So the same goes for 17-2 year olds. Don't think so. Ryan I wouldn't go so far as to discount the mother immediately. If she had prior knowledge of these kids character (They were caught with this tape while being arrested on theft charges) I think she should be accountable as well. You don't knowingly leave your child with criminals, even if they are family.Bertster7 wrote:
Whatever the usual penalty for supplying drugs to minors is.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-03-05 17:16:54)
Not to mention the grand theft charges for the stolen shit they found in thier home, including the camera with this video on it. They are FUCT!Sondernkommando wrote:
Apparently, they are being charged with a class C felony - harming a minor - which is 2 to 10 years in jail.
Plus, they are being given multiple charges, one for each kid.
On top of the drug possession charges.
Cya! Don't bend over for the soap!
It was funny in the other thread....not so much in this one...
That's why there are a range of sentences that can be applied. Clearly for a crime like this the maximum penalty should be used, whereas letting a 17 year old have some weed, whilst still technically the same, would be at totally the other end of the range of available sentences.Kmarion wrote:
So the same goes for 17-2 year olds. Don't think so.Bertster7 wrote:
Whatever the usual penalty for supplying drugs to minors is.
Agreed. But I'm gunna laugh anyways.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
It was funny in the other thread....not so much in this one...
I agree, I was just trying to point out that the if we can't protect the most innocent amongst us what chance does humanity have?Bertster7 wrote:
That's why there are a range of sentences that can be applied. Clearly for a crime like this the maximum penalty should be used, whereas letting a 17 year old have some weed, whilst still technically the same, would be at totally the other end of the range of available sentences.Kmarion wrote:
So the same goes for 17-2 year olds. Don't think so.Bertster7 wrote:
Whatever the usual penalty for supplying drugs to minors is.
What would the usual penalty be in the US? It varies from state to state doesn't it, but I'd imagine the maximum penalty is at least a few years.
That's enough.
Don't get me wrong, it's bad, really bad. But it's not up there with murdering people or armed robbery.
Lmao yeah good point wow is that actually possible having no neck, death sentence!Fen321 wrote:
LOL.... the reporter has no neck....just had to get that out.
As for the teenagers -- well -- sadly i think the MJ laws are waaay too sever for what the crime entails, but in all honesty some form of punishment should be given out considering the age of the children.
SINCE WHEN IS MJ A NARCOTIC?!?!?!?
Well, at least there was no malice to it....Kmarion wrote:
I agree, I was just trying to point out that the if we can't protect the most innocent amongst us what chance does humanity have?Bertster7 wrote:
That's why there are a range of sentences that can be applied. Clearly for a crime like this the maximum penalty should be used, whereas letting a 17 year old have some weed, whilst still technically the same, would be at totally the other end of the range of available sentences.Kmarion wrote:
So the same goes for 17-2 year olds. Don't think so.
What would the usual penalty be in the US? It varies from state to state doesn't it, but I'd imagine the maximum penalty is at least a few years.
That's enough.
Don't get me wrong, it's bad, really bad. But it's not up there with murdering people or armed robbery.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-03-05 17:33:44)
Sure it is, not only are we talking about physical effects but also encouraging unacceptable behavior and lawlessness. No matter where you stand on the legalization issue it is showing a child that if you disagree with the law it is ok to do as you wish.Bertster7 wrote:
Well, at least there was no malice to it....Kmarion wrote:
I agree, I was just trying to point out that the if we can't protect the most innocent amongst us what chance does humanity have?Bertster7 wrote:
That's why there are a range of sentences that can be applied. Clearly for a crime like this the maximum penalty should be used, whereas letting a 17 year old have some weed, whilst still technically the same, would be at totally the other end of the range of available sentences.
What would the usual penalty be in the US? It varies from state to state doesn't it, but I'd imagine the maximum penalty is at least a few years.
That's enough.
Don't get me wrong, it's bad, really bad. But it's not up there with murdering people or armed robbery.
... and it probably isn't much worse than having a mother who smoked while pregnant.
I love that movie.DesertFox423 wrote:
"To teach you boys a lesson, Officer Rabbit and I are going to stand here and watch you three smoke the whole bag."
