Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2011 11:53:26 GMT -5
When you have a young offender, he is just as naive and ignorant as you or I were when we were younger. We broke some laws if we were normal average teens. Where I come from, normal average teens obey the law. Criminals are criminals, Akamai. No exceptions.
|
|
|
Post by akamai on Nov 29, 2011 12:03:09 GMT -5
I think what Joe and Jumbo need to realize, are the circumstances with certain crimes. Let me give a couple of examples.
1. A young person is raised by average law abiding parents, and for thrills, acceptance by peers, or some form of negative recognition, he commits a heinous crime. He went to a good school, yet he fell through the cracks in our societiy.
2. A young person is raised in the ghetto. From as far back as he can remember, he has lived in poverty, has been exposed to adults who often commit crimes, has parents that are unemployed, possibly served prison time, and live in poverty. He goes to a school within the ghettos, and are exposed to peers who have the same exposure. He might do drugs because of his frustrations, not being able to work, because of his label, or because he is under-nourished because he comes from a poor family.
Both 1 and 2, may commit the very same crimes, but should they be punished equally? Of course, a person who is raised in the ghetto can become a law abiding and upstanding citizen, because some of them do. What about most of them? Of course, someone who was raised with better conditions can commit the same crimes as someone who was raised in the ghetto, but what about most of them?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2011 12:08:31 GMT -5
reasons do not equal excuses......reasons are important because some times the reason indicate a sociatatal or mental ill which can be rectifyed and thus prevent further assults/thefts/murders etc etc You just contradicted yourself, Mouse. If a mentally ill person can be held solely responsible for his criminal behavior, then it doesn't matter why he committed a crime. Each and every one of us can justify an act of murder. I trust you, as I trust each of my fellow citizens, not to do it. Let's say you commit a murder, and I just have to know why you did it. In asking, I am tacitly acknowledging partial responsiblity for your crime. By telling you it's important to know why you committed murder, I am telling you that it's not entirely your responsibility for having done it. ie a man attacked my son 2..from behind and then kicked his head.....the reason.... he was mentally deranged and is now in a secure unit If the man who attacks and kills your son is legally insane, there's nothing you could have done about it anyway. The killer is blameless and goes to a hospital. If the man who attacks and kills your son is NOT insane, it means his act of murder was one of personal volition -- he had a choice.To the extent you pathologize murder, you excuse it. the reason equates to mitigating circumstance reasons are not excuses but are valid when looking at crime to determin punishment or to determin treatment Mitigating circumstances are always excuses. The choice is between committing a crime and not committing a crime. It's either/or, yes/no. It's always that simple. when a child is naughty..the first thing most parents ask is ""why did you do so and so"" Well, mothers do that. Fathers don't. So criminals are nothing more than naughty children? and while every crime is a violation..the reasons can be multiple as to what led to the violation of law Yes, but they don't matter in court, at least not where I live. ie a car doing well over the sppeed limit and then you find it contains some one desparate to get to hospital ie pain or stab wound ior accident etc Technically, that would not be speeding, in California. The law allows for exigent circumstances. Those exceptions don't apply in felonies. If you rob a bank, you can't list as a "mitigating circumstance" that you needed the money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2011 12:15:42 GMT -5
Both 1 and 2, may commit the very same crimes, but should they be punished equally? Yes, of course. Of course, a person who is raised in the ghetto can become a law abiding and upstanding citizen, because some of them do. What about most of them? Of course, someone who was raised with better conditions can commit the same crimes as someone who was raised in the ghetto, but what about most of them? I've heard this racist crap all my life. Your views, Akamai, are as morally repugnant to me as those of any Nazi. I was raised in the ghetto, Akamai, back in the 1960s. The majority of ghetto residents are law-abiding. You slander them by excusing the actions of those that prey upon them.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Nov 29, 2011 12:35:47 GMT -5
how is why someone is murdered relevant? In Europe it does make a difference. What if you were driven to it and were justifiable homicide? Would you still bay for your pound of flesh? Your world is just too black and white, jumbo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2011 12:41:42 GMT -5
In Europe it does make a difference. What if you were driven to it and were justifiable homicide? Would you still bay for your pound of flesh? Although I am loathe to agree with Gomer, there is no such thing as being "driven" to murder. The law requires, and legitimately expects, moral restraint from all citizens.
