Texas executes man w. 61 IQ

[Big Black Dog]

Apparently he was smart enough to do the crime so good for Texas for removing another one of the dregs of society from the planet.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Doesn't matter to me. What matters to me is that he was disabled at the time, and is not smart enough to comprehend his actions.

How smart does a person have to be to comprehend that they must not murder and rape others?

My son has a pet chinchilla, and it's smart enough to grasp the concept - so I'm thinking that an IQ of 61 is probably sufficient.

Standard Disclaimer: Otherwise we better lock up Joe Biden now - I'm just saying...

 

[Uncensored2008]

I bet someone with Down Syndrome could plan a murder as well, but it doesn't mean they should be executed for it.

Uh yeah, actually it does.

 

[whitehall]

As the hip-hop generation would tell you there is a big difference between street-smarts and the I.Q. test they give in school. As a matter of fact there are municipal unions who have been suing the government over testing methods they consider biased for years. The bottom line is that the murdering bastard was smart enough to kill an informant who he considered a danger to his livelyhood and he deserved what he got.

 

[Noomi]

Apparently he was smart enough to do the crime so good for Texas for removing another one of the dregs of society from the planet.

About 10 months ago, two teenagers who lit a fire on Black Saturday that killed a man and damaged thousands of hectares, were not charged. They 'didn't know what they were doing'. Lots of people disagree, as do I. But unlike in the US, they wouldn't have been charged as adults, but as children. We don't execute people - at all - and even if we did, I think we would be unlikely to kill someone who had a few screws loose.

 

[AmyNation]

Apparently he was smart enough to do the crime so good for Texas for removing another one of the dregs of society from the planet.

About 10 months ago, two teenagers who lit a fire on Black Saturday that killed a man and damaged thousands of hectares, were not charged. They 'didn't know what they were doing'. Lots of people disagree, as do I. But unlike in the US, they wouldn't have been charged as adults, but as children. We don't execute people - at all - and even if we did, I think we would be unlikely to kill someone who had a few screws loose.

That's a firm line for me. You should not be able to charge a child as an adult simply because you find the crime they committed abhorrent.

As to the other poster who asked , how smart do you have to be to know right from wrong.... You have to be an adult with an IQ over 70.

 

[Noomi]

Apparently he was smart enough to do the crime so good for Texas for removing another one of the dregs of society from the planet.

About 10 months ago, two teenagers who lit a fire on Black Saturday that killed a man and damaged thousands of hectares, were not charged. They 'didn't know what they were doing'. Lots of people disagree, as do I. But unlike in the US, they wouldn't have been charged as adults, but as children. We don't execute people - at all - and even if we did, I think we would be unlikely to kill someone who had a few screws loose.

That's a firm line for me. You should not be able to charge a child as an adult simply because you find the crime they committed abhorrent.

As to the other poster who asked , how smart do you have to be to know right from wrong.... You have to be an adult with an IQ over 70.

I tested my IQ years ago and it was 67. But I am still fairly smart, and capable of responsible decisions.

I don't believe that any child should be charged as an adult, for the simple fact that they are not an adult. It boggles the mind to hear about 14 year olds charged as adults in the US - these are children we are talking about here, no matter what the crime, they are still kids.

 

[ginscpy]

what was the crime>>...


thingkingitwasntpretty

 

[ginscpy]

what was the crime

 

[Noomi]

what was the crime

Arson. Look up 'Black Saturday' and you will understand what my state lived through three years ago.

 

[JohnA]

Who knows what anyone's IQ is? It's all subjective.

A standardized test based on decades of research? It's subjective, maybe, but still an accurate gauge. If it's useful enough in statistics, perhaps it's useful enough in court rooms?

And nobody who takes it would ever skew their own answers if it meant life or death right? Believe me if I was staring a death sentence in the face I'd suddenly act very stupidly if saving my own skin were the result of a test I had to take.

its like they find (jesus ) when its parole board time so they look like a **good guy **
whatever you have to do ......

 

[Uncensored2008]

About 10 months ago, two teenagers who lit a fire on Black Saturday that killed a man and damaged thousands of hectares, were not charged. They 'didn't know what they were doing'. Lots of people disagree, as do I. But unlike in the US, they wouldn't have been charged as adults, but as children. We don't execute people - at all - and even if we did, I think we would be unlikely to kill someone who had a few screws loose.

You really don't grasp the difference between setting a fire that results in death, legally "manslaughter" and deliberate murder?

No one gets executed for manslaughter, never have.

 

[Montrovant]

Apparently he was smart enough to do the crime so good for Texas for removing another one of the dregs of society from the planet.

