Supreme Court Debates Juvenile Executions

[patriot]

Yes, quite convienant...

[Tarkan]

Yes, quite convienant...

So, Patriot. Lets say we caught Osama Bin Laden alive.

You are saying that it would be immoral to sentence him to death and execute him?

Rob, you are saying it would be immoral, because Osama might actually be innocent?

In answer to your question Rob, I think the burden of proof should be higher in death penalty sentences than in life imprisonment.

[patriot]

So, Patriot. Lets say we caught Osama Bin Laden alive.

You are saying that it would be immoral to sentence him to death and execute him?

Rob, you are saying it would be immoral, because Osama might actually be innocent?

In answer to your question Rob, I think the burden of proof should be higher in death penalty sentences than in life imprisonment.

Is Osama Bin Laden an American citizen? Or is he an international war criminal? He IS the enemy in a war, and in war it's either death or victory.

But let's run with it anyway. I think Osama would rather be killed and sent to heaven with all the pretty virgins instead of rotting in an American military jail. The dishonor would be worse than any Hell he could be subjected to. Let him sit in a bullet-proof box where Americans can come and spit on him and piss on him for the rest of his existence. He'd probably commit suicide anyway. That's not an appropriate example Tarkan.

Answer my question now...

Is the death penalty worth the lives of a few innocent AMERICANS?

[Prodigal Son]

Tarkan,

So ... executing the two 11-year-olds would be ok with you? Is an affinity for executing children, teens, and people like Corky just a Texas thing?

And Kilroy -- the reason it DOES need to be answered is due to two important points:

1. Discretion has increasingly been expunged from the US judicial system due to mandatory sentancing laws.

2. The reason why tougher sentances have been pushed on juvenile offenders has largely been because they ostensibly realize what comprises right and wrong. Understanding what is right or wrong is something that is not limited to just juveniles -- children are fairly capable moral beings too, thus in principle could be executed if undertanding of right or wrong is the standard we are using to determine if execution is appropriate.

[Prodigal Son]

sentance? Did I actually type that?

Grrr.... I swear I have dsylexia sometimes. Apologies for the idiot typo.

[kilroy]

Are there any actual statistics to show that capital punishment deters crime?

if this is the question you're talking about rob, here's my take. capital punishment is not necesserily about detterence. it's about punishment.

you can go ahead and make your opening statements on why japan has a barbaric regime.

And Kilroy -- the reason it DOES need to be answered is due to two important points:

1. Discretion has increasingly been expunged from the US judicial system due to mandatory sentancing laws.

2. The reason why tougher sentances have been pushed on juvenile offenders has largely been because they ostensibly realize what comprises right and wrong. Understanding what is right or wrong is something that is not limited to just juveniles -- children are fairly capable moral beings too, thus in principle could be executed if undertanding of right or wrong is the standard we are using to determine if execution is appropriate.

i believe the process used to determine if juveniles can be tried as adults is similar to how it is determined that insane or mentally retarded people are eligible to be tried. and hey, i definitely agree that mandatory sentencing is bullshit, and i'd like to see the justice system get away from it as much as possible. i am in favor of having incredibly strict standards before one is made eligible for execution, and even stricter ones for juviniles. however, i feel the option for the ultimate punishment must be left open.

[RatherNotSay]

Here's a twist.

We've got solitary confinement prisons built in the United States now to house the worst-of-the-worst (the folks who used to be called incorrigibles... is that term politically incorrect now?) Called "supermax" prisons, they detain juveniles as well as adults. Age makes no difference - everybody is subject to the same almost total lockdown. Even during school, the juveniles see only the teacher - not other classmates.

I can't imagine what these kids are like on release back into society at age 18.

Also, I can't imagine the death penalty is any more cruel or unusual than a life term spent in solitary. But on the other hand, as others point out in this thread, there are people that have comitted crimes deserving of just such a fate. IMO.

[ROB]

Tarkan - No (And I think we have had the discussion about you intentionally twisting my meanings before - it's a straw man argument meaning you lose).

My point (for people who actually want to debate MY point) is that sometimes they get it wrong. Getting it wrong even once on a capital punishment crime is too many.

Tarkan - are you willing to see your niece or sister/brother put to death on a crime they didn't commit if it also means you can also see OBL executed?

Kilroy:

See: WW2
See: Black Vans with loud speakers denouncing non-Japanese (for any number of things) EVERYWHERE
See: Fifth generation Korean-Japanese being given no rights and having to carry a gaijin card
See: UN stats on gender empowerment
See: Refugee intake
See: Adopted children being stripped of citizenship (they may not be 100% Jananese!!?! GASP)
See: Treatment of foreign crime victims in Japan
See: Many politicians visiting the Yasukuni Shrine honouring war criminals
See: 99% conviction rate for people charged by police
See: 2 year jail sentences given to premedictated gang rapists (and subsequent public opinion of sentences being "adequate")

I quite like Japan for many reasons, but I sure as hell wouldn't be holding it up as a beacon of progressive social conditions.

