 |
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
This reminds me of a famous child murder case that occurred in Chicago twenty years ago. A 10 year old boy shoved an 18 month old child out of a window. The toddler died, the 10 year old was arraigned and released into the custody of his mother. Less than a week later "Yummy's" repeatedly stabbed body was found underneath a bridge. Is that what you had in mind?
While in this case the perpetrator may have been molested bear in mind that kids that age often engage in same sex experimentation regardless of their true orientation. Combine that with exposure to sex and violence, and even sexual violence via the media, then it's easy to see that even a kid who hadn't been sexually abused might perpetrate such a crime.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001 time: 00:16
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Verres
The connection seemed logical enough to me. You may not agree with it, but I'd prefer it if you destroyed my arguments rather than attacking the way I expressed myself |
Um, I was addressing your arguments, not how you expressed yourself. The arguments were not logical.
quote:
I suspected that i would be accused of advocating vigilanteism if I said the family of the victim should be allowed to chose the killer's punishment, so I thought I would save you the trouble and say it myself. |
That's not the same thing as vigilanteism, though. If the state were to convict the killer and then allow the family to choose the method of punishment, while I would strongly oppose such a thing, it wouldn't be vigilanteism.
quote:
On the contrary, I've thought about it at some length. I am well aware that vigilanteism calls into question who is ultimately responsible for law and order etc, but I do not think that is necessarily a bad thing. |
Time devoted to thought doesn't connote it being well thought out.
Vigilanteism does far more than just "question" such a thing, though. It places the populace at the mercy of roving mobs who aren't accountable to anyone and may dispense "justice" as it sees fit. I don't see how anyone can say this is a good thing.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:16
|
|
The 12 year old brain may or may not be capable of having the requisite mens rea for murder. Just because you think you remember what you were when you were 12 doesn't mean you can generalize that to everyone. Clearly statements like that indicate a lack of understanding and experience with children.
If I had more time I would post links to studies of the juvenile brain that show the lack of development in areas which are thought to control impulses. I have a slew of information and articles on the topic, but unfortunately they are at my office.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:16
|
|
He is not elligible for LWOP, according to the article. 21 then out.
I doubt 12 year olds are waivable (or whatever the equivalent is) in Mass.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:16
|
|
And Mass is, I think, the only state that allows Juveniles to have a jury. Who knows if you would want one in ths case, but its a very unusual option.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
civman2000
|
 |
of the Martian Empire
Jun 2001 time: 23:16
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
12 years old is old enough to know what you are doing. You have to balance the rights of the person, with the need to protect society. Until we have a better idea as to why this 12 year old raped and killed his brother, then we shouldn't be letting him back into society.
Secondly, if the kid has some sick and confused ideas, then we are not doing him any good by releasing him. He needs to be in the care of others, not left to these same ideas again. |
I'm not saying he should be released, I'm just saying that calling for the death penalty or life in prison automatically is insane.
quote: Or maybe the state should try to rehabilitate him before assuming that he's a permanent threat. |
. IMHO, everyone can be rehabilitated; no one can be irrevocably evil.
quote: We'd have to check that out, I know some states (rightfully) allow juvenniles to be tried as adults in extreme cases, I know that was done with the school shootings in every state except Arkansas. |
This disgusts me. First, on principle, it disturbs me that people who are still mentally immature children can be tried as adults, and that the seriousness of the case should have anything to do with it. Sure, there are some individual cases where it may be appropriate, but I think it would be better to restrict the option in general. Secondly, I find it extremely unfair to try anyone who does not yet have the right to vote or the other rights that come with majority as an adult. If they're not mature enough to be trusted with the basic priviledges of our society, why should we demand that they have all the responsibilities that come with maturity? It's a doubles standard! If the voting age was, say, lowered to 16, I would have no problem (in most cases) with trying 16-year-olds as adults.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16. Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|