Scoutgal, I am sorry to keep pressing the issue because I know it is one on which you have very strong opinions. But reading through your posts it seems you justify the death penalty on two primary bases: (1) that the crime has such a horrible impact on the victim and (2) that the perpetrators will commit more crimes if not killed by the state.

There are many crimes with even more horrible impacts on the victim than child rape. None currently result in the death penalty for the perpetrator. Why single this out for such a penalty apart from the emotions you have in this instance? I am not suggesting the emotions are not warranted, but we disagree on whether laws should be based upon emotional reactions. I think emotions and justice are always incompatible.

Two, the statistics I have quoted show that less than half of sexual offenders re-commit crimes. You claim they are permanently and compulsively going to be re-offenders. Show me the facts to support that, please. If even one person who commits the crime is not going to re-offend, why kill all who commit the crime? If not all, how would you decide which ones to kill?

Medical science has very imperfect tools to predict the future. I think it bad enough they are currently given the power to decide if an offender can be held indefinitely in a mental facility or prison because of a likelihood of re-offending.

While I respect the feelings of those who have suffered at the hands of a sexual predator, those emotions cannot be the only factor in deciding public policy. To do so would reduce the criminal justice system to revenge and blood lust levels. That may be tempting for the victims, but a disaster for the culture.

Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie Mame
You are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul