Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Long Live The Death Penalty! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (342)	1/15/2003 3:44:09 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 828

that is a very good question. My emotional response to that is that we should. My logical response is that we shouldn't. I do not believe that a 17 year old truly understands all of the ramifications of his actions. Further, I believe that a 17 year old can be easily manipulated by an adult. This is why 17 year olds are not considered to be the age of majority, they have not developed emotionally and mentally enough to make adult decisions, therefore we do not offer them all the rights of an adult. Since our society doesn't offer a 17 year old the rights of an adult, it also follows that we apply the same reasoning in evaluating whether they had the ability to make an informed adult decision. However, I do believe that a society (as well as an individual) has the right to assure that an individual is not a threat to its survival. John Malvo is obviously damaged goods. It is unlikely that he can be rehabilitated, therefore I have no problem with locking him up for life.