This might be true that some are born broken but I feel it is a combination
of factors though not just this that makes a killer.
If someone is born into a loving family who does not ignore nor wear blinders, the broken at birth still have a chance with appropriate help. They are destined to repeat the love they know.
Those that do not stand a chance are those that are victims from birth. Unspeakable trauma that breaks even the healthiest minds. Evil begets evil.
In this case I don't think this boy is evil. His motives we can guess. I don't know how he was raised but it was a combination of factors that drove him to this.
He needs to be in a mental health treatment center for at least as long as he has walked this earth.
Into his mid twenties when the mind is actually matured enough to understand consequences
and to deal with why he perceived this woman and the unborn child as a threat.
I am hopeful he can be fixed.
I agree perfectly Pandora.
I think it is a combination of things.. and thats precisely why we cant give up on this kid. He can still be shaped. He IS still being shaped and will be for a long time.
inmytree: I dont think people in this thread are trying to rationalize what he did at all. Most are just dissecting what went wrong and trying to decide if there is a path of betterment.. Perhaps Eyed is right and he is wired wrong, but we need to dig a little deeper to figure it out before we lock him up and throw away the key.
and I respectfully disagree...I think some are trying to rationalize his behavior...this incident can be dissected many ways...at the end of the day...a pregnant women was brutally murdered...a fact that seems lost on many....
This might be true that some are born broken but I feel it is a combination
of factors though not just this that makes a killer.
If someone is born into a loving family who does not ignore nor wear blinders, the broken at birth still have a chance with appropriate help. They are destined to repeat the love they know.
Those that do not stand a chance are those that are victims from birth. Unspeakable trauma that breaks even the healthiest minds. Evil begets evil.
In this case I don't think this boy is evil. His motives we can guess. I don't know how he was raised but it was a combination of factors that drove him to this.
He needs to be in a mental health treatment center for at least as long as he has walked this earth.
Into his mid twenties when the mind is actually matured enough to understand consequences
and to deal with why he perceived this woman and the unborn child as a threat.
I am hopeful he can be fixed.
I agree perfectly Pandora.
I think it is a combination of things.. and thats precisely why we cant give up on this kid. He can still be shaped. He IS still being shaped and will be for a long time.
inmytree: I dont think people in this thread are trying to rationalize what he did at all. Most are just dissecting what went wrong and trying to decide if there is a path of betterment.. Perhaps Eyed is right and he is wired wrong, but we need to dig a little deeper to figure it out before we lock him up and throw away the key.
and I respectfully disagree...I think some are trying to rationalize his behavior...this incident can be dissected many ways...at the end of the day...a pregnant women was brutally murdered...a fact that seems lost on many....
by suggesting there is more than one way to address the 11 year old murderer we are forgetting the brutally murdered pregnant woman? is it not possible to have a differing opinion AND remember a woman was murdered?
There is definitely a problem with the judicial system of a 'civilised' country that tries children as adults in adult courts with life sentences and no chance of rehabilitation.
Just as a reminder:
"Only the US and Somalia have refused to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which rules out life sentences with no chance of release for crimes committed before the age of 18."
if the US were uncivilized this kid would have been hung by now...I think by taking the time to properly address this issue via the courts actually proves that we are a civilized nation...
If they just give the kid a 60 year sentence for blowing the head off a pregnant woman, then it will no longer conflict with the UN Convention of the Rights of a Child.
Also, it appears that the US was actively involved with drafting the Rights of the Child. It was signed but wasn't ratified because lawmakers are concerned with having International law govern our domestic policies.
If they just give the kid a 60 year sentence for blowing the head off a pregnant woman, then it will no longer conflict with the UN Convention of the Rights of a Child.
Also, it appears that the US was actively involved with drafting the Rights of the Child. It was signed but wasn't ratified because lawmakers are concerned with having International law govern our domestic policies.
But then he'd have a chance of parole, right?
And...why aren't all of the other UN members who did ratify concerned about international law trumping domestic?
The entire US prison system is considered barbaric by industrialized western standards, and rightfully so.
