Posted on 03/05/2007 8:00:45 AM PST by PurpleMan
BELLEFONTE, Pa. - Two 19-year-olds facing probation and community service or even jail time in the shooting of a steer considered a family pet took advantage of another option offered by the judge - joining the Navy.
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
"USAF won't take you if you have a conviction or are on deferred adjudication or disposition"
or have a more than 10 handicap. :>)
Thank your son for his service from a former US Navy veteran.
God Bless!!!
Ibheath
"Why not let the Navy give these two kids the same chance? ...He never caused any trouble."
The other morons are criminals
You may be right, but how many kids have entered some branch of the service as smart-ass selfish toadstools and come out decent men.
When I took over my MARINE CORPS squad in 1967 Viet Nam, I was the only man in the squad who had enlisted of his own free will, without a "judge" offering me a choice. I had the best squad in the whole Bn.
One of my guys was a moonshiner. When it came time to do something, these guys were great to get it done so they could screw off. Best "com-shaw" artists around. Could scrounge whatever the Bn. needed.
Amen. I didn't think we were going back to that "jail or the army" that was common when I was growing up.
Carolyn
"Used to happen a lot in the mid-late 60s. But it was ARMY that got these guys."
And the navy, that is how my brother entered the navy in 1965.
Thank you for your kind words! I'll tell him myself on Sunday!
God bless you, sir.
C'mon Junior, I know you read better than that.
These morons were not hunting, they were drunk and stupid, and in their drunken stupidity, they shot and killed an animal for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
I'm not going to jump on the serial killer angle, they'd be in the system by their ages if they were (IMO), but I'd say that referring to their actions as cruel is certainly within the facts in front of us.
Did you ever do anything incredibly stupid when you were 19 yrs. old?
_______
Absolutely, and beyond even. But never with a gun in my hand.
"It will be interesting to find out if the Navy is aware of their criminal behavior and has approved their enlistments. I wouldn't be surprised to find out the Navy is (was) unaware."
Especially since the navy and air force have been laying off people for a couple of years.
The army implemented the blue to green program, to hire them, but there are almost no takers.
Best response yet...
Ref
Dr. Jimmy T. (Gunny) LaBaume Archives
http://www.flyoverpress.com/jtlarchive.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The article that follows might be placed under the category of "good answer, wrong question." We are actually dealing with at least three separate issues here.
First, and probably the least important, is the idea of "cruelty to animals." Contrary to what the bed wetters contend, animals are incapable of reason (they operate strictly by instinct and cannot choose to act any other way) and therefore do not have "rights." If they do, then let them petition for them. Animals are property.
Next is the failure of the government's court system.
In an ethical world, there is no such thing as a crime against society (or 'the State') simply because there is no such separate entity as "society." There are only groups of individuals interacting with each other. When the individuals disappear, there is no-ghost like creature remaining that could be called "society." It is a mythical abstraction. So, in this case, who was harmed? Obviously it was not "society;" it was the property owner (the guy who owned the steer).
Furthermore, the ruling violates a fundamental principle of law and reason—punishment must fit the crime if real justice is to be done. None of the options given these two youngsters meet that definition.
But there are rare times when involuntary servitude is justified—but only to the extent that the criminal has harmed (or enslaved) others by depriving them of their life, liberty or property. The only ethically consistent and just sentence in cases like this is victim restitution—an eye for an eye, if you will. Furthermore, it should not be left up to some representative of the mythical "society" (e.g. district attorney) to decide whether or not charges should even be brought in the first place. That would be the victim's decision. So, in a perfect world, these two youngsters would be charged by the victim (if the victim so opted) and, if found guilty, made to pay for the damage done to the victim's property.
Finally, we come to the issue of conscription.
"Liberty" and "slavery" are polar opposites. Slavery is forcing people to work for less than they would have voluntarily accepted.
A draft means that youth are forced to register and carry draft cards so, at any moment the government sees fit, they can be seized and inducted into the armed forces. Upon induction, the draftee's body and will are no longer his. He is forced to kill and to place his own life in jeopardy. How can there be a more blatant case of undeserving involuntary servitude?
