# Poll: Cop car burning kid.



## kps (May 4, 2003)

So the news media is constantly dwelling on the 17 year old cop car arsonist from the recent Vancouver sport riot and his tearful apology. Excellent Oscar worthy performance that was. 

Lawyer says he "suffered" enough and should be forgiven. What say ye, ehmacians?

I say prosecute to the full extent of the law. He's still a juvie and can...with daddy's money and perhaps with a little time in the junior slammer turn his miserable, spoiled life around ....after he serves his 3 years that is.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

He could have killed someone. He's an idiot, no matter how wealthy his parents are. The only good thing he's done is confess, but that's hardly admirable. He would have been caught anyway with that footage. Just trying to save face, IMHO.


----------



## Mckitrick (Dec 25, 2005)

He's 17... Young and stupid. I don't think he should have his life ruined for falling victim to mob mentality...


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Mckitrick said:


> He's 17... Young and stupid. I don't think he should have his life ruined for falling victim to mob mentality...


Really? At what age do you think responsibility for one's actions should begin? He wasn't peeing on the sidewalk--he was trying to light a police cruiser on fire. I was certainly aware of the consequences of my actions when I was 17.


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

fjnmusic said:


> I was certainly aware of the consequences of my actions when I was 17.


How about me breaking into people's homes at the age of 15? I was caught and luckily the judge saw something in me that I didn't. I received two years probation and 150hrs comm. service. VERY lenient for that kind of crime. I NEVER did it again, and minus light drug use, I never broke the law again.

Punish him for sure, but he did make one stupid error in judgement and I don't think he should be screwed for the rest of life over something that didn't hurt anyone.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

I call bull**** on the so-called confession - I suspect it was carefully rehearsed and written by that lawyer. 

I think one needs to think about what could have happened. A burning car can explode and many people would have been hurt. 

Unfortunately there is no cure for stupid..........


----------



## ertman (Jan 15, 2008)

Was this the kid that is/was receiving the olympic sponsorship?

I am not seeing how he "suffered" enough, I think he does deserve jail time, how much, let the courts decide, he'll probably just get probation, which is better than him "suffering enough".

The mob mentality stuff is a pretty lame excuse. He is responsible for his own actions and should act and be punished accordingly.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Jail him and set an example for other punks who might think they can get away with it.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

The mob (or herd) mentality seems to be taking over the internet response to this as much as the mob mentality took over the crowds on the streets of Vancouver.

Under the law as a 'young offender' the kid was protected from having his identity published, but they got a court order waiving that right, so everyone knows his name. The result? Threats of reprisals (aka vigilantism) from members of the public. The family has had to leave their home, the father (and his medical practice partners) have had to shut down their practice. This disgusts me just as much as the actions of the mob on the street.

I think we should let the courts deal with him, as a young offender.

Too many people following the herd and not doing their own thinking. It's scary.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

It would appear that some are trying to take justice into their own hands… his family has received multiple threats and have had people show up at his house.

Frankly, I don't give two sh*ts if his confession sounds like it was written by his lawyer… it's neither here nor there. He waived his rights and did the right thing. He's going to take his punishment unlike the goons who are walking freely right now without any remorse or concern for their actions.

What I find sad is the absolute glee some people are taking over this whole thing.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

imnothng said:


> How about me breaking into people's homes at the age of 15? I was caught and luckily the judge saw something in me that I didn't. I received two years probation and 150hrs comm. service. VERY lenient for that kind of crime. I NEVER did it again, and minus light drug use, I never broke the law again.
> 
> Punish him for sure, but he did make one stupid error in judgement and I don't think he should be screwed for the rest of life over something that didn't hurt anyone.


And for every little angel that does come to his/her senses, how many more are encouraged by said leniency to turn the opportunity into a lifetime of crime?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

He should be tried and convicted as a young offender. It was too serious a crime to go unpunished. It need not "ruin" his life to do jail time, it may just save his life from spiralling all the more out of control thinking it is so easy to get off, just shed a few crocodile tears and walk. 

I think 6-12 months jail with 2 years probation following that would be reasonable.


----------



## chrisburke (May 11, 2010)

screature said:


> I think 6-12 months jail with 2 years probation following that would be reasonable.


I agree!

It really bugs me when people talk about "giving into the mob".. We are all our own people, and we all have our own brains, if you're so insecure that you can't walk away from something like this, and you give into peer pressure, that's your stupid fault.. Perhaps as well as jail time, he should be ordered to take some confidence building class so he can make decisions for himself...

Yes, I'm being sarcastic.. This kid chose to do this all on his own.. It has NOTHING to do with giving into mob mentality..

As for jail "ruining his life".. Jail won't ruin his life.. His decision to be a criminal is what will ruin his life


----------



## JAMG (Apr 1, 2003)

screature said:


> I think 6-12 months jail with 2 years probation following that would be reasonable.


Sounds very reasonable, by 17, you should know the phrase, "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime..." 

If this guy cries "young offender" or that he was just caught in the moment one more time I will puke. I am very liberal but crocodile tears disgust me. He should man up and take the consequences of his actions before showing his face and asking for forgiveness.

No sympathy for this devil.


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

screature said:


> He should be tried and convicted as a young offender. It was too serious a crime to go unpunished. It need not "ruin" his life to do jail time, it may just save his life from spiralling all the more out of control thinking it is so easy to get off, just shed a few crocodile tears and walk.
> 
> I think 6-12 months jail with 2 years probation following that would be reasonable.


I think that's too reasonable - I think 3 years jail, and 3 years probation, as well as full repayment of the off-the-lot value of the car (if destroyed, or any damage sustained if it wasn't).

It needs to be shown that rioting is completely unacceptable, and anyone doing so will get the book thrown at them. There is *no* excuse for rioting. It's uncivil, it's illegal, and it's just plain rude.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

JAMG said:


> Sounds very reasonable, by 17, you should know the phrase, "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime..."
> 
> If this guy cries "young offender" or that he was just caught in the moment one more time I will puke. I am very liberal but crocodile tears disgust me. He should man up and take the consequences of his actions before showing his face and asking for forgiveness.
> 
> No sympathy for this devil.