I agree that the simple notion of trying a child as an adult makes no logical sense at all....change the laws for children if they have no teeth. Let the democratic proccess determine how to handle these cases...don't cherry pick cases and apply a different set of rules only to certain people.
and I respectfully disagree...I think some are trying to rationalize his behavior...this incident can be dissected many ways...at the end of the day...a pregnant women was brutally murdered...a fact that seems lost on many....
If the person who had committed this awful crime was an adult with a mature brain that understood what he had done the punishment should be life in prison, in my opinion, being against the death penalty.
When a child commits this crime he needs good professional long term help from a mental institution.
Adults failed this child, society should not also by throwing his life away.
Either they didn't bother to see he was very troubled or they instigated his mental state or both.
Might be a leap but it seems logical to me. I feel indeed the adults in his very young life let him down.
There is definitely a problem with the judicial system of a 'civilised' country that tries children as adults in adult courts with life sentences and no chance of rehabilitation.
Just as a reminder:
"Only the US and Somalia have refused to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which rules out life sentences with no chance of release for crimes committed before the age of 18."
if the US were uncivilized this kid would have been hung by now...I think by taking the time to properly address this issue via the courts actually proves that we are a civilized nation...
Via the proper courts. Those suitable for a child.
If they just give the kid a 60 year sentence for blowing the head off a pregnant woman, then it will no longer conflict with the UN Convention of the Rights of a Child.
Also, it appears that the US was actively involved with drafting the Rights of the Child. It was signed but wasn't ratified because lawmakers are concerned with having International law govern our domestic policies.
But then he'd have a chance of parole, right?
And...why aren't all of the other UN members who did ratify concerned about international law trumping domestic?
The entire US prison system is considered barbaric by industrialized western standards, and rightfully so.
I agree that the simple notion of trying a child as an adult makes no logical sense at all....change the laws for children if they have no teeth. Let the democratic proccess determine how to handle these cases...don't cherry pick cases and apply a different set of rules only to certain people.
I'm not sure if Rights of Childs act is concerned with sentences without parole or life sentences without parole. Perhaps someone that can navigate their poorly laid-out website can tell us.
My opinion is anyone that premeditates a murder should be locked up for good, regardless of age. There is a reason why our streets are not filled with preschoolers at this very moment setting bums on fire. They understand killing human beings is very, very wrong. I'm sorry if the kid didn't realize he could end up spending the rest of his life in prison. Too bad for him that he couldn't understand the concept of time and punishment. But I find it very, very, very, hard to believe that he was unaware that killing someone was unacceptable and that there would be no consequence.
Plus, two years later, the little guy maintains innocence. And for those that think adults failed this kid, one of those adults received the ultimate punishment. And the other adult who is fighting for his son, if the kid is guilty, I have no problem with him getting thrown in the klink as well.
There is definitely a problem with the judicial system of a 'civilised' country that tries children as adults in adult courts with life sentences and no chance of rehabilitation.
Just as a reminder:
"Only the US and Somalia have refused to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which rules out life sentences with no chance of release for crimes committed before the age of 18."
if the US were uncivilized this kid would have been hung by now...I think by taking the time to properly address this issue via the courts actually proves that we are a civilized nation...
Via the proper courts. Those suitable for a child.
so you agree this is being handled in civil way...? right know a court is deciding how to proceed (adult vs. juvenile)...that seems pretty civilized to me...
by suggesting there is more than one way to address the 11 year old murderer we are forgetting the brutally murdered pregnant woman? is it not possible to have a differing opinion AND remember a woman was murdered?
:?
if you say this person should be out by 21 then the answer to your questions are "yes" and "no"...
if the US were uncivilized this kid would have been hung by now...I think by taking the time to properly address this issue via the courts actually proves that we are a civilized nation...
Via the proper courts. Those suitable for a child.
so you agree this is being handled in civil way...? right know a court is deciding how to proceed (adult vs. juvenile)...that seems pretty civilized to me...
yes?
