Youth Crime, Penalties

Generally, I would agree with that. Too often, a demand for credentials or for a citation is little more than an attempt to derail a discussion. However, when a credential is used to establish the user as an expert in a particular subject, it seems natural to ask the question, particularly if other participants doubt the validity of what is being said. In other words, if I tell you that you can believe me because I'm a rocket scientist and then go on to say stuff that doesn't seem accurate to other people in the discussion, it might be reasonable for someone to question whether I am truly a rocket scientist. Of course, if I don't feel like digging through my things looking for my rocket scientist card, I can simply ignore your request for such, and you can believe me or not.

An alternative response to such a claim is to simply ignore the claim of credentials and move on with the discussion, which is generally what I do. The question of whether someone is or is not a rocket scientist doesn't matter so much to me if the things that they are saying are wrong. In this case, the claim to be a teacher doesn't have much to do with anything under discussion here. There were teachers in Germany seventy years ago who wouldn't think twice about turning in a student who they believed to be Jewish or to be an enemy of the state. Teachers don't have any particular claim to expertise when it comes to whether or not we should make a practice of executing children. In the end, it's a matter of opinion or morality, and teachers don't get any extra credit in either of these areas.

Where the question of Silvia's claim (which I don't doubt) to be a teacher probably came into question was when she used it to lend more credibility to her opinion about public school funding. I didn't bring it up in that discussion because I didn't see any reason to, but public school teachers have little or nothing to do with the funding of the school. They are paid a salary, and they neither care nor know where the money is coming from, any more than anyone else. The "believe me, I'm a teacher", argument was irrelevant as far as I was concerned, so I didn't bring it up, but I could understand that someone might have brought it up at that point. Unlike the average public school teacher, as a program chairman, I did propose a budget for my program, but that still had little or nothing to do with where the money was coming from. My budget was either approved or it was bumped back to me.

There's nothing wrong with stating credentials. I do that sometimes in order to illustrate what I am saying. If you ask for me to prove it, sometimes I will and sometimes I won't. I am not necessarily going to be willing to drop everything to rifle through boxes for a credential that I have packed away somewhere just to prove it to someone in a forum who will probably disagree with whatever I was saying anyhow. I'm okay with speaking to those who don't think that I'm lying to them. On the other hand, if it's handy or if I don't mind doing a search for it, I might.

At any rate, this thread is about penalties for youth crimes. Someone with expertise in the rehabilitation and treatment of children with behavioral disorders might have a leg up in this argument, but it's still a matter of opinion. Although I did parent a child with reactive attachment disorder, a common element in children who kill or who go on to become serial killers, and have completed several courses on the subject, and have compiled a large library on the topic, and have personally met with some of the authors, I could argue that my experience and knowledge on the subject of whether or not these kids should simply be executed is greater than that of a public school teacher who is afraid of these kids. My opinion is that no one should have the authority to kill everyone they're afraid of. In self-defense, yes. Otherwise, capital punishment is mostly about playing to an audience that is hungry for revenge.

Until my nephew had shown some signs of recovery, we locked all of our sharp knives away, and I even sold the guns that I had at the time. We locked our bedroom door and put an alarm on his. Still, we would sometimes find large knives or pipe wrenches under his mattress. When he was thirteen or fourteen, I have no doubt that the right set of circumstances might have led to his killing someone, and probably my wife, because these kids have a particular hatred for women who are mothering them. Yet, he grew up to be a responsible, caring adult who has been married for a few years now and has a child of his own. This involved a lot of work, on our part and his, but it was worth it.

This is a serious subject. Again, since we're arguing credentials, I worked as a paramedic on the Texas-Mexico border. I have seen several people die, not because I particularly sucked as a paramedic, but because not everyone can be saved. But seeing someone die does not make my opinion more or less valid than anyone else's. I am in favor of people not dying when they can be saved, and that includes children with behavioral disorders.

 

Please stop with the off-topic stuff. When you feel the need to speak up against, or in defense of, someone else here, unless you are a member of the staff who needs to step in, your response is probably going to be in the nature of a personal attack or may be subject to being seen in that light. If you don't like a question that is being asked of you, report it to the staff if you are afraid that the person might be probing for information beyond what is needed to participate in a discussion. Otherwise, just ignore the question.

If you feel the need to post something off-topic, please bring your post back on-topic before ending it. For example, this thread is about the penalties for youth crime. Discussion about whether children should be executed or jailed for life is on-topic, but whatever your opinion is, it's an opinion. Opinions are fine, and that's mostly what we do here. It might be a perfectly valid opinion, but there's no need to get angry because others disagree with it. That's usually what happens with opinions.

As someone who is generally opposed to the death penalty, it seems odd to me that someone would be so morally outraged over the fact that someone has killed someone that they want to have someone killed in their name. Huh? I thought killing was wrong. I can understand that someone who has lost a loved one to murder would want retribution, and if they were to go out and avenge the death of their loved one by killing the person who did it, I think that should be taken into consideration in their own sentencing. If they kill the wrong person, as is sometimes even the case when the government does it, shouldn't these killings be avenged too? Should justice be about revenge? Can we do better than that?

I believe it to be a fact that the brains of children are not fully developed, and that a consequence of this is that they may not be fully capable of making reasonable decisions. This is why we don't let children enter into contracts or make a lot of decisions for themselves. When it comes to looking ahead or understanding that actions have consequences, many children are living in the here and now. Particularly, when you factor in what I believe to be a fact, that we now live in a society in which morals and ethics are discouraged, it should be no surprise that kids are going to do horrible things from time to time. Not all kids, of course, because kids are individuals, some parents are more responsible than others, and some environments are more conducive to healthy living than others. But some kids will. Should they be summarily executed or locked away for the rest of their lives for the wrong actions of a moment? Can they be saved?

 

When he killed his friend, that was a tragic waste of a life. When he was sentenced to two life sentences in prison for something that he did at the age of fifteen, that is the waste of another life.

 

Maybe it's a lot safer to just kill everyone. Who knows? The guy you allow to live might go off on you one day.