In effect, teenagers as young as 14 convicted of violent offences could be sentenced as adults and their identities no longer shielded.
Conservative Senator Jacque Demers, January 28, 2010
"I will not send a boy of 14 or 16 years to be assaulted in prison."
5 comments:
Here's a novel idea - why don't we tell people that if they commit violent offences then they will end up in prison?
this way its their own fault, not society's, if they end up behind bars.
Yeah, Tom -- lets make sure a bad decision someone makes when they are 14 effectively ends their life, if not literally (how long will the average 14 year old survive in a place like Millhaven?) then at least figuratively. Because someone banged up for five or six years at the age of 15 is not going to get rehabilitated, he is just going to get raped and beaten for a few years, but hey -- that was his decision to take that car for a drunken joyride, right? So lets make sure he never ever gets another chance at life.
Here's a novel idea - why don't we tell people that if they commit violent offences then they will end up in prison?
this way its their own fault, not society's, if they end up behind bars.
Why don't we select you as King of the World and Supreme Sex-Giver of all Humanity. That way, after solving all the World's problems in two minutes flat, you can spend the rest of your life bringing the rest of us to orgasm after orgasm with your sweet mouth.
Easy peasy.
I thought that part of the idea of not naming youth was to protect their victims, specifically in a case like rape.
Also, gangs used to require noteriety as a condition of membership, and this was defined of as being named in connection with a crime in the local press.
This used to be a real problem in my 'hood years back.
Yes. that's right. The youths would commit crimes and get caught on purpose in order to join a gang.
How long will it take before history repeats itself? 3...2...1...
Post a Comment