Replies

Ok, no wwait a minute, just cause i said I agreed with their decsions doesn't mean you or anyone need to go and get nasty with me. I happen to believe in the death penalty and support it. I also am a Conervative, but I myself have always had issues with the death penalty for people under 18. Feel free to disagree but as far as the personal attacks, can we leave thos out of this. For goodness sakes, I'm not going to wish bad things on you or anyone else.

You seem to feel that they are less of a danger if they committed a heinous murder when they were 17 years and 364 days then if they committed a heinous murder when they were 18 years and 0 days.

I just gave you an opportunity to put your money where your mouth is.

That is not a personal attack but a logical continuation of what you said. Don't blame me if you don't like the result.

If you are a conservative, and that term has any meaning in an American context, then you should support the theory of understanding the Constitution by the original intent of the Founding Fathers. The "cruel and unusual punishment" language of the Eighth Amendment did not refer to execution per se, but to the horrendous methods sometimes used in its implementation, such as drawing and quartering. It also referred to the harsher types of torture, such as excessive whipping, disfigurement, and castration.

Furthermore, the Tenth Amendment specifically states that those powers not granted to the Federal government in the Constitution were reserved to the states and the people. Prosecution of the crime of murder is the function of state governments, and has been so since the beginning of the republic. The Supreme Court is clearly overstepping its bounds and interfering with states' rights in this matter.

The decision by the Supreme Court is indefensible from an American conservative standpoint.