David Holden/Aidan McAnespie

[101]

It does seem odd that despite his lies he gets away with no real punishment, I would have had some sympathy if he had admitted it being a mistake and trying to act the big man or whatever he was doing. But to say his hands were wet as some kind of bizzare justification alone should have seen him inside or on community service.

[TxRover]

4 hours ago, Shotgun said:

Exactly right, and the reverse of my statement is also true. If at 18, he isn't responsible enough to be carrying a gun, then he shouldn't be put in that situation.

Essentially, it comes down to:
If he is old enough to carry a gun, then he is old enough to be held accountable for what he does with it. If he isn't old enough to be held accountable for what he does with it, then he isn't old enough to carry a a gun. It's one or the other.

In which case the fault lies in the system that armed him. I think the sentence wasn’t unreasonable in the circumstance, however the suspension of the custodial period makes it a joke. On the other hand, I understand the hesitancy of the court to impose a custodial sentence at this remote time from the “crime”, but that’s pretty harsh on the victims family. On the gripping hand, if he’s guilty, how are we punishing if we allow consideration of activity since the crime to influence sentence…unless the court is agreeing the criminal was too young to be fully responsible at  the time?

[Jacksgranda]

2 minutes ago, TxRover said:

In which case the fault lies in the system that armed him. I think the sentence wasn’t unreasonable in the circumstance, however the suspension of the custodial period makes it a joke. On the other hand, I understand the hesitancy of the court to impose a custodial sentence at this remote time from the “crime”, but that’s pretty harsh on the victims family. On the gripping hand, if he’s guilty, how are we punishing if we allow consideration of activity since the crime to influence sentence…unless the court is agreeing the criminal was too young to be fully responsible at  the time?

This is the problem, this should all have been sorted 30 odd years ago, although it's obvious why it wasn't.

[TxRover]

20 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

This is the problem, this should all have been sorted 30 odd years ago, although it's obvious why it wasn't.

The problem should have been sorted literally centuries ago…but we all know why it wasn’t.

[Jacksgranda]

Just now, TxRover said:

The problem should have been sorted literally centuries ago…but we all know why it wasn’t.

And how would you liked to have seen it sorted?

[TxRover]

9 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

And how would you liked to have seen it sorted?

There was no sorting it, mores the shame. The inherent problems of wealth, religion and bigotry that have persisted for centuries continue. There is no good answer…we all know the “correct” answer, but even then, it still hurts people and causes issue. The problems are beyond a quick answer summed up in a few words. Where the involved people have come together, worked and respected each other, advances have been made, but we still have a long way to go.

[Cosmic Joe]

Perhaps dividing Ireland up wasn't the most sensible thing that the Brits have ever done, in centuries of having not done sensible things. 

[Jacksgranda]

17 minutes ago, Cosmic Joe said:

Perhaps dividing Ireland up wasn't the most sensible thing that the Brits have ever done, in centuries of having not done sensible things. 

As we don't know what would have happened had the Brits not divided up Ireland, it may have been one of the most sensible things they did.