Juvenile Death Penalty Debate - Pro

[Carol Jon and Spencer]

We are doing a debate on Juvenile Death Penatly we're were put on the pro side of this and we need information on where we can find hard facts on this topic:
Heres our Proposition
*The death penalty for those who committ crimes under 18 years of age is not cruel and unusual punishment and hence not barred by the Constitution.*
Please let us know if you have anything that can help thank you!

[senior]

The USSC ruled that it was cruel and unusal March 2005. I suggest you read the opinion and look at the dissent.

Generally, states would hold a hearing to determine whether a juvenile should be charged as as adult or not. It would look at the age of the offender and the crimes to make the determination. That seems much more fair than having this arbitrary cut off point of 18 years.

[senior]

www.prodeathpenalty.com/Issues/Roper_v_Simmons_Amicus_Brief_states.pdf

Read the facts of the Duke case. Look how he planned the murders, how he hid evidence, how even though he was a juvenile was able to persuade those older than he, including an adult, to participate in this brutal crime.

[Carol Jon and Spencer]

Thanx for the feedback! We'll let you all know how it turns out please if you find anymore stuff send it our way thank you!

[Kristy Mueck]

I am writting a paper on "trying juvinilles as adults". I need two organizations (both pro and con) for this research project. I must be able to write a persuasion paper for both sides. I MUST have two national organzations for and against this... Please help....

[josephdphillips]

Kristy said:

I am writting a paper on "trying juvinilles as adults". I need two organizations (both pro and con) for this research project. I must be able to write a persuasion paper for both sides. I MUST have two national organzations for and against this... Please help....

I don't know why you need organizations, but reading Roper vs. Simmons would be a good start. That's the decision of the U.S. Supremes that nixed capital trials for under-18s.

_{caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=us/000/03-633.html}

If that link isn't clickable, try tinyurl.com/4kmx5

[bee]

senior said:

The USSC ruled that it was cruel and unusal March 2005. I suggest you read the opinion and look at the dissent.

Generally, states would hold a hearing to determine whether a juvenile should be charged as as adult or not. It would look at the age of the offender and the crimes to make the determination. That seems much more fair than having this arbitrary cut off point of 18 years.

most people, at eighteen, are able to understand the gravity of murder. probably some are able to do this at sixteen and probably some are not able to do it at twenty-one, but most are there at eighteen.
that is the way we decide the age to vote or to drive a car or to enlist in the army.
actually, juries have shown themselves to be reluctant to impose a capital sentence on anyone who is much younger than eighteen. so the law here is also responding to reality and experience.

[Wickedlyamoral]

bee said:

senior said:

The USSC ruled that it was cruel and unusal March 2005. I suggest you read the opinion and look at the dissent.

Generally, states would hold a hearing to determine whether a juvenile should be charged as as adult or not. It would look at the age of the offender and the crimes to make the determination. That seems much more fair than having this arbitrary cut off point of 18 years.

most people, at eighteen, are able to understand the gravity of murder. probably some are able to do this at sixteen and probably some are not able to do it at twenty-one, but most are there at eighteen.
that is the way we decide the age to vote or to drive a car or to enlist in the army.
actually, juries have shown themselves to be reluctant to impose a capital sentence on anyone who is much younger than eighteen. so the law here is also responding to reality and experience.

Around the world, the legal age at which an individual enters adulthood generally ranges from 16-21. This magic number, whatever it may be, is known as the age of majority. At that age, in the U.S., an individual is responsible for him or herself and can legally enter into a contract -- not exactly the most exciting rite of passage, but hey, at least you can get your own cell phone.

In most states the age of majority is 18. As for marriage and driving, different minimum ages apply state-by-state. You might have "21" on the brain because it's the legal drinking age in all 50 states. This, apparently, is the highest drinking age in the world.

Culturally, the age at which someone is considered an adult often varies from legal status. In the Jewish faith, for example, a child is recognized as an adult at 13, and is henceforth responsible for obeying the Commandments.

Whether speaking legally, physiologically, or sociologically, perception of when an individual formally passes from childhood is a complicated matter. An entry in Boston College's Sloan Work and Family Encyclopedia is a fine (albeit academic) survey of the intricate factors that go into our changing definitions of adulthood.

[fu]

they murdered someone! fry em!

[Even]

fu said:

they murdered someone! fry em!

That would make the murderer even with his victim, but it would not bring justice.

[crappieboy]

On a side note to simmons, he got married shortly after his sentence was changed from death to life in prison. Isn't that sweet?

[Ariel]

Kids can kill much younger than 18. In Britain, Mary Bell strangled some boys at the age of 10. Robert Thompson and John Venables murdered a boy when they were about the same age as Bell. All of them were let out by the time they were 21. There was no justice for their victims or the families of the murdered children. All three of these 'kids' knew exactly what they were doing and got their kicks out of it. Mary Bell murdered more than once. If we had a decent government in Britain that got us out of the EU and brought back the death penalty we could have hung the lot of them.

On the issue of juvenile murderers, I believe that the idea of a minimum age for execution is crazy but I think that at the very lowest it should be 14. I'd favour 12 myself but that's probably too strong meat even for some of my fellow-pros.