Nope. A child who committed a crime should AUTOMATICALLY be tried in a juvenile court. Not the other way around, being tried in an adult court and having to appeal in order for the trial to go where it belongs for children - ie JUVENILE COURT. There is a huge difference between these two and there is a reason why the juvenile courts have been created.
if you're no expert, how can you claim a system is dysfunctional...? That's all I'm saying...if you think my comment is snide, so be it...but I stand by it...and we're not talking about a leaky pipe, we're talking about a kid you murdered a pregnant woman...
to be honest, I'm tired of debating this...you have your views, I have mine...I just happen to have some experience and you don't...but you seem to know more...that's fine...
I think the response of the judicial system in addressing this matter is appropriate...
I think it comes down to this, you want this kid walking the streets at 21...I don't...
Wow. Once again you seem to have entirely misinterpreted what I'm saying. I've already answered the question you're asking me numerous times. I'll do it again as clearly as I can.
A system that tries a child as an adult can only be a dysfunctional system. It is basing its supposed apportioning of justice on an assumtion that is entirely invalid.
The leaky pipe I'm talking about is the system, not the kid. You have completely (again) missed the point. And from the very first post, yes, it is that system that I've been talking about.
How do you justify trying a child as an adult? That is the one question I have been asking. And once again, you have completely refused to address it at all. It is not relevant to that particular question who has experience of delinquent kids and who doesn't. Yet you keep hiding behind this absurd assumption that because you have worked with them you know everything, and because I haven't my opinion is worthless and deserves your cocky little comments like "since you seem to know it all...", "you seem to know more..."
For the record, nowhere have I said anything of the sort, or claimed to "know it all". Nor is that in any way the issue here. Yet you keep dredging it up, with this high-and-mighty air - despite the fact that you keep on missing the point, crossing the wires and avoiding the question. I'm just trying to have a reasonable debate here. If you want to engage with that, fine. If you want to keep twisting what I'm saying and only answering what suits you, then good luck to you.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
I'm sorry if the kid didn't realize he could end up spending the rest of his life in prison. Too bad for him that he couldn't understand the concept of time and punishment.
You can understand how a kid wouldn't understand those concepts, but yet you expect him to have a fully developed adult sense of morality and comprehension of the enormity of life & the finality of death?!
Come on... :roll: Where's the consistency there?
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
I'm sorry if the kid didn't realize he could end up spending the rest of his life in prison. Too bad for him that he couldn't understand the concept of time and punishment.
You can understand how a kid wouldn't understand those concepts, but yet you expect him to have a fully developed adult sense of morality and comprehension of the enormity of life & the finality of death?!
Come on... :roll: Where's the consistency there?
That is an argument being made by those who think that this is just a mistake that can be corrected with a few years of counseling. Even if I truly believed he had no idea their would be no consequence (which is even more scary to think about), premeditated murder deserves severe punishment. Also, he has had TWO YEARS to comprehend his actions. Had the police shown up and he was hysterical, scared, and sorry we wouldn't even be having this conversation right now. Instead he went to school like it was a normal day. That is fucking cold and evil.
My argument against the theory that a 11 year old couldn't fully understand his actions is the rarity of such events in an American society that is saturated w/ 200M guns, knives, rocks, etc that could be used by people under the age of 18 to kill someone in their sleep.
by suggesting there is more than one way to address the 11 year old murderer we are forgetting the brutally murdered pregnant woman? is it not possible to have a differing opinion AND remember a woman was murdered?
:?
if you say this person should be out by 21 then the answer to your questions are "yes" and "no"...
as you can imagine, i respectfully disagree.
i will say i think it's crazy our only options are he's released at 21 or sits in prison for the rest of his life, but with my understanding of pennsylvania law i'll go with 21.
by suggesting there is more than one way to address the 11 year old murderer we are forgetting the brutally murdered pregnant woman? is it not possible to have a differing opinion AND remember a woman was murdered?
:?
if you say this person should be out by 21 then the answer to your questions are "yes" and "no"...
as you can imagine, i respectfully disagree.
i will say i think it's crazy our only options are he's released at 21 or sits in prison for the rest of his life, but with my understanding of pennsylvania law i'll go with 21.
if I ever lose it and take someone out I want you as my judge
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
if at 11 years old, he thinks it's ok to kill someone, what do you think he's going to be like at 30...? there are lots and lots and lots of 11 year olds out there....I don't hear of many in the position he is in....
