The decision declaring the death penalty unconstitutional where rape did not cause, and was not intended to cause, a child’s death, is a travesty.
On 25 June, 2008, the Supreme Court held, five to four, that child rape, no matter how brutal, vicious and damaging to the child, cannot be punished by death unless it results in the death of the child, and was intended to do so. Note the use of the conjunctive, rather than the disjunctive. If the rape was intended to, but did not result in, death of the child, the death penalty is disproportionate. The primary basis cited by the Court is that societal views have changed to the point that the death penalty is viewed as unacceptable by "the people," and therefore violative of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.…
Article comments
26 - Dan Miller
Dan
27 - Clavos
"Chemical castration makes us feel satisfied, as would physical castration or, well, the death penalty, but I'm not sure it's actually effective."
Point taken, Phillip. However, execution does at least stop that particular individual from repeating.
28 - Baronius
I used to think that chemical castration was a great idea, until I heard an FBI behavioralist talk about it. He basically said what Phillip said. Chemical castration just makes a person impotent and angry about it. You take a person with no self-control, whose identity is so closely tied to his sexuality, and permanently enrage him. You've only changed the crimes he's likely to commit.
Dan, thanks for the reply. The Constitution may give the Court some wiggle room, but this ruling makes sure that all future wiggling is done in the Court-approved direction.