The Death Penalty should be applied equally to all ages

[ok doser]

Mea culpa, but that time period that Clete seems to like had almost 4 million people enslaved in the US which is the more important part to consider

And my great great grandfather and many others' ancestors fought to set every one of them free.

You're welcome

 

[JudgeRightly]

Not really. There's reasons why we don't hold children or the mentally impaired as accountable for their actions as adults and it's based in (shock, horror) science. Otherwise we'd have nutball laws that would have five year old's and younger being executed or some such garbage...

What should be done regarding the OP? A NINE YEAR OLD RAPED A FIVE YEAR OLD.

Doing anything other than putting him to death would be to tolerate rape.

Being mentally impaired or incapable of understanding what they're doing should be an aggravating factor with such crimes, not a mitigating factor.

You appeal to science, yet seem to forget that science does not tell us "ought," only "is."

God says you shall not pity the criminal. Life shall be for life.

A criminal is one who has committed a crime.

Rape is a crime, one punishable by death, at least in a civilized society, and had been since Noah.

We ought to punish criminals appropriately. Just because you don't like the punishment doesn't mean it's wrong.

When we put criminals guilty of capital crimes to death, society is better off.

 

[ok doser]

Ah yes, the first century of the US.

1781-1881
16% of that time period was entirely slave free.
For most or all of that time period, northern states were entirely slave free.

 

[Arthur Brain]

What should be done regarding the OP? A NINE YEAR OLD RAPED A FIVE YEAR OLD.

Doing anything other than putting him to death would be to tolerate rape.

Being mentally impaired or incapable of understanding what they're doing should be an aggravating factor with such crimes, not a mitigating factor.

You appeal to science, yet seem to forget that science does not tell us "ought," only "is."

God says you shall not pity the criminal. Life shall be for life.

A criminal is one who has committed a crime.

Rape is a crime, one punishable by death, at least in a civilized society, and had been since Noah.

We ought to punish criminals appropriately. Just because you don't like the punishment doesn't mean it's wrong.

When we put criminals guilty of capital crimes to death, society is better off.

I'm not 'appealing to science', I'm using it as the yardstick that any sane system has (and does) when it comes to apportioning culpability for a crime, your bizarre objections to that notwithstanding. You actually believe that an incapacity to understand one's actions should be an aggravating factor in ascertaining guilt for a crime?! So...a fully aware adult who deliberately and with malice aforethought commits first degree murder has done nothing worse than one who kills without fully realizing what they've done effectively?!!

There's a reason why the kind of lunacy you propose isn't accepted in both our respective countries and never will be. It fails on a scientific and just as importantly, a moral level.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I'm not 'appealing to science', I'm using it as the yardstick that any sane system has when it comes to apportioning culpability for a crime, your bizarre objections to that notwithstanding.

AGAIN, science tells us what is, not ought.

Science cannot tell you right and wrong. We're discussing what is right and wrong.

It's like using a tape-measure to know what color the sky is.

You actually believe that an incapacity to understand one's actions should be an aggravating factor in ascertaining guilt for a crime?!

Yes. Have you noticed how many criminals use "mental illness" as a means of mitigating their punishments when otherwise their case would be open and shut?

That's not a coincidence.

So...a fully aware adult who deliberately and with malice aforethought commits first degree murder has done nothing worse than one who kills without fully realizing what they've done effectively?!!

Both have committed murder. Both are deserving death.

Man is not authorized, nor has the capability, to try to calculate the correct amount of punishment. God is and does.

There's a reason why the kind of lunacy you propose isn't accepted in both our respective countries and never will be. It fails on a scientific and just as importantly, a moral level.

I don't care what you think, Arthur.

Man is evil. God is just.

God said put the murderer, the rapist, the adulterer and the adulteress, to death.

Who are you to say we should do otherwise?