|
High Court Ends Death Penalty for Youths
|
View this Thread in Original format
| josh4 |
| quote: | High Court Ends Death Penalty for Youths
35 minutes ago
By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - A closely divided Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that it's unconstitutional to execute juvenile killers, ending a practice in 19 states that has been roundly condemned by many of America's closest allies.
The 5-4 decision throws out the death sentences of 72 murderers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes and bars states from seeking to execute minors for future crimes.
The executions, the court said, violate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
"The age of 18 is the point where society draws the line for many purposes between childhood and adulthood. It is, we conclude, the age at which the line for death eligibility ought to rest," Justice Anthony Kennedy (news - web sites) wrote.
The ruling continues the court's practice of narrowing the scope of the death penalty, which justices reinstated in 1976. Executions for those 15 and younger when they committed their crimes were outlawed in 1988. Three years ago justices banned death sentences for the mentally retarded.
Tuesday's ruling prevents states from making 16- and 17-year-olds eligible for execution.
As a result, officials in Prince William County, Va., said Tuesday they will not prosecute a murder case there against teen sniper Lee Boyd Malvo, who is already serving life in prison in two of the 10 sniper killings that terrorized the Washington area in 2002. Prince William County Commonwealth's Attorney Paul Ebert had hoped to get the death penalty for Malvo, who was 17 at the time of the killings, but said another trial would now be an unnecessary expense.
Juvenile offenders have been put to death in recent years in only a few other countries, including Iran (news - web sites), Pakistan, China and Saudi Arabia. Kennedy cited international opposition to the practice.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...nalty&printer=1 |
|
|
|
| electronicmaji2 |
this is total bull
the whole reason the teen did this crime was because his friends "Assured" him that he couldnt be punished for it because he was a minor
next we know anybody under 18 will never be guilty of anything because there to young to know what theyre doing :rolleyes: |
|
|
| wolverine16 |
| quote: | Originally posted by electronicmaji2
this is total bull
the whole reason the teen did this crime was because his friends "Assured" him that he couldnt be punished for it because he was a minor
next we know anybody under 18 will never be guilty of anything because there to young to know what theyre doing :rolleyes: |
All they said is you can't kill a kid, Lee Malvo, for example, will still never spend a day of his life outside of prison, which is not exactly getting away unpunished. Not to mention that the death penalty is so arbitrarily used and heavily biased toward minorities, along with the high number of people in my state who were found to be innocent while on death row. On top of that, no correlation has been shown between the death penalty and reduction in violent crime. |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by wolverine16
On top of that, no correlation has been shown between the death penalty and reduction in violent crime. |
There are other reasons for administering punishment to people being found guilty of a crime, in particular the feelings of the victims, and the assurance that justice is being served to the populace at large. Further, by containing or killing dangerous people, you keep them off the streets. |
|
|
| electronicmaji2 |
bill clinton pushed for the same law in my state and got it instated in 2 years
there were several incidents including 2 teen boys ages 16 & 17 who raped a 14 year old boy to death
they didnt get more than 15 years in jail
Because of clintons law
such laws make prosecution of monster minors uncapable and pretty soon a kid like lee malvo wont see more then 6 years in jail
TRUST ME IVE SEEN IT
these kids let out after 6 years will grow to becomes serial killers
they are arleady dead to society hey are monsters lee malvo and his friends are not sorry nor have they ever apologised they dont even care they are qaul to those in the shootings of columbine detatched from reality
he does not deserve to receive the benefits of society or jail it would be cheaper to kill him now then to have him live for life in jail...that ultimetly is his FATE anyways... |
|
|
| wolverine16 |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
There are other reasons for administering punishment to people being found guilty of a crime, in particular the feelings of the victims, and the assurance that justice is being served to the populace at large. Further, by containing or killing dangerous people, you keep them off the streets. |
I certainly advocate life in prison without parole for violent crimes, which keeps these people off the streets. I recognize that families of victims certainly experience great pain, but the Constitution is not based on the concept of "eye for an eye." The arbitrary implementation of the death penalty also means that 2 people committing the exact same crime would get different versions of justice. |
|
|
| wolverine16 |
| quote: | Originally posted by electronicmaji2
bill clinton pushed for the same law in my state and got it instated in 2 years
there were several incidents including 2 teen boys ages 16 & 17 who raped a 14 year old boy to death
they didnt get more than 15 years in jail
Because of clintons law
such laws make prosecution of monster minors uncapable and pretty soon a kid like lee malvo wont see more then 6 years in jail
TRUST ME IVE SEEN IT
these kids let out after 6 years will grow to becomes serial killers
they are arleady dead to society hey are monsters lee malvo and his friends are not sorry nor have they ever apologised they dont even care they are qaul to those in the shootings of columbine detatched from reality
he does not deserve to receive the benefits of society or jail it would be cheaper to kill him now then to have him live for life in jail...that ultimetly is his FATE anyways... |
Are you from Arkansas? Bill Clinton pushed for what law? One allowing the death penalty in the case of minors?
