WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Wednesday outlawed executions of people convicted of raping a child.
In a 5-4 vote, the court said the Louisiana law allowing the death penalty to be imposed in such cases violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
"The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion. His four liberal colleagues joined him, while the four more conservative justices dissented.
There has not been an execution in the United States for a crime that did not also involve the death of the victim in 44 years.
Patrick Kennedy, 43, was sentenced to death for the rape of his 8-year-old stepdaughter in Louisiana. He is one of two people in the United States, both in Louisiana, who have been condemned to death for a rape that was not also accompanied by a killing.
The Supreme Court banned executions for rape in 1977 in a case in which the victim was an adult woman.
Forty-five states ban the death penalty for any kind of rape, and the other five states allow it for child rapists. Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas allow executions in such cases if the defendant had previously been convicted of raping a child.
DO YOU BELIEVE THIS SHIT!
Well that shows you where we would be if Obama appoints more liberal judges. It is totally unbelievable that those five Supreme Court Judges believe that the crime of raping a child does not deserve the death penalty. That torture and repeated rapes of toddlers would not rise to the level necessary for the death penalty. That a national consensus is there to stop the death penalty in these cases.
I believe that that there is a national consensus for vigilante justice in such cases. If someone repeatedly rapes and tortures your child, you and your family should just kill him outright. But don’t let it be known. Don’t even press charges. Just disappear him in a right wing death squad sort of way. The legal establishment doesn’t care about regular people. No jury would convict you. The law that the Court lays down is only important if you intend to obey it. More decisions like this and more and more people will begin to realize that the law is not on the side of the law-abiding.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I'm against the death penalty, in principle.
Needless to say, I'd kill anyone who laid a finger on my kids. I'd probably hunt them down and kill them.
Not just my kids either. I'm fairly confident I'd have taken out that bastard who beat his two-year-old to death on the side of a road.
But there's a difference between what the law should condone and what a man needs to do.
Also I'd jury nullify the hell out of anyone trying put someone away for killing someone under those circumstances.
Heh. It's those little contradictions....
Trust me. If someone hurt one of the children in my family he would beg for the sweet release of death.
Now, now, you don't want to offend some sensitive fellow's sensibilities.
Post a Comment