Bill Pending - Convicted Sex Offender - Lose Personal Property
 

Criminals convicted of sex crimes involving children could lose their homes, cars, computers and other property if lawmakers approve two bills proposed during the 2007 legislative session.

There is absolutely no way that ever survives a Constitutional challenge.

I agree with you there. I don't like sex offenders either, but why arrest them, make them serve time, and then put them out on the street? That sounds a lot like double jeopardy to me.

Most people realize that you cannot rehabilitate these offenders but if you can take away the conveniences and things in life that are viewed as privileges it will make them more miserable and I'm all for that. In my opinion they have violated their civil liberties.

True, but punishment is suppose to induce regret in the subject and make him aware of the consequences of his actions, thus making him gradually step toward a more civilized lifestyle. Excessive punshiment on the part of society will induce hatred for society in the subject and thus encourage him to further rebel against it by breaking more laws.

In other words, the subject may declare such things as, "Society hates me, so why should I care?" This may not be true, but would you feel differently if society took your house and car away from you after you got out of jail?

I just feel this level of punishment is excessive. We already make sexual predators announce when they move into the neighborhood.

I understand your point AnimeSpirit..there is no easy way to deal with these offenders. I would however comment that consequences have actions. I try to be a good citizen and do not see myself committing a crime that would incarcerate me. But if we do not teach the concept that consequesces have actions then how are people to learn? Civilized society has rules. What's the deterent? Kind of a "you play you pay" philosophy.

I don't know about anyone else. But my view is, if you rape a child don't take their house after they get out of jail. Take their private area. Whack the sucker off. It should be consider the same as force with a deadly weapon. But I'm only talking of children. If it is an adult hey that changes things because you don't know if it is real or payback. But children can't defend their self. Just like the guy in Florida that rape the little girl and then buried her alive under the back porch. I have no sympathy for anyone who hurts a child. If it is a woman who rapes a boy, hey sew it up , she doesn't need it.

My goodness Piemaker, I like you already. I am with you on this one!

Thanks Belle. I just don't like anyone who hurts children. Fi they really want to punish them, convict them and then send them to me. I'll deal with them with pleasure.

Lets just kill em for cryin out loud. First, we stick em in with the general population in prison for a couple of weeks, after we make sure everyone knows what theyre in for...let em get a taste of their own medicine...then we give em over to the victim and his/her family so they can take their "pound o flesh"...if theres anything left, or if the victim lacks the stomach to finish it, we shoot the bastard. Bullets are cheap! Society saves a ton of money. Victim gets closure. The maggot'll never hurt anyone else's kid. Everybody's happy!

No, let's take out in the woods, stake him out nude, pour honey on him and let the ants feast. Ouch The torment last longer that way. They have time to think.

Not that I am against punishing criminals......

But what "cruel and unusual" punishment should we inflict upon your own child should he/she be arrested for a crime?

Obviously being devoured by ant's is a punishment that doesn't fit the crime, so be sure to be equally as creative when planing the torture then execution of your own child.

As a parent of three girls
 

I could get real mean to someone that had raped or killed my child. I think it best to use the Al method and just give them their day in court and if found guilty then one bullet from the family if they choose and get closer. I think if I abused someone it would haunt me all the days of my life. Liquidate them and be done with it. This once again is in cases of "aggravated" rape or murder. This is a bad subject for a parent to dwell on for very long :nono:

My punishment might sound cruel and lingering, but what about a child that endures a rape for days,or months. Take Jessica in Florida, John Cooey, they say kept her for 3 days. Raping her before buring her alive under his back porch. Don't you think that was not cruel and lingering? Was it quick for her? What about the man that had a room under ground beneath his shed that he kept his victims for days and weeks to torture then kill. Luckily 2 of his victims manage to escape. Where is the justice there? Quick get the abuser, kill him. I think a person who commits a crime against a child needs to be made to think long and hard about what pain he inficted. If you kill him immediately then what did he think about. Some of these victims carry it with them a lifetime. Do you think just because you kill the person they forget.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/LAW/04/2....ap/index.html

Hey there Pie :peace: I am all for a tall tree and short rope. I posted that because I do not need to have something like that in my mind but then again if I had the death or rape of my child in my mind that I would be crazy anyway and at that point the sky is the limit as to what I might do :clap:

The 8th Amendment protects all Americans from cruel and unusual punishment....even child molesters.

No I don't agree with it. Yes I think torture would be a far greater crime deterrent than 3 hots and a cot like criminals get now, but the law is the law.

If you commit a federal offense by violating the 8th Amendment, what makes you any better than the criminal you are punishing?

I understand what you say, but you say Admin.8 protects even the molesters. WELL, what admendment protected the victim. I say I would not do the punishment unless it was a law, so that means the laws we have only protect the criminal. Hooray for them. Do you really think 3 meals a day and a cot is punishment for what is infected on the victim.

Actually minors are not afforded all the rights guaranteed in the Constitution....take voting for instance.

...and of course I don't consider 3 hots and a cot an acceptable form of punishment for a child molester, but I don't make the laws, I just agree to abide by them.

Brain don't you think that child molesters get more than 3 hots and cot ? What I mean is they are looked down on even in jail and are treated real bad form what I have read.

>WELL, what admendment protected the victim

The Constitution and its Amendments don't protect citizens from each other, they protect citizens from the government.

Depends on the prison really. He could be in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day coming out only 1 hour a day, with only a guard, for shower and exercise. No contact with other inmates means no inmate justice.

Likewise, depending on who it is, he could be in one of these country club prisons we send politicians to.....

Stereotypes exist because some people really are like that, but that doesn't mean it holds true in every single situation.

That's right they are treated bad in prison that is why they put sex offenders in solitary because they know what would happen to them. So tell me they aren't still trying to protect them. So children aren't protected by the amendments does that make them exspendable. Just oh their a child it doesn't matter what happens to them because they have no rights.

Nobody of any age is protected from sexual assault* by The Constitution or its Amendments.

The Constitution guarantees the right to free speech, for example. This means that the government cannot punish you for expressing your opinions, not that NBC has to give you your own show so you can spread them.


*except in the case of state-sponsored sexual assault

Being a minor doesn't make one expendable, it makes one a minor.

Kids don't have a "right" to not be molested, molesting a child is a crime....there is a difference.

>Kids don't have a "right" to not be molested

...by other citizens. They do have a right not to be molested by the state.

One of you need to get something straight. Brain says that Admendment 8 protects people from cruel and unuasal punishment. Jo says the amendments protect no one. Now what is going on

The Constitution outlines the powers of the federal government.
The 8th Amendment forbids the government from imposing cruel or unusual punishments.

So technically the 8th Amendment is not "protecting you" but rather limiting the powers of the federal government.....understand?

There really needs to be laws that protect our children and not the offender. I say if they hurt a child , their feelings shouldn't matter. Put them in the cell with every one else and let them take their licks. If they can dish it out they need to learn to take it.

heh....

Putting them in jail isn't cruel and unusual punishment, having them eaten alive by ants is.....

I once heard that in prison, most rapists have to separated from other prisoners because they'll get their @$$es kicked. It is somehow comforting to know that even in a house of the horrid and violent, there is still a hint of honor and code that says, "Don't hurt women and don't hurt children."

hey I didn't say anything about being eaten alive. Just nibbled on enough that he remembers it. All you have to do is get his attention.