Morons paid the price
- 05-16-2007, 07:55 PM
- 05-16-2007, 08:16 PM
Seen this one on a "cops" type show before. What morons tape themselves in the act of commiting a crime? Same ones who think that terrorizing people is funny I guess.
- 05-16-2007, 09:03 PM
05-16-2007, 10:03 PM
05-17-2007, 05:54 PM
Maybe I'm the Devil's advocate here, but four years for pinging some random people with paint balls? They were definitely *******s, and it is a stupid thing to do to say the least, but that seems a bit excessive to me. As long as they didn't take anyone's eye out I probably would have hit them with a year or six months. Get them off the street to think about it definitely. No community service. But four years?
05-17-2007, 05:58 PM
I also think 4 years is a bit much give em 2 and serve 1 for good behaviour. If they get caught for anything again then load em up for double 4 serve three etc.
05-17-2007, 07:32 PM
05-17-2007, 09:55 PM
That's what I'm thinking. First offense, the taping to me indicates they didn't take it seriously even though they should have, which to me says intent wasn't likely to do damage, just **** with people. Stupid way of doing it that could have lead to a real bad situation. But as long as no one was actually hurt bad I'd say 6 months to a year in jail would likely be enough to scare them straight. 4 years with hardened criminals might not be the best thing for them. Might turn out worse than when they went in.I also think 4 years is a bit much give em 2 and serve 1 for good behaviour. If they get caught for anything again then load em up for double 4 serve three etc.
05-17-2007, 09:56 PM
05-17-2007, 10:04 PM
**** 'em. I'm glad they're doing 4 years. Little b1tches. I have no compassion for people like that. You shouldn't either.
05-18-2007, 12:03 AM
05-18-2007, 01:29 AM
Or at least that's what I think and what I'm trying to get at.
05-18-2007, 01:36 AM
Yea 4 years is a bit much, and the camera man got 2 years?
Even if I was a victim in that I would still think that was a bit harsh, and I can imagine how those people felt.
They had to have previous convictions.
05-18-2007, 01:37 AM
05-18-2007, 01:45 AM
Let's count the crimes contained in this tape:
1) Vehicle damage (possible felony depending upon $ amount of damage);
2) Assault with a deadly weapon upon pedestrian;
3 and 4) Assault with a deadly weapon upon two pedestrians;
5) Assault with a deadly weapon upon pedestrian;
6) Assault with a deadly weapon upon a bicyclist (causing the bicyclist to crash into a parked vehicle);
7) Assault with a deadly weapon upon a second bicyclist (causing him to crash);
8) Assault with a deadly weapon upon a homeless man;
9 and 10) Assault with a deadly weapon upon two pedestrians;
11) Assault with a deadly weapon upon a second homeless man;
12) Since they acted in concert with each other, add a second conspiracy to commit charge to each of the above crimes;
13) In many states, it is either a separate offense or an aggravating factor to commit an assault from a moving vehicle.
Four years was lenient.
05-18-2007, 01:51 AM
05-18-2007, 03:19 AM
i was hoping someone else noticed that yeahright... first thing caught on tape was them smashing out a window.... and thats the ONLY thing we saw them break.... who knows what else was goin on between the clips of them shootin people.... possibly defacing much more property and such. they got exactly what they deserved and might be let out early only serving 1/3 there time... well if their in Ca then thats the case, and prob still have community service.
they werent lenient on those they shot... bicyclists crashing ( that can really hurt as all know) shooting allready down and out bums... these kids are scum and deserve to be with the rest of scum, for 4 years at least.
05-18-2007, 08:38 AM
05-18-2007, 09:33 AM
They failed to show any compassion for the victims of their crimes and did not express any remorse.
The video tape was their ticket to a four year sentence.
The four year sentence is mainly a deterrent for other such misadventures into the public sector by people with felonious intent.
It is important to create a precedent that does not express lenience for endangering human life.
They may get out sooner through their own rehabilitation
05-18-2007, 10:17 AM
05-18-2007, 10:25 AM
If, after driving that home they then **** up, throw the book at them.
05-18-2007, 02:32 PM
I wonder what would happen if they shot someone possessing a handgun and they thought they were being shot at with real bullets...
05-18-2007, 02:44 PM
05-18-2007, 03:53 PM
It depends upon the state statute how "deadly weapon" is actually defined but what is considered a deadly weapon is usually looked at in the context of how it was used and the potential for physical harm.
Here is a typical statute:
"Deadly Weapon is defined as any firearm or other weapon, device, instrument, material or substance, whether animate or inanimate, which in the manner it is used or is intended to be used is known to be capable of producing death or serious bodily injury."
Here, the weapon was indiscriminately fired at people's heads. Using a foreign device to strike at someone's throat or head always has the potential to cause life-threatening injuries. Whether a particular device (under the circumstances it was used) qualifies as a deadly weapon would be a question for a jury. Can a paintball gun take out an eye if fired into the eye? If so, then it qualifies as a deadly weapon under the above cited statute.
In this case, the shots at the bicyclists in particular had great potential harm for life-threating injuries in that both bicyclists crashed aggravating the possible range of injuries from the criminal conduct.
05-18-2007, 07:17 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By anabolicrhino in forum PoliticsReplies: 6Last Post: 07-19-2007, 11:23 AM
- By Kaliman in forum Exercise ScienceReplies: 12Last Post: 01-08-2007, 09:44 PM
- By TheUnlikelyToad in forum General ChatReplies: 4Last Post: 02-07-2006, 07:23 PM
- By bizzare_777 in forum SupplementsReplies: 9Last Post: 03-16-2005, 01:24 PM