Poetic Justice

In article >,
Eeyore > wrote:
>
>
>"Mike T." wrote:
>
>> "gpsman" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> Scott en Aztlán wrote: <brevity snip>
>> >
>> > http://www.chicagosuntimes.com/outpu...nws-bus14.html
>> >
>>
>> Without any reference to the length of the punishment this story may as
>> well been unreported. Was it one day, one week or one school year?
>> May the child drive elsewhere, or just not to school?
>>
>> (my reply)
>>
>> Hey, you just reminded me of something. When I was 16-18 (the age of the
>> teens in this story), I had to work after school. We had no bus service in
>> my school district at all, BUT, if we did, and a judge had ordered me to
>> ride the bus, I would have been FIRED shortly afterward for being late to
>> work. I wouldn't have minded too much having to ride the bus, but I simply
>> wouldn't have had time to ride the bus.
>>
>> Surely ordering someone to quit their job, or causing them to be fired, for
>> a minor traffic infraction, is not an appropriate punishment. -Dave
>
>A license suspension would have the same effect, so what's the big deal ?

Because the violation wouldn't ordinarily carry suspension as a
penalty; instead, it would result in a fine.

--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:04:14 -0400, "Mike T." > wrote:

>
>>>Surely ordering someone to quit their job, or causing them to be fired,
>>>for
>>>a minor traffic infraction, is not an appropriate punishment. -Dave
>>>
>> Priorities...
>> A high-schooler losing a job isn't neaqr as damaging as a breadwinner
>> for a family losing his/her job.
>
>What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Or put another
>way, do you think it's appropriate punishment for a person to lose their job
>over a minor traffic infraction, even if said person isn't the breadwinner?
>We're talking about minor traffic infractions, remember. -Dave
>
I'm making a comparison between a teenager working for pocket money
and a person working to support a family.
The teenager doesn't lose anywhere near as much as the breadwinner
does by losing a job.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:25:15 -0400, "Mike T." > wrote:

>>
>>>>>Hey, you just reminded me of something. When I was 16-18 (the age of
>>>>>the
>>>>>teens in this story), I had to work after school. We had no bus service
>>>>>in
>>>>>my school district at all, BUT, if we did, and a judge had ordered me to
>>>>>ride the bus, I would have been FIRED shortly afterward for being late
>>>>>to
>>>>>work.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't that kinda like a convicted criminal whining about being fired
>>>> when they get sent to prison?
>>>>
>>>> If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
>>>
>>>I'd agree with you, if we weren't discussing minor traffic infractions.
>>>You
>>>think someone deserves to lose their job for a minor traffic
>>>nfraction?
>>
>> This is a strawman argument. Just because they cannot drive their car
>> to school doesn't automatically mean they will lose their job. The
>> students can:
>>
>> * Adjust their work hours
>> * Take some time off
>> * Explain the situation to their employer, and work out a solution
>>
>> Worst case, if a high school student does lose their job, they still
>> have a roof over their heads, they still have food on the table, and
>> (most importantly) they can easily find another no-skills-required job
>> after their sentence has been fulfilled. In the meantime, they'll have
>> more time to do their homework, and to think about how to avoid
>> repeating their mistakes.
>
>Ever heard of emancipated minors? Myself and several of my friends were on
>our own from the age of 16. Regardless of the quality of job you hold, it
>takes on an entirely different significance when the income is used to buy
>groceries and pay your share of the rent. -Dave
>
In that case, you would be treated as an adult, and wouldn't be given
the choice to ride a bus or take the conventional punishment,
including the record that went with it.
Which is anothe rpoint you forgot: the teens have the choice. If
riding the bus means they lose a job, they can choose the conventional
punishment.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

>>
> I'm making a comparison between a teenager working for pocket money
> and a person working to support a family.
> The teenager doesn't lose anywhere near as much as the breadwinner
> does by losing a job.
> --
> Bill Funk
> replace "g" with "a"

Again, does that mean that appropriate punishment for a minor traffic
infraction is to lose your job? Sheesh, I just don't get this attitude
where people seem to think it's appropriate to punish someone MUCH more
severely just because they are calendar-challenged. -Dave

>>Ever heard of emancipated minors? Myself and several of my friends were
>>on
>>our own from the age of 16. Regardless of the quality of job you hold, it
>>takes on an entirely different significance when the income is used to buy
>>groceries and pay your share of the rent. -Dave
>>
> In that case, you would be treated as an adult, and wouldn't be given
> the choice to ride a bus or take the conventional punishment,
> including the record that went with it.

