Supreme Court: No Death Penalty for Juveniles - Page 3

vsvo · 03-02-2005, 20:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bravo1-3

...Texas is installing an express lane.

And giving juvenile offenders equal access. 29 on death row.

**The Reaper** · 03-02-2005, 20:59

I am going to lay it out for you people as I see it. This is just my personal observation and opinion.

There are animals among us of all ages, whether born or made that way by their environment. They will never be tamed or domesticated, no matter how many times you turn your cheek, they will be there to strike. The BTK Killer, Jeffrey Dahmer, David Berkowitz, Charles Manson, will never be normal functioning members of society. They are wolves among us in a society comprised mostly of sheep. Others of us choose to be the sheepdogs. Whether their crimes were committed at 12, 16, or 18, these wolves are incorrigable. They are sufficiently mature and intelligent to know right from wrong, but they do not believe it, do not care, or think that they are beyond the law. I think by the time we trust you to drive a car safely, you know that it is wrong to kidnap, torture, rape, and murder a 10 year old girl. Some people know right from wrong at 8, and some do not at 80. A young punk of 17 should know that it is wrong to kill another human. I do not want my kids exposed to the one who has failed to understand that, even if the murderer has been a model inmate for 50 years. I do not believe that these people are reformed.

Some of these people slide into an escalating series of criminal behavior, others just leap into their abberrant behavior full tilt. Few begin as hard core murderers. As Rudy noted, one broken window unrepaired leads to a lot of broken windows and broken lives, eventually. We don't execute kids for breaking windows. Most do a lot of bad things before reaching the point of being tried in a capital case. They need to learn action equals consequence and personal responsibility before they reach that state.

The ones that are the most heinous and are found to have absolutely committed cold, calculating, premeditated murder (and the states consider mitigating and extenuating circumstances) should be put to death in the same manner as their victims. We do not attempt to reason with rabid dogs, or man-eating tigers. We kill them. I do not care what your IQ is, your sanity was, your race or ethnicity might be, or your age. You should die for your crime, preferrably in a horrible manner. Executions should be returned to public places, not hidden as they are now. You should see these people die, and it should be carried out in a timely fashion. There are people on Death Row today who have exceeded their life expectancy on the street because they are incarcerated. protected by the state, and using the appeal system (with the assistance of the lib lawyers on the left) to draw out their evil existence. You should be tried, and if found guilty of a capital crime by your peers, executed in a public place near the scene within 12 months of your crime.

You drown your kids in a car; abduct, rape, torture and murder a mother; tie up, rape, and set afire a great-grandmother; kill a law enforcement officer in an ambush; or bury someone alive; I do not care one whit what your age is, you are one dangerously crazy SOB and should not be living on this planet.

Many here should remember when insanity became the plea excusing people from all sorts of hideous crimes. Look at women coldly and methodically killing their own kids in a horrible manner. Kill your kids, go to the mental asylum for a few years, and become sane again to be let out. Not Guilty by reason of insanity. Want her for a neighbor? What do you think the chances of her becoming a contributing member of society are? It became a crutch.

You let kids of 16 and 17 kill without facing the death penalty, they will be operating with impunity till they are caught, and after they are released. This ruling sends a very bad message to those who think that they are above the law.

No, I feel strongly that while some people who commit a capital crime may be too immature to understand the nature of their crime, the calendar is not the best determiner of that and the corect people to determine that are a jury of their peers, not the Supreme Court.

That's all I have to say about that.

TR

**Roguish Lawyer** · 03-02-2005, 21:05

Well put, TR. I agree.

NousDefionsDoc · 03-02-2005, 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I am going to lay it out for you people as I see it. This is just my personal observation and opinion.

There are animals among us of all ages, whether born or made that way by their environment. They will never be tamed or domesticated, no matter how many times you turn your cheek, they will be there to strike. The BTK Killer, Jeffrey Dahmer, David Berkowitz, Charles Manson, will never be normal functioning members of society. They are wolves among us in a society comprised mostly of sheep. Others of us choose to be the sheepdogs. Whether their crimes were committed at 12, 16, or 18, these wolves are incorrigable. They are sufficiently mature and intelligent to know right from wrong, but they do not believe it, do not care, or think that they are beyond the law. I think by the time we trust you to drive a car safely, you know that it is wrong to kidnap, torture, rape, and murder a 10 year old girl. Some people know right from wrong at 8, and some do not at 80. A young punk of 17 should know that it is wrong to kill another human. I do not want my kids exposed to the one who has failed to understand that, even if the murderer has been a model inmate for 50 years. I do not believe that these people are reformed.

Some of these people slide into an escalating series of criminal behavior, others just leap into their abberrant behavior full tilt. Few begin as hard core murderers. As Rudy noted, one broken window unrepaired leads to a lot of broken windows and broken lives, eventually. We don't execute kids for breaking windows. Most do a lot of bad things before reaching the point of being tried in a capital case. They need to learn action equals consequence and personal responsibility before they reach that state.

The ones that are the most heinous and are found to have absolutely committed cold, calculating, premeditated murder (and the states consider mitigating and extenuating circumstances) should be put to death in the same manner as their victims. We do not attempt to reason with rabid dogs, or man-eating tigers. We kill them. I do not care what your IQ is, your sanity was, your race or ethnicity might be, or your age. You should die for your crime, preferrably in a horrible manner. Executions should be returned to public places, not hidden as they are now. You should see these people die, and it should be carried out in a timely fashion. There are people on Death Row today who have exceeded their life expectancy on the street because they are incarcerated. protected by the state, and using the appeal system (with the assistance of the lib lawyers on the left) to draw out their evil existence. You should be tried, and if found guilty of a capital crime by your peers, executed in a public place near the scene within 12 months of your crime.

