Thread: Nothing Constructive and Only Posted to Cause Controversy Again

Originally Posted by kiwijames

I think you're wanting it both ways here.

So are the people wanting harsh retribution and a reduction in crime. Method probably counterproductive to their aims.

Originally Posted by Sidney

Of course its a brain explosion, who said that brain explosions have to be instantaneous... do you think he intended to shoot some girls eye out? 18 year old boy's frontal lobes don't fully develop till 25, all they have is testosterone and a lack of ability to forsee consequences...

The very fact that he used a paintball gun indicates he intended no serious harm...

Actually none of its perfectly OK... the fact that it happened and the fact that some 18 yr old kid is now being put into jail to be trained to be a serious criminal after using a paintball gun is a fricken human tragedy... not only for him but also for his future victims that this jail sentence is creating.

The fact that statistically that is now more likely to happen than not is an indictment on the system... and of course I am speaking in the abscence of knowledge about his previous history which may have had bearing on the sentence recieved....

So a little less of the complacancy when thinking about this stuff might be considerably smarter..... OK my arse

Okay first of all. I replied "perfectly OK" to you saying that it is OK to be less certain about things, i was actually agreeing with your last statement, not saying that this whole situation is "perfectly OK". We are all uninfromed, and cannot make accurate judgements on what happened, we do not know the whole story, i agree.

I am 18 years old myself, and you saying that we are not able to foresee cosequences at this age is absolute rubbish. Im assuming you think it is a terrible idea then to give firearms to 16 year old "kids" who have a real lack of ability to foresee possible consequences? last time i checked, one of the most crucial characteristics of being a firearms holder is knowing the consequnces that can come thereof.

I am sure he intened no serious harm.. but he did not think of the possible consequences either, did he.. Hopefully this teaches him a lesson. Dont worry about the kid, the prisons in this country are basically hotels. In saying that, i do not agree with that form of punishment.

My parents used a belt on me, not abusively, they did so in correcting me. I am grateful they did. They never locked me up in my room leaving me to wallow up with negative thoughts and hatred. They gave me my short term punishment and then they helped me to correct my ways. This is, ofcourse, just an example of the way i think the justice system should be moving toward..

Should let the girl who lost her eye do to him what they did on Jackass to Stevo with a paintball gun, minus the safety glasses.



Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by gimp

So are the people wanting harsh retribution and a reduction in crime. Method probably counterproductive to their aims.

For sure.
I was more alluding the Judge should have a much better understanding of ALL the circumstances around the event and has made a more informed decision.
Armchair speculation from either side is merely that, speculation.

Criminal justice policy is probably beyond any of our purview anyway

Originally Posted by TheJanitar

Okay first of all. I replied "perfectly OK" to you saying that it is OK to be less certain about things, i was actually agreeing with your last statement, not saying that this whole situation is "perfectly OK". We are all uninfromed, and cannot make accurate judgements on what happened, we do not know the whole story, i agree.

I am 18 years old myself, and you saying that we are not able to foresee cosequences at this age is absolute rubbish. Im assuming you think it is a terrible idea then to give firearms to 16 year old "kids" who have a real lack of ability to foresee possible consequences? last time i checked, one of the most crucial characteristics of being a firearms holder is knowing the consequnces that can come thereof.

I am sure he intened no serious harm.. but he did not think of the possible consequences either, did he.. Hopefully this teaches him a lesson. Dont worry about the kid, the prisons in this country are basically hotels. In saying that, i do not agree with that form of punishment.

My parents used a belt on me, not abusively, they did so in correcting me. I am grateful they did. They never locked me up in my room leaving me to wallow up with negative thoughts and hatred. They gave me my short term punishment and then they helped me to correct my ways. This is, ofcourse, just an example of the way i think the justice system should be moving toward..

Ok I picked that up wrong... apologies...

And to your credit, at 18 your contributions are rational and intelligent. What I said about 18 year old is a physiological developmental truth however, with a touch of hyperbole for effect I must admit. Of course their are variations in how that is represented in the wider population.

But consider a kid without your educational advantage and your family stability and discipline, chuck the physiological developmental issues in as well and we have less ability to understand and forsee outcomes, less inhibition and self discipline and a more reckless approach to life....?

Is that all the kids fault....?

And the issue from my perspective, do we want to make it worse for him and for us by just sticking him in jail.....

this is rhetorical because I don't know what this kids record is like..... it could be that he is already past that point..

accountabilty does not go away, but hopelessness cannot be created if we have any chance as a society to sustain ourselves

Originally Posted by kiwijames

So whats the solution then?
Can't lock him up, thats potentially going to make things worse.
Cuddles arn't the answer either, and anything in between probalby wont fix it too.
@Sidney, I like a lot of what you say as there is logic in your arguments but, I think you're wanting it both ways here.

