3 ms·

> Some of those guys will almost certainly grow out of it. We send teenagers to prison for less societal damage. They don't get an opportunity to "grow out of

> Some of those guys will almost certainly grow out of it. We send teenagers to prison for less societal damage. They don't get an opportunity to "grow out of it". I don't know why these teenagers should get more benefit of the doubt.

atmavatar 6mo ago
This 100%. For the benefit of those outside the US: when I was growing up, and we constantly had police officers talk to us in school as part of the ill-fated DARE "just say no" campaign, the next most common phrase we heard was "tried as an adult". i.e., if you were 14 or older, you couldn't drink, vote, or even get a learner's permit to drive a motor vehicle, and you were probably flooded with all kinds of hormones making it even more more difficult to regulate yourself, but you'd be put in prison with adults rather than go to juvenile hall if you were ever convicted of a crime, and any felonies would stay on your record permanently, essentially ending any hope you'd have at a normal life. While I have some sympathy for the youngest members of DOGE, they are actually old enough to be legal adults, and I would point out that their youthful naïveté and the "but they're just kids" response to any attempts at holding them accountable is precisely why they were chosen for their roles.
palmotea 6mo ago
> We send teenagers to prison for less societal damage. They don't get an opportunity to "grow out of it". Yeah, but in those cases there are literal laws against what they did, and usually the morality is much more stark (e.g. killing a guy). Also, the "logic" of being harsh to immature person X so we have to be harsh to every immature person just doesn't fly. > I don't know why these teenagers should get more benefit of the doubt. Because this was a more ambiguous situation (e.g. politically polarized) and almost certainly the people who were supposed to know better were telling them they were doing a good job. I'm saying forget the teenagers, and focus on the real bad guys.

atmavatar 6mo ago

This 100%. For the benefit of those outside the US: when I was growing up, and we constantly had police officers talk to us in school as part of the ill-fated DARE "just say no" campaign, the next most common phrase we heard was "tried as an adult". i.e., if you were 14 or older, you couldn't drink, vote, or even get a learner's permit to drive a motor vehicle, and you were probably flooded with all kinds of hormones making it even more more difficult to regulate yourself, but you'd be put in prison with adults rather than go to juvenile hall if you were ever convicted of a crime, and any felonies would stay on your record permanently, essentially ending any hope you'd have at a normal life. While I have some sympathy for the youngest members of DOGE, they are actually old enough to be legal adults, and I would point out that their youthful naïveté and the "but they're just kids" response to any attempts at holding them accountable is precisely why they were chosen for their roles.

palmotea 6mo ago

> We send teenagers to prison for less societal damage. They don't get an opportunity to "grow out of it". Yeah, but in those cases there are literal laws against what they did, and usually the morality is much more stark (e.g. killing a guy). Also, the "logic" of being harsh to immature person X so we have to be harsh to every immature person just doesn't fly. > I don't know why these teenagers should get more benefit of the doubt. Because this was a more ambiguous situation (e.g. politically polarized) and almost certainly the people who were supposed to know better were telling them they were doing a good job. I'm saying forget the teenagers, and focus on the real bad guys.