On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:25:17 -0500, Ned Simmons wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:08:12 -0500, Ned Simmons wrote:

We've apparently decided to stop executing children, so anything is
possible g.

Remind me again how a murderer who is a day short of 18 years is a
"child" please?

Take it up with the Supremes.

"While drawing the line at 18 is subject to the objections
always raised against categorical rules, that is the point
where society draws the line for many purposes between
childhood and adulthood and the age at which the line for
death eligibility ought to rest."

Do you have a good argument for 17-1/2 years? 8-1/2?

Yes, I feel that the crime should determine the penalty.

The age of the murderer doesn't change the outcome
for the victim and their family,

Are you looking for revenge here, or is this an eye for an
eye thing?

Are you saying we should try to rehabilitate a murderer? How
do you propose they will contribute more to society than they
have taken? Even if it's possible, why invest money and effort
on someone who as already shown themselves to be unworthy of trust?

and if you're old enough to murder
someone you're damn well old enough to suffer the consequences.

6-1/2 years?

Can you show me a case where a 6 1/2 year old has been convicted of
murder and sentenced to death?

But keep that funny size paper outta here.

On that, we agree. It just looks _wrong_.

It *is* wrong (and doesn't fit in any of my binders).

I used to have a four-hole punch for the stuff, went in the four-ring
binders, of course. It's like a whole 'nother world. And, the 50-Hz
buzz is really strange; you get used to 60 Hz (I'm hearing it right now
if I listen for it), and everything just sounds _wrong_.