Posted on 06/22/2002 4:03:21 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
... and suppose they were 19-year old punk rockers carrying baseball bats. And suppose they were 25-year old wrestlers carrying Uzis. And suppose they were 31-year old football players carrying hydrogen bombs. We can play this game all day; the ages of the participants were what they were.
ld that alter your perception of the young girl's actions? This young girl was in fact an actual victim of assault, but you and the legal system refuse to recognise it because she pulled a gun.
The "young girl" was apparently robust enough to kick in her mother's bedroom door to steal the firearm, so we're not talking about Shirley Temple. Seeing as she and her friends started the fight to begin with, I do not see her as any sort of a victim. We can't have children pulling a gun every time somebody calls them a doodyhead on the playground, and they need to be severely punished when they, sadly, do.
The so-called victim quoted is a one of the teens who committed the assault. You had to swallow awfully hard to post that.
As far as your comment about the reasonableness of kids settling disagreements at gunpoint, I think it has changed over time. Consider how well (US) society handles aggression and violence among children now...head in the sand, pretends it doesn't happen and doesn't need to be channeled constructively. Fair play is not an object any more either, with zero tolerance. Society has pretty much abandoned the victimized kid, with any victim expected to just take it or be labeled a criminal and responsible for being the object of assault.. The result is open season for bullies and sociopaths, who game the system without check until they can't get away with it as minors.In places where parents actually exert a counteracting positive influence, the effect is diminished. In some areas,however, the diligent idiots in the courts/schools/police/media etc shamelessly act to encourage the bad in support of a shameless ideal. The article is a warning.
Quit whining about how terrible it is for a 10-year old to solve her problem with a gun. It was not a playground fight. The real question you are ignoring for your silly rant is:
Why are four self-confessed criminals let go with less than a warning and labeled victims while their actual victim gets a criminal record and is vilified by the press?
I don't disagree with your sentiment, but in this case:
The four older girls were preparing to drive away when the 10-year-old ran into her house.
Seems the fight was over at the point she retrieved the gun.
Self defense wasn't an issue.
Nope .. you have it completely reversed.
"the four alleged victims in the case were hanging out in the driveway of a friend's house in the area of Longfellow Street and Tennyson Point in Homosassa when the 10-year-old, her 14-year-old sister and two other friends walked by on their way to the 10-year-old's house and yelled obscenities.
Note that it says "the alleged victims", not "the alleged perpetrators". And that the four older girls drove over to the 10-year-old's house, after they had been abused by the 10-year-old and her peers.
Not really. I believe in keeping the record straight as much as humanly possible, even when it comes to minor points. I'm right on this issue, so I have no need to embellish my position.
Fair play is not an object any more either, with zero tolerance. Society has pretty much abandoned the victimized kid, with any victim expected to just take it or be labeled a criminal and responsible for being the object of assault
There's this thing called the "civil court system" and "criminal court system" we have here in the US. It is certainly flawed and unfair in some ways and definitely could be improved, but it beats anarchy and running gunbattles in the streets. We have police and courts so we DON'T have to solve minor squabbles with a firearm any more. Sorry, but the Wild West era ended a hundred years ago, for better or for worse.
The result is open season for bullies and sociopaths, who game the system without check until they can't get away with it as minors.
Why don't you move to the United States? We don't have that sort of system here. The juvenile courts and juvenile halls are full of such bullies and sociopaths here. We sure don't get them all, but we get many of them.
Quit whining about how terrible it is for a 10-year old to solve her problem with a gun.
Never. It IS a terrible thing, and the kid deserved every iota of the punishment she got. She and her friends started the entire incident, and we can't have children running around pointing firearms at people in a civilized society.
It was not a playground fight.
Kids calling other kids names; what else would you call it? At least it was a playground spat until Li'l Miss Dirty Harry pulled heat on the other kids.
Why are four self-confessed criminals let go with less than a warning and labeled victims while their actual victim gets a criminal record and is vilified by the press?
Probably because no one saw the so-called "self-confessed criminals" commit any crime; somebody apparently DID see the younger child pull the gun. You have to have witnesses or a preponderance of the evidence before police can haul anyone off to jail. And the older children were victims. They were standing around bothering no one when the younger children cursed at them, and they responded like the juveniles they were. The older children could certainly have handled the situation better (you don't trespass on an offender's property and confront them for one thing), but the provocation for this entire regrettable incident originated solely from the younger children.
