Arnold, California, and Necrophilia

Today Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law a bill making necrophilia a crime punishable by eight years in prison. A similar bill failed to become law last year. I have a couple of rhetorical questions here. Why should it be a crime to use a corpse in this way? Why would any one want to use a corpse in this way? Why is California the last state in the union to criminalize necrophilia? Why did last year's ban fail?

The internet hasn't caught up with this one yet, but here are some pertinent links:

www.google.com...

[edit on 04/9/10 by GradyPhilpott]

Blame the victim. Blame the victim. Blame the vic... just kidding!

Originally posted by curme
Blame the victim. Blame the victim. Blame the vic... just kidding!

Be careful. I just got docked 270 points for that observation. That's pretty funny, though.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Why should it be a crime to use a corpse in this way?
Why would any one want to use a corpse in this way?

I can only try to answer two of your questions...

1. It is and it should be a crime. Respect for the dead.

2. Dead girls don�t say no. And they don�t talk back like a live one might do...

8 years is what you might get for murder in Norway.
Max. 21 years in jail, which in reality is much shorter than 21 full years.
A man in Norway is believed to have killed as many as 138 people.
He confessed to 27 murders.
He was finally convicted of 22 murders and given a 21 year sentence, the maximum allowed by Norwegian law.
They let him out of jail after 12 years...


EDIT: some facts about the norwegian serial killer...



[edit on 2004/9/10 by Hellmutt]

There may be some answers here relative to the law and the traditions impacting treatment of the dead:

The dead themselves have limited legal rights. Chief among them is the right to remain silent. From the time of the ancient Egyptians, the conviction has been that corpses have the right to rest undisturbed and unmolested. William Henry Francis Basevi, in his 1920 book The Burial of the Dead, wrote that across history, cultures with almost no other rituals in common treat their dead with reverence. "In or near the grave are placed food, clothes, and weapons; while the body is protected from molestation often most elaborately. All this provision conveys the idea that there is something more in burial than the disposal of a dead man's bones."


The respect for corpses is so rooted that we even agree to deal gently with the bodies of our enemies. International rules about the treatment of the battlefield dead date back centuries. Witness Shakespeare's Henry V, in which a French herald pleads with King Henry: "I come to thee for charitable license/ That we may wander o'er this bloody field/ To book our dead, and then to bury them." The 1949 Geneva Conventions explicitly provide that prevailing forces must "search for the [enemy's] dead and prevent their being despoiled." The conventions further require that enemy "dead are honorably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, that their graves are respected, grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased, properly maintained and marked so that they may always be found." Violators have been convicted and imprisoned.

The right of the dead to rest quietly is not merely spiritual or historical. It was given voice, only last week, by the French government's advocate in the Martinot case. Christian Prioux rhetorically asked of the court: "What kind of peaceful resting place can a fridge be, when you can just go downstairs and take a peek any time you want?" Although the deceased in this case evidently wanted to be peeked at, Prioux maintained that the dead sometimes deserve more respect than they ask for themselves.

The state limits what survivors can do with the remains of the deceased or what the deceased can demand. Recording deaths, regulating the death business, and protecting corpses from abuse are all government functions, for reasons ranging from health and hygiene to crime control to fraud prevention.

Why can't you cryogenically freeze your grandma? Well, in some states you can. But you don't get to do as you please with your dead because a very long legal tradition rejects the notion that family members own the remains of their loved ones. This rule stems from the 17th-century British belief that human souls have the right to reclaim their bodies on Resurrection Day, therefore they can't transfer those rights to their descendants. American courts still refuse to find a property right in the body of the deceased, and so crimes against dead bodies are treated leniently for the most part. The Model Penal Code provision concerning abuse of a corpse only makes it a misdemeanor, explaining, "[G]reater penalties seem plainly excessive in light of the fact that the harm involved is only outrage to sensibility." In other words, the law permits survivors to recover for emotional damage and trauma but not for damage to the dead as their property.

[edit on 04/9/10 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by Hellmutt

8 years is what you might get for murder in Norway.
Max. 21 years in jail, which in reality is much shorter than 21 full years.
A man in Norway is believed to have killed as many as 138 people.
He confessed to 27 murders.
He was finally convicted of 22 murders and given a 21 year sentence, the maximum allowed by Norwegian law.
They let him out of jail after 12 years...


EDIT: some facts about the norwegian serial killer...



[edit on 2004/9/10 by Hellmutt]

Thats pretty scary you would think they would atleast pass a law after that if you killed a 100+ people you would get life in Norway.

Is that suppose to be justice for the families of the 138 people. If I was a family member of a person that guy killed I would shoot him in the head the second he got out of jail and then happily serve my 8 years.

grady you ask why someone would sign such a bill? you ask why someone would be prosecuted for doing such a thing with a corpse? because pretty soon if it wasnt punishable people would start thinking its normal! pretty stuipd question if you ask me.

there are my serial killers out there who kill people just for the taste of their bodies when eaten, not to mention for their own sick sexual pleasure.

if you ask me arnold is just being a step ahead of these serial killers. becuase hes thinking like they do. only to work against them.

