Quote:
Originally Posted by notabook
I am against the death penalty period, so I'll have to go with no.
And what pussyserver just said I agree with 100%. If a minor cannot understand the implications of sex, however could they understand the implications of taking a life?
|
First off, I do not think minors (teens) are completely oblivious with regards to the implications of sex. Sure, they might be both foolish and selfish when it comes to sex, paying little attention to the possible dangers of it and caring little about the emotions of their partners, but I dare say that a vast majority comprehend enough of it to cope with it fairly well. Considering the fact that the average person loses his virginity at 16 without raping anyone, getting anyone or getting infected with an STD, this almost certainly has to be the case. In fact, when one looks at the average 15 year old, there appears to be very little difference with the average GFYer in attitudes toward sex.
But this isn't about sex. This is about cruelty. Pure, unadulterated, premeditated cruelty. Cruelty for the sake of cruelty. And I am convinced that these "kids" fully understand cruelty - if they did not, there would have been no reason for this act. It was, indeed, a truly masterful exhibit of cruelty, displaying the knowledge and ability to inflict the most amount of harm possible.
This, in my opinion, is far worse in terms of motivation than most murders. A kid who does not fully understand the implications of taking a life might murder out of greed, or anger. Only someone who was truly and utterly evil, however, would do this sort of harm purely for sheer enjoyment.