Or, perhaps, two months ago, he was torturing the local cats to death “for fun” and “to have something to do”. You don’t know beans about this kid, beyond the murder.
100 years ago, 14 year old boys were married, having children, & running their own farms!
The Human Animal hasn’t changed that much, only our culture.
So were the kids who walked through Colombine High, leaving a trail of death & destruction. Who planned it for months. Who idolized figures of evil. Were they widdle wost wambs, too? :dubious: :smack:
If the 14 year old was “mindless”, mercy would be the only correct response. But as far as we know, he wasn’t. Knew exactly what he was doing, & came back to finish him off. He is “a sentient human being”, and all the more culpable for his actions.
No, I don’t, so I think it’s equally unfair to assume he’s a little monster, torturing cats and the like.
Well, to be fair, that was somewhat of a rarity. Most people were married in their twenties.
Right. So, my point is that instead of simply screaming for blood, we ought to ask ourselves what went wrong, how we can try to stop it in the future, and how we can help those who are damaged.
Raising the body count does no good. Throwing them in a cell does no good.
Perhaps if those around them would have paid attention to the warning signs, we never would have heard of Eric Harris and Dennis Klebold.
There are a few retarded inmates in the prison in which my husband works who could probably be called “mindless” because they’re completely incapable of a normal life. Should we show them “mercy” and kill them?
We will never know exactly what was in his mind-- especially if the idea of lock-em-up or killing kids like him is followed. We don’t know if he had a true understanding of what death actually is. For all we knew, he thought it was like on television.
I’m not saying we should just send him to bed without dinner. I’m advocating that this child get intensive psychiatric help, which may teach us more about kids who kill, which may in turn lead to preventing someone from commiting such an act in the future. Rather than concentrating on revenge, we should be concentrating on prevention.
Lionel Tate and Tiffany Eunick. The girl wasn’t a “playmate” of Lionel, per se. Lionel’s mother was babysitting her, and the two were watching TV together.
Tate, now 18, was recently charged with armed robbery.
I’m sorry, but if you get to a point in your childhood (14 for this lad) where you can beat another human being to death (and not all at once, but in episodes) for shits and giggles, it should be check out time. It has to be check out time. And frankly, I don’t even see the need to spend my tax dollars on a trial for a kid that admitted to it.
At 14, your sense of right and wrong has been formed. You may not be an adult, but if you get to the age of 14 and have no concept of value for a human life, I’m afraid you aren’t going to form one. About the only sympathy he’s getting from me is the nod to swab the needle so he doesn’t get an infection just before the injection.
Yeah, sure, I’m no better than him. I admit it. Now book his flight off the planet.
Behaviour, individual cognizence, and the ability to make choices based on that is, I think, the only thing that can really define anything as a human–as opposed to an animal or computer program or such. I would consider an AI or talking dog as being fully eligible to the same laws as the rest of society if it was capable of such humanity–so if anything this definition would be the only thing to rive through all racism, spceism, religiousity, or what-have-you I would think.
[/quote]
In my husband’s time working for the correctional system, I have seen the most indescribable evils-- things that my innocent mind would shirk from believing that any human is capable of doing. I have seen the depths of hell.
[/quote]
I can’t admit to being astonished by much I know human kind has done.
I am not talking about being a good citizen. I am talking about people who have been perverted at some point in their youth to find satisfaction only in things that are by any (sane) person’s definition, evil.
As said, I don’t particularly care if he is locked up forever or executed. I would object strongly to his being released until such time as there was proof that we could fix and had fixed such persons to be safe. But at the moment I do not see any evidence that we can do such–particularly not in any way that would leave that person with an enjoyable life. And in between locking them up and executing–execution is cheaper.
Please note though, I do not consider death to be a punishment nor something bad. Just zero.
Having never been a sociopath, rapist, axe-murderer, nor (serial) pedophile–admittedly I can’t say anything with 100% conviction. Simply I can’t imagine that between whatever perverted the kid in the first place, jail, a life of being feared, and being deprived of the only thing (i.e. hideous acts) that made you get your only high in life–that you would be enjoying yourself more than zero. And in my understanding of sociopaths–it’s not like there is anything in society that will be granting them joy–except as potential targets.
