Yankton Daily Press

February 10, 2004

Editorial

South Dakota law­mak­ers have an oppor­tu­ni­ty this ses­sion to send an impor­tant mes­sage about the state’s sys­tem of crim­i­nal pun­ish­ment and its notion of reform.

The ques­tion is, which mes­sage will they choose to send?

The answer can be found in SB182, a bill which would pro­hib­it the exe­cu­tion of any­one under age 18 con­vict­ed in South Dakota of mur­der, aggra­vat­ed kid­nap­ping or ter­ror­ism. With the death penal­ty part of state law, it is pos­si­ble that at some point in the future a minor may be con­vict­ed of a cap­i­tal crime — a very adult offense, to be sure — and be sen­tenced to die. South Dakota is cur­rent­ly one of 16 states in the coun­try that allows this practice.

The bill was approved by the Senate Monday and now heads to the House for consideration.

South Dakota should put this law on its books.

By so doing, the state would send a mes­sage of hope, for lack of a bet­ter term. It would leave open the pos­si­bil­i­ty that there is a chance of reha­bil­i­ta­tion for a youth­ful offend­er who has made a horrible mistake.

By reject­ing this mea­sure, law­mak­ers are, in effect, under­cut­ting one of the pur­pos­es of our penal sys­tem. They would be pro­claim­ing that a crime com­mit­ted at such a young age for­feits any chance a con­vict­ed minor may have of right­ing him­self or her­self, or of using any wis­dom that may come with matu­ri­ty to find a bet­ter path in life.

Let’s not be naive about this. A cap­i­tal crime such as mur­der is an uncon­scionable act, no mat­ter the age of the per­pe­tra­tor. And of course, no amount of mer­cy or reform for the pris­on­er will ever bring back a vic­tim from the dead. Murder is the ulti­mate trans­gres­sion in our soci­ety, and cur­rent­ly the law in 38 states says it demands the ulti­mate price. (The mer­its of that law com­prise anoth­er argu­ment for another time.)

However, the state should also rec­og­nize that minors are at a con­fus­ing, impres­sion­able, chaot­ic age of tran­si­tion. Emotions can run ram­pant, pri­or­i­ties can be short­sight­ed, and judg­ment can some­times pro­duce mirages of log­ic and illog­ic. For any kid, this is an awk­ward time of matu­ri­ty — think back to your own teen years. A kid’s vio­lent, anti­so­cial, self-destruc­tive behav­ior may be a result of par­ents who did not under­stand the needs of the child and did not ful­ly appre­ci­ate the awe­some respon­si­bil­i­ty of mold­ing a law-abid­ing cit­i­zen. It may sim­ply be the result of bad, mis­guid­ed judg­ment. In either case, it is a seri­ous cry for help.

If a teen com­mits a mur­der, that youth should be giv­en the oppor­tu­ni­ty to set his or her life straight. It may mean years in prison and the loss of pre­cious free­dom, but it would also mean that there is at least a chance for a young life to reform.

That’s one of the things our prison sys­tem is sup­posed to rep­re­sent: giv­ing felons the chance to reha­bil­i­tate them­selves while pay­ing for their crimes. Certainly, some of these peo­ple will nev­er change their ways — but some actu­al­ly do. Juveniles, who unde­ni­ably still have a lot of grow­ing up to do, should be giv­en that chance to change with the pas­sage of time and to real­ize what the walls and bars around them truly mean.

This bill does not ask for for­give­ness for juve­niles con­vict­ed of a cap­i­tal crime; instead, it asks for a gen­uine oppor­tu­ni­ty for reha­bil­i­ta­tion. With the prop­er coun­sel­ing and guid­ance, there is the chance that a young, still-form­ing life can be put on a bet­ter path. By exe­cut­ing teens, we are dis­miss­ing this pos­si­bil­i­ty. We are dis­miss­ing any hope.

That is some­thing this state should not do.

Sources

Yankton Daily Press