Three girls face no charges after pinning down and stripping an 11 year old boy

[Kaida23]

There's probably a double standards thread every other day on /b/. It's the same as adults - if a woman can slap a man in public and not face consequences, he can do the same. Oh wait - he can't, because that's abusive and horrible.

That's the very same argument I tried to make when the Dixie Chicks released "Goodbye Earl", but our society seems to think that domestic violence only goes one way.

[Furah]

I know that domestic violence towards children isn't a gender-dominated issue, and I'd grab the source for that but I'm a little tired to go searching.

[Nomrombom]

I don't think the girls were being cruel tbh. I think they were having a laugh and (obviously) didn't think about what the consequences might be before they did it. They probably thought it was hilarious in the moment. They should absolutely not be executed.

 

Charges should have been pressed though, and when the boy is old enough to understand, he's going to be angry.

[Dheginsea]

I don't think the girls were being cruel tbh. I think they were having a laugh and (obviously) didn't think about what the consequences might be before they did it. They probably thought it was hilarious in the moment. They should absolutely not be executed.

 

Charges should have been pressed though, and when the boy is old enough to understand, he's going to be angry.

 

I don't understand a few things:

 

1. How the boy has no idea what pressing charges is, at that age i knew full how the court system in America worked.

 

2. Why on earth is the mother not pressing charges?

 

3. True in 8th grade you still will have some problems with realizing the consequences to your actions (just speculation as I am not in 8th grade yet), but I think at that point you should know full well what stripping a boy and posting it on youtube can lead to.

[Lose No Hope]

3. True in 8th grade you still will have some problems with realizing the consequences to your actions

It's not like they are 8 years old. They should know by that age what is right and what is wrong.

[sees_all1]

This situation reminded me of:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q_djcOf2ko&feature=related

[Nomrombom]

3. True in 8th grade you still will have some problems with realizing the consequences to your actions

It's not like they are 8 years old. They should know by that age what is right and what is wrong.

 

They definitely know, but they're still nowhere near mature enough to be able to think that through all the time.

 

And Dheg, if I had to guess, I'd have said you were like 14-16. Very mature for your age. I applaud you.

[Dheginsea]

3. True in 8th grade you still will have some problems with realizing the consequences to your actions

It's not like they are 8 years old. They should know by that age what is right and what is wrong.

 

They definitely know, but they're still nowhere near mature enough to be able to think that through all the time.

 

And Dheg, if I had to guess, I'd have said you were like 14-16. Very mature for your age. I applaud you.

 

Thanks I guess, it seems that most people who meet me irl think I'm 15-17 because I act around 15 and look about 16.

[Lose No Hope]

3. True in 8th grade you still will have some problems with realizing the consequences to your actions

It's not like they are 8 years old. They should know by that age what is right and what is wrong.

 

They definitely know, but they're still nowhere near mature enough to be able to think that through all the time.

 

And Dheg, if I had to guess, I'd have said you were like 14-16. Very mature for your age. I applaud you.

We all have lapses in judgment, but a lapse in judgment doesn't justify what they did or make them exempt from charges.

[The Dark Lord]

I still think it's wrong for them to go through the legal system at that age, when they are likely too young to comprehend that what they did was illegal.

 

This sums up my view. Boy or not, no child of that age should have to go through the legal system. Their parents should handle the punishment.

 

Unless it was something more serious, involving a homicide.

[Nomrombom]

We all have lapses in judgment, but a lapse in judgment doesn't justify what they did or make them exempt from charges.

 

I guess, but there is a reason you're not allowed to drive, drink, smoke, marry, or screw under certain ages - your brain isn't developed enough to make good choices. This is also why there are different charges for minors and adults.

 

Still, even if it had been 3 woman stripping a man, there probably wouldn't be sufficient charges in that case either. It's double standards and we have to live with them, no matter how [bleep]ing stupid they are.

[Nomrombom]

I knew the difference between right and wrong at a young age. Exceptionally well by the age of 12 [by that I mean how the other parties feel and long term consequences of actions] maybe I was more mature then most my age but I doubt it, people just play the immature card when they are backed into a corner.

