National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Murderers



[pic][pic][pic][pic][pic][pic][pic]

[pic]

Share this on:

Facebook Twitter Digg delicious reddit MySpace StumbleUpon LinkedIn

Time to deal on life sentences for kids

By Jeanne Bishop and Mark Osler, Special to CNN

updated 11:55 AM EDT, Fri July 6, 2012

[pic]

The Supreme Court has ruled that states cannot give juvenile offenders life without parole as a mandatory sentence.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Jeanne Bishop, Mark Osler: Court ruling on mandatory sentences for juveniles fraught

They say people have long been divided on issue: whether to show mercy or demand justice

Court forcing discussion of how to decide which kids should be released and when, they say

Writers: It's time for both sides to set aside conflict, bring best people to table, move forward

Editor's note: Jeanne Bishop is a criminal defense lawyer in Cook County, Illinois, and a survivor of family members murdered by a juvenile. Mark Osler is a professor of law at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota and a former federal prosecutor.

(CNN) -- Last week, the Supreme Court ruled that states cannot give juvenile offenders life without parole as a mandatory sentence. The 5-4 decision in Miller v. Alabama raised some hard questions. Many states now have to both address past sentences under mandatory schemes and come up with a new rule for future sentences.

Outside the court, in the real world, this decision presents for many a difficult moment on a fraught issue, one we have both been engaged with -- each for our own reasons -- for years. We each represent different sides of the juvenile life-without-parole debate, a conflict that has long raged among legal organizations, family groups and others.

Mark, a former prosecutor and law professor, has argued that juvenile murderers are different from others sentenced to life terms because they are unformed children at the time of the killing. In the same way that we treat children differently in many other areas because they are still developing, he believes there should be some chance for rehabilitation allowed in every juvenile case. He represents the view of many criminal law professionals who seek consistency with other areas of law: He seeks mercy.

[pic]

Jeanne Bishop

In contrast, Jeanne, a criminal defense attorney, believes that some juveniles convicted of murder deserve life without parole. Her belief comes in part through personal experience: In 1990, a 16-year-old named David Biro killed her pregnant sister, Nancy Bishop Langert, and her husband, Richard Langert, in their townhouse in Winnetka, Illinois. He broke into her loved ones' home only to kill them; he took nothing. In advocating on this issue, she has stood with those who love someone who was killed by a juvenile -- a group that bears the pain of a thousand social failures. She seeks justice.

[pic]

Mark Osler

The Supreme Court has now come down on Mark's side, at least in cases where the sentence of life without parole was mandatory. (About 80% of the 2,500 inmates who are serving life sentences for crimes committed when they were juveniles were sentenced under mandatory sentencing systems, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.) Now the question is what an alternative to juvenile life without parole should look like, particularly in states without adult parole or with restricted adult parole.

It's tricky, emotional terrain, but we must now go there. And it will not be easy. Too often, the discussion surrounding the issue has been strident. Victims' groups, such as the National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers, have depicted some advocates for juveniles as callous to the trauma of victims. Some opponents of juvenile life sentences, such as Mary Ellen Johnson of the Pendulum Foundation, have characterized life without parole as pure retribution.

Neither side has made much effort to find a middle ground between justice and mercy. We need a new model, one that provides a meaningful opportunity for juveniles who have served an appropriate amount of time for taking a human life to seek release, while at the same time weighing public safety and ensuring that the voices of victims' families are sought out and heard.

And now that the Supreme Court has forced our hand, we call on those who have opposed one another to come together and talk. The important questions are not the ones behind us, but the ones in front: Who gets to decide on releasing these convicts, and when?

What notification and resources, if any, should be provided to victims' family members whose loved ones were murdered by a juvenile? How often and under what conditions should a murderer who was a juvenile at the time of his crime be able to seek release?

What should inform the decision of whether to release him?

The range of factors in making such a decision is vast: It could include observations about the juvenile made by guards and social workers in correctional facilities who come into contact with him every day; input from childhood teachers, neighbors and family members; psychological and medical information; anything that would shed light on future dangerousness.

We need at the table experts in child psychology and brain development, prison staff, counselors, academics, murder victims' family members -- all important voices that have too often been left out of the process.

Other reforms should include eliminating mandatory transfers of defendants from juvenile to adult courts and shifting funds from incarceration to crime prevention programs and victims' services.

As the Supreme Court's decision reflected, juvenile life without parole strikes to the core of key definitional issues for our society: the meaning of childhood, the role of rehabilitation and redemption in criminal law, and the searing pain caused by senseless murders.

These issues have been important enough to divide us; now that the Supreme Court has ruled, they should unite us.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

[pic]The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Jeanne Bishop and Mark Osler.

[pic][pic][pic][pic][pic]

[pic]

Share this on:

Facebook Twitter Digg delicious reddit MySpace StumbleUpon LinkedIn

We recommend

[pic][pic][pic][pic]

You might like:

The secret gay agenda CNN Opinion

One night will decide Obama's fate CNN Opinion

Father, son lose 260 pounds after weight loss surgery CNN Health

Springsteen and McCartney cut off by London curfew CNN Entertainment

Legally blind contestant stops short of Miss Florida USA title CNN Living

Kerry Kennedy charged in hit-and-run crash

| | |

From around the web

Selected for you by our sponsor:

Heidi Klum and Seal's Unusual Marriage, Revealed Zimbio

How to Get Employees to Train Each Other Mashable

Billionaire Has Choice Words for Obama Moneynews

4 Attainable Careers That Bring $100k Salaries U.S. News University Directory

Once Neuropathy Sets In, There Is No Cure--Don't Let It Happen to You!

Thomas Edison Did Not Invent Electricity, (and Other Things You Should Know) Qualcomm Spark

[what's this]

[pic][pic]

Disqus

Login

About Disqus

Like

Dislike

Glad you liked it. Would you like to share?

[pic]Facebook

[pic]Twitter

Share

No thanks

Sharing this page …

Thanks! Close

Real-time updating is enabled.

Comments for this page are closed.

[pic]

Showing 157 of 157 comments

[pic]

dntbstupid 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I agree...no more mandatory death sentences for people who got shot either....this whole dying thing is getting WAY out of hand. I mean, after all, it was only a 13 year old that shot you! You can't take a kids 9mm round? You should have more compassion! You probably scarred that 13 year old for life just dying off like that!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

40 Likes

F

[pic]

WWWYKI 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Send the kids to Jerry Sandusky's Cell.