I think if corpses didnt want it they shouldnt dress that way. Whats a man susposed to do? They just lay there seducing you.

God that is sick

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
If I was a family member of a person that guy killed I would shoot him in the head the second he got out of jail and then happily serve my 8 years.

I think they gave him a new identity.
And snuck him out the back door without telling anyone first.
I guess he might have done something to change his face too.
Maybe a beard or something.
I know I would if I were him...

Originally posted by Hellmutt
8 years is what you might get for murder in Norway.
Max. 21 years in jail, which in reality is much shorter than 21 full years.
A man in Norway is believed to have killed as many as 138 people.
He confessed to 27 murders.
He was finally convicted of 22 murders and given a 21 year sentence, the maximum allowed by Norwegian law.
They let him out of jail after 12 years...

[edit on 2004/9/10 by Hellmutt]

This is the kinda crap you get when you worry more about the killer than the victoms.

I hope the Judge and parole board are the first new victoms on his list

Originally posted by topsecretombomb
grady you ask why someone would sign such a bill? you ask why someone would be prosecuted for doing such a thing with a corpse? because pretty soon if it wasnt punishable people would start thinking its normal! pretty stuipd question if you ask me.

Why, thank you for calling me stupid. You know I have been docked many points for less than that and no one, that I know of, has ever been docked for asserting my lack of intelligence.

But, to address your observation. First, these are the questions I asked:

I have a couple of rhetorical questions here. Why should it be a crime to use a corpse in this way? Why would anyone want to use a corpse in this way? Why is California the last state in the union to criminalize necrophilia? Why did last year's ban fail?

Now, I will ask you a question. Do you know the meaning of a rhetorical question? I'll give you a hint:

A question asked to induce thought and to provide emphasis rather than to evoke an answer.
www.google.com...

Got it?

"it was a tough life, things were hard, but now I finally get eternal rest and... whats that? ..ow....OW...OWWWWOWWWWOWWWWAAAAAAAGHHHHHHHH!!!!!"

Seriously though, as long as both parties consent I don't have a problem with it.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by topsecretombomb
grady you ask why someone would sign such a bill? you ask why someone would be prosecuted for doing such a thing with a corpse? because pretty soon if it wasnt punishable people would start thinking its normal! pretty stuipd question if you ask me.

Why, thank you for calling me stupid. You know I have been docked many points for less than that and no one, that I know of, has ever been docked for asserting my lack of intelligence.

But, to address your observation. First, these are the questions I asked:

I have a couple of rhetorical questions here. Why should it be a crime to use a corpse in this way? Why would anyone want to use a corpse in this way? Why is California the last state in the union to criminalize necrophilia? Why did last year's ban fail?

Now, I will ask you a question. Do you know the meaning of a rhetorical question? I'll give you a hint:

A question asked to induce thought and to provide emphasis rather than to evoke an answer.
www.google.com...

Got it?

He/She said the question was stupid, not you.

As for the law, well I don't know what to say. Its a pretty random law to decide to make an issue of as a governor. When someone dies all that is left iis a piece of meat, I am not religous so all I see is flesh.

However that does not mean I think having sex with a dead body is something a sane person would do.

I remember reading that multiple persons semen were found in Marlyin Monroe after she had died. Probably an urban myth but who knows

Originally posted by Kriz_4He/She said the question was stupid, not you.

I was busted for calling a person and idiot, when what I actually said was, "I know your not an idiot, you just sound like one."

I see a strong equivalence, myself.

At any rate, one should always strive to return good for evil.

Originally posted by Kriz_4
I remember reading that multiple persons semen were found in Marlyin Monroe after she had died. Probably an urban myth but who knows

Normally I wouldnt have sex with a dead person but in her case.........?

Originally posted by deevee
"it was a tough life, things were hard, but now I finally get eternal rest and... whats that? ..ow....OW...OWWWWOWWWWOWWWWAAAAAAAGHHHHHHHH!!!!!"

Seriously though, as long as both parties consent I don't have a problem with it.

Is this an actual quote from the late Sam Kennison?

I really want to be cremated when I die. One reason may be this.
But then I guess someone will make a pie out of my ashes.

Originally posted by pennyforyourthoughts
I really want to be cremated when I die. One reason may be this.
But then I guess someone will make a pie out of my ashes.

I dont know if you know this but you can have a Diamond created from your ashes.

lifegem.com...

Hmmm, what if someone does a deliberate NDE like on the movie "Flatliners" and someone has sex on them, but then brings them back to life?

This could open up a whole line discussed in another thread: legalized corpse prostitution!

Ok I can see why they made it illegal, I mean it's sick.

I wished they attached a 'no placenta eating' bill to this. Come on, that is simply screwed up. I can understand people eating fingernails and buggers but a placenta!? Jesus H. Christ...

Sick world, man.

This is a dead boring subject.

I think it's all political bull# though. How many known necrophiliacs were caught and let off with a "don't screw corpses again" smack on the wrist, prior to Arnie's new law?
Maybe they're just closing a loophole that some sicko might exploit. Is there a rise of necrophilia cases in the US?