Posted by mmushrooms on February 17, 2008 at 2:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Why not? Why not try him? He made the same decision as a full-grown adult would? I was friends with the victim, and this boy SHOULD be tried as an adult...these actions are hurtful and damaging to more people than we will ever know...

Posted by SF1943 on February 17, 2008 at 4:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Since when does a Star editorial come under the heading, "Latest News"? Staff opinions are NOT news!

Proposition 21 was passed by the citizens of this state in good faith that our authorities would abide by it and thats just what the District Attorney's office is doing. Yes, this incident is extremely tragic just as any shooting is, whether random or calculated. If this young man was Hispanic or Black and a gang banger, I doubt very seriously that your staff would take the time to issue an opinion on transferring this case to Juvenile Court! He did the crime and now he pays for it in adult court. Under the law, all the District Attorney has to do is prove that he knew it was wrong to shoot the victim and the case stays where it should be.

Posted by steveb36701 on February 17, 2008 at 6:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Also, the voters of California passed Proposition 21 because, unfortunately, a lot of people in the juvenile system have the same attitude as this editorial portrays. "OH, THE POOR DARLING IS ONLY 14 AND COULDN'T POSSIBLY HAVE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE BIG BAD GUN WOULD REALLY KILL SOMEONE." If the kid wanted to play like the big boys he can go down like the big boys.

Posted by pweinman on February 17, 2008 at 6:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree this is a very difficult decision. Trying him as an adult is extreme. His actions were so shocking that I have not made up my mind whether or not he should be having a trial in adult court. Physiologically he is a adultescent and the unfortunate and tragic circumstances is that Lawrence King has been murdered.
I hope and pray that in Lawrence's memory and respect for his life that Ventura County develop the best and proven prevention program in all of the public schools in this county. Tolerance is something that is taught and learned. Tolerance is not something that comes naturally for anyone.

Posted by ekwhite on February 17, 2008 at 6:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm sorry, but this was a cold blooded murder. I don't not want this youth out on our streets at the age of 21 to endanger our community. His crime deserves the full punishment.

Posted by cslaurie on February 17, 2008 at 7:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with the Times. The boy is a juvenile and juvenile law is supposed to consider the well being of the child. Putting a juvenile into the adult court and prison system is wrong.

I believe that naming this a hate crime because the victim was apparently a homosexual is a means to add this adult enhancement. I thought naming homosexuals as a protected class didn't pass legal scrutiny in the past.

Unfortunately, kids today don't have any guidance in how to respond to a homosexual advance. The schools, led by politically correct left over hippies, have encouraged homosexual behavior. It's OK to be different is the mantra.

Allowing kids to cross dress and attend school as transvestites is a gross dereliction of the school boards oversight and responsibility.

The first persons to go in this tragedy should be the Principal and Vice Principal of that school, along with the current school board and Superintendent - as they either come up for re-election or contract renewal.

Posted by 805m0mma on February 17, 2008 at 8:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Just b/c Ventura County has never had a case like this doesn't give the DA the right to slap his hand and let the kid off. If he is NOT hit with a hard sentence what message is this going to send to other kids!!!! I am sorry but I have NO faith in the justice system! Hit him w/the hardest sentence he can get!
BTW, does anyone read these comments besides the public??? Does the Star pass them on to the appropriate people??

Posted by SF1943 on February 17, 2008 at 8:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Quote cslaurie; I agree with the Times. The boy is a juvenile and juvenile law is supposed to consider the well being of the child. Putting a juvenile into the adult court and prison system is wrong.

cslaurie....read the law as it pertains to Proposition 21. He forfeited his right to being a juvenile the minute he pulled that trigger!

Posted by gramagracie on February 17, 2008 at 8:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Editor, it is interesting to read that a 14 year old is not an adult in this situation, yet a 14 year old girl can make the decision, without her parents knowledge, to end the life of her unborn child! This is a tragedy for both families but we have to allow the law to speak for the victim of this crime it shouldn't matter that this is the first of it's kind. My prayers are with both families.

Posted by JesusMalverde on February 17, 2008 at 8:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The Star's editorial actually crack me up.

When Prop 21 was passed it received 62 percent of the vote in California. It passed in EVERY county except San Francisco. The public spoke LOUD and CLEAR that they wanted juvenilles who commit heinous crimes (like executions in a classroom) to be treated as adults. Grown up decision, grown up actions, grown up consequences.

A few weeks back, the Star editorialized about medical marijuana. The rationale was that the Federal Government should back off on pursuing marijuana cases where there is a medicianal issue involved because the voters had overwhelmingly voted that people wshould be allowed to use medicinal marijuana. That vote was 55-45.

So as I understand it, the Star believes the voters' will should be respected as long as it does not contradict the Star's obvious left wing tendencies.

Does anyone else see the contradiction here? I think the DA is doing nothing more than enforcing the law exactly how the citizens want it enforced.

Posted by ROLL_IT_UP on February 17, 2008 at 8:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Maybe he should have thought about that before he made an adult size decision to shoot his classmate in the back of the head. I don't want this person lose when they turn 21 to endanger our lives and that of our children. He deserves to be in prison for the rest of his life. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, right?

Posted by EagleEye on February 17, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The Star Editorial board is like an arm of the ACLU. This evil son of a gun walked up and shot an innocent boy to death in a room full of other students. If the Star had it's way, this murdering scumbag would be out on the street at age 25 ready and able to kill again. The Star Editorial Board needs a major reality check.

Any good District Attorney or cop isn't worried about how they look, they are concerned with protecting the public. Time and time again I am reminded that our Sheriff, District Attorney and Chiefs of Police are out their fighting the good fight, only to be spit on by the left leaning Ventura County Star.

Posted by Cat on February 17, 2008 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What goes around, comes around....shoot him in the head like he did to his innocent victim and be done with it. He *knew* exactly what he was doing that schoolday morning when he packed the gun in his backpack and proceeded to kill someone. No leverage should be given just because of his age. He'll serve no good purpose to society. Don't waste taxpayer's money. A bad egg is a bad egg....forever. Put him out with the trash.