|
|
|
Post by akamai on Nov 29, 2011 13:32:30 GMT -5
Both 1 and 2, may commit the very same crimes, but should they be punished equally? Yes, of course. Of course, a person who is raised in the ghetto can become a law abiding and upstanding citizen, because some of them do. What about most of them? Of course, someone who was raised with better conditions can commit the same crimes as someone who was raised in the ghetto, but what about most of them? I've heard this racist crap all my life. Your views, Akamai, are as morally repugnant to me as those of any Nazi. I was raised in the ghetto, Akamai, back in the 1960s. The majority of ghetto residents are law-abiding. You slander them by excusing the actions of those that prey upon them. Joe, you are a racist. There are all kinds of people of all different races in the ghetto. You should know that. Of course, the majority of the people in the ghetto are law abiding. Most people from EVERYWHERE are law abiding. Now, are you telling me there are more criminals who come from average families than there are criminals coming from the ghetto??? Were you really raised in the ghetto? Doesn't look like it to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2011 14:18:29 GMT -5
There are all kinds of people of all different races in the ghetto. You should know that. I do. I was one of the few white people in my neighborhood. Of course, the majority of the people in the ghetto are law abiding. Most people from EVERYWHERE are law abiding. So why go soft on murderers from certain neighborhoods? are you telling me there are more criminals who come from average families than there are criminals coming from the ghetto? Why aren't ghetto families average? Furthermore, what difference does it make?
|
|
|
Post by akamai on Nov 29, 2011 14:20:18 GMT -5
how is why someone is murdered relevant? In Europe it does make a difference. What if you were driven to it and were justifiable homicide? Would you still bay for your pound of flesh? Your world is just too black and white, jumbo. Hi Fretslider, In the US it does make a difference also. There are degrees of murder, and justifiable homicide. The European social system is better as far as crime though. There is far less crime in Europe than there is in the US. The US is better as far as its economic system, but in order to achieve that, you need free enterprise, which means some will live in poverty.
|
|
|
Post by akamai on Nov 29, 2011 14:26:14 GMT -5
JP> Why aren't ghetto families average?
AK> Because they have less money.
JP> Furthermore, what difference does it make?
AK> It makes a huge difference, because if you don't need any money, it is less tempting to rob or steal.
Joe, if you say you were from one of the few white families from the ghetto, then you should know there are all kinds of races in the ghetto. ALL of the law abiding in the ghetto are from lower than average family incomes, or they wouldn't be there.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Nov 29, 2011 15:01:24 GMT -5
the WHY is always relevent whether its murder..theft or what ever the WHY rarely excuses but the reasons are always important the why NEVER excuses, so it's never important. because someone is poor and can't buy new shoes is NEVER an excuse to steal them. same goes for every other crime. the ONLY thing that is relevant is the fact that an inherently worthless individual chose to commit it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2011 15:02:22 GMT -5
It makes a huge difference, because if you don't need any money, it is less tempting to rob or steal. I get the picture now. If you're in a very low tax bracket, like me, it's acceptable to steal. Especially if you're black. Yes, that makes perfect sense in a Mein Kampf sort-of way.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Nov 29, 2011 15:32:38 GMT -5
If every crime is one of volition, why are the reasons important? Reasons = excuses. a = areasons do not equal excuses......reasons are important because some times the reason indicate a sociatatal or mental ill which can be rectifyed and thus prevent further assults/thefts/murders etc etc ie a man attacked my son 2..from behind and then kicked his head.....the reason.... he was mentally deranged and is now in a secure unit...thus preventing him from attacking some one else or say a boy/girl bullied at school who then snap and turn on the bullies causing harm...the reason equates to mitigating circumstance reasons are not excuses but are valid when looking at crime to determin punishment or to determin treatment etc etc when a child is naughty..the first thing most parents ask is ""why did you do so and so"" and while every crime is a violation..the reasons can be multiple as to what led to the violation of law ie a car doing well over the sppeed limit and then you find it contains some one desparate to get to hospital ie pain or stab wound ior accident etc ..so yes a violation but for a viable reason was the punk who attacked your son mentally deranged, or was he legally insane? unless an individual is legally insane, according to mcnaughten, he is TOTALLY culpable for everything he does. mental illness does NOT mitigate any crime. unless the clown actually does not know that what he is doing is wrong, he is completely responsible. in the case of turning on a bully, that is self defense.