Got to give him credit for fessing up, gun to his head or not. However, this does not amount to a get out of jail free card. Lighter sentence, perhaps, but if he goes free, what message does that send to every other young person who only feels remorse after they tried to ignite a vehicle? I've been in a burning vehicle and fortunately escaped unharmed. It's serious enough when it's an accident. To brazenly do this when you know you're being photographed---well that's borderline homicidal and sociopathic. What does it take next time to get the same thrill?


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

We also have to look at how we treat those who do confess as an example to others who may feel guilty and want to confess but will not do so now because of the ramifications, not of the crime, but of the over-the-top reaction of the public. 

Yes, the kid did something horrible. He needs to be responsible for the consequences of his actions. But ... we also need to exhibit that thing known as 'compassion', and also prove that we live in a 'fair and just' society.

The lesson needs to be 'don't do this' rather than 'don't get caught'.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I certainly don't want people to believe that being swept up by crowd dynamics is a mitigating factor in lighting automobile gas tanks on fire.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

The only thing I think should effect his punishment should be whether its his first offence or not. If the crime has a min to max sentence, if its his first offence, it should be towards the min - med range. The situation leading up to the sentence and surrounding predicament shouldn't play that much of a roll if any. 

Here's what I will say...

You mix Young Age + Being Male + Alcohol + Large Group in same category and what you get is a very much shortened gap between a making a good decision and a bad one. 

There's still the gap and the decision still needs to be made correctly and the punishment still needs to be the same. 

I don't think as a society we can send the message that putting yourself in a situation like the one above is somehow grounds for a reduced sentence. 

Parents really need to teach young teens (Male especially) about the dangers and risks of certain situations. They need to be taught of certain decisions that need to be made _*before*_ they go into a situation where their judgement might not be the best. That relates to violence, driving, sex, theft etc...


----------



## Elric (Jul 30, 2005)

Mckitrick said:


> He's 17... Young and stupid. I don't think he should have his life ruined for falling victim to mob mentality...


I wish we still had the Like button.

He got caught up in the moment. I dare any of you to try and tell me you have never done anything stupid "in the heat of the moment" and I'll personally crown you Jesus Christ.
I say give him a fine, but leave his scholarship and everything else alone. The "Righteous Mob" has run his entire family out of town (possibly province), I mean, seriously? This new Mob is more disturbing than the one that started it all.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Elric said:


> I wish we still had the Like button.
> 
> He got caught up in the moment. I dare any of you to try and tell me you have never done anything stupid "in the heat of the moment" and I'll personally crown you Jesus Christ.
> I say give him a fine, but leave his scholarship and everything else alone. The "Righteous Mob" has run his entire family out of town (possibly province), I mean, seriously? This new Mob is more disturbing than the one that started it all.


I have never done anything violent or destroyed property in the heat of the moment.

I am far more disturbed by the mob that destroyed property and threatened lives for no good reason, than the current one.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> *I have never done anything violent or destroyed property in the heat of the moment.*
> 
> I am far more disturbed by the mob that destroyed property and threatened lives for no good reason, than the current one.


+1 this isn't getting stupid drunk and falling down. He lit a police car on fire for gawds sake! Maybe Elric participated in vandalism of private or of public property in his youth and thinks it is no big deal... But it is a big deal. The car could have exploded severally hurting or killing people. Sorry but those that think he should get just a slap on the wrist I think couldn't be more wrong. If he loses his scholarship over it too bad... he sure hasn't displayed that he is too smart and should lose his scholarship as far as I am concerned.


----------



## ertman (Jan 15, 2008)

Macfury said:


> I have never done anything violent or destroyed property in the heat of the moment.
> 
> I am far more disturbed by the mob that destroyed property and threatened lives for no good reason, than the current one.


+1

Same here.


----------



## jamesB (Jan 28, 2007)

Mckitrick said:


> He's 17... Young and stupid. I don't think he should have his life ruined for falling victim to mob mentality...


There's been much ado about having his life ruined.
Pure Bullcrap, it's called "lifes lessons", a temporary setback, while he pays up for his stupidity, and then his life will go on. Maybe not quite in the direction he'd hoped for, but no one except himself is to blame for that.
As far as his Olympic aspirations, considering most Olympians are taxpayer subsidized and often held up as "role models", I think in his case it's a big fail.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

screature said:


> He lit a police car on fire for gawds sake!


Correction, he ATTEMPTED to light a police car on fire and was stopped. The police car was not set on fire.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

Interesting article on 'due process'.

Tried and convicted in the court of public opinion?


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

Interesting, the Criminal Code of Canada doesn't seem to have attemped arson. The closest thing would be: 



> Possession of incendiary material​
> *436.1* Every person who possesses any incendiary material, incendiary device or explosive substance for the purpose of committing an offence under any of sections 433 to 436 is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
> 1990, c. 15, s. 1.


No wonder I can't find a sentence for it. Then again, maybe it's covered by some other offense.

Provided he isn't tried in the court of public opinion or by the internet's vigilante mob, my guess, since this is a first offense, there was no planning, he's turned himself in and expressed regret, is that he'll get a light sentence. 

Besides, really, is this the people we really want to prosecute? What about the ones that started all this, with face masks, etc. and came planning to do this. The ones with records of arson and malicious intent.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

Man, mischief is quite the big offense in the Criminal Code. You could get LIFE for mischief. That gives new meaning to mischief-maker!

Oh, and the Criminal Code of Canada is here: CanLII - Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46
if you are interested.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Kosh said:


> Correction, he ATTEMPTED to light a police car on fire and was stopped. The police car was not set on fire.


Is this true? I am just asking because by all reports he lit the car on fire.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> Is this true? I am just asking because by all reports he lit the car on fire.


Nah, it was like the shoe bomber. Couldn't quite get her lit. Perhaps that's his only good luck in this whole scenario.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

fjnmusic said:


> Nah, it was like the shoe bomber. Couldn't quite get her lit. Perhaps that's his only good luck in this whole scenario.


Ok so he never lit the police car on fire then? Is so then slap him on the wrist give him some community probation and be done with it.

Jail time for what? People selling crack don't get jail time, someone killing someone with car while drunk or driving recklessly don't get jail time. A 17 year old who tried but failed to light a police car on fire gets a year or more in jail like some of you are suggesting? Come on.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Kosh said:


> Correction, he ATTEMPTED to light a police car on fire and was stopped. The police car was not set on fire.


Ok correction noted.... I was going on what had been said here and the title of the thread... so he isn't a very accomplished arsonist... he was attempting to be an arsonist... I guess that makes it all right then and all he needs is a good spanking.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Kosh said:


> Interesting, the Criminal Code of Canada doesn't seem to have attemped arson. The closest thing would be:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Uh yes... if he had been successful he could have killed people. Do we really want to send the message, "all you have to do is shed crocodile tears and you get off?


----------



## chrisburke (May 11, 2010)

Terrorists that fail at their bombings get jail time.. He tried to blow up a car and failed.. How is a blowing up car that could kill people any different than a blowing up plane that can kill people?? This kid just didn't have the bomb up his ass...


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Just as an aside note, while I think the kid should be punished and even get some jail time, cars don't explode or blow up when they are lit on fire, even with a full tank of gas. That only happens in the movies. 

When the fire hits the gas, you'll get a bit of a whoosh, or a cap may even blow off, but you don't get an "explosion" or anything.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

chrisburke said:


> Terrorists that fail at their bombings get jail time.. He tried to blow up a car and failed.. How is a blowing up car that could kill people any different than a blowing up plane that can kill people?? This kid just didn't have the bomb up his ass...


Lighting a car on fire with no one in it with intent to burn the car because you're drunk and stupid with tons of people cheering around you with their cameras pointing at you *VS* bombing a plane with dozens of people on board, with intent to kill the people on board, meticulously pre-planned for religious and / or political reasons. 

The two have very little in common.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

screature said:


> Uh yes... if he had been successful he could have killed people. Do we really want to send the message, "all you have to do is shed crocodile tears and you get off?


Did you actually watch the drunken guy. He couldn't set something on fire if his life depended on it. I doubt the car would have even started on fire with the lighted rag thrown in the car window like that.

If there wasn't all this media circus around the event it wouldn't have even got hits on Youtube!


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Kosh said:


> Did you actually watch the drunken guy. He couldn't set something on fire if his life depended on it. I doubt the car would have even started on fire with the lighted rag thrown in the car window like that.
> 
> If there wasn't all this media circus around the event it wouldn't have even got hits on Youtube!


If he hadn't been filmed, he wouldn't have been caught... So what?


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

ehMax said:


> Just as an aside note, while I think the kid should be punished and even get some jail time, cars don't explode or blow up when they are lit on fire, even with a full tank of gas. That only happens in the movies.
> 
> When the fire hits the gas, you'll get a bit of a whoosh, or a cap may even blow off, but you don't get an "explosion" or anything.


True dat. I was in a burning car once……burnt to a crisp but never did explode. The mirris and the tires were melted little puddles on the ground.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Are we to say, then, that this bright fellow knew that he was sticking a wick into the gas tank, with absolutely confidence that this was a mere prank--that it had no chance of lighting the car on fire?

Intention is very important here.


----------



## Mckitrick (Dec 25, 2005)

It's funny how many of you think "a little jail time" won't ruin his life. 

It will. 

Once you have a criminal record, you lose your bondability and are severely limited in terms of career and travel for the rest of your life unless somehow you can get a pardon of some sort. 

"I knew the difference between right and wrong when I was 17" is another common sentiment. 
I personally knew the difference too but I was never put into a position of being in a "mob destruction" situation at that age so while I can *say* that I would have the confidence and presence of mind to walk away, I don't know for sure nor do I think the average person can say for sure either. 

I would say that if it's a first offense then go easy with the minimum/medium sentence subscribed by the law. If he has a history of being reckless and a hazard to society (which I doubt based on his scholarship, etc.) then nail him to the wall and make an example of him.

Why is everyone so excited to throw stones? Seems mean-spirited and vindictive to me. He's not a shoe bomber for crying out loud! I doubt very highly his *intent* was to hurt people.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Mckitrick said:


> It's funny how many of you think "a little jail time" won't ruin his life.
> 
> It will.
> 
> ...


Read your last paragraph again. Mean-spirited and vindictive is when you try to light someone's else's vehicle on fire, especially if that someone is a police officer. Tell me: what will the kid learn if the system is lenient on him? What will he do the next time he's in a mob situation? What lesson is he going to take away from this experience? And why not treat all the vandals with the same leniency? After all, we don't want to ruin their lives.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

You're right. Throw the book at him… he was clearly the worst of the bunch by burning that cop car. Well, _attempting_ to burn a police car, he didn't actually succeed, it was the other hooligans that followed through. But it doesn't matter. He's clearly at risk of attempting to burn other cars and will most likely be a repeat offender if Vancouver makes it to the finals next year… and fails… and a riot ensues… again.

Save us all.


----------



## whatiwant (Feb 21, 2008)

mannyp design said:


> you're right. Throw the book at him&#133; he was clearly the worst of the bunch by burning that cop car. Well, _attempting_ to burn a police car, he didn't actually succeed, it was the other hooligans that followed through. But it doesn't matter. He's clearly at risk of attempting to burn other cars and will most likely be a repeat offender if vancouver makes it to the finals next year&#133; and fails&#133; and a riot ensues&#133; again.
> 
> Save us all.


+1


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Mckitrick said:


> It's funny how many of you think "a little jail time" won't ruin his life.
> 
> It will.
> 
> ...


