Amazon.com Widgets

Do you think minors should ever be considered for death penalty sentencing?

  • If the crime fits the bill.

    I love when people say that "they're brains aren't developed" and "they don't know what they're doing". That doesn't change from the fact that they committed a crime and just punishment is due. Unless you can prove that the minor is legitimately brain damaged and is incapable of a coherent thought, then that's another story. But if the kill 10 people and wound 10 others with a home-made pipe bomb because they think their life sucks, then just punishment is due. Which in that case I'm pretty sure would be the death penalty.

  • A crime is still a crime regardless of age.

    Minors should ALWAYS be considered for death penalty sentencing, assuming their crime is as monstrous to even motivate the jury to consider considering the death penalty sentence. I believe crime should be considered irrelatively of age, because a crime is still a crime regardless of age. The minor criminal should then be proceeded with just as any normal adult criminal, and evaluated on their qualification for the death penalty!

  • Do adult crime do adult time

    I have conflicting views on this matter. I am a firm believer in what goes around comes around and I think juveniles are eligible for capital punishment if the crime was serious enough. If a minor commits a homicide with abominable circumstances (e.G. Rape and torture) and he/she feels no remorse, capital punishment seems warranted. On the other hand, I oppose life without parole for juvenile offenders, the other extreme in juvenile sentencing. It seems like if I oppose putting minors behind bars for the rest of their natural lives, perhaps I should also oppose juvenile death penalty.

  • Nothing better than fear.

    The law system is in place not to catch every single criminal but to catch a few they can and set examples to the rest what happens. If they get caught too.

    So hanging 1 or 2 kids to threaten the rest. It's good. If any kids would be extremely frightened to bully any more in schools. To cause physical harm and damage to others.

    Besides most say no to death penalty to minors because they go soft. They see kids as cute and cuddly and innocent. If any, we all have been kids and we all know while there is innocence doesn't mean there is a lack of badness.

    Adult killers to act upon anger. They do it more meticulously than kids. However doesn't change quite a bit of murders are from just moments of rage or emotional overwhelming. They still get death penalty.

    So why not for kids? Sucks for the kid but we are trying to create a society where people will fall in line.

  • Some minors should be considered for the death penalty

    Some crimes are so heinous that the death penalty could be a proper punishment. The death penalty may even be appropriate for minors who are of proper age to understand the consequences of their actions. It should only be considered in very extreme circumstances such as serial murder or extremely tortuous murders.

  • The death penalty should be abolished

    Minors should not ever be eligible for the death penalty because the death penalty should no longer exitst. It is a barbaric punishment that has little to no influence in preventing future crimes. Death row cases cost millions of dollars more to prosecute than cases resulting in life sentences. And, most importantly of all, a death sentence is impossible to reverse if new evidence comes out showing a wrongful conviction. It is morally wrong to create the possibility of executing an innocent man.

  • Torture and Fear are the best plan of action

    For one, it really matters on the crime, but killing somebody doesn't teach anything. Death just ends their life. Although some people believe in a greater afterlife, most believe that once we die on Earth, we're gone. Torture is a better way to get the point across. For one, it'll scare the piss out of them to never commit that crime again, and for two, it gives them another chance to make up the wrong that they did. Life is very precious, and death is very extreme. It would make more sense to rehabilitate someone then to end their life.

  • Nothing better than fear.

    The law system is in place not to catch every single criminal but to catch a few they can and set examples to the rest what happens. If they get caught too.

    So hanging 1 or 2 kids to threaten the rest. It's good. If any kids would be extremely frightened to bully any more in schools. To cause physical harm and damage to others.

    Besides most say no to death penalty to minors because they go soft. They see kids as cute and cuddly and innocent. If any, we all have been kids and we all know while there is innocence doesn't mean there is a lack of badness.

    Adult killers to act upon anger. They do it more meticulously than kids. However doesn't change quite a bit of murders are from just moments of rage or emotional overwhelming. They still get death penalty.

    So why not for kids? Sucks for the kid but we are trying to create a society where people will fall in line.

  • Brains are not developed enough when people are minors.

    Minors should never be considered for death penalty sentencing. As heinous as some of the crimes are that minors commit, their brains are not fully developed until they are over 18, so they should get prison sentences or perhaps physical punishment. Hitting/spanking a minor serves as a deterrent to commit future crimes.

  • Life in prison.

    No,, I do not think that minors should ever be considered for death penalty sentencing, because the death penalty should be reserved for the most extreme cases. There is always the possibility that the minor did not fully comprehend what they were doing, or that the minor had terrible parents and never had a chance.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.