Sorry, but I can't buy the argument that the 10-year old had clean hands in this matter. Shirley Temple doesn't go around kicking in doors, stealing firearms, and committing assault with a deadly weapon.
It wasn't a playground spat. You're just trying to color your perceptions, so you can justify to yourself an unmaintainable position.
The younger group of kids started this entire mess and should be made to pay the consequences.
Blame the victim, yada yada. Also your comments about the robustness of the 10-year old are irrelevant, the issue is her state of mind, not whether she has a moustache and plays football.
I also notice that the whole thing apparently started when the 10 year old, her sister, and friends "shouted obscenities" at the older girls.
Nice kids.
Should the older girls have gotten the chair if they had ridden a mule to the 10-year old's house instead?
Alleged insults from pre-teens are not justification for assault. I don't think the state there recognises "fightin' words" any more, either.
The feds do, at least when it comes to First Amendment protection. See Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. As for Florida law, I don't have Lexis/Nexis here at home. So, if you have any cites that specifically state that the concept of "fighting words" doesn't apply in Florida, do post them.
It wasn't a playground spat.
Repeating yourself doesn't make this any more true. And I'm still waiting for your reply to my statement in the previous post that "What would you call two groups of kids exchanging insults?"
You're just trying to color your perceptions, so you can justify to yourself an unmaintainable position.
The courts agree with me (at least in this case). Sorry about YOUR position.
Blame the victim, yada yada.
Pretty robust "victim" that goes around kicking in doors and stealing handguns.
Also your comments about the robustness of the 10-year old are irrelevant, the issue is her state of mind, not whether she has a moustache and plays football.
I thought the issue was a 10-year old unlawfully pulling a handgun on other children.
So right, in fact, you view criminal trespass as justifiable when the trespassee shouts insults. Are you sure this isn't another reason why the young girl was justified? You point proves the situation had escalated beyond playground spat when the so-called victims executed a criminal trespass.
I don't think you are a serious freeper, just a disrupter. you aren't discussing the article, you mis-represent quotes from others merely to spin a troll, you are wasting the time of anyone who cares to debate the points, you introduce irrelevant points when you feel like it, and you seem to enjoy it. Not what I would expect from an actual freeper, but definitely indicative for a troll.
The ease at which you jump to conclusions is astonishing. You have a definite future as an Olympic high jump or pole vault competitor.
Are you sure this isn't another reason why the young girl was justified? You point proves the situation had escalated beyond playground spat when the so-called victims executed a criminal trespass.
Selective Reading Disease, I see. You should have that looked at. The older girls were LEAVING when the 10-year old pulled out the heat.
I don't think you are a serious freeper, just a disrupter.
Would a disruptor post opinion that allegedly torpedoed his or her own assertions? A real disruptor would bloviate, misrepresent, stamp his or her foot, and throw up red herrings like he or she owned the entire fish market, much like you're doing.
And you respond:
The ease at which you jump to conclusions is astonishing. You have a definite future as an Olympic high jump or pole vault competitor.
You raised the point about trespass, you are the person who said it was precipitated by the insults. Ergo, the conclusion is implied by you. This is an example of dishonesty on your part. You may think this is a dance or a sparring match; actually you are flip-flopping about like a fish out of water.
All you seem to really want is the last word. Ideally your access should be pulled and your account sent to time out. I really don't like hitting the abuse button or petulantly begging the moderator for relief. I recognise in some cases there may be an explanation for poor posting habits, e.g. alcohol or drug intoxication, unsatisfying sexual performance, poor job performance, feelings of racial inferiority, or some other infirmity. Since writing a post is not like operating heavy equipment, I'm sure we can put up with it, short of the actionable writings would cause FR a problem.
Yeah,but it doesn't really matter because my point was the 10 year old,her sister,and her friends were the original aggressors.
That's an issue I can't address since I don't know that particular school's policy. However, our local public schools also have a policy that assigns punishments to be suffered at school based on misconduct a student does in the community. For example, the head cheerleader caught at a party with alcohol will likely lose not only her cheerleader status (an elective), but might even be suspended or even expelled from school. Stronger transgressions result in more serious punishments.
My assumption is that the school in question has a similar policy.
Say what you will about the policy (and I can see where reasonable people could think there is a disconnect between behavior at school and in the community), but it has cut down on the raw number of incidents of misconduct in our town by teens.
Well, its not always an ideal world, now is it? All of us nasty people just spouting our opinions willy-nilly on FreeRepublic must really burn you, huh?
Have a nice day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.