UndergroundScene Forums - View Single Post

XerXes · 28th May 2003, 08:18 PM

Define “kids”? Yes, we have death row but no children are on it. That is ludicrous and completely unfounded.

We must first come to a common ground on the definition of what a “kid” is and THEN we can argue if the US has them on death row.

The youngest person in recent history to be sentenced to death was 16. He will not be executed until he is at least 18. Like in Scotland, 16 is old enough to be tried as an adult.

The U.S. does not execute children. Twenty-two states can try 16 and 17 year-old “kids” for murder and place them in storage on death row until they reach 18. What does that prove? It doesn’t support your argument that the motives for going to Iraq were not somewhat motivated by human rights issues, among the numerous other strategic reasons OVER oil.

28th May 2003, 08:18 PM	#10 (permalink)
XerXes Registered User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Shitville, Scotland Posts: 18	Define “kids”? Yes, we have death row but no children are on it. That is ludicrous and completely unfounded. We must first come to a common ground on the definition of what a “kid” is and THEN we can argue if the US has them on death row. The youngest person in recent history to be sentenced to death was 16. He will not be executed until he is at least 18. Like in Scotland, 16 is old enough to be tried as an adult. The U.S. does not execute children. Twenty-two states can try 16 and 17 year-old “kids” for murder and place them in storage on death row until they reach 18. What does that prove? It doesn’t support your argument that the motives for going to Iraq were not somewhat motivated by human rights issues, among the numerous other strategic reasons OVER oil.