ChasingBlueSky 0 #1 March 1, 2005 I'm curious to hear what all the death penalty supporters say about this one: High court strikes down death penalty for juveniles WASHINGTON-- The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Constitution forbids the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes, ending a practice used in 19 states. The 5-4 decision throws out the death sentences of about 70 juvenile murderers and bars states from seeking to execute minors for future crimes. The executions, the court said, were unconstitutionally cruel. Currently, 19 states allow executions for people under age 18: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Texas and Virginia._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #2 March 1, 2005 Quote bars states from seeking to execute minors for future crimes. I think that any state that can see into the future has some technology they need to share. I wonder where in the constitution the judges pulled their positions from (specifically qoting 18 years old or legal adult versus capital punishment). I'd have thought it would be a state's issue... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #3 March 1, 2005 QuoteI wonder where in the constitution the judges pulled their positions from (specifically qoting 18 years old or legal adult versus capital punishment). I'd have thought it would be a state's issue... On the news this morning they played someone saying the judge saw the age of 18 as a clear line this country believes in (gun ownership, military, etc). That doesn't show anything about their findings in the constitution, but it was their explanation._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #4 March 1, 2005 Won't be long until it's gone completely. Then the USA will leave the company of Somalia, Iran and North Korea and join the civilized nations of the world. Homicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casurf1978 0 #5 March 1, 2005 QuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. It would also be interesting to see how much money was saved after this went into effect. CP cases are notoriously more expensive to pursue than LWOP. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #6 March 1, 2005 They're using the 8th Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. From the case opinion by Justice Kennedy: 2005 WL 464890 (U.S.Mo.) " The Eighth Amendment provides: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." The provision is applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment...By protecting even those convicted of heinous crimes, the Eighth Amendment reaffirms the duty of the government to respect the dignity of all persons. The prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishments," like other expansive language in the Constitution, must be interpreted according to its text, by considering history, tradition, and precedent, and with due regard for its purpose and function in the constitutional design. To implement this framework we have established the propriety and affirmed the necessity of referring to "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" to determine which punishments are so disproportionate as to be cruel and unusual A majority of States have rejected the imposition of the death penalty on juvenile offenders under 18, and we now hold this is required by the Eighth Amendment. Because the death penalty is the most severe punishment, the Eighth Amendment applies to it with special force. Capital punishment must be limited to those offenders who commit "a narrow category of the most serious crimes" and whose extreme culpability makes them "the most deserving of execution." This principle is implemented throughout the capital sentencing process. States must give narrow and precise definition to the aggravating factors that can result in a capital sentence. In any capital case a defendant has wide latitude to raise as a mitigating factor "any aspect of [his or her] character or record and any of the circumstances of the offense that the defendant proffers as a basis for a sentence less than death." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tcnelson 1 #7 March 1, 2005 QuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. do you think that is a cause/effect relationship?"Don't talk to me like that assface...I don't work for you yet." - Fletch NBFT, Deseoso Rodriguez RB#1329 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tcnelson 1 #8 March 1, 2005 i don't support the death penalty...it's too easy. i want hard labor day in and day out. i think a persons life in prison should consist of shelter, food/water, sleep, and labor; no tv, no visits, no weights, no games, etc."Don't talk to me like that assface...I don't work for you yet." - Fletch NBFT, Deseoso Rodriguez RB#1329 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #9 March 1, 2005 QuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. Huh? Are you saying that once murderers saw that they couldn't be executed, that they no longer wanted to kill anyone any more? I'd like to see your logical explanation for that... "Well shucks, Damien, without that death penalty, murder just ain't no darn fun anymore. I'm a-givin' it up." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #10 March 1, 2005 if capital punishment always (?) gets remapped to life without possibility of parole, it's not too bad. These kids will get the longest possible sentence. Maybe the other prisoners will do the job for the state. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #11 March 1, 2005 QuoteI'm curious to hear what all the death penalty supporters say about this one: I don't know if I'd be considered a "death penalty supporter" per se, but I think it's reasonable in some cases and don't feel particularly motivated to ban it altogether. That said, I think this was a good move. We were one of only a handful of nations left in the world that considered it acceptable to execute a person for a crime they committed as a child. Then again, I'm in the fringe element that thinks it's absurd for children to be tried as adults in the first place. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #12 March 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. Huh? Are you saying that once murderers saw that they couldn't be executed, that they no longer wanted to kill anyone any more? I'd like to see your logical explanation for that... "Well shucks, Damien, without that death penalty, murder just ain't no darn fun anymore. I'm a-givin' it up." I've had a chance to talk to some death row inmates. One of them just wanted to die, his lawyer and family was the one pushing the appeal process. I guess life in prison is that bad and he would have rather been dead then spend more time there. Maybe the thought that you would have to spend the rest of you life doing hard time could be a deterent? Then again, the other guy I talked to wanted to live no matter what, even if it meant to be in jail for 50 years. Who knows._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EBSB52 0 #13 March 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. Huh? Are you saying that once murderers saw that they couldn't be executed, that they no longer wanted to kill anyone any more? I'd like to see your logical explanation for that... "Well shucks, Damien, without that death penalty, murder just ain't no darn fun anymore. I'm a-givin' it up." Basically there is no correlation and the concept of deterrence is a smokescreen for retribution...... revenge. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #14 March 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. Huh? Are you saying that once murderers saw that they couldn't be executed, that they no longer wanted to kill anyone any more? I'd like to see your logical explanation for that... "Well shucks, Damien, without that death penalty, murder just ain't no darn fun anymore. I'm a-givin' it up." It's the "John Lott" explanation. You know all about that.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdhill 0 #15 March 1, 2005 QuoteMaybe the thought that you would have to spend the rest of you life doing hard time could be a deterent? I realize that prison life is no walk in the park, but perhaps if hard time were really hard time, it would be a deterent... If a life sentance looked like: sufficient food, water, shelter, and big rocks into little rocks (or something along those lines) until they drop... no extraordinary medical care (i.e. you don't get to go to the top rated cancer hospital in the world for free), no TV, no books, no smokes, etc... 3 hots (or colds) and a cot, and hard labor... JAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #16 March 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteMaybe the thought that you would have to spend the rest of you life doing hard time could be a deterent? I realize that prison life is no walk in the park, but perhaps if hard time were really hard time, it would be a deterent... If a life sentance looked like: sufficient food, water, shelter, and big rocks into little rocks (or something along those lines) until they drop... no extraordinary medical care (i.e. you don't get to go to the top rated cancer hospital in the world for free), no TV, no books, no smokes, etc... 3 hots (or colds) and a cot, and hard labor... J For lifers I am all for that as long as their civil rights are still in tact. For others you would need to keep them seperated so you could work on rehab and trying to find a way to integrate them back into society. This would keep them away from the "I have nothing to lose" attitude the lifers have._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #17 March 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. Huh? Are you saying that once murderers saw that they couldn't be executed, that they no longer wanted to kill anyone any more? I'd like to see your logical explanation for that... "Well shucks, Damien, without that death penalty, murder just ain't no darn fun anymore. I'm a-givin' it up." It's the "John Lott" explanation. You know all about that. Well, it didn't take you long being admitted back into this forum once again, before you resumed playing your little irrelevant games. I haven't mentioned Professor John Lott in this forum since Jan. 14th, 2004 - over a year ago. Check the search feature if you don't believe me. So I don't know why you're throwing that at me now. If you have some problem with Professor John Lott, start your own thread and state your case. Hijacking this unrelated thread to vent your anger with John Lott is not the appropriate way to make your point. If your disagreement is with me, just make your points straight-out, without the silly games. This is the kind of thing that got you banned from here for a while just recently... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #18 March 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteMaybe the thought that you would have to spend the rest of you life doing hard time could be a deterent? I realize that prison life is no walk in the park, but perhaps if hard time were really hard time, it would be a deterent... If a life sentance looked like: sufficient food, water, shelter, and big rocks into little rocks (or something along those lines) until they drop... no extraordinary medical care (i.e. you don't get to go to the top rated cancer hospital in the world for free), no TV, no books, no smokes, etc... 3 hots (or colds) and a cot, and hard labor... J For lifers I am all for that as long as their civil rights are still in tact. For others you would need to keep them seperated so you could work on rehab and trying to find a way to integrate them back into society. This would keep them away from the "I have nothing to lose" attitude the lifers have. I think it's already like that in some prisons. Wa state just went smoke free in their prisons. Got a toothach prison dentist only does extractions really bad people have to stay in their room. etc. R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EBSB52 0 #19 March 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteMaybe the thought that you would have to spend the rest of you life doing hard time could be a deterent? I realize that prison life is no walk in the park, but perhaps if hard time were really hard time, it would be a deterent... If a life sentance looked like: sufficient food, water, shelter, and big rocks into little rocks (or something along those lines) until they drop... no extraordinary medical care (i.e. you don't get to go to the top rated cancer hospital in the world for free), no TV, no books, no smokes, etc... 