That's a bigger deterrent than death.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to dntbstupid

6 Likes

F

[pic]

mhill68123 4 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Kids nowadays are often gang members and totally worthless before they are 18.

Who stands up for the victims?

Why so concerned for a vicious murderer?

Because you know he won't be living in your neighborhood?

Just another way to laugh in the face of victims, cry for sympathy for murdering punks.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

31 Likes

F

[pic]

drewcrewof2 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

JL, HOGWASH!

If that "ex gang member" killed anyone while in the gang, rid the earth of him!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to mhill68123

9 Likes

F

[pic]

David1268 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

The prosecution, the victim's family and friends and victims advocacy groups stand up for the victim.

See the post above - the S. Ct. did not abolish life sentences w/o parole for juveniles, it just said that decision has to be made by a judge.

There are many juveniles who are hardened criminals unlikely to change well before their 18th birthday, and for them a life sentence w/o parole is appropriate. That decision however should be made on a case-by-case basis.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to mhill68123

2 Likes

F

[pic]

Think4yourse 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

JLS639 Maybe Im not only looking at violent crimes. Should a career felon enjoy a life of crime? Not in my book.Im glad you know people that have grown out of "this foolishness" but 20yrs of crime doesnt make going straight at 30 a clean sheet.

Those people were still responsible for the loss and suffering of others. Our laws were ment to stop that, and did a pretty good job of it until people started thinking it was ok for someone that is hungry to steal an apple. In this day and age, the apple has gone from a apple to a car, or a bank, or even another life.

Lady Justice is blind. People are not, and thats why crime continues to grow. Again, I have no sympathy.

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

in reply to mhill68123

1 Like

F

[pic]

CrookedRook 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

So. What about a 17 year old with 2 months till his birthday?

He didnt know any better so he should not get life?

Punishment to fit the crime! Why let them know they can murder at a young age and will eventually get away with it if they "play nice"?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

26 Likes

F

[pic]

DavidLevinsn 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I'm not sure what the controversey is over the Supreme Court's decision. Decisions regarding the sentencing of a minor are now purely in the hands of the judge/and or jury (depending on individual State laws on sentencing), and that is exactly where those decisions should be made. The Court's ruling did NOT abolish life sentences for minors.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

24 Likes

F

[pic]

waltonsimons 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

"The Court's ruling did NOT abolish life sentences for minors."

This. Heck, SCOTUS didn't even abolish life sentences without the possibility for parole. They simply said that judges shouldn't have their hands tied when it comes to sentencing.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to DavidLevinsn

10 Likes

F

[pic]

David1268 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Agree 100%. I'm generally a death-penalty supporter for adult murderers, but I don't think a one-size-fits-all rule is possible for juveniles. Some may be hardened criminals by age 12 or 13, others may have some possiblility of rehabilitation at 15 or even 16.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to DavidLevinsn

1 Like

F

[pic]

Mike Carter 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

The argument that they're "unformed children" is ridiculous. Teenagers are old enough to understand the implications of murder and the possible consequences thereof. Our concern should not focus on the criminal, but on justice: let the punishment fit the crime. The concept of rehabilitation sounds great, but is in fact a fallacy. It simply doesn't work most of the time (sad, but facts are facts, whether you want to face them or not). For those who truly are rehabilitated: well done! But you still pay for your crime. For those who are not: we'll provide room and board in a place that removes you from civilized society (thus you pay for your crimes and society is protected from you committing more against the innocent).

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

18 Likes

F

[pic]

Joe Smith 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

And the argument against teens driving, gambling, voting, and joining the army is....

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Mike Carter

12 Likes

F

[pic]

MIJohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Ouch, expect the bleeding hearts giving liberals a bad name to come after you. Nothing gets them foaming at the mouth more than "innocent children" having to pay the price for making stupid decisions.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to Mike Carter

2 Likes

F

[pic]

EehnS 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

While murder is a horrific thing, we must also acknowledge fact. The sad fact is, as juveniles the brain is undeveloped. To hold a juvenile to the same standard as an adult ONLY when they do something wrong is hypocritical. We do not allow juveniles to drink alcohol because we acknowledge that they are not developed enough to handle it. Why then do we believe that they are developed enough to be held to an adult standard when it comes to criminal actions?

I feel for the families of victims, I do. But I am also looking at this situation from an outsider's perspective. One that is based more in logic and sadly, cold truth. Holding a juvenile for life without parole is expensive. Life expectancy these days is high, and in prison these people have healthcare that - barring a shanking within the prison itself - means...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

17 Likes

F

[pic]

Prince Albert 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

then send them to the chair

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to EehnS

7 Likes

F

[pic]

opinalicious 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Eehn, I knew from the time of gradeschool that hurting other people was wrong. Everyone knows that murder is wrong and what the consequences are. The problem with our current society is that people are no longer held responsible and accountable for their actions any more. We don't allow minors to drink to protect them but when they eventually get into liquor and abuse it, we punish them! We don't stroke their hand and tell them how precious they are. They know the rules and are accountable for their actions just like you, myself and everyone else is.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to EehnS

5 Likes

F

[pic]

jdr24 5 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

The idea of being a minor yet tried as an adult is ridiculous. If you think people should be tried as adults at 16, then fight for the legal age to be changed to 16. It's common sense, people! Responsibility and privileges go hand in hand.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

15 Likes

F

[pic]

opinalicious 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

People are tried for their crime, not their age. Crimes know no age boundaries.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to jdr24

4 Likes

F

[pic]

DavidLevinsn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Your comment is ignorant and ill thought out. I would be in favor of changing the law so that you could be tried as a juvenile.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to jdr24

5 Likes

F

[pic]

texdoc78154 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

I thought Obamacare moved being a dependent minor to 26?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to jdr24

3 Likes

F

[pic]

Todd Gilbert 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Were not talking about driving or voting here were talking about murder. It's common sense.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to jdr24

0 Like

F

[pic]

donking7 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

As I read all of these comments, I just shake my head in disgust, at the absolute hypocrisy and fraud, exhibited by all of you. Some of the issues mentioned go beyond capital crimes committed by a child to encompass perspectives and notions that apply to the entire spectrum of criminal justice, but, at least it's a start.

Teens know what it means to kill someone. That's why we recruit them, train them, pay them, and give them medals for killing people they've never met. Just an added incentive to increase their kill ratios. I'm certain that 17-19 year old understands the consequences of disobeying an order given by someone older to kill that stranger. Yep. Potentially dishonorably discharged from the military in shame, serving time in a federal prison. Never being able to vote, get a job (other than the most menial labor jobs), or attain anything...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

8 Likes

F

[pic]

Severonius 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Great post!