Posted by jill on February 17, 2008 at 8:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

People's brains have not fully developed and netted together into teens and sometimes early twenties. This is what causes so many young people to do stupid things. They don't think of the consequences or the scope of what they are doing. How many times have you asked your son/daughter, "Why would you do a thing like that?" and you get a blank stare. They weren't thinking. Don't get me wrong. I think he should pay for what he did, but not in the adult system where people should have more sense.

Posted by ironwoman on February 17, 2008 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Try him as an adult...he took a life away. Send him to prison where he belongs. He obviously has a serious anger problem. Do we want such in our society. Don't give him any breaks. He doesn't deserve it.

Posted by zoezoe on February 17, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The Star's Editoral and the defense attorney are the only two that think this suspect should be tried as a juvenile. We have become such a forgiving nation that crime certainly does pay.

Posted by LizardL8y on February 17, 2008 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As a psychology major I am versed in the fact that children do not have the same impulse control and understanding of consequences as adults. That being said, this kid didn't go into a blind rage and get into a fist fight and accidently hit the kid in the temple and kill him. This boy brought a gun to school, aimed it, shot it, and ended another child's life. A 14 year old may not understand the justice system, but he is old enough to know that shooting someone with a gun can kill them. He made a conscious decision to kill this other boy.
As for cslaurie's statement, I am devestated, though not entirely suprised, to see someone say "Unfortunately, kids today don't have any guidance in how to respond to a homosexual advance. The schools, led by politically correct left over hippies, have encouraged homosexual behavior. It's OK to be different is the mantra." First of all, I have not read anything indicating that there was any "advance" involved. Secondly, I have never seen school administrators of any kind encourage homosexual behavior - I have seen it discouraged and I have seen it tolerated but certainly never encouraged. Thirdly, to blame the administrators for allowing this teen to dress how he so chose and be "different" is just the kind of intollerance that was probably drilled into this young alleged murderer making him think that killing the kid was okay. I don't care what your personal opinion of homosexuals is, but hate is hate and when you teach children to hate other children, even if you feel the hatred is warrented, all you wind up with is tragedy.

Posted by EagleEye on February 17, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

On another note, think of it this way. Before the murderer committed his act of evil, the victim was a happy-go-lucky kid who was finding his way in the world. He was doing things his own way, which takes a great deal of courage. He went to school and expressed himself in a way that was ok with school officials, then just because he is gay the evil doer shoots him in the head with a pistol in front of a room fool of children. One day he's a happy go lucky kid, the next day his organs are being harvested.

Ventura County Star, your position is an offense to decent law abiding people who want to raise their children in a safe environment. You have lost any rational sense of right and wrong.

Posted by santabarbarasand on February 17, 2008 at 9:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree LizardL8y! I also have studied psychology and while teens do not have the impulse control, this was a thought out crime, not an impulsive reaction. I also was taken aback at cslaurie's comment regarding homosexual "advances". There has been nothing reporting any advances but if a girl isn't happy about a boy flirting with her that wouldn't give her an excuse to shoot him! Come on now, you can't be that homophobic that you think that it's okay?!

This juvenile planned and followed through with a murder of another young man, in cold blood and in a classroom setting where other teens were present. He should have turned the gun on himself afterwards as the majority of these school shooters seem to do, that way we wouldn't be having this dilemma. Since he chose to spare his own life, after so viciously taking another, he should pay to the fullest extent that the law will allow. He has traumatized so many people, especially the children in that school who should have felt safe there. That is an act of terrorism if you think about it. Who cares his age? He is a danger to society.

Posted by Tom_Johnston on February 17, 2008 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

To a couple of readers so very sure of their facts..this editorial appeared in the Ventura Star, not the LA Times....and I'd have to agree that an Editorial really isn't "Latest News".

That being said, should a barely 14 year old be put to trial as an adult?

It certainly was an adult-sized decision, so I think a good case can be made for it. What I don't like is a law that mandates it.

This is a lousy law, promoted and voted upon by people fed up with violence, but unsure what to do to prevent it other than lock more people up AFTER it happens. That's not a solution, its a reaction, and a knee-jerk one at that. Just a line drawn, that's it, John Q. Public is done with it, and doesn't have to THINK about it anymore.

In this case, it may have been better to be more open about diversity, and in this school based setting, more attentive to "bullying" and other unsocial actions of young people. Have we learned nothing from the Columbine killings?

I would prefer a pre-trial hearing where input from the DA and child psychology specialists can present facts to be decided upon by a panel of judges. If this boy had shot young Mr King 20 days before he did, he would be considered a juvenile? That is patently absurd.

Will his trial deter other young people from committing so heinous a crime? Well, clearly most young people already don't commit crimes like this. The few who might, they aren't going to care about this case, if they even would have heard of it.

Reading through the prior posts, this really isn't about justice, it's about vengeance. Let's at least be honest about that.

We have yet to hear about who owned this gun. It should have been registered and in my opinion that person bears significant responsibility in this case.

Posted by AnnaWhaat on February 17, 2008 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

cslaurie,Good point!
Being tried as a Juevenile I would like to know the max time he could recieve. Obviously this kid had some serious mental problems to take a gun to school and shoot someone in the back of the head a couple of times.
BUT I do agree that someone should have stepped up talked to the victim about his actions with makeup and all and what people would do. Its very sad he had to die..........

Posted by dcsfancy on February 17, 2008 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I also agree that he should not be tried as an adult. Most of you on the band wagon to try this boy as an adult. Will re thank your decision when all the facts of this case come out in trial. There is some important information that is not being released to the press that will cause you all to think twice.

Posted by skywayave on February 17, 2008 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I MOST DEFINATELY AGREE WITH THIS. He is NOT an adult. An adult, which everyone should know, is considered 18 years of age. Does he look 18 to you? NO. He's 14 for crying out loud! You obvisiously have no heart what so ever, to let a 14 year old boy rot in prison WITH ADULTS. You people have NO IDEA of what was actually happening in the situation. Not one bit. He needs to be tried in juvenile court, not adult court.

