4 ms·
You can argue that the cyberflashing law is a bit too broad and the punishment a bit too harsh. I might agree if we're talking about one adult sending sexy phot
by yosito 3y ago
You can argue that the cyberflashing law is a bit too broad and the punishment a bit too harsh. I might agree if we're talking about one adult sending sexy photos to another adult without asking first. In that case it might just be bad manners worthy of a slap on the wrist. But here's what this guy did, and in his case the punishment totally fits the crime:
> Hawkes borrowed his father’s phone, saying he needed to call the probation office, went in another room and sent photos by WhatsApp to a woman and by iMessage to a 15-year-old girl, who began crying.
- Dylan16807 3y agoHer being 15 doesn't stop me from thinking over five years is too much. What a weird argument to act like those are mutually exclusive. That a pretty big fraction of what you'd get for murder.
- alphabettsy 3y agoNot his first time. He was already a registered sex offender. Seems he didn’t learn his lesson.
- Dylan16807 3y agoI don't think the first time or not distinction should change your sentence by more than... let's say a year.
- boomboomsubban 3y agoHe plead guilty to violating the terms of his probation, meaning he committed the crime knowing what the penalties would be.
- Dylan16807 3y agoHow is this relevant to how long sentences should be? I'm glad he didn't waste the court's time very much, I guess.
- boomboomsubban 3y agoBecause the crime he committed and primarily was sentenced for was breaking his probation. Presumably his probation terms included "don't commit crimes" so the cyberflasher law is only relevant as it was the crime he did to break his probation
- Dylan16807 3y agoThe punishment for breaking probation should mostly be going back to prison. Over five years is way too much for that. Either way, if that's the case then this story is extremely misleading.
- Sirizarry 3y agoProbation is a privilege that a prisoner needs to apply for. It could be argued that even though he was previously convicted perhaps he didn’t know the exact consequences and so leniency can be given. However, by violating probation, he has proven to be intentionally malicious and a danger to society even more so then before. I think a few extra years for that is definitely justified
- Dylan16807 3y agoPeople usually do felonies in an intentionally malicious way. The base punishment should already take care of that. Think of it this way: If someone on probation intentionally shoplifts, and gets a full punishment for shoplifting, and their probation gets cancelled, how much extra punishment should they get on top of that? I'd say some, but not years. And I don't think the extra a punishment should be a multiplier, I think it should be largely independent of the specific crime. Different amounts for misdemeanor and felony, probably, but neither one should be huge.
- uaserussia 3y ago[flagged]