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Nov 29, 2011 15:46:13 GMT -5
how is why someone is murdered relevant? of course most older murderers are not gang bangers. that is also irrelevant. the fact that a kid is so inherently worthless that he joins a gang to begin with, makes his crime a thousand times worse than the older murderer, and there is NO atonement for him, or any other first degree murderer. juvenile courts are for piddly crimes to begin with. they are not set up for murder cases, which is precisely why aggregious murders are tried in adult court. ALL first degree murders should be, regardless of the circumstances, as well as ALL violent felonies of any kind Jim, A while back, we had a traffic fatality. Two teens were drag racing on a highway, one lost control, crashed his car, and his female passenger died. Of course, it was stupid, but as old as I am, I am still young enough to remember that drag racing on the streets were very common when I was young, and in fact, I did it too. I was just lucky that I didn't kill anyone or myself. When you have a young offender, he is just as naive and ignorant as you or I were when we were younger. We broke some laws if we were normal average teens. A young offender may be exposed to things far worse than we were, and that should be a consideration. A person who commits a crime might be rehabilitated, so punishment should be considered on a case by case basis. The juvenile is apt to make more mistakes than an adult. i did some stupid stuff when i was younger. luckily, no one ever got seriously hurt. however, the fact is that, had someone gotten hurt or killed, i wouldn't have had a bitch coming. nonetheless, your example is not a case of intentionally committing a murder. in california, it could be charged as second degree murder, but probably would only be charged as vehicular homicide, with a max of fifteen years.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Nov 29, 2011 15:56:39 GMT -5
I think what Joe and Jumbo need to realize, are the circumstances with certain crimes. Let me give a couple of examples. 1. A young person is raised by average law abiding parents, and for thrills, acceptance by peers, or some form of negative recognition, he commits a heinous crime. He went to a good school, yet he fell through the cracks in our societiy. 2. A young person is raised in the ghetto. From as far back as he can remember, he has lived in poverty, has been exposed to adults who often commit crimes, has parents that are unemployed, possibly served prison time, and live in poverty. He goes to a school within the ghettos, and are exposed to peers who have the same exposure. He might do drugs because of his frustrations, not being able to work, because of his label, or because he is under-nourished because he comes from a poor family. Both 1 and 2, may commit the very same crimes, but should they be punished equally? Of course, a person who is raised in the ghetto can become a law abiding and upstanding citizen, because some of them do. What about most of them? Of course, someone who was raised with better conditions can commit the same crimes as someone who was raised in the ghetto, but what about most of them? huh uh. first of all, what cracks did the "normal" boy fall through? he had the education, and has no excuse. peer pressure does NOT excuse anything. neither does thrills, or wanting negative recognition. the simple fact is that he chose to commit a crime because he is an inherently worthless individual. realistically, the same goes for the ghetto boy. there is no one growing up in a ghetto now that is poorer than i was, and i never robbed a liquor store or stole a car. there is no one growing up in the ghetto any poorer than the kids in appalachia, but the crime rate in appalachia is a quarter of the crime rate in watts or harlem. the simple FACT is that there is NO societal or environmental cause of crime. the ONLY cause of crime is the worthlessness of the individual who chooses to be a criminal
|
|