I highly doubt that because we do not have laws allowing the death penalty for minors someone like Malvo will ever get out in 6 years. I also don't see where there is a maximum penalty that is 15 years or death. If a 16 or 17 year old and it is determined that they knowingly committed an especially brutal crime, they still can be
charged as an adult for that crime, with greater penalties, they now just cannot be put to death. We were recently amongst a small minority in the world, with countries like Iran, who executed minors and people with mental disabilities. As for the costs of keeping people in prison for life really is not that great when you look at what the legal costs to the state or federal government are in terms of prosecuting a death penalty case. The process of appeal is more frequent and much longer, as courts provide greater opportunity for appeal when someone's life is at risk. I would hope the people who believe the death penalty should be used are at least in favor of radical reforms to the process, as it is so infrequently imposed and I believe there is still not one case where someone who is white has gotten the death penalty for killing someone who is black, while so many have gotten it in the reverse situation. |
|
|
| electronicmaji2 |
im in arkansas
bill clinton pushed for a bill to not allow death setence in case of minors... |
|
|
| smokeape |
Supreme court only closed the small gap of 16-17 year olds. It was hotly debated and a close call, but seems to me they could have comprised and left in the 17 year olds as bargain basement. Truthfully, I see no difference in a 17 year compared to an 18 year old committing capital murder nor the difference between a 15 and 16 year old. Thank god we still have the death penalty for anyone in this country. Makes me wonder sometimes when the liberal justices try to fix something that's not broke to begin with.
:whip: :whip:
[[[smoke]]] |
|
|
| Izzy |
the issue i have with it is why 18? that's such an arbitrary number. Why is 18 the line for adulthood?
a jewish kid has a bar-mitza at age 13 to enter adulthood
US "kids" at age 16 get drivers liscence because they are considered adult enough
you get drafted at 18
can only drink alcohol at age of 21
we all know people mature at various paces.
i think each trail should be done case by case regardless of the age as opposed to some random age limit. |
|
|
| smokeape |
NOw you understand the crux of the matter. Why were the Justices f*cking with rules written a hundred years ago to begin with. Age is abritrary... too late now, they ruled and f*cked things up for the next 100 years.
;)
[[[smoke]]] |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by Izzy
the issue i have with it is why 18? that's such an arbitrary number. Why is 18 the line for adulthood?
a jewish kid has a bar-mitza at age 13 to enter adulthood
US "kids" at age 16 get drivers liscence because they are considered adult enough
you get drafted at 18
can only drink alcohol at age of 21
we all know people mature at various paces.
i think each trail should be done case by case regardless of the age as opposed to some random age limit. |
i agree, agelimits are stupid. that said i dont think there are any 17 year olds that should be sent to death. |
|
|
|
|
