Skip to comments.
CNN: US SUPREME COURT: ALL DEATH PENALTY CASES WITH JUVENILE KILLERS THROWN OUT!
CNN on TV
Posted on 03/01/2005 7:21:16 AM PST by Next_Time_NJ
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Constitution forbids the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes, ending a practice used in 19 states.
The 5-4 decision throws out the death sentences of about 70 juvenile murderers and bars states from seeking to execute minors for future crimes.
The executions, the court said, were unconstitutionally cruel.
This report will be updated as details become available.
TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ban; deathpenalty; impeachthem; judicialtyranny; juveniles; levinsexactlyright; meninblack; readmarklevinsbook; ropervsimmons; ruling; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400, 401-420, 421-440 ... 821-826 next last
To: Next_Time_NJ
The executions, the court said, were unconstitutionally cruel. And the murders they committed aren't cruel?
401
posted on
03/01/2005 8:53:55 AM PST
by
Mo1
(Question to the Media/Press ... Why are you hiding the Eason Jordan tapes ????)
Comment #402 Removed by Moderator
To: BureaucratusMaximus
So if a child learned to have sex? If they learned how to drink wiskey? If they learned how to drive a car? and follows through with the act, they are no longer children either? Again.. we only treat them as adults when they do something bad.
403
posted on
03/01/2005 8:54:20 AM PST
by
Next_Time_NJ
(NJ demorat exterminator)
To: Next_Time_NJ
Abortion is about life not only morality.
We have the right to life as long as we are not a threat to others.
New born babies have a right to life!
404
posted on
03/01/2005 8:54:31 AM PST
by
M 91 u2 K
(Kahane was Right!)
To: Harmless Teddy Bear
When you commit first degree murder fully knowing that what you are doing is wrong...There is your line. Oh well then...you are in favor of making it even MORE arbitrary.
Most 7 year olds understand that murder is wrong. But with cartoons and video games...maybe they don't understand that shooting someone might actually KILL them. Same can be said for even some 14 year olds. Who will make the decision then...A psychologist, a judge, YOU?
We have made the age of majority 18. That is the law in the land. We simply must accept that children are viewed differently by LAW.
405
posted on
03/01/2005 8:54:39 AM PST
by
colorcountry
(All the people like us are we, and everyone else is They. ...Rudyard Kipling)
To: Tree of Liberty
Are you serious? Ok then why cant juveniles sit on juries? Do they lack reason? Or can 12 yr olds serve in the military?
406
posted on
03/01/2005 8:55:04 AM PST
by
amosmoses
(Merle Haggard- The last great American singer.)
To: null and void
well yeah then it will be the guns fault....
407
posted on
03/01/2005 8:55:07 AM PST
by
Vaquero
To: Quick1
So because there is no death penalty, there is no penalty at all? Huh? Huh? I never said there should be NO death penalty. And I thought it was pretty obvious. I am PRO DEATH PENALTY. You do the CRIME (murder), you pay the price (the death penalty).
And because of the seriousness of the crime of MURDER, I'm not inclined to really have an age restriction whatsoever. Yeah, if you're old enough to murder someone, and you know that murder is wrong, then you're old enough to face the consequences.
408
posted on
03/01/2005 8:55:08 AM PST
by
MeekOneGOP
(There is only one GOOD 'RAT: one that has been voted OUT of POWER !! Straight ticket GOP!)
To: Next_Time_NJ
You don't give someone that is just learning to drive the right to drink at the same time. That would increase the drink driving deaths which of course these young drinkers would not be held accountable for, according to some.
We have a society where we try to incrementally move minors into adulthood. If the legal drinking age were 16 I think we'd see a lot more drop outs and more alcohol abuse. We don't take them into the military because we want to educate minors.
Recruiters get into trouble for things like forging high school diplomas.
These things shouldn't HAVE to be explained!
409
posted on
03/01/2005 8:55:37 AM PST
by
Netizen
(jmo)
To: colorcountry
We have made the age of majority 18. That is the law in the land. We simply must accept that children are viewed differently by LAW."We" have done no such thing. That's the whole point.
410
posted on
03/01/2005 8:56:02 AM PST
by
JCEccles
(If Jimmy Carter were a country, he'd be Canada.)
To: M 91 u2 K
Abortion is about both life and morality.. Abortion has a ton to do with morals. And the death penality has nothing to do with life?
411
posted on
03/01/2005 8:56:03 AM PST
by
Next_Time_NJ
(NJ demorat exterminator)
To: Peach
I really don't have a problem applying the death penalty to teenagers...as long as they are kept in prison until they die.Ditto to that !
412
posted on
03/01/2005 8:56:25 AM PST
by
Dustbunny
(The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist)
Comment #413 Removed by Moderator
To: Next_Time_NJ
No one is so young and innocent when they commit a murder that they are unaware it is wrong.
414
posted on
03/01/2005 8:57:24 AM PST
by
Hexenhammer
( Four more years is the just beginning.)
To: Netizen
Thats my point.. They arent ready yet.. They dont have the brains to do it. Again why only treat them as adults when they do something bad..
415
posted on
03/01/2005 8:57:34 AM PST
by
Next_Time_NJ
(NJ demorat exterminator)
To: Next_Time_NJ
Because we understand that there is a much lower threshold to knowing when a big something is bad. It is the subtle nuances that come later. First degree murder is not subtle.
You ask any eight year old and he knows what death is.
416
posted on
03/01/2005 8:57:46 AM PST
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(No one knows the shape of the future or where it will take us. We know only the way is paved in pain)
To: Quick1
>>Lock him up for life, don't execute. I know it won't satisfy your lust for blood, but aren't we trying to run a moral country here?<<
LOL
good one.
Lock him up for life ..okay.
You mean lock him up until some other judge reverses his sentence.
Crime does pay.
To: Modernman
It's more complicated than that. A crime can have a mandatory minimum sentence. However, a judge is now more free to determine whether a person convicted of a crime deserves to have additonal years added to his sentence. This ruling does not give judges the power to go under a mandatory minimum sentence. Oh no Judges can now give what sentences they want which means bleeding heart liberal judges will give lighter sentences to criminals.
The ruling over turned mandatory minimum sentencing laws, I believe. Correct me If I am wrong with a link.
418
posted on
03/01/2005 8:58:16 AM PST
by
M 91 u2 K
(Kahane was Right!)
To: mict42
Will they be put into GP when convicted? That might be worse than death.
419
posted on
03/01/2005 8:58:37 AM PST
by
Perdogg
(Rumsfeld for President - 2008)
To: Next_Time_NJ
Not really surprised by this.
But to get some discussion started think about this. If you support the death penalty for junvinials this you must support lowering the age of consent. You have said that the individual was sane and cognitive enought to committe the crime. There for the same junvinal is capable for the same sane and cognitive thought process to consent to sexual activity.
debate away freepers!!!!!!!!!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400, 401-420, 421-440 ... 821-826 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson