Should 13 and 14 y.o. killers be sentenced to life without parole

[CRedskinsRule]

I guess I see this as an interesting contrast to the current teachers thread. I am pretty torn on this, and couldn't even answer the poll question. My biggest thing is what type of "rehabilitation" are you going to give a 13 or 14 year old. If they do 10 or more years, for example, in an adult corrections center, there is no way on earth that they will come out and have any clue how to live life. They would have a stigma attached forever, thus making employment a near nil chance since they have no work history, and their teen years would have been spent seeing prison life as the norm. If you were to say that it was cruel and unusual, you would have to put ALOT of resources in to making sure that they actual come out rehabilitated not more bitter/angry. Pretty hard to see that happening in our current system.

But, then way that against the fact that 13 and 14 year olds aren't mentally/emotionally mature as adults, that they act far more on impulse, and whatever troubled past/homelife they might be in., and how can you look at it, even in the most horrendous cases and not see that somehow, this was a life ruined before it ever had a chance to start. Sympathy for the victims, justice for the victims, all of that needs to see that this is not an act fully understood by the perpetrator, even if he/she thinks she does.

Like I said, I couldn't choose an answer on the poll, but would like to hear other people's thoughts:

Underlying Yahoo story (not very informative - like most Yahoo bits)
What's Your Verdict: 14 Years Old and Life Without Parole? - Yahoo! News

Poll Website
Should 13 and 14 year old killers be sentenced to life without parole?

[NC_Skins]

Their lives are pretty much over so yes, they should be locked up for life as sad as it is. Making a dumb mistake at one thing, killing another human being is going down a road one can never come back from. Unless it was revenge killing for somebody executing his loved ones or unless it was a defensive maneuver, I simply can't see him productive citizen without the looming threat that he could kill yet again.

[RedskinRat]

Some kids grow up in a disadvantaged home and still manage to do something with their lives. Some don't.

I am in favor of executing kids that murder.

[That Guy]

depends on the situation, but in general murder is still murder, so yeah, probably life.

[hooskins]

Really tough call. One hand they are kids, but killing is killing.

However life in jail or execution doesn't prevent this from happening into the future. Its just negative reinforcement, which is only so effective.

[hooskins]

To be clear I support life in prison, but I think this really shouldn't be the topic of discussion.

It's what kind of things can be used to create incentives and disincentives to minimize murder at the youth level.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by hooskins

However life in jail or execution doesn't prevent this from happening into the future. Its just negative reinforcement, which is only so effective.

How could it NOT prevent it? I'd be impressed if an executed murderer was a recidivist.

Originally Posted by hooskins

It's what kind of things can be used to create incentives and disincentives to minimize murder at the youth level.

I'd rather we focus on protecting potential victims/law abiding citizens than cossetting psychopaths.

[mlmpetert]

Not trying to detract from this thread but i read this, this when i woke up:

Tyler Clementi, Dharun Ravi and the problem with hate crimes laws | Fox News

Not really all that great of an opinion piece, but it made me think about this thread because of this:

Longer prison sentences actually increase the likelihood of recidivism.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc...riefing%20.pdf

Which i think is intuitive and what we all knew for the most part.

All of us were outraged when we found out the Norway killer would serve a maximum of 21 years in a Danish/mid-century-modern style prison for the 70 or so people he killed. But i believe someone posted in that thread (i get all my news from warpath threads, fyi) that Norway has an extremely low murder and recidivism rate compared to the US and other countries with stricter sentencing.

So unless youre going to put a person away forever or kill them, it unintuitively makes more sense to give them a lighter prison sentence that focuses on rehabilitation IF your goal is to reduce the likelihood of recidivism.

But while rehabilitating a violent offender may be great for that person and preferable to the community he is released in, it leaves out the accomplishment of one major thing, justice. In my mind justice and atonement is and should be the most important aspect in administrating punishment. I dont think we owe it to a violent criminal, thief or cheat to fix or rehabilitate them for hurting another. However I firmly believe we owe the persons they wronged, in the form of just punishment on the wrongdoer.

Also with regards to should a 13 or 14 year old be sentenced to life or death for carrying out a plot to kill another? Absolutely. I think its fair to make a judgment call on the mental capability of a youngster but in general I think a 13 year old can be just as culpable as a 18 year old.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

How could it NOT prevent it? I'd be impressed if an executed murderer was a recidivist.



I'd rather we focus on protecting potential victims/law abiding citizens than cossetting psychopaths.

Nice. I love the cynical approach. Your perspective is extremely shortsighted. I am not talking about the single case, I'm talking about long term. Why can't you do both, worry about victims and decrease the number of future victims?

Jailing, and execution, doesn't decreased future crimes. The US has one of the highest rates of criminals returning to jail after their first visit. Its a bigger social and correctional issue.

[hooskins]

Look at this, for example. Now I'm not advocating making prisons into resorts but a bigger effort in correction would go a long way. Exploring other options would make sense since crime is high in the US vs. other developed nations.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/24/world/...l?c=homepage-t

[hooskins]

Another interesting link :

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/us...pagewanted=all

[mlmpetert]

I heard an interview from Richmond's Sheriff this morning about a study conducted at his jail. A VCU doctorate candidate did her (gets me everytime) dissertation on the effects of a “faith based” program instituted at a local prison.

Green, 44, was a subject of a study that found that Richmond inmates who participated in the faith-based Kingdom Life Ministries/Men in Recovery program had an 18 percent lower recidivism rate than did prisoners in another program. The study also concluded that the program saved taxpayers nearly $8 million over the 3½-year study period.

City jail program's results touted | Richmond Times-Dispatch

So with the links in mind that hooskins posted what do you guys find preferable if recidivism rates and costs were to be equal. A healin’ from Jesus while in jail or an awakening through a short sentence mixed with facilities so posh your wife can pull in design cues from them?

Also im pretty sure the supreme court ruled life sentences for youths unconstitutional.