The death penalty issue has always been one of the most important issues of the justice system. For many years ago, the majority of the criminals were adults over 20, but nowadays the situations have changed. The number of criminal is not only growing up by adults but also by children who are under 18 years old committed murders and other horrible crimes. Capital punishment has been widely used almost everywhere in this country for people who break the law. On the other hand, people who favor in death penalty believe that if someone in the community has done something brutal to anyone’s life; they deserve to pay for their action no matter how old they are. Capital proponents also believe the death penalty does reduce crime by scaring youth
…show more content…
The saying ‘’an eye for an eye and a tooth foe a tooth’’ can used to support this viewpoint. Those who favor keeping the death penalty for juveniles argue that it does not matter if the killers are children or not; if they commit the crime that means they are old enough to pay their action. They are acting like an adults, therefore they have to take the responsibility and be tired as adult as well. Oklahoma Assistant Attorney General David Lee, commented about the death penalty in front of Supreme Court that, “If it’s [it is] horrible murder, and they’re [they are] shown to be mature enough and responsible for their actions, then i [I] don’t [do not] see why they shouldn’t [should not] receive the death sentence”(Stengel 25). However, there are many people who see those situations differently. A juvenile’s brain have not fully developed like an adult as a result; he or she cannot comprehend the severity and the repercussions of his or her actions. They might not truly understand what they were doing and they did not realize what would be the long-term consequence of their action. They are not being able to think critically between something they should do or should not …show more content…
From the article in the book “Teen and the Death Penalty”, capital proponents say that, “the death penalty serves as a deterrent against the future crimes. They stress that a would-be murderer who is certain he’ll be executed for his crime will be more likely to think twice before acting” (24). They strongly believe this method might stop the children from killing anyone again. Nevertheless, they might forget the fact that the people who committed the crimes are under 18 years old. The death penalty does not serve as a deterrent for the children because they cannot fear something they do not truly understand. They do not take the death penalty seriously when they commit the crime; most of the children are willing to die and do not have to wait until someone put them in the death row. They might have been under the influences or used drug without concern the consequences. Therefore, the method that death penalty can reduce the crime might not work if the children decide to die after murdering
The saying ‘’an eye for an eye and a tooth foe a tooth’’ can used to support this viewpoint. Those who favor keeping the death penalty for juveniles argue that it does not matter if the killers are children or not; if they commit the crime that means they are old enough to pay their action. They are acting like an adults, therefore they have to take the responsibility and be tired as adult as well. Oklahoma Assistant Attorney General David Lee, commented about the death penalty in front of Supreme Court that, “If it’s [it is] horrible murder, and they’re [they are] shown to be mature enough and responsible for their actions, then i [I] don’t [do not] see why they shouldn’t [should not] receive the death sentence”(Stengel 25). However, there are many people who see those situations differently. A juvenile’s brain have not fully developed like an adult as a result; he or she cannot comprehend the severity and the repercussions of his or her actions. They might not truly understand what they were doing and they did not realize what would be the long-term consequence of their action. They are not being able to think critically between something they should do or should not …show more content…
From the article in the book “Teen and the Death Penalty”, capital proponents say that, “the death penalty serves as a deterrent against the future crimes. They stress that a would-be murderer who is certain he’ll be executed for his crime will be more likely to think twice before acting” (24). They strongly believe this method might stop the children from killing anyone again. Nevertheless, they might forget the fact that the people who committed the crimes are under 18 years old. The death penalty does not serve as a deterrent for the children because they cannot fear something they do not truly understand. They do not take the death penalty seriously when they commit the crime; most of the children are willing to die and do not have to wait until someone put them in the death row. They might have been under the influences or used drug without concern the consequences. Therefore, the method that death penalty can reduce the crime might not work if the children decide to die after murdering