[Penta]

Like, if you take the two 11 year olds in Britain that lured the 4 year old away from the mall then bashed his head in with a rock, I have to wonder how you think society benefits from them being released at 18, which they will be. And if they are never released, how society benefits from permanently locking up two horrible victimizers in a juvenile institution where they will undoubtedly victimize other juveniles who haven't committed murder and are rehabilitatable, and then graduating to adult prison where they will get to do the same. Some people, children even, really do deserve to die for their actions.

Facts again, Tarkan. They were 10, not 11. And they were released, on life licence, in 2001, aged 18, having spent 8 years in special secure accommodation, during which time they had intensive therapy. They have, of course, been given new identities, as they'd not survive 5 minutes, otherwise. (Nor would they have survived if they'd been moved, as they would have had to be once they were no longer minors, into an adult prison. They are also, one assumes, being very closely monitored, as they will be for the rest of their lives. One step out of line, and they're back inside.

They were little boys, neglected, abused, typical of the sort of kids we were talking about earlier, and they did one horrific act.

This solution is the most humane our system could come up with. I don't think it's a bad outcome for our society. Killing them would have been cheaper, but barbaric. We try to be civilised. You, Tarkan, wouldn't even try.

[patriot]

I agree, Penta, that they should not have been executed, but I think it is foolish to let them out or to try and reabilatate them. They don't deserve to be reabilitated, and I could care less how bad their childhood was.

Is it any excuse to murder someone else because you got beat as a child? What about the thousands of children who are abused that don't kill anyone?

The truth is murders aren't deserving of redemption from anyone except God, but we as a society have to be better than them by not stooping to their level and murdering them back.

[patriot]

if this is the question you're talking about rob, here's my take. capital punishment is not necesserily about detterence. it's about punishment.

So it's about punishment? Or revenge? I heard you say earlier that these people have no chance of becoming functional members of society, so they deserve to die. But by that same logic shouldn't we execute serial rapists and child-molesters as well? There is no cure for serial rapists or paedophiles, so they can never become functional members of society.

The truth is you know it's about revenge, and you know in your heart that it's wrong. It's barbaric and it makes us just as barbaric as the individual we execute.

[Penta]

i am in favor of having incredibly strict standards before one is made eligible for execution, and even stricter ones for juviniles. however, i feel the option for the ultimate punishment must be left open.

Why? What purpose does it serve?

The juvenile and special needs murderers must be a very small proportion of the total, and the very real danger of poor defence and wrong convictions even greater in their cases. Why can't you just concede that there has to be a cut-off point about full sentient adult responsibility for one's actions and accept that they shouldn't be executed? Isn't the richest country on earth capable of providing resources for decent treatment of these few people appropriate to their circumstances?

Naturally, I think capital punishment is state-sanctioned murder, wrong in itself, whatever the circumstances, but there isn't an argument that cuts the mustard when it comes to juveniles and people with the mental age of a child.

[Penta]

I think it is foolish to let them out or to try and reabilatate them. They don't deserve to be reabilitated

They were 10 years old and had completely lacked moral guidance until that point: there's no question of deserving or not. Thoroughly unpleasant and nasty little boys, no doubt, but they didn't fully understand what they were doing. They've had 8 solid years of being taught about right and wrong, and no doubt preparation for their unimaginably terrifying futures of living incognito, never being able to talk about their backgrounds, who they are, having always to remember their cover stories, never getting really close to anyone apart from their counsellors and minders in case they let something slip. Terrified that someone will recognise them in the street, and they'll have to be rushed off to another location, another cover story. It's hardly that they just swan off into an easy life, free of care. Jesus, what a life. If that isn't punishment enough, I don't know what is.

[kilroy]

okay rob, point taken on japan.

Quote:
if this is the question you're talking about rob, here's my take. capital punishment is not necesserily about detterence. it's about punishment.


So it's about punishment? Or revenge? I heard you say earlier that these people have no chance of becoming functional members of society, so they deserve to die

i never said earlier that they have no chance of becoming functional members of society. you have me confused with someone else.

Kilroy wrote:
i am in favor of having incredibly strict standards before one is made eligible for execution, and even stricter ones for juviniles. however, i feel the option for the ultimate punishment must be left open.

Why? What purpose does it serve?

the punishment must be commiserate to the crime. when the evidence is damning enough, and when the crime is vicious enough, the convicted deserves death. and it would also take away the license to committ crime unlimited in prsion to those convicted to a maximum sentence of life without parole.

My point (for people who actually want to debate MY point) is that sometimes they get it wrong. Getting it wrong even once on a capital punishment crime is too many.

they wont get it wrong if the standards set for evidence are high enough and discretion is left to the system. as i said previously, i am all for having the death penalty used on a much rarer basis than it is now, but i still think the recourse to execution should be left open for the most extreme circumstances.

[patriot]

i never said earlier that they have no chance of becoming functional members of society. you have me confused with someone else.

Ugh!!! I think I have a brain tumor or something.

Then why do you want to execute people?