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to donking7

2 Likes

F

[pic]

Devin Rasmussen 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

This is true, how ever it really depends on the murder. If a 12-16 year old killied a person and police will ask them why? Most of them will respond in a postive matter, but one of them say it was fun gutting them open like a deer. There's lies the problem of this issue. The way I look at it is yes we should inforce this, but order to do that we need to see how hideous of the killing is.

Taking a life is no replacing matter. Other crimes that young teens do shouldn't apply to this, but when a killing happen there we have to look at on how bad of the killing is to determind if the young teen should get life in jail.

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

in reply to donking7

0 Like

F

[pic]

Tony Sprouse 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

DO THE CRIME DO THE TIME AGE DOES NOT MATTER.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

10 Likes

F

[pic]

sealectro 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

So, a vicious dog of less than 2.4 years of age must not be put down for it's violent attack. After all, it is a mere pup.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

9 Likes

F

[pic]

Max Power 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

You deal with it by putting murderers to death. The only thing that should kill them is harvesting their organs

for the sick on waiting lists. Throw the

empty husk to the buzzards.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

7 Likes

F

[pic]

kittencock1 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

If this country wanted to do some good it would abolish life in prison. This is a horrible horrible thing. The most cruel thing. Executions should be quick, fair, and should not depend on race, sex, age, etc. They should depend entirely on the crime. If two year olds blow up a building then... so long little guys!

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

3 Likes

F

[pic]

nomercy4them 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Rehab doesn't work. todays gang oriented youth do crimes because they know no matter how horrid the crime they will get out. execution of juvies and adults will lower the cost of incarceration to law abiding citizens and teach kids they are responsible for their actions. Everyone who kills is a bad seed and the garden needs to be weeded.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

5 Likes

F

[pic]

mk63 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

By prioritizing rehab and understanding with minors, and for all criminals, we make the deterrent to crime so ineffective that the only way to keep people from committing crimes is to convince them that they need to act for the "greater good". When will we learn that some people really don't care and won't care?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

5 Likes

F

[pic]

Tina Adams 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Sad to say,,, Without the human respect factor or any respect factor, young ones grow to self-righteous, demanding arrogance & not to mention entitled to too much power of their own choice, granted by local state & governmental agencies, with not enough to the parents who try to save them.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

4 Likes

F

[pic]

pabloinbama 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

What is the purpose of having counselors and brain scans and all that time consume waste of tax payer money for? Just have minimum sentences before they can apply for parole. Say 25 yrs for non-capital murder and 50 years for capital murder. Problem solved. The other option is to change the age that children graduate to adult status.

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

getthefkouttahere 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I'm sorry, but 13 is smart enough to know what he's doing...do an adult crime..do the adult time.

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

dream15 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

To a point that is a fair statement, however as I am now 'slightly older' than 13 years I can honestly state my thinking patterns and reasoning are now different different from that age.

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

in reply to getthefkouttahere

1 Like

F

[pic]

DJSeuss 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Liberals lose future voters everytime a juvenile gets a life sentence.

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

madmax10 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

I believe a nut is a nut, whatever is his or her age. A badly brought up kid with distorted mind and venomous look towards the society & life is a danger to all forever. So, anybody beyond 12 yrs, must be dealth with strong mind and must be subjected to punishment whatever is appropriate for him or her. It is a good time to look into the rehabilitation staticstics in all countries where it is being followed, citizens need to know what is the success rate for a criminal who started his criminality at an young age (say at 12 yrs or above)....!!!!!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

3 Likes

F

[pic]

pamelas lichota 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

they are right. no life in prison without parole. either EXECUTE them get rid of the waste of human space on our planet. or take an island in the middle of any ocean mine it around the outside and drop them in by helicopter and leave them there to survive or not on their own

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

3 Likes

F

[pic]

Puffywauns Muse 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

We call that "island" you speak of, Australia. We call the ideology of isolating criminals to "other" places and not dealing with the problem, British. The end result of this thinking? The 13 colonies. Philosophically speaking, your view is either in line with the USSR & Singapore, or in line with the British. The United States borrowed its philosophy from the French & British. That is why when *our* "personal rights" are violated we raise Cain under the memes of Freedom & Justice, but when it's a group we do not like for whatever reason, we collectively split into cliques to deny then their rights. It's very Ancient Roman of us.

Read any psychological journal on child develop today, and you will come across studies and articles suggesting that the level of psychopathic and sociopathic amongst children as young as 3-5 yrs of age is increasing. This is in...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to pamelas lichota

0 Like

F

[pic]

Neutral4Ever 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

There can't be a balance between justice and mercy when it comes to murder. If anything less than justice is served it isn't justice. No murderer, child or adult, deserves to have a normal life (or a second chance) after irrevocably taking another's. Justice demands a punishment equal to the crime. A life cannot be replaced, so when you take a life you forfeit yours or there is no justice.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

3 Likes

F

[pic]

gorillasandbananas 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

The histrionics quality of this comment section is mind-blowing.Jailing a 12 year old with adults will only get said 12-year old sexually assaulted again and again, how exactly does that fit the crime as a form of punishment? Can you even recall what went through your mind when you were 12? You put a kid that young in jail for 40 or 50 years, and he will miss everything important life has to offer. What's the point of keeping him in jail another 10 or 20 years until he dies? Keeping a 20-year old in jail costs taxpayers $45,000/year, keeping a 60-year old in jail costs taxpayers $70,000/year. It doesn't make sense. Stop thinking with your emotions, your intellect will serve you better. Revenge is not justice, until you recognize that, you will not be able to call yourself civilized. The article calls for people on both sides of the...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

Jalek 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

If you look at historical sentencing, the terms were usually much shorter. If a person is locked up for six months, generally they have already decided if they will alter their behavior or not, and another year or ten makes no difference to that end. In fact, the longer they're institutionalized, the less likely they will be able to emerge and contribute to society again.

