Sunday, February 8, 2009

18-Year-Old Sentenced to 30 Years

The Miami Herald reports on the stiff sentence handed down in the "dirt-biker" murder.
On his way to prison for manslaughter, Joshua Ladson barely looked up.

He slouched in a Miami-Dade courtroom jury box Friday, glaring at the bereaved. Through their tears and applause, Ladson never winced. When given a chance to speak, he said nothing.

What happened took place in 2006, when the shooter was 15 and the victim 14. Giovanny Mayoral, a Cuban American boy, rode his dirt-bike motorcycle too close to the armed black youth. In what I suppose was an attempt to avenge the act of disrespect, Ladson opened fire, hitting the younger boy in the back as he rode away.

An unspeakable tragedy it was, which made me think about the youthful offenders. There must be a time when they can still be reached, when the right person or circumstances can help them to choose a better path. Perhaps on sentencing day it was too late for the 18-year-old Ladson. He'd already spent two and a half years in jail awaiting this day when all he could do is silently glare at the victim's family.

The other idea that came to mind is the inevitability of this kind of violence repeating itself over and over again. One of the best depictions of it I've seen was on The Wire. Black kids growing up in the projects can too easily be seduced by the lifestyle. In the first season we saw the characters D'Angelo and Wallace try to come to terms with the violence in their lives, only one of them succeeding. I found it quite touching and ample reason for us to seek rehabilitation rather than punishment. What's your opinion? Is the availability of guns a factor? Is the easy access to guns by these young gangsters the price we pay for preserving the 2nd Amendment? Or is there no connection at all?

Please leave a comment.

33 comments:

  1. Yes, easy access to guns was most decidedly a factor. This isn't just a urban "gansta culture" problem, but the image is powerful to kids who have nothing else to aspire to.
    If we live in a society, we have an obligation to participate in the uplifting of it. By investing in education which improves the quality of life and the ability to aspire to something else than instant bling, we not only improve the lives of the lower classes, but we enoble ourselves as well.

    The up side? An 18 year old going with a 30 year sentence will not serve 30 years...

    Too bad the prison system for young offenders is not based more on evaluative rehabilitation rather on simply placing offenders in a "dead zone" where they will only become more inured and desocialized so they will be more likely to be repeat offenders when they get out.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mike,

    Yes, access to firearms was a factor just like access to words is a factor in slander.

    (Easy access to a penis is a factor in rapes.....what are you going to do to remove that access?)

    And access to a printer is a factor in libel, and access to matches is a factor in arson, and access to cars and alcohol is a factor drunk driving.

    Access to the freedom to choose is a factor---take away that freedom to choose and you've taken away the liberty that defines a free person.

    It stinks that some people will not make the right decisions, but it isn't right to take away everyone else's rights because of the bad decisions of a few.

    As the prosecutor said, it was the end result of many choices; the choice to load a firearm, the choice to carry the firearm, the choice to perceive riding too close as disrespect, the choice to respond, the choice to respond with lethal force.

    All of those choices are part of the culture that the youth lived in, not the availability of the firearm. You and I growing up had access to firearms, but we never considered using them. No decision exists in isolation but consider how many other people in America that day were "disrespected" but didn't open fire, didn't use lethal force.

    I found it quite touching and ample reason for us to seek rehabilitation rather than punishment

    I would rather say we need to seek rehabilitation as a part of the consequences. Actions that damage society have to have negative consequences...just hopefully out of those consequences a young man will turn his life around. But to excuse that action, that murder of another young man without consequences is appalling. I really hope I misunderstood your meaning.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Easy access to illegally sold fire arms openly available to children unable to gauge the grave consequences of their actions...

    Uhhh...easy access to illegally sold penises openly available to children...

    I just don't know how to rephrase this to make the comparison work...
    Bob, you get me so confused!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Easy access to illegally sold fire arms openly available to children unable to gauge the grave consequences of their actions...

    Succinct statement, microdot. Not too confusing at all. Subject, predicate. Only one pronoun, reflecting back to the previous noun.

    Yep. Got it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oddly enugh when you remove the "Thug Culture" all the guns in the world at the easiest of access doesn't seem to make a difference.

    But best not look at that, for there lies the truth and that might upset the anti-gun apple cart.

    Also this appears to be another instance of prosecutors using plea-bargains rather than serving justice.