When I was 12, I really, really, really wanted to kill my sister. Why? She kept trying to blackmail me. It wasn't the usual, "I'm going to kill you", I was literally going to kill her. I don't remember how I was going to do it, but I do remember how I was going to dispose of the body. Throw her in the dumpster in double Hefty sacks. I figured nobody ever handled the garbage, so the body would never be found and I would never get caught. I do not remember considering how I would feel about not having my sister around beyond not having her blackmailing me anymore. And, I certainly didn't consider how my mom would have been devastated. I don't remember why I never went through with it. I think my mom found out about the big secret, so my sister could no longer tell on my anyway.
When I think about how certain I was about my plan, I start to feel sick. My sister is now one of my most favorite people in the world.
When I was 12, I could have literally killed my sister. Now I'm in my thirties and I live a mostly vegan lifestyle, so I would say my perspective on life and death has definitely matured.
I have always said "we all have a taste for blood"
we always slow down to see the car crash..why ? we might see blood,
while watching a horror movie we will cover or eyes with our hands
and peek through the small gap between our fingers...we have to see it,
some people arnt afraid to look and some have the cold ability to act on their anger
I think these primal instincts for survival reasons are stored in our brains from thousands of years back
and some more than others can not control these primal instincts and act aggressively
with out fear on the consequences.
sounds a little weird I know, it's just a theory I've always thought about.
is it reasonable to assume that since this kid had a hunting rifle/shotgun sized for his age group, that he had been hunting with his father or other adult? had been trained in its use and safety?
If the above questions can be asnswered yes, then this kid was fully aware that shooting a human being in the back of the head would reasonably result in the death of that person. Ater all isnt that the purpose of a hunting firearm?
we can monday morning quarterback all day. The fact is the law of that state is what it is. Have issue with it? Move there. Become a citizen. rally like minded residents and vote to change this law. Until then.....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Fuck him. At the risk of sounding like a Republican (the horror), fuck this kid. Sounds like he's a cold-blooded killer judging strictly by the released facts.
I have always said "we all have a taste for blood"
we always slow down to see the car crash..why ? we might see blood,
while watching a horror movie we will cover or eyes with our hands
and peek through the small gap between our fingers...we have to see it,
some people arnt afraid to look and some have the cold ability to act on their anger
I think these primal instincts for survival reasons are stored in our brains from thousands of years back
and some more than others can not control these primal instincts and act aggressively
with out fear on the consequences.
sounds a little weird I know, it's just a theory I've always thought about.
Godfather.
edit.
i forgot i'm not supposed to post in here.
sorry.
is it reasonable to assume that since this kid had a hunting rifle/shotgun sized for his age group, that he had been hunting with his father or other adult? had been trained in its use and safety?
If the above questions can be asnswered yes, then this kid was fully aware that shooting a human being in the back of the head would reasonably result in the death of that person. Ater all isnt that the purpose of a hunting firearm?
we can monday morning quarterback all day. The fact is the law of that state is what it is. Have issue with it? Move there. Become a citizen. rally like minded residents and vote to change this law. Until then.....
i understand your train of thought but i'm not sure an 11 year old can understand the full weight of what it means to kill someone. when hunting an animal in the wild you're not emotionally attached to it in anyway, so you go out, kill the deer (or whatever) take it home as a prize. there was no real attachment. then a couple weeks/months later you go back out and shoot another deer, so there's no real loss. i'm not sure this kid could understand the forever aspect of shooting his step-mom, even if he was trained to use a gun. i don't know.
and just as a side note, the articles i've read suggested this rifle was newly acquired, so i'm not sure how much training this kid actually had.
and i want to be clear, i don't think this kid should be let off the hook. what he's done is horrible, there need to be consequences. i just believe it's wrong to treat an 11 year old as an adult in one instance when we won't give him the credit/responsibility/privilege as an adult in any other area.
is it reasonable to assume that since this kid had a hunting rifle/shotgun sized for his age group, that he had been hunting with his father or other adult? had been trained in its use and safety?
