So
lately the Supreme Court has been focusing some of its efforts on
limiting capital punishment. In this ruling, that extends past
Florida, the court said that the I.Q cutoff for death row is too
strict.
The argument has been made that this cutoff, that is defined only by
a number, does not incorporate all of the factors involved. As
Justice Kennedy wrote, “Intellectual
disability is a condition, not a number.” Do you guys agree with
the ruling?
I agree with the ruling in that I do not believe that a number can account for all of the "multidimensional" factors in mental retardation. As mentioned in the article, the death penalty is the most severe punishment that man can impose on another man. We must base these decisions off of more than just one test.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the ruling to limit capital punishment. It's hard to make rules surrounding the death penalty when, like Josh said, it is the most severe punishment that can be imposed. I think the fact that numbers are being used to determine who/who is not spared makes this even more difficult. It becomes a really slippery slope when someone gets one point above the score cutoff like Freddie Hall did, so I think this case was ruled correctly.
ReplyDeleteI am usually against the death penalty, with the exception of extreme cases, such as terrorist attacks. I am especially against it in this situation. This man was one IQ point away from being considered mentally disabled. I completely agree with the supreme courts ruling, and I think that they should continue to expand on this thinking.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with this ruling. I disagree with the death penalty pretty much in every circumstance, and this one is no exception. A measure of one's "intellectual disability" does not get to guarantee whether or not they have the right to live. I've disagreed with a few Supreme Court rulings lately, but this one they definitely got right. I'd like to see if they go further in their rulings on other death penalty related cases.
ReplyDeleteI think the court decided correctly in this ruling. IQ tests are an ambiguous scale and an individual's mental capabilities cannot be fully determined by a single IQ test. A broader analysis of the person should be made before something as harsh as the death penalty is imposed. The decision of life or death should not be made on one test alone, so I definitely agree with the Supreme Court on this case.
ReplyDeleteI am personally against the death penalty, I think that by killing someone, you are just as bad as the person you have killed. I think that having IQ limits for whether or not to kill someone is absolutely ridiculous in the first place. Everyone deserves fair judgement. I think that the death penalty is a really difficult subject to discuss, mainly because I want to believe the good in people, but I don't think IQ is the best way to handle it.
ReplyDeleteI too am against the death penalty in most cases. I agree with the statement in the article that the IQ rule is too mechanical an approach for something as serious as the death penalty. In order for someones actions to warrent the death penalty I think it must be certain that they understood what they were doing and understood what they were doing was wrong.
ReplyDeleteOur prison system is so astoundingly screwed up, and this is just one part of it. There is so much reform needed in terms of our jailing, punishing, and (lack of) rehabilitation/help for the mentally ill and disabled. It should be obvious that just looking at the numbers of one test should not be enough to decide whether someone is competent enough to possibly receive the death penalty. I completely agree with the ruling and hope that the trend away from capital punishment continues.
ReplyDelete