Did you hear the one about the hobo and the frat boy?

I agree.

You get a bunch of young guys together in a frat house, they start suffering from testosterone poisening.

You know, the lack of concern in that he and his friend dodged the issue by going out for pizza shows a behavior pattern I see more and more.

People who spend a lot of time gaming sometimes forget that they're dealing with flesh and blood people. He might have thought he was going to score some kind of bonus for shooting the guy.

Between the light sentence, and the shootee not saying anything, I smell payoff.

deep-dish or thin and crispy?

Ugh.

Re: Did you hear the one about the hobo and the frat boy?


This one really disgusted me. Because he came from a "sheltered environment"? ! ? ! ? I see--if you grow up in the burbs, in the lap of luxury, you shouldn't have to suffer for your deeds as do mere peons from the ghetto, or rural impoverished shacks. Sure . . . makes sense to me . . .

10 years from now this kid is going to kill someone and these same 16 people will shake their heads for the evening news cameras and say "Gee... He was always such a nice guy. If only we had seen some sign....".

Hmmm. I wonder about Sanderson. The article didn't mention the nature of his wounds. Something doesn't sit right with this entire situation. Call me too imaginative, but I wonder about some sort of pact.

The whole thing reminds me of the short story, "The Most Dangerous Game", but on a smaller scale.

I don't think there was any kind of deal. Here's a little more info from an article that ran in my paper the other day:





And just as scary:



Those quotes are from an article found at: http://www.oregonlive.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news/1177122329220450.xml&coll=7

Now that we have armed campuses, we need to arm homeless people. The world won't be safe until everyone has a gun.

What ever happened to just shooting homeless with paintballs?

What has the local response been, Boomer? Has there been much public backlash to the mild sentence?

I lost my response, JPB, but that is basically what I wondered about, especially in the light of the VA. Tech thing.

(much faster now)

I'm not saying that the sentence is fair--or just.

I'm saying that young men, both drunk and sober, from "good families" do some damned dumb things.

I have no idea whether or not this young jackass can learn from his mistakes. If I knew that, I'd be equipped to judge his sentence.

Prison is to punish--and to protect society from evil doers. Ideally prison should also reform the criminal.

The Young Jackass will be punished. Society will be protected. Reform? I don't know.

Perhaps it will offer reform in the sense that now he can see how the other half lives.....

I dunno.

A "mistake" to me, is maybe throwing a rock at the guy. Getting a gun, loading it, aiming it and shooting someone harldy sounds like a "mistake".

The public response has been one of quiet shock. The second article I linked was the only one I saw in our local paper but I dug around a little bit. I'm sure over the next few days we'll start hearing more of an outcry.

People here are still reeling over the wrist slap given to a couple of west hills* high school kids for suppling their friend with enough cocaine to make him drop dead in a local park (http://www.oregonlive.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news/1177127726113760.xml&coll=7) and the fact that most of them recently attended their school prom.

*Portland's west hills are where all of the millionaires live; they were immortalized in a song I really like: "I Will Buy You A New Life" by Everclear, which kind of fits this tread:

Here is the money that I owe you
So you can pay the bills
I will give you more
When I get paid again

I hate those people who love to tell you
Money is the root of all that kills
They have never been poor
They have never had the joy of a welfare christmas

I know we will never look back

You say you wake up crying
Yes and you dont know why
You get up and you go lay down
Inside my babys room

I guess Im doing ok
I moved in with the strangest guy
Can you believe he actually thinks
That Im really alive

I will buy you a garden
Where your flowers can bloom
I will buy you a new car
Perfect shinny and new
I will buy you that big house
Way up in the west hills
I will buy you a new life
Yes I will

Re: Did you hear the one about the hobo and the frat boy?


Yeah, because they must surely be used to it. Blech.

Ignoring a wounded person, hiding evidence, lying to police...

More than "a" mistake, too.

I am possibly the last person who would step up and defend the actions of a spoiled fratboy jerk sniper, but perhaps a word or two of dissent is appropriate here.

Any time we discuss the appropriateness of a punishment we must first ask ourselves: what purpose does punishment serve in this case? In general, punishment can serve five permissible purposes: incapacitation/incarceration; deterrence; retribution; restitution; and rehabilitation. Restitution was fully warranted and was ordered in this case (for those of you who think that the victim didn't get fully compensated by receiving the cost of his pants, remember that he can still sue the shooter for damages in a civil action). What purpose, however, would a lengthy jail sentence serve? It would certainly prevent Grimes from committing more crimes while he is in prison, but he is probably a low risk for committing more crimes anyway, so it would just be a waste of resources to lock him up if we're really interested in preventing him from shooting more homeless people.

Likewise, the crime is so unusual that a longer jail term wouldn't really enhance the deterrent effect of the punishment. Grimes, after all, is now a convicted felon, a not inconsiderable burden that he will carry for the rest of his life. For people like him, that's likely enough to deter him and others from committing crimes like this one in the future. As for rehabilitation, the judge and Grimes's character witnesses are right: prisons today just don't do a very good job of that. Far better to rehabilitate him outside the walls of the penitentiary than to attempt to do so from within.

Which leaves only retribution. The state certainly has an interest in exacting a measure of revenge against any malefactor, both to satisfy the presumed desires of the victim and to demonstrate the value that it places on the sanctity of its laws and on the public order. And retribution alone could justify a much more severe sentence than the one handed down in this case. I wonder, however, if that's enough of a reason to destroy this young man's life when there is still the potential for him to become a productive member of society. And I wonder if anyone here has wondered that too.

Joe, I have thought through that and I agree with 99% of what you've said but it keeps flashing back to me that this kid shot a man (whether he intended to hit him or not) for sport.

This is where our opinions part ways:



I think he's probably high risk. I think anyone that would do something like this is unbalanced at best. I think he's only sorry that he got caught. Five months in jail might sober him up a bit to his jerkiness but I think the guy is dangerous.

I think it's safe to say most beer-chugging college males have done some pretty stupid f'n things(except me, I've never done anything stupid), but shooting someone is just a tad overboard.

If he shot a "regular" person for sport, I'm sure the punishment would have been more severe.

You hit the nail on the head Slappy.

We've all done stupid things but shooting a (at a) guy for fun? That crosses a line.

Maybe this story distrubs me so much because I've been poor. I've never been homeless but there are times that I probably was only a few steps away from it. These days I say I"m rich but to anybody else I'm probably solidly middle class. It's all a matter of perspective.

Whatever the reason, I have a hard time feeling sorry for this boy and I think he got off way too easy. He seems dangerous to me.