Lotta_Drool
Spit
+350|6550|Ireland

11 Bravo wrote:

well you said as a juror....i know if i said life it would get chopped to 30 years or something.
Well, I don't think he could be convicted of murder.  Perhaps negligent homicide in which the penalty would be limited to a few years most likely. There are a lot of people that feel like shit after they do something wrong, so like Bravo said it shouldn't matter if the law is broken.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,818|6473|eXtreme to the maX

Turquoise wrote:

If there was an epidemic of people bringing their children to gun shows and accidentally killing them, then I suppose there would be harsher laws involving that too.
Why would there need to be an 'epidemic' before you would take action?
The kid is dead, there is a clear chain of negligence, it needs to be dealt with.
All it takes is one juror to say "not guilty", and then the guy gets off.
Doesn't the US have majority verdicts?
Fuck Israel
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6772|North Carolina

Dilbert_X wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

If there was an epidemic of people bringing their children to gun shows and accidentally killing them, then I suppose there would be harsher laws involving that too.
Why would there need to be an 'epidemic' before you would take action?
The kid is dead, there is a clear chain of negligence, it needs to be dealt with.
What is there to deal with beyond the cop's bad judgment?

Dilbert_X wrote:

Doesn't the US have majority verdicts?
...not for criminal convictions.  All you need is a majority for civil cases, but a felony criminal case requires a consensus by the jury.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hung_jury
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,818|6473|eXtreme to the maX
Ah OK, outside the US 10-2 is often enough.
What is there to deal with beyond the cop's bad judgment?
The fact a kid is dead as a result? Its not as if he served warm lemonade instead of cold.
Fuck Israel
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6772|North Carolina

Dilbert_X wrote:

Ah OK, outside the US 10-2 is often enough.
What is there to deal with beyond the cop's bad judgment?
The fact a kid is dead as a result? Its not as if he served warm lemonade instead of cold.
So a father makes a bad decision that ends up killing his son, and you want to throw him in jail?   I understand that a trial must be held for formality, but punishing him further seems to be a bit much, don't you think?

It would be different if this was intentional.

Last edited by Turquoise (2011-01-08 20:36:49)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,818|6473|eXtreme to the maX

Turquoise wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Ah OK, outside the US 10-2 is often enough.
What is there to deal with beyond the cop's bad judgment?
The fact a kid is dead as a result? Its not as if he served warm lemonade instead of cold.
So a father makes a bad decision that ends up killing his son, and you want to throw him in jail?
Yes, to discourage others from being reckless and justice must be served evenly.
The boy was his wife's son too. He had a responsibility to her as well as his son, and to innocent bystanders who could have been killed by an eight year old with a micro-uzi.
I understand that a trial must be held for formality, but punishing him further seems to be a bit much, don't you think?
No.
Fuck Israel
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6772|North Carolina

Dilbert_X wrote:

Yes, to discourage others from being reckless and justice must be served evenly.
The boy was his wife's son too. He had a responsibility to her as well as his son, and to innocent bystanders who could have been killed by an eight year old with a micro-uzi.
Ok then...   I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one....
Lotta_Drool
Spit
+350|6550|Ireland

Turquoise wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Yes, to discourage others from being reckless and justice must be served evenly.
The boy was his wife's son too. He had a responsibility to her as well as his son, and to innocent bystanders who could have been killed by an eight year old with a micro-uzi.
Ok then...   I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one....
Actually you don't, because Dilbert is obviously correct.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6772|North Carolina
lol...  Well, that's a compelling argument.
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|7063|NJ
Wow just wow. The amount of "lets lock everyone up" nuts. By chance do you people live in a free country?

I sure wish I did, it's retarded to think that ones personal choices should cause someone who had nothing to do with it be charged with a crime.

If I parked my car on the side of a road and someone got pushed into it and died should I be blamed cause my car was there?
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6837
'free country' is not a catch-all term for 'have no fucking personal responsibility'.

you cannot cite the fact that you live in a free country as an excuse for negligently giving a little kid a fully automatic weapon to shoot.

that's like letting your toddler take a stroll on the freeway and then saying "meh, free country! he can go where he likes!"

as dilbert said there's a compelling legal argument to punish the guy to set a public-moral example
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
JahManRed
wank
+646|6995|IRELAND

" Spano was 15 at the time of the Massachusetts gun expo and was put in charge of allowing people to fire the 9 mm Micro Uzi"
Guilty. What the fuck is a 15yo doing handing out guns? A 15year old in charge of deciding who gets to fire an Uzi. Unbelievable. Both the father and the guy who set up the expo should both be charged, but im sure the father has been punished enough for his stupidity..

It shocks me that in the US it seams like a rights of passage thing that you must get a gun into your kids hand at as early an age as possible, so they can drunkenly boast to your mates about it. Their are idiots like that in Europe too. Only thing is the law is so strict on guns that this wouldn't happen. A minor in charge of any gun just wouldn't happen.

