Thread: Hunter convicted

Originally Posted by Maca49

Well Sidney we have plonkers making these decisions, if found guilty the punishment should be universal. No buts or ifs, clearly one size fits all. As mentioned before on here, a king hit on my son was treated by some idiot judge as so immaterial, the offender was given diversion? Fat useless Islander should have been charged with a min of grievous bodily harm. Sentences are crap!

Not even close Maca... every situation is different, so every outcome has to be as well... to suggest universal outcome is plain stupidity...

I have no idea about the appropriate outcome for your son and everybody gets stuff wrong. But as usual we haven't got all the facts and the judges don't determine what charges are laid. There is usually a reason for that and we don't know what that is either.

Look most of us understand the concept of fairness or proportionality and that doesn't stop suddenly because of personal emotional involvement. In that situation those decisions have to be made by others in order to attempt to maintain some degree of proportional response.

The fact is there is much more to consider that just the feeling of the victim or their families. And it wouldn't matter what was done for many victims, it would never be sufficient or appropriate in their opinion. Look at your response and then consider the contrast with the shooting victim's position in this story... in your case it doesn't matter to you what the offenders story is, in the shooters case he gets convicted anyway in spite of his victim's feeling about the matter...

Society has to consider the downstream effects of making decisions... victims are usually limited in that...