Cuddles is a term applied to anything other than locking someone in prison apparently...

I have no idea whether this kid is past the point and warrants imprisonment for what was an unintentional outcome from a deliberately reckless action.
But he gets 2+ years @ $99k per year of resource allocated to him with this sentence. Apparently we get a 75% chance that he will turn into a liftetime serious criminal for that investment. Sounds like a win to me.

Apparently international research indicates that supervison and one-on-one type of focus and training programs generate only a 25% re-offending rate.

And we have got $200k to work with over a couple of years... sentence him to 2 years on a dairy farm, with bracelet and pay the cocky $50K/year for 24/7 supervision?? Weekly external supervison and accountability follow up and other life skills training... surely the options are considerable..

I like that Sidney

Originally Posted by gimp

Criminal justice policy is probably beyond any of our purview anyway

yep you're right, but unfortunately it is politically sensitive.... which means the the public perceptions are actually important.

and the punative response that we typically see here is the problem, its the default position. The only way to change that is to be made to think about it differently.. so we should challenge the typical emotive reaction and encourage people to think about the issue.

Yeah I know.... pushing shit uphill, people prefer not to think about it and the system caters for that by locking up the problems...

Originally Posted by Sidney

yep you're right, but unfortunately it is politically sensitive.... which means the the public perceptions are actually important.

and the punative response that we typically see here is the problem, its the default position. The only way to change that is to be made to think about it differently.. so we should challenge the typical emotive reaction and encourage people to think about the issue.

Yeah I know.... pushing shit uphill, people prefer not to think about it and the system caters for that by locking up the problems...

I agree with you however I don't really want an argument about it here

Of course I banned systolic this morning so that's less likely now

Originally Posted by Sidney

yep you're right, but unfortunately it is politically sensitive.... which means the the public perceptions are actually important.

and the punative response that we typically see here is the problem, its the default position. The only way to change that is to be made to think about it differently.. so we should challenge the typical emotive reaction and encourage people to think about the issue.

Yeah I know.... pushing shit uphill, people prefer not to think about it and the system caters for that by locking up the problems...

Yes, there is no simple solution. However there is also a desire to set some deterrent. Should fines be removed for speeding offences too? The guy on the bones of his arse will likely find it difficult to pay. But the guy with a good lawyer and/or plenty of dosh that does it frequently will probably not bat an eyelid.

From the outside looking at the sentence compared to the damage caused I would stand by my fair acknowledgement. There are other sentences that would likely also be fair, but as you yourself have stated you do not know his history either.

Originally Posted by gimp

Of course I banned systolic this morning so that's less likely now

Gimp, I think I love you

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Yes, there is no simple solution. However there is also a desire to set some deterrent. Should fines be removed for speeding offences too? The guy on the bones of his arse will likely find it difficult to pay. But the guy with a good lawyer and/or plenty of dosh that does it frequently will probably not bat an eyelid.

From the outside looking at the sentence compared to the damage caused I would stand by my fair acknowledgement. There are other sentences that would likely also be fair, but as you yourself have stated you do not know his history either.

Yeah I understand why you want to think like that.... its simpler, but your version of fair is no more relavent than mine. I am pretty sure the judge wouldn't even say it was fair... he hopefully would say that it was appropriate given all the circumstances, otherwise he shouldn't have given it.

I'm pretty sure that we have already had considerable discussion on the lack of deterant value around punative response to intentional crime and its a bigger reach to claim deterent value on unintentional outcome. Who are you deterring? The offender....? well you just but him into prison to train him to be an intentional criminal so clearly thats not the focus...

Other general members of the public? Does your target audience (18 yr old testosterone filled, low empathy scoring individuals) actually read the newspaper so that they can be informed?? Deterrant?

Sorry but this sort of sentencing is only designed to pacify the gen pop.... and its not very intelligent..

Fear of getting caught is the deterrant that actually works, not fear of consequences. 18yr olds with poor upbringings, testosterone and low perceptive development have no regard for consequences, if they are not concerned about getting caught. Punative sentences have little to no value in that respect. Thats why speeding policing works.... the money isn't that significant..

Originally Posted by gimp

I agree with you however I don't really want an argument about it here

Of course I banned systolic this morning so that's less likely now

Can I unblock him now?

Originally Posted by Pointer

Gimp, I think I love you

I think you might need to stand in line!!