Man, that kid needs to get his ass beaten... I don't even advocate violence as a correction tool, But this little prick fucking deserves it.
12-Year-Old Forced to Put Up Wii For Bail
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
A 12 year old beating people over the head with his fists and POOL STICKS. You know you can kill people hitting them in the head, right? Not to mention this is his third or fourth offense? And they're making him put up only $250 bail? That's pathetic.Gormourn said:
Bail is supposed to STOP people from jumping their sentences, but imagine he does it again and goes too far. Some kid is damaged for the rest of his life, and the government gets a console that they can't even use. But it's worth it right? Cause now the judge makes him put up his games for bail and now he's "learned his lesson" at the small cost of a few kids' childhoods.
I don't care what age he is, if I were the judge he'd be sent straight to juvey for a good few years because he sure as hell isn't going to be improving anytime soon.
Sounds like a type of kid who lives out his threats.
Not meaning to boast, but leave me in a room with that brat for a few minutes and I will beat him senseless.
To many kids are being allowed to run wild, Jesus, you can't say to a child stop that, it will carry on, can't smack the child, nope.
Heck, I heard they where going to ban children being grounded.
Not meaning to boast, but leave me in a room with that brat for a few minutes and I will beat him senseless.
To many kids are being allowed to run wild, Jesus, you can't say to a child stop that, it will carry on, can't smack the child, nope.
Heck, I heard they where going to ban children being grounded.
If he doesn't meet the requirements, I propose that instead of simply losing the Wii, A police officer or something should put it on the floor in front of him and smash it with a hammer.
I remember a time when if you heard the phrase "12-Year-Old Forced to Put Up Wii For Bail" it meant something ENTIRELY different.
Everyone says beating your children makes them behave properly. I don't see how that works. Can someone explain it?
I'm pretty sure almost anyone would be able to beat a 12-year old senseless.Jarek Mace said:
Shoot him in the head. I have no patience for shit like this. The human race will die out when the current "children" inherit the earth. Something needs to be done to fix this immediately.
its effectiveness depends on if he is able to get a new one after (he might be spoiled by his parents since he obviously isnt disciplined)
ZING!George Palmer said:
I was buying things such as that at 12. I was damned if my parents were ever going to (Except times such holidays.)gibboss28 said:
And if he does not get it back, and assuming his parents do have a spine, he will have to buy a new one on his own.
That'll learn 'im.
Really? I thought it was Vancouver or us folks in Toronto...Avernus said:
We've really stepped up our game since I've been born, if you guys have the worst crime.
Sorry to hear about that statistic...
I don't understand this whole "jail him for life" sentiment. All jail teaches them is how to be better criminals, so it makes sense to use it as a last resort. At the same time people are acting like he's a serial rapist or something. He beat up people, three whole people. I'm sorry, but in my opinion that's just not enough to send somebody a 12 year old to jail over, especially because kids get into a lot of fights for lots of stupid reasons. Admit it, you were some of the bullied kids in school, so you're overreacting.
However that sentiment is still better than the "beat his ass" sentiment. What the hell is wrong with you people? This kid assaulted three people, so we need to beat him up. Can you really not see the irony in that statement? Even if someone is for parents spanking their kids, there's a difference between spanking and beating. Every kid needs at least one deserved spanking, no kid deserves to get beat.
However that sentiment is still better than the "beat his ass" sentiment. What the hell is wrong with you people? This kid assaulted three people, so we need to beat him up. Can you really not see the irony in that statement? Even if someone is for parents spanking their kids, there's a difference between spanking and beating. Every kid needs at least one deserved spanking, no kid deserves to get beat.
Having been institutionalized when I was younger I am guessing several reasons:KnowYourOnion said:
#1: His parents can't afford it and there are no govermental programs availible to foot the bill.
#2: There is really no cause to lock him up. I am not familiar with the laws involving children down there, but kids have more rights in many cases than you might think.
See, it is possible to provoke a minor into acts, and hold him less accountable than he would be as an adult if he is considered to have been acting in the heat of the moment or whatever.
We don't know the overall situation, but basically it's always possible he wound up in some kind of adversarial position with the school over something relatively dubious. Hence why he was basically "seperated" from the school instead of being locked up (he was wrong, but so were they in doing whatever caused him to act out). If being "stuck out" like that put him in ongoing conflicts with other people in the educational system and/or students it could all be considered part of the same ongoing situation.
I could talk about some situations I'm aware of, but none would nessicarly apply to this. I am however GUESSING he's not locked up yet because the court system is looking at a situation that is messed up from all perspectives and pretty much can't say that the school was right, but can't really say he was right either for taking action the way he did (which he may or may not have had issues with).
-
Even though I wasn't going to use specific examples, let's look at say the Dodge Ball game. For whatever reason the school doesn't like him for being involved in something. Dodge Ball is one way that faculty has been known to abuse students they don't like, this was kind of parodied in games like "Bully", because it is a convention. So basically they decide he gets to be the target, and they find some kid who doesn't like him (or hates anyone) to pummel him with hard balls in a very unfair fashion. Especially if they have him say dodging against a wall or backboard as opposed to between two students/groups of students.
The kid eventually says "F@ck this" and punches the kid pelting him in the face, and then when the teacher responsible gets involve punches him.
That's not right, but let's say the kid has witnesses to what the teacher was doing. This goes up before a school board that is neutral and the entire situation is going to be a hand toss because they can't say the kid was right to hit them, but then again he was arguably assaulted by a teacher and student (though in most cases when such things have been done there are no witnesses that say 'oh yes, that is what the school was doing to him').
Don't jump all over the problems with this, it's not meant to be all inclusive, or a "I know what happened", nor does it account for everything. It's simply an example of the kind of thing that could have been going on that defies an easy solution/ruling. If nobody is right, what do you do?
To us we hear simply one of the incidents is "kid punches adult and student over dodge ball game". That doesn't mean that this is all the authorities heard about the incident.