If it's just to remove them from society, that's another thing. The deterrent argument seems pretty well shot, they know if they're breaking the law and likely don't keep up with sentencing guidelines.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to gorillasandbananas

1 Like

F

[pic]

IndianaDobie 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I don't think there should be mandatory life sentences for juveniles or adults. I am not against life sentences (or the death penalty for that matter) as a punishment - but there should be human being involved before such a drastic punishment is enforced. What is wrong with having sentencing guidelines that allow judges some leeway?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

Jerushaman 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Because too many judges have become little more than media wh0res.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to IndianaDobie

0 Like

F

[pic]

Guest 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

While we appreciate the well-intentioned forward thinking of this article, there is one important correction to make. Where the article says that victims groups have "not made much effort" to find common ground with those advocating for the offenders, that is factually incorrect. As the President of NOVJL, Jennifer Bishop Jenkins, I have worked tirelessly for 6 years to reach out to advocates for juvenile justice reform, only to be met by moratorium and an information black out. If there has been a failure to find common ground, it has not been for lack of effort on the part of our victim organization.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

FreeMind1776 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Sure, parole them. But they get to live the first year out with the person that granted the parole and the releaser is responsible for all the damage done by the person they release.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

general_tarfun 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

we need to rehabilitate the culture that raises the young thugs

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

Jerushaman 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

And we begin that by getting rid of the young thugs.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to general_tarfun

0 Like

F

[pic]

paulmartinDJ 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

This is a VERY sensitive and DIFFICULT subject folks ! AS a seasoned reporter and single Dad of 2 grown Sons I have strong opinions on this topic ! It is true that many youngsters grow up in horrible conditions, loveless homes often with drunken, junkie parents or no family life at all. Many of them join gangs because they would rather belong to someone and some family than none at all ! Many gangs require new members to kill someone, just to prove they are not law enforcement or planted snitches,etc. However, all things taken into consideration everyone, no matter how young, knows the difference between RIGHT and WRONG and that to go out and cold bloodedly take the life of innocent victims, except in absolute self defence) is WRONG !!!

Therefore I for one have NO sympathy for them regardless of their punishment !

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

farkingargle 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Leave them locked up. Maybe if we get enough violent juveniles locked up for long enough, the government will run out of prison money and we can stop imprisoning non-violent offenders.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

telesia 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Just an idea... but instead of handing down "life sentences without parole", judges could hand down 70-year sentences, without parole... or something similar that keeps these animals from ever killing again while they pay the price for having taken another's life.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

2 Likes

F

[pic]

DavidLevinsn 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I think you misread the article. Nothing in the Supreme Court's decision says that judges can't sentence minors to life. The ruling strikes down mandatory life sentences for minors.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to telesia

3 Likes

F

[pic]

telesia 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Some crimes show a complete lack of remorse, and true depraved indifference to life by those minors. Judges should be allowed to sentence them at their discretion, to mandatory life sentences with no chance for parole.

As a street-wise kid I can tell you we all knew the difference between right and wrong by ten years old. KiIling was wrong. Stealing was wrong. Assault was wrong. Any questions? Or, weren't you taught right from wrong when you were a child?

Let it go Dave.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to DavidLevinsn

0 Like

F

[pic]

Deb R Rose 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

The ruling was about MANDATORY sentencing - sentencing rules that remove a judge's ability to, well, judge a defendant.

Nothing in it says a depraved sociopath cannot receive an appropriate sentence.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Bingo! Further, nothing in it says that the state is required to let the depraved sociopath out of prison during his lifetime.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to Deb R Rose

0 Like

F

[pic]

humtake 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

They are wasting time and money on finding ways to lessen sentences for violent murderers while keeping someone who got caught with pot in jail for years. Yeah, the order of priorities in this country is atrocious.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Who is "they?"

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to humtake

1 Like

F

[pic]

idunno20202 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I never understood why children, never having been adults, can be deemed to have committed "adult" actions and are sentenced as adults without hesitation. But adults, who HAVE been children before, can't be charged as children for acting childish.

If you're gunna say 18 is the cut off, then stick to it. Don't say one kid acted like an adult (even though he's never been an adult) and then another kid acted like a kid. You can't just say "Children don't have the mental capacity to understand their actions and therefore should be sentenced leniently." Then turn around and say "This kid understood his adult actions (even though I just said kids don't have the capacity to understand their actions) so I'm going to try him as an adult."

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Are you trying to say that if 14 is the age for life in prison without parole then 14 should be the age of majority for everything else including voting, getting married, legally consenting to sex, etc?

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to idunno20202

0 Like

F

[pic]

Jalek 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

If someone's going to be sitting in an institution for the rest of their life without the possibility of anything else, judged unworthy to exist around people in society, then why are they there?

Kill them or find another society willing to take them. Keeping them around makes no sense. I don't mean execution after 20 years of appeals and pleas for clemency, they've been judged, it's already over.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

GRS62 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Yes, life sentences for under age killers is ridiculous. Sentence them to death and then actually follow through with the sentence.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

So, just ignore the rule of law. Isn't that what the felons in prison did?

How about instead you try to change the law, since you don't like it?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to GRS62

1 Like

F

[pic]

Mikado Cat 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Mandatory sentences prevent bias between similar crimes in different courts resulting in different sentences. I think what the court is saying is that over zealous legislatures have assigned mandatory penalties that are excessive, plus life to a 17 year old is not the same sentence as life to a 60 year old. It seemed to me the court leaves open strong sentences as long as they allow mitigation and have balance.

That said I see nothing about our current prison system that is effective in reforming a criminal. Just the opposite prison time creates hardened criminals.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

GrouchyKat 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

While it's not fair to the children to never have the rest of their lives, what about the families of the victems? In giving clemancy to those children, you are essentially telling the families that it doesn't matter that they lost husbands or wifes or children or parents.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Clemency? Where'd that come from? Clemency is a pardon. The issue in front of SCOTUS was the automatic denial of parole.

You are free to disagree with SCOTUS but will you please learn about the issue before you disagree with it? Parole is the issue. Pardon isn't.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to GrouchyKat

1 Like

F

[pic]

pghgirl 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Boy aren't you smart, MCHammBohn. No need for the rude attitude -we can't all be as smart and informed about the law as you are.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to GrouchyKat

0 Like

F

[pic]

Worldwalker 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Why do we say a child is mature enough to be tried as an adult in a criminal case, but not mature enough to consent to sex?

Or to vote, drink alcohol, buy cigarettes, drive a car, hold a job, sign a contract, join the military, get a tattoo, marry, leave school, make medical decisions, or do, well, pretty much anything else that we think adult mental development is necessary for? Surely if a child is mature enough to understand the full consequences of criminal actions, they're old enough to understand the consequences of drinking a beer.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

pghgirl 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

The problem is that is a child has the ability to kill, this could be something that stays with them for life. The average kid knows not to do something like this -but the kid that goes ahead and commits such a crime is "off".