If the above questions can be asnswered yes, then this kid was fully aware that shooting a human being in the back of the head would reasonably result in the death of that person. Ater all isnt that the purpose of a hunting firearm?
we can monday morning quarterback all day. The fact is the law of that state is what it is. Have issue with it? Move there. Become a citizen. rally like minded residents and vote to change this law. Until then.....
i understand your train of thought but i'm not sure an 11 year old can understand the full weight of what it means to kill someone. when hunting an animal in the wild you're not emotionally attached to it in anyway, so you go out, kill the deer (or whatever) take it home as a prize. there was no real attachment. then a couple weeks/months later you go back out and shoot another deer, so there's no real loss. i'm not sure this kid could understand the forever aspect of shooting his step-mom, even if he was trained to use a gun. i don't know.
and just as a side note, the articles i've read suggested this rifle was newly acquired, so i'm not sure how much training this kid actually had.
and i want to be clear, i don't think this kid should be let off the hook. what he's done is horrible, there need to be consequences. i just believe it's wrong to treat an 11 year old as an adult in one instance when we won't give him the credit/responsibility/privilege as an adult in any other area.
newly aquired with access to it and he knew enough to know how to load it. still though, just cant get past the premeditated nature of it. back of the head, now its time to go to school like nothing happened. Dad bears his legal responsiblity too. My opinion here is tried as an adult but with the possibility of parole.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
by suggesting there is more than one way to address the 11 year old murderer we are forgetting the brutally murdered pregnant woman? is it not possible to have a differing opinion AND remember a woman was murdered?
:?
if you say this person should be out by 21 then the answer to your questions are "yes" and "no"...
as you can imagine, i respectfully disagree.
i will say i think it's crazy our only options are he's released at 21 or sits in prison for the rest of his life, but with my understanding of pennsylvania law i'll go with 21.
simple question then, when this murderer is let out at 21 are you willing to live next to him or have him in your neighborhood? I live in pennsylvania and i don't want this kid let out at 21 to live on my street or my neighborhood.
simple question then, when this murderer is let out at 21 are you willing to live next to him or have him in your neighborhood? I live in pennsylvania and i don't want this kid let out at 21 to live on my street or my neighborhood.
that's a great question. I've said all along that he shouldnt be tried as an adult, but I guess i'd be the first to admit the irony here. I wouldnt want to live next door to him ever. But although I still think he shouldnt be tried as an adult, does that mean he automatically gets out at 21 if tried as a juvenile?
He should still serve some hard time (maybe 18-20 yrs?).
newly aquired with access to it and he knew enough to know how to load it. still though, just cant get past the premeditated nature of it. back of the head, now its time to go to school like nothing happened. Dad bears his legal responsiblity too. My opinion here is tried as an adult but with the possibility of parole.
simple question then, when this murderer is let out at 21 are you willing to live next to him or have him in your neighborhood? I live in pennsylvania and i don't want this kid let out at 21 to live on my street or my neighborhood.
that's a great question. I've said all along that he shouldnt be tried as an adult, but I guess i'd be the first to admit the irony here. I wouldnt want to live next door to him ever. But although I still think he shouldnt be tried as an adult, does that mean he automatically gets out at 21 if tried as a juvenile?
He should still serve some hard time (maybe 18-20 yrs?).
i'd like to think i'd be willing to live next door because if i'm not willing to live next to him i shouldn't make anyone else. and i know it's much easier said than done, but i really believe i would be okay living next door. that's not to suggest that i wouldn't take extra precautions, but people have to live somewhere when they get out of prison.
and i agree with you mickeyrat and jonnypistachio, i think the kid should do time. 21 is too soon but i think life is too long. i suppose my real problem is the two extremes, the black or white of the sentencing. why does it have to be 21 or life without parole? 21 or 75+? there's gotta be some middle ground.
