Judges says, "I shouldn't be doing this, but I'm going to."

First, there is very seldom a valid excuse for hitting something in the roadway that isn't moving. One is driving to fast for conditions.

Second, sports is our national religion which is why all our money tells a lie - "In God we trust" is not true.

 

I live in Texas, where football is loved beyond all reason. But in my district, if those boys did that, they wouldn't need a judge to tell them they couldn't play anymore. The school would have banned them from playing.

That judge needs to retire and let someone who cares about the law more than football take his place.

 

I think those kids have been playing too much football they've lost their brains, if they've got any in the first place, and forgot to figure out that a motorist and/or a pedestrian could get in serious problems with these 'prank' they played.

I wonder what their grades are in Math ?

 

What are you trying to say?

 

I am wondering the same thing Rev. At what age are kids responsible for their actions? Sometimes the "kids are kids" excuse is stretched too far. My son is only 9, going on 10, and we make sure that he knows that ALL of his actions have consequences. It is up to him whether those consequences are good or bad.

 

I agree with you filmstar, I think a future story for their kids should be, "I couldn't play football because I etc... and if you keep acting up etc..." I know my parents never let me off saying I was just a kid.

 

If I had done something stupid as that I wouldn't have survived long enough for a judge to sentence me to anything. My parents would have ensured that!

(favorite saying of parents in this locale: I brought you into the world and I can take you out! )

 

I don’t think this is a slap on the wrist. The boys played a dangerous prank and two other boys got hurt. It was a stupid thing to do and criminal, but not intentional. They were sentenced to house arrest, fines, community service, and 60 days in jail. I think that is an appropriate sentence. If they had been out driving around and hit the other car the injuries might have been the same but no one would be crying for jail time.

It seems like the only controversial part of the sentence is that the judge is going to let them finish football season before they start serving their 60 days. I think he probably would have excused them for other positive activities just as quickly. They are still going to serve the sentence. The judge saw one thing in these boys lives that was positive and did not want to destroy that. Perhaps he really cares about the kids.

 

I take it you've never lived in Wisconsin? :smilewinkgrin:

 

I grew up in Iowa, and have most of my relatives in Wisconsin. Football is a mere bagatelle in Wisconson, compared to the fanaticism you see in Texas.

 

They should serve the sentence immediately.

While this is not a slap on the wrist (they will still have to serve the time), it is preferential treatment.

 

Yep!! And IMO, they should also be monitered while 'serving the time' by a responsible adult constantly in the cell? alongside them. I would suggest the judge! :smilewinkgrin:

Ed

 

It is preferential treatment in my opinion, and should not be tolerated. Even he said he "shouldn't do it!"

 

Why does the coach and/or school not ban them from playing? I have a friend who is a HS coach - He wouldn't tolerate this. They would not play, probably never again for him.

Yes. it is preferential treatment.

 

I agree with you. same thing here.
Faithgirl