Should the death penalty be applied to murderers of all ages?

supertannoThe 10-year old kid would regret it a second after he killed his parents.

The two 10 year olds that tortured jamie bulger to death never showed remorse for what they had done.

Why did they do that by the way?

Replying to #82

they never told anyone why they did it I dont think.

supertanno · #82Why did they do that by the way?

Replying to #83

I seem to remember reading somewhere at the time that one of them said they "did it because they were bored" or something like that. I think it was in the Independent.

because they were bored?? that just stupid... they must have been influenced by something... a tv show or something? maybe someone? i mean not even me would do something like that...

Replying to #85

No, don't pin the blame on television or anything.The thing is, is that kids are reckless. Especially boys, I know a lot of the little boys I knew had behavior that they liked to break things and experiment to break things.Like teens in Edmonton trespassed in someone's house and put the owner's cat in the microwave and killed it. Also there are cases of teens beating up bus drivers and a bunch of others.It's a generalization though don't get me wrong, in no way I'm saying that all kids are reckless. Just some kids are more aggressive and reckless than others.

dhanash · #85because they were bored?? that just stupid... they must have been influenced by something... a tv show or something? maybe someone? i mean not even me would do something like that...

The blame probably rests at the door of the people responsible for their upbringing (parents, teachers, priests, etc.). Television cannot be blamed as it is not capable of independent thought, you might as well blame the stones they used to do the deed...

i still do think they had some sort of a problem..... must have been emotional or something...

NOO!!!
maybe the parents should be penalised with death if the kid poses serious crimes

Why?

bhatooth · #89NOO!!!
maybe the parents should be penalised with death if the kid poses serious crimes

no they shouldnt, although the parents should be blamed for not raising them properly... they should no be the one being peanlised

The question here is:
Was the person aware of their actions at the time of the muder?

Replying to #92

in the case of jimmy, they said that the two kids were aware of what they were doing and they chose to do that.... even thought tha tmight be true, the death peantly should not still be given to them... but rather alife imprisonment sentence

Replying to #93

That makes sense

err......yes, i agree. If you killed someone you should be put to death....it is the law of equivilent exchange.

that is not equivalent exchange.....

Even though a person killed, they still deserve to live unless that person is actually a large problem to public.What if that person is at a young age...let's say 6.
Would that child be killed even though he/she doesn't know what he/she's doing?

in some cases like the one with jimmy they knew what they were doing, or atleast what i read.... said so.... but even still they do not deserve to die... since i strongly think its a prob that led them to do that

They should be put in a deathrow
or at least until theyre "decent"

wtfromsSay if a 10 year old killed his parents because he could not play his video game should the death penalty be applied to him? Or for anyone any age that has taken someones life. Especially kids under 15I honestly believe if any aged person kills another person they should be put to death. "unless out of self defense for their life and only if they had to kill them"Murder is not acceptable no matter what age you are or who you are. You have no right to stay living on this earth if you take a life of another I really don't care if its a child people say they don't understand the consequence of murder or what they have done. I see that as no excuse to allow someone to get away with murder.

So what do you think should the death penalty be applied to murderers of all ages?

I strongly believe that no one under the age of 20 should be put to death if they have taken a life or comitted a bad crime.
Unless they have killed a LARGE number of people, or raped a large number of people intentionally.I believe that people do have the capability to change, especially if they are young because I believe that everyone has a conscience.
What gives us the right to take away a life, even if someone else has taken a life???If they re-commit murder or another bad crime, then they should be put to a life sentence or prison for a really long time.
But I think that if they stay in jail long enough, they will be able to reflect upon their actions and themselves and they will begin to understand that what they did was wrong.Of course this may not be the case and there are many flaws in my argument,
But is it really right for us to decide who should live and who should die?
It is a human life after all that we would end.But if a person killed like 5 people and above intentionally, then yes I agree with the death penalty.

grimsimNo. I will be the first to disagree with this. If a 15 year old murders somebody, they will be tried fairly in a court of law because they are old enough to appreciate the consequences of their actions. Provided of course that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and that he is sane, not under the influence bla bla bla (elements of a crime).But if a 8 or even 10 year murders his parents for not letting him play video games, he cannot be sentenced to death. The kid does not understand the consequences of his actions. He is too young to realise the effect it will have on him and for that reason it is not allowed in law to sentence someone like that to death. Sure, they will probably be sent to juvenile institution and some sort of psychological rehabilitation, but it's stupid to want them to die for something they do not understand. A judge will then eventually have to decide whether they are fit to reenter society once they are of age.But like I said, if you're 15 and you dissect your friends face in his sleep, then yeah, you should probably die a brutal death.

I agree with this guy :)

calmccIt's a tough question.Society functions when there is law, like it or not. Through acquiescing to societal laws, we then are allowed to function and contribute within that society. However, as history as shown us (yes, weasel words, but do you really want me to source material that is self-evident in a forum debate?), societal values change over time and with those changing values there is a reevaluation of the laws that govern that society.To quote Schopenhauer:
I think that there should be a reevaluation of how we not only enforce law, but whether minors under the current legal system(s) of a nation are in fact culpable for their actions, instead of defaulting to the stock line that "they are minors and therefore can not be held responsible for their actions". I believe that it's a gross logical fallacy to assume that persons under a certain age are considered incapable of weighing the gravity of a crime they commit, due merely to age.Give them psych tests & if they are found to be aware & culpable, they should be sentenced like adults with sufficient leniency given (because of the fact that they are young & may well have made one or several grave errors of judgement). Capital punishment is an option that should be reserved for true monsters (for example, Ted Bundy), but not used wholesale as it is in some parts of the world. Prison sure as hell isn't true rehabilitation; it is a punishment. But it doesn't need to be a place of torture, either. Many people that are sent to prison can become useful members of a society, given the tools.Finally, one case where I feel that they should have been in prison for far longer than what transpired was the Bolger case in the UK (link to the Wikipedia article here). 8 years, then paroled under new identities. IMO, they seemed very culpable, and the fact that they were allowed to re-enter society after such acts sends a chill up my spine and sends out the wrong message to the public, but that's just my view.Cheers, thanks for reading.

This person is on the right track too :)