 

 

By that logic, one should be allowed to drive at 12? Or get married at 12? I'd like to think that I knew consequences at age 12 but I am glad that some things are restricted to keep people safe.

 

At any rate, they should get sexual assault [or rape], battery, possession and spreading of child pornography.

 

 

I agree with the first two, but child porn charges at such a young age is kind of excessive. One stupid decision shouldn't dictate the rest of their lives.

[Furah]

By that logic, one should be allowed to drive at 12? Or get married at 12? I'd like to think that I knew consequences at age 12 but I am glad that some things are restricted to keep people safe.

Actually, until fairly recently, people did get married at that age and were considered adults and could drive if cars were around back then.

[K4ylan]

I still think it's wrong for them to go through the legal system at that age, when they are likely too young to comprehend that what they did was illegal.

 

This sums up my view. Boy or not, no child of that age should have to go through the legal system. Their parents should handle the punishment.

 

Unless it was something more serious, involving a homicide.

 

I don't know how old you guys are, but speaking as someone only two years older than these girls, I'd have to say that they're complete idiots, and they should full well know that this is just sick and wrong. No parent's punishment, even physical, can make up for that.

[Lose No Hope]

I still think it's wrong for them to go through the legal system at that age, when they are likely too young to comprehend that what they did was illegal.

 

This sums up my view. Boy or not, no child of that age should have to go through the legal system. Their parents should handle the punishment.

 

Unless it was something more serious, involving a homicide.

 

I don't know how old you guys are, but speaking as someone only two years older than these girls, I'd have to say that they're complete idiots, and they should full well know that this is just sick and wrong. No parent's punishment, even physical, can make up for that.

I agree. Grounding them won't make up for the mental, physical, and emotional pain and anguish the boy is likely to go through for God knows how long.

 

The police need to be brought in on this because of how inexcusable it is. There is a reason minors can still be charged with crimes. They are not exempt from the law.

[Kaida23]

There is a reason minors can still be charged with crimes. They are not exempt from the law.

In Canada they are, if they're under 12. Even when minors are charged and convicted of a crime here, as long as they're tried as a minor their records are sealed when they turn 18 and those convictions, no matter how numerous or horrendous (and people in this country have been convicted as minors for some pretty awful stuff), can't be used against them as an adult even if they commit the same crimes again.

 

We're far too soft on criminals. :wall:

[Lose No Hope]

This was in the US. They are 13, so they still would have been charged in Canada.

[Kaida23]

And would have gotten a slap on the wrist, and essentially have their records purged when they turn 18. Some punishment. <.<

 

on topic: By not charging these girls that woman has not only shown her own son that she won't stand up and defend him (I know I wouldn't have any respect for my mom if she had done that), but has given all of those girls a very bad idea of what they can do and still get away with.

[Nomrombom]

Another article I read dealing with this said that the police aren't sure if they can actually file charges because there hasn't actually been a crime committed :rolleyes:

[Riku3220]

Another article I read dealing with this said that the police aren't sure if they can actually file charges because there hasn't actually been a crime committed :rolleyes:

Stripping someone in public isn't a crime? :-k

[Kaida23]

Another article I read dealing with this said that the police aren't sure if they can actually file charges because there hasn't actually been a crime committed :rolleyes:

Stripping someone in public isn't a crime? :-k

Or posting a video of a naked 11 year old on YouTube? :-s

[Dheginsea]

Another article I read dealing with this said that the police aren't sure if they can actually file charges because there hasn't actually been a crime committed :rolleyes:

Stripping someone in public isn't a crime? :-k

Or posting a video of a naked 11 year old on YouTube? :-s

 

Stripping someone in public would be assault and battery/sexual assault, and you could make a case for attempted rape.

 

The posting of the video and them having the video is possesion and distribution of child pornography.

[Lose No Hope]

BUT double standard will protect them most likely...

[K4ylan]

apparently three wrongs makes a right. What did the boy have to say?

[Dheginsea]

I think his mom is trying to hush it up so hes not gonna say a thing.