IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )


 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> speaking of pedos..., texas wants to kill them
Divergent Realit...
post Mar 7 2007, 12:10 PM
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Agents
Posts: 4,026
Joined: 23-February 06
From: lu-bok
Member No.: 41



http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/4604407.html

QUOTE
In a bill designed to crack down on sex offenders who repeatedly prey on children, the House voted to create a new category of crime — continual sexual abuse of a young child or children — that carries a minimum of 25 years to life in prison and possibly the death penalty for a second offense.


--------------------
32-bit whore


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Psykopath
post Mar 7 2007, 12:25 PM
Post #2


Why so serious?


Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 5,286
Joined: 22-February 06
From: Fate, TX
Member No.: 4



Slippery slope to prescribe the death penalty for crimes beyond their "eye for an eye" justification...


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
griseyeux
post Mar 7 2007, 08:43 PM
Post #3





Group: Moderators
Posts: 1,551
Joined: 19-April 06
From: Lubbock
Member No.: 162



instead, why don't we just send them to prison and assign an inmate to rape them on a regular basis....wouldn't that be an eye for an eye?


--------------------
Je suis toute du merde.
....bitches!!!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
THECHICKEN
post Mar 7 2007, 09:27 PM
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 1,302
Joined: 20-February 07
Member No.: 721



The sad thing about this is that the supreme court ruled that a man raping an adult women couldn't be put to death constitutionally. They didn't address whether repeat offenders or pedos could.

Problem is that if someone were charged with this crime, they would be set free as soon as higher courts simply ruled it what it would be: unconstitutional... thus a pedo, or repeat sexual predator would walk because of this ass hat's law.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dauss
post Mar 7 2007, 11:11 PM
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 706
Joined: 22-February 06
From: Lubbock, TX
Member No.: 20



What about those guards sexually molesting boys at that West Texas Youth Detention place?


--------------------
Beers that I have had, updated July 5th, 2009: 1,548
My Beer List

"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" - Samuel Johnson

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ" - Mahatma Gandhi
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Seeker
post Mar 8 2007, 12:03 AM
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 5,275
Joined: 22-February 06
Member No.: 2



forsaken better stay away from the police
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chook
post Mar 8 2007, 02:21 AM
Post #7


Oh baby bring me down
Group Icon

Group: Agents
Posts: 4,115
Joined: 23-February 06
From: Way out yonder
Member No.: 68



QUOTE (THECHICKEN @ Mar 7 2007, 09:27 PM) *
The sad thing about this is that the supreme court ruled that a man raping an adult women couldn't be put to death constitutionally. They didn't address whether repeat offenders or pedos could.

Problem is that if someone were charged with this crime, they would be set free as soon as higher courts simply ruled it what it would be: unconstitutional... thus a pedo, or repeat sexual predator would walk because of this ass hat's law.

I'm not the law student, but would the ruling of guilt still stand and the sentence, not the crime still be upheld?


--------------------
Southern Rock, beer and bears!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spectatrix
post Mar 8 2007, 11:10 AM
Post #8





Group: Admin
Posts: 6,906
Joined: 22-February 06
From: Austin
Member No.: 9



I'm pretty sure they'd have to go back to court for re-sentencing if the higher courts deemed the death penalty unconstitutional in such cases.


--------------------
QUOTE (pebkac @ Oct 14 2006, 03:15 PM) *
You and your logic.

QUOTE (Foamy)

http://xkcd.com/386/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pysex
post Mar 8 2007, 11:16 AM
Post #9


I was raised on the dairy, BITCH!


Group: Members
Posts: 3,080
Joined: 23-February 06
From: Cedar Park
Member No.: 49



They just need space in prisons so it's easier to kill them off than to keep moving them around or setting them free.


--------------------
"Ah, y'know it's funny, these people they go to sleep, they think everything's fine, everything's good. They wake up the next day and they're on fire."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FORSAKENR320
post Mar 8 2007, 05:55 PM
Post #10


GORILLA FLUFFER
Group Icon

Group: Agents
Posts: 7,711
Joined: 23-February 06
From: lubbock
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Overlord @ Mar 8 2007, 12:03 AM) *
forsaken better stay away from the police




oh snap


--------------------
QUOTE (Jessica @ May 7 2007, 01:15 PM) *
but yeehaw dammit. YEEHAW
QUOTE (Dogmeat @ Jun 26 2008, 07:51 PM) *
ok once upon a time I jacked myself off retarded.