Posted by skywayave on February 17, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

One more thing, the second person above, you are so rude and inconsiderate.

Posted by doesntgetit on February 17, 2008 at 10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Maybe the victim did something really wrong, blew a kiss at him, winked at him, or maybe raped him? That would justify bringing a gun to school and executing the perpetrator, right? Now for those advocating juvenile justice, like the Star, do us a favor, once he's out and reformed, can you hire him to work for you to give the guy a second chance in life, to make sure he doesn't kill any of us in case someone denies him a job because of his past. Unfortunately, I would err in the side of caution, I don't want to take the chance of my child encountering this person, offends him, and get killed by him, in case the juvenile reform system fails.

Posted by ridered00 on February 17, 2008 at 10:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Not try him as an adult...are you kidding? Yeah lets slap him on the wrist, give him a few years behind bars, then he can get out go shoot up somewhere else!

Posted by cslaurie on February 17, 2008 at 10:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

For all the Prop 21 chest thumpers out there, who apparently can't put themselves in the shoes of the parents of this boy - please read on. Also please note my comment about a manufactured hate crime enhancement.

Proposition 21, the get-tough-on-juveniles initiative passed by state voters last year, suffered its first major legal defeat yesterday when an appellate court overturned a provision that let prosecutors charge youths age 14 to 17 as adults in serious crimes. (2001)

The state Court of Appeal in San Diego ruled 2-to-1 that the provision violated judges' constitutional authority over sentencing by letting prosecutors decide whether youths would be sentenced as adults.

"Today's decision has effectively gutted Proposition 21," declared San Diego attorney Kelly Steigerwalt, whose 15-year-old client was one of eight defendants charged with hate crimes in an attack on five Mexican farm workers. The prosecutor's decision to file in adult court, where the defendants faced potential sentences of 12 to 16 years in prison, prompted the court challenge.

Treating more juveniles as adults was a central theme of the wide-ranging measure that won 62 percent voter approval last March. It has been under constant attack in the courts since then and has been implemented cautiously, contradicting -- at least for now -- opponents' predictions of huge expenses and an influx of youths into state prisons.

When tried and convicted as adults, juveniles receive full adult sentences, up to life in prison. Juvenile courts can order confinement only up to age 25.

The provision challenged in yesterday's case, allowing prosecutors rather than judges to send certain cases to adult court, has generally been reserved for the most violent cases, said David LaBahn, deputy director of the California District Attorneys Association and a drafter of Prop. 21.

Posted by tdcjerry on February 17, 2008 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Did any of these 14 to 17 year olds shoot any of these five Mexican farm workers in the back of the head?? need more on this to compare.

Posted by abe1 on February 17, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

We as a society should be on trail as a adult but in this tragic case perhaps new legislation should be created allowing a minor to who commits a heinous act to get juvenile jail time and lifetime pyscho therapy sentence the records should be sealed however the then adult should have to register privately with the local police deptarment where they choose to live

Posted by brian_williams on February 17, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Two days ago I wasn't 21 years old.

Today I am charged with felony drunk diving??

How did I become responsible in just two days to be able to make the correct decision to drink and drive?

Weak argument Mr. Vogal; I don't care if if your client is tried as an Adult or a Minor. As long as his jail time is the same.

Young Larry is just as dead, just as murdered, has if a 18 year old had walk up behind him, put a gun to the back of his head and shot twice. It's not the age that should be considered, but the severity of the crime. Adults kill for far less of a reason.

At what age to you have to be to know that murder is wrong?

The biggest mistake your client made was not turning the gun on himself - like every other campus killer.

Posted by Jeille on February 17, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with this editorial. He is not an adult and does not have a fully developed brain that can make rational decisions. This not just simply my opinion, it can be verified medically. This crime is terrible and my heart filled prayers go out to both families. I just believe that prosecuting him as an adult is based on the horrific crime and not his age. He can't even legally but a pack of cigarettes, join the military or vote. Why because these are decisions that need to be made by adults. He does not qualify for any of the above. Trying him as an adult will not bring the victim back. Putting him in prison with real adults will only further damage this already confused teenager. For those of you that think he has the capability of making adult decisions should do a little research on the development of the brain before making up your mind. If you feel that we don’t punish juveniles harsh enough then lobby to have harsher penalties for juveniles. It is just ridiculous to say the crime is so horrible so now we are going to call you an adult. Again my prayers are with both families as both of them have lost their children to a senseless crime.

Posted by cslaurie on February 17, 2008 at 11:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Here is an law review article concerning Prop 21.
The Supreme court did ultimately uphold Prop 21 and a prosecutors right to file the adult charges.

However, the court noted that the trial judge's right to sentence a child was unchanged. Even if the child is tried as an adult with adult enhancements, the judge decides whether or not the child, if guilty, serves Juvenile time or Adult time. So bottom line, the prosecutor can file it but it takes a judge to uphold it.

http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~usclrev/pdf/0...

Posted by Common_Sense on February 17, 2008 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Justice cannot be served by trying this 14-year-old in adult court."

I AM SURE that the author of this very poorly thought out, yet Politically Correct, rambling would take a different stand if it was their child who was shot in the head while in a classroom FULL OF KIDS. This left wing nonsense (which has bled out of the editorial page into the newsroom) coming out of much of the print media is one of the main reasons why subscribership has declined nationwide so significantly. WHile I would expect such a rediculous position out of this rag of a newspaper, why would they place an editorial under "breaking news? on this website?" It aint news! It is an OPINION! You know what they say about opinions.....

I guess they are so blinded by their ideology that they forget there is a difference. As for the actual issue discussed, many of you have hit the nail on the head. Fortunately atleast 62% of the voters have more 'Common_Sense' than the author of this piece (literally)....

Posted by calipilot99 on February 17, 2008 at 11:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This kid deserves to be tried to the full extent of the law. Have some of you forgotten Columbine? Does it take the kid to kill more people for you to side with the law? Just because he turned 14, 3 weeks before the shooting does not change a thing. He made a grown up decision the minute he pulled the trigger and in my opinion it was premeditated. It is now up to the authorities to prosecute him and we the people as a jury to decide within the law what his punishment will be.

