Via The Bias Committee:
In December, the United Nations took up a resolution calling for the abolition of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for children and young teenagers. The vote was 185 to 1, with the United States the lone dissenter.
I gave a woman asking for money $1 today and she did not immediately get up chuckling and move to…
When capitalized, "Sie" is the formal way to address adults of either gender in polite German. I majored in the…
If one assumes that a person is making their money, including enough money to have no incentive to "work", by…
Ob sie wirklich Deutsch spricht. Normalweise, kommt die US Soldaten nicht ins Stadt und spricht nicht so oft mit denn…
As for being a Nazi, ich spreche fliessend deutsch und wohnte in Deutschland fuer drei Jahre mit der americanishe Luftwaffe…
Booo!! You suck, U.S.
Sorry, couldn’t help it.
Sadly, we do suck.
This disgusts me. The ONLY UN country that wants to throw away the lives of CHILDREN! It is becoming clearer now why we have troubled children, in the numbers that we do, to begin with.
I’m not expert on international law, but might this have something to do with federalism? Congress has the power to enter into treaties but does it have the power to enter into treaties agreeing to things it has no jurisdiction over, such as sentencing guidelines for non-federal crimes?
Apparently we were the lone voice of reason on this.
Every kid that has gone down the wrong track is not redeemable. Not every kid has an inner innocent doe-eyed little angel that just needs a second chance in order to come out. Even though Jeffrey Dahmer committed his first (known) murder at 18 he didn’t all of a sudden just start having his horrific inclinations on his 18th birthday. He was unsalvageable long before that.
Do a google search on “youngest serial killer.” There are human monsters of all ages. Though it might be rare these people should be put away for the rest of their lives when we find them what ever their ages.
This does sound bad, but the way the UN operates I’d be tempted to vote in the negative if the UN resolved that the sun was up at Noon. Has there been any explanation for this vote?
Michael may have a point. It’s sometimes hard for non-Americans to understand that the several States in the U.S. are not just administrative regions but have real (albeit limited) sovereignty, and that the Federal government can’t simply make them submit (unlike so many of their own governments). According to the single comment on the source page, that seems to be the issue here.
Re: Federalism
1. U.N. resolutions are not binding, and even if they were in theory, no U.N. policy can be enforced against the U.S., since we have a permanent veto in the Security Council. So this would not be imposing law on the states, it would simply be stating the official OPINION of the U.S. government.
2. The 14th Amendment, through either the due process or privileges and immunities clause (take your pick), forbids the states from violating the rights of their own citizens that the Constitution forbids the federal government from violating, and authorizes Congress to enforce this through appropriate legislation. A life sentence for children is clearly an 8th Amendment issue (although it is admittedly not clear what the 8th amendment would require). One type of legislation that it is appropriate for Congress to use is the Senate’s power to ratify treaties.
Therefor, U.S. federalism would not be violated by our voting for this resolution.