- May 20, 2009
- 23,425
- 8,069
- 890
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.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
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.
I bet someone with Down Syndrome could plan a murder as well, but it doesn't mean they should be executed for it.
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.
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.
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.
what was the crime
its like they find (jesus ) when its parole board time so they look like a **good guy **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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.