, that's a sick bastard.
 
I'm on the fence. Depends on the age of the child? Maybe they can serve a jail sentenace until the child turns 18 and then he can be executed. I don't think a child is smart enough to understand why their parent deserves death.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']Thats nutty, how do you rape and kill eleven year olds if you have kids of your own?[/quote]
Exactly. And if you truly are guilty, then your children shouldn't be allowed to see you anyway.

The only real qualm i have with capital punishment is the "are you really guilty" factor.
If it could be shown 100% without a doubt that someone is guilty of serial killings, raping/murdering little children, etc. then i think there shouldn't be a delay and the person should be fried.
Its really only a good system if there can be guarantees that there would be no innocents sent to the slaughter
 
All rapists and child molestors/killers should be tortured and left for dead. No exceptions. As for sparing someone because of their kids ("will someone please think of the children!") I say no way. Having a convicted rapist/murderer father (or mother if the case may be) in jail for the rest of his or her life can't be too much of a difference psychologically than having a convicted rapist/murderer father or mother who gets executed for his or her crime. I guess it would depend on the crime but generally if you get the death penalty you've done something pretty bad.
 
The thing that pisses me off is these guys going and having like 3 kids WHILE locked up for life. They never once think of how that will impact the childs life. They are gonna end up in the same place as their dad without a father figure around.. but hat is just my opinon though
 
[quote name='javeryh'] Having a convicted rapist/murderer father (or mother if the case may be) in jail for the rest of his or her life can't be too much of a difference psychologically than having a convicted rapist/murderer father or mother in jail for life. [/Quote]

Nope, especially when they are exactly the same thing :)

I think you need a 15 min break :D
 
[quote name='Ace-Of-War']
You have a noble cause but it's also a pandora's box. Who's to say some child couldn't be coerced into saying that they don't want their dad to die when, in fact, they're scared to death of him.[/quote]

No on is suggesting to directly involve the child. It's not hard to show whether or not an inmates family has contact with them and, if they do, if its just the parents and the lover, or children as well.

What if the person killed more than one person? Ten? Twenty? Fifty? A hundred? Would he still be given a pass?
Click to expand...

Well, in my view yes. But that's also why I added "Depending on the crime". But then again, life in prison without parole isn't really being given a pass. It's the second most severe punishment, one that the majority of crimes (including murders) don't recieve.

If you prevert the law to protect someones feelings then who's to say how far that will go from then on? What if a wife has an undying love for her husband that was proved in court? I know you may not support some of these, but all it takes is a good lawyer and a lenient judge to set precendent from that point on.
Click to expand...

This question focuses on the intellectual capacity of children. We already treat children differently, but yet those differences don't get extended to adults. We even treat different ages of children differently in regards to sex crimes, as well as other offenses such as murder. Because of this an adults love wouldn't effect this, and has no bearing on the issue at hand.

On another note that's some crazy mother to let her children see a "father" that could even think about raping and killing an 11 year old girl. My God, that's no father, that's a sick bastard.
Click to expand...

Well, that's something you bring up with the mother. This case aside (since the guy confessed), many maintain their innocence, so you can't blame the mother if she believes the father is innocent. For whatever reason though, if the kids maintain contact then, in my opinion, that matters.

I'm on the fence. Depends on the age of the child? Maybe they can serve a jail sentenace until the child turns 18 and then he can be executed. I don't think a child is smart enough to understand why their parent deserves death.
Click to expand...

I thought of that, but I think that would be worse. While it's out of the childs control, directly tying their fathers life with their age has the potential to be psychological torture. It's out of their control, but the factor that will kill their father is directly related to them. I think that creates a worse problem. Personally I'd set the age to around 12 or 13 (ages commonly used in sex crimes, as well as other crimes) and that someone who is still in contact with their children, children who are under that age, would not recieve the death penalty, but life in prison without parole instead. But, if the execution would simply be delayed, and tied directly into the persons age, then I couldn't agree with that.
 
[quote name='Pookymeister1234']Nope, especially when they are exactly the same thing :)

I think you need a 15 min break :D[/quote]


:booty: :booty: :booty: :booty: Holy crap I'm losing it!!!

I fixed my original post.
 
The purpose of capital punishment primarily is a deterrent to crime. If a killer knows he/she will not get a death penalty verdict because he has children this negates the purpose of the punishment.
Further, a parent committing an act as horrific as kidnapping and raping an 11 year old girl is going to do a tremendous amount of damage to any child regardless of what punishment is meted out.
 
anyone remember those collars in the movie dead lock...... runs towards family BOOOOM!!!!!!!!!!!


personally i think if someone kills someone they should be put to death as well the same way.... im tired of people killing people very badly and they when they executed all they do is put them to alsleep... i say we kill the #$#$# the same way they killed their victims
 
[quote name='vherub']The purpose of capital punishment primarily is a deterrent to crime.If a killer knows he/she will not get a death penalty verdict because he has children this negates the purpose of the punishment.

Further, a parent committing an act as horrific as kidnapping and raping an 11 year old girl is going to do a tremendous amount of damage to any child regardless of what punishment is meted out.[/quote]

But they still visit and have a connection with them. They're not going to have authority over the child like they would if they were free. I'm not sure how having their parent killed wouldn't be worse. Whether that should be taken into consideration or not is questionable, but I think it clearly is worse for the killers children.

But the deterrent argument is one that appeals to the masses, but has essentially vanished as an argument in courts and among the educated. There's no evidence to support such an argument, and educated proponents of the death penalty have essentially given up that point. There are many reasons for the death penalty, primarily justice, closure etc., but not deterrence.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']No on is suggesting to directly involve the child. It's not hard to show whether or not an inmates family has contact with them and, if they do, if its just the parents and the lover, or children as well. Well, in my view yes. But that's also why I added "Depending on the crime". But then again, life in prison without parole isn't really being given a pass. It's the second most severe punishment, one that the majority of crimes (including murders) don't recieve.[/quote]

I mean, we're going by the assumption that capital punishment is okay, so there's no reason to advocate another form of punishment in this instance. That being the case all I'm saying is if you bend the law to protect the feelings of anyone, be them the child or someone else, it's not really fair to everyone, and therefore it isn't just. Why doesn't some jerk just get out on bail and knock some girl up while he waits for his courtdate? The kid will be ten before he gets to the end of death row.

Well, that's something you bring up with the mother. This case aside (since the guy confessed), many maintain their innocence, so you can't blame the mother if she believes the father is innocent. For whatever reason though, if the kids maintain contact then, in my opinion, that matters.
Click to expand...

Oh, that was just a personal note. It wasn't meant as a point. I know if my wife had raped and killed a 11 year old kid I would never let my children come close to that monster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top