@Silvia Benoit Ah, but Charlie had been "rehabilitated", don't you know? We should still consider that he was not a minor committing his crimes, was he? Frank
No, not a minor but a horrendous person who couldn't be left free. The BS of rehabilitation is the mother of many crimes that were not supposed to happen. Sil
@Silvia Benoit Granted that the above is true enough, it presupposes to make acceptable, activity which relies on future events occurring a certain way. An answer I do not put forth; I have none, but rather am deeply flummoxed by the consideration. Frank
Of course, that remark was intended to be facetious. The point that I made earlier was that judges should be empowered to make reasonable decisions on a case-by-case basis. However horrible the crimes they commit, not every child murderer is a lost cause, and all murders are not equal. I am opposed to the death penalty because our justice system gets it wrong too often. The police are judged according to whether or not they have arrested someone for a crime, and prosecutors are judged according to the number of convictions they secure rather than whether or not they have played a useful role in bringing about justice. Before even getting into a courtroom, defendants are tried and either found innocent or guilty by the media. Judges, on the other hand, are either constrained by mandatory sentencing laws, by the demands of the public for harsh sentences, or by fears of being labeled as being easy on crime. At the same time, those who do indeed make a career of being easy on crime are too often secure in their positions, so instead of removing judges who don't make reasonable judgments, we hamper them with mandatory sentencing laws. The end result is that far too many innocent people have been sentenced to prison terms and if they fail to present the expected amount of remorse for a crime they never committed, their sentences are harsher. Even after innocence is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, once having been unjustly found guilty, they often have to plead guilty in order to be released. We will never know the number of people who have been executed for crimes they never committed because, in most cases, no one is standing up for the dead and the justice system certainly isn't going to revisit its own errors. So, I am opposed to the death penalty, not because I believe that every life is worth saving, but because it's too late to say "oops" after someone has been executed. Charlie Manson was an adult, and he had a life history of crime, beginning when he was a child. Had he received treatment rather than imprisonment early on, his name may not be a household name. We'll never know.
I just read the entire account of the murder. Apparently the two teenage boys were interested in the same girl, so one killed the other. I believe that the murderer deserves punishment, but why TWO life sentences? I also noted that the defendant's attorney said that upon receiving the guilty verdict, the boy wanted to call his mother. Seriously?? A mother wouldn't even show up when her child was on trial for murder? Kind of tells me a lot about the "why" of it.
Ken, Sure, tell your opinion to the Tony LA Bianca, Sharon Tate and the others' families. I give to you the judicial System makes mistakes...and for that we have the appeals....but a murderer is a murderer regardless of his / her age. Sure, there are cases and cases and each must be judged separately BUT ALWAYS KEEPING IN MIND A PERSON LIFE WAS STOLEN. One thing are self defense and manslaughter but a very different one is murder for the sake of murder....as it was the case I posted.
No...but while a two years old doesn't know the meaning of stealing, a 15 y/o DOES KNOW WHAT IMURDER IS.
Going off the topic of youth crimes...some people are born with criminal gene's n others due to circumstance. It does take a lot of time effort n tax payers money to do the work involved, but bottom line they are human. Just read about Lisa Montgomery whose death row is coming up.. petition sent to the president for forgiveness n life term. If u read her life story..... so much damage done, its unbelievable.
Susan, We all know genetics can't be put aside when talking about certain crimes. Life for Lisa Montgomery? Yes.....as long as "the know it all" assure me she will never be declared "cured" and set free. Now, before resting our eyes on "having the gene or being a victim of a horrible life" we must think of the victim/s in particular and on society in general.
Silvia, As much as I would like to agree with "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" , I have to say that in my opinion the situation should be weighed before judgement declared. One can never know it could be our loved ones in that situation, at whatever given time, and maybe they could be victims for whatever reason which would lead to the inevitable. I lay my case to rest.
I didn't say each case shouldn't be examined on its own merits....nor I said an eye for an eye...but we can't stay away from the fact a life was lost and must keep in mind the murderer must be punished according to the crime he / she committed. Could the murderer be a relative? Indeed...but this doesn't change the fact he / she killed a person...or two. Ciao.
Perhaps we could stage public executions on the school playgrounds, to serve as a warning to all of the other would-be murderers. Hey, if it saves even one life...
Ken....LOL You write anything as long as it gives you the chance to keep going. I hope your words gave you some "" LOL "" or at least as many as they gave me