• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should these teens be tried as adults

Should the 15 and 16 year old also be tried as adults

  • yes and throw away the key

    Votes: 72 87.8%
  • no, they deserve a second chance

    Votes: 10 12.2%

  • Total voters
    82
I'm claiming that committed terrorists blowing up 191 innocent civilians are probably less likely to be rehabilitated than three adolescents whose ennui and stupidity led to the death of a single innocent man. I'm guessing you disagree.

Well you got that last part right.

I'm inclined to believe that the poor babies suffering from "ennui and stupidity" would have gladly killed again and again, perhaps in multiples next time, had they not been caught this time.

I'm also inclined to believe that one life wrongly taken demands the same severe punishment as any multiples of lives taken.
 
Well you got that last part right.

I'm inclined to believe that the poor babies suffering from "ennui and stupidity" would have gladly killed again and again,
On what evidence are you basing this hunch? They may have killed again, they may not have. I wouldn't presume to have the evidence to be able to predict one way or the other.
perhaps in multiples next time, had they not been caught this time.

I'm also inclined to believe that one life wrongly taken demands the same severe punishment as any multiples of lives taken.

Well, call me old school, but I tend to treat crimes committed as more serious offences than those that might potentially happen. I guess you must be a catholic and treat sins of the mind with the same severity as sins of the flesh.

Don't misinterpret me, I'm very glad they were caught and I hope they receive the sentence that is appropriate for the severity of the crime they committed. I'm just sure that what you and the hang 'em 'n' flog 'em brigade think is appropriate won't coincide what I think is appropriate.
 
Do you actually think bringing in absurd examples changes anything? 7 year olds? I'm sorry, but this discussion was working along rational lines. I'm not interested in crazy.

Yes, at one time in the US, kids as young as 7 years old COULD receive the DP. Whether any did or not I don't know, but the point I was trying to make is that we know how we used to view kids as miniature adults is wrong. If you doubt, it's all in the links I provided.
 
As long as the facts as stated are true... meaning that the confession and facts weren't fed to them and coerced out of them, which is not unheard of... then I say LWOP.
 
Fifteen is pretty young to be charged as an adult IMO. Most kids are still very much a child at that age. I just wish there was a way to hold them longer than until their 18th birthdays when it's a serious charge such as this.
I just cannot buy that anymore.
 
I just cannot buy that anymore.

It's a scientific fact. Google it yourself if you don't trust my links, but they are all valid.
 
Maybe before you guys just start saying, "duh . . . I don't believe it" you should actually READ the data. :roll: It's so annoying to keep having to repeat over and over and over to everybody the facts that they either missed or decided not to read.

Anyway, here is some more data for those who missed it before. This in no way excuses what these kids did, and I'm not trying to use it as such. I'm using this data against putting teens to death is all.

HowStuffWorks "Teenage Brain Development"
 
Yes, at one time in the US, kids as young as 7 years old COULD receive the DP. Whether any did or not I don't know, but the point I was trying to make is that we know how we used to view kids as miniature adults is wrong. If you doubt, it's all in the links I provided.

So you bring up 7 year olds receiving the death penalty, even though you don't know if they did or not? I'm not sure how that helps your argument.

Besides, 15 is not 7.
 
So you bring up 7 year olds receiving the death penalty, even though you don't know if they did or not? I'm not sure how that helps your argument.

Besides, 15 is not 7.

According to every single study out there, 15-year-olds are still children. I am NOT comfortable with allowing the state to KILL citizens who are already in custody, but especially CHILDREN.
 
According to every single study out there, 15-year-olds are still children. I am NOT comfortable with allowing the state to KILL citizens who are already in custody, but especially CHILDREN.

Your hyperbole aside, I am not aware there is a single state in the United States that allows the death penalty to be handed down on a minor tried as an adult.
 
According to every single study out there, 15-year-olds are still children. I am NOT comfortable with allowing the state to KILL citizens who are already in custody, but especially CHILDREN.

and according to every legal expert out there... a "child" is a person 14 and under.
 
Your hyperbole aside, I am not aware there is a single state in the United States that allows the death penalty to be handed down on a minor tried as an adult.

I believe as of right now, it is illegal to execute anyone under the age of 18 as cruel and unusual punishment (as of 2005 I believe, but I could be wrong), but we have certainly executed minors in the past. The youngest person on record executed was 14 years old.

George Stinney - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States: A World Leader In Executing Juveniles, Human Rights Watch Report, March 1995
 
Maybe before you guys just start saying, "duh . . . I don't believe it" you should actually READ the data. :roll: It's so annoying to keep having to repeat over and over and over to everybody the facts that they either missed or decided not to read.

Anyway, here is some more data for those who missed it before. This in no way excuses what these kids did, and I'm not trying to use it as such. I'm using this data against putting teens to death is all.

HowStuffWorks "Teenage Brain Development"

Don't mistake conclusion as fact. The two are not necessarily the same. Doesn't mean they're not wrong, but it doesn't mean they're conclusively correct, either.

For the record: I don't support putting them to death, either.
 
Don't mistake conclusion as fact. The two are not necessarily the same. Doesn't mean they're not wrong, but it doesn't mean they're conclusively correct, either.

For the record: I don't support putting them to death, either.

This has been observed on MRIs, electroencephalograms and other tests visually.
 
Fifteen is pretty young to be charged as an adult IMO. Most kids are still very much a child at that age. I just wish there was a way to hold them longer than until their 18th birthdays when it's a serious charge such as this.

yeah...most kids at that age don't go out and hunt down and kill another human being. that's why we don't charge ALL minors as adults, but instead on a case by case basis. In THIS case, the actions of THESE teenagers warrant charging THEM as adults.
 
I believe as of right now, it is illegal to execute anyone under the age of 18 as cruel and unusual punishment (as of 2005 I believe, but I could be wrong), but we have certainly executed minors in the past. The youngest person on record executed was 14 years old.

George Stinney - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States: A World Leader In Executing Juveniles, Human Rights Watch Report, March 1995


Thank you for the links. They are relevant today in what way?

I take it the bottom line is opposition to the death penalty period.
 
Nope, you're wrong.

sorry....

a person 14 years and under. A "child" should be distinguished from a "minor" who is anyone under 18 in almost all states.

What is CHILD? definition of CHILD (Black's Law Dictionary)

opposite of “adult,” and means the young of the human species, (generally under the age of puberty,) without any reference to parentage and without distinction of sex.

Biologically, a child is anyone between birth and puberty

a young human being below the age of puberty
 
Thank you for the links. They are relevant today in what way?

I take it the bottom line is opposition to the death penalty period.

Yes, and there are plenty of posts here advocating for the killing of these kids, which makes us better how? The only difference is the purpose of the killing. It's still killing helpless human beings, and in this instance immature human beings. To me that is disgusting.
 
Yes, and there are plenty of posts here advocating for the killing of these kids, which makes us better how? The only difference is the purpose of the killing. It's still killing helpless human beings, and in this instance immature human beings. To me that is disgusting.

I have stated unequivocally that I do not support the DP for these individuals. But... "helpless"... really?
 
Okay, juvenile or minor then. Still doesn't change the fact that they aren't adults and should not ever be treated as if they are.

whatever....let your heart keep bleeding for these criminals. and then in a few years when they are released from juvie and kill again, be sure to send a sympathy card to the family of their victim.
 
I have stated unequivocally that I do not support the DP for these individuals. But... "helpless"... really?

They're pretty much helpless while they're locked up in a facility from the state killing them.
 
If you are old enough to do the crime....you are old enough to do the time.
 
Back
Top Bottom