I have two papers two write for my Medterm in Philosophy thats due next week, Friday. For one question i would like people to answer, because i'm highly curious for how people will answer
( Read more... )
I believe that capital punishment should be applied to the mentally challenged. It's not something a person gets charged with for speeding or an expired license. If a man is facing the death penalty, chances are he's murdered somebody.
One could argue that a person with a low IQ wouldn't "know any better". I disagree; just because a person may not have the intelligence to pass a high school exam doesn't mean they lack the capacity to have values.
Furthermore, if said person is either so challenged or unpredictable that he is a danger to himself or others, then he should already be under supervision in a facility.
I believe that when a person intentionally violates an innocent person's right to life, he forfeits his own, plain and simple.
Here's another perspective: If a person breaks into my home, I have the right to shoot him in self defense. Nobody is coming into my home and threatening the lives or safety of me or my family. His IQ is immaterial. If I can legally defend myself from an assailant, even if he dies, why shouldn't a court be able to make the same judgment?
It states that a mentally retarded person has an I.Q. of 70 or lower.
Let's say an adult man had an I.Q. of 69. That man would not be able to perform intellectual tasks beyond the capacity of a typical ten-year-old. He would not be able to understand commmon vocabulary [of someone who is older then 10]. or know how to comprehend basic understanding of normal day-to-processes, like where the sun sets, or how the body fully works, etc. Not all mentally retarded people can live a life of solitude, because they cannot understand how to self-care, communicate, express emotion, follow directions, particapate, and/or live a social life. Some can live normal lifes but be surpervised at a job and/or school. Or watched full time at a home where people could take care of them.
I read an article that stated that a man who was mentally retarded was with his "friends" who convinced him to take a guy into a store and take the persons money. He didn't understand why or that it was even wrong because a "friend" told him it was good to do. When he walked in a few minutes later, he couldn't remember what his friend told him to do and just shot the man and left, without robbing the bank. Do you think he should be sentenced to death for the death of that man?
He was put on death row because he shot that man, even if he didn't have the cognitive and intellectual ability to understand the situation and it's consequsences.
Let me ask you something, would you put a 5-year-old child on death row for shooting his friend with his fathers gun? Satistics show that many would say, No, because the 5-year-old doesn't have the knowledge and comprehension at that age to understand the full meaning of deat, and that if he/she had a loaded gun in her/his hand and pulled the triger in front of someone, a bullet would come out and harm that person/child or even kill them. and how peramente death is.
Do you think a 5-year-old would understand what's right and wrong when it comes to their good friends telling him/her its okay to go into a store and rob them? Some might say it's wrong, but some might either be fine with it, believing their friends like the mentally challenged man with his. If we don't put a child on death row, then why a mentally retarded person who thinks the same level?
I'm not saying that the M.R. person shouldn't be punished. I just believe they should be put on a fair trail of not just knowing what the offender did wrong but also know the I.Q., the testing he/she got, their background history and present, family, etc. A M.R. person could be raised in a home with abuse or neglect-which could cause more disorders. Not all M.R. people can afford theraphy, or move into a home for M.R. people that have suppor Or don't have the proper funding or were taught that they need help and support.
Some M.R. people are only troubled in subjects like writing and reading and jsut need help in school, but can cope with every day life experiences just like any other person [this is someone who is right at the level of M.r. to a couple of points higher].
Basically, when it comes to M.R. people there is a lot more information out there that i believe people and court trails need to know about before making a decision. It's so wide spread that there are plently of directions/evidence the attrony could point out.
People need to realize that just because an adult killed someone or even a group, or raped someone, doesn't mean that adult knows what he/she did to a normal 100+ I.Q., healthy person. That just because he/she looks like an adult doesnt mean they can think like one. Picture a child on death row at the same level as the mentally retarded person. If you disagree with putting a child on death row, then we should think the same for the M.R. person who fits the same description?
I believe that capital punishment should be applied to the mentally challenged. It's not something a person gets charged with for speeding or an expired license. If a man is facing the death penalty, chances are he's murdered somebody.
One could argue that a person with a low IQ wouldn't "know any better". I disagree; just because a person may not have the intelligence to pass a high school exam doesn't mean they lack the capacity to have values.
Furthermore, if said person is either so challenged or unpredictable that he is a danger to himself or others, then he should already be under supervision in a facility.
I believe that when a person intentionally violates an innocent person's right to life, he forfeits his own, plain and simple.
Here's another perspective: If a person breaks into my home, I have the right to shoot him in self defense. Nobody is coming into my home and threatening the lives or safety of me or my family. His IQ is immaterial. If I can legally defend myself from an assailant, even if he dies, why shouldn't a court be able to make the same judgment?
Food for thought. I hope this helps.
Reply
Let's say an adult man had an I.Q. of 69. That man would not be able to perform intellectual tasks beyond the capacity of a typical ten-year-old. He would not be able to understand commmon vocabulary [of someone who is older then 10]. or know how to comprehend basic understanding of normal day-to-processes, like where the sun sets, or how the body fully works, etc. Not all mentally retarded people can live a life of solitude, because they cannot understand how to self-care, communicate, express emotion, follow directions, particapate, and/or live a social life. Some can live normal lifes but be surpervised at a job and/or school. Or watched full time at a home where people could take care of them.
I read an article that stated that a man who was mentally retarded was with his "friends" who convinced him to take a guy into a store and take the persons money. He didn't understand why or that it was even wrong because a "friend" told him it was good to do. When he walked in a few minutes later, he couldn't remember what his friend told him to do and just shot the man and left, without robbing the bank. Do you think he should be sentenced to death for the death of that man?
He was put on death row because he shot that man, even if he didn't have the cognitive and intellectual ability to understand the situation and it's consequsences.
Let me ask you something, would you put a 5-year-old child on death row for shooting his friend with his fathers gun? Satistics show that many would say, No, because the 5-year-old doesn't have the knowledge and comprehension at that age to understand the full meaning of deat, and that if he/she had a loaded gun in her/his hand and pulled the triger in front of someone, a bullet would come out and harm that person/child or even kill them. and how peramente death is.
Do you think a 5-year-old would understand what's right and wrong when it comes to their good friends telling him/her its okay to go into a store and rob them? Some might say it's wrong, but some might either be fine with it, believing their friends like the mentally challenged man with his. If we don't put a child on death row, then why a mentally retarded person who thinks the same level?
I'm not saying that the M.R. person shouldn't be punished. I just believe they should be put on a fair trail of not just knowing what the offender did wrong but also know the I.Q., the testing he/she got, their background history and present, family, etc. A M.R. person could be raised in a home with abuse or neglect-which could cause more disorders. Not all M.R. people can afford theraphy, or move into a home for M.R. people that have suppor Or don't have the proper funding or were taught that they need help and support.
Some M.R. people are only troubled in subjects like writing and reading and jsut need help in school, but can cope with every day life experiences just like any other person [this is someone who is right at the level of M.r. to a couple of points higher].
Basically, when it comes to M.R. people there is a lot more information out there that i believe people and court trails need to know about before making a decision. It's so wide spread that there are plently of directions/evidence the attrony could point out.
People need to realize that just because an adult killed someone or even a group, or raped someone, doesn't mean that adult knows what he/she did to a normal 100+ I.Q., healthy person. That just because he/she looks like an adult doesnt mean they can think like one. Picture a child on death row at the same level as the mentally retarded person. If you disagree with putting a child on death row, then we should think the same for the M.R. person who fits the same description?
Reply
Leave a comment