death help: Is it wrong to sentence a juvenile to the death penality? - Help.com

Like Qzzzz I am against the death penalty because of my faith. However, if they are going to use the death penalty I believe it should be based on how horrible the crime was and whether or not there is a good chance the person can and will change rather than age.

I am actually for the death penalty, although it really varies depending on the crime. As for death penalty for juviniles, it depends on how old they are and what the crime is. It also depends on whether they have committed the crime before. I think that pretty much anyone over the age of 13 or 14 should be held responsible for their actions. When someone is sentenced to the death penalty they go through a long trial w/ 12 of their peers, then they usually spend a lot of time in jail. The law is put in place for a reason, and if there are no punishments for horrible crimes - what is the point of even having the law?

Keep in mind that this is only my opinion.

i think if someone is killed delibretly they should be killed to

I f they have commited a major crime then no

thank you ..

i dont think so! but it depends on what they did.

I could never agree with state sanctioned murder, regardless of age. Capital punishment should be a thing of the past by now. Death is irreversible.

it depends rememberpoe. if this minor has decided to forfit his childhood then he is liable and should recieve punishment. but just becuz he did the crime doesnt mean death is the correct punishment. if you look into thier eyes u can tell. if he is dead inside. if he is a shell. empty. not afraid. he shouldnt be killed. he should be kept alive and isolated for as long as possible. but if he values his life after he takes one then he should be stripped of it. keep in mind. they have to throw thier childhood behind him. if they still are a child then it would be wrong. you can place an age on the body but after a certain point the brain will be unbound. the brain can exceed the body’s age.

I think it should depend on how adult the killer is…you shouldn’t kill a twelve year old, but a sixteen year old…? Depends on how they see their crime, how remorseful they are

How on earth do you tell how remorseful someone is?

No. I don’t think the death penalty for juveniles under the age of 18 is a good idea. I do think there are some very disturbed individuals who cannot be reformed. I have worked with juveniles who have raped but not murdered others. These individuals were very disturbed but they are still people. I just think young adults can be so disconnected to their feelings if they are influenced by others or drugs. I just don’t think they should be put to death.

I think as someone once said.. an individual’s freedom should be limited so as not to interfere with another’s.

If someone takes the liberty to rob someone of their very right to liberty, their right to liberty should be curtailed. Whether that means the death penalty is another matter.

If juveniles- and the very term ‘juvenile’ absolves them of responsibility- can rob someone of their right to liberty in the extreme, their rights should be limited. The protective privilege should end where the public peril begins and juveniles should be treated with the punishment commensurate with the crime.

I believe that juveniles should be supervised by their parents. Shouldn’t the parents be held responsible for what their child does?

No,I DON’T think it’s right.Trust me, Juvey is bad enough,death is just wrong.

well it’s not right for the parents to get all the repercussions for what their children did. they should teach them right from wrong, but if the kid does something, it’s their fault, not their parents. thats like saying, when a kid fails a class, it’s all the teacher’s fault. it really all depends on if the parent knew about what their kid was going to do, and if they had anything to do with it. if they like watched their kid do it, or if their kid told them about it before they did it, and the parent didn’t do anything, the parent should be held partially responsible. but if they didn’t have any idea what their kid was doing, then it’s not their fault it’s the kids

yepp

As parent, I believe it is my responsibily to know where my children are and what they are doing. They earn their freedom from that close supervision as they show maturity. If they make a mistake, they take a step back. If they make good choices, they are entitled to more freedom. But, only when the become adults, do I relinquish responsibility for their actions.
In the above example of the child who fails a class, I blame the parents. A child does not fail a class without warning. The teacher and the parent are supposed to work together to ensure the student’s success, but it is up to the parent to be aware of what is going on. That is what a parent is supposed to do. Parenthood is a tough job. Unfortunately, many parents do know seem to realize how much work goes into creating an effective adult. There are so many children who do not have the benefit of good parenting. Maybe if they were held responsible for their failure to parent, parents would do their job.

i dont think that it should really happen

No it is not wrong

I am against death in general, but for the sake of arguement, if I allow the idea that, legally, there are people that deserve death, then I have one major argument.

The whole purpose of classifying juveniles as such, is because we believe that there is an age in which all people become responsible for there actions. In the U.S. the legal age for culpability is 18, and age of drinking responsibility falls on 21.

If our justice system is to hold any merit in deciding what is right and what is wrong, then we need to set a clear age mark of responsibility. If a person is not responsible enough to decide who should be the ruling executive body over every life in the US, then should we really hold them responsible for the life of another?

Anonymous wrote:
I am actually for the death penalty, although it really varies depending on the crime. As for death penalty for juviniles, it depends on how old they are and what the crime is. It also depends on whether they have committed the crime before. I think that pretty much anyone over the age of 13 or 14 should be held responsible for their actions. When someone is sentenced to the death penalty they go through a long trial w/ 12 of their peers, then they usually spend a lot of time in jail. The law is put in place for a reason, and if there are no punishments for horrible crimes - what is the point of even having the law?

Keep in mind that this is only my opinion.

This is true. The law is put into place for a reason, but that doesn’t mean all laws are good.

Now this is for this question in general. I don’t think it’s right to sentence a child to death. In prison maybe, yes, but not put to death. You have to know what it was that led up to the crime. Some kids are victims. And a lot of the anger and crimes youth commit come from something that was done or not done at home. I don’t think anyone is born crazy. I think life makes you crazy. So it would be our duty to get them back on track. Not kill them. That’s some BS.

