> -Original Message-
> From: William Bowen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 7:10 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Juvenile Killers no more death penalty
>
> > Unpredictability does have the benefit of keeping people on their toes.
&
> Unpredictability does have the benefit of keeping people on their toes.
Wouldn't this logic apply to a law requiring that everyone keep their
head lower than a certain height?
Let's say that those that don't will be randomly shot.
Now, not everyone keeping their head above a certain height wil
> -Original Message-
> From: William Bowen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 4:13 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Juvenile Killers no more death penalty
>
> My main problem with the death penalty is this exactly:
Again - I'm not sa
My main problem with the death penalty is this exactly:
> Imagine two criminals, one from the 1850's and one from now:
> "You steal that horse and you'll be hanged by dinner time!"
Well, I'll overlook the fact that you're comparing lynch mobs to a
criminal court system, but okay...
With our pr
> John wrote:
> Whole heartedly agree. I could dream up some doozies, and wouldnt
> lose much sleep seeing those applied to the likes of the Polly Klaas killer,
> and others in their ilk.
>
While I understand this, it always strikes me as similar to striking
someone in anger. Emotionally it fee
>>Personally, for the real monsters amongst us, I don't see anything wrong
>>with a little cruel and unusual punishment. But I simply don't see a
>>relatively peaceful death as a very harsh punishment.
Whole heartedly agree. I could dream up some doozies, and wouldnt lose much
sleep seeing those
> -Original Message-
> From: G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 1:07 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Juvenile Killers no more death penalty
>
> I got no problem with the death penalty. However, I disagree with some of
> the pro-DP ar
It certainly is a deterrent. That particular person will never again commit a
crime.
It deters them!
Jerry Johnson
Web Developer
Dolan Media Company
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/02/05 01:07PM >>>
No way will you convince me that the death penalty is
a deterrant, for instance.
~
agh to be young again.
to kill or to jump buildings.
exciting times we live in
~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49
M
>
> If you're for the death penalty then I think there are plenty of cases
> when it should be used and the measuring stick shoudl be
> sophistication. For example, the Lee Malvo case. If you're smart
> enough to plan and execute a series of murders of then you're adult
> enough to get the death
> Brian wrote:
> Perhaps the law should/could be re-written so that crimes committed before
> the age of 18, are eligible to be tried in the juvenile system. Whereas all
> crimes committed after that age, are not. Each case could then be judged on
> an individual basis, taking into consideration wh
Age limitations have always kind of puzzled me.
According to the law, you are a minor until you turn 18. Before this age,
any crimes you commit are supposed to be handled by a juvenile court, where
the penalties are tempered by the supposition that the defendant's relative
young age shields the
> Adam wrote:
> I don't advocate the death penalty really but if we are going to have
> it how can be be so dead set on the age 18?
I guess I agree with Justice O'Connor that each case should be taken
on its own merits, but overall if you're going to sanction killing
people what's the difference i
> Oh jeeze... we can't execute toddlers, we can't execute retards, we can't
> execute foreigners, we can't execute the insane - pretty soon we'll only
be
> able to execute competent, hardened criminals. And what fun is that?
Yeah, but... what about insane foreign retarded toddlers who kill?
Certa
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 12:03 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Juvenile Killers no more death penalty
>
> "Only seven countries other than the United States have executed
> juve
"Only seven countries other than the United States have executed
juvenile offenders since 1990, he said. They are Iran, Pakistan, Saudi
Arabia, Yemen, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo and China"
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&u=/nm/20050302/ts_nm/court_execution_juven
if its not blanket, i wonder why they are not re-trying malvo in the
sniper case?
tony
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 19:30:12 -0500, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I read it very differently. In the decision, they specifically make
> reference to the laws in 30 states that forbid the execusion
I read it very differently. In the decision, they specifically make
reference to the laws in 30 states that forbid the execusion of
minors. Nothing about those raised from that status after a court
hearing. Chances are the SCOTUS would allow such executions given the
case by case nature of the dec
The way I read it is tried as an adult or not if you are under 18 when
you commit the crime you can not be setenced to death
Adam H
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:17:42 -0500, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So what will happen is that the prosecution will have to work a bit
> harder to
So what will happen is that the prosecution will have to work a bit
harder to have the perp raised to adult status, then they can initiate
a death penalty case.
larry
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:13:18 -0500, Adam Haskell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/01/politics/01cnd-sco
20 matches
Mail list logo