+1



fjnmusic said:


> Read your last paragraph again. Mean-spirited and vindictive is when you try to light someone's else's vehicle on fire, especially if that someone is a police officer. Tell me: what will the kid learn if the system is lenient on him? What will he do the next time he's in a mob situation? What lesson is he going to take away from this experience? And why not treat all the vandals with the same leniency? After all, we don't want to ruin their lives.


He's 17. As adults people seem to have short memories, maybe some of you were angels and saints (I highly doubt it) when you were 17. 

He and his family life will forever be changed now since be outed by the university and he didn't hurt one soul or actually damage any property. Remember he was unsuccessful in his attempt.

Why don't we focus our stones at people like this who's goal is to destroy property.

Montreal activist arrested during G20 will avoid time behind bars - 680News



> "I feel tearing down the security fence wasn't a call to violence," Singh explained. "It was a justifiable action in the face of the policies of the G20 and i stand by that."
> 
> *Instead of jail time, Singh has been given 75 hours of community service and one year probation. *


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> Why don't we focus our stones at people like this who's goal is to destroy property.


Why not all of them, Vancouver and G20?


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

Justice is always a balance of 'society' versus 'individual'. It bothers me to see the same emotionalism coming into play regarding 'punishment' that was in control during the riot itself.

Rational society, anyone?


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Macfury said:


> Why not all of them, Vancouver and G20?


I am with you on that. But this kid failed in his attempt so can't punish that.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> +1
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I imagine that by the time he is finished the legal game, our little Vancouver friend will get by with a warning or possibly a fine for public mischief, if that. But this thread is about what we think should happen, not what will likely happen. 

I'm surprised by the number if people here who favour leniency. What if that had been your car with your family inside? Just because he didn't succeed does not make his actions justifiable or even defensible. No penalty would set a terrible precedent legally for all the other hooligans who are ALSO watching this example very closely.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

I'm sure by the time he's finished the legal game Vancouver will have wasted more money than what it would have cost to buy a new Police cruiser.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MannyP Design said:


> I'm sure by the time he's finished the legal game Vancouver will have wasted more money than what it would have cost to buy a new Police cruiser.


Who ever said justice or the legal system comes cheap? Nice to know that you think it is a waste.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

fjnmusic said:


> I imagine that by the time he is finished the legal game, our little Vancouver friend will get by with a warning or possibly a fine for public mischief, if that. But this thread is about what we think should happen, not what will likely happen.
> 
> I'm surprised by the number if people here who favour leniency. What if that had been your car with your family inside? Just because he didn't succeed does not make his actions justifiable or even defensible. No penalty would set a terrible precedent legally for all the other hooligans who are ALSO watching this example very closely.





> What if that had been your car with your family inside?


 Now you are making up secenarios. Insurance will cover the cars thats why we pay the high prices.

His actions were not justifiable or even defensible agreeded. But you cannot send someone to jail for something that may have happened if all conditions were perfect. What is this the Minority Report?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Mckitrick said:


> It's funny how many of you think "a little jail time" won't ruin his life.
> 
> *It will.
> 
> ...


Tell that to Lindsay Lohan, Mike Tyson, etc., etc. A criminal record and jail time need not ruin your life, that is up to the individual.

I sure the hell new at 17 it wouldn't be "cool " to even *try* to set a police car on fire *especially* if it were in public...


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

screature said:


> Who ever said justice or the legal system comes cheap? Nice to know that you think it is a waste.


Please point out where I said it was a waste. Feel free. Go ahead. Show me.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MannyP Design said:


> Please point out where I said it was a waste. Feel free. Go ahead. Show me.


Like shootin' fish in a barrel:



MannyP Design said:


> I'm sure by the time he's finished *the legal game Vancouver will have wasted more money* than what it would have cost to buy a new Police cruiser.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

screature said:


> Tell that to Lindsay Lohan, Mike Tyson, etc., etc. A criminal record and jail time need not ruin your life, that is up to the individual.
> 
> *I sure the hell new at 17 it wouldn't be "cool " to even try to set a police car on fire especially if it were in public...*


Maybe you like I was afraid of the beating I would get when I got home. :yikes:


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

screature said:


> Like shootin fish in a barrel:


:lmao: You're making a pretty big leap, there. Are you _really_ that deficient?

Grasping at straws…


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MannyP Design said:


> :lmao: You're making a pretty big leap, there. Are you _really_ that deficient?
> 
> Grasping at straws…


Deficient in what? Tell me now what are you implying hmmm? Trying to be a jack ass are we?

You made the comment Vancouver would *waste* money playing the "legal game".. in black and white, now cut the crap.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

screature said:


> Tell that to Lindsay Lohan, Mike Tyson, etc., etc. A criminal record and jail time need not ruin your life, that is up to the individual.


Yes, because the experiences of celebrities are just like the experiences of everyone else....


----------



## Elric (Jul 30, 2005)

screature said:


> Maybe Elric participated in vandalism of private or of public property in his youth and thinks it is no big deal... But it is a big deal..


Yes, unfortunately I have. I never once said it "wasn't a big deal", I know it's a big deal.
I have apologized to all that I have wronged since I've grown up. And I can honestly say, if my apologies were not accepted I would have said "**** it then" and would be in a FAR worse place than I am right now.

The kid was trying to make it right, if we all go barbarian on his ass, he's going to go down for the rest of his life. For one stupid mistake.

Just for fun, let's google how the brain works during adolescence.

Society for Neuroscience - The Adolescent Brain

"Areas associated with more basic functions, including the motor and sensory areas, mature early. Areas involved in planning and decision-making, including the prefrontal cortex -- the cognitive or reasoning area of the brain important for controlling impulses and emotions -- appear not to have yet reached adult dimension during the early twenties. The brain's reward center, the ventral striatum, also is more active during adolescence than in adulthood, and the adolescent brain still is strengthening connections between its reasoning- and emotion-related regions."


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Sonal said:


> Yes, because the experiences of celebrities are just like the experiences of everyone else....


