[Lemon]

Q. Are rich people better than poor people?

A. Yes, they are.

Q. Are rich people smarter than poor people?

A. Yes, they are.

Q. I disagree. There are plenty of poor scientists and starving professionals out in the world.

A. Well, if they were so smart they wouldn't be poor now, would they?

Q. But what about Brittany Spears, surely she is just a dumb blonde who got lucky. How can you say that she is better than anyone else?

A. Brittany Spears spent years of her life training to become a singer and had the wherewithal to get herself to the top. She made the right connections and had the drive to succeed, unlike you.

Q. What about all of the people who were just born into money. You can't really say that they are smarter or better than a poor person.

A. Yes you can. When parents reproduce they are really just making copies of themselves. The people born into wealth are copies of their parents who worked hard and succeeded. Children are a continuation of one's [successful] self

Q. But poor people don't really have the opportunity to make it. When you are born into poverty it's hard to get out of poverty.

A. That excuse may have worked in the middle ages, but these days there are endless opportunities available. One does not even need to go to college to educate themselves in a field. With the internet and free public libraries it is possible to self educate yourself in fields like technology, law, or business. There are countless self-educated techs and businessmen out there. Abraham Lincoln passed the Bar Exam without ever setting a foot into Law School, after all.

It is also possible to start a business these days without a heavy investment in capital. Internet businesses are regularly run out of bedrooms.

Q. But how can poor people get themselves out of poverty when they are holding a full time job?

A. If you are working from 8 to 5 and turn on the TV when you get home then you obviously do not have a drive to succeed. It's your fault that you are poor, clearly.

noooo...!!

[spoon]

To the people saying he got off easy:

It is not the law's job to get revenge for the victims, but justice for the kid. Stop thinking about all the dead people and think about the decisions the kid made. He took drugs, drank, and drove. I'm sure more than half of America has done all three of those things (not necessarily simultaneously). The point is, he did nothing malicious. Sure, he made a colossal mistake, but he has to live with that. If it were me, the guilt, regret, shame, and emotional stress would be worse than any punishment a judge could come up with.

I think the punishment is just.

[DDDDAts all folks]

I think the punishment is just.

I disagree, there are other kids who have been brought up in even worse circumstances but don't commit crime.

[spoon]

I think the punishment is just.

I disagree, there are other kids who have been brought up in even worse circumstances but don't commit crime.

I'm sure those kids you're talking about made mistakes. Luckily for them, their mistakes didn't result in a horrible accident.. And it's not like he got off scotch free.

[Rama Set]

I think the punishment is just.

I disagree, there are other kids who have been brought up in even worse circumstances but don't commit crime.

There are kids brought up in worse circumstances who do commit crime. Your point seems moot.

And well said Spoon.

[DDDDAts all folks]

I think the punishment is just.

I disagree, there are other kids who have been brought up in even worse circumstances but don't commit crime.

There are kids brought up in worse circumstances who do commit crime. Your point seems moot.

And they get punished for it. My point is not moot. An expensive lawyer has been used to reduce this kids punishment. What lesson is this kid learning? it seems to me the system is adding to the supposed abuse his parents have been giving him over the years, by doing exactly the same as them, and not punishing him appropriately.

I'm willing to bet this kid will commit even further crimes (possibly) more serious in the future.

[Saddam Hussein]

To the people saying he got off easy:

It is not the law's job to get revenge for the victims, but justice for the kid. Stop thinking about all the dead people and think about the decisions the kid made. He took drugs, drank, and drove. I'm sure more than half of America has done all three of those things (not necessarily simultaneously). The point is, he did nothing malicious. Sure, he made a colossal mistake, but he has to live with that. If it were me, the guilt, regret, shame, and emotional stress would be worse than any punishment a judge could come up with.

I think the punishment is just.

Thread Bishop'd.

[spoon]

I think the punishment is just.

I disagree, there are other kids who have been brought up in even worse circumstances but don't commit crime.

There are kids brought up in worse circumstances who do commit crime. Your point seems moot.

And they get punished for it. My point is not moot. An expensive lawyer has been used to reduce this kids punishment. What lesson is this kid learning? it seems to me the system is adding to the supposed abuse his parents have been giving him over the years, by doing exactly the same as them, and not punishing him appropriately.

I'm willing to bet this kid will commit even further crimes (possibly) more serious in the future.

You have failed to explain how the punishment is inappropriate.

[DuckDodgers]

This isn't about revenge but about holding the kid responsible for the lives he stole.  10 years of probation is hardly a punishment and he will not really be affected too much by it beyond but being able to legally drive for quite some time.  He also has been driving since 13 so I doubt the illegality of his driving is going to change his mind.

[Blanko]

As opposed to growing jaded in a shitty jail cell, which is bound to definitely change his mind.

[DuckDodgers]

http://www.alanformanlaw.com/newsletters/traffic-law-duidwi/penalties-for-dui-manslaughter/
Also, the penalty for a single dui manslaughter charge in most states are about 10 years minimum.

[Blanko]

Maybe instead of thinking whether this case is unjustified based on regular penalties, you should be thinking whether regular penalties are justified.

"Rehabilitation" seemingly means absolutely nothing in the American legal system.

[spoon]

10 years is almost 2/3 of the time he has been alive. It is a massive change of lifestyle and will doubtlessly affect him. And again, unless he truly is a heartless sadist, he will suffer for the rest of his life.

Why don't you read a less biased article.

http://www.khou.com/news/texas-news/Judge-gives-probation-to-teen-who-killed-four-in-crash-235313421.html

It's a kid who made an awful mistake. His parents are paying for it financially and he is paying for it emotionally. Ten years of his life are going to be spent on probation. In addition, his social life is ruined indefinitely. He will likely not have friends; I can't imagine he has too many relationships still intact.

[DuckDodgers]

A lot of people regret their actions later.  Should saying "I'm sorry" lessen sentences?  This kid took 4 lives,  whether unintentionally or not.  There are dozens of lives that won't be the same no matter what.  An 18 year old that has sex with a 16 year old faces a worse fate than this kid.  They have to be a registered sex offender for their lives and must tell people the live next to of this fact.  That seems a little it off, no?

[spoon]

A lot of people regret their actions later.  Should saying "I'm sorry" lessen sentences?

His guilt is adding to the sentence. In addition to money lost, probation, and potential ostracism, the child must deal with lifelong remorse. Tell me that isn't torture enough.

 

An 18 year old that has sex with a 16 year old faces a worse fate than this kid.  They have to be a registered sex offender for their lives and must tell people the live next to of this fact.  That seems a little it off, no?

Firstly, irrelevant.

Secondly, no, it's not "a little it off". This kid had no ill intent. A rapist does.

[DuckDodgers]

I'm not calling for the kid to be tortured, but to actually face consequences that match up to the severity of his crime.  Teens are tried as adults all the time, case in point is the teen in Massachusetts whom is being tried as an adult for killing his teacher.  I'm not saying he should have gotten the 20 years in jail that he could face, but surely some time behind bars is deserved for this.  The juvenile system could provide the same type of therapy that he is going to be receiving at this other facility.  One way or another, this teen is a criminal and should be treated as such.

The underaged sex is relevant for comparison.  It wouldn't have to be rape, it could be completely consensual and the 18 year old could face sex offender labels for the rest of their lives.   

[Blanko]

Uuhhh... So, statutory rape charges are ridiculous, therefore this should be as well? Is that what you're trying to say?

[DuckDodgers]

That is exactly what I'm trying to say Blanko 

I'm just drawing a comparison of an innocent act which wouldn't necessarily be considered a crime a few years later which affects a person for the rest of their lives.  While this teen committed a crime for a person of any age and will limitedly affected for 10 years, and would have likely served prison time if he were just 2 years older.

[spoon]

I'm not calling for the kid to be tortured, but to actually face consequences that match up to the severity of his crime.  Teens are tried as adults all the time, case in point is the teen in Massachusetts whom is being tried as an adult for killing his teacher.  I'm not saying he should have gotten the 20 years in jail that he could face, but surely some time behind bars is deserved for this.  The juvenile system could provide the same type of therapy that he is going to be receiving at this other facility.  One way or another, this teen is a criminal and should be treated as such.

Sure, he could have spent time in jail, but the punishment he received is also fitting. The most pivotal period of his life life is going to be spent on probation.

The underaged sex is relevant for comparison.  It wouldn't have to be rape, it could be completely consensual and the 18 year old could face sex offender labels for the rest of their lives.   

No. It is not relevant. A statutory rape case is not a precedent for this case. If you want to discuss the punishment for statutory rape, make a different thread. We are discussing what is a fitting punishment for a sixteen-year-old who accidentally killed and injured people while intoxicated.

[DuckDodgers]

Let me ask you this.  Suppose this teen came from a middle class or lower class family instead, what do you think happens to him?  Assume its parental neglect in terms of the parents not punishing the kid just like this, only they aren't wealthy.