3 hots (or colds) and a cot, and hard labor... J If cap pun isn't a deterrent then how will prisoner abuses deter anyone? If anything, it will strengthen the resolve to commit the crime or kill/die trying, as any deterent value will shift to the consequence of where a person goes if they're caught rather than make a person think twice about committing a crime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EBSB52 0 #20 March 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. Huh? Are you saying that once murderers saw that they couldn't be executed, that they no longer wanted to kill anyone any more? I'd like to see your logical explanation for that... "Well shucks, Damien, without that death penalty, murder just ain't no darn fun anymore. I'm a-givin' it up." It's the "John Lott" explanation. You know all about that. Well, it didn't take you long being admitted back into this forum once again, before you resumed playing your little irrelevant games. I haven't mentioned Professor John Lott in this forum since Jan. 14th, 2004 - over a year ago. Check the search feature if you don't believe me. So I don't know why you're throwing that at me now. If you have some problem with Professor John Lott, start your own thread and state your case. Hijacking this unrelated thread to vent your anger with John Lott is not the appropriate way to make your point. If your disagreement is with me, just make your points straight-out, without the silly games. This is the kind of thing that got you banned from here for a while just recently... Well, it didn't take you long being admitted back into this forum once again, before you resumed playing your little irrelevant games. Is that necesary? I'm not aware of the reference, but it sounds like a metaphor to avoid having to drag out an explanation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mcarchangel 0 #21 March 2, 2005 Well I read the case. And there are a few problems with the reasoning. First off they make a big point that because of the switch of five states now a majority of states do not allow execution of juviniles. But in actuality 12 states do not have the death penalty. If the 38 states that do think capital punishment is acceptable, a thin majority 20 to 18 are inclined to execute 16, 17, and 18 year olds who have commited particularly henious crimes. But the change of five state laws is enough to change the meaning of the US Constitution. So Kennedy knows where he wants to go and will use any means to get there. He also mentions that since very few exicutions of juviniles take place this will not change tthings much. But isn't that an example of the law being properly applied it this exception is so rare that tells me it is being used only with the worst offenders.(There have been six in the last 15 years.) Then he goes on to mention that the United States has not signed treaties on this subject because if the way Congress fells about it but because the people of Europe think it's barberic we should definately get rid of it. Funny, but I don't think a Supreme Court justice should be basing his opinions based of what the governments of other countries are doing. We are the "City on a Hill" and Europe has had a lot of really bad ideas over the last 250 years. I'm not so sure we should be taking our cues from them. And to quote from Justice Scalia's dissent: "Unless the Court has added to its arsenal the power to join and ratify treaties on behalf of the United States, I cannot see how this evidence favors, rather than refutes, its position. That the Senate and the President “those actors our Constitution empowers to enter into treaties, see Art. II, §2–have declined to join and ratify treaties prohibiting execution of under-18 offenders can only suggest that our country has either not reached a national consensus on the question, or has reached a consensus contrary to what the Court announces." As they say in law school, "A sympathetic case makes for bad law."------------------------------------------------------- "These are the old days, the bad days, the all-or-nothing days. They're back! There's no choice left, and I'm ready for war." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #22 March 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHomicides in IL went down dramatically after the moratorium on CP went into effect. Huh? Are you saying that once murderers saw that they couldn't be executed, that they no longer wanted to kill anyone any more? I'd like to see your logical explanation for that... "Well shucks, Damien, without that death penalty, murder just ain't no darn fun anymore. I'm a-givin' it up." It's the "John Lott" explanation. You know all about that. Well, it didn't take you long being admitted back into this forum once again, before you resumed playing your little irrelevant games. If you have some problem with Professor John Lott, start your own thread and state your case. At which university is John Lott a professor? Last I read he was at the AEI.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #23 March 2, 2005 Quote I haven't mentioned Professor John Lott in this forum since Jan. 14th, 2004 - over a year ago. Check the search feature if you don't believe me. So I don't know why you're throwing that at me now. Funny, this post is from January 17 2005: www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1438858#1438858, Some else posting under your name? However, you cannot argue one logic in one situation, and the opposite in another, just because it suits your predisposed ideas (well, actually you can, but it destroys your credibility).... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #24 March 2, 2005 Quote Currently, 19 states allow executions for people under age 18: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Texas and Virginia. Curious breakdown between "red" and "blue" states, don't you think? "Red" states are far more likely to engage in cruel and unusual behavior. Who'd a thunkit?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrunkMonkey 0 #25 March 2, 2005 I'm thinking dying early from rape-induced HIV gets us to a dead convict, something those who favor CP are shooting for, plus we get the bonus of them living a hellish existence for the balance of their days... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
