Supreme Court bans juvenile executions

[A18]

A 17 year old murderer is no less fit for the death penalty than an 18 year old murderer.

This is the "old enough to know not to kill people" status we're talking about. It has absolutely nothing to do with voting, contracts, or any other BS that actually takes maturity.

A 10 year old who murders someone should surely be put to death.

[A18]

Um putting to death murderers is a double standard...how?

[A18]

Um putting to death murderers is a double standard...how?

Two wrongs don't make a right.  Life isn't replaced by killing another person.

How is killing a murderer a second wrong?

[A18]

Still not wrong. Just an unfortuante situation.

[A18]

Um putting to death murderers is a double standard...how?

Two wrongs don't make a right.  Life isn't replaced by killing another person.

How is killing a murderer a second wrong?

It shows that you're stooping to the level of the murderer by reciprocating his sin, not showing any compassion or mercy whatsoever.

You're not reciprocating his sin. His sin was killing an innocent person.

How the hell could it be wrong to kill someone and then find out after the fact that they're innocent?

[A18]

It isn't just the fact that someone died. It's that he was murdered. There was wrongdoing on the part of the murderer.

On September 11th, 2001, three thousand people died of terrorism.

And four thousand people died of food poisioning that year.

[A18]

You support life sentancing. Should everyone be thrown in jail for life, or are we allowed to distinguish between mass murder and stealing some kid's lunch money when you were 12?

Because that would mean INNOCENT LIFE was killed, which you profess to care so deeply about.

If I slip and fall, and crack my head open, innocent life was killed. I guess that means it was wrong?

[A18]

I thought we were talking about murder here. Apparently we're now talking about "the poverty currently manifesting itself in America." Tell me, are you related to opebo?

The fact that four thousand people died means there's no reason to punish murder. Got it.

You mean killing someone for murdering someone else? That has to be kept separate from murdering someone for murdering someone else.

I didn't call you f****** looney tunes.

[A18]

There are no 100% safety standards.

Just an hour or two ago someone on your side of the argument said it's far better to die than spend life in jail. Well, maybe to spare the innocent, we'd better execute them.

I don't even completely, flat out support the death penalty. I'm for replacing it with hard labor. It is, however, vastly superior to letting some coldblooded baby killer sit in a cell, work out, or whatever else they let people in prisons do.

Murder isn't healed by murder, but it is better met with execution than a prison cell.

I dodged what question? No, I think I made it very clear that there's a difference between death and the intent to kill.

Only if this person knew the 'criminal' was innocent would this be wrong.

Food poisoning stat is important, because we have to distinguish between people dying (bad) and people being murdered (atrocity that must be punished). Unless you think we need to lock people up for life over the food poisoning or leave al Qaeda alone, in which case, I suggest you hook up with Kucinich.

Well, it's pretty simple when you try to say that there's no reason to execute people over murder just because life apparently isn't worth that much, since people die all the time.

I can completely understand how someone can oppose the death penalty on the grounds that an innocent person might die but you seem worried about the guilty.

[A18]

Someone needs to start an advocacy group for "Hell on Earth."