Comments
and I respectfully disagree...I think some are trying to rationalize his behavior...this incident can be dissected many ways...at the end of the day...a pregnant women was brutally murdered...a fact that seems lost on many....
by suggesting there is more than one way to address the 11 year old murderer we are forgetting the brutally murdered pregnant woman? is it not possible to have a differing opinion AND remember a woman was murdered?
:?
Also, it appears that the US was actively involved with drafting the Rights of the Child. It was signed but wasn't ratified because lawmakers are concerned with having International law govern our domestic policies.
And...why aren't all of the other UN members who did ratify concerned about international law trumping domestic?
The entire US prison system is considered barbaric by industrialized western standards, and rightfully so.
I agree that the simple notion of trying a child as an adult makes no logical sense at all....change the laws for children if they have no teeth. Let the democratic proccess determine how to handle these cases...don't cherry pick cases and apply a different set of rules only to certain people.
If the person who had committed this awful crime was an adult with a mature brain that understood what he had done the punishment should be life in prison, in my opinion, being against the death penalty.
When a child commits this crime he needs good professional long term help from a mental institution.
Adults failed this child, society should not also by throwing his life away.
I still think this is a giant assumption... No more than the ones I have presented, but still.
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
https://www.createspace.com/3437020
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000663025696
http://earthtremors.blogspot.com/
Either they didn't bother to see he was very troubled or they instigated his mental state or both.
Might be a leap but it seems logical to me. I feel indeed the adults in his very young life let him down.
Via the proper courts. Those suitable for a child.
My opinion is anyone that premeditates a murder should be locked up for good, regardless of age. There is a reason why our streets are not filled with preschoolers at this very moment setting bums on fire. They understand killing human beings is very, very wrong. I'm sorry if the kid didn't realize he could end up spending the rest of his life in prison. Too bad for him that he couldn't understand the concept of time and punishment. But I find it very, very, very, hard to believe that he was unaware that killing someone was unacceptable and that there would be no consequence.
Plus, two years later, the little guy maintains innocence. And for those that think adults failed this kid, one of those adults received the ultimate punishment. And the other adult who is fighting for his son, if the kid is guilty, I have no problem with him getting thrown in the klink as well.
so you agree this is being handled in civil way...? right know a court is deciding how to proceed (adult vs. juvenile)...that seems pretty civilized to me...
yes?
if you say this person should be out by 21 then the answer to your questions are "yes" and "no"...
Nope. A child who committed a crime should AUTOMATICALLY be tried in a juvenile court. Not the other way around, being tried in an adult court and having to appeal in order for the trial to go where it belongs for children - ie JUVENILE COURT. There is a huge difference between these two and there is a reason why the juvenile courts have been created.
Wow. Once again you seem to have entirely misinterpreted what I'm saying. I've already answered the question you're asking me numerous times. I'll do it again as clearly as I can.
A system that tries a child as an adult can only be a dysfunctional system. It is basing its supposed apportioning of justice on an assumtion that is entirely invalid.
The leaky pipe I'm talking about is the system, not the kid. You have completely (again) missed the point. And from the very first post, yes, it is that system that I've been talking about.
How do you justify trying a child as an adult? That is the one question I have been asking. And once again, you have completely refused to address it at all. It is not relevant to that particular question who has experience of delinquent kids and who doesn't. Yet you keep hiding behind this absurd assumption that because you have worked with them you know everything, and because I haven't my opinion is worthless and deserves your cocky little comments like "since you seem to know it all...", "you seem to know more..."
For the record, nowhere have I said anything of the sort, or claimed to "know it all". Nor is that in any way the issue here. Yet you keep dredging it up, with this high-and-mighty air - despite the fact that you keep on missing the point, crossing the wires and avoiding the question. I'm just trying to have a reasonable debate here. If you want to engage with that, fine. If you want to keep twisting what I'm saying and only answering what suits you, then good luck to you.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
You can understand how a kid wouldn't understand those concepts, but yet you expect him to have a fully developed adult sense of morality and comprehension of the enormity of life & the finality of death?!
Come on... :roll: Where's the consistency there?
