Bomb-Threat Teen
Travis Biehn, a 17 year-old Newfoundlander, "sat in inscrutable silence in a Pennsylvania courtroom yesterday" while a Pennsylvania judge described him as arrogant and emotionally immature, after Biehn's conviction on charges of threatening to blow up his high school. He has been remanded to custody until he begins a month-long wilderness program in August. At the end of that time, the judge will determine whether or not to release him into his parents' custody. If that decision is made, the parents would have to sign a contract that prohibits any type of weapons — including paintball guns and fireworks — from their house. The family would also have to attend counselling sessions and there would be restrictions on Travis Biehn's computer use. He will be obliged to complete 100 hours of community service with Habitat for Humanity and pay $8,218.95 (U.S.) in restitution to police departments and the school district.
Some supporters of the teen are suggesting that the judicial reaction is an overreaction. Some have said the trial results have "shattered" their faith in the judicial system. Biehn's parents have complained about the judge describing their parenting as being substandard because they never held their son accountable for his actions.
Get over it, all of you. This kid is a creep. Period. He knew what he was doing when he uttered those threats. He knew the seriousness of his actions. He needs to have it forcibly pointed out to him that issuing such threats is an infringement on the rights of others. Why waste time bemoaning the judge's supposed harshness and patting the boy on the head? Why send him home free to carry out his school threat or others he has not yet uttered? Which one among those supporting this thug would want to shoulder the responsibility for the deaths that could occur if they guessed incorrectly about his intent?
Even if he actually had no intent to carry out his threats (and who could really be sure of that?), he will now have learned that simply issuing the threats makes him a persona non grata among the law-abiding. He will hopefully have learned that his actions create repercussions and responsibilities. He has to know that he is not free to do just as he wants, whenever he wants. He needs to learn that he does not exist in a vacuum. His world is peopled by other individuals who have every bit as much right to life as he does.
Some supporters of the teen are suggesting that the judicial reaction is an overreaction. Some have said the trial results have "shattered" their faith in the judicial system. Biehn's parents have complained about the judge describing their parenting as being substandard because they never held their son accountable for his actions.
Get over it, all of you. This kid is a creep. Period. He knew what he was doing when he uttered those threats. He knew the seriousness of his actions. He needs to have it forcibly pointed out to him that issuing such threats is an infringement on the rights of others. Why waste time bemoaning the judge's supposed harshness and patting the boy on the head? Why send him home free to carry out his school threat or others he has not yet uttered? Which one among those supporting this thug would want to shoulder the responsibility for the deaths that could occur if they guessed incorrectly about his intent?
Even if he actually had no intent to carry out his threats (and who could really be sure of that?), he will now have learned that simply issuing the threats makes him a persona non grata among the law-abiding. He will hopefully have learned that his actions create repercussions and responsibilities. He has to know that he is not free to do just as he wants, whenever he wants. He needs to learn that he does not exist in a vacuum. His world is peopled by other individuals who have every bit as much right to life as he does.
posted by aka.alias @ 2:55 PM 5 Comments 
5 Comments:
What they should have done was make the little puke work with trauma victims.
I can't stand people who make excuses for their little rats.
I'm sorry, did you find some actual evidence that he uttered the threats?
Like, you know, a single shred of evidence?
There is none. The case against Biehn used a circular argument, and the court has now begun to contradict itself. It will almost certainly be overturned on appeal.
Usually conviction, you idiot wonderdog, means that yes, there is evidence that he has issued those threats.
Look it up in the dictionary, idiot.
Law.
The judgment of a jury or judge that a person is guilty of a crime as charged.
The state of being found or proved guilty: evidence that led to the suspect's conviction.
So, would you eat your words if he did blow up his highschool, what about any other kid who HAS done this in the past? Do you want them to walk free. It's idiots like you who allow 9/11 to happen. If anyone wants to meet a potential terrorist, we should introduce them to this kid, or you.
Just so I am fair,
Main Entry: circular argument
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: any discussion in which one argues the conclusion as a premise; a discussion that makes a conclusion based on material that has already been assumed in the argument.
What do you care anyway? Are you his mother?
Threats like this need to be nipped at the bud. I'm sure if some hardened criminals were scared straight when they were younger, we'd have a little less crime to deal with.
Hi!
Travis here, my verdict was overturned because basically there was no evidence, not even circumstantial! I'd appreciate you revising your blog entry, or adding an update.
Thanks,
It's good to see so many independent thinkers in one place!
Post a Comment
<< Home