BF2S Forums 15 year old charged as an adult for attempted murder

Haven't they handled cases like this with two trials, one juvie and another one adult after a few years?

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well this piece of shit is about to be educated.

Yes well done Mr. Lynch Mob.

FEOS wrote:

jord wrote:

I wanted to kill people when I was 15, I didn't though, because I didn't want to fuck up the rest of my life.

Impossible.

Because you couldn't have possibly known that it was wrong to do that at the age of 15 so you couldn't have been held responsible for it.

Just ask ruisleipa.

wtf does this stupid comment mean? Are you even reading this thread, or just posting dumb comments?

Ohhh let me guess, we need to rehabilitate him right? Make him a useful member of society again right? Society is meant for people that do not commit crimes against their fellow citizens, society is for people that contribute to it. Society is for people that help each other help themselves.

Society is not for entertaining criminals, parasites, and everything that generally detracts from that society.

We all know the difference between right and wrong, and we are judged and treated accordingly, by those decsions we make. I have no problem with that. Why would you?

ROGUEDD wrote:

lowing wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well this piece of shit is about to be educated.

Yes well done Mr. Lynch Mob.


wtf does this stupid comment mean? Are you even reading this thread, or just posting dumb comments?

Ohhh let me guess, we need to rehabilitate him right? Make him a useful member of society again right? Society is meant for people that do not commit crimes against their fellow citizens, society is for people that contribute to it. Society is for people that help each other help themselves.

Society is not for entertaining criminals, parasites, and everything that generally detracts from that society.

We all know the difference between right and wrong, and we are judged and treated accordingly, by those decisions we make. I have no problem with that. Why would you?

Lowing, get over yourself and swallow your pride for a minute. Rus has not said once in this thread that the kid doesn't deserve punishment, or that he doesn't deserve punishment equivalent to his actions. What he's been saying is that the kid deserves to be punished for the crime he's committed, just not as an adult would be. This goes for FEOs as well.

and I already asked what kind of punishment you hand down for attempted murder on a person that he says doesn't know the difference between right and wrong. You want to differenciate between adult and teen ager yet you have not yet stated a difference in punishment

Because I don't study law. Do you? If not, then please, go contact someone who does and get the answer from them.

ROGUEDD wrote:

Because I don't study law. Do you? If not, then please, go contact someone who does and get the answer from them.

We seem to know enough as to form an opinion about a 15 year old charged with attempted murder. You are full of opinion about what he should and should not be considered while trying him without know shit about him. Why stop short on how to punish him?

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

stomping a kids head into the ground with a steel toed boot? Yeah I can think of a punishment. Here is a hint, he wouldn't be getting out at 21 with a clean record.

So you consider only the act itself to be worthy of disapproval, with no regard for motives or other relative factors? Would it be worse or better if it were a steel pipe? Or a non-steel toed boot? Or Adidas?

lol I just don't know what to say to that bizarre comment.

lowing wrote:

We seem to know enough as to form an opinion about a 15 year old charged with attempted murder. You are full of opinion about what he should and should not be considered while trying him without know shit about him. Why stop short on how to punish him?

Well you're forming an opinion about him, I can't speak for the other guy but I'm just saying he shouldn't be tried as an adult, which is what the OP was about, remember? Jeez you're in a bad mood today.

I'm sorry, I didn't know you could find some justification in attempted murder. I didn't know there would be circumstances, warranting stomping a defensless person head into the ground.

Yeah I remember, you don't wnat him tried as an adult but you have no idea as to what to do with him after if you try him as a kid who doesn't know the difference between right and wrong

3 lads at my old school broke a kids neck (everyone was about 14). They said they didn't know what they were doing, but i remember how one of them was grinning as he was jumping on this kids neck. They got removed from the school (obviously), but no criminal charges as far as i know

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

I'm sorry, I didn't know you could find some justification in attempted murder. I didn't know there would be circumstances, warranting stomping a defensless person head into the ground.

Yeah I remember, you don't wnat him tried as an adult but you have no idea as to what to do with him after if you try him as a kid who doesn't know the difference between right and wrong

I'm not saying any situation warrants it - although I'm pretty sure you would say that if an intruder came into your house then stomping his/her head into the ground would be acceptable. I would disagree, mind you.

But again, this is an internet forum, not a court of law or a collection of lawyers. I don't know enough about the law and sentencing to say exactly what punishment this kid should get in this particular situation, apart from anything else because we don't know everything about the case. The fact that I'm not going to state a specific punishment doesn't detract from my original argument, vis-a-vis not trying and sentencing children as adults. So in fact, you don't remember at all.

yeah ya did say it....."So you consider only the act itself to be worthy of disapproval, with no regard for motives or other relative factors"

or was this supposed to mean something else?

lowing wrote:

yeah ya did say it....."So you consider only the act itself to be worthy of disapproval, with no regard for motives or other relative factors"

or was this supposed to mean something else?

errr...no I didn't say that any situation warrants someone's head being kicked in with a boot, steel-toed or otherwise, although I did point out that you probably do think that would be reasonable punishment for an intruder in your home, for instance.

The quote in your post meant what it said. The full quote was this:

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

stomping a kids head into the ground with a steel toed boot? Yeah I can think of a punishment. Here is a hint, he wouldn't be getting out at 21 with a clean record.

So you consider only the act itself to be worthy of disapproval, with no regard for motives or other relative factors? Would it be worse or better if it were a steel pipe?

