Harry Krause wrote:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- 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, cited the fact
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.

I don't know about this. If you look at the statistics of inner cities,
you'll see that an alarming rate of murders and habitual crimes are
perpetrated by persons under 18. Now, I'm not necessarily for the death
penalty, but, I do think that these thugs should be treated just like
someone who did the same crimes and was OVER 18.