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Worldwalker

0 Like

F

[pic]

Bryan Jones 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

They are juveniles, and should be sentenced as such....there's your solution

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

Todd Gilbert 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

As far as I'm concerned you take a life, you forfeit your freedom for life. Any age. It's no surprise the one advocating for it is a person whose family was a victim of these sociopaths. It's the nitwits that feel sorry for these creetons that let them out only so more people become victims. Those are the same people that think people don't need guns. So they can become complete victims in their own homes. They break in, shoot em.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

arpiniant 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

There are certainly murderers who should never again see the light of day. There are certainly murderers who are capable of being rehabilitated. Mandatory sentencing means there is no difference.

To say that a 14, 15 16 year old is never, in the next 70 years, capable of being a productive citizen, is absurd. At the cost of incarceration, we should always be looking for the answers.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

Prince Albert 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Let them out -just as soon as the victim climbs out of the grave and endorses such a decison.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to arpiniant

1 Like

F

[pic]

StopTheBS01 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Let's put the juice back in justice and fry these little turds...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

ReadsBooks 4 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

telesia - You have no idea what it's like.

My grandma's house was broken into by some juvinile, she tried to kick him out and ended getting hit in the head and dying. The guy was just released after 25 years in prison.

Do I want to kill this guy - nope

Do I want to torture this guy - nope

Do I think he was punished for his crimne - yes.

Why do you think people all suddenly become blood thirsty psycopaths just because someone hurt one of your loved ones?

I know one thing for sure, my grandma would NOT want me to be the sort of person you seem want me to be.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

spoddney 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

You're more enlightened than most of the morons who post on CNN blogs.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to ReadsBooks

1 Like

F

[pic]

Rick Shultz 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

I am certain that your Grandmother is proud of you. You have not let this turn you into one of the fools who want you to be like them.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to ReadsBooks

0 Like

F

[pic]

Prince Albert 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

yet , your Grandmother - is dead, never to return

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to ReadsBooks

0 Like

F

[pic]

Roallin 4 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Juveniles can't have sexual intercourse, because they are not adults and legaly cannot give consent. Given this, how can the criminal justice system decide to try a juvinelle as an adult, when it has already been established they are not adults and unable to make descions that adults can. Sounds like a double standard. A juvenile should be considered a juvenile in all situations.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

1 Like

F

[pic]

Puffywauns Muse 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

The law does not prevent them for engaging in sexual behavior or, committing "Adult" level crimes. What the law does is reflect Social Contract. In this case, hypocritical? Absolutely but so is our society. Do as I say, not as I do.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Roallin

0 Like

F

[pic]

Rick Shultz 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

You expected LOGIC from this judicial system? I'm disappointed in you Roallin.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Roallin

0 Like

F

[pic]

Prince Albert 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

LOL you make the point!

If they do have "coitus" then they are breaking the law and they go to jail.

I do agree that they shouldn't go to jail -they should be in the electric chair

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Roallin

0 Like

F

[pic]

pagan1gov 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!

show more show less

ALike

4 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

pagan1gov 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Deserve a chance to learn right from wrong!

Education is still based on MUCH therory.

WHY because it is true NOT everyone person will react the same.

Some learn this in school!

show more show less

ALike

4 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

pagan1gov 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

It is funny to me how quick people are to Condem.

Gosh I hopes there is a heaven.

I think I may have some finger pointing to do up there.

Hopefully later than sooner.

show more show less

ALike

4 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

mikeysmind 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Here is a novel idea....Lets just let all the little perps out of prison and we can let society take care of the problem of having delinquent muderers run in the street...( Stand Your Ground ) is the defence of the decade......

But in reality, the current child felons/detainee's that have committed murder while under the age of 18 will get 25 years from this day forward

No time off for good behavior or any previous time behind bars will be given, All sentences must be served Consecutively...Not Concurrently.... Any person convicted (under 18) get 50 years for each offense before parole can be considered.

This rule of law should apply to all prisoner's past, present, and future felons convicted of homicide.

It's not life with out parole, but might as well be !!!

show more show less

ALike

4 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

smbelaen 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

By the time a kid turns 12 years old, they certainly do understand the permanency of death, and they do know right from wrong. Even a kid as young as 10 understands the permanent nature of death; however, a 10 year old may not fully understand right from wrong, but they do know killing is wrong. If a kid kills, I think the likelihood of them being rehabilitated is extremely rare, that is unless the kid is a 6 year old "murderer".

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

sckimmy 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

There has to be a middle ground. A child that is not an adult their brain is still developing. But I think what a good approach is preventive action. There are kids out there right now that need intervention on one level or another. If you take that child and provide the resources that are needed you can prevent his or her future crimes. I am not looking at this with rose colored glasses not everyone can be helped but there are some that can. Working with my church we have a tutoring outreach. Many of the kids we see are raising themselves. And when they need someone to stand beside them with school issues that have no one. Standing in the gap can make a world of difference.

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Think4yourse 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Some people, kids included, are just evil and a danger to everyone around them. These people do not need to be locked up and treated, they need to be expunged as they are just burden on the rest of us.

I have no sympathy for them. That being said, how many innocents died to rid the world of Hitler. Would you that are against the death penalty allow him to live today? If so, Id say you need to be put in the victims place, just as you should today.

Mistakes? yes, its going to happen. Regardless, it happens because the facts were presented to a jury of 12 people of sound mind and they decided the outcome. This is our law. We can choose to respect it or not. We can live with it or not.

If you allow a murderer to live, then you...

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

That's all nice but the point behind the article is that we (Americans) should deal with what the law actually says. Executing a 14 year old is "off the table" short of a constitutional amendment. Unless you truly think that 38 states are going to agree with you, what is your LEGAL plan to deal with the issue?

I agree with the conclusion in the article (we should use a process involving in order to decide what to do that best approximates the will of the people while also obeying the law).

So, what do you propose we do?

