Thank you, Polipundit.
You have said what I've been thinking about the latest stupidity from the Supreme Court (and when the He(( is Bush going to make the obvious move, and replace Rehnquist with Judge Scalia, a man who is unafraid to support the Constitution).
Eliminating the death penalty from the under-18 crowd makes them the ideal recruit for the Best New Teen Job Alternative to Mickey D's! - Apprentice Hit-man!
I've had this argument with educators and professors before - they seem to think of the 14-18 year-old crowd as needing training wheels before they can be expected to follow the law.
Bad idea. Any kid over the age of 13 knows D**N well that it's not nice to kill people. As well as that, if they do, the courts should have the right to fry their A$$.
I'm not in favor of pushing the limit on kids who do stupid things (which should be considered the definition of a kid - they do stupid things). That would include driving too fast, or hitting someone with a body part (head, fist, whatever), and being the cause of a death. Similarly, egging someone on, and having a death result would seem to fall into a gray area - except with a vulnerable victim, such as the developmentally disabled, or significantly younger children.
But, there's no way I can accept that, by 13-14, a kid shouldn't have a lick of sense. And, if he doesn't, I think we should be looking to the fools that raised that kid. Perhaps they're the ones that need to go to jail.
I've had, unfortunately, too great an experience with thuggish kids. I've taught in schools too long.
Most are great, almost all are at least pretty darn good.
A few are walking sociopaths waiting for the chance to hit the headlines.
Those will be the kids who become The New Murder, Inc., Jr. division.
God help us.