NY Blogger Criticized For Posting Photos of Teen Vandals
pixiq.com
pixiq.com
Of course, I'm joking. I applaud the posting.
We had a similar thing near here where a package thief was recorded making her rounds. And the thieves among us commented how terrible it was that she was put on public display for her crimes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poMTVXcvGoo
And criminals will have their countermeasures. Burglaries may be performed by robots that fly into your garage as the door closes when you leave for the office.
Of course you're right that in general people must be held accountable for their crimes. However, it's somewhat different for children, who need and deserve some protection from the stupid things they do in their youth.
I fully support the punishment of the children, and any and all legal ramifications they receive, but I don't believe they should be help accountable forever. I suspect that when these kids go for jobs in 10 years, the first result in Google will be the post with their names and their foolish youthful actions.
Actually it won't be... Google works like the world does. If these kids were to do more valuable things with there time and be recognized for that, then these pages with fall in their ranking.
Are you saying that these kids should be admitted into college over kids that don't throw rocks at people and destroy other people's property?
Because while I was maybe mischievous, I wasn't a malicious little shit doing pointlessly antagonistic and destructive things.
I just think that someone so blatantly being a jackass, and being filmed in the act, deserves all the publicity that they get. I'm not suggesting we burn these kids at the stake or tattoo their crimes on their forehead. I just fail to see why anyone should bemoan their potentially besmirched reputation. Boo. Hoo.
In olden times when we lived in small villages, yes people knew when someone was being an asshole. And they remembered. One more disincentive against bad behavior.
And people know they are dealing with a young person and the potential to grow out of it. All the more reason to make the consequences immediate and not have them learn they can treat badly without consequence.
I am. I don't think a fine effectively gets across the point that battery and vandalism are crimes, not minor violations like jaywalking. $200 is a speeding ticket, and to some upper-middle class teenagers, little more than pocket change. Three days in jail (or juvenile detention), on the other hand is most likely a novel and frightening experience that's actually likely to discourage similar behavior in the future.
> some upper-middle class teenagers, little more
> than pocket change
> Three days in jail (or juvenile detention), on
> the other hand is most likely a novel and frightening
> experience that's actually likely to discourage similar
> behavior in the future.
The part were you are an arsonist, run a medicare fraud ring, and have stolen millions from investors will be so far back in the Google results it will be like it never happened.
and perhaps it will be a lesson to parents to know what their kid is up to. Its the mom thats really complained here and again, its better to suffer the embarrassment when its about something minor
BTW, why is it OK to use "pedophile" as an insult? If you used other mental diseases as insults, it's considered offensive. ("You're a retard!")
(Incidentally, I am not sure what insult to use for someone that thinks there's a link between wanting to have sex with undeveloped children and videotaping developed teenagers committing crimes.)
I would like to hear that someone was sued for slander for that. It's an outrageous accusation as a weak "Witch!" cry because their poorly raised, nit wit, addled youth are morons.
Their "pedophile" is my "model citizen", and I think most people are on my side :)
I suppose the best response possible would be to be waiting with predrafted legal papers for slander and ask "Sir what is your name?" when they're forced to respond simply fill out their name and say "Consider yourself served".
Of course if the police don't arrest them, the process won't start, so bringing pressure on the police through the blog and the press might get things started so they can prosecute the teens.
In an age when almost everyone has a camera and Internet access in their pocket, I'm amazed at how ignorant people still are regarding photo/privacy rights ... and I'm not one to have high expectations of society.
Self defense.
People who dig their heads in the sand and ignore minor crime while "leaving to the police" are screwing over their communities with their indifference. And teenagers? That's especially when people should get involved - kids who never learn what the boundaries are become shitty adults.
Gerritsen Beach is its own place. I'm not excusing it, but it explains so much.
An otherwise completely normal European country.
Screenshots were available publicly therefore submitted to the public domain.
Again with the public domain? Of course that's not what the whole article is about, but I'm astonished how this kind of reasoning seems to have manifested itself.
When one attacks another's person and property, one should expect retribution.
I think the problem here was that these kids are the children of local cops, who willingly turned a blind eye.
Just ONE adult with a shiny chrome .45, 1911 frame or shotgun would have stopped all of this in its tracks.
EDIT to add: "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." -- Robert A. Heinlein
From the article: "An older man in his late 60′s was driving along Gerritsen Avenue when his car was hit by eggs, when he exited the vehicle he was pelted by dozens of eggs, rocks were thrown, chucks of brick, and someone tossed a hammer."
And how's that been working out lately for you Americans?
Much like the repeal of the national 55mph speed limit, the arguments against were all FUD. Neither resulted in bloodbaths.
[1] A law which requires the state to issue a permit to carry a concealed weapon, except under specific disqualifying circumstances, which the state bears the onus showing.