Did any of you guys see that story on MSNBC where the little boy who was about what…12 or 11 killed his dad, because his stupid azz mom brainwashed him? He got sentenced to 10 years, which was kind of light, but he was only 11. I don’t think that he should have had to serve that time. I think his dumb azz mother should have been put on trial. You could tell it was her fault. I didn’t see any sincerity in her face, though she tried to look it. I’m all for the kids, and don’t think they should have to hurt for nothing. Though they should be diciplined of course, but damm!! Death? That’s a little harsh. I don’t believe in the death penalty at all. But that’s just me.

We probably do need to remove a killer of any age from the general population so that we can all have less fear. In an ideal world, we would attempt to rehabilitate all criminals, but still protect the innocent from those criminals who committed violent crimes.
When a child is guilty of a crime, rehabilitation is a worthy goal. And, why could society not require that the parents of the child criminal be expected to pay for that rehab. rather than the public?

The death penalty is wrong!
FULL STOP!

An eye for an eye leaves everybody blind.

Why does killing people who kill people make killing okay?

Right, capital punishment for someone less than 20 yrs……I am not in favour of this. They must consider the turbulence that goes within a teenager’s mind. Well it depends upon other factors like what the crime was and the circumstaces. There are remand homes which should focus on reformation oh human beings.

This is an age old post but I may as well stick my oar in. I’m against the death penalty entirely (thankfully it is not legal for the state to take life in cold blood in the UK.) I can’t state more than the standard reasons but just for fun here they are:
Any miscarriage of justice is guarantueed irriversable.
There is wide dispute about the amount of suffering undergone by a person being executed. Many methods (some hangings, electrocution, gas chamber, lethal injection etc) paralise the victim before they die over a matter of up to a few minutes, the assumption is that they are unconsious but we can’t be sure.
There is no acctual positive result of executing someone, the only reason for doing it is revenge, I would have hoped western society had outgrown that.
In the USA the chances of a death sentance being passed vary widely depending on the defendant’s ethnic origin.
There is evidence to show that violent crime rises in areas where the death penalty is enforced compared with similar areas where it is not. I’m not aware of any serious studies as to why but I would guess that once a person has comitted a capital crime and are in essence already dead, they will commit further crime to cover it up or even further crime since they no longer have anything to lose.
If justice is to be fair and even the death penalty should be applied to certain criminals regardles of their social status, gender, race, religion, age & location, it is not.
A large portion of criminals on death row are mentally retarded, mentally ill, or were suffering with mental health problems when they committed the crime and/or defending themselves at trial. These individuals need care not killing.
After being sentanced to death many criminals spend years waiting to die, in a few cases they have been taken to the execution chamber and the execution has begun only to be halted when they recieved a last minute stay of execution. Most of these go on to reenter the chamber and have the execution completed at a later date. It goes without saying that this is very stressful, under international torture laws and pretty much every military and civilian law in the western world pertaining to torture this constitutes psychological torture and is illegal. The pressure of waiting to die (whether or not they enter the execution chamber more than once) leaves many inmates with severe psychological problems while they wait for death.

Yes it is old. But not the question.

To start with, any killing of juveniles puts a judical system lower than lowest, that position already being occupied by at all having capital punishment.

Nobody gave us the right to kill. Therefore we can not delegate that right to anybody working for us, i.e. presidents, judges or whoever.

Then the one who kills is affected by something. Lunacy, lust, greed or whatever, but to a degree of being sick. Or maybe scared, or desperate. But affected. That does not neccessary excuse the act, but it may be an explanation.

Then you have the other people, those who are not in affection. Those are chosen people because of their dignity and integrity. Like juries, judges and lawmakers.
By ice cold blood, they don’t hesitate to put somebody to death! They are worse than any mass murderer!

These people are often “Christians”, claiming that they have the right to put somebody to death. That is an insult to their God, because if he wanted somebody dead, he would fix that himself without compromising others to do that dirty work.

Murderers, that is what they are!

And this is NOT a matter of what crime somebody has committed.
This is a matter of the relation between ourselves and our system!

Not a fan of the death penalty overall - child or adult. Especially difficult situation for a child - since they have less capacity to understand the full impact of their actions. Depends a lot on the child, their age, their maturity, etc, whether you can hold them as accountable as an adult.

The two countries in the world executing most people, are China and USA.

What will be needed to make these two countries civilized?

I do not want to be “tolerant” of a##holes. I would like to defend myself and put the moron out of business when he/she decides to hurt or abuse me or my family/friends. Who needs a death penalty? How about instant justice?

Sure. I can understand it. But it would not be right.
But maybe he/she hurt your family/friends because they hurt his family/friends. Who did that because those guys hurt another of his friends… and so on.

Instant justice may be understandable, but not worthy of civilized human beings.

Killing out of greed, dispair, being afraid or whatever may also be understandeable, but not tolerable. Rape by uncontrollable lust may be understandable but totally unacceptable. Hurting by intention may sometimes be understandable but not acceptable.

But to sentence somebody to death, by cold blood, is not understandable. It is totally unacceptable, and all those that involve in it are by far worse than all of the criminals!

Because those hypocrites try to justify it, telling themselves and others that they have a divine right to decide who shall die and who shall live, hat what they are doing is in any way decent.

So what if your brother or son is executed in error? Those things happen!
Do you have the right then to kill the judge and the jury? Because the error makes them murderers!
OK, they are “given” that right by the Government. …but that makes the Government murderers.
Will you then have the right to kill the Government?

Well, that would be understandable, too.
But I don’t believe you would say it is acceptable.