Im trying to say that kids that are young do not grasp the idea of what jail and death is yet. All they see is TV and movies. If a 13 year old with a gun is going to shoot someone .. the last thing he/she is thinking about is "I might get introuble".. He/she already has the gun, loaded the gun.. i think prior to even picking up the gun.. if he/she thought they were going to go to jail they would have never picked it up in the first place.
But regarding those who do act in cold blood, I'd like the court - society really - to have the discretion to remove them from the gene pool, regardless of age.
The court has said, No, you can't make laws, we shall tell you what they should be. And they have said, we will use philosophy and not our Constitution that we are sworn to uphold, to invent systems of laws for you, the citizens.
The legislative power, forbidden to the Court, has been usurped in violation of the oath of office. The mercy in the power to pardon and commute has been stolen from the executive offices as well, all for making Judges look lofty. It is an ego trip and a power grab.
Many don't, **but some do**. Up til now, we let juries decide whether a teen "grasped" the significance of his crime.
Do you really think that a blanket generalization regarding *all* teen criminals is preferable to having each criminal judged on a case by case basis?
More importantly, do you think that *your* preference is Constitutionally required?