Firstly, the whole point of law and due-process is to assign value to everything in the world-- in a way that is as rational and fair as we can get it.
Secondly, you’re going to have to do a lot more convincing before you’re going to get me on the fence that discrimination against Ed Gein rates up there with racial discrimination.
Certainly there is. You have deprived the person the possibility of having a free and joyous life. As such, an equal punishment would be to live out the rest of your life not having a free and joyous life–i.e. jail.
Most of the beating will not have been (in terms of what pain the man was actually able) any greater than any other beating that causes someone to lose consciousness. Burning would be far greater than that–being possibily the most pain a person can experience (previous to losing awareness.)
If I was elected the sole protector of humanity, and whose sole duty it was thereby to see to the physical and mental safety of the rest of the world; I would kill him. I would kill Hitler and Ed Gein. Admittedly, this wouldn’t be a favorite occupation–but I would view that as the obligation of my role and unhonorable not to follow through on.
I highly doubt that. Two months ago he was probably being raped by a family member and dreaming of killing people.
I didn’t state that he would voluntarily choose such. I said that this would probably be the happier result.
Not that his actions have proven to me–nor from what I can tell reading interviews with others similar to him.
No, the only question at hand in my opinion is, “Does the accused’s young age mean that he had a diminished ability to distinguish from right and wrong? Or that he didn’t understand the consequences of his actions as well as someone of adult age?” If the answer is no then he should rightfully be tried as an adult.
It truly amazes me that people feel bad for this 14yr old. This crime was not done out of rage, drugs, etc…(well not that we know of yet). It was deliberate and evil. He should die, as should the 18yr old. And dont give me this “turn the other…” crap. I agree that God is the ultimate judge, so we should just hurry up and send the 14yr old to meet Him.
Can these boys be rehabilitated? I don’t know. Should we try? Again, I don’t know, but I’m leaning towards “no, we shouldn’t”.
We, as a society, do not have unlimited resources to try to rehabilitate everyone who commits a crime. Therefore, we need to make intelligent choices on whom we, as a society, choose to spend our resources.
This is a heinous crime. The beating is bad enough, but to return on several occassions (under the assumption that the news story is accurate)? Remove these kids from society, and spend resources on the kids with drug and alcohol problems, spend resources on getting help for the bullied before they decide that shooting up a school is the only way, spend resources on helping the non-violent offenders find a socially-acceptable vocation.
You may consider it cruel to write of someone like this, but until such a time that resources for rehabilitation are unlimited, it has to happen. Society can’t help everyone; spend our resources wisely.
Obviously we aren’t arguing with all the facts but the underlying premise is that a 14-year-old repeatedly, over a period of time, beat a man dead for fun.
It’s pure nonsense to suggest this falls into the category of youthful indiscretion. Poor judgement is playing cowboy with a loaded gun and shooting your friend dead. Poor judgement is driving fast in a car and getting into an accident that kills someone. The idea that we make allowances for the poor judgement of children is based on, to some extent, the intent of the act or the inability to understand the consequences.
The article implied this was deliberate with extreme prejudice.
I keep deleting what I think should be done so I’ll just stop here.
That is an utter impossibility. I can’t guarantee that YOU won’t go out and kill someone tomorrow. I can’t guarantee that I, or my little sister, or ANYONE for that matter, won’t do something like that. I can gamble on the odds, but I can NEVER provide “proof” that someone is safe.
No, it is not. The death penalty is MUCH, MUCH more expensive than life in prison. It only costs a couple of bucks per day to house, feed and clothe each inmate. It costs thousands, if not sometimes hundreds of thousands, to go through all of the legalities for executions.
Unless you’re willing to trim a little “fat” from the Constitution, the death penalty will always be exponentially more expensive than housing an inmate for the rest of his/her life.
I don’t necessarily think that the article was giving us a full picture. It was one of those “shock” articles, designed to get a reaction from the reader.
