Death Penalty for MInors (includes Somalia, Iran, the COngo, and...the USA)

I was logging onto the internet this evening, and my handy dandy headlines popped up on the screen. The first tag read something about Martha, the next about IPods, and then something interesting appeared.

High Court Weighs Juvenile Death Penalty

The article reads...

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Wednesday struggled to assess the morality and propriety of states' executing murderers who killed at age 16 or 17 - the ultimate punishment carried out in few places outside the United States.

The article gets worse as it goes...

The court has outlawed executions for those 15 and under when they committed their crimes. Still, 19 states allow the death penalty for those older teenage killers.

Another article, High Court Debates Teen Executions, reads:

The federal government and 22 U.S. states permit the death penalty, and 19 states allow the executions of juveniles. Twenty-two minors have been executed since 1976, and 42 others are now on death row.

...international human rights groups have criticized the United States for allowing it and said executing minors puts it on par with countries like Somalia, Iran and Congo, the only other countries to allow the death penalty for minors.

Anyone else find this just a wee bit...odd?

I'm in Texas, one of the precious 19. I'm starting to jitter in my boots, if you want my honest opinion.

I was against the death penalty before, and now I'm starting to lose faith.

If you cant walk the walk then dont talk the talk. I don't think any teenagers have to worry about being shot for stealing clothes and jewelry.

I mean youd have to do something truly sick and depraved, I dunno like Rape several children, then torture them to death and film it all while singing down with America.

Now I dont think that happens very often, so dont jitter too much.

It all depends on what the Federal age of consent is. In some countries, 16 is considered an adult, while other countries 16 is still a child. In some African tribes, in order for a boy to reach adulthood, his tribe requires him to kill a lion on his own. 60 years ago, 16 year olds started families and joined the military, now we view them as children.

Remember those two boys who were caught in England for kidnapping a 2 year old from a mall, abusing him and making him walk miles before leaving him to die beaten on the railroad tracks.

Yeah they just got released a couple years back when they turned 18....in the US they'd be in their unmarked graves where they belong.

Take your holier-than-thou crap elsewhere...this world is brutal, and truly evil do-ers deserve the noose.

Originally posted by FreiMaurer
Take your holier-than-thou crap elsewhere...this world is brutal, and truly evil do-ers deserve the noose.

yes, let us walk the path of getting pleasure through enacting retribution
because that's what seperates us from the criminals
we only get pleasure from harming those who deserve it....
hmm

looking at the death penalty like that, one could construe it as quite evil

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
looking at the death penalty like that, one could construe it as quite evil

Is the death penalty really a case of good and evil? I'd rather think not. It is a case of ultimate justice, and the most severe deterrant possible, aside from outright perpetual torture with the utmost of unending pain. And even then, it still fails often to deter people from commiting murder and acts that defy belief in a civilized society.

But the question of what age that deterrant should take place is even tougher. Personally, I'd lower that age down to about ten. Yup, I said ten.

Reason: A child is made aware much younger than that, that in life there are many many things that are to be avoided at all costs. You teach to avoid chemicals in the house such as bleach. They learn in school about dangerous insects, snakes, and animals. They learn that if they don't look when they cross the road, they can be killed instantly. And they also learn the dangers of guns, most of the time under adult supervision.

So please tell me why then, with all those other dangers, that the act of killing in itself- even worse than stepping out in front of a car and killing yourself- is not included on that long list of dangerous acts that can result in death? Yep, even at age ten. Or less.

To kill those that have raped, molested or murdered without reason, should face the severest punishment. But be careful not to muddy the water with phrases like "evil" and "the right way" and other such sensationalism. It's mind-less blood lust in the name of justice that starts mistakes. While there are still flaws in the justice system, there are going to be mistakes, and innocent people will be murdered by the state.

Originally posted by Subcomandante
While there are still flaws in the justice system, there are going to be mistakes, and innocent people will be murdered by the state.

Absolutely. Two wrongs can never make a right. The death penalty is wrong, in all of its forms in my opinion.

If someone has done something truly horrible, why kill them and let them off easy?

Now I'm not too familiar with cases of the death penalty applied to minors in the United States, but for those of you who don't know, execution of any minor is against human rights laws established by the United Nations as part of its International Bill of Human Rights. The US though, is certainly not the only offender.

How about this Iranian girl who was executed for "Crimes Against Chastity" after she was raped by a middle aged man?

[ABC News] - 4 Corners - Execution of a Teenage Girl
She had previous convictions for crimes against chastity – behaviour like being alone in a car with a boy. For these she had received a hundred lashes. At the age of thirteen a relationship began with a much older taxi driver. He may have been a predator working on a young woman without a reputation she could defend. He may have offered affection. Certainly in Australia a 50-year-old man having sex with a young teenager would be guilty of statutory rape. Under Sharia law in Iran where the age of consent for girls is nine years old the woman is assumed to be the temptress.

More links:
[ABC News] - 4 Corners - Background

Eye for an eye, we'd all be blind.




If a crime is haneous enough, I believe the death penalty should stand.
It should never be taken of the table, but it should never be dealt out easily.

If you murder someone in cold blood, put him in prison for life.
If he goes on a murderous rampage killing several... put him to death.

like wise, if he rapes someone, castration, and life in prison.
If he rapes a baby, or multiple women, put him to death.

The problem is when lawyers come into the mix.
Lawyers are what cause the law to be taken out of context.
If they can create an ARGUMENT about something, then they have the ability to alter the law.

To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson: If a child doesn't respond to correction by the time he's 14, he should be taken out and silently and decently beheaded.