The Execution of the Mentally retarded.

[Charles]

Well, it's not every day that yours truly creates a topic in Otaku Lounge, so here goes nothing.

The Supreme Court on Thursday declared an end to the execution of convicted murderers who are mentally retarded, saying the United States has reached a consensus that it is cruel and unusual to put to death a person with the mental age of a child.

As a result, eighteen states, including Arizona, which impose the death penalty, have passed new laws exempting prisoners who are mentally retarded, the court said.

The reasoning behind this movement, is simple. Justice John Paul Stevens spoke for the court when he said that the practice was "truly unusual."

It is also cruel, he said, because those with a diminished mental capacity are more likely to act on impulse and less likely to consider the consequences.

The ultimate punishment of death should be reserved for the worst of murderers, Stevens said. Because retarded people are less culpable for their acts of violence, they must be "categorically excluded" from capital punishment, he concluded.

I can imagine inmates pleading that they are mentally disabled in order to save themselves now. I feel that despite a criminal's mental capacity, the punishment should be death. What are your opinions on this? If you managed to read through all, that is.

[James]

[color=royalblue]It's very hard to punish a person adequately, when they have a mental disorder (particularly an intelligence disorder).

Having said that, I don't agree with the death penalty at all. It is truly something that belongs in the middle ages -- so I guess that my response to the idea of "letting off" mentally disabled people would be that alternative punishments should be considered.[/color]

[The Vampire: Ed]

Actually, I am in agreement here with Crazy White Boy. Although the guilty party is mentally incapable of understanding exactly what it is that they have done, there is always a chance that it could happen again. I think it would be necessary to execute the mentally ill as well, to assure the safety of others.

I mean we put down rabid dogs, even if they are not completely aware of their actions. Granted, this is no dog in this case, but it's basically the same type of scenario in my opinion.

[Amphion]

Im not sure what should happen to Murder's that are MR. To me anyone who Murders someone is messed up in the head.

I guess my opinion is, if they are MR, then no, the DP should not be a punishment. But for someone who is sane who murders innocent people (Timothy Mcvay ect. ect.) then yes, death penalty is preffered. I would much rather get rid of scum like that guy then use tax money that could be feeding the poor to keep him fed in jail.

[Harry]

I think it doesn't matter if they're retarded or not. It's whether they know it's right or wrong, that's the main point. If you have some guy that knows it's wrong to slaughter a whole family and does it anyway, it doesn't matter if he's retarded.

[Juu]

well okay..., it's really not fair, it's not their fault that they were born that way. It wasn't their choise either. BUT if they ARE dangerous, even in jail or whatever, they should be executed.

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Juuthena [/i]
[B]yeah, I agree, it's really not fair, it's not their fault that they were born that way. It wasn't their choise either. So if they are dangerous to us, then put them in a place where they won't be. But unless they're dangerous, even in jail or whatever, they shouldn't be executed. [/B][/QUOTE]

It doesn't matter if they were born retarded. It's not fair for the victims that are killed by them.

[Juu]

um.. I just edited that. (sorry, off topic) I'll delete this in a lil bit.

[Kinetic]

[color=royalblue]
I disagree with the death penalty in any case. I know the bible says eye for an eye, but it also says Thou shall not kill. Personally, if I did believe in the death penalty, I would exempt the mentally retarded, just do something to keep people safe. As in, I would have them put in a special place or something (and not a bad one like nursing or foster homes).
[/color]

[Charles]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Amphion [/i]
[B] I would much rather get rid of scum like that guy then use tax money that could be feeding the poor to keep him fed in jail. [/B][/QUOTE]

Actually, it costs more money to execute someone than to keep them alive in jail. State and local governments pay for the prosecution as well as for the defense team--which consists of at least two lawyers and a battery of investigators and experts; much of this money is spent even if the defendent eventually gets a lesser sentence. I've heard that California alone, spends $90 million a year on the death penalty.

Anyway, it's important to take into consideration the family of the victim's feelings. Does it hurt less just because a person who killed their loved one isn't considered fully aware of their actions?

