A murder is the unlawful killing of another human-being with malice-aforethought. In a United States Court of Law, the jury and judge must use the totality of the circumstance test when coming to their final conclusion. In the totality of the circumstance test, many factors are examined, such as the defendant’s age, the motive of the crime, and if the defendant had a prior malice towards the victim. There are many different kinds of murders, such as first-degree, second-degree and third-degree. The length of one’s sentence is typically synonymous to the degree of the crime. In the United States of America, the Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Additionally, the Supreme Court ruled that life sentences for juveniles that commit …show more content…
Death happens on a daily basis, but murder is much more rare. Additionally, the number of juveniles committing murders is far lower than the number committing other crimes. When murder is committed almost on a daily basis in a community, there must be a systematic error. People are a product of their collective life experiences; therefore, not all juveniles are as innocent as one may think. Recently in Chicago, a local rapper, Clint Massey, was sentenced to forty-five years to life for murder. At the time of the crime, he was 17 years of age, but was given a bail amount of two million dollars (chicagotribune). Being that crime in Chicago is a systematic occurrence, police and prosecutors are almost used to the mass amounts of heinous crimes. Typical teenagers spend the majority of their time doing school work or practicing a sport, but Chicago rapper Lil Herb describes the life his friends and himself took living in the inner-city: “At thirteen, I was in the books and playing basketball. Then at 16, I was cool with crooks...(lyrics L’s)” Additionally, he attributed his dropping out of school to his inability to play high school basketball and the discrimination of his peers and himself (DJVLAD). This prominent rapper was able to change his life; however, Mr. Massey was not so lucky, and is still facing the excessive, forty-five years to life …show more content…
Traumatic experiences can change one’s life forever. Seeing violence on a day-to-day basis makes one almost insensitive to it. After a while, it becomes a part of their lives. In regards to Clint Massey, the Chicago rapper facing a forty-five year prison sentence, he saw violence daily living in the south side of Chicago. Additionally, he had experienced the murder of his close friend at the hands of rival gang members. This type of situation is what sparked the mass amounts of killing in Chicago, because gangs are always trying to get retribution. Tupac Shakur once said that “revenge is the sweetest joy.” This type of mindset is what is making “superpredators.” The teens and young adults committing these crimes are stuck in an immature mindset, that sets their ego ahead of their consciousness. Chicago native Lil Herb summed up the continual rise in violence on his streets: “If you shoot at him, you might not hit him, but it’s a war. If somebody dies, it’s an everlasting war.” This mindset demonstrates the immaturity of juveniles and that they act impulsively. By law, a homicide committed in the heat of the moment is manslaughter, not murder. Sigmund Freud conclusions about children consciousness demonstrates their narrow-mindedness: “Children are completely egoistic; they feel their needs intensely and strive ruthlessly to satisfy them.” Instead of punishing
In the article On Punishment and Teen Killers by Jenkins, sadly brings to our attention that kids are sometimes responsible for unimaginable crimes, in 1990 in a suburban Chicago neighborhood a teenager murdered a women, her husband, and her unborn child, as she begged for the life of her unborn child he shot her and later reported to a close friend that it was a “thrill kill”, that he just simply wanted to see what it felt like to shoot someone. A major recent issue being debated is whether or not we have the right to sentence Juveniles who commit heinous crimes to life in adult penitentiaries without parole. I strongly believe and agree with the law that states adolescents who commit these heinous crimes should be tried as adults and sentenced as adults, however I don’t believe they should be sentenced to life without parole. I chose this position because I believe that these young adults in no way should be excused for their actions and need to face the severe consequences of their actions. Although on the other hand I believe change is possible and that prison could be rehabilitating and that parole should be offered.
Most people don 't look at every aspect of a crime. They don 't think about everyone that was affected, other than the victim. In her article "On Punishment and Teen Killers", Jennifer Jenkins explains how her younger sister was taken from her by a murderer who shot and killed her. In her article she states, "So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never recover." Jenkins is explaining her personal experience of losing her younger sister to help others understand what the families of the victim have to deal with for the rest of their lives. She brings a point of view that most people have never been in because they 've never experienced what it 's like to have a loved one taken away from you by murder. In her story she also states, "If brain development were the reason, then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world." Many people believe that the supreme court needs to be more lenient on juveniles because their brain is not fully developed as that of an adult, but brain development cannot be used as an excuse because as Jenkins explains, the teens would be killing at the same rate all over the world. Jenkins also brings up a good point about how the US as a whole needs to step up to prevent these crimes from happening. Jenkins states, "We in America have to own to this particular problem, with weapons so easily available to our youth, and the violence-loving culture we raise them. She is trying to bring awareness to society that America is also at fault for these crimes. Furthermore, she also explains why life sentencing is not as cruel as some may feel it is when she says, "… a life sentencing still allows a great deal of good living to be done, even from behind bars, far more than these teen killers gave to our murdered love
Tio Hardiman, the creator of the Violence Interrupters Program, said, “You can give them a history lesson. Your daddy was violent, your granddaddy was violent, and your great granddaddy was violent. And now your brothers are messed up because you misled them” (James et al., 2012). He is describing how violence is a learned behavior from your family and close peers. Hardiman goes on to tell a little about his own family’s history with violence. When he was fourteen, a man tried to hurt him in the streets, but his stepfather killed the man right in front of him, and he recalls feelings good about it. This family taught him violence was okay through their own
