Thursday, January 08, 2009

Tell me why we simply don't kill this person as a genuine menace to society?

This sex offender preys on young boys and even raped a 6-year-old relative. Now he's been caught with a teenage boy. And he apparently has HIV.

Tell me why he should be allowed to live? He should be butchered horribly where he stands. But when most "regular people" lack the moral fiber to help an old man on a train, why should we expect them to have the courage to dispatch the worst elements among us?

Haven't we learned from the case of Jessica Lunsford? Or from the case of the little girl who was repeatedly molested over a four-year period? Her rapist, and remember this name Mark Hulett in case he lives in your town, was originally sentenced to 60 days, and the public outrage caused the judge to up it to 3-10 years. Hulett was scheduled for release this month. Who wants to bet he'll rape again, no matter how much the government "supervise" him? Sex offender registration didn't save Jessica Lunsford, now did it?

1 Comments:

Blogger Bowly said...

Cases like this bug me, and I'm never sure where to stand. Philosophically, I accept that some people are menaces who deserve to die. But my philosophy also resists giving government that kind of power.

I do notice that you didn't say who should do the butchering, though. If the victim's relative did a little vigilantism, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. I could also vote to acquit the vigilante with a clean conscience, if I felt the evidence against the original lowlife was convincing enough (which it seems to be in this case). I doubt that kind of evidence would be allowed at the vigilante's trial, however.

Friday, February 13, 2009 10:06:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home