In this way, the death penalty can affirm life, because if action is not taken, we are signaling a lessened regard for the value of the victim's life. The mentally retarded person surely isn't serving any purpose. If the accused can't recognize the wrongfulness of murder, then they can be of no use in our society. So, in these respects I'm in agreement with Harry.

[Harry]

I'd rather have those people executed. You never know when the Supreme Court will declare the death penatly unconstitutional and those people will be set free. Have a retarded killer loose is pretty much the equivalent as a merciless psychopath.

[Alley Catt]

The main problem with this new law is that sain people can act mentally retarded to get off of death row.

MR people do have problems but most still now the basics of right and wrong. Being MR gives them no right to to stay alive when other people who do the same as them are put to death.

[Amphion]

Yeah but how much does california pay to keep up all the people that are in for life? I have never seen that statistic.

Im not sure though, see a person can be declare mentally unstable but still no the difference between right and wrong. So I think you have to draw a line some where. I guess it all depends on how bad they are. Then again, no matter if they knew it was wrong or not they still comitted a crime and took a life. So if they dont get the death penalty then they would have to have life.

[Justin]

First of all, everyone here isn't exactly politically correct. "Retard" has become more of a slur, and for the sake of those who would be offended by it, I think everyone should watch the way they throw it around.

Also, I think several of you should reconsider your opinions, or at least the way you stated them. How would you feel if someone close to you had a handicap like that? Not the same, I'm sure...

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Harry [/i]
[B]Have a retarded killer loose is pretty much the equivalent as a merciless psychopath. [/B][/QUOTE]

You, sir, are cold and ignorant.

-Justin

[BlueGender]

[SIZE=1]I do not feel the murder of someone with a mental disorder is right because many of those who comitte the crime do not understand what they have done or do not understand the replacations of what their actions. I also do not agree with the premace of an eye for an eye Murder is Murder it does not matter who you do it for government or for self it is still wrong. I fell the death prenalty should be outlawed and instead criminal's should be trained at a job or given their education which they may not have gotten earlier in life while they in jail. I feel everyone deserves a second chance and if they comitee another crime of severeness then they shoulld be placed in a cell for the rest of their life.[/SIZE]

[Amphion]

Actually I do have someone close to me with a handicap. She is a 2nd cousin of mine and she is Mentally retarded. I dont think we should use the word retard cause that is a deamining word. If she killed someone, I would probably say that she would need life in one of those institutes. but she is so bad off she is confined to a whell chair. So I cant realy picture her killing someone. Unless she could figure out how to use a gun. But now come to think of it I dont think they should deserve the DP if they are that bad, cause I know she cant help some of the things she does.

[Charles]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Justin [/i]
[B]First of all, everyone here isn't exactly politically correct. "Retard" has become more of a slur, and for the sake of those who would be offended by it, I think everyone should watch the way they throw it around.

Also, I think several of you should reconsider your opinions, or at least the way you stated them. How would you feel if someone close to you had a handicap like that? Not the same, I'm sure...

-Justin [/B][/QUOTE]

Well, I was afraid that question would arise over the term "retard." I assure you though, that the term "mentally retarded" was used in the newspapers and Internet articles I read, along with the television news reports that I viewed. The term isn't a negative slur [I]unless[/I] someone comes out and makes it one. I doubt we'll see any ignorance in this thread.

Moving on, I don't see where you're going when asking people to reconsider their opinions. It's one thing to know a mentally handicapped individual who leads a respectable life, but it's another to know someone who has deliberately killed someone. I would feel the same way if a proven genius took another human being's life away.

What a lot of us are saying, is that something [I]more[/I] has to be plaguing someone who takes another person's life. The value of life is a basic understanding that [I]everyone[/I] should understand. Is it not worthless to keep someone confined, slowly weathering under endless confinement until they die? Obviously, their sanity can crumble even further. [I]That's[/I] cruel if you ask me.

