Death Penalty for Juveniles Unconstitutional

[CAPTAIN MIKE]

The Supreme Court ruled this week that on a national basis, imposing the death penalty on minors (under age 18) will be unconstitutional under the 8th Amendment.

 

[MudPuppy]

I've not read the consitution in a while, but I sure don't remember that part.

I'm not attacking or defending the justice in executing those under 17/18--but is it truly unconstitutional or is this "judicial legislation"?

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

 

[Vernal45]

Give the young punks, the ones that will do bad, a free ride. Go ahead, kill some one, we wont do a thing to you.

 

[rick_reno]

Funny thing, Christopher Simmons – the misguided lad who bound a woman (Mrs. Crook) up in duct tape and tossed her off a bridge told friends they could “get away with it because they were minorsâ€. So if a couple of 17 year old punks break into your home to commit a robbery, duct tape your arms together while putting tape over your eyes and mouth and using electrical wire to tie your legs together and finally they toss you off a bridge – you better be good at the dolphin kick. They won’t get the death penalty. Chrisopher Simmons might have been misguided, but he was right – thanks to the Supreme Court.

Read the court decision here it's really very enlightening.

 

[Werewolf]

The recent decision to prohibit the execution of minors was based IMO on fairly simple logic:

Minors are less capable of understanding the potential consequences of their actions and thus it is cruel and unusual to put them to death.

For some minors the above is very true - hell - it's true for many that are legally adults.

The death penalty IMO should be reserved for the truly evil among us. IMO for an act to be evil the actor must be fully cognizant of what he or she is doing and the harmful consequences that issue.

If it can be determined by competent authority that the minor was indeed incapable of understanding the consequences of his or her action then it would IMHO meet the test that makes the death penalty cruel and unusual. Executing those that are truly retarded - for example - is just plain wrong IMO - assuming they are so retarded they don't have a clue that what they did is wrong. Lock 'em away but don't execute them.

OTOH - many legal minors are perfectly capable of understanding that murder is wrong and that there are/will be consequences.

It is beyond me why the USSC could not rule that the death penalty be applied on a case by case basis. It would be up to a judge to decide competency (gee! isn't that what they get paid to do) and determine whether a legal minor had the ability to understand the consequences of his/her actions. If competent then the needle and gurney may be in their future if so judged by a jury. If not then rotting in a cage may be their fate. Either way it should be left up to a judge and jury.

A blanket prohibition against the death penalty for murder commited while one is a minor is not justice - it is just another example of how ZERO TOLERANCE type rules fail to accomplish what they purport to accomplish.

 

[2nd Amendment]

The truly evil would be those who plan, then carry out, a murder. We aren't talking about kids who don't understand smacking Jimbo in the head can have negative repercussions. We're talking about killers with records committing a crime because they were betting they could get away with it. He bet wisely, didn't he.

I'm tired of hearing all the debate about the DP and it's "purposes". Here's what it boils down to: Take a life, give a life...your own. I don't care if it offends some of the more weak-kneed, nor do i care if helps reduce crime. It makes sure the perp in that case doesn't do it again, regardless of his or her age.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Unfortunately, the "child" in the case the Supremes ruled on committed a coldly calculated, brutal assault ... with full knowledge and understanding of exactly what he was doing.

While I can MAYBE go along with passing laws restricting the use of the death penalty to those older than ten (maybe twelve) years of age ... this perp deserves to be terminated. There is nothing "unconstitutional" about executing a mad dog killer. It would be far less cruel than his actions.

I grow very weary of the current Supreme Court. They appear to be incapable of reading the Constitution.