Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was reading an article about a Supreme Court Decision wherein teenage murderers must be eligible for parole after a certain time. This was about one who got parole the first time he came open for it. He had spent 30 years in prison and married a guard there.
The court reasoned that Mandatory life sentences, the justices ruled in Miller v. Alabama, constituted cruel and unusual punishment for juveniles, ignoring their "immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate risks and consequences."
I'm split on this issue.
On the one hand, murdering a person(s) seems to defy whether or not the killer is a minor or not (of course, within limits). It is the taking of an innocent human life and all that includes. So it shouldn't matter if they are 16 or 18. One has to answer for their actions.
On the other hand, mid teens are not fully emotionally or mentally developed. So maybe it's good to consider parole after so many years in prison.
It's only unusual because the court blocked it. Otherwise I suspect you would see more of it. Most people including fairly young kids understand death is permanent and the victim can never recover. Teens definitely understand that. The teen not wanting or expecting a long punishment shouldn't be a factor. Some really do deserve to be locked away for life.
I was on a jury once for a case where five teens killed another teen. It was a planned murder. They'd made some dumb attempts but succeeded with this one.
The actual killer, 17 at the time of the murder, got possibility of parole after 40 years. The guy who had him do it, 18 at the time of the murder, got possibility after 30. That is the jury I was on.
I always wonder if they will get out. It's been 22 years since the trial.
I was reading an article about a Supreme Court Decision wherein teenage murderers must be eligible for parole after a certain time. This was about one who got parole the first time he came open for it. He had spent 30 years in prison and married a guard there.
The court reasoned that Mandatory life sentences, the justices ruled in Miller v. Alabama, constituted cruel and unusual punishment for juveniles, ignoring their "immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate risks and consequences."
I'm split on this issue.
On the one hand, murdering a person(s) seems to defy whether or not the killer is a minor or not (of course, within limits). It is the taking of an innocent human life and all that includes. So it shouldn't matter if they are 16 or 18. One has to answer for their actions.
On the other hand, mid teens are not fully emotionally or mentally developed. So maybe it's good to consider parole after so many years in prison.
I'm not sure what "murdering a person seems to defy whether or not the killer is a minor or not" means. Yes, of course murder is the taking of an innocent human life. That is implied by the definition of "murder," but I don't see how it follows that the murderer being a teenager is irrelevant. It is of course true that one has to answer for his actions, but that doesn't tell us anything about what a proper answer for such actions is. These sorts of statements are really just platitudes.
Many teenagers are very different people than they will be in thirty years. They are given to impulsiveness, and their behavior is sometimes very much a product of their environment. That isn't a defense against any punishment at all, but it would seem to be a good defense against a guaranteed life in prison.
To me, spending fifty years in prison could certainly constitute answering for one's actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ms12345
It's only unusual because the court blocked it. Otherwise I suspect you would see more of it. Most people including fairly young kids understand death is permanent and the victim can never recover. Teens definitely understand that. The teen not wanting or expecting a long punishment shouldn't be a factor. Some really do deserve to be locked away for life.
Understanding that death is permanent is not sufficient to say that a person should be locked away with no chance of parole. I'm also not sure that anyone has said that what the teens wants is a factor in determining the sentence.
Teen brains are still developing, and in many cases teens are biologically bad at critical reasoning. They are in many ways different people than they will eventually be. Some 18 year-olds are stone cold killers who should never enter the general population again, but a chance at parole doesn't mean they can't spend their entire lives in prison. Many teenagers, however, act out of a youthful foolishness that likely won't stick with them for the rest of their lives.
I foresee someone saying "They shouldn't do the crime if they can't do the time," or something similar. This is certainly true, but it's also true that they shouldn't do the crime for many other reasons as well. The converse is also true: If they can do the time, they still shouldn't do the crime. Everyone has good reason not to murder. Pointing out that they shouldn't have committed the crime isn't a good explanation for a certain punishment, as that reasoning can be used to promote any punishment.
Teens that murder don't just do it on a whim. Usually murder is just the final step in an already long and violent criminal education.
When people are paroled they generally go back to crime. It's because they're criminals. They're bad, and that's what they do.
I believe in parole, even for non-teen murderers. But not until the criminal is 65. By then, even though he still has the killing instinct, his killing ability is gone. Pretty much.
I am a bit surprised that we don't see more teens killing with the mass murders from around the world they see on the TV news in violent movies and video games that they play. It all serves to desensitize them and their developing brains.
Of course we have seen an uptick in suicides due to peer pressure bullying and drug use.
It is very hard to say what is going through a teens mind when he or she willingly kills someone in cold blood. Should they be treated as adults and possibly face capital punishment? It sounds harsh but the victim has been silenced forever and there is no doubt that the teen murderer is sorry for what he has done but for some they are only sorry that they were caught.
Cases of teen murderers need to be carefully gone through in a court of law and the punishment should fit the crime. It is the best we can do.
How many years would it take for the killer to be rehabilitated and worthy of parole? 10- 20- 30+ the victim doesn't have any options. 2 lives ruined.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