    I find it VERY difficult to imagine a scenario where you shoot one man in the back and have it be anything resembling a manslaughter charge.

    American law has a word for it, it's called Murder.

    Micro is correct too, he won't serve the full term. I hope he reforms his life before he is again free. Of course trusting a man who is already a murderer to reform his life is a pretty stupid proposition IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Microdot,

    The intent of the statement was to prove that while every man has the equipment for rape, not every man chooses that crime.

    Just like we all have access to words but don't commit libel, slander, or fraud.

    unable to gauge the grave consequences of their actions

    Sorry but at 15 I'm not buying that a person can't gauge the grave consequences of their actions.

    Given the reality of crime, Ladson had to have certainly seen his share of violence, of the results of shootings, of the deaths that can be caused by violence.

    And in response, Ladson had wielded the gun starting the day before the shooting

    So, this wasn't a rash spur of the moment decision. It was a calculated decision to carry a gun. It was a calculated decision to respond with lethal force to a "disrespect" and certainly Ladson didn't show remorse in the courtroom.

    Sounds like he was certainly aware of the 'grave consequences " of his actions and deliberate chose that action.

    When does a "youth" become responsible for his/her actions?

    ReplyDelete
  7. In many US rural areas, schools are closed for the first day of deer season and many youth have 'easy access to firearms' as they tote their fathers (or even their own) shotguns and high powered rifles through woods and fields. Murders by these individuals is nearly unheard of.

    Now compare that to the "urban youth" who are raised under the 'stop snitchin' mantra, listening to adults brag about their time in prison, and where family and school structures are denigrated.

    Even where there aren't 'easy access to guns' like Chicago, criminals find a way and give them to these kids for the express reason that they'll get lighter sentences than adults.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It is already illegal for that kid to own, possess, purchase or carry that gun. I guess making it illegal for me to own one in Ohio could have stopped that incident from happening?

    You people are nuts. You cannot legislate behavior. Incidentally, there were kids riding dirt bikes on my property this weekend and guess what? None of them decided to shoot any of the other kids on dirt bikes.

    Behavior by these inner city idiots is no reason that the rights of normal, hard working, law abiding citizens should be trampled on.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Fatwhiteman is right --it was already illegal for the kid to have a gun --yet he had a gun. So gun laws don't prevent gun access except for the law-abiding who want them for proper purposes of hunting and home protection and their constitutional right to bear arms --against the possibiliy of a despot with an army arising --as in No. Korea and countries that were disarmed by use of gun registration in the Soviet bloc nations.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Of course it is correct state that the kid had an illegally obtained weapon which gave him the opportunity to act out an immature power trip fantasy.
    To say that this is an "inner city" problem too easy of a way to say "only inner city kids (insert ethnic insinuation of your choice) have these kinds of problems.
    We know that this isn't true.
    We also know that in the context of this discussion, speaking about the need to have armed 15 year olds to counter the threat of Kim il Jung is not even worth our consideration...
    The real problem here is the availability of guns to people who have ne reason to have to access to them. eg: 15 year old ganstuh wannabees...unstable kids with social problems...felons with previous records...
    The flood of unregulated arms on the market is the problem and the big profits to be made selling them on the street...
    Just as the flood of arms that find their way into the street markets of Mogadishu..
    Over the week end, I heard the most amazing tale from a friend of mine who worked for MSF in Somalia in the early 90's. He described the gun markets in Mogadishu and having to be driven (he was a sanatation engineer in refuge camps) by a Khat chewing crazed armed driver who claimed that chewing Khat gave him the mental powers to see an ambush before it happened....
    The arms industry is profit driven and its quest for profits fuel the culture of violence all over the world.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Microdot,

    So you're comparing the US to Mogadishu? You honestly think the US firearms industry is promoting their products so that gang bangers and wannabees buy them instead of the tens of millions of legal firearm owners?

    Chicago has 5x the murder rate of the rest of the state. Yes, the problems happen elsewhere but at rates comparable to even the strictest W. European nations.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Microdot,

    Nice strawman argument here:

    We also know that in the context of this discussion, speaking about the need to have armed 15 year olds to counter the threat of Kim il Jung is not even worth our consideration

    No one is talking about needing to have 15 year olds armed to counter anyone. You admit the illegality of a 15 year old possessing, carrying and murdering someone but then try to confuse the issue.

