Lead Singer Of Rock Band Shot And Killed By Five Juveniles Ages 12 To 16

[Najnaj]

Good post.

Reminds me a bit of Lord of the Flies (William Golding). A brilliant read which is very insightful in the nature of children and how susceptible they are to undue influences. I've not read the book in over 20 years, so I'd be interested to read it again after stuff I have experienced and seen, especially wrt sociopaths/psychopaths

..and unique (well almost) in that the 1963 movie is better than (or at least as good as) the book.



A few people in this debate should probably take 2 hours off to watch it.

[Bae]

That’s the thing they literally lack the capacity but you guys are taking the act as having.

- - - Updated - - -



So “I want this child dead let him grow up first even if he is rehabilitated kill him for a crime he committed not as an adult with adult faculties but as a kid”

This is like saying if a kid steals something at age 10 loco them up and the. Charge them with harsher terms as an adult.

- - - Updated - - -



You clearly have no idea what premeditated murder is.

Again like the other person who replied to me. You're putting something totally different as a comparison. Theft does NOT directly take away a life and directly destroy so many lives around them. So using a 10 year old for theft is really pathetic. You're using something that cant be compared to try and make your point valid.

Fact is this. 12-16 year olds who knew what they were doing, knew the outcome and just wanted to be like some hood rappers/gangsters decided to take a life, steal cars putting further lives at risk etc. They are children yes, but they knew what they were doing. Its sick and its vile and people defending them because they're a few years below the age of being tried as an adult is sickening.

Using the defence of "they're children" means nothing. Its a poor defence. The facts are they knew what they were doing,they know what guns do, they know what they were doing was wrong, It really is that simple. They know the law and they get away with sickening acts because they're a few years too young? Most of the comparisons here are so bad its laughable. Its not like saying a kid steals something at 10. MURDER IS NOT THEFT SO DO NOT COMPARE THE TWO TO SUIT YOUR OWN IDIOTIC THEORIES.

[Rotted]

Impossible. You can't understand that kind of stuff.

- - - Updated - - -



I see a lot of excusing. But hey.

Not sure if master troll...... or IQ of an amoeba...

[josykay]

These kids could be literally killed by the state... what they did was fucked up for sure but so is the justice system in texas

They can not. Death Penalty for minors, no matter if trialed as adults or not, violates the constitution. Since all are younger than 18, it is impossible.

Also, why do law and order fans constantly demand, that the state should violate their own laws?

[Dextroden]

Not sure if master troll...... or IQ of an amoeba...

*Sigh*

Still mocking people that legit believe these kids didn't know what murder is or that it's bad.

Jesus guy.

[Najnaj]

I know how the law works. Doesnt mean thats how it should work. Also i dont believe a 5 year old is capeable of knowing what theyre doing is totally wrong. 12-16 year olds are so comparing the two is pathetic and just seems like youre going to extremes to be proved right.

So going a few years up is OK, going roughly the same amount down is extreme. The odd part is that the world of psychiatry is nearly unanimous in not agreeing with you so who is really extreme here? Is if the people calling for established legal principles to be upheld or the ones asking to kill kids?

Nearly the entire world is unanimous in that at 18 you can be reasonably aware of the consequences of your actions and all I have seen that counters this is a couple of catch phrases. If you can do the crime you can do the time might rhyme but that is all it really does. We have 2 year olds that have "willingly" killed people, should they do the time as well? When I was 6 I tried to saw the head off a girl I hated, should I be locked up? what about if it had happened at 8 or 10?

Why is it that you think 18 is a bad age to be responsible for your actions? I have yet to see a single reasonable explanation for this in the entire thread.

[triplesdsu]

What's wrong with that by itself?

They are protected by the law, but murderers nevertheless.

Why are you defending criminals again?

Not defending the scumbags but their age makes them ineligible for the death penalty. The SC ruled you cant give a death sentence to minors, so they could get Life W/O Parole at best.

[Najnaj]

Again like the other person who replied to me. You're putting something totally different as a comparison. Theft does NOT directly take away a life and directly destroy so many lives around them. So using a 10 year old for theft is really pathetic. You're using something that cant be compared to try and make your point valid.

Fact is this. 12-16 year olds who knew what they were doing, knew the outcome and just wanted to be like some hood rappers/gangsters decided to take a life, steal cars putting further lives at risk etc. They are children yes, but they knew what they were doing. Its sick and its vile and people defending them because they're a few years below the age of being tried as an adult is sickening.

Using the defence of "they're children" means nothing. Its a poor defence. The facts are they knew what they were doing,they know what guns do, they know what they were doing was wrong, It really is that simple. They know the law and they get away with sickening acts because they're a few years too young? Most of the comparisons here are so bad its laughable. Its not like saying a kid steals something at 10. MURDER IS NOT THEFT SO DO NOT COMPARE THE TWO TO SUIT YOUR OWN IDIOTIC THEORIES.

The fact that they killed a guy and then went to hang at Walmart should tell you something. They still had the gun and parked the car outside ....

