Taylor Gets Tough on Child Molesters
Mark Taylor, Lt. Governor and gubernatorial candidate, claims that if he becomes governor he will introduce legislation giving juries a death penalty option for repeat child molesters as part of his “Child Protection Act of 2007.” You can read more about it here.
As a parent, and a voter who feels that we are far too lenient on violent criminals in our state and in our country, I am all for this. Sure, it is only an election-year retaliation against Perdue’s claims that he will increase GBI manpower to seek out criminals preying on our children. But you know what? This is just the kind of stance that will buy my vote. Okay, to be honest, I think Taylor was probably going to get my vote anyway, but this really is alluring. That’s right. I said it: I think the death penalty for repeat child molesters is a good thing.
I wonder, though, what it means for a Democrat to take such a surprisingly uncharacteristic stance on the death penalty question. Is this an example of a candidate grasping for votes? Is his campaign in its death throes? Most importantly, if he wins will he follow through with this promise?
“Most importantly, if he wins will he follow through with this promise?”
We can’t even make people show an ID when they vote, I doubt anything like this would EVER hold up in a court if it were to pass.
Sadly, methinks you are correct. . . . Not to mention, I think people are too gutless to give anyone the death penalty. Those that aren’t will never get to sit on a jury.
It makes me sad that people still act so scared and vengeful in 2006, still shouting for people to be burned at the stake. The drumming up of fear for “child molestors” (which is no more on the rise than population is) distracts from actual isses we could have control over, mainly to do with the corruption of those in power. If it is not the communists or terrorists among us, it is the child molestors. A scarlet “A” on anyone even passingly accused. Remember, the law will define a child molestor as an 17 yr old with a 16 year old partner, too. As nice as it is to think about all the creepy old men being locked up and killed, that is just not the reality of the situation.
Rationally, of course, I am not in favor of child molestation or those who practice it walking free from the crime they commit. Perhaps, though, we ought to try and rehabilitate and understand what is going on here in order to decrease the occurances. The death penalty has NEVER been statistically proven to decrease crime, so the idea here is venegence. Is that the society we wish to live in?
Education, transportation, health care, employment etc all fall to the side and your vote rests on this issue (it “buys your vote”)?
I mourn the fear mongering of goverment in this state and country and the loss of rationality in the populace.
FYI it costs more to house and kill a death row inmate than it does to rehabilitate.
Lastly: How many “repeat child molestors” are in this country? A question that should be answered before we go into “shark attacks everywhere!” mode…
While on the one hand I think people who hurt children should pay severely – on the other hand I think our current definition of “child” is way too broad. There’s a gray area between the ages of 13 and 16 where young women can easily pass themselves off as adult (and vice versa I’ve known a few “adult” women who could pass for 13 – 16). Males in that age range, while far from mature (are we ever?) are adult enough to want to activly pursue sex. I’m not suggesting it’s okay for 40 year olds to date 13 year olds but if the relationship is consentual and both parties is matured physically then it should be different than “child molestation”. I recall being 18 and being nervous about sleeping with my 15 year old girlfriend because it could (and has for others) lead you to a sex offender label for the rest of your life. We were both fairly mature and were safe and wanted to explore sexuality with each other in a loving way as any growing adults would. The law is black and white and it should be gradiated dependant on the relative ages and physical and emotional maturity of the participants.
I don’t think I’m gutless for having serious reservations about taking the life of another person.
Granted, serving on a jury and deciding a person’s sentence isn’t the same thing as donning the executioner’s mask, but it’s not a task I’d take lightly.
“Gutless” seems just as pejorative a term as someone on the other side lazily calling the death penalty “barbaric”.
And, while I self-identify as a liberal, I think giving juries, judges and all involved with the judicial process MORE choices for how they sentence (as oppossed to mandatory sentencing laws) is a good thing, at leas in the abstract.
I completely respect the opinions of those of you who have a moral problem with the death penalty. i don’t agree with it, but I definitely respect your right to disagree with it. I probably went a little far with the “gutless” comment. My apologies.
That being said, for those of you who have a problem with the gray area that is the molestation of teenagers, if you have bothered to read the article I linked to, you would have read that, “he would introduce legislation allowing juries to sentence criminals to death after they have been convicted a second time of molesting or raping children under 14.” Still have a big problem with it?
