I always find it interesting how the under-eighteen set is considered too young to make mature decisions on such things as having sex, drinking, signing contracts, and so on, but when it comes to throwing them in prison…
This reminds me of that British girl who was arrested because she joked about having a bomb.
As much as I hate to say it the world is serious place and you gotta be careful because not everyone knows when you’re joking, or even shares your taste in humor.
Now is an 8 year sentence excessive? Hell yes.
rapists and murders can get less.
Not only is punishment cruel and by precedence unusual to the youth. It’s also fucked up for victims of rape, and the survivors of murder victims.
How would you feel if the person that violated you in a most personal way got half the sentence of some kid making a prank call?
The implication would be the severe trauma you went through wasn’t as important as some one else’s prank call.
This sentence is not excessive. The punishments that murderers and rapist get are to light. They should be executed.
Light sentences are fucked up. At least this one was pretty good. We should not give this criminal a lighter sentence to match it to sentences that are too light.
The most important fact that we know is that the kid didn’t have a gun.
Add to that, he made the call on the bus in front of a bunch of other kids. Typical occurence at the middle and high schools I went to. “Bad” kid gets talked into doing something “bad” by the “good” kids for their amusement. We got bomb and shooting threats on a monthly basis and when they occasionally caught the kid who did it he would get a few days out of school suspension and a stern talking-to from the police. Maybe that wasn’t quite stern enough (debatable), but 8 years is way, way, WAY over the line. I agree with Drain Bead that they’re ruining this kid’s life for nothing. When he gets out he is not going to want to be a positive, contributing member of a society that has failed him. This sentence is bad for him and bad for his community in the long run.
As to making the call from a traceable phone?
That just means that he’s not too bright.
He didn’t own a gun that we know of you mean.
The crime actually did occur, the crime of making a terroristic threat.
When I was in sixth grade we had nearly a dozen bomb threats. Kids did it to get out of class, because we’d move out to the far end of the playground and have a recess atmosphere. They’d often send us home early. Yes, it’s a big deal for the school without a doubt, and when I was in 5th grade it was still the 80s, but I think this is excessive. Poor dumb kid.
You can’t have it both ways. He was so stupid that he made the call from a cell that could be traced in front of a whole bunch of witnesses, but he was enough of a criminal mastermind that no cop could ever find his gun!
Also, regarding the warning: can you find one single instance, any time, in any place, of a school shooter or a school bomber who actually called and warned the school before he carried out his deed? I sure can’t. That might not prove he wasn’t serious, but it sure says something for his actual motivation, or lack thereof.
So you keep saying. We already have not only a higher percentage of our population incarcerated than any country in the world, but also the highest raw number of people in prison - higher than a communist country that despises human rights and has quadruple our population. Kinda makes you think, doesn’t it? What? It doesn’t? And we should have more people in jail? And we should lock them up even longer? Quite the humanitarian you are - that’s all I can say.
Yea, it means we’ve executed fewer people than Stalin or Mao.
Last time I checked, those guys were dead.
Bullshit. North Korea has us beat.
If people would stop committing crimes, they would not have to go to prison.
Incarceration prevents crime. Do you want more crime?
Cite?
Cite? I mean, other than the fact that if they’re locked away, they physically can’t commit crimes.
There are over two hundred countries in the world. There might possibly be one that locks up more of its citizens than us, but that can’t be proven. Officially, we’re still number one. And the lesson you take away from that is that we’re just not tough enough on criminals?! What the fuck, man? What the fuck…?
So… pretty much exactly what I said, along with the fact that NK might have more prisoners, but it can’t be proven, and that, whatever the case, our numbers are disturbingly high. I’m not sure what else you expected me to take away from that article.
Many states “allow” or at least don’t have a statute on sex between consenting underage kids.
As for contracts, underage people can’t sign a legally binding contract because it’s likely that the information they’re signing could be made confusing by the contractor. There is nothing confusing about “You do not call up someone else and threaten to murder them.” That is not a prank and no legal age mumbojumbo can change the fact that something like that is common knowledge.
Can you provide us with information about your assertion? I"m not convinced you’re correct, here.
I didn’t go down the whole list, but Alaska and Arkansas both seem to have such statutes. I’m sure many other states do as well.
It’s a strawman anyway. If under-eighteens were adults they’d be allowed to have sex with adults. I don’t think sex with other kids was Frank’s premise.
Why not? His premise that this is somehow not a serious crime is that Tyler was “only 17 and not an adult.”
And it’s the rare state that seems to not allow sex between 17 year olds and “adults.”