About 10 months ago, two teenagers who lit a fire on Black Saturday that killed a man and damaged thousands of hectares, were not charged. They 'didn't know what they were doing'. Lots of people disagree, as do I. But unlike in the US, they wouldn't have been charged as adults, but as children. We don't execute people - at all - and even if we did, I think we would be unlikely to kill someone who had a few screws loose.

That's a firm line for me. You should not be able to charge a child as an adult simply because you find the crime they committed abhorrent.

As to the other poster who asked , how smart do you have to be to know right from wrong.... You have to be an adult with an IQ over 70.

The argument against that is that the line drawn between what is a child and what is an adult is both arbitrary and ignores individual differences. Some people mature faster physically, some mature faster mentally. Different places put different ages on what is a child and what an adult; even within the US, different states have different laws concerning age (marriage laws are a good example). So it's really not as cut and dried as 'don't charge a child as an adult'.

Oh, and IQ tests, while perhaps a decent guideline, are in no way a definitive test of intelligence. Even determining just what constitutes intelligence is difficult, let alone coming up with an accurate way to test it.

 

[Papageorgio]

They executed TruthMatters?

 

[Uncensored2008]

That's a firm line for me. You should not be able to charge a child as an adult simply because you find the crime they committed abhorrent.

As to the other poster who asked , how smart do you have to be to know right from wrong.... You have to be an adult with an IQ over 70.

There was a rat in my tomatoes. It was eating the fruit. So I had a talk with the dingo, and told her to kill the rat.

I didn't ask the age of the rat, because I don't care. It was eating my tomatoes. I didn't give the rat an IQ test, I don't care what it's IQ was.

The dingo killed the rat this morning. I gave her a kiss, told her she is a good dog, and gave her a Puparoni treat. (Since I took the carcase away from her.)

If there is a rat, you kill it. Not for revenge, not even for justice, but to protect your infrastructure and as a warning to other rats.

If there is a murderer or a rapist in society, you kill it, not for revenge, not for justice, but to protect society and as a warning to other animals.

 

[Uncensored2008]

They executed TruthMatters?

61, not 31.

They executed del.

 

[AmyNation]

About 10 months ago, two teenagers who lit a fire on Black Saturday that killed a man and damaged thousands of hectares, were not charged. They 'didn't know what they were doing'. Lots of people disagree, as do I. But unlike in the US, they wouldn't have been charged as adults, but as children. We don't execute people - at all - and even if we did, I think we would be unlikely to kill someone who had a few screws loose.

That's a firm line for me. You should not be able to charge a child as an adult simply because you find the crime they committed abhorrent.

As to the other poster who asked , how smart do you have to be to know right from wrong.... You have to be an adult with an IQ over 70.

The argument against that is that the line drawn between what is a child and what is an adult is both arbitrary and ignores individual differences. Some people mature faster physically, some mature faster mentally. Different places put different ages on what is a child and what an adult; even within the US, different states have different laws concerning age (marriage laws are a good example). So it's really not as cut and dried as 'don't charge a child as an adult'.

Oh, and IQ tests, while perhaps a decent guideline, are in no way a definitive test of intelligence. Even determining just what constitutes intelligence is difficult, let alone coming up with an accurate way to test it.

I have no issue with states perhaps following their age of consent instead of 18, or testing to determine maturity(not sure if you can do that)I also have no issue with states creating a more conprehensive test to determine what is or isnt mentally handicapped. My issue is when the state pushes to charge minors as adults, based on nothing more then the crime they are accused of.

 

[Papageorgio]

They executed TruthMatters?

61, not 31.

They executed del.

Okay, thanks for the clarification.

 

[Montrovant]

That's a firm line for me. You should not be able to charge a child as an adult simply because you find the crime they committed abhorrent.

As to the other poster who asked , how smart do you have to be to know right from wrong.... You have to be an adult with an IQ over 70.

The argument against that is that the line drawn between what is a child and what is an adult is both arbitrary and ignores individual differences. Some people mature faster physically, some mature faster mentally. Different places put different ages on what is a child and what an adult; even within the US, different states have different laws concerning age (marriage laws are a good example). So it's really not as cut and dried as 'don't charge a child as an adult'.

Oh, and IQ tests, while perhaps a decent guideline, are in no way a definitive test of intelligence. Even determining just what constitutes intelligence is difficult, let alone coming up with an accurate way to test it.

I have no issue with states perhaps following their age of consent instead of 18, or testing to determine maturity(not sure if you can do that)I also have no issue with states creating a more conprehensive test to determine what is or isnt mentally handicapped. My issue is when the state pushes to charge minors as adults, based on nothing more then the crime they are accused of.

That's understandable. Certainly it would seem more fair, or just, to treat all crimes equally as far as whether or not individual determinations of adulthood are concerned. It may simply be impractical, though. The time and resources involved in individual determinations of adulthood maybe prohibitive.