In fact if anyone's life *could* be ruined by jail time it would be a celebrity as their reputation is in the public eye. So if celebrities can do jail time and come back from the very public humiliation then a private citizen should have every bit as much ability to do so. As I said it is up to the individual as to whether or not it ruins their life.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Elric said:


> Yes, unfortunately I have. I never once said it "wasn't a big deal", I know it's a big deal.
> I have apologized to all that I have wronged since I've grown up. And I can honestly say, if my apologies were not accepted I would have said "**** it then" and would be in a FAR worse place than I am right now.
> 
> The kid was trying to make it right, if we all go barbarian on his ass, he's going to go down for the rest of his life. For one stupid mistake.
> ...


Good for you Elric that you were honest enough to make this post.

I certainly don't wan't to go barbarian on the kid but he shouldn't get a free pass either. It doesn't set the right example for him or the public at large. As I said before I think 6-12 months and then 2 years probation would be fair and I'm quite sure that with a lenient judge he wouldn't even get that, but I think he should have to get something... even if it is just two years probation with no jail time.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

What will ruin his life is trying to burn a police car in full public view. Just how stupid do you have to be to do THAT?

Any punishment is a *consequence* of that choice. Consequences are something these kids just don't understand. 'If you can't do the time don't do the crime' is a saying for a reason.


----------



## dibenga (Oct 30, 2001)

Ya'll a bunch of bleeding hearts. Crucify the little prick.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

screature said:


> In fact if anyone's life *could* be ruined by jail time it would be a celebrity as their reputation is in the public eye. So if celebrities can do jail time and come back from the very public humiliation then a private citizen should have every bit as much ability to do so. As I said it is up to the individual as to whether or not it ruins their life.


I disagree in the case of celebrities... jail time means more publicity, book deals, TV talk show appearances, photos from jail to be sold, possibly a reality show deal, etc. 

I do agree to a point that it is up to the individual (might be a very good reason to go into self-employment, for example) but it's a significant handicap.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

Macfury said:


> If he hadn't been filmed, he wouldn't have been caught... So what?


That's not what I meant,... then again maybe indirectly that's what would have happened.

What I meant is none of this would have even been news. It's interesting how people can get so whipped up into a vigilante mob just by news coverage...

It reminds me of a woman who's child died, I can't remember the exact details of the case, but there were some doubts whether the woman killed her kid or not, at least for some. But not the people in the town or city she lived in. She was arrested and had a trial within a day. Hilarious, how often do you see a trial within a day with our backed up justice system??? You have to wonder if justice was done? Was everyone at that trial unbiased and had time time to cool down?


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Monkey See, Monkey Do.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Sonal said:


> I disagree in the case of celebrities... jail time means more publicity, book deals, TV talk show appearances, photos from jail to be sold, possibly a reality show deal, etc.
> 
> I do agree to a point that it is up to the individual (might be a very good reason to go into self-employment, for example) but it's a significant handicap.


Didn't work that way for Mel Gibbson for example... as I said it depends on the individual and obviously what you went to jail for as to how much of a hindrance it can be to you. 

I had a buddy who did a very short stint for drug possession and the only significant limitation it put on his life was the inability to enter the US. The claims being made here is that it will *ruin* his life. Again it need not but if it does that is because of him and his own actions not the jail time and criminal record itself.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

screature said:


> Didn't work that way for Mel Gibbson for example... as I said it depends on the individual and obviously what you went to jail for as to how much of a hindrance it can be to you.
> 
> I had a buddy who did a very short stint for drug possession and the only significant limitation it put on his life was the inability to enter the US. The claims being made here is that it will *ruin* his life. Again it need not but if it does that is because of him and his own actions not the jail time and criminal record itself.


Ya who checks for criminal records when hiring? I certainly haven't, and I should have.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

There is a kid in our community who got a bad reputation after trashing the washrooms in the local highschool. He didn't make the papers or anything, there wasn't video of the event on the internet, but still all the teachers knew, the parents of the other kids at the school knew, and potential employers in the area knew (and still know). He was 15 at the time, and was just a stupid kid. He made restitution. He got some counselling. 

Did he turn his life around? Nope. He's 21 now and living in his mother's basement. Never graduated highschool, can't find work. The only recourse will probably be to move away from here where he can blend into the crowd.

Does it bother me? More than just a little.

I hate to see 'potential' lost, because of one stupid decision that was made for all the wrong reasons. Teenagers are technically insane, (don't you know?) and make spur of the moment decisions based upon using the wrong part of the (still developing) brain. (aka amygdala hijacking).

No, it's not an 'excuse', but it's also not a reason to 'throw the book at him', and 'make an example of him'. He's a kid. *We have a justice system that recognizes that kids do things that reasonable adults would not do.* Let's let that justice system work. He's been 'outed'. His life, as he knew it, will never be the same.

So ... let's let the justice system deal with him. Let him deal with the ramifications of his actions. Because there will be ramifications. 

But I'm really sick and tired of all this 'holier than thou' stuff that's happening here. The only reasons this is a big deal and people are discussing it on web forums is because:

1) there is video 
2) there is the internet
3) people don't have better things to do with their time than judge others

How about we spend our time on something a little more positive and productive? How about all those people who are being shown in videos as trying to prevent the destruction? How about the same amount of time be spend reinforcing their actions as have been spent pretending that we're all better than this 17 year old kid?

Try to set some positive examples, people.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MLeh said:


> There is a kid in our community who got a bad reputation after trashing the washrooms in the local highschool. He didn't make the papers or anything, there wasn't video of the event on the internet, but still all the teachers knew, the parents of the other kids at the school knew, and potential employers in the area knew (and still know). He was 15 at the time, and was just a stupid kid. He made restitution. He got some counselling.
> 
> Did he turn his life around? Nope. He's 21 now and living in his mother's basement. Never graduated highschool, can't find work. The only recourse will probably be to move away from here where he can blend into the crowd.
> 
> Does it bother me? More than just a little....