Your statement was that stomping someone's head into the ground (does it matter she was a minor as well? Or is that also irrelevant?) is always worthy of a specific punishment, so YOU are the one saying the act itself is the thing to disapprove of, with no regards to any other relevant factors. The sentence you quoted was more of a clarification of YOUR position.

Fine, but I'm saying that the punishment should fit the crime. No two crimes are exactly the same. Some may be of a more heinous nature than others and deserve more punishment, and vice versa. Here, right now, on this forum we don't know enough to state what the punishment for this kid should be. I say that as a matter of principal, children, inlcuding fifteen-year olds, shouldn't be tried and sentenced as adults. I go further and say that we should make the age of adult criminal responsibility and the voting age the same.

What exactly are you arguing, other than taking some quotes of mine and distorting them, saying how this guy should rot in prison, or in general being in a really bad mood?

lowing wrote:

To be clear, if someone broke into my home, and I am able, I will shoot to kill and I will make sure he is a dead as fuckin' door knob. I will not waste time and energy stomping him.

Yes of course circumstances matters, however in this case, the guy went to school saught victim out and stomped his/her head into the ground. This was calculated, he had time to cool off before he committed a "crime of passion". It was thought out and executed. There is no circumstances that warrant this behavior. Sorry.

What if your gun fails? Would yo get the stomp on? Whatever, you accept my point obviously, that circumstances matter to the sentencing, yes?

I agree he deserves punishment. I do NOT agree that he should be tried and sentenced in the same way as an adult (although this does not mean that he would not receive the same sentence as an adult) by virtue of his age, and I've explained why. I take it you disagree with my position entirely, or is it only some situations where a young accused should be treated as an adult for judicial purposes?

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

To be clear, if someone broke into my home, and I am able, I will shoot to kill and I will make sure he is a dead as fuckin' door knob. I will not waste time and energy stomping him.

Yes of course circumstances matters, however in this case, the guy went to school saught victim out and stomped his/her head into the ground. This was calculated, he had time to cool off before he committed a "crime of passion". It was thought out and executed. There is no circumstances that warrant this behavior. Sorry.

What if your gun fails? Would yo get the stomp on? Whatever, you accept my point obviously, that circumstances matter to the sentencing, yes?

I agree he deserves punishment. I do NOT agree that he should be tried and sentenced in the same way as an adult (although this does not mean that he would not receive the same sentence as an adult) by virtue of his age, and I've explained why. I take it you disagree with my position entirely, or is it only some situations where a young accused should be treated as an adult for judicial purposes?

Malevolent, violently malicious, calculating teenagers should be treated as an adult. Such as it is with this guy.

If my gun fails, no worries I have others ...seriously I understand your point, and yes if it came down to hand to hand, if I am able, I will struggle to the death to protect my family and my home. but  Iam sure it will never come to that, I will shoot him or he will shoot me. I am pretty sure I will be shooting first however.

FEOS wrote:

What it means is that at age 15 one absolutely DOES understand the difference between right and wrong and the consequences of crossing that line. That there is a distinct difference between beating someone up and repeatedly kicking them in the head as they are lying on the ground, not fighting back.

Yes you should understand the difference between right and wrong. No, a fifteen-year old does NOT understand the ramifications of his actions in the same way we assume an adult criminal to have weighed up the pros and cons.

Again, I am not saying he shouldn't be punished, possibly receiving a sentence equivalent to what an adult might receive. But the process of arriving at that sentence should not take place under the same strictures under which an adult would be tried. Because he is 15.

FEOS wrote:

Of course I'm reading the posts. Are you? Or are you just getting butthurt and reacting emotionally to every response?

If you bothered to read my posts you would then see that I haven't said he shouldn't be held responsible at all, so this hilarious pastiche of my arguments:

FEOS wrote:

Because you couldn't have possibly known that it was wrong to do that at the age of 15 so you couldn't have been held responsible for it.

...is bollocks.

FEOS wrote:

When a 15 year old behaves as an adult, thay have to deal with the adult ramifications of their actions. Whether that be beating someone within an inch of/to death, making a baby, or any number of other choices they make. Because like it or not, unless it's self-defense, it's a choice.

Wtf. 'Behaves like an adult'? What, when they start walking? Like I've said before (you said you read the thread yeah?), I believe that a person should be tried as an adult when they are of voting age, because at that point you enter a social contract with the state. Admittedly you might not want to vote, but that's by the by. The state says you can partake in political life and have some say in the country, so now you're fully responsible. Any other age limit is just ad hoc. My opinion.

DrunkFace wrote:

You don't need to know the law to have an opinion. After all the law is just someone else's opinion.

Well, the law is society's 'opinion', and often it's wrong anyway, but I see your point.

DrunkFace wrote:

As for what my opinion of a suitable punishment is for what I know about the case. 15 years, with mandatory monthly psychiatric evaluation because he is clearly an aggressive violent sociopath.

Riight. Aggressive, violent sociopath. OK I admit he's clearly not the nicest bloke ever but barring a full psychiatric evaluation you can't say that with any certainty - it's just a knee-jerk reaction to an article you saw on the internet. Have you studied psychology or anything? No?

DrunkFace wrote:

As for charging people as adults or juveniles, I think it's complete load of bullshit. There are only 2 things that matter in any crime, the crime itself and the motive. If a 3 year old butchers some old lady because they were told to get of her lawn, then I want that 3 year old in prison rotting like any other murderer.

Just...wow.

Can't really think of anything to say to that tbh.

Last edited by ruisleipa (2010-03-25 11:42:54)