(03-01-2016, 01:12 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(03-01-2016, 12:58 PM)Blindgreed1 Wrote:

(03-01-2016, 12:53 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: The state is not considering charging the boy as an accessory or accomplice, Gunnar.

Intent is irrelevant in the potential prosecution of this case. The firearm was not a long gun. So, when the boy stole or borrowed it from his parents, at 15-years-old, he was illegally in possession of the gun without the supervision of a parent and willfully transferred it to the girl who was not legally eligible to be in possession of it either. The illegal transfer is the crime the state is considering prosecuting.

In any case, I don't think the boy should get a pass. I think he should be prosecuted and held accountable for his actions (which he knew were wrong and he tried to conceal), not punished for the actions of the murderer. However, as I said, I'm not suggesting that he's a monster who should have the book thrown at him.

Illegally possessing a gun... That I can get behind. Anything else and you're just being an asshole. And he didn't fucking steal the gun. I believe the charge they are seeking though is sale or gift of a firearm to a minor. Additionally, word on the street is the DA won't go after the kid because DA agrees with me.

That makes no sense to me.

I'd either charge him with both illegal possession and illegal transfer, or charge him with the crime that contributed to the deaths of two teens (the transfer). The gun was found with the two dead girls. The severity of the charges and punishment would depend on the details, some of which have not been revealed.

Giving a gift, making a loan, or selling something to someone is a transfer.

(03-01-2016, 02:13 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: He wasn't in possession of the gun when police went knocking on his door, Gunnar.

The girl to whom he'd illegally transferred it had it near her dead body and the the body of the girl she murdered.

Based on the details thus far revealed, the only reason the boy was in possession of the gun illegally at one point was for the purpose of illegally transferring it.

So, I (and apparently the person who is in fact the DA) would consider charging him with breaking the existing law of "illegal transfer of a firearm to a minor" because it's logical. I would not likely also charge him with illegal possession considering what I know about the case now because I think that would be a kind of an asshole move.

We'll see what happens. If the kid was told a story that didn't involve the girl using the gun and if he's a good kid in general, I'd probably consider sally's suggestion regarding a diversionary program if I was the DA. I would not consider a free pass.

(03-01-2016, 02:29 PM)Maggot Wrote: Its all the girls fault. The boy should not be prosecuted. At least that's what I think for what its worth.

(03-01-2016, 02:27 PM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: Maybe you should contact the DA then and offer up your expert advice on how to move forward.

(03-01-2016, 03:01 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(03-01-2016, 02:27 PM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: Maybe you should contact the DA then and offer up your expert advice on how to move forward.

I already said I'll trust the DA's judgement.

And, it doesn't take an expert to counter your bullshit, Gunnar. You were wrong calling other people ridiculous for wanting the boy to be prosecuted, in my opinion. Whether he's prosecuted or not, it's not ridiculous to want the existing law enforced in this case.

There may be sound arguments for not prosecuting or holding the boy accountable at all; however, I haven't heard any from you ("he's just a teen, he only borrowed the gun secretly, it was just a loan, it would be an asshole move to practice what I preach").

Anyway, I suspect and hope he'll be appropriately held accountable for his crimes -- not heavy-handed and not let off scot-free.

(03-01-2016, 03:27 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Nobody here is looking for a scapegoat, Maggot.

Nobody here is suggesting that the boy is responsible for the girl's actions.

Nobody here has suggested that the boy be charged as an accomplice, that he be hit with every possible charge, that he be bumped into adult court and/or have the book thrown at him, or anything of the sort.

Some of us are simply suggesting that the juvenile should be held reasonably accountable for his own illegal juvenile actions. I haven't read a good argument against it yet.

(03-01-2016, 04:00 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: BG, you're so smug and arrogant, even when you're wrong.

I'll even argue this.

Teen girl, heartbroken, impulsively asks friend for gun to kill her ex and herself.

If this kid says no, the chances of her finding another friend in a 2-3 day timeframe to supply a gun are pretty slim.

I use the 2-3 day timeframe because I'm suggesting that after 48-72 hours her impulse to end it all begins to wane, and, voila, 2 15 year olds are still alive.

Also, as we've discussed, a gun is the easiest way to kill someone. Stabbing her friend to death, pushing her off a cliff (or driving off as Maggott suggested) are not as easy and are generally messier.

Was the friend duped? I'm really hoping so, and the act of arming his friend is noble, however, he knew without a doubt that it was wrong.

The murdered 15 year old never had a say in all this, and the DA needs to set some sort of example that a crime such as this won't go unpunished.

(03-01-2016, 03:57 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: You're as bad a troll as you are a thinker, Gunnar.

So, it doesn't surprise me that you think bullshit should be taken seriously and being truthful is funny.

Decades of head-banging will do that to a noggin, I guess.

(03-01-2016, 04:41 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Yeah, Gunnar, you've got a real track record for making sound arguments and being right.

Since you seem to have serious challenges comprehending and connecting dots.......the only way you can end up being right and I can end up being wrong (or vice versa) in this exchange is if it somehow becomes ridiculous to want to see existing laws enforced, OR if somehow MS's, sally's, Cutz's, Duchess's and my opinion (namely, that the juvenile should be held reasonably accountable for his actions/crimes) magically becomes a ridiculous opinion. You don't have a big enough wand to make either of those things happen.

It's not the DA's ultimate decision that I'm contesting -- I'll trust his judgement either way. It's your characterization of other people's opinion, your contradiction of your own oft-repeated proclamations, and your weak logic that I've been contesting.