Fifteen Year Old Girl Stabs, Strangles, and Slits the Throat of a Nine Year Old Girl.

^So if she provided a better explanation, she shouldn't be tried as adult? Every crime is horrible, especially murders. Should all children who have been suspected of murder be tried as adults? Or just the ones we suspect that are too brutal?

So, being stabbed, strangled, and having your throat slit isn't brutal?

Edit: She knew what she was doing. She's old enough to know the consequences. She basically did it "just because". That little girl's life ended. She was only nine years old.

Fifteen year old aren't unintelligent. They have the intelligence to know when you stab, strangle and slit someone's throat is wrong.

That's exactly what I'm saying, if you're going to decide based on the brutality of the crime, 95% of murders should fit the mold. Murdering a person is never not brutal. Shock effect is not something that should affect the decision of whether they are tried as adult or not.

Jewel Nicole:

I, personally, think she should be tried as an adult.

What she did was a serious crime. She cold bloodily murdered a nine year old girl. Stabbed her, strangled her, and slit her throat just to "see what it felt like"? What kind of an explanation is that? I don't think it's a very good one.

Jewel Nicole:

So, being stabbed, strangled, and having your throat slit isn't brutal?

Edit: She knew what she was doing. She's old enough to know the consequences. She basically did it "just because". That little girl's life ended. She was only nine years old.

Fifteen year old aren't unintelligent. They have the intelligence to know when you stab, strangle and slit someone's throat is wrong.

Do you know who Brian Howe was?

Got strangled, had an "M" carved into his stomach, had parts of his hair cut off and had his genitals mutilated.

Brutal, yes? Made even moreso by the fact he was only three years old at the time. Three.

His killer was eleven. Given the brutality of her crime, would you have wanted her tried as an adult?

^Yes, I would. Anyone who's capable of doing something to that extent should be capable of being tried as an adult. You all may disagree with me but that's just my opinion.

^So...say that crime took place in a place where the punishment for murder was capital punishment. If she was found guilty for murder, would you say she deserved the chair? Age regardless?

EDIT: Dedrick Owens. Brought a gun into school and shot/killed a classmate.

Owens was six. Should he have been tried as an adult?

^I'm a firm believer in the saying "an eye for an eye". I think anyone who takes another ones life cold bloodily should get the highest possible punishment. Unless it was an accident or self dense.

I'm sure most of you all are going to attack me for stating that but that's just what I believe.

You're going to continue to throw examples at me... and I'm going to continue to stand behind my previous statement.

In the case of the Owens, I do believe that it could have been prevented. A six year old shouldn't have had the opportunity to take a firearm to school, the parents should have taken some sort of responsibility.

I'd like to add that I don't think these people/minors should be put in the electric chair or any sort of fatal punishment. But I believe they should get every sort of treatment that's available to them for their psychological well being as they're incarcerated.

Edit: There's a difference between a 15 year old, 11 year old, and a 6 year old.
A fifteen year old is completely aware of what they're doing. An eleven year old, for the most part, knows what they're doing as well. Most eleven year olds know that it's wrong to mutilate one's body. As for a six year old taking a gun to school and shooting another child. I think the parents are to blame for allowing a loaded firearm to be in reach.

^Just to ask: What's your view of soldiers in war? Does eye for an eye apply to them, or not?

Jewel Nicole:

Edit: There's a difference between a 15 year old, 11 year old, and a 6 year old.
A fifteen year old is completely aware of what they're doing. An eleven year old, for the most part, knows what they're doing as well. Most eleven year olds know that it's wrong to mutilate one's body. As for a six year old taking a gun to school and shooting another child. I think the parents are to blame for allowing a loaded firearm to be in reach.

Where should the line be drawn? At what age should people be tried as adults, if six is too young?

I just feel lucky that people who make these decisions usually don't end up having enough power to actually put their "righteousness" into action. Killing kids and explaining it with an "eye for an eye"... But yeah, it's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Jewel Nicole:

I, personally, think she should be tried as an adult.

What she did was a serious crime. She cold bloodily murdered a nine year old girl. Stabbed her, strangled her, and slit her throat just to "see what it felt like"? What kind of an explanation is that? I don't think it's a very good one.

Clearly psychologically, there is more to it than just that. That may be her reasoning, but to me that just shows that this girl is severely mentally unstable.

^I'm not denying that there isn't something wrong with her. I'm just saying that she knew what she was doing. She knew it was wrong. She's fifteen not five. I don't know, maybe my train of thought is wrong, hmm.

If you're five, you usually know that killing someone is wrong. Should five year olds be tried as an adult. I guarantee that if you ask most five year olds if it's wrong to kill someone they'll probably say yes.

