More on yesterday's Supreme Court ruling
Continuing on the silliness of the Supreme Court's decision to ban capital punishment for heinous crimes committed by those under 18, there's this story. Here's an excerpt:
"Emerging from the neuropsychological research is a striking view of the brain and its gradual maturation, in far greater detail than seen before," the American Psychiatric Association said in its brief to the court. "Although the precise underlying mechanisms continue to be explored, what is certain is that, in late adolescence, important aspects of brain maturation remain incomplete, particularly those involving the brain's executive functions."
I guess I was an early bloomer. When I was sixteen, I had already figured out it wasn't good to rape, strangle and mutilate someone. But I guess that's just me.
Justice Kennedy relies upon this psycho-babble in his opinion:
Kennedy said the evidence in the studies led to the conclusion that the punitive justifications for the death penalty apply to youth with lesser force than adults. It also obliterates the justification for the death penalty's retributive motivations.
"Retribution is not proportional if the law's most severe penalty is imposed on one whose culpability or blameworthiness is diminished ... by reason of youth and immaturity," Kennedy wrote.
If this is true, then shouldn't we be taking into account the maturity level of everyone convicted of a crime regardless of their status as a minority? Why should the 35 year old guy with an I.Q. of 98 and an 8th grade education receive the same punishment as the 22 year old Yale grad? And aren't there 17 year-olds who have a much higher level of maturity than some 19 year-olds?
So silly.
Oh, and by the way, this research by the American Psychiatric Association upon which Kennedy relied? According to Justice Scalia, they took quite the opposite position when the issue was whether minorities should be allowed to have an abortion without parental consent. Here's Scalia finding the rub in all this hogwash:
The group took "precisely the opposite position before this very court" in a 1990 case about whether minors could choose to have abortions without parental consent. The group said that by age 14 or 15, teenagers are similar to adults in their "reasoning about moral dilemmas, understanding social rules and laws, and reasoning about interpersonal relationships," Scalia noted.
You don't think there are some people just making stuff up to further their own agendas do you? Nah.
"Emerging from the neuropsychological research is a striking view of the brain and its gradual maturation, in far greater detail than seen before," the American Psychiatric Association said in its brief to the court. "Although the precise underlying mechanisms continue to be explored, what is certain is that, in late adolescence, important aspects of brain maturation remain incomplete, particularly those involving the brain's executive functions."
I guess I was an early bloomer. When I was sixteen, I had already figured out it wasn't good to rape, strangle and mutilate someone. But I guess that's just me.
Justice Kennedy relies upon this psycho-babble in his opinion:
Kennedy said the evidence in the studies led to the conclusion that the punitive justifications for the death penalty apply to youth with lesser force than adults. It also obliterates the justification for the death penalty's retributive motivations.
"Retribution is not proportional if the law's most severe penalty is imposed on one whose culpability or blameworthiness is diminished ... by reason of youth and immaturity," Kennedy wrote.
If this is true, then shouldn't we be taking into account the maturity level of everyone convicted of a crime regardless of their status as a minority? Why should the 35 year old guy with an I.Q. of 98 and an 8th grade education receive the same punishment as the 22 year old Yale grad? And aren't there 17 year-olds who have a much higher level of maturity than some 19 year-olds?
So silly.
Oh, and by the way, this research by the American Psychiatric Association upon which Kennedy relied? According to Justice Scalia, they took quite the opposite position when the issue was whether minorities should be allowed to have an abortion without parental consent. Here's Scalia finding the rub in all this hogwash:
The group took "precisely the opposite position before this very court" in a 1990 case about whether minors could choose to have abortions without parental consent. The group said that by age 14 or 15, teenagers are similar to adults in their "reasoning about moral dilemmas, understanding social rules and laws, and reasoning about interpersonal relationships," Scalia noted.
You don't think there are some people just making stuff up to further their own agendas do you? Nah.
posted by Wonderdog | 3:44 PM | Permalink
|
0 comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home