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

in reply to Think4yourse

0 Like

F

[pic]

orlandojon 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Want to see the murder rate double? Tell kids they can get away with it

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Where in the ruling does it remotely suggest that kids can get away with it? A 14 year old can still end up spending the rest of his life in prison for murder.

show more show less

ALike

5 days ago

in reply to orlandojon

0 Like

F

[pic]

lindyhop 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Behind almost every juvenile offender is a parent who made them that way. Not only should the juveniles punishment fit the crime the parents who have unleashed these monsters into society should be jailed also. If you own a dog and it bites someone you get sued. Let a monster out to kill and you get..that's right nothing.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

south4evr 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Big surprise....judges ignore mandatory sentences all the time!!! There are numerous states with laws requiring mandatory 10 year sentences for possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. How often are firearms charges ever applied? Liberals always whine about gun control, yet they ignore the fact that existing laws are not applied or enforced!! Judges do what they want, not what the law dictates!!

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

jbingham223 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Everyone here seems to think all murders are equally vicious and unthinkable. There are many cases though, where murder, if not exactly commendable, is at least understandable. Think about the abused child prostitute who eventually snaps and kills her pimp. Or the young boy who kills the man who beats his mother. Those aren't people who are likely to be out prowling for their next victims when they're released. Not all murderers are vicious, anti-social monsters, and cases like this are the reason mandatory sentencing doesn't make sense.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

noleman13 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I have a great idea.....lets send these poor kids over to Jeanne and Marks house.

Problem solved

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Jeanne and Mark didn't say they were poor kids that should be released. Did you read the article?

They said we need a plan that complies with supreme law. Why do you object to that?

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to noleman13

0 Like

F

[pic]

wildferalcode 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Murderers and violent criminals should be executed even if they are under 18. America has whole prisons dedicated to just one gang b/c they are too violent to put in prison with other gangs. Waste of tax dollars. Execute them all.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

wildferalcode 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

I think some patriots need to borrow some drones and bombers and reduce these prisons full of violent criminals to rubble...actually they should just gas all the prisoners so they can reuse the prison when they start arresting the rest of the gang members not in prison. Rinse and Repeat

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to wildferalcode

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

So, you don't like the state of the law. OK.

The problem is that some state's have laws on the books that are now unconstitutional. (Doesn't matter if you like it or not; the law is the law.)

The question is what should these states do so that they will have a law that comes as close as legally possible to reflect the desires of the legislatures.

Ignoring the problem, by saying you don't like the current supreme law, doesn't solve the problem. It's just whining.

Of the legal options, what do you think should be done?

My opinion is we do what the authors suggested -- go through a process to determine what should be done that closely reflects the wishes of the people in state and is also compliant with the supreme law (the Constitution).

So, again, of the LEGAL...

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to wildferalcode

0 Like

F

[pic]

daddypops 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I think the point is being missed. I agree that life without parole as a mandatory sentence is at best a byproduct of old penal thinking. No judge should be told that he must sentence someone to this with no regard to the age or situation. I think it is reasonable to still allow life sentences for juveniles, but we must have some system that allows for the possibility of reconsideration. Some juveniles should spend the balance of their life in prison for the crimes they committed. Some juvenile criminals are so young and immature that they have the possibility of being rehabilitated. They still need to serve a reasonable sentence before consideration is given to the possibility of parole (maybe a minimum sentence of 20 years after they become adults) to eliminate a backlog of parole applications immediately after imprisonment. I think that at least one hearing should...

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

noleman13 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Sure, you fool, lets leave it up to liberal judges. The geniuses who dont die when they show compassion to a killer. Maybe if judges had to pay for their mistakes that would be ok. Say a judge gives a psyco a break. That psyco goes out and kills someone. The judge then has to go to prison for life. It is the judges fault that the psyco is out and commited the crime.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to daddypops

1 Like

F

[pic]

madnessofjack 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

This article is crap....our "justice" system is crap.....and excuse me if I dont extend a bleeding heart to a murderer or a rapist or a violent offender regardless of his age.

The victims of crime pay a price that the "justice" system ignores and I'm suppose to feel sorry for these monsters???? I'm suppose to believe these criminals are "victims"????

The "Debt to society" DOES NOT MAKE THE VICTIMS FAMILY WHOLE, it largely ignores them.

Pray this never happens to you....because the "justice system" will NOT be seeking "justice" for you or your family.

From the article.

"In contrast, Jeanne, a criminal defense attorney, believes that some juveniles convicted of murder deserve life without parole. Her belief comes in part through personal experience: In 1990, a 16-year-old named David Biro killed her pregnant sister, Nancy Bishop Langert, and her husband, Richard Langert, in their townhouse in Winnetka, Illinois....

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Um, the quote you provided, to support your point came from the article that you called crap. How is this possible?

The point of the article isn't to offer an opinion on if the SCOTUS ruling was a good ruling or not. The point of the article is to say that the SCOTUS ruling is law (which it is) and that state legislatures are going to have to pass state laws that comply with federal laws. Why are you arguing against that (by calling the article crap)?

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to madnessofjack

1 Like

F

[pic]

madnessofjack 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

um, the larger point was about the heinousness of the crime committed by juvenile violent offenders and the result to victims families.

I mention that in my post, did you bother to read it?

My contention is that violent juvenile offenders are no different than adult violent offenders.

This article makes the point...supported by the SCOTUS....that somehow juvenile violent offenders are....different.

That is what I called crap.

"Mark, a former prosecutor and law professor, has argued that juvenile murderers are different from others sentenced to life terms because they are unformed children at the time of the killing. In the same way that we treat children differently in many other areas because they are still developing, he believes there should be some chance for rehabilitation allowed in every juvenile case. He represents the view of many criminal law professionals who seek consistency with other areas of law: He...

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to MCHammBohn

0 Like

F

[pic]

madnessofjack 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

"Kids" assault, rape, murder in the same fashion as adults.

Further, what is not being talked about is that "Life" is defined, depending on the state, as 20 years not including parole.

Charles Manson's little family has been eligible for parole after 7 YEARS of incarceration.

This is BULLCRAP......If you cant do the time..DONT DO THE CRIME.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Jalek 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

One or two laws have changed in the last 40 years...

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to madnessofjack

1 Like

F

[pic]

madnessofjack 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Parole eligibility varies from state to state.

