Should of let her get her ass beat.

[Lewkowski]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/indiana-w...killing-3-kids

"An Indiana woman was sentenced to prison on Wednesday after she killed three siblings who were trying to board a school bus last year — and the kids' grief-stricken mother lunged at the woman in court.

Alyssa Shepherd, 25, was sentenced to four years in prison, three years of house arrest and three years of probation after she killed the children — Xzavier and Mason Ingle, 6-year-old twin brothers, and Alivia Stahl, their 9-year-old sister — on Oct. 31, 2018.


As the children were crossing State Road 25, a two-lane highway in Rochester, to board the school bus, Shepherd plowed into them."

Alyssa Shepherd got off lightly. Frankly only the must pathetic of criminal lovers would have any issues with those poor children's mother getting a few licks in first. This piece of shit completely destroyed a family and she'll probably get out of prison in 3 years? Ridiculous. Every time someone gets behind the wheel they need to fear the consequences of negligence.

[Loki]

Was this an attack against yesterday's Lewk who claimed to care about the Constitution?

[Lewkowski]

Was this an attack against yesterday's Lewk who claimed to care about the Constitution?

Eh? I'm not suggesting the State say "go ahead" I'm suggesting the guards as autonomous individuals be a little slow to break it up.

[Timbuk2]

'Should have'

[Loki]

Eh? I'm not suggesting the State say "go ahead" I'm suggesting the guards as autonomous individuals be a little slow to break it up.

The guards are state agents, just like the police. There is no point to constitutional protections if you're not going to enforce them.

[rille]

But seriously, like adding 18,5 years would improve anything.
It’s like in the dark ages.

[Veldan Rath]

But seriously, like adding 18,5 years would improve anything.
It’s like in the dark ages.

?

Yeah, why have punishments at all?

Again let’s take Lewk out of it. The sentence is incredibly light considering the offense. Every yahoo with a driver’s license knows you don’t fuck around when a school bus is near for exactly this reason.

Even the most principled person would have the gut response of throw her to the wolves. At the very least, be able to joke about it by saying the mom should get 10 min of quality time with the offender.

We are allowed to have these type of responses, just not act on them.

[rille]

She will not be wiser after 21,5 years and will cost more resources.

It’s unfortunate.
Several actions by society could have been made to stop this, for example:

1. Make it harder to get a license.
2. Install monitoring gps with association to a car plate.
3. Forbid all cars that doesn’t have any form of auto-break functionality. This would solve some other problems.
4. Park/Stop the bus at a safer place.
5. Install road bumps.
6. Install simplier forms of speed cameras.
7. Cultural avareness. I’m down in south europe now and they drive like crazy. The f...

[Aimless]

?

Yeah, why have punishments at all?

Come on man.

[Veldan Rath]

Come on man.

No, you.

[Aimless]

I'm sorry but you and I both know that even you can see how dumb your extremist interpretation was. "Why have punishments at all"? Gimme a fucking break.

[Veldan Rath]

It was a simple reaction to the same silly reaction of in essence thinking that there is no point in a harsher sentence. And look above to the response that all of society needs to change to coddle an idiot that KILLED 3 kids.

So find someone else to shed your sanctimony on.

[Aimless]

It was a simple reaction to the same silly reaction of in essence thinking that there is no point in a harsher sentence.

No, he suggested nothing of value would be gained from imprisoning her for a further 18.5 years. That's not just a "harsher sentence" in general; it's a specific harsh sentence. His post did not dismiss the legitimacy of all harsher sentence—just the specific and very harsh sentence that was sought, according to the article. Nothing in that post suggested that all punishment is illegitimate. Adding another year would also be a "harsher sentence", but may be justified from his perspective—I don't know, and neither do you, but we both know that his objection can't reasonably be interpreted as a rejection of the very concept of punishment in and of itself.

So find someone else to shed your sanctimony on.

I'm sorry your performative outrage didn't get the reaction you were hoping for. Next time you want to suggest that someone is being unreasonable because of Lewk's involvement, make sure you aren't being unreasonable yourself because of Lewk's involvement.

As for your claims about gut reactions, my first instinctive reaction was that this sounds like a tragedy caused by an accident that neither I nor anyone else here understand how it occurred. My gut reaction is that this mother already has to live with the knowledge that she unintentionally killed three children, that she's destroyed another mother's life, that she's going to lose years of her time with her own offspring (and has thus partly ruined her own family's lives as well), and that she will not only spend several years in prison and several more in house arrest, but likely also spend the remainder of her life struggling to make ends meet. I have literally no desire to see her be physically assaulted on top of that. It adds literally nothing of value, from my perspective. I can think of many more people much, much more deserving of extralegal physical punishment of that kind, such as the kind of reckless and/or racist state thugs whose actions Lewk so often applauds (and other reasonable members of this forum ignore or even defend). There are any number of overly aggressive, racist police officers who I feel should be beaten up for deliberately assaulting people, sometimes with fatal outcomes. Officials who separate children from their parents and then lose them in the system, or who abuse and humiliate the people in their charge. That's the kind of people it makes sense to want to see beaten up: those who deliberately harm others—not people who kill someone by accident. Sanctimony? Mate, I just thought you were being dumb.

[Hazir]

I agree with Aimless. Other than that I wonder what level of illiteracy brings forth a name like Xzavier?

[GGT]

Lewk, if you'd wanted us to debate criminal sentencing (and its flaws), you SHOULD HAVE made a better thread title.

But you didn't, because you just wanted to feed your perversion surrounding violence and death.

Fuzzy was right (in your other thread about the death penalty):

Lewk literally derives pleasure-center activation from seeing and spreading this sort of news. All that talk of deterrence he used to spout was just rationalization as he agitated to get more of his addiction stimulation.

It's a real shame, because there's usually an important topic ripe for discussion, but we can't get there before calling you out, and getting sucked into your trolling. Veldan was right about that.