MLeh examples like this are in every community, but it isn't just one mistake that leads to someone not finishing high school and living with their parents at 21 without a job. 

It is comes down to their individual character, personality, motivation etc. Sure to some people you will always be "branded" in such and such a way, I experienced that myself growing up, but you either choose to rise above it or you don't, that is no one else's fault if you don't.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MLeh said:


> Did he turn his life around? Nope. He's 21 now and living in his mother's basement. Never graduated highschool, can't find work. The only recourse will probably be to move away from here where he can blend into the crowd.
> 
> Does it bother me? More than just a little.


Why should anyone local hire him when they have a choice of hiring another teenager who has never done such a thing?

Better he should move away and hope nobody finds out what he has done.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Saw what I thought, was a really great interview with *Stephen Fry* on TV last night. Was just talking about his life. For those who don't know him, he's a very accomplished comedian, actor and author. He started his career with Hugh Laurie (Of House fame) and Emma Thomas. 

Anyways, he had a troubled youth and at 17, he was caught for credit card fraud and did a minor 3 month stint in prison. He credits that prison time as his wake-up call and turned his life around and was determined to get into Cambridge university. Someone there was willing to look past his stint in jail. 

Just thought this story was really applicable to this thread. 

Young male teens need to know that there are consequences for actions and I think sometimes that involves a necessary wake-up call. 

I also do think that once a punishment is served, there needs to be forgiveness and second and even 3rd chances at life. 

As in a lot of situations, I think the solution to this kid is somewhere in-between extreme viewpoints.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

ehMax said:


> Young male teens need to know that there are consequences for actions and I think sometimes that involves a necessary wake-up call.


What's the fixation with young male teens. Young female teens can be even worse. I saw a mob of female teens beat up one female teen for nothing. Young female teens love to internet bully. I've seen young females sentenced for murder. Young females were also caught in this Vancouver riot.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

screature said:


> MLeh examples like this are in every community, but it isn't just one mistake that leads to someone not finishing high school and living with their parents at 21 without a job.
> 
> It is comes down to their individual character, personality, motivation etc. Sure to some people you will always be "branded" in such and such a way, I experienced that myself growing up, but you either choose to rise above it or you don't, that is no one else's fault if you don't.


I absolutely agree. Didn't mean to blame 'society' for all his woes (he's got lots of other issues), but it is sad to see lost potential.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Kosh said:


> *What's the fixation with young male teens.* Young female teens can be even worse. I saw a mob of female teens beat up one female teen for nothing. Young female teens love to internet bully. I've seen young females sentenced for murder. Young females were also caught in this Vancouver riot.


Statistics. Although the rate for young women is increasing, there are irrefutable statistics the young men are many time over more likely to commit crime. 

Just anecdotally looking at the crowds in Vancouver, there is about a 100 to 1 ratio of young guys to young women.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

ehMax said:


> Saw what I thought, was a really great interview with *Stephen Fry* on TV last night. Was just talking about his life. For those who don't know him, he's a very accomplished comedian, actor and author. He started his career with Hugh Laurie (Of House fame) and Emma Thomas.
> 
> Anyways, he had a troubled youth and at 17, he was caught for credit card fraud and did a minor 3 month stint in prison. He credits that prison time as his wake-up call and turned his life around and was determined to get into Cambridge university. Someone there was willing to look past his stint in jail.
> 
> ...


+1 Agreed, good post, I think these are the kind of points that many of us here are trying to make.


----------



## broad (Jun 2, 2009)

MannyP Design said:


> I'm sure by the time he's finished the legal game Vancouver will have wasted more money than what it would have cost to buy a new Police cruiser.


so when someone gets mugged and their wallet stolen instead of catching the thief the toronto police should just replace the $40 the victim had in their wallet and tell them to get on with their life?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MLeh said:


> I absolutely agree. Didn't mean to blame 'society' for all his woes (he's got lots of other issues), *but it is sad to see lost potential.*


Agreed.


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

prosecute him.

he's only sorry b/c he got caught.

someone could have died or been hurt, he destroyed property and worse, it was a cop car! no respect for the police?! and the fact that he was part of idiocy which cost the taxpayers alot of cash in OT for the police officers no doubt (and paying for a new car)

if he's let off, it's sending a very bad message about right and wrong.

throw the book at him!


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

ehMax said:


> Saw what I thought, was a really great interview with *Stephen Fry* on TV last night. Was just talking about his life. For those who don't know him, he's a very accomplished comedian, actor and author. He started his career with Hugh Laurie (Of House fame) and Emma Thomas.
> 
> Anyways, he had a troubled youth and at 17, he was caught for credit card fraud and did a minor 3 month stint in prison. He credits that prison time as his wake-up call and turned his life around and was determined to get into Cambridge university. Someone there was willing to look past his stint in jail.
> 
> ...


Also agreed good post. So I think he has served is punishment as his scholarship and playing for Canada in his sport was taken away. Let's forgive and forget.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

keebler27 said:


> prosecute him.
> 
> he's only sorry b/c he got caught.
> 
> ...


Again he did not destroy anything, he attempted to and was stopped.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

This kid is not likely going to go to jail. He's 17 and a young offender. A year or 2 from now his life will be back on track. There may be some long term consequences but his life will not be ruined. He has a couple of things going for him, his family is rich and he has lawyers fighting for him.

Yes, there are a lot of yahoos out there calling for life imprisonment and doing illegal things like harassing his family. In the meantime the justice system will follow due process. I don't see any reason to worry about this kid's future unless he continues to do stupid things going forward. My guess is that he'll probably learn from this, maybe his athletic career will be over but he'll finish his education and get a job.