Like women (and I speak as a woman who's currently having a debate on another forum with an anti about why she thinks women should always be let off but not men), kids CAN be just plain evil. Most, thank God (and I am a Christian so mean that sincerely) do not. Even at 10 years old kids know that killing is wrong.

[Cant think of a name]

You are probaly going to write mean responces to this but there are other factors when it come to the Venable/ Thomas killing. Both these children suffered serious phycologial and physical abuse. Thomas's father beat and sexually abused his wife and children. This mother was a acoholic who attepted suicide on many times and one of his brothers tryed to OD in a foster. His other brothers would fight, beat and threaten eachother with knife. Venables mother had a pshchiatric problem, including depression, his parents seperated andhe only saw his dad 2 days a week. To top this of his brother and sister had major learning disabiltes. He often banged his heasof walls and cut himself with scissors.

What they did was wrong and they should hae been imprisoned for life but after all that abuse you have to wonder did they really understand?

[Jen]

I have to be honest here. I had a real crappy childhood...not even going to go into the disgusting details. I have never killed anyone. Those boys imo were straight up evil. That poor little child. May he rest in peace.

[iamjumbo]

Cant said:

You are probaly going to write mean responces to this but there are other factors when it come to the Venable/ Thomas killing. Both these children suffered serious phycologial and physical abuse. Thomas's father beat and sexually abused his wife and children. This mother was a acoholic who attepted suicide on many times and one of his brothers tryed to OD in a foster. His other brothers would fight, beat and threaten eachother with knife. Venables mother had a pshchiatric problem, including depression, his parents seperated andhe only saw his dad 2 days a week. To top this of his brother and sister had major learning disabiltes. He often banged his heasof walls and cut himself with scissors.

What they did was wrong and they should hae been imprisoned for life but after all that abuse you have to wonder did they really understand?

no mean response, just straight reality.
it's not cool that they had a crappy childhood, but their childhood is totally irrelevant. regardless of what they endured, they still knew it is wrong to murder, and that is the ONLY thing that matters.

[Cayte]

I would think their childhood to be very relevant considering that they killed when they were CHILDREN.

Your childhood defines who you are as an adult. A crappy childhood CAN mean crappy values (which was obviously the case here). Thankfully, since they were still children, change was still possible.

[iamjumbo]

Cayte said:

I would think their childhood to be very relevant considering that they killed when they were CHILDREN.

Your childhood defines who you are as an adult. A crappy childhood CAN mean crappy values (which was obviously the case here). Thankfully, since they were still children, change was still possible.

nope. the ONLY thing that matters is whether or not they know that murder is wrong. there are very few for whom you can claim that their crappy childhood made them totally believe that murder is okay. unless you can prove such a claim, their childhood has no relevance whatsoever

[Cayte]

But when they have grown up with abuse all their lives they may think that hurting another person is acceptable.
They may have not set out to KILL instead maybe HURT. They are CHILDREN and don't know themselves as well as adults. if they have had a crappy childhood then chances are their parents have not been around to install proper values.

I wonder if you can prove that our childhood does not shape out adulthood.
I doubt it very much.

[josephdphillips]

Cayte said:

I wonder if you can prove that our childhood does not shape out adulthood.

What you can't prove is why childhood is relevant to anything. It isn't.

By rights I should be on death row by now. Yet am I am not. How do you explain that?

[Cayte]

Your childhood build you up to who you are as an adult.

You go to school as a CHILD
You learn as a CHILD
You are taught basic human kindness as a CHILD

I do my best to prove my point but it is hard when people only read what they want.


How do i explain how you are not on death row?

Simple

You have been very good at evading the police OR (and this is the real reason for i assume you are not a murder) you are lucky and have been saved and taught proper morals etc.

[josephdphillips]

Cayte said:

Your childhood build you up to who you are as an adult.

It doesn't predetermine my moral choices.

Cayte said:

You are taught basic human kindness as a CHILD

Not in my case.

Cayte said:

I do my best to prove my point but it is hard when people only read what they want.

You can't prove your point because it is based on a false, deterministic premise.

Cayte said:

You have been very good at evading the police

Nope. My parents would have turned me in.

Cayte said:

OR (and this is the real reason for i assume you are not a murder) you are lucky and have been saved and taught proper morals etc.

A decision to refrain from any act of murder doesn't accrue from "luck." It is a cognitive choice.

I have not been "saved." Not only did Jesus NOT die for my sins, he deserved to be crucified for his.

In our amoral culture, I shouldn't have any morals at all, but I do. I have made the choice to retain some. They were not imparted to me, certainly not by way of example.

[Kay]

Cayte said:

Your childhood build you up to who you are as an adult.

You go to school as a CHILD
You learn as a CHILD
You are taught basic human kindness as a CHILD

I do my best to prove my point but it is hard when people only read what they want.


How do i explain how you are not on death row?

Simple

You have been very good at evading the police OR (and this is the real reason for i assume you are not a murder) you are lucky and have been saved and taught proper morals etc.

Please join the board if you wish to debate, this section is for student requests only.