Posted by ironwoman on February 17, 2008 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

cslaurie- stop blaming the system for Mcinerney's CHOICE to commit murder. He took a gun to school and killed another student becuase of WHAT? His ill-feelings toward gays? Sounds like a sick individual to me. He deserves to be tried as an adult.
Your liberal mind is why our society is where it is. Giving sick criminals breaks creates more victims. They belong behind bars, away from my kids and all others that deserve not to be shot in a classroom!!!!
"put yourself in his parent's shoes"---no thank you. My kids know better than to take a gun to school, let alone use one.

Posted by drumsnwhistles on February 17, 2008 at 11:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

You've certainly hit a hot button. I'm not the same person today at 49 than I was at age 14, but I have the same fundamental values and one of them is that murder is just plain wrong. It was wrong when I was 14 and it's wrong now.

The problem I have with trying Brandon McInerney as a juvenile is twofold: First, his record will be sealed after he serves his time, meaning that at age 25, just 9 years from now, he can walk into society and begin to rebuild his life without having any further accountability for the one he took. Second, he will not have to account to anyone for WHY he did such a thing, since juvenile proceedings are closed to the public. It's possible he might not even if he's tried as an adult, but his defense would at least give an inkling of the reasons.

One of my family members was murdered when I was 12. He went missing for 3 days, until someone reported his car sitting in downtown LA. His body was in the trunk. He'd been shot twice in the neck.

37 years later I still don't know why. The police claim it was one man on a spree, but there was no evidence tying him to my relative, so it felt to me like a way to dispose of a case they didn't expect to solve.

I want Brandon McInerney to stand up and admit that he made the decision to shoot Larry King because he was so offended by Mr. King's sexuality that he felt justified in taking his life.

I want him to hear the ugly echo of those words, to own them, to admit that he didn't have the guts to face his own fears so he tried to kill them instead. I want him to own what he did, so I can forgive him for it, because if he doesn't own it and admit it, I believe he'll keep trying to find ways to justify it.

If he can do that and be tried as a juvenile, fine. If not, try him as an adult and give him a reasonable sentence. But at age 13 or 14 or 49, I have to believe he knew that putting a gun to someone's head and blowing their brains out was a crime.

Posted by drumsnwhistles on February 17, 2008 at 11:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

@doesntgetit,

I'm assuming the first two sentence of your comment were sarcastic, right? I sure hope so.

Posted by NothingButTheTruth on February 17, 2008 at 11:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If 14 year olds are so intellectually developed that they can be held to "adult" standards, we should lower the drinking age to 14 and the voting age while we're at it. Heck they are old enough to even go see a Hannah Montana movie! With their well developed brains they should be driving at 14 too. Think how exciting our highways would be with these intellectually developed drivers! Pun.

At some point the judiciary will make an appropriate decision in this case. In the meantime, I'll wait to see how that goes...

Posted by cason on February 17, 2008 at 12:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes, they should try the little skinhead punk as an adult. 14 is well old enough to know that you should'nt kill people. I am white, and I am telling all of you skinheads, black power, brown power fools you are all idiots. I know many of you, wake up. We are all the same, just wait till your dying and someone from another race saves your pathetic life.
Try the 14 as an adult and give him the 25 to life like he deserves. And put his grandfather in jail for allowing the guns to be available to the kid. He is a racsist puke as well, hell with it let's let black and browns beat his head in. Then we will see how racscist he is

Posted by steveb36701 on February 17, 2008 at 12:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"If you feel that we don’t punish juveniles harsh enough then lobby to have harsher penalties for juveniles."

I believe the voters of California did just that overwhemingly; it's called Proposition 21.

Posted by drumsnwhistles on February 17, 2008 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NothingButTheTruth,

Do you really believe that a 13/14 year old doesn't understand that it's wrong to get a gun (illegally), take it to school (illegally), walk into a classroom that wasn't his (against the rules), put that gun to the back of another person's head and pull the trigger?

Are you saying that somewhere between the age of 14 and 18 kids suddenly figure out that murder is wrong?

I'm more inclined to believe that somewhere between the age of 12 and 14 this kid figured out that murder might be right. What would be the best way to disabuse him of that belief?

Posted by spokenit on February 17, 2008 at 12:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

cason you sound angry! You call Brandon a skinhead? Is he? " lets let blacks and browns beat his head in??? Sounds like a hate crime to me. I have yet to read that Brandon said he killed him because he was gay. Isnt that all hear say until proven? Larry's death is being used as a stepping stone for so many people now. As if anything is ever really going to change. Trying Brandon as an adult is clearly wrong. He isnt an adult. If the DA does this then he should start charging all the 14 and unders who consent to causual sex w/ 18 year olds as an adult and have them reg.sex offenders also. I know its a totally dif crime but who is to say when a 14 year is an adult then? Is it just the group of 14 year olds that are having sex that cant make an adult decision?

Posted by imbetnonit on February 17, 2008 at 12:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

13 or 14 year old children understand the difference between right and wrong. This young man surely knew that it was wrong to take a gun to school for the purpose of shooting another student in the head. Twice.
The article in the Star suggested that the young victim was having gender issues, but it looks to me that the shooter was the one with the issues.
Maybe we should be asking each other where a 14 year old child learns to hate someone, they hardly know, to the point of committing murder in broad daylight in front of all his classmates. Was he seeking attention? Was it arrogance? Jealousy? Was he having his own gender issues?

Posted by bluefairy on February 17, 2008 at 1:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Granted, the alleged suspect is still a child however he committed an adult act. I refuse to believe that he took the gun to school, pulled the trigger, shot the victim and thought to himself "nothing will happen". That is nonsense! He pulled the trigger with intention of bodily harm - whether or not death was his plan.

Hands down - this kid should not be allowed the daily freedoms that were taken away from the victim, no matter his age.