I had to handle an Air Rifle from 16-18 before my dad would let me near a proper gun. And at that it was a .22 bolt action. He has to spend 2 full days a year with the Police fire arms officer doing safety inspections etc. If the police even suspected that anyone but him, doesn't matter what age or experience as much as touched his guns they would take the licence & guns from him.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,818|6473|eXtreme to the maX

Turquoise wrote:

Wow just wow. The amount of "lets lock everyone up" nuts. By chance do you people live in a free country?
No-one is calling for 'everyone' to be locked up, just the people whose negligence led to the death of an eight-year-old.

Uzique wrote:

as dilbert said there's a compelling legal argument to punish the guy to set a public-moral example
Not so much set the standard, more to maintain it - people need reminding now and then.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-01-10 03:43:02)

Fuck Israel
DrunkFace
Germans did 911
+427|7048|Disaster Free Zone

Dilbert_X wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Wow just wow. The amount of "lets lock everyone up" nuts. By chance do you people live in a free country?
No-one is calling for 'everyone' to be locked up, just the people whose negligence led to the death of an eight-year-old.
Lock the eight-year-old up.
DrunkFace
Germans did 911
+427|7048|Disaster Free Zone

Turquoise wrote:

lol...  Well, that's a compelling argument.
Your argument is pretty good also.

Turquoise wrote:

If there was an epidemic of people bringing their children to gun shows and accidentally killing them, then I suppose there would be harsher laws involving that too.  Since that's not the case, we have to look at it as an isolated incident with tragic consequences.

I say the father has been through enough.
Because it doesn't happen much it shouldn't be prosecuted. You know what else doesn't happen much? Cannibalism.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6772|North Carolina

Uzique wrote:

'free country' is not a catch-all term for 'have no fucking personal responsibility'.

you cannot cite the fact that you live in a free country as an excuse for negligently giving a little kid a fully automatic weapon to shoot.

that's like letting your toddler take a stroll on the freeway and then saying "meh, free country! he can go where he likes!"

as dilbert said there's a compelling legal argument to punish the guy to set a public-moral example
I think the kid's death already set that example.  Further punishment is excessive.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6772|North Carolina

DrunkFace wrote:

Because it doesn't happen much it shouldn't be prosecuted. You know what else doesn't happen much? Cannibalism.
This is just getting ridiculous.  I'm done with this thread.
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6909|Texas - Bigger than France
wtf is a eight year old doing at a gun show?  and shooting a gun?

I'm pretty sure the organizer is guilty.  I'm pretty sure the dad should be in jail due to child protective services issues
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5626|foggy bottom
i was 5 years old the first time i shot at a range.
Tu Stultus Es
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5626|foggy bottom
was a .380 constable and a .22 rifle though
Tu Stultus Es
Lotta_Drool
Spit
+350|6550|Ireland

JahManRed wrote:

" Spano was 15 at the time of the Massachusetts gun expo and was put in charge of allowing people to fire the 9 mm Micro Uzi"
Guilty. What the fuck is a 15yo doing handing out guns? A 15year old in charge of deciding who gets to fire an Uzi. Unbelievable. Both the father and the guy who set up the expo should both be charged, but im sure the father has been punished enough for his stupidity..

It shocks me that in the US it seams like a rights of passage thing that you must get a gun into your kids hand at as early an age as possible, so they can drunkenly boast to your mates about it. Their are idiots like that in Europe too. Only thing is the law is so strict on guns that this wouldn't happen. A minor in charge of any gun just wouldn't happen.

I had to handle an Air Rifle from 16-18 before my dad would let me near a proper gun. And at that it was a .22 bolt action. He has to spend 2 full days a year with the Police fire arms officer doing safety inspections etc. If the police even suspected that anyone but him, doesn't matter what age or experience as much as touched his guns they would take the licence & guns from him.
The have to be real careful with guns in Ireland because you don't want a population of angry drunkards armed.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5953

JahManRed wrote:

It shocks me that in the US it seams like a rights of passage thing that you must get a gun into your kids hand at as early an age as possible, so they can drunkenly boast to your mates about it.
You know there is 50 states and each region of the U.S. have slightly(can't stress that word enough) different cultures?
Rates of gun ownership vary greatly by region and by state, with gun ownership tending to be most common in Alaska, the Mountain States and the South and least common in Hawaii, the island territories and the Northeast megalopolis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of … s#Firearms
I know more people who have never seen a gun up close then people who have seen one let alone shot it. I live in the northeast btw.
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|7063|NJ

eleven bravo wrote:

was a .380 constable and a .22 rifle though
Did you shot someone or yourself? Was it under your parents supervision and/or would you like for a child of yours to share in that experiance?
Lotta_Drool
Spit
+350|6550|Ireland

eleven bravo wrote:

i was 5 years old the first time i shot at a range.
I was a zygote when my momma stuck a .45 up her vigina and I pulled the trigger hitting a terrorist in the head.

Check out my war stories on my blog or I will be appearing here daily on the game forum. /bravoism

Last edited by Lotta_Drool (2011-01-10 13:52:22)

.:ronin:.|Patton
Respekct dad i love u always
+946|7176|Marathon, Florida Keys
Only thing i shot at that age was an air rifle.
https://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g117/patton1337/stats.jpg

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard