Seven Year old Paul Pearson - Please read

[nimbus]

now your true subconscious is preserved forever in my quote.


rob.

lol i'm not advocating laxer sentences for child-molesting killers

i just don't think knee-jerk emotional reactions make for good criminal justice

 

[cindylou]

i duno man. i like to think that the people who write and interpret law know what they're doing.

who's to say what someone "deserves".. criminal justice should serve a purpose other than satisfying emotions

if more time would serve as more a deterrent in the future, then i can see why one would want his sentence to be stiffer

but if not, why be spiteful towards someone who is possibly ready to make a good contribution to society

iotta red you for this lol

but seriously, what about the justice for the child and family?

 

[nimbus]

iotta red you for this lol

but seriously, what about the justice for the child and family?

that's what civil court is for

 

[-SD-]

i duno man. i like to think that the people who write and interpret law know what they're doing.

who's to say what someone "deserves".. criminal justice should serve a purpose other than satisfying emotions

if more time would serve as more a deterrent in the future, then i can see why one would want his sentence to be stiffer

but if not, why be spiteful towards someone who is possibly ready to make a good contribution to society

Its not about whether or not he can make a good contribution to society. its about meting out appropriate punishment. im sure youve heard of a million inmates who suddenly found jesus once they were in the pin, doesnt mean they are ready to contribute to society when they are out but thats beside the point still. the purpose of a jail sentence is delivering punishment. if the punishment for the rape and murder of a child is only 19 years thats a huge problem because it essentially sets an upper limit precedent of what a someone can be sentenced for murder of anyone. Because if someone can get away with 19 years for raping and murdering a child, what should someone get sentenced for if they "only" murder an adult? 10 years? 7? You have to think of these things. Its not as overcomplicated so as only people in black robes with a lot of letters after their name can only ponder. If we have life sentences and death penalties available for certain crimes, I cant think of any crime more worthy of either than the rape and murder of a child. That and serial killers.

 

[-SD-]

that's what civil court is for

nonsense. even if the parents won a civil judgment its not enforceable, the plaintiff has to somehow go after it and get it themselves. Remember OJ and all the trouble Ron Goldman had to go through to get any money at all? I guarantee if the parents had to choose between getting whatever little money the guy has and putting him away for life, or death penalty they will gladly choose the later every time, and it will be just.

 

[BlueBird]

...why be spiteful towards someone who is possibly ready to make a good contribution to society

Considering there are over 6.5 billion people on this planet, and a good percentage of these, probably, want to leave a good legacy for humankind...well, this guy can curl up and die already.

 

[nimbus]

i don't believe in punishment for punishment's sake. i don't think someone deserves to suffer just because they did something bad.

i think our penal code should serve two purposes:
to deter future crime, and to keep people who are going to commit repeat offenses away from society

if two decades is no more of a deterrent than five, and the parole board has reason to be convinced that he won't commit those crimes or similar ones, i don't see why he should have to keep being punished out of spite.


i feel horrible for the victims, i really do. but making the guilty suffer for the sole sake of suffering is not the best thing for humanity in my opinion

 

[nimbus]

i would rather see 50 welfare lifers who won't do anything but eat and watch tv die than a reformed killer who is going to be productive with his life

 

[nangiggles]

Im sure that does opposed to his release think that a suitful punishment is death, an eye for an eye :you take my boy I take your life" what is the point of this? there is a reason it is called a CORRECTIONAL facility, the purpose of incarceration is to rehabilitate people, granted this is rarely the case, but if this person regrets their behaviour and did their time and will be productive to society without harming others I see NO good reason to keep him in, you cant just lock him up because he "might" do something bad, it's not fair and yes I know it's not fair what happened to the little boy but judicial system doesnt work like that....

 

[cindylou]

I completely disagree. Usually another life has to be lost until someone is locked away for life. It shouldnt be that way, that is NOT justice. When another child dies, is that enough? When it comes to our children, we should protect them, not the criminals. What kind of society cant even protect children from people who have killed them before? Lets just hope a man like this does not move into your neighborhood and near your schools when you have children. In my eyes, you kill one child, you dont GET another chance. Drug offenders, yes..child rapist/murderers..NO. But whatever - we dont all have to agree. I just really really dont agree with that mindset. That is all. (lol) I find it unimaginable to take a garden hose and wrap it around a childs neck and watch him die and dump his dead naked body in a ravine. Can someone like that be rehabilitated?

Just three weeks ago a child was abducted from a repeat child molester who had JUST been released. What about that girl that was killed while she was jogging by a repeat offender? Those kids didnt have to die.

Probably cuz I have a kid. Couldnt imagine someone doing that, that wasnt so messed up...