This kid is not nearly the worst of some of rioters captured on film and video, his picture just became a symbol. There's a young woman caught on video (who I believe has also turned herself in) who can be seen smashing the cop car quite violently with a 2x4 or something and then later succeeding in lighting the back seat on fire. She was pretty intent on getting that car to burn and with the help of others did what the more famous kid failed to do. I expect she might be looking at some jail time. I don't know if her parents have retained lawyers to look out for her or if she is young enough to fall under the young offender category.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

broad said:


> so when someone gets mugged and their wallet stolen instead of catching the thief the toronto police should just replace the $40 the victim had in their wallet and tell them to get on with their life?


That's _exactly_ what I'm saying.


----------



## JAMG (Apr 1, 2003)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> This kid is not likely going to go to jail. He's 17 and a young offender. A year or 2 from now his life will be back on track. There may be some long term consequences but his life will not be ruined. He has a couple of things going for him, his family is rich and he has lawyers fighting for him.


He is white and was not selling $50 worth of crack so let him go?

Puh-Leeeese....

He should get much more than a slap on the wrist, but not a life sentence.
I don't think he should be banned from water polo but I would be disappointed if there are 10 world class athletes in canada who would want his notoriety to follow their team to the Olympics...

Damaged goods, buddy... go silent for a couple years, get out of the media, but this is going to follow you, not every day, but anytime you approach the spotlight, expect this to resurface.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

JAMG said:


> He is white and was not selling $50 worth of crack so let him go?
> 
> Puh-Leeeese....
> 
> ...


Exactly. The only way to prevent more people from becoming hooligans and vandals is by forcing them to think ahead to the consequences of their actions and, failing that, allow them to live with the consequences, however inconvenient they may be. To ignore the concept of natural justice is a gross distortion of the concept of "forgive and forget." Perhaps some kind of healing circle where the wrongdoer must confront the people they've hurt would be appropriate.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

JAMG said:


> He is white and was not selling $50 worth of crack so let him go?
> 
> Puh-Leeeese....
> 
> ...


OK JAMG, you've grossly twisted what I wrote and went on to present that distortion as my opinion. The idea that I would suggest that a criminal not be charged because they are white is offensive to me. You can retract that baseless fictional statement please.

If you look back in this thread and on the Stanley Cup thread you'll see that you have completely misunderstood where I was coming from. No where did I say that anyone should "get off" or get "a slap on the wrist". In my other posts on the subject I expressed the opinion that I was angry and disgusted by the riot and that I hope the police can apprehend every last one of the arseholes who participated.

I was stating my opinion of what he would likely get based on his age and seriousness of his crime. I don't think he will get jail time, or if he does it will be light. I'm not a legal expert but I don't think they even give jail time to minors. I do believe that while this kid is clearly stupid, his was not the worst of the crimes that occurred. I have heard very little about the young woman I wrote about who appears extensively in photos and videos actually succeeding in lighting the car on fire as well as actively smashing it.

I'm not a vigilante and I don't believe in "throwing the book" at anyone just because I might be angry. I do believe in due process. For many of the riot participants jail is certainly warranted and especially for those that assaulted others who were attempting to protect cars and windows from being destroyed. Assault is a lot more serious than wrecking a car in my opinion. For a lot of the people who were there I would expect community service will be the sentence, if they can be caught.

Something that a lot of people are overlooking is that anyone who remained in the area after the police ordered the crowd to leave were breaking the law, even if they only wanted to hang around to see the action. They hampered the ability of the police to get at the real jerks and helped create the conditions for the riot to carry on longer. I hope many of them are charged as well, although I certainly wouldn't advocate jail for that. There is suggestion that a brigade of community service sentencers working on cleaning up alleys and graffiti downtown would be a good idea for the lighter crimes.

Again, I hope that the police are able to apprehend as many of the lawbreakers as possible and that the justice system gives them fitting sentences based on their crimes.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> Exactly. The only way to prevent more people from becoming hooligans and vandals is by forcing them to think ahead to the consequences of their actions and, failing that, allow them to live with the consequences, however inconvenient they may be. To ignore the concept of natural justice is a gross distortion of the concept of "forgive and forget." Perhaps some kind of healing circle where the wrongdoer must confront the people they've hurt would be appropriate.


This is what I'm talking about. Should the people in this video who are clearly vandalizing someone else's property while the three girls try in vain to protect their vehicle also be treated leniently? After all, they are also young and don't need to have the rest of their lives ruined because of a youthful indiscretion. Another good case of forgive and forget? 

YouTube - ‪Women Defending Their BMW From Vancouver Rioters‬‏


----------



## steviewhy (Oct 21, 2010)

sudo rm -rf /


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

fjnmusic said:


> Exactly. The only way to prevent more people from becoming hooligans and vandals is by forcing them to think ahead to the consequences of their actions and, failing that, allow them to live with the consequences, however inconvenient they may be. To ignore the concept of natural justice is a gross distortion of the concept of "forgive and forget." Perhaps some kind of healing circle where the wrongdoer must confront the people they've hurt would be appropriate.


Actually it has been proven that fear of punishment does not deter from crime. It never has and it never will.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Joker Eh said:


> Actually it has been proven that fear of punishment does not deter from crime. It never has and it never will.


I would like to see where that it has been proven. There have been studies that show *increased* penalties don't reduce the incidence of a particular crime or are a deterrent. But for example when I was a kid I know that I wouldn't do certain things because I knew if I did and my Dad found out the s**t would hit the fan, so because I knew of the potential repercussions for my actions I wouldn't do certain things. I believe that this remains true in later life as well. For example when I was young I used to speed all the time, after a couple of hefty speeding tickets and the resultant increase of licensing and insurance costs I sure learned my lesson and didn't speed any more.

I think in most circumstances the reason why a person will or will not commit a premeditated crime is whether or not they think they can get away with it, I do agree that for crimes that are not premeditated fear of punishment is not a deterrent at all because the perpetrator isn't thinking at all.


----------



## Elric (Jul 30, 2005)

screature said:


> I do agree that for crimes that are not premeditated fear of punishment is not a deterrent at all because the perpetrator isn't thinking at all.


I think this applies perfectly to the topic.