    The real problem here is the availability of guns to people who have ne reason to have to access to them. eg: 15 year old ganstuh wannabees...unstable kids with social problems...felons with previous records...

    So other then banning firearms completely, collecting the approximately 270,000,000 firearms in America...how do you stop people from BREAKING THE LAW?

    The flood of unregulated arms on the market is the problem and the big profits to be made selling them on the street...

    Sorry sir but you are lying. Simply flat out lying if you say that firearms are unregulated!

    The arms industry is profit driven and its quest for profits fuel the culture of violence all over the world

    So the arms industry is fueling the culture of violence all over the world? You any scientific evidence to back up that absurd claim?

    How about the culture of violence in the U.K.? Firearms are strictly controlled there, but the level of violence is increasing. How is the firearm industry making a profit there?

    Again, it is a straw argument that doesn't work.

    How about answering some of my questions?

    When does a "youth" become responsible for the "grave consequences of their actions"?

    How about the fact that some cultures in America don't have the level of violence the inner cities do, yet they have greater access and greater sheer numbers of firearms available?

    How about answering FWM: How will making it illegal for him to own a firearm stop a criminal from committing murder?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Bob S...obviously and with good reason, you did not read the Barb comment. She made the statement about North Korea, and I merely used an anti dandruff medicated shampoo to refer to it.
    And I am not lying about the unregulated trade in firearms...the next time I am in Toledo, if we can somehow protect our identies...I will score you the weapon of your dreams, if I was still connected, I could do it in the Lower East Side of Manhattan...but most of those folks are dead now.

    I am not lying about the third world trade in bargain arms and you know it. Talking about the UK is totally obscuring the focus of this discussion.

    On the other hand, this statement:

    "How about the fact that some cultures in America don't have the level of violence the inner cities do, yet they have greater access and greater sheer numbers of firearms available?"

    is again obscuring the problem in the fog of your perception clouded by your prejudice. I said as much in other words in my statements all ready, but I attempted to refer to the problem of violence in "inner city culture" as part of a bigger failure on many fronts which we as a society can and must address.

    The responsible sale of fire arms is one very positive way that we can begin. You know how easy it is to buy guns. You know that there are a lot of irresponsible entrepreneurs out there who buy guns for the express purpose to make bucks on the street.
    If you don't know it, then you are living in a real state of denial.

    You sound like you are a smart guy who has some interaction with society as a whole...when do you start to address the big picture and your role?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Bob.S. you have to understand, my position has nothing to do with your right as an individual to own a gun, okay?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Third power:

    Did I compare the US to Mogadishu?
    I wrote about the availability of guns in the third world and how they are dumped on the market....
    I thought it was an interesting anecdote that further illuninated the point I was making, but hey, if that's where you want to take it, please, feel free.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Microdot,


    Please explain then?

    The real problem here is the availability of guns to people who have ne reason to have to access to them

    If you say the problem is the availability of guns but then say:

    my position has nothing to do with your right as an individual to own a gun, okay?

    How do you stop the availability of firearms to those prohibited without impacting the rights of those responsible firearm owners?

    Sorry but you did compare Mogadishu with the U.S.

    The real problem here is the availability of guns to people who have ne reason to have to access to them. eg: 15 year old ganstuh wannabees...unstable kids with social problems...felons with previous records...
    The flood of unregulated arms on the market is the problem and the big profits to be made selling them on the street...
    Just as the flood of arms that find their way into the street markets of Mogadishu.


    So how do you stop the "flood" - amazing that so few firearm crimes can be called a flood...but I don't see calls to stop the 90% of crimes that are committed without firearms.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Microdot:

    Now you're being disingenuous. You directly compared the two.

    "The flood of unregulated arms on the market is the problem and the big profits to be made selling them on the street...
    Just as the flood of arms that find their way into the street markets of Mogadishu.."

    That's more than an 'interesting anecdote'.

    So why aren't the authorities going after those 'irresponsible entrepreneurs'? Why are all the calls for further restrictions on people like me purchasing firearms? Why don't you define what you think is a 'responsible sale'?

    ReplyDelete
  18. "The real problem here is the availability of guns to people who have ne reason to have to access to them. eg: 15 year old ganstuh wannabees"

    I think that's the whole point. Why do people WANT to be Criminals? And why are there so many of them in our inner cities?

