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?).
If he is tried as a juvenile, he will be release at 21...
in order to serve "hard time"...he will need to go through the adult system...
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.
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.
you're assuming he will get 75+ years...
where did you get that figure...?
i didn't assume he would get 75+ years, i said the options, as they are now, is he's released at 21, or he's in jail for the rest of his life, which on average would end at roughly 75, thus "21 or 75+".
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.
you're assuming he will get 75+ years...
where did you get that figure...?
i didn't assume he would get 75+ years, i said the options, as they are now, is he's released at 21, or he's in jail for the rest of his life, which on average would end at roughly 75, thus "21 or 75+".
not to be flip, but you're assuming he'll get life without parole...he may get 30 to life, which here means: he'll do 30 years, then have a chance at parole...
i didn't assume he would get 75+ years, i said the options, as they are now, is he's released at 21, or he's in jail for the rest of his life, which on average would end at roughly 75, thus "21 or 75+".
not to be flip, but you're assuming he'll get life without parole...he may get 30 to life, which here means: he'll do 30 years, then have a chance at parole...
Unless the lawyers for Jordan Brown who is now aged 13, can convince the judges to change tack, he will be tried in adult court and if convicted will serve an automatic life sentence with no chance of parole. He would become the youngest child in US history to be sentenced to be incarcerated forever.
this is my biggest problem, it's either 10 years or the rest of his life. i think the extreme nature of both laws is the real problem. it's ridiculous to sentence him with these hard-line generalizations. i think there should be a way to try him as a child and still hold him past the age of 21 - OR - try him as an adult but give him a chance at parole and doing something with his life. there needs to be a middle ground, a gray area that allows for cases like this, in my opinion.
I usually disapprove of mandatory sentencing rules for various crimes. I feel that part of the purpose of an individual judge is to weigh individual criminals differently. Some (and I'd wager most) 13 year olds who commit a serious crime like this can be rehabilitated back into society. Some (I'd wager few) cannot. When people have proven to everyone as best is possible that they are truly rehabilitated, there is little use for additional prison time beyond that point. Yes, prison serves as both punishment, prevention of future crimes and a potential rehabilition strategy, but there needs to be regular reviews of progress made and sometimes people should be let out earlier or later than any universal mandatory sentence can allow for.
While I agree with the people who believe that actions should have consequences, it is also unfair to assume that the decision making process of typical 11-13 year olds will not change over time. I can think of very few people who possessed fully developed decision making or even fully developed moral understandings at such an age. Age does almost universally bring additional wisdom to our decision process and 11-13 year olds are simply not adults and should not be sentenced as though they are fully developed in their thinking skills or potential. Teach the kid what can be taught, counsel them, evaluate them continuously and work hard to bring them back into society in a rational manner. If such measures prove fruitless, then they likely need to be institutionalized in some capacity. Crimes by children is always a pretty disheartening subject.
this is my biggest problem, it's either 10 years or the rest of his life. i think the extreme nature of both laws is the real problem. it's ridiculous to sentence him with these hard-line generalizations. i think there should be a way to try him as a child and still hold him past the age of 21 - OR - try him as an adult but give him a chance at parole and doing something with his life. there needs to be a middle ground, a gray area that allows for cases like this, in my opinion.
this is my biggest problem, it's either 10 years or the rest of his life. i think the extreme nature of both laws is the real problem. it's ridiculous to sentence him with these hard-line generalizations. i think there should be a way to try him as a child and still hold him past the age of 21 - OR - try him as an adult but give him a chance at parole and doing something with his life. there needs to be a middle ground, a gray area that allows for cases like this, in my opinion.
Comments
If he is tried as a juvenile, he will be release at 21...
in order to serve "hard time"...he will need to go through the adult system...
you're assuming he will get 75+ years...
where did you get that figure...?
i didn't assume he would get 75+ years, i said the options, as they are now, is he's released at 21, or he's in jail for the rest of his life, which on average would end at roughly 75, thus "21 or 75+".
not to be flip, but you're assuming he'll get life without parole...he may get 30 to life, which here means: he'll do 30 years, then have a chance at parole...
see quote from original post...
this is my biggest problem, it's either 10 years or the rest of his life. i think the extreme nature of both laws is the real problem. it's ridiculous to sentence him with these hard-line generalizations. i think there should be a way to try him as a child and still hold him past the age of 21 - OR - try him as an adult but give him a chance at parole and doing something with his life. there needs to be a middle ground, a gray area that allows for cases like this, in my opinion.
While I agree with the people who believe that actions should have consequences, it is also unfair to assume that the decision making process of typical 11-13 year olds will not change over time. I can think of very few people who possessed fully developed decision making or even fully developed moral understandings at such an age. Age does almost universally bring additional wisdom to our decision process and 11-13 year olds are simply not adults and should not be sentenced as though they are fully developed in their thinking skills or potential. Teach the kid what can be taught, counsel them, evaluate them continuously and work hard to bring them back into society in a rational manner. If such measures prove fruitless, then they likely need to be institutionalized in some capacity. Crimes by children is always a pretty disheartening subject.
I stand corrected...
and I agree with your points here...
common ground!