The 14-year-old boy may have said it was just for fun . . . and maybe he didn’t. The aritcle attributed that quote to “the teens”. It could be that the comment was made by the older boy and the younger just agreed to it.
It could also be that there was another motive and the boy was afraid to admit to it (especially if it were drugs, or something like that.) It could also be that if the boy said it, he said it to sound tough. As stupid as it is, sometimes young kids try to make themselves sound tougher and meaner to the cops, thinking that they’ll impress them.
The article also said there may be more arrests, meaning that there may have been others involved. The youngest boy may have had little to do with the actual beating.
Who knows? The purpose of the article was to shock, not to inform. Until all of the details come out in a trial, I think it’s grossly unfair to judge this boy as an unrehabilitatable monster.
And I think that a fourteen year old boy is a prime example of those to whom we should devote our resources.
I’d lay money that this boy will not be spending the rest of his life in prison. The immediate furor and moral outrage of a trial may end in that sentance, but I doubt highly if it will stand. He will be released, sooner or later.
All I’ve been advocating for is that this boy recieve the intensive therapy and treatment that he may need. He will be back out on the streets at some point. Our choices are whether we allow him to harden and become embittered at the system in a cell, or try to turn him into a productive member of society.
Can you imagine the scene?
A lonely old man, alone in the woods.
5 hostile young men, beating him, breaking his legs so he can’t escape, picking up a log & shattering his ribs, doing it over several hours. Finishing him off with a blow to the skull, crushing it.
The screaming, the pleading, the young men shrieking obscenities at the old man, his slow & painful death.
If you folks want to disagree, even vehemently, on this emotional topic, feel free. If you insist on hurling aspersions at each other, take it to the BBQ Pit. Declaiming your feelings about other posters does not address the issue on the OP.
I for one would like to see a cite of a study that shows what the recidivism rate for sociopaths is. Everything I’ve seen says they’re virtually uncureable, and if we’re talking about letting this kid go, I think we need to have much more than a ‘maybe’ as an answer when you’re asked if he’ll go on to kill again.
Think about this crime. It took deliberation and forethought. They returned to the old man three times. Think about that. They found him, and beat him. Then they left. And came back, and they beat him. Then they left. And came back and beat him yet again. Then they left and then they came back to finish him off.
What psychobabble can we spew at these kids to make them understand that taking a human being’s life is wrong? I don’t care if the kid is only 14, there has to be something seriously wrong with him, and the rest of the kids for that matter, if they’re not only willing but eager to murder a man for fun. Hell, let’s even assume it wasn’t for fun… what good reason could they possibly have had?
But I will tell you one thing, they chose someone they thought they could get away with killing.
I’ll let that sink in.
Who’s the next person? Someone alone on the streets at night? Another homeless man or woman? Maybe drag a woman into an ally and rape her before slitting her throat? These kind of people are not people we want roaming our streets. “Maybe” and “possibly” will simply not cut it when we talk about having them go free and not kill again.
There are certain actions which, if taken in a sane state of mind, disintegrate your participation in a social contract. Certain crimes simply place you outside the bounds of society. And, quite frankly, it is not society’s duty to rehabilitate everyone. Some people, and I use the term loosely, are no better than mad dogs. If someone is a rabid brute, we do not have to let them walk the streets, and we do not need to waste thousans of dollars and trying to rehabilite a monster. Sometimes, removing a person from existence entirely is the best course of action, and if that’s not available, lock them up in a little steel and concrete cage until they’re too old to cause physical harm to anybody else.
If it turns out that this child took part in the crime, returning to the scene several times, I’ll strongly disagree. I’d rather devote the resources on a fourteen year old stealing cars or doing drugs. If, instead, it turns out that he was brought to the scene only once and had little to do with the beating, that’s another story.
The people who took part in the beating deserve no mercy, nor any more of soceity’s resources than those necessary to keep them in a dank cell for the rest of their natural lives. And if the death penalty becomes a more economical choice, and if the death penalty can be equally applied regardless of race and/or economic status, and if the death penalty can ensure no innocent man is ever executed, I will support the death penalty for this type of crime.
