Posted on 01/24/2006 11:41:49 AM PST by presidio9
It seems some people go into politics just before they go totally brain dead. This is the only explanation for the announced effort in New York State to increase the penalty for killers of children to life without parole from the current 25 years to life. "I hope that will play a deterrent," said a Brooklyn assistant district attorney, urging on the politicians. Where do we get these people? Let us see: Envision an enraged parent or some other custodian of a child (the sort of person the law has in mind) who is abusing his or her ward and, while in the throes of a homicidal rage, pauses before delivering the fatal blow to consider the penalty. Life without parole is too high a price to pay, he somehow reasons. But 25 years to life, that's a different story. With that, the blow is administered.
The proposed legislation is already being called "Nixzmary's Law" after Nixzmary Brown, the 7-year-old Brooklyn girl who was allegedly tortured and then murdered by her stepfather.
Little Nixzmary was starved. She weighed only 36 pounds at death. She was tied to a chair. She was repeatedly beaten. She was made to eat cat food. She was deprived of toilet privileges and had to use kitty litter. She was repeatedly kept out of school and when, finally, she supposedly helped herself to some yogurt, the authorities say, her stepfather killed her.
Over and over again officialdom reached out to her - often feebly, in the end futilely. Her school noticed her condition and made a report. A doctor examined her. Social workers went to the house, could not get in and went away. Neighbors must have suspected something was wrong. Her relatives must have known enough to worry or maybe just to wonder. Letters were
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
It is simply amazing to me to see people here and everywhere embrace this nonsense.
ML/NJ
He actually makes a pretty good argument for the death penalty.
Is this equal justice under the law? A kid's life is automatically more valuable than an adult's life? At what age does a person's life lose value and therefore only constitute a normal murder sentence from a killer?
Exactly. If this law is to be constitutional, it has to be applied equally to everyone.
these kinds of laws are on the books everywhere - for a wide range of offenses - I don't see any successful 14th amendment challenges to them anywhere.
Typical knee jerk reaction from the libs, "pass a new law!"
in NY, first degree murder only applies to the killing of a police officer. if the 14th amendment was as you claim, I am sure some NY lawyer defending a cop killer over these past years would have gotten some court to agree - so far, they haven't, so my guess is that your interpretation of the 14th is incorrect.
Yes. Additionally kids are awarded special protection because they can't protect themselves. Additionally, the crime is more heinous because the perpetrator is a parent.
My interpretation is correct. The fact is, there are a lot of unconstitutional laws on the books. Hate crime legislation comes to mind.
So your life's value is directly correlated to your ability to defend yourself? Interesting theory.
What journalists like Cohen cannot accept, however, is that this society is totally incapable of dealing with incidents like this -- because "dealing with it" would require us to do things that "civilized people" would consider utterly unacceptable. Anything short of tossing these mutants (and I include the girls step-father and mother in this case) through a wood-chipper within ten minutes of their conviction in a court of law is a waste of time.
Well, obviously not in this society. We legally kill off 2mm of our most helpless individuals every year.
Works for me!
I had not heard that quote, but gosh it makes sense!
state hate crime laws have been upheld, so long as they mainly regulate conduct already criminalized at the state level, and do not criminalize speech alone. so have these kinds of "uplifts" on sentences for acts which are already crimes at the state level.
So your life's value is directly correlated to your ability to defend yourself? Interesting theory.
When a bound captive has been tortured over a period of time and slowly killed, shouldn't the murderer face just a a weensy bit of extra punishment?
And this is more fallout from the so called sexual revolution that implied it was ok for women to have multiple partners and have babies without getting married--this "mother" had six kids from different fathers; the step-father who killed Nixzmary had fathered only two of her children.
The jury should have the option of the death penalty. That's as extra as you can get.
Do we need to go back to the old days when such cases were prosecuted under animal cruelty laws? You can get people whipped up about starving a dog to death, so why not a child? In the end, it is the the judges that order these children back home to monsters. It behooves everyone, including the relatives, to expose the monsters and protect the children at all costs. If a child is murdered by someone in her/his own family, excuses are made about "parenting problems" that can be solved by counseling, education, and other ideas that don't work for severe abusers.
I say take these monsters out of society either by lethal injection or life sentences with no parole and let the prison population take care of them - they should never be a threat to any child ever again. Anything less is State-sanctioned child abuse/murder. You shouldn't get a second chance to kill your kid. That would send a message, I think, and would be a deterrent if actually implemented.
Life in prison?
Naw, too cruel.
Treat such criminals as we do the disabled....give them a "beautiful death with dignity" (starvation/die of thirst).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.