Being a "kid" and committing a homicide is no less painful for a victims family as an adult performing the same act.

show more show less

ALike

6 days ago

in reply to Jalek

0 Like

F

[pic]

Brian Allan 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

gorillasandbananas "... he will miss everything important life has to offer."I think you hit the nail on the head. I see no problem giving a criminal the same punishment he/she gave the victim! The victim is also missing everything important life has to offer...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

gorillasandbananas 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

I agree with you, a sentence of 30 or 40 years will ensure the convicted felon misses everything important in life, just like their victim did. My point is, what is the point of sentencing them to more than that? It doesn't make sense. All it does is cost taxpayers a lot more money. Do you really want to pay for a convicted killer's hospice care to the tune of $70,000/year?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Brian Allan

2 Likes

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Brian, if by "same punishment" you mean killing the convict, I see a problem. George Stinney was executed for a crime he apparently didn't commit.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Brian Allan

1 Like

F

[pic]

Tatiana Covington 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Justice does not exist. There's far better evidence for the Higgs boson.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

James Penrose 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Simple solution: Let the advocates for letting some of these monsters out of jail take full legal responsibility for them.

You get him when he is released, you care for him, teach him and stand bail for any further crimes he commits.

The assumption that merely because you are 16 or whatever prevents you from formulating and carrying out great acts of evil is flawed.

Some things done by "children" are so hideous and vile that absent some guarantee they will not do such again, they need to be kept away from society.

Never forget the other goal of punishment: To protect the people from further harm by criminals.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Simple? There's the little matter of the First Amendment...

If you want to amend the Constitution, why don't you just propose getting rid of the cruel and unusual clause instead? Why pick on freedom of speech?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to James Penrose

1 Like

F

[pic]

jameskatt 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Give them 75 years in prison. Simple.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

crazyvermont 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Does anyone now doubt where the road leads when we have such a lack of respect for life......

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

LindaLuttrell 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

A teenager, deemed legally sane, is certainly old enough to know "the difference between right and wrong." Murder is murder. You do the crime; the do the time! This article sounded like: well they've served long enough AND...the prisons are getting even more crowded because of it. If that monster had killed my sister and her husband, I'd still be demanding the death penalty...for him and everyone else like him!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Why are you waiting until someone kills someone in your family before you act?

Why don't you run for state or federal office or actively support someone who hold similar beliefs? (Perhaps you are but you didn't say so.)

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to LindaLuttrell

0 Like

F

[pic]

drewcrewof2 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

There are far too many Liberals on the planet today. Lets start there and all these problems will solve themselves!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Puffywauns Muse 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Whether or not you are, "Liberal" or "Conservative", has little bearing on this conversation. I am a "bleeding liberal" and pro-choice. That does not mean I want little Jimmy loose in society anymore than you do. People are perfectly capable of knowing their own minds without the help of Fox, Glenn Beck or Rush. Those political gurus are popular because they reflect back the paranoia and bigotry already present in society and validate it. Rush and some of the Conspiracy cases over at Fox, use the same technique as Hitler used to get into office. When people stop thinking for his/her selves, run purely on fear, manipulate facts/events/or ambiguous situations to validate those anxieties we loose no only rationality but also democracy. "Liberals" and "Conservatives", in the schema you used it - refers to a lack of Independant critical thinking on both sides. This issue, that of...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to drewcrewof2

1 Like

F

[pic]

RedLeftHand 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Pack a lunch.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to drewcrewof2

0 Like

F

[pic]

Gohek 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

When you kill someone, regardless of whether you're a minor, if it was planned and premeditated, and you are up to the age to comprehend that doing (a) action will result in (b) death, then you are also up to the age to receive the death penalty. It seems quite like "an eye for an eye", but it this sort of situation, it is almost always justifiable. Now if it is a different situation, life in prison wont do much of anything to change or punish a person.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Brian Allan 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Very poor decision! You do the crime, you do the time! Murder is murder regardless of who does it...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

What is the legal flaw in the decision? (Not the political flaw but the legal flaw.)

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Brian Allan

1 Like

F

[pic]

pmichner 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

"As a determinist, I'd have to say the problem goes back to the origin of the universe"

-Dilbert

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Rick Shultz 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

RFLMAO ----- THAT one I like.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to pmichner

0 Like

F

[pic]

Rick Shultz 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Oh I see Chiefpr, it's OK for you to flap your jaw it's just not OK for me to point out that these

hydrocephalic gorillas whose forum you are using to insult me are liars and hypocrites huh?

Seems like I saw this document once that had a part that said First Amendment. Yup, I rememberit because the paper was real old. In fact, it wasn't even paper it was vellum. That's how old it was. Reckin it predates anything YOU can come up with bigmouth.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

RedLeftHand 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Please avoid feeding the trolls, Mr. Shultz. There is no remedy for idiocy.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Rick Shultz

0 Like

F

[pic]

Rick Shultz 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I just asked Mr. Moderator sir to let y'all decide whether my comment was fit to read and they won't do it. That should prove they're afraid of free speech, and just plain hypocrites. In addition

to being liars.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Chiefpr 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Take your meds, go to mass, say a novena, whatever works to seal your flapping jaw.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Rick Shultz

0 Like

F

[pic]

Rick Shultz 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

MY comment is put on hold but this joker named Elder_Pliny is allowed to publist a "comment" that contains the statement "Work them to death, or just excute them" and HIS balderdash is not even

questioned!! Can I say "CNN sucks?"

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Rick Shultz 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Again I typed what I considered to be thoughtful and measured comment and again it was put on HOLD by CNN who is obviously STILL LYING about not pre-screening comments! How long do we have to put up with this boldfaced lie and insult to the readers of these forums?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

pghgirl 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Oh my gosh...there are such bigger things in life to be concerned about!!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Rick Shultz

0 Like

F

[pic]

Olinser 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

What CNN conveniently forgets to mention in the article is that the vast majority of crimes requiring a mandatory sentence of life without parole would be eligible for the death penalty for adults. I also notice that they fail to give a single example out of the cited 2500 inmates that didn't deserve to spend his life behind bars.

Miller, the person at the center of this case, beat a man unconscious and set fire to his house with him still inside, obviously killing him.

These are not people convicted of theft, drug crimes, assault or even rape. They are murderers, every single one of them (and not just murder - most states that had such a law reserved it only for certain types of murder - first, or possibly second degree murder).

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

MCHammBohn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Um, the article is an opinion piece that wasn't written by employees of CNN.

The point behind the article is that we should take steps to cope with the SCOTUS ruling. We may not like it but it is the law. The point is that it is the law. Our elected officials have to deal with that reality.