Posted by Comments on February 17, 2008 at 2:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Should this child be tried as an adult? I'm not sure. What I do know is that he killed another human being in cold blood and planned the murder. He did not attack his peer in a fit of anger or emotional outrage. He got a gun, told another peer that he was going to hurt him and then shot him twice in the back of the head. Those are facts. 14 yr olds absolutely know the consequences of those actions. At 14 you know that dead is dead and that killing is wrong. I do agree that the brain isn't fully developed yet and that children may act more impulsively than adults. In instances like this I'm not sure that's a good enough excuse to allow a teenager to get away with murder.

I do think it's a shame that another young life is essentially lost as well. And, I'm sorry for the murderer's family. However, if this teenager does not have to seriously pay for his crime then other teens may follow suit and think that a few years in juvie are worth settling a score for being disrespected.

The Star's editorial said:

"We believe there is a strong reason for a juvenile-justice system and that justice is served in that system.

The Star believes, in this case, it is the only way justice can be truly served."

I too agree that there is a reason for a juvenile justice system. However, the punishments meted out in that system often don't fit the crime. What is the punishment for premeditated murder in the juvenile justice system? I don't know, but I've seen it cited here that he'd be out by the time he were 25 if prosecuted to the max in that system. That to me is not nearly enough punishment for an act like this. If he'd murdered my son I would not be happy with this at all. And, if the editorial writer were honest he or she would agree that if someone killed their child this way that the'd likely want them prosecuted in such a way that gave the maximum punishment.

Someone above mentioned that the posters were perhaps more interested in vengenance over justice. Perhaps. However, to me they're closely linked in this case.

Posted by B8R_N4MD on February 17, 2008 at 2:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well said LizardL8y. I agree with you.
As for the difference between Juvenile and Adult Courts: If the suspect is convicted in Juvenile Court, the maximum term he can serve will end when he turns 25, and the files will be sealed. Thats it, only until he is 25, and it will all be served at the Youth Authority. If he is convicted in Adult Court, he will be housed in the Youth Authority until after he reaches 18, at which time he will be transferred to an adult prison to serve out the remaining part of his sentence. He will NOT be a juvenile housed in an adult prison.
It basically comes down to if 10 years or so is an appropriate sentence for premeditated murder, or if a substantial longer sentence is warranted. Sorry Nothingbutthetruth, but this does not come close to comparing to drunk driving or driving at 14 years of age. Everyone is taught murder is wrong, no matter what age you are. It was no accident, he planned it, made an effort to find a gun and take it to school, and even mentioned to a friend he was going to do something to the victim. 10 years is not long enough, 25 years to life is more appropriate.

Posted by rebel123 on February 17, 2008 at 2:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am stunned at the level of acrimony and violence in these posts. I don't care what stupid law 60% of voters....which is not 60% of the public by any stretch....passed, a 14 year old is not an adult. Cherry picking what we consider to be "adult" worthy behaviors is simply a way to feel vindicated. Teens do not have the mental capacity to look at this law and change their behaviors accordingly. It will not prevent other teens from committing crimes by trying this boy as an adult. It will only satisfy the outraged public. If that's what you wish to call justice, fine. The real question is why we have a culture that promulgates the level of hate this boy had in his heart, not to mention the incredible level of vindictive violence that I read in some of these posts.

Posted by EthicalPerson on February 17, 2008 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

He should most definitely be tried as an adult. The moment he took that gun and pulled the trigger with the full intention of taking anothers life was the moment he decided his life should end as well. He should also be elligible for the death penalty. He took an innocent life! This must be punished to the full extent of the law and the juvenile justice system cannot offer the punishment that this vagrant deserves. I say give him the chair!

Posted by drumsnwhistles on February 17, 2008 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

In reading through these comments and others, I keep seeing the "14-year olds are not adults" logic , but it makes no sense to me.

If this had been an impulsive act, I might be able to buy that argument. But it wasn't impulsive at all; it was very, very deliberate. He got the gun, he loaded the gun, he put the gun in his backpack or whatever and took it to school, he told someone Larry King's last day would be that day, he took the gun, he c---ed it, he put it to the back of Larry King's head and he pulled the trigger. Then he c---ed it again and shot Larry King in the back.

And then he ran to a place that he planned on running to.

This is not an impulsive act. It was methodical and carefully planned. At the very least, he should serve one year for each year of Larry King's life, which he will not do in the juvenile system. And for the duration of his sentence, he should have to stare at pictures of the young man whose life he took, and learn that when one makes deliberate choices that are serious, serious consequences follow. Very serious consequences.

I'm surprised there's even a difference of opinion on this...how does this play out if it's a gang shooting by a 14-year old? I'm willing to bet there would be no outrage about trying that one as an adult.

Posted by skywayave on February 17, 2008 at 4:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You people are so stupid. Not to mention who put emphasis on the WHITE kid. What's up with that? You think he's going to get away with murder because he's white?

Posted by spokenit on February 17, 2008 at 4:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think the laws need to be changed. Our society says at 18 you are a legal adult, you can go serve our country, you can go to prison, you are old enough to be out on your own, but you cant buy alcohol your not an adult old enough to drink until 21. Two whole years make the difference. Our society says that if you date under age children when you are of age you can be arrested, for that underage child is not of mind yet to make those choices on their own. How does one decided when a 14 yr. old is 14? This terrible crime was committed by 14 year old not yet an adult but now our society wants him to stand and be punished like one. The law needs to change so that no matter what age you are your punishment fits the crime. You cant have it both ways. 14 today with good behavior 18 tomorrow for terrible behavior? Maybe they shouldnt say adult to fit their own agendas when he isnt an adult. Put him away for 25 to life because that is the correct punishment for what he has done. Adult or no adult. How about human to human? Change the law and do it for Larry....name it LARRY'S LAW!

Posted by durpdurpdurp on February 17, 2008 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

he obviously knew killing people is wrong. he made sure to kill him too, with those multiple shots in the head.

Posted by SF1943 on February 17, 2008 at 5:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I took a poll of the comments here as of 5:12pm today ant the results are as follows:

SHOULD HE BE TRIED AS AN ADULT?

