Posted on 02/22/2005 9:57:10 PM PST by logician2u
Anyone who doesn't think the War on (some) Drugs affects them personally would have second thoughts if it was one of their children who was attacked by this predator.
Brents gets impaled and left to rot on his pike, as a warning to would-be offenders.
Angelos gets 10 lashes and probation.
Does anyone have any answers?
Gee, here's a thought....kill 'em as soon as possible after trial. Quit wasting the taxpayers money to give murderers and rapists room and board. That would free up a lot of cells for the less violent criminals and put an end to repeat rapists and murderers.
Tie them both face down naked on cots in the center of prison.
There is a reason why we have the right to bear arms.
This is a direct result of mandatory-sentencing laws that say if criminals use a gun in the commission of their crime they'll go to prison for a long, long time. I believe it started as an NRA-backed experiment called "Project Exile." It doesn't much matter if the gun was actually fired, or even brandished. If the perp has one, his sentence will be a long one.
No, child-rape should be a capital offense.
There's a huge difference between the child rapist who served 15 years and someone who sells $350 of marijuana and gets 55 years without possibility of parole.
Your question was "When our justice is unjust"
The government should deal the drugs?
Uh, $350 worth of weed ... that's an ounce!!! Wait, the numb-skull had a gun in his possession. Still that's nuts to send him up for 55 years while a violent child predator is let loose after 15 years. We the people need to sit down with our representatives and set some priorities that make sense.
Decriminalization
Yes, I do.
They're old and the test has probably changed a bit, but here they are:
1) cSorry, I don't at this point remember which class it was for.
2) a
3) c
4) b
5) c
6) T
7) F
8) F
9) T
10) F
No, child rape should be a capital offense.
It is in Florida and Louisiana. Regardless of what state he lives in, though, he should've been executed the first time.
But in their zeal to demonstrate they are tough on crime, sometimes their priorities get misplaced.
That's why we used to have a judiciary which was free to fill in the blanks, as in particular the length of time a convicted criminal should be imprisoned, in proportion to the severity of the crime.
Mandatory sentencing laws have taken that option away from judges, and now we must live with the consequences.
BTW, although the Brent Brents case is new, the fallout from Judge Cassell's sentencing Angelos to 55 years has been ongoing. We may have missed it here on FR, but the legal community did not.
Google on "Weldon Angelos" and you'll be amazed.
As is usual with stories of this nature, important facts are conveniently left out. Missing from the story, of course, is that he turned down a plea bargain that would have gotten him 15 years.
Many people have served long sentances for less. He only has himself to blame - for his actions, and his attempt to avoid the consequences for his actions. Save your pity for the victims who purchased his poison.
This story is simply propaganda for those who want to 'decriminalize' drugs. The article is also deceptive in that it also poses a false premise that their is a "linkage" between these two examples (we are letting out child rapists for innocent pot smokers). The question we should be asking is, "why did the child rapist get off so light ?".
-R
I believe the reason that we don't see child rape being punished as a capital offense is that a large percentage of child rape is perpetrated by a relative of the child (by either blood or marriage). Regardless of what the rapist deserves, most juries would stick at putting a child's father or stepfather to death for raping her (or him). Also, I think you would see a lot less reporting of rape by relatives if they knew upfront that the rapist had a good chance of the death penalty. People tend to protect their relatives whether they deserve it or not.
Regardless, I do think that the death penalty is what is deserved by child rapists.
My guess is that Brent J. Brent will meet vigilante justice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.