The utilitarian argument that the government uses to support the draft is, "Who will defend us if we do not have a draft?" That argument is insupportable for several reasons.
First, if you and I think we need to be defended we have no moral right to coerce someone else into defending us. The inescapable sequitur to this argument is that the draftee owes his life to "society" or "his country" Well, if so, exactly who is this "society" or "country." Once again, it is simply all individuals in the territory except the ones being conscripted. "Society" is nothing but a mythical abstraction used to conceal the coercion of the draft.
Second, why is it necessary to conscript defenders? No one is conscripted on the free market, yet people manage to obtain almost every conceivable good or service they desire. People are hired every day to perform dangerous services (fire fighters, underwater welders, etc). Why can't soldiers be hired too? Government employs thousands of people from truck drivers to scientists. Why is there no "shortage" in these areas? Even within the army itself there is no "shortage" of officers—no one has ever had to conscript generals. The answer is because the government hires them at the market wage. There is a shortage of buck privates because their pay is severely below the market wage. The way the market induces people to volunteer for hazardous jobs is to pay them extra. [Editor's Note: As a buck private in the Marine Corps during the Vietnam War (the days of the draft) I was paid a whopping $75.00 per month. But beer was fifteen cents at the E-Club and cigarettes were a quarter at the PX. So, being a young, dumb private, life was not completely unbearable]
And as a side bar: Drafting doctors' at ages far beyond anyone else is a special disgrace. What is the moral justification for penalizing those who choose to enter the vital health care industry? Is that any way to cure the shortage of doctors? Again, the armed forces' need for doctors could easily be satisfied simply by paying them the market salary. It strikes this editor as odd that, if the government wants to hire nuclear physicists, it doesn't draft them. It hires them at extremely handsome salaries.
thegunny, 419
Posted on Sun, Mar. 04, 2007
Two men choose Navy as sentence
Associated Press
BELLEFONTE, Pa. - Two 19-year-olds facing probation and community service or even jail time in the shooting of a steer considered a family pet took advantage of another option offered by the judge - joining the Navy.
Chris Jabco and Eric Smith, both from Bellefonte, had pleaded guilty to criminal conspiracy to commit cruelty to animals and two summary violations in the shooting of the $3,500 Scottish Highland steer.
The two were drinking Sept. 17 and drove through Spring Township with another man in search of deer to poach, culminating in the shooting of the steer, authorities said. The pair reached a deal with prosecutors, who recommended two years' probation and at least five hours of community service.
But Centre County Court Judge Bradley P. Lunsford said the case warranted more than probation. He noted the pain caused to the animal's owner and said Jabco and Smith had been drinking and driving around looking for something to kill. Their actions, he said, "were premeditated, senseless, and your motivations were evil."
The judge said they could spend 48 hours in jail, two years on probation, and 100 hours caring for animals on a farm; avoid jail time but spend 200 hours on the farm and remain on probation for two years; or enlist in the military.
Defense attorney Jim Bryant said his clients planned to join the Navy.
"I think it was an appropriate and innovative resolution to a bad situation," Bryant said. "This was a case of young adult stupidity."
Centre County Assistant District Attorney Nathan Boob also said he was pleased.
"We believe the defendants will benefit from military service," he said.
Another judge had sentenced the third man, who pulled the trigger, to two years' probation.
© 2007 Philadelphia Inquirer and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.philly.com
"Let's see, they come back from shore leave, drunk, wanting to kill something. Then they crawl into the rack next to me."
In my case, my shipmate crawled drunk into the overhead rack, sometime during the night, and wet the bed. I wasn't in my rack at the time, but when I got back from standing watch, I hopped into my rack, noticing the sheets felt unusually cold and damp. Then I was the drips falling from the springs above my head. Ack.
"Then I was" = Then I saw.
I am a product of the military due to some "unfortunate directions" I was taking as a young an imature teen....it did ok by me. BTW there was no judge involved though...LOL
Meadow Muffin
yeah, everybody knows the air farce is not the real military......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.