Pro; 33
Con; 8
Undecided; 6

With all of the maudlin arguments, I can see where the pubic's mindset is on this issue. Stop whining and follow the will of the people! The Star's left wing thinking has no merit here whatsoever! I've been called prejudiced and biased and thats what makes this country great but the will of the people has been spoken and it should be adios to this loser that pulled the trigger more than once to extinguish a life that he didn't agree with! The people have voted overwhelmingly in favor of this non-human to be disposed of and that is all there should be to it!

Posted by jonschell66 on February 17, 2008 at 5:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

committ an adult crime do adult time

Posted by whalevideo1 on February 17, 2008 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I believe if this young man thought he could get a gun and act as a foolish adult he should be tried and treated as a adult. It is about time that this nation stops blaming kids and slapping there hands and saying go on dont do it again. When will this stop make ita statement and try him so it does not happen again.

Posted by lxgnzls on February 17, 2008 at 7:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ventura county star editorial. You should be fired. Did you read how many disagree with you? I guess you now know you are way in the minority. I don't wish you ill will however lets just say the tables were turned? A so called 14 year old child kills your loved one, I bet you 100% you would be singing a different tune. I vote for that prop in 2000 and I know that at 14 you are smart enough to know from right and wrong.

Posted by bsokor on February 17, 2008 at 7:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Another misguided editorial.

You write: "A boy 19 days into his 14th year is absolutely not a candidate for adult court."

and

"The boy's attorney, Brian Vogel, stated that if the shooting had occurred before his client's Jan. 24 birthday, he could not be tried as an adult. "My client hasn't become an adult in the last three weeks," he said."

You are right, he didn't become an adult in the last three weeks, he became an adult the moment he pulled the trigger on the gun he knowingly brought to school, intentionally walked up behind the innocent victim, pulled out, aimed and shot Lawrence. That is when he became an adult. It matters not how many days one is into their year of life.

As many have said before me, follow the law and punish him accordingly. The DA will follow the law just as Brandon should have done.

Posted by foojy on February 17, 2008 at 8:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I say we send the kid to CYA till he's 25 and send the person who negligently made the gun available to him to prison as an accessory to murder. That would sure make parents think twice about locking up their guns pretty securely. Use a gun, go to jail. Let your kid use your gun, go to jail.

Posted by bugmenot on February 17, 2008 at 8:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow, one editorial and the star is considered "left" or the "arm of the ACLU".

Have you forgotten who owns the star or that it is referred to as the Ventura County Red Star?

VCS, who wrote this? Where is the "By" line?

Posted by imbetnonit on February 17, 2008 at 9:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

foojy has it right. If the kid is tried as a juvenile, then the responsibility, legally, should be shared with his parents. Parents are responsible for their children's actions until the age of 18. So if he is tried as an adult, his parents should not be held accountable.

Posted by NothingButTheTruth on February 17, 2008 at 9:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

drumsnwhistles, no, I am not saying the shooter didn't know what he did was wrong. I am simply saying there must be a reason WE don't let 14 year olds vote, drink or drive. Could it be WE enacted laws creating those restrictions is because WE feel they lack mature reasoning or something? The most unanswered question is where were the people who SHOULD HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE DEVELOPEMENT OF THE SHOOTERS THINKING? Obviously somebody dropped the ball; that's why ALL the kids aren't doing such horrific acts. My belief is there is a lot more we will find out about the shooter in time.

Posted by ebrockway on February 17, 2008 at 10:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well, Star, if 14 and two or three weeks isn't good enough to try as an adult, how about 14 and three weeks? Or four weeks? Where is your dividing line? When is it appropriate to try a 14 year old as an adult for murder?
14 too young? How about 15? Still too young?
Quit complaining about "It's only two weeks". Can a 17 year old vote or buy smokes if he/she is within "a couple weeks"? How about selling booze to a person 20 years old, 11 months and 20 days?
You can't just pick an arbiturary time to start enforcing the law, it's either 14 or it's not.

Posted by rg on February 18, 2008 at 12:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If a 14 year old can be tried as an adult then all 14 year olds should be allowed to vote, drive, serve in the military, get a job anywhere they want, marry, make all their own medical decisions, etc. I'd be surprised if the majority feels that an average 14 year old is reasonably capable of making those kinds of choices, especially since laws have recently passed further limiting drivers under the age of 18.

You can't have it both ways. If they are "adults" then they deserve adult rights as they are capable of making adult decisions. If they aren't capable of making adult decisions then they don't deserve adult rights or adult punishments.

Of course, I see no reason why the legal system can't be changed to allow a juvenile's sentence to last further into adulthood, depending on the circumstances. Just don't call them an adult when they clearly are not.

Posted by narc121 on February 18, 2008 at 12:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't know who's more sick, Brandon McInerney or his attorney Brian Vogel..."The boy's attorney, Brian Vogel, stated that if the shooting had occurred before his client's Jan. 24 birthday, he could not be tried as an adult. "My client hasn't become an adult in the last three weeks," he said."

This is the most ludicrous exucuse I've ever heard! Does that mean you magically become an adult at 18 or 14 and all of a sudden in that moment understand the difference between right and wrong? I think not! This kid knew what he did was evil and wrong, yet he still chose to do it. It's no different than the shooters at Columbine, Virginia Tech or North Illinios. McInerney is not some clueless child that can't comprend something simple as not killing another human being...I went to E.O. Green in the mid-90's and try to place myself in his shoes. At that age I knew darn well that taking a gun to school and shooting a classmate was WRONG and completely INCONCIEVABLE! That fact that he planned the whole thing out shows me what an adult he really is!

Posted by mikeb6804 on February 18, 2008 at 12:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I am more concerned with victim's rights than whether the 14 year old should be protected.

Posted by Ventuckey on February 18, 2008 at 7:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

He knew what he was going to set out and do that day. He made the decision to kill in cold blood for the simple fact that the kid was different. He shot to kill and pulled the trigger not once, but twice to make sure he finished the job. This scum should be seen as an adult and given the maximum secentence possible.