Align this with his position to abolish parole for violent offenders and Taylor is setting himself up as the “very extreme on crime” candidate.
If you’re a parent in Georgia, what’s more likely to affect you: child molestors or an education system ranked 48th in the country? It’s a shame we’re focused on the wrong issues.
Why do people insist on the category of “molestation”? Why not child rape?
As a survivor of child rape, I don’t think the man who raped me needed to die: I think he needed help– mental help. Killing the people who commit these crimes will not change the conditions that lead up to their committing them. Child rapists will not refrain from raping because other child rapists before them were executed, rather than going to jail and forever losing their ability to live and/or work without stigma.
Mark Taylor’s missing a big piece of the puzzle that he and others continue to mislabel “molestation.”
First, I hate people, so I’m all for killing more of them. More beer for me! And more space on the road.
Second, isn’t it funny that Mark Taylor isn’t going to introduce any legislation to GET TOUGH ON DRUNK DRIVING? Or maybe some legislation to curb Big Food?
It took me a while to digest the whole “burned at the stake” comment. I had to go to the ymca and cool off. I thought about it on the way home.
I do think that I am scared for my children, and that anyone who is a parent and isn’t a little scared is maybe not the best of parents.
“The death penalty has NEVER been statistically proven to decrease crime, so the idea here is venegence. Is that the society we wish to live in?”
My first inclination was also to say that I am not vengeful. I would say that first and foremost, the idea here is NOT vengeance. I see this as an issue of public safety, and the best way to make the public safe from a repeat offender would be to make it so that they cannot harm again. I do not see the death penalty as a deterrent – these people cannot be deterred, because they are compelled to act on their compulsions. I see the death penalty as a way to make it so that they will never have the opportunity to molest another child again.
That being said, on thinking it over, I would agree that if my own child were molested, I would most certainly hope that the molester would be punished in a severe fashion, and if that is vengeful, then I don’t see what’s wrong with a little vengeance. It is not like I would seek it out myself – That would be up to the courts. The whole point of this is that Taylor’s legislation would be giving the justice system (and I do believe that people have a right to a fair trial) more options for sentencing. So, really, i think the whole “burning at the stake” comment is a little misguided.
Concerning the “rise” in child molesters that you seem to think I was commenting on (I don’t see anything in my post implying that it is on the rise), all it takes is one child molester to ruin a child’s life. You have a complete right to your beliefs, and your moral objections to the death penalty, but I think you are putting words into my mouth – I didn’t say anything about “burning at the stake,” the rise in the number of child molesters, or branding people with scarlet letters.
Furthermore, if you have bothered to read the linked article, you would find that this would apply to those who molest minors under the age of 14, which would alleviate the “grey area” of teenage sexual activity.
Concerning rehabilitation: It is my understanding that molesters are usually not able to be rehabilitated, and if they are 2nd-time offenders, then obviously attempts at rehabilitation have failed.
“Education, transportation, health care, employment etc all fall to the side and your vote rests on this issue (it “buys your vote”)?”
I would probably vote for him anyway, based on the above issues. I am a writer. I was being dramatic. I cannot be bought. :-)
“I mourn the fear mongering of goverment in this state and country and the loss of rationality in the populace.”
Agreed that there is fear mongering taking place, and I don’t necessarily agree with it all (and I feel it is propagated as much by the media as the government). However, I do feel that I have a rational argument here. Irrationality would be if I was truly “shouting for people to be burned at the stake.”
Thanks for your comments!
Sour:
Agreed on the “grey area” that is teenage sex. I think that the article outlines that this would apply to those molesting children under the age of 13. Remember that it is also a 2nd time offender situation. You might have been accused of molesting your 15 yr old girlfriend, but do you think that is likely to happen twice? Also, remember, this is not automatic. You would be getting a fair trial (in theory) and I doubt many juries would sentence the boyfriend in such a case to death.
Seth:
I owe you an apology for the “gutless” comment. You are right; my saying that is the same as others calling me barbaric for my beliefs.
