Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
Where's the balance there?
Community service is going to stop them from doing it again? No, the public scorn is going to stop them from doing it again. I'm pretty sure dickweed isn't going to be torturing anymore gay kids anytime soon.
So hell, let's just let them skate altogether. Then you'll certainly end up with productive citizens and they're no more or less likely to commit this act again.
Your approach seems to give zero weight to the retributive aspect of this. You seem concerned only with deterrance and rehabilitation when really, nothing the court will do here will anything more to deter or rehab these kids than has already happened.
The court's sole purpose here is retribution. They need to be punished for their conduct. A malicious, pre-meditated attack on a weakling deserves jail time. Even had he not killed himself, this would've had far greater long-term ramifications on his person than had they just shoved his ass down the stairs when he wasn't looking. Surely anyone will admit that would deserve jail time.
Call this thing what it is - an assault - and there's no way around sending them to jail for it. It's easy to say this was a prank gone awry so they should get off light, but it's also wrong. It was pre-mediated attack on a kid they knew wouldn't fight back.
|
I see no value in retribution here and you do. That's why I concluded in post 446 that we'd have to agree to disagree. I'm not going to convince you to give up your jones for retribution and you're not going to convince me that there's any value in it.
Given that I'm not interested in retribution, your arguments in this post explain why I don't think a harsh sentence is necessary. The perpetrators are very unlikely to ever do this again so the value in a punishment lies in deterring others. IMO, getting kicked out of school and possibly a conviction with no jail time is adequate to get that job done.