Posted by alwayswatching on February 18, 2008 at 1:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This wasn't some kind of accidental shooting or anything that can be construed as a mistake. This 14-year-old willfully and maliciously took the life of a classmate and he is plenty old enough to understand that his classmate won't just be "waking up" and coming to class again-- he's old enough to know what death is and know that there's no "take backs."

For those of you who say that "he's too young to ruin the rest of his life..." we let kids his age ruin their future all the time when we don't encourage them to try hard and earn good grades-- because it's no kind of life barely making it from pay check to pay check because you never got the education you needed to get a good paying job. But so many kids do and then have to learn how to overcome it in their futures. To this 14 y-o this is just a choice of his that he will have to learn to over come in his future-- just like drop outs he can do something better with his future or just let himself spiral down-- it's all up to him.

---To TheVeracious1
I, for one, am not angry or hateful to the shooter, I have no reason to be as I don't have any ties to the victim. I just feel the proper thing to do with him is punish him as per allowance of the law. I'm sure for some it will be too harsh, and am positive that for the family it will never be enough, but it will be fair.

Also what is this ridiculousness you're talking of?

Posted by alwayswatching on February 18, 2008 at 1:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OH, forgot to include this, sorry:

I feel he should be tried as an adult, though when it comes to sentencing he age should factor in slightly, but not so much as to be as lenient as juvenile court because this is a very serious crime done in cold blood.

Posted by ca4ever on February 18, 2008 at 1:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If you act like an adult and kill somebody, then you need to suffer the consequences and be treated as an adult. I really dont care how he is tried, as long as they send him away for the rest of his life. That is what he deserves. He shot him TWICE!!! He was very clera as to what his motives were

Posted by e_arreguin on February 18, 2008 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

yes i agree he is still a child but he did an adult crime not only shooting this boy once but twice he was not there to scare him and the gun went off accidentally but maybe he had planned it not matter what was in his mind he killed a human being and ask yourselves all of you who are saying to try him in the juvenile court system if this was your loved one would you have the same opinion and maybe they should let the family of larry decide what should be done also i saw on the news that a 15 year old up in L.A Somewhere broke in a house and beat this 86 year old lady to a coma and he is gonna be tried as an adult i belive adult decisions adult consequences

Posted by ironwoman on February 18, 2008 at 6:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Veracious1- It is not immoral or irresponsible to charge this teenager as an adult. I am glad that there is a law that allows it. Does that make me hateful? I would say that I enjoy living in a society where it is safe from these types of individuals that shoot and kill another person.
Maybe you should be involved with Crime Victims Organizations to get a clear understanding about how their lives have been completely changed because of the decision criminals make.
I hope that Mcinerney spends a great deal of his life in prison, where he belongs.
No need to look in the mirror.

Posted by thumpery on February 18, 2008 at 7:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Okay, so don't try this kid as an adult---leave that decision to his parents, a social worker and the judge.
If the parents/guardian believe their child should be tried as a juvenile for an adult crime---then the parents have to agree to serve time in jail too.
If they don't agree---then the kids goes to big boy court and be sentenced to big boy prison---where his parents really should be.
I don't know about anyone else, but I am a tired taxpayer who is fed up with having to pay for other people's negligence----their child ends up in prison and we pay for the food, lodging, education, psych services; meds, health and dental care---not to mention their Public Defender.

To the bleeding hearts who don't think it's fair that McInerney be tried as an adult---try this on--
until and unless your family is affected by a minor who commits a felony--you will never understand. Until it happened to my family by a 17 year old with a gun----I also thought minors should not be charged as an adult---regardless of the crime.
I don't believe that anymore.

Tonight---take an extra long look at the family members you love so much and as you kiss them good night--- ask yourself -----if a minor injured or murdered one of MY precious loved ones-----would I still be willing to try the underaged perpetrator as a minor?

Or would you want the minor aged perp to be tried as an adult?

Posted by creativityunleashedmagic on February 18, 2008 at 7:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Cason you are right Brandon is a racist little skinhead piece of dog s@#$t I know 2 people that know his family and they live down the street from him and tell me that they have swastikas in their home they should charge the family as well as Brandon and Brandon should be placed in prison for life with all the grown black men and brown men so they can give him a piece of his own medicine by letting those guys loose on him. That punk knew exactly what he was doing. He makes us white people look bad.

Posted by mandynathan on February 18, 2008 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If we are going to try children as adults, then they should have the right to vote. Bottom line. In case it isn't clear, I think it's immoral to try a child as an adult. They are not treated as adults in any other circumstance. They are not old enough to make informed decisions, that is why the laws protect minors. Not that children should not be held accountable, especially in the case of a heinous crime where there is an innocent victim. Of course they should be held accountable, but not to the same standards as an adult. That is why in every other case the law, state and federal, treats children differently than adults. You can't have it both ways, at least you shouldn't. Two wrongs don't make a right, and trying a child as an adult is just plain wrong.

Posted by 805grl on February 19, 2008 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If he is sent to CYA he will be released back into society! He will re offend-then we will kick ourseleves for not having sent him away when we had the chance!
YES to Prop 21 and YES to send him to adult court! I dont care if he turned 14 the day before he did this. The law is the law! I had a birthday the same day as the killer-so does that mean IM not officially one year older yet??

Posted by imn93002 on February 19, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree that most juvenile crime should be tried in a juvenile court. However, if there was EVER a case when a juvenile should be tried as an adult it is this case!! As someone mentioned earlier, if the accused was black or mexican the Star would be at lease silent on the issue if not advocating for trial as an adult. This was planned cold blooded murder!!!

Posted by nancy_4ever on February 19, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is one case I would love to follow. What was the killer thinking, pondering, planning, during the days leading up to the tragic murder? Did he forewarn Lawrence King of his intentions? Was he taken seriously? Did his teachers suspect or were they told of this in room conflict? was it ignored? I can't believe this tragedy happended without any warning; not E.O.Green. E.O.Green is probably the best middle school in Oxnard: Uniforms, beachfront kids, military children... it is attended by what we Americans consider a good population of students. And such a horrendous crime to happen in broad daylight, in front of the eyes of the world, by our children and to our children. Yes, these are our children! America - these are our children! I still can't believe it.

