Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Really?
Granted, a 16 year old certainly isn't a fully mentally developed adult, but they have agency. They're capable of discerning right from wrong and making informed decisions. If a 16 year old is shot while conducting a drug deal, they've probably made some bad choices in order to put themselves in that position. I can't think of any circumstance where you could say a 6 year old is in any material way culpable for his or her own gun death.
Do you really want to stand by this view?
EDIT: It seems to me that the better response would be something like, "12 times more likely means that about 10% of those children were absolutely and inarguably innocent children - that is, 12 years or under. 130 dead kids a year is also a complete travesty."
|
The bad choices made by a 16 year old getting involved in drugs does not mitigate or absolve the state from responsibility for its own bad choices. The latter is the issue under consideration in this context. Running with the former is designed to try and muddy the waters.