Righteous indignation can be used to create nobility in the most deplorable of acts. Just because a behavior is rooted in twisted mores, it does not make it a suitable response.
but - if a crime is of direct diametrically opposed moral sense contrary to the standards of the society, such actions should be dealt with with an iron fist.
There is no excuse for such an action - there is no recourse for such an action - there is no proper penalty for such an action.
Besides - it's the light handed approach that the US has taken that has led to our jails breaming full of criminals, whether for misdemeanors or felonies. We allow criminals to be released in only a fraction of their sentenced time, so as to make room for the throngs of newly convicted criminals.
Our system has become weak - leaving far too many jaded in our system. People commit crimes just to end up in jail, because it's a warm shelter; food and clothing are provided for free. There is entertainment and recreation . . . no one is afraid of the penalty of their actions anymore. Look at how quickly small crime rates are on the rise across the nation.
Our jails should not be a hotel - but more of a work camp. Let criminals work for free to offer some kind of return to society. But certain crimes should not be tolerated in the least. Sure, two wrongs don't make a right - but our governement is
supposed to be the insitution that sets our boundaries, guides the populace as a whole, and responds to their needs. Our government is
supposed to be the final say as to what is allowed and what isn't. Send a man to jail for 20+ years for a crime like this, and when he's back out on the streets in 3, how does that look to the younger citizens?