Month: March 2005

High Court Ends Death Penalty for Youths

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050301/D88I8SPO1.html

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Constitution forbids the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes, ending a practice used in 19 states.

The 5-4 decision throws out the death sentences of about 70 juvenile murderers and bars states from seeking to execute minors for future crimes.

The executions, the court said, were unconstitutionally cruel.

It was the second major defeat at the high court in three years for supporters of the death penalty. Justices in 2002 banned the execution of the mentally retarded, also citing the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishments.

The court had already outlawed executions for those who were 15 and younger when they committed their crimes.

Tuesday’s ruling prevents states from making 16- and 17-year-olds eligible for execution.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, noted that most states don’t allow the execution of juvenile killers and those that do use the penalty infrequently. The trend, he noted, was to abolish the practice.

“Our society views juveniles … as categorically less culpable than the average criminal,” Kennedy wrote.

…

In a dissent, Scalia decried the decision, arguing that there has been no clear trend of declining juvenile executions to justify a growing consensus against the practice.

“The court says in so many words that what our people’s laws say about the issue does not, in the last analysis, matter: ‘In the end our own judgment will be brought to bear on the question of the acceptability of the death penalty,’ he wrote in a 24-page dissent.

“The court thus proclaims itself sole arbiter of our nation’s moral standards,” Scalia wrote.

Random Linkage

– Bruce Campbell: comic book writer!

– Make $100,000 just for lovin’ and livin’ The Dukes of Hazard

– Trying to halt global warming with one giant leap. Interesting, though something makes me think it ain’t gonna work. Just a feeling I have.

– Have you played with Google Maps yet? Pretty sweet if you ask me. And you should.

– IGN announces the top ten must own games for the Game Cube and I own none of them.

– Tiny Mix Tapes is a neat site where you submit a topic and someone might give you a play list to soundtrack it.

– Star Wars Episode 3 spoilers if you’re interested. And I do mean SPOILERS.

Blogger Terrorizes Children!

Screaming “GET OFF MY LAWN”, anal self righteous blogger chases children off his site by throwing empty cans of Pabst Blue Ribbon and incoherently muttering about the government

So it seems a class has found me enjoyable. Or, rather, useful. Like cutting through my lawn they have used my site as a way to an “easy A-“. Well I’m gonna make them earn that there A- and wear it on their chest all red and glaring and such. Like in that book, Brave New World.

I wrote this thing about a week ago concerning those recorded conversations an author had with the President where said President alluded to possibly, maybe, kinda inhaling or something like that back in the day (“good ol’ days” as they are probably called).

Well the first critter came across my property and decided that I was a crazy ol’ coot in my rantin’. Which I was. But that’s not the point. That they called me on it, THAT’S the point.

Not really.

The point is that instead of considering my actual discussion about whether CNN handled the story appropriately, the discussion became as to whether or not admitting drug use was a valid approach to the topic and the consensus seems to have been yes. Now, everyone’s opinion gets twisted in the retelling so I’ll forgive the first critter, despite being called left leaning when I mentioned something about a “liberal media”.

But it seems this critter has friends.

This one felt my post was entirely opinion and cited no credible sources. Okay, maybe CNN’s fluff at times, but not credible? It seemed more likely that they didn’t realize that CNN had been cited (nevermind that I did cite it and their first friend also cited it and their dog was doing that cute barking that sounds like words in the background going “CNN! CNN! CNN! I RUV RU!”)

So, in a fit of overweening pride and hubristic arrogance I stripped to my wife beater, grabbed that there fly swatter and waddled to the front lines of battle on my front porch.

I put them there young’uns in their place (here and here).

In hindsight I feel like an ass.

The teacher’s probably going to spank me by e-mail for even bothering to defend my virtual honor by correcting their students. Which is fine.

Now, what I really think happened was that the first person did not realize that in blockquoting and italicizing words I’m citing the article verbatim, not just spouting crap out like I normally do (see above). Had she read the article she would have noticed this. Or accused me of plagarism. Either way, we’re good. Her pal, the second poster, apparently never even saw my post. Or ____________ (I’m tired, insert your own funny comment, it’s kinda like a MadLib).

What also happened was that the President’s stance was taken for my opinion whereas my analysis was overlooked. Do I agree with the President’s view, that any admission of drug use does not serve to prevent drug use? Somewhat. We all mock that “From YOU, alright? I learned it by watching YOU!” commercial, many while high. Thanks, Faux TV-Dad.

More importantly though was the President’s opinion that such stuff shouldn’t matter and that he would refuse to answer it. Instead of agreeing with the President, CNN decided that this MUST be an admission and that is a bad thing! THAT is what I was criticizing. Not the President, whether he did drugs or not, but that in the President’s careful consideration on how to handle his personal past, CNN threw out the “PRESIDENT IS A DAMN DIRTY HIPPIE DRUGGIE!” headlines. And that wasn’t entirely accurate. Not entirely.

So to the class that’s being made to do these blogs to enhance their critical reading skills, good luck folks. Please please please take more than five minutes to do those posts. You can’t critically evaluate something with just one quick read. You have to follow links, really look into what’s being said, and then think about it. Give your writing a good, oh, ten minutes. And maybe proofread it, make sure it sounds pretty, then share it with the world. Because you’re on the web with these things. You’re not just being graded by your teacher but you’re going to be graded by anyone in the general public that stumbles across your site, including us ego surfers that just love to find our names in the weirdest of places (though bathroom stalls are generally bad).