Licking anuses, one kindergarten class at a time!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pebkac
post Mar 8 2007, 05:57 PM
Post #11


From Atlantis to Interzone


Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 2,512
Joined: 23-February 06
From: Somewhere in space and time
Member No.: 65



Sigh... as if Texas doesn't ALREADY put enough people to death.


--------------------
QUOTE (Spectatrix @ Oct 13 2006, 09:51 PM) *
Holy shit, pebkac, you're awesome!



"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Theodor Seuss Geisel (AKA Dr. Seuss)

"An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all." - Oscar Wilde
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pebkac
post Mar 8 2007, 09:19 PM
Post #12


From Atlantis to Interzone


Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 2,512
Joined: 23-February 06
From: Somewhere in space and time
Member No.: 65



QUOTE (Spectatrix @ Mar 8 2007, 11:10 AM) *
I'm pretty sure they'd have to go back to court for re-sentencing if the higher courts deemed the death penalty unconstitutional in such cases.


Well, the problem is that there wouldn't be any law to sentence them under if it were declared unconstitutional. And they couldn't sentence them under a new one because of the ex post facto clause of the constitution.


(I'm not a lawyer though, so this is conjecture on my part)

This post has been edited by pebkac: Mar 8 2007, 09:19 PM


--------------------
QUOTE (Spectatrix @ Oct 13 2006, 09:51 PM) *
Holy shit, pebkac, you're awesome!



"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Theodor Seuss Geisel (AKA Dr. Seuss)

"An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all." - Oscar Wilde
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
THECHICKEN
post Mar 9 2007, 06:23 PM
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 1,302
Joined: 20-February 07
Member No.: 721



QUOTE (pebkac @ Mar 8 2007, 09:19 PM) *
Well, the problem is that there wouldn't be any law to sentence them under if it were declared unconstitutional. And they couldn't sentence them under a new one because of the ex post facto clause of the constitution.
(I'm not a lawyer though, so this is conjecture on my part)


Thats what i was kinda getting at. They are passing a new law, not just forming a new sentencing for the guys. So in the very least, if only the death penalty was unconstitutional and they wanted to still preserve the law, they'd either have to give a new trial or new sentencing.

However, with it being a new law, if the only sentence for a "second" offender was the death penalty. And they are convicted on the ground of being a "second time offender", then they may very well walk, with there being no other thing to charge them with and no other sentence to give them.

Either way would be a waste of money and time...


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spectatrix
post Mar 10 2007, 09:17 PM
Post #14





Group: Admin
Posts: 6,906
Joined: 22-February 06
From: Austin
Member No.: 9



QUOTE (pebkac @ Mar 8 2007, 09:19 PM) *
Well, the problem is that there wouldn't be any law to sentence them under if it were declared unconstitutional. And they couldn't sentence them under a new one because of the ex post facto clause of the constitution.
(I'm not a lawyer though, so this is conjecture on my part)

*looks at article again*

Oh, completely new category of crime. I thought it was simply new sentencing options. Never mind.


--------------------
QUOTE (pebkac @ Oct 14 2006, 03:15 PM) *
You and your logic.

QUOTE (Foamy)

http://xkcd.com/386/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James
post Mar 11 2007, 03:10 AM
Post #15


Fool


Group: Members
Posts: 2,127
Joined: 23-February 06
From: LBB
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (Spectatrix @ Mar 10 2007, 09:17 PM) *
*looks at article again*

Oh, completely new category of crime. I thought it was simply new sentencing options. Never mind.


To get around it, just charge and convict them on two counts: one for sexual offense and one for repeat offender. If repeat offender is ruled unconstitutional, then the sexual offense count is still there to keep the offender in jail for at least a year or two.


--------------------
Spam? Isn't that something poor people eat?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th August 2026 - 12:32 AM
Skin made by: skeedio.com