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
My argument against the theory that a 11 year old couldn't fully understand his actions is the rarity of such events in an American society that is saturated w/ 200M guns, knives, rocks, etc that could be used by people under the age of 18 to kill someone in their sleep.
as you can imagine, i respectfully disagree.
i will say i think it's crazy our only options are he's released at 21 or sits in prison for the rest of his life, but with my understanding of pennsylvania law i'll go with 21.
if I ever lose it and take someone out I want you as my judge
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
me too!
When I was 12, I really, really, really wanted to kill my sister. Why? She kept trying to blackmail me. It wasn't the usual, "I'm going to kill you", I was literally going to kill her. I don't remember how I was going to do it, but I do remember how I was going to dispose of the body. Throw her in the dumpster in double Hefty sacks. I figured nobody ever handled the garbage, so the body would never be found and I would never get caught. I do not remember considering how I would feel about not having my sister around beyond not having her blackmailing me anymore. And, I certainly didn't consider how my mom would have been devastated. I don't remember why I never went through with it. I think my mom found out about the big secret, so my sister could no longer tell on my anyway.
When I think about how certain I was about my plan, I start to feel sick. My sister is now one of my most favorite people in the world.
When I was 12, I could have literally killed my sister. Now I'm in my thirties and I live a mostly vegan lifestyle, so I would say my perspective on life and death has definitely matured.
we always slow down to see the car crash..why ? we might see blood,
while watching a horror movie we will cover or eyes with our hands
and peek through the small gap between our fingers...we have to see it,
some people arnt afraid to look and some have the cold ability to act on their anger
I think these primal instincts for survival reasons are stored in our brains from thousands of years back
and some more than others can not control these primal instincts and act aggressively
with out fear on the consequences.
sounds a little weird I know, it's just a theory I've always thought about.
Godfather.
If the above questions can be asnswered yes, then this kid was fully aware that shooting a human being in the back of the head would reasonably result in the death of that person. Ater all isnt that the purpose of a hunting firearm?
we can monday morning quarterback all day. The fact is the law of that state is what it is. Have issue with it? Move there. Become a citizen. rally like minded residents and vote to change this law. Until then.....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
edit.
i forgot i'm not supposed to post in here.
sorry.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
i understand your train of thought but i'm not sure an 11 year old can understand the full weight of what it means to kill someone. when hunting an animal in the wild you're not emotionally attached to it in anyway, so you go out, kill the deer (or whatever) take it home as a prize. there was no real attachment. then a couple weeks/months later you go back out and shoot another deer, so there's no real loss. i'm not sure this kid could understand the forever aspect of shooting his step-mom, even if he was trained to use a gun. i don't know.
and just as a side note, the articles i've read suggested this rifle was newly acquired, so i'm not sure how much training this kid actually had.
and i want to be clear, i don't think this kid should be let off the hook. what he's done is horrible, there need to be consequences. i just believe it's wrong to treat an 11 year old as an adult in one instance when we won't give him the credit/responsibility/privilege as an adult in any other area.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
simple question then, when this murderer is let out at 21 are you willing to live next to him or have him in your neighborhood? I live in pennsylvania and i don't want this kid let out at 21 to live on my street or my neighborhood.
that's a great question. I've said all along that he shouldnt be tried as an adult, but I guess i'd be the first to admit the irony here. I wouldnt want to live next door to him ever. But although I still think he shouldnt be tried as an adult, does that mean he automatically gets out at 21 if tried as a juvenile?
He should still serve some hard time (maybe 18-20 yrs?).
i'd like to think i'd be willing to live next door because if i'm not willing to live next to him i shouldn't make anyone else. and i know it's much easier said than done, but i really believe i would be okay living next door. that's not to suggest that i wouldn't take extra precautions, but people have to live somewhere when they get out of prison.
and i agree with you mickeyrat and jonnypistachio, i think the kid should do time. 21 is too soon but i think life is too long. i suppose my real problem is the two extremes, the black or white of the sentencing. why does it have to be 21 or life without parole? 21 or 75+? there's gotta be some middle ground.