    This in no way is no way a racial statement at all, there are gangs of every race and creed around here.

    The first time I went shooting I was 19. I went with a 20 Year old friend. His younger brother (maybe 17) was with us too. I'm trying to remember if his parents were home, they certainly had plenty of access to the guns and full permission to do so. It was quite a collection, from target pistols, to .45s, and from air guns to Weatherby Big-Game rifles.

    All three of us are successful members of society with no criminal history. Why? No culture that glorifies crime. We were going to college and studying hard because we saw THAT as the Glory.

    Now let's take another group. MS13
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mara_Salvatrucha

    They're gaining in huge numbers and there are chapters is most of the major cities of America. What's one of their calling cards?

    Machete hits. You snitch on the MS13, you'll get chopped up with a Machete.

    Sure they get guns too, but certainly you can't think that "Availability of guns" somehow drives them.

    I was reading a report about knife attacks in Scotland (mostly whities...and also the place where my ancestors came from) HUGE numbers of knife attacks EVERY DAY there. Of course they've all but banned guns in the UK...but the violence is still a huge problem, and Scotland is one of the most dangerous places in the "Developed World".

    That right there is a MASSIVE Red Herring.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Just for the record, Microd, 3 comments in a row!!! OUTRAGE! Tsk tsk. Where's your friend Mudrake when you need him to say, "OCD --Three comments in a row --OCD!!! EVerybody look --he's got OCD!!!"

    As for my No. Korea reference --that's just in general defense of our right to bear arms as private citizens. The So Koreans haven't a chance to mount a coup without weapons (and food.) They are stuck in the most abject situation. Granted, registered guns as we have in the US can be rounded up one at a time by a couple of soldiers at one's door as happened in Poland. But the concept of self-defense and gun ownership is theoretically a caution to any tyrants who would try to disarm and brutalize the people.

    The Revolutionary War would not have been fought or won if the colonists were unarmed.

    Obviously, the problem in gang neighborhoods, where drugs are a way to make money, appears to be a sex and family problem--as depicted in your video clip. Too many babies making babies and no parents in sight doing what parents should do. "The sins of the parents are visited upon the
    3rd and 4th generations."

    ReplyDelete
  20. Microdot wrote:
    "To say that this is an "inner city" problem too easy of a way to say "only inner city kids (insert ethnic insinuation of your choice) have these kinds of problems."

    Very true, it can and does happen anywhere but probably 95% of the time in inner cities. And basically I don't care what happens in Miami or most other inner cities. They need to clean up their own problems and taking away guns from the rest of the free world because they cannot control their idiots in inner cities is not a solution.

    "The arms industry is profit driven and its quest for profits fuel the culture of violence all over the world."

    You're right. Glad there was no violence in the world before guns were invented.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The arms industry is profit driven

    this is trivially true in a capitalist society.

    and its quest for profits fuel the culture of violence all over the world.

    this appeal to emotion begs for evidence.

    (though, honestly, how could you provide any evidence for that? first you'd have to show that there is a global "culture of violence", then you'd have to measure its degree somehow in order to show whether or not it was "fueled" at all, then... frankly, you'd be better off just admitting that phrase was a blatant appeal to emotion that you can't support; otherwise you'll labor forever to support it.)

    ReplyDelete
  22. In the inner city, too many youth lack responsible fathers who live with them and discipline them. So not only are guns a problem, EVERYTHING is --alcohol, drugs, theft, thugs and bullies, promiscuity, teen pregnancy, gangs, truancy.

    Without 2 determined parents to raise their offspring, with most families parented by teen-age Mom and Grandmother, teen-age kids are at risk for many problems --including illegal gun access and abuse of guns. and it's hard to stop this cycle of early single parenting and male irresponsibility and crime.

    ReplyDelete
  23. First of all, Bob, no one is lying here. I've installed special software that detects untruths and makes them appear like those google capcha thingies.

    Secondly, I want to say, I think Microdot has his eye on the ball when he says availability of guns is a big part of the problem. Yes, the question of why do these kids want to be criminals is pertinent, but while we're correcting that with education and societal changes, I say we gotta cut down on the availability.

    ReplyDelete
  24. So, Mike, if Guns are the most important part of the equation, why is it rural youths (of any race) who have HUGE access to guns don't seem to have this problem?

    That's called a Red Herring, Mike. You can follow it all you want, it doesn't lead to what you're looking for.

    Well unless you don't actually care about Urban violence, and just want to support your backwards ideas of eliminating guns and the 2nd Amendment.

    What IS your motivation, Mike?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Mike,

    I was very clear in my assertion: IF Microdot is saying the arms industry is unregulated he is lying.

    His statement is similar to saying that a pusher selling vicodin on the street corner is involved in the "unregulated selling" of pharmaceuticals. That is a lie; there are many laws concerning the manufacture, distribution, and selling of firearms, not just in America but around the world.

    The flood of unregulated arms on the market is the problem


    Next --- you keep saying this:
    I say we gotta cut down on the availability. but you never put forward any ways of doing just that. Hey, I think that drugs are a problem we can fix with education and societal changes. How about we make them against the law, work with foreign governments to stop the growth, patrol the border to stop the import, arrest the dealers on the streets, run nearly illegal aerial searches using infrared (heat from growth lights for marijuana), search as many cars as we can when we stop people for minor traffic violations, send thousands of people undercover to infiltrate the organizations, demonize some drugs through advertising and indoctrination in elementary schools.

    All those actions will surely stop the "flow of drugs" and make them less available, right?

    Then couldn't we do the same for guns?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Cut down on the availability to whom Mike? and how?

    ReplyDelete
  27. They have had gun buy-outs in the inner city, haven't they--where the police paid people for their weapons? and thus rounded up many guns and put them out of circulation.

    It's like that London Times writer, the atheist Michael Paris (?) said about Africa in the Dec. 27 or 28th issue, 08 --"what they need is more missionaries. Christianity makes a difference in people." We need more Christian youth work and Christian presence in inner cities. More neighborhood Bible studies. More supervision of youth. More tutors. More children's ministries in their schools like the Good News Clubs. More responsible parenting by parents --more intact marriages with a kid's real parents together under the same roof. Less drinking and drugging and prostituting --And law enforcers. But late night basketball as some innovators have suggested and youth-gathering places have often become late night crime scenes and drug markets.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Thirdpower said, "Cut down on the availability to whom Mike? and how?"

    Well, those are exactly the right questions. The answer to the first is to the bad guys, of course. The answer to the second is what you gun guys are helping me figure out. The answer is not quite ready for publication yet, but I have a feeling you're not gonna like it.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Thirdpower, you're new here. Mike's a little wishy-washy when it comes to REAL action and REAL Results.

    But if he sticks to his standard holding pattern, he'll next up ask you to come up with a change in the current laws.

    You'll give a similar answer we've given in the past, and he'll call you "Paranoid" because you won't suggest a law that will cut your own throat.


    ....at least he doesn't play games with the comments.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hey Mike,

    How about I make it easy on you.

    How about we take the idea of successful bans and prohibitions and see if we can apply them to firearms.

    Isn't that what we are talking about: banning criminals from getting firearms and prohibiting the transfer to people that shouldn't have them.

    So, let's start with successful prohibitions....

    (crickets chirping)


    Bueller, Bueller, anyone?

    ReplyDelete
  31. MikeB,

    WB says you'll next ask what kind of improvements I would make. Here's one. Universal background checks.

    "Wait", you say, "That's the same thing that the gun control groups are calling for."

    There's a significant difference in my plan as compared to theirs. EVERY 'gun control' group wants all sales to go through licensed FFL dealers. The problem? They also endorse and advocate suing those same dealers out of existence through 3rd party lawsuits. No FFL dealers. No legal sales/transfers.

    My idea?

    Open up the NICS system to non-FFL inquiries.

    Groups like the Brady Campaign, Ceasefire, etc. either oppose that or refuse to comment when it is suggested.

    Ask yourself why.

    ReplyDelete
  32. +1, I'm all for that.

    I'd also like to NICS people who I invite into my house. No Baby Sitters, General Contractors, or service techs may enter my home without a valid NICS! (They can flash their carry permit too, if they want)

    ReplyDelete
  33. And there the discussion dies when real-life solutions to problems are proposed.

    THIS is why the anti-gun types are plain-and-simple, Black-and-white WRONG, when it comes to their views.

    ReplyDelete