You drown your kids in a car; abduct, rape, torture and murder a mother; tie up, rape, and set afire a great-grandmother; kill a law enforcement officer in an ambush; or bury someone alive; I do not care one whit what your age is, you are one dangerously crazy SOB and should not be living on this planet.

Many here should remember when insanity became the plea excusing people from all sorts of hideous crimes. Look at women coldly and methodically killing their own kids in a horrible manner. Kill your kids, go to the mental asylum for a few years, and become sane again to be let out. Not Guilty by reason of insanity. Want her for a neighbor? What do you think the chances of her becoming a contributing member of society are? It became a crutch.

You let kids of 16 and 17 kill without facing the death penalty, they will be operating with impunity till they are caught, and after they are released. This ruling sends a very bad message to those who think that they are above the law.

No, I feel strongly that while some people who commit a capital crime may be too immature to understand the nature of their crime, the calendar is not the best determiner of that and the corect people to determine that are a jury of their peers, not the Supreme Court.

That's all I have to say about that.

TR

Yes, but how do you feel?

**Roguish Lawyer** · 03-02-2005, 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

Yes, but how do you feel?

LMAO

vsvo · 03-03-2005, 09:04

Nicely put, Sir.

CRad · 03-03-2005, 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

You take a life with intent and malice, you owe your life.

There's no equity in that. Take the example of Deputy Hathcock and Trooper Lowry lives compared to the lives of the Golphins. The Golphins did nothing but cause trouble, pain and sorrow. The Deputy Hathcock and Trooper Lowry gave of themselves to their communities, departments and families.

My opinion is the Golphins both deserve to die for their crime because it's the punishment for what they did. No way can taking their lives be equal or judgement for the ones they took.

In most cases the lives of the murderer can't hold a candle to that of the victim. You kill them as punishment for the crime not for a "life for a life."

**Pete** · 03-03-2005, 15:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRad

There's no equity in that.

Nowhere in my post did I place their souls on a scale and see how they ballanced out. Since there were some pretty long post in here I made it short and to the point. You take a life with planning and intent then you owe your life.

Do not read things into posts that are not there.

Pete

CRad · 03-03-2005, 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

You take a life with planning and intent then you owe your life.

Do not read things into posts that are not there.

Pete

Without reading anything into it, I don't agree with that. It's also why I think setting an age limit is a bad idea. I don't think something like the death penalty is that cut and dried.

**Pete** · 03-03-2005, 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRad

Without reading anything into it, I don't agree with that. It's also why I think setting an age limit is a bad idea. I don't think something like the death penalty is that cut and dried.

Here I thought you agreed with me and were for the death penalty. Oh, well, I guess I was wrong.

Pete

CRad · 03-04-2005, 07:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

Here I thought you agreed with me and were for the death penalty. Oh, well, I guess I was wrong.

Pete

I do agree with and am for the death penalty in a number of cases. What I don't agree with is the idea of saying you take life - you owe a life because in my opinion that boils it down to the lowest common denominator, and it's not that simple. It's just like putting a cap on the age a person can be held accountable. I know 16 and 17 year olds who have better judgement than a number of 26 or 36 year olds. But here the Court has gone and said unless a person is 18 they aren't accountable (at least where the death penalty is concerned) for their actions. They've set an arbitrary cut off date. I don't think that's right.

Pete, you're an SF guy surely you know by now you are rarely, if ever, wrong. It's just a failure of clear communication.

C.

**Pete** · 03-04-2005, 07:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRad

Pete, you're an SF guy surely you know by now you are rarely, if ever, wrong. It's just a failure of clear communication.

Wrong? Oh I've been plenty wrong a time or two. Good thing a CSM outranks an LTC on some things

.

Opinions are opinions and one's opinion is never wrong. It might be based on bad information, poor judgement or just a messed up mind but it is still just an opinion. When a person uses false "facts" to back up their opinion is where they start to start sinking in the swamp.

Any plans for SFAS? If you do and get selected I'll take you out for steak and a drink (beer if you're over 21).

Pete

QRQ 30 · 03-04-2005, 08:04

Be forewarned, I am addressing the age issue and not the death penalty per se.

A line has to be drawn. To leave it to total arbitration will only add more confusion, litigation and appeals. Age lines are used all throughout society. One must be 16 to drive. Some 18 yr olds are too immature and some 14 year olds are more than suffuciently mature. However the line must be specific. The same for drinking, voting, and legal issues.

At age 18, in this country, an individual becomes an adult and legally can act for himself and conduct business without his guardian's permission. That seems a reasonable point to draw the line.

IMO "Try as an adult" has become a political cry of politically ambitious DA's.

**Pete** · 03-04-2005, 08:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by QRQ 30

A line has to be drawn. To leave it to total arbitration will only add more confusion, litigation and appeals

I agree with you Terry, the problem I have is with the line as the courts see it. The courts have placed "lines" all over the map. 16 to drive, 18 for the death penalty and voting, 21 to drink and abortion without parental notification at any age. We can all argue the placement of the lines but it will not solve the problems.

My opinion on drinking age. This follows the old "If you're old enought to die for your country" line. Keep the drinking age at 21 but any soldier with an active duty ID card can drink at any age, even at 17. If you want a beer that bad go for it.

What say you guys in the pipe line on this subject?

Pete
With two 15 year old girls who love to be DDs.

CRad · 03-04-2005, 08:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

Any plans for SFAS? If you do and get selected I'll take you out for steak and a drink (beer if you're over 21).

Pete

I'm too old for SFAS plus the wrong gender. I'll take you up on the steak and beer though. We agree on the issue of opinions too.