----------



## JAMG (Apr 1, 2003)

I have no sympathy for this brat, take offense if you chose, but the suggestion that he is from a good home, rich parents with lawyers, and his life will be back on track offends me.

I do not retract.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

JAMG said:


> I have no sympathy for this brat, take offense if you chose, but the suggestion that he is from a good home, rich parents with lawyers, and his life will be back on track offends me.
> 
> I do not retract.


Yep. I didn't care about his life before he tried to blow up a car. Why should I care if his life gets back "on track" now?


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Macfury said:


> Yep. I didn't care about his life before he tried to *blow up a car*. Why should I care if his life gets back "on track" now?






+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






Again... I think the distinction needs to be made between _blowing up a car_, and _lighting a car on fire_. The above is blowing up a car, which happens in movies. 

The kid did not attempt to _blow up_ a car. . 

Below is a car on fire. Notice the fireman not running away in horror for fear of the car _blowing up_. This is because cars on fire do no _blow up_. 





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






As for the question of why should you care if his life gets back "on track" now. 

For myself, for purely selfish reasons, I'd rather have a 17 year old back "on track" to be a productive, tax paying, law abiding member of society for the rest of his life, than see really harsh justice done, but have him get to entrenched in the system and continue a life of crime and being a burden on society.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Macfury said:


> Yep. I didn't care about his life before he tried to blow up a car. Why should I care if his life gets back "on track" now?


Because people need to forgive and move forward.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Lars said:


> Because people need to forgive and move forward.


Forgive him? Move forward? He didn't do anything to me. If the media never reports on hm again, I won't even be curious. I simply care about him slightly less than 8 billion others who don't do anything destructive.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ehMax said:


> Again... I think the distinction needs to be made between _blowing up a car_, and _lighting a car on fire_. The above is blowing up a car, which happens in movies.
> 
> The kid did not attempt to _blow up_ a car. .


With all due respect, you don't know what he intended to. But the possibility of that outcome existed.



ehMax said:


> For myself, for purely selfish reasons, I'd rather have a 17 year old back "on track" to be a productive, tax paying, law abiding member of society for the rest of his life, than see really harsh justice done, but have him get to entrenched in the system and continue a life of crime and being a burden on society.


Sure. I'll be happy if it turns out that way. But not if the only way to achieve that is letting him off the hook.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

JAMG said:


> I have no sympathy for this brat, take offense if you chose, but the suggestion that he is from a good home, rich parents with lawyers, and his life will be back on track offends me.
> 
> I do not retract.


Hey JAMG, you know what? You've just revealed something about YOUR character now. The idea that I would support someone being let off because they were white is a racist accusation you made about me and I said nothing of the kind.

I also never claimed that I had sympathy for him or any of the other rioters. You also read that into my comment and smeared me with that. 

What I wrote was to state that in my opinion his life will be back on track within a year or two because that is what will likely happen. First because he is a minor, and second because he comes from a rich family who have lawyers. I highly doubt if he will go to jail, or at least not for long. It also offends me that he would get better treatment than others because of his family's wealth, but this is a fact. I also did not indicate he came from a "good" family, I highly doubt that a good family could produce a kid with such a serious lack of good judgement.

I really wish you would actually read someone's comment rather than make drive-by accusations based on your distorted perception of what they wrote.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Macfury said:


> With all due respect, you don't know what he intended to. But the possibility of that outcome existed.


While I don't know with 100% certainty, I'm quite certain he didn't intend for the car to explode or blow up. I disagree that the possibility of that outcome existed, unless there happened to be dynamite in the police cruiser which I don't think police are in the habit of carrying around to crowd control calls. 



Macfury said:


> Sure. I'll be happy if it turns out that way. But not if the only way to achieve that is letting him off the hook.


I agree, I don't think he should be let off the hook.


----------



## JAMG (Apr 1, 2003)

Your statements offend me,
My statements offend you...

film at eleven...

BTW, I am not calling you a racist, but I disagree with "your distorted perception"


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Well here's my spin on this. 

It might be considered public mischief if he tried to burn down a newspaper box, but when you attack what is unquestionably a symbol, not only of authority, but of security and public safety, you are attacking the very fabric of society that keeps us from lapsing into anarchy.

He needs a few quiet years in a juvie institution to mull things over...then a lengthy probation with conditions.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

JAMG said:


> Your statements offend me,
> My statements offend you...
> 
> film at eleven...
> ...


You most certainly DID imply that my comment was racist with this comment:


JAMG said:


> He is white and was not selling $50 worth of crack so let him go?
> 
> Puh-Leeeese....


The fact that I wrote nothing like that and that you completely misrepresented what I wrote and now won't even own up to it, after I've carefully explained what I wrote, is what is offensive. It's an offence to basic reason, intelligence and honesty.

You say "your statements offend me" yet nothing you've said about my statements is even vaguely correct. Amazing. 

OK, which statements specifically? Not your skewed interpretation of them, which ones?


----------



## Mckitrick (Dec 25, 2005)

ehMax said:


> unless there happened to be dynamite in the police cruiser which I don't think police are in the habit of carrying around to crowd control calls.


Who knows.... That might be effective.


----------



## friend (Nov 14, 2009)

A Police car is an emergency vehicle, thus 
the crime becomes a treat to public safety.
Age might come into consideration depending
on any previous crimes, felonious or convictions.


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

kps said:


> Well here's my spin on this.
> 
> It might be considered public mischief if he tried to burn down a newspaper box, but when you attack what is unquestionably a symbol, not only of authority, but of security and public safety, you are attacking the very fabric of society that keeps us from lapsing into anarchy.
> 
> He needs a few quiet years in a juvie institution to mull things over...then a lengthy probation with conditions.


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

ehMax said:


> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> ...


I think you're splitting hairs here, mayor. Whether the car blows up or burns in a blaze of glory, the passengers inside would still be just as dead, or at the very least, the property damage would be just as costly to replace. Danger is danger and the kid was knowingly being an idiot. What could he possibly say to rationalize his act as not dangerous?


----------