Why are you blaming CNN again? Because they published an opinion piece that says we need to cope with reality? Really?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Olinser

0 Like

F

[pic]

daddytimsit 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

AH! the little ones aren't we all great role models!!!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

John Adams 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

The supreme court has made a ruling on the sentencing, what's the point of this article again?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

hooties242 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Hang the little bastards....I don't care how young they are.....nip it......nip it in the bud!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

breakdown 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

16 yr olds are kids anymore.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

outawork 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

OK, life with parole only after 50 years.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Jeanne Bishop 2 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I want to pay tribute to the many people who have reached out and listened to the other side in this important discussion, people who give me hope for the future on the issue of juvenile life sentences: my sister Jennifer Bishop-Jenkins, Jody Kent, Bernardine Dohrn, Randolph Stone, Rich Klawiter....the list is long and honorable.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

VictimsofTeenKillers 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

I am Jeanne's sister, and the President of NOVJL, the victim organization mentioned in this article. While we appreciate the positive forward looking approach in this article, it is important to make one significant correction. Where this article says that victims groups have made "no real effort" to find common ground with those who are advocating to release our loved ones killers, that is factually incorrect.

I will not detail here the 6 years of very hard work on my part doing outreach to offender advocates - including calling them, traveling to meetings, spending much time, money, effort, discussions, emails, lengthy meetings, even moderated restorative justice circles - that has been met mostly by a cold shoulder and an information blackout. Suffice it to say that my effort has been significant.

Any failure to find common ground up to now on this issue is NOT due to any lack of...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Jeanne Bishop

0 Like

F

[pic]

rg500g 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Some people, adult or juvenile, simply cannot be rehabilitated. How we tell those who can from those who can't I don't know, but we need to come up with some process with the least error (and there will be error no matter what), and either warehouse those who cannot be rehabilitated for the rest of their natural life or put them down. Call it barbaric, call it whatever you want. We simply cannot delude ourselves into thinking that simply because someone is a minor their mind is malleable and they can all be rehabilitated.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

truffaldino 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

The court case just said that the courts need to consider whether the juvenile should be sentenced to life or not. It didn't say that a juvenile couldn't be sentenced to life imprisonment, only that it couldn't be mandatory. It makes perfect sense to consider each case on its own. A juvenile convicted of some heinous crime who comes across like a sociopath should be locked up forever. A juvenile who played enough of a role in a murder to be convicted but who might not have been its architect may merit a different outcome. It seems far fetched to say everyone is moldable, but it is just as far fetched to say that none of these juveniles can be rehabilitated. At any rate, there are probably some juveniles out there that have more capacity for rehabilitation then say a libertarian has of developing a sense of empathy or...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

misslynn29 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

I used to think dictators that exterminated were cruel. But really...I think we need to thin the herd and start with these sociopath murderers and pedophiles too.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Leecherius 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

It's all in the wording. No life sentence without paroles , ok , how about 80 years , parole after 60.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

Prince Albert 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

nope . why should they have ANY life after they deprived a person of thiers?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Leecherius

0 Like

F

[pic]

sacj7 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

E X A C T L Y !

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to Leecherius

0 Like

F

[pic]

SCY385 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

This is a tough one because some of these juveniles are commiting some really serious crimes. On one hand you have to wonder WHY some of these kids are doing some of the things that they are doing? On the other hand there is what's best for society in general. I don't think that you can just paint the issue with one broad stroke. There could be external factors like mental illness, self-defense, abuse, etc. going on with some of these kids. I do think it is important for society to put more effort in helping kids that are in jeopardy and maybe, just maybe it could prevent more serious issues. I have been the victim of a juvenile offfender and I did everything in my power to convict him. I did succeed, but I have often wondered if it even...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

dfizzo 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Not all criminals are sociopaths, some act out of desperation, many act out of mental illness.

In many states traveling 15+ mph over the speed limit is a CRIMINAL misdemeanor. Are the people that do that, therefore, sociopaths?

There needs to be some level of gradiated punishment, the "all criminals are the same soulless monsters" stance is completely illogical.

But you do see in many other counties far more humane systems than our, frankly, hellish prison system. You also see far less crime and FAR less recidivism in those countries. But, for some reason, the American positions appears to be "treat them like animals" in a lot of cases.

Yes there are truely evil people who need to be treated as the monsters they are in terms of punishment. But many, MANY, criminals CAN be rehabilitated, CAN rejoin society and SHOULD be given that chance.

...

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

telesia 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

I'm outta here... top of the day to all.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

telesia 7 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

Looks like SCOTUS is putting "justice" into the hands of the American people once again, as they have done with immigration problems, and CommieCare. I never agreed with vigilantism, but I think the time is nearing for true Americans to start upholding our Constitution, laws, mores, and freedom to a higher standard than our politicians, courts, and LEAs do.

Unless someone has a better solution, or simply thinks that "status quo" works, I don't see any other way.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

0 Like

F

[pic]

GEMSathanas 3 comments collapsed CollapseExpand

I've always been in favor of sinking the planet. It would fix just about everything, except for the problem of how to sink a planet.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to telesia

2 Likes

F

[pic]

telesia 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Reply to DavidLevinsn:

I could, but won't...

... other than to say don't mess with mine, or I'll mete out justice in a way the courts never can or will, and it won't involve kiIling. I'll leave the rest to your imagination.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to GEMSathanas

0 Like

F

[pic]

telesia 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Uh... pull the plug on the bottom and top. and watch it shrivel up like a raisin!

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to GEMSathanas

0 Like

F

[pic]

DavidLevinsn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

telesia--your post doesn't make a lot of sense. Can you elaborate on this "solution" that you are advocating?

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to telesia

1 Like

F

[pic]

waltonsimons 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

"don't mess with mine, or I'll mete out justice in a way the courts never can or will, and it won't involve kiIling. I'll leave the rest to your imagination."

Oooh, an internet tough guy. I'm sure the real-world gangbangers and mafioso are shaking in their shoes.

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to telesia

0 Like

F

[pic]

DavidLevinsn 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

telesia---that didn't really help. I guess maybe you have voodoo powers or something

show more show less

ALike

1 week ago

in reply to telesia

0 Like

F

[pic]

opinion4 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

The issue is the lack of a competent reformation process instead of just removing unwanted elements from society. We are keen to lump a common sentence on everyone guilty of a crime with the expectation that they all know as much as each other and the time penalty provides reform. The expectation is that those guilty understand their crimes to a common degree...not that they committed a crime, not that 'yes I shot that person' or the like, but the real impact that imparts. I dare say that last part if a rally for those against life sentences. Still though prison does not equate to reform, a terrible deed does not demand damnation of the person forever. What really needs to be done is a comprehensive reformation process where the individual can be helped and evaluated to determine if they can be a functional member of society. That process,...

show more show less

ALike

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download