Thursday, November 19, 2009

Youth and the death penalty

Today in class we discussed a case in which a young boy who was under the age of 18 killed a girl by tying her up and throwing her off of a bridge while she was still alive. The question that arose was do we think that we can or should give this juvenile the death penalty? There is no doubt that this young boy’s action was pre-meditated. He thought of the plan to tie up this girl and kill her in such a heinous way, that it’s without a question to me that we should definitely give this young boy the death penalty. I think that cases in which juveniles kill other people should be looked at by a case by case basis. However, if a murder is committed in such a grotesque way such as the young boy did, what is stopping us from even thinking twice about giving this kid the death penalty. Chip, in class, said that the worst part for that boy is that he gets a little needle prick in his arm, where as this girl probably struggled to keep her head above the water and fight to get her limbs loose so she would live. I mean think about the difference here. The girl was ALIVE and drowned to death because of this sick young kids mind. It’s a tough subject to talk about, but that young boy deserves what is coming his way. He knew what he was doing; he even offered to show exactly what he did again in a re-enactment at the crime scene. Do we really think that he didn’t know his actions were wrong?

5 comments:

  1. I do agree with the post above that when there is an option to try a juvenile for the death penalty we should look at each case differently and the facts of the case. I do believe the boy knew what he was doing when he tied a girl by tying her up and throwing her off of a bridge while she was still alive. In this case I believe the boy deserve the death penalty because the murder was pre –mediated and he went around and brag about the murder. The facts in the case are beyond reasonable doubt that the teenager knew his act was wrong. I feel if we are going to give juveniles the death penalty we should do it because of the facts of the cases and not by emotions of the victim’s family or think we are serving justice to society.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I totally agree with you, I think this is a terrible situation and the boys actions deserve to punished with by death. He planned the attack and showed no remorse for his actions. I don't think that we should compare ourselves to other countries. Who cares if we are in the same category with some pretty bad countries? As long as we are doing what we feel is right.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When dealing with the death penalty in any situation I think you have to look at each individual case. With this example it's obvious that there are several contributing factors as to why he deserved to get the death penalty. He committed a pre-meditated crime with such severity that any adult who committed the same act would be put on death row as well. I think that psychological factors and others need to be considered when ruling on cases like this. The death penalty shouldn't be ruled out for all juveniles. When crimes are committed that are as serious as this example, it is necessary for the criminal to be punished to the full degree, whether they are under 18 or not.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with many of the posts above. That is, the death penalty is a controversial sentencing and both sides can be argued. However, I think, much like the individual above, that cases have to be look at case by case and there is no definite ruling that could apply to "all" cases--something a positivist might attempt.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree that this sick individual she be punished to the fullest extent for such a crime. For the death penalty, it is essential to examine the dynamics of each case on a case by case basis. In modern society, numerous inmates have been sentenced to the death penalty unjustly. Psychological factors do contribute to this specific case, but lets face the facts: a boy brutally took the life of a young girl.

    ReplyDelete