Posted by floydspinky71 on February 19, 2008 at 6:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"I am stunned at the level of acrimony and violence in these posts. I don't care what stupid law 60% of voters....which is not 60% of the public by any stretch....passed, a 14 year old is not an adult."

Gee, that's too bad. Unless you voted back when Prop. 21 was on the ballot, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN. The proposition was approved by the voters by an overwhelming majority.

I, too, say that he should be tried as an adult. The whole "kids should vote" argument is a non sequitur. Every kid should know that taking a gun to school with the intent to kill someone is WRONG and ILLEGAL. If they know that one simple fact, it does not mean that they are well informed on the economy, national security, and other issues pertaining to the American public in general. Knowing that shooting someone in class is illegal is COMMON SENSE. Throw the book at the shooter.

Posted by brownstones2 on February 19, 2008 at 7:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If tried in Juvenile Court, he can be held in the California Youth Authority until the age of 25. If convicted in Adult Court, he can potentially receive a significantly longer sentence. However, he would be housed in a juvenile facility until he reaches adulthood.

In determining his fitness for Juvenile Court, he will be evaluated on 5 separate criteria. Failure on any one of these criteria will most likely land him in Adult Court. Based on Criteria #5, which looks at the "Seriousness and Gravity of the Offense", chances are slim that he will remain in the Juvenile System. Sorry to the Star and others who were hopeful that this cold and calculated murderer would be given the opportunity to "rehabilitate" himself in in one of our wonderful state youth facilities.

Those of you who want to relieve this murderer of taking full responsibility for his actions and instead place blame our "liberal society" and educators for allowing the VICTIM to express himself are complete lunatics. I would argue that it is people and parents like you who create cowardly individuals who commit crimes like this.

Thankfully, at the age of 14, and in spite of my inferior undeveloped brain, I was able to comprehend that shooting a classmate in the back of the head was wrong. Wrong no matter what style of dress he or she was wearing. Wake up people.

Posted by santabarbarasand on February 19, 2008 at 9:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It is so interesting how many here who think that the killer shouldn't be tried as an adult are so keen to blame society. Yes, society is made up of a lot of people who are not perfect. However, the killer chose to kill, after more than likely being taught by the majority of society that killing is WRONG. He made an individual and independent choice to murder another person in cold blood. It wasn't self defense, it was murder. It was planned and he knew that it was wrong or he would not have run away afterwards.

Maybe the system is messed up in that we have "juvenile" crimes and "adult" crimes. Perhaps if it was worded as "serious juvenile crimes" and murder, rape, mutilation, and other heinous crimes were listed as a "serious juvenile crime" that carried adult sentences and stayed on their record PERMANENTLY, that would be better. The problem is that the courts aren't set up that way. Killers who are under 18 should be subjected to severe consequences and it should be on their permanent record. That's the reason that we want him tried as "an adult". We want to be sure that when he is released that his previous MURDER will be traceable. Maybe he can be rehabilitated but it's not likely and he may always be a menace to society. Society has the RIGHT to know about his history, no matter how old or young he is!

Posted by santabarbarasand on February 19, 2008 at 9:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And yes, I intentionally disregarded the KILLER's name because that doesn't matter. He is a KILLER, MURDERER, regardless of age.

Posted by BeaHappi on February 20, 2008 at 9:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

A question for those who don't think he should be tried as an adult:

If the shooter was a member of the Colonia Chiques gang or another Oxnard gang...same age, same situation...what would you say?

Would you still think that he should not be tried as an adult?

Posted by jill on February 20, 2008 at 12:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"If the shooter was a member of the Colonia Chiques gang or another Oxnard gang...same age, same situation...what would you say? Would you still think that he should not be tried as an adult?"

No.

Posted by jill on February 20, 2008 at 12:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

As for Brian Vogel, he's just doing his job.

Posted by tdcjerry on February 21, 2008 at 12:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Last time I checked, I 'child' didn't know how to find a gun, load it, embezzle it onto a school campus and kill a classmate. This was pre-meditated murder. If this author knew Lawrence King or saw the pain and dismay this tragedy has caused his family and loved ones, they would not have written this article.

Posted by santabarbarasand on February 21, 2008 at 1 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeah, I cannot believe that the Ventura Star has actually taken a stance on this. I imagine that there are many people who work there that feel this KILLER should be tried as an adult. It's very irresponsible for one reporter to be allowed to be the voice for an entire organization. It is showing us all that the Ventura Star is biased and that we should not expect fair and honest reporting regarding this situation in the future. Sad!

Posted by Erkine_Childers on February 22, 2008 at 5:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Jill- please don't tell me/us what we'd say or think if it were a different situation. You have no idea.

Posted by Erkine_Childers on February 22, 2008 at 5:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

my bad Jill. I suggested removal on my last comment- I didn't read yours right. Sorry about that....

Posted by karen39 on March 1, 2008 at 7:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

First of all, the reason children aren't tried as adults is because they are not supposed to be capable of understanding the consequences of their actions.

Telling people you were about to murder him, obtaining a firearm you don't otherwise have access to, seeking out the victim in a situation where they don't even know you're approaching (much less with hostile intent), and shooting them in the back of the head point blank is an execution.

It understood what effect it's actions would have. We have laws for a reason.

Secondly, somebody on the EDITORIAL BOARD wrote this:

"A BOY 19 DAYS INTO HIS 14th YEAR [...]"

You mean 15TH YEAR, right?

Learn to count, you backwoods killer-is-the-victim because he killed somebody-that-deserved-it &^(*$s.

If ever the author of this editorial (surely the whole editorial board is not this stupid) were to commit murder, I expect they would be eligible for a defense of mental deficiency. Until that time, forever, they should not speak for the public in how to meter out justice.

The word outrage does not do my sentiment justice.