seriously ya, the practice of mesuring inteligence using IQ tests itself, is extremely questionable.
but what is most interesting, and important for all of us here, that your life and death is determined by people, based on how physically so called normal u r. i'm saying this, because i was recently on a flight, when an airhostess came to me to give me the usual rant of instructions, and she informed me, that in the event of an immergency evacuation, i will be the last person to be helped out of the plain. meanning that all the other normal people, who r more likely to positively contribute to society, will have a greater chance of survival than me, only because i'm less of an asset to humanity because of my blindness. i found this extremely amusing, and felt like spending my entire travel time, making a list of all the positive contributions made by my fellow-pasengers, and proving to them, that there would b at least 1 pasenger on bord, who deserved a lesser chance than i did, in that respect. anyway. so if nothing else, we must be proactive in society, if only to survive, and not be the last to be saved, if for no other reason. smile. On 3/4/14, avinash shahi <shahi88avin...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't understand how they have drawn a Lakshman Rekha on 70 IQ > level? And can intellectual disability be measured? very complex for > me! > Mar 4th 2014 15:22 by The Economist | WASHINGTON, DC > > http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/03/capital-punishment > WHEN Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas, he oversaw the execution > of Ricky Ray Rector, a man so feebleminded that he said he would save > the pecan pie from his last meal "for later". In 2002 the Supreme > Court ruled that putting mentally retarded people to death was a > "cruel and unusual" punishment, and therefore unconstitutional. But > the justices left it up to the states to define retardation, and this > has proven so difficult that on March 3rd the issue came before the > Supreme Court again. > > A Florida man named Freddie Lee Hall (pictured) was convicted in 1978, > along with an accomplice, for the rape and murder of a pregnant woman > and the murder of a police officer. He was sentenced to death. His > lawyers are appealing that he is too mentally incapacitated to be > executed. > > > For the bulk of the hour-long hearing, the justices quizzed Seth > Waxman, representing Mr Hall, and Allen Winsor, Florida's > solicitor-general, about the role of statistics in defining > intellectual disability. Florida's test requires defendants to > demonstrate both "significantly subaverage intellectual functioning" > and impairments in "adaptive behaviour" like communicating and looking > after oneself. Psychiatrists use a similar approach and, like Florida, > consider an IQ score of 70 or below as indicative of mental > disability. But unlike many states and against the medical consensus, > Florida uses that score as a rigid cutoff point. Mr Hall's IQ in 2002 > was 71, so Florida considers him eligible for execution. It refuses to > consider other evidence of his disability. > > That is a very slim line between prison and death, but, as Justice > Sonia Sotomayor said, "a line has to be drawn somewhere." The main > question she and several justices pressed is whether Florida may > ignore the "standard error of measurement" implicit in all > intelligence tests. "It is universally accepted," Mr Waxman argued, > "that persons with obtained scores of 71 to 75 can and often do have > mental retardation" due to a five-point margin of error. The four > liberal justices, along with the swing voter, Anthony Kennedy, were > inclined to agree. "Your rule prevents us from getting a better > understanding of whether that IQ score is accurate or not," Mr Kennedy > admonished Mr Winsor. > > Not until the closing minutes of the hearing did anyone acknowledge > the man's life hanging in the balance. Justice Stephen Breyer noted > that Mr Hall "has been on death row for over 35 years". Justice > Kennedy asked Mr Winsor if he considered Florida's brand of delayed > justice to be "consistent with the purposes of the death penalty". > This inquiry from Mr Kennedy had nothing to do with the narrow legal > question of the day, but it betrayed his more general doubts about the > way the Sunshine State puts people to death. > > Antonin Scalia, a conservative justice, was more hostile to Mr Hall's > defence. He noted that it took ten years after his initial conviction > for Mr Hall's lawyers to raise the issue of retardation. He added that > the complexity of the crime--which involved hiding one victim's body in > a wood--belies Mr Hall's purported disability. The state might well > argue, Justice Scalia said, that Mr Hall "could not have pulled all of > this off" if he was really so intellectually impaired. This is an old > theme for Mr Scalia, who argued back in 2002 that the court's bar on > executing the mentally disabled would turn "the process of capital > trial into a game" where murderers "feign mental retardation" to avoid > the death penalty. > > Justice Elena Kagan cut to the chase late in the proceedings: "Can I > just ask," she said to Mr Winsor, "why you have this policy?" > Initially flummoxed, Mr Winsor replied: "Florida has an interest in > ensuring that the people who evade execution because of mental > retardation are people who are, in fact, mentally retarded." Raising > the IQ cutoff to 75 to take account of the margin of error, he said, > "would double the number of people who are eligible for > the...exemption." In other words, Florida wants to execute more > people, and therefore uses the most rigid definition of retardation > that it can get away with. It probably won't get away with it for much > longer. > > -- > Avinash Shahi > M.Phil Research Scholar > Centre for The Study of Law and Governance > Jawaharlal Nehru University > New Delhi India > > > > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of > mobile phones / Tabs on: > http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the > person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
