5 ms·

I don’t know how it feels and hope I never have to feel the grief that a homicide of a loved one. I also don’t think that locking a 14 year old up for their ent

by S_A_P 5y ago

I don’t know how it feels and hope I never have to feel the grief that a homicide of a loved one. I also don’t think that locking a 14 year old up for their entire natural life is appropriate either. My son is 13. He is not even close to being capable of understanding the long range consequences of his actions right now. I could see how letting him roam around the streets without adult supervision could put him in a very tough spot. IMO At this age kids need love and guidance and small doses of agency to allow them to make choices and learn how to navigate the world. I think that a lot of these kids that end up in this circumstance are likely from broken or otherwise dysfunctional homes. I’m not sure how to fix it, but life in prison doesn’t seem to be the right way.

hkt 5y ago
To be clear, the article specified that he was jailed for a non-homicide offence.
- xyzzyz 5y ago
  Yes, it didn’t end up being a homicide — not for the lack of trying, though. He shot his victim in the head.
  - Griffinsauce 5y ago
    I've never understood why this is segmented by outcome instead of intention for these kinds of cases. If you shoot someone in the head you should be tried for murder. It's what you intended to commit.
    - laichzeit0 5y ago
      What if I intended to shoot you in the shoulder but missed and hit your head?
      - henvic 5y ago
        You assumed the risk of causing more harm than you wanted the very moment you pulled the trigger. Did you pull the trigger by accident? You assumed the risk the moment you decided to cock the gun. Did you cock the gun by accident? You assumed the risk the moment you decided to engage. All that said, I don't believe in punitive justice. For me, justice should be reparative. It's great if he has recovered and been pardoned by the victim. I also don't think isolating someone as much is good either. However, I can understand how you might want to isolate someone who does such wicked action. It's a shame nothing else was done during incarceration, though. Thankfully death penalty wasn't applied. We can't trust the state to decide who lives or dies. Not only are there too many victims of wrongful convictions, but the cost of a single miscarriage of justice is unbearable.
        Griffinsauce 5y ago
        I'd like to note because you're mentioning them and assumptions could be made about my position by my earlier comment, IMO: - trying a minor as an adult is ridiculous - isolation is torture - the death penalty is unethical and ineffective
      - axiosgunnar 5y ago
        Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and accidental manslaughter (assuming the person died from the headshot, otherwise just aggravated assault with a deadly weapon)
      - Griffinsauce 5y ago
        That would be a risk you're taking in that case.
        laichzeit0 5y ago
        I agree it’s a risk. But I think saying it was the _intent_ to shoot them in the head (as per your first comment) is very difficult to argue. Someone could have intended to shoot them in the shoulder. I’m being devils advocate here. If you want to avoid arguing about intent, then you can just punish based on outcome. The argument could be turned. I could intend to shoot you in the head, but miss and hit your shoulder. The intent was to kill you, the outcome was you didn’t die. What now?

by S_A_P 5y ago

hkt 5y ago

To be clear, the article specified that he was jailed for a non-homicide offence.

xyzzyz 5y ago
Yes, it didn’t end up being a homicide — not for the lack of trying, though. He shot his victim in the head.
- Griffinsauce 5y ago
  I've never understood why this is segmented by outcome instead of intention for these kinds of cases. If you shoot someone in the head you should be tried for murder. It's what you intended to commit.
  - laichzeit0 5y ago
    What if I intended to shoot you in the shoulder but missed and hit your head?
    - henvic 5y ago
      You assumed the risk of causing more harm than you wanted the very moment you pulled the trigger. Did you pull the trigger by accident? You assumed the risk the moment you decided to cock the gun. Did you cock the gun by accident? You assumed the risk the moment you decided to engage. All that said, I don't believe in punitive justice. For me, justice should be reparative. It's great if he has recovered and been pardoned by the victim. I also don't think isolating someone as much is good either. However, I can understand how you might want to isolate someone who does such wicked action. It's a shame nothing else was done during incarceration, though. Thankfully death penalty wasn't applied. We can't trust the state to decide who lives or dies. Not only are there too many victims of wrongful convictions, but the cost of a single miscarriage of justice is unbearable.
      - Griffinsauce 5y ago
        I'd like to note because you're mentioning them and assumptions could be made about my position by my earlier comment, IMO: - trying a minor as an adult is ridiculous - isolation is torture - the death penalty is unethical and ineffective
    - axiosgunnar 5y ago
      Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and accidental manslaughter (assuming the person died from the headshot, otherwise just aggravated assault with a deadly weapon)
    - Griffinsauce 5y ago
      That would be a risk you're taking in that case.
      - laichzeit0 5y ago
        I agree it’s a risk. But I think saying it was the _intent_ to shoot them in the head (as per your first comment) is very difficult to argue. Someone could have intended to shoot them in the shoulder. I’m being devils advocate here. If you want to avoid arguing about intent, then you can just punish based on outcome. The argument could be turned. I could intend to shoot you in the head, but miss and hit your shoulder. The intent was to kill you, the outcome was you didn’t die. What now?