[triplesdsu]

Again like the other person who replied to me. You're putting something totally different as a comparison. Theft does NOT directly take away a life and directly destroy so many lives around them. So using a 10 year old for theft is really pathetic. You're using something that cant be compared to try and make your point valid.

Fact is this. 12-16 year olds who knew what they were doing, knew the outcome and just wanted to be like some hood rappers/gangsters decided to take a life, steal cars putting further lives at risk etc. They are children yes, but they knew what they were doing. Its sick and its vile and people defending them because they're a few years below the age of being tried as an adult is sickening.

Using the defence of "they're children" means nothing. Its a poor defence. The facts are they knew what they were doing,they know what guns do, they know what they were doing was wrong, It really is that simple. They know the law and they get away with sickening acts because they're a few years too young? Most of the comparisons here are so bad its laughable. Its not like saying a kid steals something at 10. MURDER IS NOT THEFT SO DO NOT COMPARE THE TWO TO SUIT YOUR OWN IDIOTIC THEORIES.

Dont come to CA then. You'd hate it here. Recent laws passed basically made it so the cops wouldnt be able to interview any of these suspects (under 16) and half of them couldnt be charged as adults either (Cut off is 14 now i believe). Hell, with recent changes to the felony murder rule I could see some of the kids getting probation if this crime occurred out here under the argument, that the other four kids didnt know the guy with the gun was going to shoot, thus they couldnt be charged with murder.

Im not exaggerating either.

[josykay]

They could if they were tried as adults. Retrials are a thing

I hope you dont think I'm a law and order fan?

The age when committing the crime are relevant, not the age when staying trial.
Also, can't you only ask for revision some weeks after?

No, but a disturbing amount of users in that threat.

[Monster Hunter]

No, it's "not written right in history". It's written on some crappy website that likes to stir controversy by some hack looking to get hits on his site.

But sure keep doubling down on it. I am sure that in time it will cause me to respect what you're saying

PS: At this point you're strawmanning and using ad hominem all in one.

His racism is well documented.

We have his letters to hitter with "dear friend" on them

We have his trip and meetings with mousloini recorded

We have his policy's on record during the famine

And we have his acts to suppress knowledge of the famine on record.

We also have the accounts of the women he abused on record.

His nice who was made to sleep naked with him for "naughty cuddles" as he called them.

He was Litteraly scum. And your type can't protect him or his legacy of evil anymore.

[Najnaj]

It's not opinion, it's written right in history. He was a sick, evil man.

I take it you have a reason not to include a link to that bunch of rubbish... lol

[Guyv3r]

these kids didn't know what murder is or that it's bad.

For real?

I'm sure videogames, television, parents or maybe a simple empathic response could have told them that.
They know what they did. Don't be a fool and think they don't.

[Violent]

They’re not adults. 12 years old isn’t an adult.

And you literally want to kill children.

I kinda want these kids to die too.

So fuckin' sue me, IDC.

[Zyky]

What's wrong with that by itself?

They are protected by the law, but murderers nevertheless.

Why are you defending criminals again?

Based on his post history, I guarantee you if the singer was black he'd have a different tune entirely(no pun intended).

The messed up part is, they show no remorse in their mugshots. They look like little punks with no care towards what they did.

[Najnaj]

His racism is well documented.

We have his letters to hitter with "dear friend" on them

We have his trip and meetings with mousloini recorded

We have his policy's on record during the famine

And we have his acts to suppress knowledge of the famine on record.

We also have the accounts of the women he abused on record.

His nice who was made to sleep naked with him for "naughty cuddles" as he called them.

He was Litteraly scum. And your type can't protect him or his legacy of evil anymore.

again, links please. This is really someone out to make Gandhi look bad by twisting every word and action as much as possible.

Gandhi never ran a country so not sure how he caused a famine.

He slept with loads of naked women in his room and in his bed as a part of his chastity project. It is a little odd but well documented and not one of them accused him of any wrong doings. It was also supervised by his wife.

"Dear friend" to Hitler... means about as much as best regards. Trying to paint Gandhi out as a Nazi sympathizer is really stretching it.

- - - Updated - - -

Based on his post history, I guarantee you if the singer was black he'd have a different tune entirely(no pun intended).

The messed up part is, they show no remorse in their mugshots. They look like little punks with no care towards what they did.

We should just base the entire judicial system on this one absolutely fail-safe method ...

Seriously, do you people read what you write?

[Zyky]

We should just base the entire judicial system on this one absolutely fail-safe method ...

Seriously, do you people read what you write?

I mean, they shot and killed a man. Their parents failed them, and they failed society. Murder is murder.

[Najnaj]

I mean, they shot and killed a man. Their parents failed them, and they failed society. Murder is murder.

..and you can tell this by looking at their mug shots? You must be a genius!

[breadisfunny]

You do understand we have a system of laws and punishments in place. And the sentence for murder isn't death....

it should be. our current system is flawed. it needs to be an eye for an eye.

[Violent]

it should be. our current system is flawed. it needs to be an eye for an eye.

An eye for an eye leaves us all blind.

Then the man with 1 eye in the land of the blind, is King.