| Author |
Message |
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
 Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:28 am Justices abolish death penalty for juveniles |
|
| Quote: | MSNBC
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.
Earlier ban
It was the second major defeat at the high court in three years for supporters of the death penalty. Justices in 2002 banned the execution of the mentally retarded, also citing the Constitution�s Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishments.
The court had already outlawed executions for those who were 15 and younger when they committed their crimes.
Tuesday�s ruling prevents states from making 16- and 17-year-olds eligible for execution.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, noted that most states don�t allow the execution of juvenile killers and those that do use the penalty infrequently. The trend, he noted, was to abolish the practice.
�Our society views juveniles ... as categorically less culpable than the average criminal,� Kennedy wrote.
Juvenile offenders have been put to death in recent years in just a few other countries, including Iran, Pakistan, China and Saudi Arabia. All those countries have gone on record as opposing capital punishment for minors.
The Supreme Court has permitted states to impose capital punishment since 1976 and more than 3,400 inmates await execution in the 38 states that allow death sentences.
Kennedy joins more liberal justices
Justices were called on to draw an age line in death cases after Missouri�s highest court overturned the death sentence given to a 17-year-old Christopher Simmons, who kidnapped a neighbor in Missouri, hog-tied her and threw her off a bridge. Prosecutors say he planned the burglary and killing of Shirley Crook in 1993 and bragged that he could get away with it because of his age.
The four most liberal justices had already gone on record in 2002, calling it �shameful� to execute juvenile killers. Those four, joined by Kennedy, also agreed with Tuesday�s decision: Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, as expected, voted to uphold the executions. They were joined by Justice Sandra Day O�Connor.
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.
Scalia's dissent
In a dissent, Scalia decried the decision, arguing that there has been no clear trend of declining juvenile executions to justify a growing consensus against the practice.
�The court says in so many words that what our people�s laws say about the issue does not, in the last analysis, matter: 'In the end our own judgment will be brought to bear on the question of the acceptability of the death penalty,'" he wrote in a 24-page dissent.
�The court thus proclaims itself sole arbiter of our nation�s moral standards,� Scalia wrote. |
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:30 am |
|
Excellent News!! Its about time they banned it
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:37 pm |
|
Fantastic! Now just to end the immoral and disgusting use of the death penalty against all of mankind. at 17, you can turn your life around, even from a life of crime (and I include the most horrific crimes in that statement). No Christian can morally accept the death penalty as an acceptable punishment, in my opinion. Not only is it inhumane, but it can also be used against the innocent, and there is no bringing back the dead if the wrong person is executed.
http://www.amnesty.org/deathpenalty
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:31 pm |
|
When your 16 or 17, you know the difference between right and wrong.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:28 pm |
|
This is HORRIFYING news. Yes, I was anti-Death Penalty, although with that stance I believed that murderers, rapists, etc. that qualified for the death penalty of ANY age should get it while it's law, INCLUDING minors. Just today I have been converted to an advocator of the death penalty for rapists, murders, and terrorists. This is BAD news, whether or not you support the death penalty at all.
Those that are hardened criminals that committed acts at age 16 or what not (who KNEW right from wrong) and are now 25 years old and older and would still be on death row are now going to be LET OUT, rather than remain on death row! NOT RIGHT. Those who commit acts such as murder, terrorism, and rape deserve the death penalty. Now this screws us more terrorism-wise. Now the terrorists know that a person younger than age 18 won't be killed, so they will use that to their advantage! This is HORRIBLE news. I'm a minor, and I see it as horrifying and wrong.
But I have one question which I actually find myself asking: Where is the President on this issue?
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
borgslayer
Rear Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 2646
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:15 pm |
|
This anti death penalty is just wrong.
This unconstitutional claim by the supreme court incourages more violent teenagers to be more violent. Which can lead to higher crimes commited by teenagers. Because now since the teenagers can't be put to death for crimes like murder, I think the crime rate of murder will rise.
|
|
|
webtaz99
Commodore
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 1229
Location: The Other Side
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:38 pm |
|
So now some punk that's out to cap somebody is taking less of a risk than an innocent person taking a walk. The innocent person gets killed, the punk just gets "life".
Total B.S., no matter what age the gunman is. 
As Ambassador Keyes said (paraphrase), "Some crimes are so heinous that we as men cannot judge the perpetrators. By exercising capital punishment, we are remanding them to a higher authority for judgement."
-------signature-------
"History is made at night! Character is who you are in the dark." (Lord John Whorfin)
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:42 pm |
|
Utterly stupid. You either have a death penalty or you don't. Sixteen or seventeen years old, as stated previously, you do know right from wrong, and you certainly know not to kill another human being. Sheesh.
|
|
|
Krall
Klingon General
Joined: 03 Sep 2002
Posts: 3863
Location: Lie? I do not lie! Except just then.
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:49 pm |
|
Ahh, Tis why I'm proud to be a texan. In texas, if there are 3 or more crediable eyewitnesses you don't wait 20 years, you strait to the front of the line. While other abolish the death penalty, My state's puttin in an express lane. 
|
|
|
Zeke Zabertini
Captain
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 4832
|
| Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:52 pm |
|
If you're going to have the death penalty, just do it. The rediculous procedures they go through now make giving someone the death penalty more costly to the state than just keeping him in prison for fifty or sixty years. I'm an advocate of the death penalty because it has the potential to save cost and space in the penal system. Right now though, it isn't doing much of a job at either. Thus, as long as the process remains so complicated, I'd rather it not be done. There's simply no benefit to it besides some twisted sense of eye-for-an-eye justice. The only way I see it as practical today is for people who are likely to escape incarceration, in which case killing them would prevent that.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:06 am |
|
Capital punishment emphasizes nothing but revenge, and is a disgusting, primitive inhumane act. Those who seek the death penalty are just as bad as murderers.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:08 am |
|
I have to say that borgslayer, Taz, and Exalya are RIGHT ON. You know the difference--you deserve the punishment. Now this guy who killed someone (forget exactly...) in 1994 and is now 25 or 26 is getting off the hook!
