RiverDog wrote:We endlessly talk about how the SeAdderall Seahawks are cheating and need to be suspended but will come up with a million excuses defending Aldon Smith's dumb ass.
That might as well have come from Futureite.
Futureite wrote:RiverDog wrote:We endlessly talk about how the SeAdderall Seahawks are cheating and need to be suspended but will come up with a million excuses defending Aldon Smith's dumb ass.
That might as well have come from Futureite.
Lol! I'd love to see a copy and paste of the post I made suggesting Aldon does not deserve a suspension. When have I ever said that . . . . Ever.
mykc14 wrote:Futureite wrote:RiverDog wrote:We endlessly talk about how the SeAdderall Seahawks are cheating and need to be suspended but will come up with a million excuses defending Aldon Smith's dumb ass.
That might as well have come from Futureite.
Lol! I'd love to see a copy and paste of the post I made suggesting Aldon does not deserve a suspension. When have I ever said that . . . . Ever.
Relax future, RD's post says nothing about him 'not deserving a suspension' it just says they will come up with a million excuses for Smith. You never said he didn't deserve to be suspended you just continually attempt to tell us what a good guy he is and that his moronic actions didn't have malicious intent and that we should allow him to babysit our kids because he is just misunderstood.
burrrton wrote:That wasn't bad.
Futureite wrote:I couldn't have said it better myself. That's exactly my point. All along, Future has been spinning the Smith debacles into something equivalent to a high school prank and completely ignores, or at the very least trivializes, the crimes Smith admitted to committing, arguing that Smith should receive nothing more than a slap on the wrists.
Futureite wrote:That's not accurate. I said many times in terms of legal action that he deserves what the "average person" would get for doing the same things. The disconnect was that many of you believed a plumber would be sitting in prison for 5 yrs for the same crime, and thus somehow I was minimizing the severity of the crimes to suggest Aldon should receive far less than that. In reality, the man that stabbed Aldon was convicted of the exact same possession violation and he received probation. He was an average Joe or possibly worse criminally speaking, and he received nothing close to what some of you proposed for Aldon. What I stated was right in line with what was fair and just. Your statements were not.
And, the criteria that I posted should be considered in the sentencing; from Aldon's criminal history to his intent, was carefully considered and ennunciated by the judge in his decision. And yet most of you scoffed (snd apparently still are) at the idea that one's intent matters in a criminal case. Basically what both of you are telling me is that an experienced judge who listened to all of the facts of this case in not fit to determine Aldon's intent, but a fan that's read media reports is equipped to determine "malicious intent"? None of this made any sense to me at the time and it makes even less now that you are still debating it. No, he had no malicious intent. Yes, it matters.
Morally I disagree with some of what Aldon has done, so I understand your point. But I wasn't at his party. I don't know who invited the gang members, if they threatened him, or where he fired the shots. Do you know for certain how you'd react in the same situation? I do know at 25 I drove countless times drunk from college parties and could have easily been Aldon in San Jose. Yes it was dumb, but it doesn't make me a thug. Like most things in life it is all far, far from the black and white picture a lot of you have painted.
HumanCockroach wrote:And, the criteria that I posted should be considered in the sentencing; from Aldon's criminal history to his intent, was carefully considered and ennunciated by the judge in his decision.
The only issues I have with that statement, is professing that all those without intent, or first time offenders get the same leniency, which IMHO is INCREDIBLY naive, and insanely inaccurate. Plenty of judges willing to hand out maximum sentences to "teach them a lesson" and it simply isn't accurate to claim otherwise. Also, obviously Smith's infractions are growing by leaps and bounds yearly ( is that five separate instances in less than three years, seems like a pattern to me) you can claim he didn't intend to drive high and drunk, TWICE, and claim he didn't intend to create the situation that lead to the felony charges ( which would again be COMPLETELY inaccurate, as he KNEW he was circumventing the law by having them without a license) and no matter what you say, KNEW again that shooting them off, or even SHOWING them was AGAIN against the law. The attempt to switch license plates after his second DUI, AGAIN clearly shows intent to "hide" what he had done, the tantrum in the airport AGAIN shows "intent" on his part.
NOTHING I've seen shows ANY regards for others, and a FULL intent to circumvent the law, you can CLAIM otherwise, but that stuff is ALL public knowledge, or COMMON SENSE. You continue to argue it was just a "dumb kid" mistake, and yet have zero qualms about bashing on someone who is a MODEL citizen has NEVER had any issue with the law, or endangered the lives ( with or without intent)of innocent people. SMH.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests