Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
The court doesn't have jurisdiction to throw the kid out of school. That's a university issue, state school or no.
Death wasn't foreseeable, but wouldn't clinical depression be? And clinical depression surely isn't something to disregard.
You continue to trivialize what they did to this kid and the raw malice behind it. They weren't trying to be funny, they never thought he was going to laugh this off. They were trying to cause this kid at least some degree of emotional or psychological harm. Mission accomplished.
So if you're going to use a purely emotion barometer like "look at how much this would damage these intelligent young people's future", I don't see how you can disregard the inverse of that emotional barometer "look at the damage their malicous behavior caused". It's pure emotion one way or the other so why is one worth considering and the other not?
|
It's not emotional to choose the path that seems most likely to balance turning these kids into productive citizens with teaching a lesson so that this isn't as likely to happen again. Your path is all about retribution and sending a clear message. There's no balance at all. I don't think retribution should be the goal here, especially if the motivating factor is avenging the death of the suicide.