I'm just going to jump into the conversation here. This is, well, shocking. I believe that something is going on within her and it should be checked out, but, I, too, have wondered what it'd be like to kill someone. I'm not saying that I'd ever do it, but, there are times when I just want to know why people do it. What 'pleasure' can someone gain from such actions? And, how can they go through with such actions?

I'm unsure on whether she should be tried as an adult but I think she should. I don't think age should apply here because she has developed complete thoughts and knew fully well what she was doing, unless, of course, she has some sort of mental disability. She should really be checked out.

Jewel Nicole:

^I'm a firm believer in the saying "an eye for an eye". I think anyone who takes another ones life cold bloodily should get the highest possible punishment. Unless it was an accident or self dense.

How is giving somebody a lethal injection/etc. not murder?

kafka.:

How is giving somebody a lethal injection/etc. not murder?

It's legalized murder.

Jewel Nicole:

It's legalized murder.

Does that make it okay? That it's legalized? I thought murder was wrong?

The girl is legally a minor, a child, and not an adult.
Does that mean it is wrong to try her as an adult? Just because legally she isn't an adult?

Make up your mind about whether you are following legal guidelines or moral ones. There are differences.

Isis:

Does that make it okay? That it's legalized? I thought murder was wrong?

The girl is legally a minor, a child, and not an adult.
Does that mean it is wrong to try her as an adult? Just because legally she isn't an adult?

Make up your mind about whether you are following legal guidelines or moral ones. There are differences.

I think, if someone is aware of what they're doing no matter their age they should punished. The law is clear. It's possible for a minor to be tried as an adult. In this case, I think, she should be.

Please don't tell me to "make up my mind". My mind is very well made up. I believe legalized murder is doing justice. It's done by the government. I'm completely for it.

However, I don't believe in one person killing another person "just because". No matter the age. They should be held accountable for their own actions. Tried as an adult or not.

Hopefully, she will be in jail for a long time. That little girl deserves some justice and so does her family.

Jewel Nicole:

I think, if someone is aware of what they're doing no matter their age they should punished.

I don't think anyone is denying she should be punished. No one is suggesting she just skip off scotch-free. But I'm not sure she should be tried as an adult.

Like I stated before, I think most eight year olds know that killing someone is wrong. Should an eight year old be tried as an adult?

Jewel Nicole:

I think, if someone is aware of what they're doing no matter their age they should punished. The law is clear. It's possible for a minor to be tried as an adult. In this case, I think, she should be.

Please don't tell me to "make up my mind". My mind is very well made up. I believe legalized murder is doing justice. It's done by the government. I'm completely for it.

However, I don't believe in one person killing another person "just because". No matter the age. They should be held accountable for their own actions. Tried as an adult or not.

Hopefully, she will be in jail for a long time. That little girl deserves some justice and so does her family.

If there is even a question of her being tried as a child or an adult, obviously the law isn't quite clear enough, is it? Maybe she was aware of what she was doing, but she may also have serious mental ailments. If she does, do you still think she deserves legalized murder as a punishment considering her mental capacity is diminished?

It's done by the government. I'm completely for it.

So anything the government does is justified because it's the government doing it? The government in most states in the US count incest as illegal, yet you find nothing wrong with incest, correct? Just because the government does something or says it's okay doesn't mean it actually is right.

And no matter the age? That statement of yours horribly disturbs me. You see no difference between a six year old killing and a twenty year old killing?

Isis:

If there is even a question of her being tried as a child or an adult, obviously the law isn't quite clear enough, is it? Maybe she was aware of what she was doing, but she may also have serious mental ailments. If she does, do you still think she deserves legalized murder as a punishment considering her mental capacity is diminished?

I stated this already:

Jewel Nicole:

I'd like to add that I don't think these people/minors should be put in the electric chair or any sort of fatal punishment. But I believe they should get every sort of treatment that's available to them for their psychological well being as they're incarcerated.

Isis:

It's done by the government. I'm completely for it.

So anything the government does is justified because it's the government doing it? The government in most states in the US count incest as illegal, yet you find nothing wrong with incest, correct? Just because the government does something or says it's okay doesn't mean it actually is right.

I'm not saying that I always agree with the government, but in the case of capital punishment, I do.

Isis:

And no matter the age? That statement of yours horribly disturbs me. You see no difference between a six year old killing and a twenty year old killing?

Jewel Nicole:

They should be held accountable for their own actions. Tried as an adult or not.

Of course, there's a difference. But we're talking about a fifteen year old girl here. One who was completely aware of what she was doing.