oVo wrote:1101 people should have the pulse of America.
This week in Texas, an 18 year old boy who stole a few cases of beer with friends and killed 4 people (injuring 7 others) driving drunk was given 19 years probation, while a woman who was caught stealing a weed eater and an armful of other things (her second offense) was sentenced to 70 years in prison.
In the drunk driving case, the rich kid's parents did put the boy in an expensive California rehab center while he was waiting his trial. If you compare time in a rehab center to dog years they are very similar. So obviously the potential 20 year sentence for killing and crippling half a dozen people was easily satisfied with an out of state non-alcohol country club experience.
Yeah, I saw those two cases. The case of the teenager, what's there to say? Pretty messed up.
However, the lady with the 70 year sentence, she probably deserved it. It's not just the stealing of the power tools, she has a rap sheet the size of "War and Peace". In the past she's been convicted of solicitation to commit murder, credit card fraud, child endangerment, theft, assault and, of course, drug possession. The woman is a career criminal. And she was convicted under the "three strikes you're out" law (which the fairness is of itself another discussion). Even if she hadn't been tried under that law, she would have been sentenced to 2 to 20 years. If she'd been sentenced to 20 years some would still be saying "for stealing power tools? 20 years?"
Naw, even though sentenced for 70 years, she won't serve all that time. She could have gotten life in prison. She'll be out on parole in a decade or two, if even that long. At which time she will almost certainly go ahead and commit more crimes, thus repeating her previous bad decisions. After a while people stop with the "let's just give the convicted a second chance (third, fourth, fifth, etc etc) At some point someone says "enough is enough".
Which brings one back to the 19 year old. Probation for the killing of four people, though unintended, is pretty light. Though I can't blame the family or lawyer for doing everything they can to defend against the charges. That's just normal.
But how long of a sentence should he have gotten, in one's opinion?
People, do they deserve to get second chances for mistakes made (as horrible as those mistakes sometimes are)?
*I'm not saying the kid should get, nor is it right, that he get leniency, I'm just exploring justice here is all*
It's unfortunate to say the least that deaths of the four others that the teen was responsible for. But what sentence is going to bring back the dead? The teen's family is likely going to be facing civil suits which could lead to the family's destitution. Which causes more suffering and what not. And people are big on giving second chances. Like the post here about the woman getting 70 years, should she deserve a second chance? (scratch that, more like twentieth chance).
Individuals seem to be arbitrary on who should and who shouldn't get leniency based on emotional responses. That's fine and dandy as it's only human to be as such, but we have courts. They aren't perfect, not by a long shot, but I'll take it over law and punishment based on emotion. IMO. If the teen messes up again in life, this case will be remembered and he could find himself under the gun as the woman who got 70 years.
Then again, the kid killed four people. Tossing him in prison for 40 years may be justice as well. It's in the kid's ballpark now. He might have a chance to make something of his life, which won't bring back the dead but in the end may make the world a slightly better place. Or he could keep on making stupid decisions and he'll end up like the lady getting 70 years for stealing tools.
