Supreme Court rules that child rapists can't be executed

Posted by DarthDilbert at 6/25/2008 03:54:00 PM

I can't think of a class of criminal that would warrant being executed more than a child rapist. I am outraged that Anthony Kennedy along with his socialist liberal pals John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer would allow a monster such as Patrick Kennedy to steal one more breath of oxygen rather than to have him executed and sent to burn in hell.

From the decision: "Rape's permanent and devastating impact on a child suggests moral grounds for questioning a rule barring capital punishment simply because the crime did not result in the victim's death, but it does not follow that death is a proportionate penalty for child rape. The constitutional prohibition against excessive or cruel and unusual punishments mandates that punishment 'be exercised within the limits of civilized standards.'"

Is drug testing mantatory for the SCOTUS? They are sending a clear message to animals such as Patrick Kennedy that if they cause internal injuries and bleeding not to mention severe emotional trauma to a child which would require extensive surgery and therapy they won't be executed as long as the victim is alive at the end of their attack. What type of Alice in Wonderland logic is this?

Justice Kennedy claims that there is a "social consensus against the death penalty for child rape". Where was this supposed "consensus", from his pals at DailyKos or DUmmieLand? He goes on to say that "It is not at all evident that the child rape victim's hurt is lessened when the law permits the perpetrator's death." Really? I would invite him to speak with the children who have been scarred for life by these animals and ask them if their hurt would be lessened by executing those who attacked them. Not content with saving Patrick Kennedy from the executioner, Justice Kennedy does his best to discredit the victim in this case by bringing up the issue of "unreliable, induced, and even imagined child testimony".

The fact that too many liberal activist judges take this course of action is why monsters such as Patrick Kennedy are dealt with outside of the legal system. If he isn't executed, Patrick Kennedy should be placed into general population and left to defend himself against his fellow inmates once they are informed about his crime.

In his dissent, Justice Samuel Alito expressed the outrage of many of us. It begins on page 42 of the ruling, and yes, I did read all 65 pages of the ruling. Alito calls out Justices Kennedy, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer saying by their opinion that "the Eighth Amendment categorically prohibits the imposition of the death penalty for the crime of raping a child" it doesn't matter to them "how young the child, no matter how many times the child is raped, no matter how many children the perpetrator rapes, no matter how sadistic the crime, no matter how much physical or psychological trauma is inflicted, and no matter how heinous the perpetrator’s prior criminal record may be." He then excellently dismisses the flawed argument of a "national consensus" as well as the Court's supposed "independent judgment" that imposing the death penalty for child rape is inconsistent with "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society."

Do I believe in vigilante justice for child rape victims when liberal activist judges refuse to do their job? Absolutely. Lock and load, baby. Double tap between the eyes does wonders.

CNN
Yahoo News
Glenn Beck
Supreme Court ruling (PDF)