“. . . I think giving juries, judges and all involved with the judicial process MORE choices for how they sentence (as oppossed to mandatory sentencing laws) is a good thing, at leas in the abstract.”
Well-said. I completely agree.
Daniel: Very true. “Very extreme on crime.” I actually believe that we need to be a little more extreme in sentencing violent crimes, so that is okay with me. I wonder, though, if this is an attempt to get a cross-over vote?
True Believer:
You wrote: :If you’re a parent in Georgia, what’s more likely to affect you: child molestors or an education system ranked 48th in the country? It’s a shame we’re focused on the wrong issues.”
Check out my post about GA educational suckage at http://atlanta.metblogs.com/archives/2006/08/georgias_new_ed.phtml
As a parent, I am concerned about both. I choose to focus on both.
Child abusers need to be punished. No argument there.
But how about a discussion (not just here, but by politicians) on how to actually reduce the frequency of child molestation.
Does anyone actually think that the death penalty will actually deter people from molesting children? Is there any correlation in the U.S. between penalties and the child molestation rate? I don’t know the answer. Does anyone here?
Perdue, Taylor, the GA legislature, and every other politician who makes speeches about getting “tough” on child molesters never seem to address that question of whether their proposals will actually reduce frequency of the crime. I suspect that if they had a statistic supporting that notion, that they’d cite it. Did someone cite it? Did I miss it?
If it turned out that intensive psychotherapy and psychiatric care, combined with criminal penalties, actually reduced the rate of child molestation ,would anyone be for it? Or would voters just prefer the death penalty (which, by the way, has never been carried out in the states where it’s already instituted for child molesters).
I don’t think that the poor children I see playing in my neighborhood need a death penalty to protect them from sexual predators. They need professional after school care, police that show up when they’re called, and social workers whose case loads are manageable enough to focus adequate attention on them.
Ga. politicians give speeches about child molestation for one reason: it’s a cost-free political position. No one wants to be painted as “soft on child molesters” so everyone lines up to be the “toughest” on the issue. Tough plays well in Ga. elections. Nevermind that it doesn’t actually help the kids on behalf of whom voters are supposedly outraged.
I’d like to see credible evidence that a death penalty for child molesters actually helped children before I supported it.
Andisheh: Great comments, as always. I agree that we also need to work on the fundamental problems that create child molesters. I am not saying that I don’t also support improvements in social and police services. Again, I don’t think that the death penalty is a deterrent to child molesters. To me, and this is going to get my flamed for sure, it is much like putting down a rabid dog. We don’t try to rehabilitate rabid dogs and then put them back on the streets. Why would we do the same with a human? In my opinion, they are both public safety issues.
I also share your concerns that we have enough laws that are not being upheld as it is. Realistically, I doubt anyone will ever be sentenced to death for child molestation, and that is a problem in and of itself.
I also have to add here that Taylor has now officially lost my vote based on the ridiculous baby-kissing commercial I saw this morning. Anybody seen it? It is pitiful.
Wow. That was short. This will win you back.
Jim, if i am anything, it is fickle. That Sonny commercial is great. Who knew Sonny was such a comedian?
Imposing the death penalty as a punishment for rape is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has already explicitly ruled it unconstitutional as a punishment for rape. Taylor must know this given his background. This is nothing but pandering to soccer moms.
i am morally, ethically and logically against the death penalty. that being said, i wonder how many times a person has to commit child molestation or rape before we determine they are unable to be rehabilitated?
while we certainly lack very limited understanding of what motivates people to do this, the news is littered with story after story after story of repeat offenders of these crimes. its not like they robbed a conveience store to pay for diapers and if you just easesd their financial condition they wouldn’t have to.
i am not about vengenance. i am about protection. once someone has shown that they will engage in the willful destruction of a child’s innocene more than once isn’t it proper to remove them from society to protect the children they will inevitable come into contact with?
change taylor’s proposal to “life in prison without possibility of parole,” and yeah, i probably am all for it.
Where’s the middle ground?
Admittedly glancing through the comments and not reading all of them in full, I see rehabilitation and death represented, but I’ve always thought castration was a great answer to/solution for sex offenders.
Of course I also think it’s a great idea for people who cut me off in traffic.