If a family member was murdered, a family member was murdered, age should not dictate if the punishment for homicide will be more lenient or not. If anyone not just juveniles has the capabilities to take someone's life and does so knowing the repercussions, they should be convicted as an adult. In the case of Jennifer Bishop Jenkins who lost her sister, the husband and their unborn child, is a strong advocate of juveniles being sentenced to life without parole. In her article “Jennifer Bishop Jenkins On Punishment and Teen Killers” she shows the world the other side of the spectrum, how it is to be the victim of a juvenile in a changing society where people are fighting against life sentences for juveniles. As she states in the article “There are no words adequate to describe what this kind of traumatic loss does to a victims family. So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never
The subculture of violence theory revolves around individuals using violent acts in need of survival. In this theory, people kill because one was living their lifestyle through violent acts as normal behavior. According to Thio, Taylor, and Schwartz they mention, “violent behavior is more effective than nonpoor families’ (Thio et al, 2013, p. 79). Most poor neighborhoods have higher chances of committing crimes, especially, knowing that the behavior of the actions is reflected towards survival. These behaviors can be reflected on the family, peers, and community aspects. Living in poor neighborhoods, can be scary when not knowing what type of violent act or individuals that live around one. For example; some individuals might be influenced with gangs or fall into the wrong crowd. Individuals, who choose violence, are influenced by the experience from these gang groups, peers, parents, or normal neighborhood behaviors. These individuals live through the violence acts to kill because this is the type of lifestyle they are living in. I believe that people are violent because they believe killing is an escape to get away from issues and own problems. Also, people might turn to killing because it’s the main solution for survival. For example; if one is being harassed, one might feel that violence could to a key factor to protect themselves in this type of
The sentencing of underage criminals has remained a logistical and moral issue in the world for a very long time. The issue is brought to our perspective in the documentary Making a Murderer and the audio podcast Serial. When trying to overcome this issue, we ask ourselves, “When should juveniles receive life sentences?” or “Should young inmates be housed with adults?” or “Was the Supreme Court right to make it illegal to sentence a minor to death?”. There are multiple answers to these questions, and it’s necessary to either take a moral or logical approach to the problem.
In a Google search of “serial killer memorabilia”, approximately 135,000 results would appear. While the U.S. produces over eighty-five percent of the world’s serial killers (“Why do Americans Idolize Serial Killers?” 11), Americans still tend to treat these murderers as icons and celebrities. As defined by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a serial killer is expressed as the unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events. While it is no secret that serial killers have a different mindset than that of a normal person, do these murderers have genetically different minds? Although there is no exact answer as to what causes certain people to have the urge to kill, studies from the “Minnesota Study of Twins
Murder, a common occurrence in American society, is thought of as a horrible, reprehensible atrocity. Why then, is it thought of differently when the state government arranges and executes a human being, the very definition of premeditated murder? Capital punishment has been reviewed and studied for many years, exposing several inequities and weaknesses, showing the need for the death penalty to be abolished.
An inmate by the name of Gary Graham drew several protestors to a Huntsville unit in the year 2000; they were there in opposition to Graham’s execution. This day finally came after nineteen years on death row and four appeals. With him being a repeat offender he was not new to this side of the justice system, but after being put in prison he became a political activist who worked to abolish the death penalty. People who stood against his execution argued that his case still had reasonable doubt, he was rehabilitating himself, and his punishment would cause major harm to his family. Aside from that you have the advocates arguing that you have to set example for others, so you must carry out the punishment that was given, and while the execution may harm the offender’s family it will give the victims’ families closure for his crimes.
Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is entirely eliminating the use of the life without parole sentence for juveniles, regardless of the nature of the crime being charged.
In this paper I will ask three people four different questions about their views on the death penalty. The first question I asked was “Why do you feel the death penalty is wrong?” Question number two, “Does the death penalty help protect the public and discourage crime?” Question number three, “Do you consider the death penalty cruel and unusual?” The final question, “Is the death penalty economically justifiable and cost effective?”
Capital punishment is the type of punishment that allows the execution of prisoners who are charged and convicted because they committed a “capital crime.” Capital crime is a crime that is considered so horrible and terrifying that anyone who commits it should be punished with death (McMahon, Wallace). After so many years this type of punishment, also known as the “death penalty”, remains a very controversial topic all around the world, raising countless debates on whether it should be legalized or not.
The death penalty was around for many years, though we do not really hear much about it today. The death penalty was used as a way of punishment for committing the most serious crimes. This punishment was executed in various ways, all of them leading to the death of the person being executed. However, there are reasons why this punishment is no longer being used today.
Death penalty has always been a topic of controversy. Interchangeably known as capital punishment, death penalty legalizes the authorization to sentence the execution of a criminal. Controversy that rise from death penalty involve the notion of ethics and epistemology. Many people questions whether it is morally right to take another person’s life, tieing into the 8th amendment that prohibits people from suffering from a certain type of punishment. Another factor is that what exactly determines whether a person deserves execution or not. The justice system has the legal dilemma of properly determining to what extent of a crime committed is reprehensible enough to face death or if it is not as grave and more suitable with merely a life sentence.
The Death Penalty is cruel and unusual, however we still give constitutional acceptance to the federal system. It presents “a relic of the earliest days of penology, when slavery, branding, and other corporal punishments were commonplace. Like those other barbaric practices, executions have no place in civilized society.”(1) It is wrong to advocate the the use of the capital punishment when numerous options are available to those in need of rehabilitation. Three of the most prominent problems with continuing this archaic method of retribution are innocents conflicted with inaccurate verdicts, the death penalty being a state-sanctioned killing that only continues the evolution of violence, and the nation's taxes going towards the purchase of fatal narcotics used in the killings of fellow human beings.