That's my point though. An adult would be given a slap on the wrist, while
a teenager is punished much more harshly for the same behavior. That makes
no fricking sense whatsoever. -Dave

In article >,
Bill Funk > wrote:

>In that case, you would be treated as an adult, and wouldn't be given
>the choice to ride a bus or take the conventional punishment,
>including the record that went with it.
>Which is anothe rpoint you forgot: the teens have the choice. If
>riding the bus means they lose a job, they can choose the conventional
>punishment.

Which would be fine, except that the judge jacks up the conventional
punishment (compared to that of older offenders who commit the same
offense) in order to get the teen to accept the unconventional one.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:46:22 -0400, "Mike T." > wrote:

>>>
>> I'm making a comparison between a teenager working for pocket money
>> and a person working to support a family.
>> The teenager doesn't lose anywhere near as much as the breadwinner
>> does by losing a job.
>> --
>> Bill Funk
>> replace "g" with "a"
>
>Again, does that mean that appropriate punishment for a minor traffic
>infraction is to lose your job? Sheesh, I just don't get this attitude
>where people seem to think it's appropriate to punish someone MUCH more
>severely just because they are calendar-challenged. -Dave
>
The punishment isn't to lose a job, it's to ride a bus.
Or are you saying that the punishment of going to jail should be seen
as a punishment of losing a job, and therefore souldn't be done?
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:06:33 -0500,
(Matthew Russotto) wrote:

>In article >,
>Bill Funk > wrote:
>
>>In that case, you would be treated as an adult, and wouldn't be given
>>the choice to ride a bus or take the conventional punishment,
>>including the record that went with it.
>>Which is anothe rpoint you forgot: the teens have the choice. If
>>riding the bus means they lose a job, they can choose the conventional
>>punishment.
>
>Which would be fine, except that the judge jacks up the conventional
>punishment (compared to that of older offenders who commit the same
>offense) in order to get the teen to accept the unconventional one.

Ar eyou saying that the original citation doesn't carry the sentence
the judge gives? I don't see how that's possible.
If the citation is, for example, for speeding, doesn't that infraction
already carry the suspension as a possible punishment? If not, you're
right. But I don't see how a judge can possibly mete out a punishment
greater than the maximum allowed.
If you're trying to say that suspension isn't always meted out, but is
a possibility within the judge's legal choices, well, that's an
entirely different thing
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

In article >,
Bill Funk > wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:06:33 -0500,
>(Matthew Russotto) wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>>Bill Funk > wrote:
>>
>>>In that case, you would be treated as an adult, and wouldn't be given
>>>the choice to ride a bus or take the conventional punishment,
>>>including the record that went with it.
>>>Which is anothe rpoint you forgot: the teens have the choice. If
>>>riding the bus means they lose a job, they can choose the conventional
>>>punishment.
>>
>>Which would be fine, except that the judge jacks up the conventional
>>punishment (compared to that of older offenders who commit the same
>>offense) in order to get the teen to accept the unconventional one.
>
>Ar eyou saying that the original citation doesn't carry the sentence
>the judge gives? I don't see how that's possible.

I would assume it carries that as a possible sentence. But it's not
the usual sentence.

>If the citation is, for example, for speeding, doesn't that infraction
>already carry the suspension as a possible punishment? If not, you're
>right. But I don't see how a judge can possibly mete out a punishment
>greater than the maximum allowed.
>If you're trying to say that suspension isn't always meted out, but is
>a possibility within the judge's legal choices, well, that's an
>entirely different thing

If the judge has decided that a 16 year old gets a suspension where a 26
year old gets a fine, for the same offense under the same
circumstances, that's not justice. Even if, perhaps especially if,
the judge is doing that in order to force acquiesence to her own
nontraditional punishment.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

Matthew Russotto wrote: <brevity snip>
> If the judge has decided that a 16 year old gets a suspension where a 26
> year old gets a fine, for the same offense under the same
> circumstances, that's not justice.

Minors are not equal to adults in many legal circunstances. Minors are
"learning" to drive, supposedly. Traffic offenses are not all equal.

> Even if, perhaps especially if,
> the judge is doing that in order to force acquiesence to her own
> nontraditional punishment.

The teen is not forced to comply with the judge's decision, she can
defy it... and accept those consequences if she so chooses. I'd lay
about 50/50 on those odds, the kid doesn't seem all that smart.

If the judge had chosen to fine her fifty bucks and she'd burst into
tears... would you have a problem with that as well?
-----

- gpsman