If you do the crime, you do the time. You keep animals in cages, why not humanoids? Better idea, impose the death penalty.

I see no problem with holding a dangerous person in prison for their entire life. I think, though, that rehabilitation is possible and even someone who has committed a terrible crime can turn their life around. I think it’s appropriate to have the possiblity for parole, understanding that parole boards have to be trusted to make the right decisions.

Kurt, things are different now. When I was a kid you were actually a juvenile at 15 because you didn’t play with guns, you still rode a bicycle, you didn’t use drugs or drink your parents beer. You were off the streets by 8:00 on school nights and 10:00 on weekends. You came home to eat dinner with the family at 5:00. We were indeed dumb juveniles.

Today, juvenile means playing with guns at 15, doing drugs, riding around in cars all night, eating at McDonald’s with you friend and throwing the trash out on the parking lot. Adults let this happen with their kids. They were pushed out of the juvenile category. They were raised to be adults too soon and they committed adult crime knowing what they were doing all the time.

I hate the fact that a young person will spend the rest of their lives in prison. However, they were aware of what they were doing. That makes them adult in my opinion. The only person that endured cruel and unusual punishment was the elderly woman and the people that had guns pressed up their noses.

By the time a child reaches the age of most of the ones they sentence to life in prison they definitely know the difference between right and wrong, so yes they should have the same penalties for “youthful” offenders as they do adults.

There will always be people who will require exceptions (i.e., mental disorders), however, I then believe that those individuals, while they may or may not have known what they were doing was wrong, they should still be put away in a mental institution to keep them from hurting anyone else “accidentally”.

If someone is incarcerated at a very young age (i.e., 12 to 15) then I think every effort should be made to rehabilitate them and allow for parole no sooner than 20 years from the date they are incarcerated.

It is not at all “cruel and unusual punishment” to make someone fully accountable under the law for their choice of actions. And yes, it is indeed their choice to commit these acts, a very bad choice, but a choice nevertheless.

Part of the reason we are seeing so much more “youthful crime” now is because parents and the law have become too soft and permissive or dismissive with kids. Saying…”Oh boys will be boys.”…just doesn’t get it anymore. We aren’t talking about breaking a window with a baseball anymore people. Now kids are committing crimes that were once reserved to only the adult world. They should be punished as such.

He who steals with a gun in his hand get 10 to 20 in the can. I think that is sufficient to limit unlawful acts.

I bet the elderly lady who was raped by Joe Sullivan feels that the crime committed against her was cruel and unusual. I don’t think it’s cruel and unusual, at all, to lock a piece of garbage up and throw away the key. If the rest of us were lucky, more of these wastes of skin would find a way to get themselves killed before doing harm to innocent people.

I would probably ease up the parole restrictions, though. Let them be eligible for parole when they turn 80.

Wait a minute…”Terrance Graham was IMPLICATED in armed robberies…”??
IMHO, only the most heinous crimes should be life without the chance for parole (think Charles Manson). I believe in second chances in most cases. I’d like to hear more about these individual cases before stating strongly one way or the other. Make sure there is DNA evidence of this person commiting the rape, and very conclusive evidence on the robberies.

I’m opposed to the death penalty because it doesn’t work as a deterrent to other people. The only person who will not commit crimes due to DP is the person being put to death. That, and it costs more for the govt to put someone to death than life in prison.

First we need one definition of juvenile. Next, we should focus on rehabilitation. Juveniles should never be given life with no chance of parole.

Well, I usually get paid quite well for submitting briefs, but I understand if finances are pinched at the allegedly very liberal PD these days so here’s a freebie. No, they should not be thrown away forever unless you put BOTH parents with them. With the immaculate conceptions that seem to be ever increasing being the exception. Then one parent taking a co-inmate position would be acceptable. Or perhaps a media figure who made money off of violent, sick content can volunteer to stand in as a civic dsuty. But along with this we must consider who will pay for the lifelong upkeep of these evil prisoners? No one seems to want to. Work details are SO passe’. I’ll take my leave before this generates into politics. Nothing political about the penal system in this country. No sir!

Clarification needed…do you consider underage white collar criminals who steal retirement funds, thus causing mass suicides, or a CEO of a defense contractor (first tom’s good buddy) who steals funds meant for troop armor projects thus causing more casualties amongst the troops at war in this group, or is it only the juicy street criminal kids who get life in hump land for causing far less grief? Bet most of you are thinking dark urban faces even though Kurt did not mention that? Is this an example of the new TOTD? Drama trauma? Way to bait dude! Amerikan society truly deserves these kids. They created them. Readers sound like viscious animals themselves today, but not THEIR kid. No prison for their kids under the same circumstances. They would mortgage their souls to keep THEIR kids out of jail, even if evidence showed they were guilty as SIN. You can take that to the bankrupt US banks.