http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37589-2003Apr5.html
Assuming this kind of document is admissible as evidence, is there any other possible verdict?
There will always be those who oppose the death penalty for any reason whatsoever, so yes, there are many possible verdicts. Although I don’t oppose the death penalty, I would not feel that justice was “slighted” if we chose in the country to outlaw it. That is, as long as there was such a thing as life in prison w/o possibility of parole and that prison time was spartan and tough. Not cruel, but not comfortbale either. I think there is some truth to the saying that “death is too good for some criminals”.
I really don’t see the point behind the death penalty. I don’t think it deters those types of people at all, and I think spending the rest of your life in prison is a better punishment.
I am against the death penalty for two reasons. Well, three actually.
-
Fallibility. Death can’t be reversed. Life in prison can. Sure, there will be cases where it’s “obvious” that the convicted did the crimes, there have also been cases where those “obvious” convictions have been overturned with new evidence.
-
License. I do not think it reasonable to give a state permission to kill its citizens in cold blood.
-
Ineffectiveness. I’ve never seen evidence that having a death penalty reduces crime. I have seen evidence that the death penalty increases costs for the state (and therefore the taxpayer).
Julie
YUP! Certain types of vermin require extermination.
Hopefully, cases such as this one will bring lawmakers to seriously reconsider trying juveniles as adults for certain crimes, and perhaps eventually make it the law of the land. I’ve never adhered to the school of thought which says that on the day you turn 18, somebody flips a switch which instantly makes you a full fledged, fully knowledgeable, adult capable of being tried for murder and put to death or spend the rest of his or her days behind bars.
Malvo, 17 at the time, knew exactly what he was doing.
Omni:
The only problem is that you have to set the age limit somewhere. What age would you set and what would be your reasoning? It’'s as much a flipped switch at 16 or 14 as it is at 18.
All right then, wouldn’t you have to give people under 18 more rights than they currently have?
If a 17 year old can’t sign a contract, how can you allow them to effectively sign their own Death Warrant through their actions?
Heh! I like that.
Opponents of the death penalty want it removed because of the innocent, not the guilty. Very, very few cases are as cut-and-dried as this.
Besides which, it will always remain my contention that power is given to the state by the populace, not devolved down to them from the government. I’m not giving my government the power over life or death. I don’t trust them that much. It tickles me that some people do, and wonder if they’d be interested in buying this Bridge…
No, I want it gone because it degrades my humanity to have something so revolting done in my name. The occassion when such a penalty is imposed on the innocent raises the bar from the revolting to the unspeakable.
Of special ghoulish revulsion is the struggle amongst a group of prosecutors for the privilege of pressing thier case.
There’s that too.
Uh, since when is anything the government does performed “in your name”? Particularly when the government that’s attempting to execute this particular bad guy isn’t even your state?
There are lots of reasons to oppose the death penalty, but “elucidator’s humanity” is not one of them.
Can’t say for certain about whether something done by the Virginia legislature is done in some guy from Texas’ name, but anything done by the government you elected is, technically, in your name. You give them the power to govern at the ballot box. Anything they do, you are technically responsible for too.
Or MN.
And if that same 17 year old can legally purchase a rifle, does the same reasoning apply?
So I assume you’d also repeal the driving age, drinking age, voting age, etc.? After all, if minors can fully understand the implications of these “certain crimes”, surely they can choose between a Democrat and a Republican once every couple years!
In response to the original question, life in prison without the chance of parole is another viable option, although I am sure that the state of Virginia can’t wait to get a death penalty conviction.
The idea that the age of majority is an all-or-nothing thing is totally false. Whether one believes the DP should apply to people of a certain age or not, the contention that giving someone of a certain age one privilege or responsibility obliges you to give them any or all others is wholly at odds with our current reality. Privileges/rights such as age of consent, license to own guns, license to drive, right to vote/drink/enlist/marry may all occur at different times, sometimes depending on which state. Personally, I think it’s silly to allow a 17 year old to enlist (with parental consent of course) in the marines to possibly lay his life down, but also say that he can’t cast a vote or have a beer, but such is the way of things.
Is 17 is too young to realize the seriousness of the act and consequences of murder? You’ll have to work pretty hard to convince me of that one.
Actually, Malvo is the poster boy for the NRA.
You know, “Gun control is being able to hit your target.”
By that standard, he da man.
Is there evidence that life imprisonment reduces crime? Is there evidence that any punishment acts as a deterrent for a determined criminal? (Given that neither life terms nor executions seem to prevent heinous crimes such as Malvo’s, I’d suspect not.) And, how much do taxpayers spend on those sentenced to life in prison vs. the amount spent on executions?