[Anna]

I think the decision of punishment should rest upon the point of whether or not the defendant's capacity of conscience is sufficient, mentally disabled or not. I know a mentally retarded person, but she is [i]very[/i] clever, and definately knows when she has done something wrong or not because she'll try and hide her misdeeds. Has anyone here read [u]Of Mice and Men[/u]?? That would certainly add more color to this subject. I'm not going to go into that book right now though, I'll let someone else have the fun. Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that all mentally retarded convicts shouldn't be excluded from proper punishment just for the fact that they are mentally retarded. For example one who has commited murder that is mentally retarded could still have the same capacity for knowing between right and wrong that my own mentally retarded friend has. Therefore, excluding that one who has commited murder would unduely let them off from the vices of the law for committing felonous crimes. [i]That[/i] will not solve anything. The judicial system doesn't need to get lazy and make the prosecutions quicker by simply writing off a group of people. Each case still needs individual weighing and careful thought, as each case will forever be slightly different from the last.

[Juu]

wait a sec, isn't it men and mice? lol, anyway, Yes I agree, as I said. They should only be punished if they are dangerous to the world/a country...etc. If they're harmless, leave em alone! why should the harmless be punished for being born that way? now if they're dangerous, yes, not sure, keep them isolated from groups of people.

[Anna]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Juuthena [/i]
[B]wait a sec, isn't it men and mice? lol, anyway, Yes I agree, as I said. They should only be punished if they are dangerous to the world/a country...etc. If they're harmless, leave em alone! why should the harmless be punished for being born that way? now if they're dangerous, yes, not sure, keep them isolated from groups of people. [/B][/QUOTE]

No, the title is "Of Mice and Men"; I read the darn thing I would know. Anyway they wouldn't be harmless if they've been brought before a court for committing an action which caused harm now would they? We're not talking about the general mentally impaired public, we're talking about inmates who could recieve the death penalty. No one's talking about persecuting someone for being born a certain way.

[Delian]

Have a retarded killer loose is pretty much the equivalent as a merciless psychopath. [/B][/QUOTE]

That statement is absolutely ridiculous . How can you even compare a mentally retarded person who kills someone with a merciless psychopath. The latter is completely aware of what they are doing and the consequences of their actions.
A mentally unstable person who kills someone is partially or fully unaware of their actions and consequences. However, it's not like they will be set free if they don't receive the death penalty. Most likely they'll got to a gaol for the mentally unstable (or whatever those facilities are called) and receive psychiatric treatment, in some cases indefinately.

Convicted killers who are in their fully right mind should receive a life sentence with no parole. Depending on each case, sometimes the death penalty should play a part

[Charles]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Delian [/i]
[B]That statement is absolutely ridiculous . How can you even compare a mentally retarded person who kills someone with a merciless psychopath. [/B][/QUOTE]

Well, Delian I completely agree with you.

I do believe, however, that the statement was comparing the utter lack of regard for the value of life on both parties. It is a completely unfair comparison though because one party [I]considers[/I] their actions while the other is less culpable for their acts of violence.

Furthermore, as you stated, the act will not free anyone.

[Fall]

It's easy for someone who doesn't know someone who was killed by a mentally retarded person to say that they shouldn't be put to death.

Though what do you think the family of a victim killed by a mentally unstable person would say? Of course, they'd most likely say to put them to death.

I really am sitting on the fence on this topic. I'm stuck on what should be done...

[Alley Catt]

There is no easy answer for this dilema. I believe that not all people with a mental disability should be set free from the death penalty. All cases should be thought out very carefully. There are so many different types of mental retardation that there are always exceptions to the rules.
The penalty for a crime should depend on the action and the ability of the person to destinguish between right and wrong.

[Delian]

Aren't mentally disabled people supervised, or under the certain care of someone? Also, the ones who are mentally unstable to the point of becoming violent are usually kept under close supervision. I have not come across any mentally disabled person who was not with a gaurdian or caretaker at anytime. Although some disabilities provoke irrational and sometimes extreme behaviour depending on the environment. However, I have only read about patients who have become dangerously violent due to provokation (sp?) and when a supervisor is not around.

Then again, I could be wrong...