Oh, and also, if we don't kill them (which really got me to agreeing with the death penalty) they can socialize, join jail gangs, etc.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:13 am |
|
Exayla is right on when she says:
| Quote: | | you certainly know not to kill another human being. |
Is the death penalty not killing another human being?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:19 am |
|
| JanewayIsHott wrote: | Exayla is right on when she says:
| Quote: | | you certainly know not to kill another human being. |
Is the death penalty not killing another human being? |
For doing wrong. It's a punishment for evil.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:25 am |
|
That is not what I am asking. Is it killing another human being? Are you for people being killed or not? Abortion and the death penalty weigh the same on my balance. Killing anyone is wrong unless it is unavoidable (self defence) which the death penalty is NOT. You are choosing to make the same choice as a murderer when you let your anger take controll of you and decide make the choice that we have the right to take the lives of others. It is wrong, it is inhumane, it is evil, and from my perspective, disgustingly opposing the values of Christianity.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:27 am |
|
The death penalty is a paradox in and of itself, but the families deserve revenge, I don't care whether or not it's primative, it's right.
When you take another human's live unjustly, you lose your humanity.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:30 am |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | The death penalty is a paradox in and of itself, but the families deserve revenge, I don't care whether or not it's primative, it's right.
When you take another human's live unjustly, you lose your humanity. |
No, you deserve justice. There is a difference between what is just, and what is just dispicable revenge. It is in no way right.
And listen to your self:
When you take another life you lose your humanity. What is captial punishment...are we even listening to ourselves? Revenge does not equal justice. Justice preserves the integrity of the victim.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:38 am |
|
| JanewayIsHott wrote: |
And listen to your self:
When you take another life you lose your humanity. What is captial punishment...are we even listening to ourselves? Revenge does not equal justice. Justice preserves the integrity of the victim. |
Look at what I said again.
"When you take another human's live unjustly, you lose your humanity."
Meaning: If someone takes another's live unjustly, they no longer are a human (in my eyes), and thus the taking of that life is NOT the taking of a human life. It is the taking of a MONSTER'S live, therefore it is JUST, therefore it is not murder, therefore the executioner does not lose his humanity, he's just fulfilling justice.
If I call it a rose and you call it a tulip, we will never reach common ground. You see the criminal as one thing, I see it as another. All I wish is for you to understand my stance, I certainly understand and respect yours. This is why Captiol Punishment is a paradox, it all depends of perspective.
Last edited by LightningBoy on Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:40 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:40 am |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | | JanewayIsHott wrote: |
And listen to your self:
When you take another life you lose your humanity. What is captial punishment...are we even listening to ourselves? Revenge does not equal justice. Justice preserves the integrity of the victim. |
Look at what I said again.
"When you take another human's live unjustly, you lose your humanity."
Meaning: If someone takes another's live unjustly, they no longer are a human (in my eyes), and thus the taking of that life is NOT the taking of a human life. It is the taking of a MONSTER'S live, therefore it is JUST, therefore it is not murder, therefore the executioner does not lose his humanity, he's just fulfilling justice. |
Interesting point. I just believe in the idea that, "With actions come consequences," and when you do an action like said, you face such consequences.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Zeke Zabertini
Captain
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 4832
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:43 am |
|
It should be noted that, of the four levels of justice, personal revenge is the most primitive form. And no, I'm not reading into it any further than that.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:44 am |
|
Whatever. I will let you all continue to judge when people retain the right to leave, or if you see it fit to take their lives. I will never see the reasoning behind this, considering in my opinion all life is sacred because it was made my God, and through the death penalty you are destroying God's creation. I really don't know what I can say that gets people out of the mindset that justice equals revenge, because it doesn't necessarily work that way.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:47 am |
|
| JanewayIsHott wrote: | | Whatever. I will let you all continue to judge when people retain the right to leave, or if you see it fit to take their lives. I will never see the reasoning behind this, considering in my opinion all life is sacred because it was made my God, and through the death penalty you are destroying God's creation. I really don't know what I can say that gets people out of the mindset that justice equals revenge, because it doesn't necessarily work that way. |
What would you do? Let them socialize? Let them join gangs, make friends, and have many luxuries? I don't think this should be a matter of revenge, but punishment for misdeeds. Would you at least support the death penalty for terrorists? And if there IS a death penalty law, which there is, do you think that it, whether you agree with the basics or not, should apply to 14-17 year olds as well as adults?
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:52 am |
|
I thought I would have made it clear. If there is a way to protect the human population other than through murder, then I am against capital punishment. I am against capital punishment for ANY ONE. 14-17, murderer, rapist, terrorist, woman, man, adult, child-I don't care: it is wrong. It would be just as easy to campaign for stricter, more harsh prisons, but instead, you jump right onto the capital punishment bandwagon.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:53 am |
|
| JanewayIsHott wrote: | | I thought I would have made it clear. If there is a way to protect the human population other than through murder, then I am against capital punishment. I am against capital punishment for ANY ONE. 14-17, murderer, rapist, terrorist, I don't care: it is wrong. It would be just as easy to campaign for stricter, more harsh prisons, but instead, you jump right onto the capital punishment bandwagon. |
I used to agree with that, until I realized the cost and how it would never happen. Politicians do not focus enough on this. If they would TRULY do such a thing, I would support that over capital punishment.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:54 am |
|
Well make them focus on it. I plan on it. Things don't come up unless they have someone actually pushing for them. It can happen if people decide they care enough about it to make it happen.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
