said by peterboro: said by Wolfie00:
The bottom line here is simple. If a young person commits an offense, especially a young person working towards a career, are we better off with a knee-jerk reaction that destroys his future, or are we better off carefully weighing the prospects for rehabilitation?
And he is different than some guy starting out his career by working part time at McDonalds how?
First of all you're assuming that the McDonald's guy of the same age would have been treated differently. It's back to your social discrimination argument, for which there is no evidence. In fact there's not even a premise -- the kid is just a junior undergrad, not a friggin' faculty member! Yes, I sympathize with the guy to some degree, but not because he's some sort of fellow academic!
I sympathize with him because he's just a kid.
Justice is not about treating everyone the same way. It's about making appropriately balanced judgments, taking into account all the facts and specifics including prospects for rehabilitation, which is especially critical for young people. That's why judges have such a wide range of discretion.--
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
Daniel Patrick Moynihan