> Soth wrote:
> perhaps i did make a mistake in the interpretation of your posts. I should have taken the immediate assumption that you did not read anything before your post and were just spouting egging cases in an attempt to validate whatever point you were trying to prove.
but the fact of the matter still stands (which is why im right) both parties were wrong and both parties can be considered criminal.
now how do you not understand that? or are brains passed out upside down in canadia?
If brains were passed out upside down, I don't think my spinal column would work properly. I'd be a quad. 
Legally speaking, a criminal is someone who was found guilty or been convicted of a criminal offense. So neither of them are criminals, although the accused murderer will likely be one in short order.
Now, what the boy did was wrong. It may even run contrary to the law, but unless prosecutors would have brought a criminal case against him, he would not be a criminal. And in a simple one-off egging case, the likelihood of that is slim. Now of course, if this child was a repeat offender, sure they may have charged him, in an attempt to knock some sense into him. But the majority of the time, a young kid lobbing an egg at a car isn't going to criminal court and should not be called a criminal.
Laws are often not meant to be interpreted strictly. They tend to be created with a goal in mind, a purpose. For example, there are laws against hitting your spouse. That being said, is the law designed to stop all spouses from hitting one another? No. Are prosecutors going to charge every spouse for every little infraction? No. Prosecutors don't really care about a wife who slapped her husband a few times a husband who hit his wife once (unless of course the spouse really cares and is adamant that something be done). They're more worried about repeat offenders, or those who beat their spouse black and blue, or those that use a weapon or cause injury. In short, the law blankets everyone, but it's not used on everyone. It's used to nail the dangerous and the extreme cases.
I remember stealing a small toy from a store when I was old enough to know better. I admitted it. Do you think they came after me? Hell, no. Sure theft is illegal. They could have pressed charges, tried to send me to juvie, but criminal law isn't really meant to deal with such small matters. It can of course...if I kept stealing toys from stores, charges would eventually be pressed, but for one toy...nah. The law isn't meant for that.
I know where you're coming from Soth. The kid did violate a law. But the odds were heavily in his favour that criminal charges wouldn't have been pressed...and so, he's no criminal. Just a silly kid who did something wrong. Of course, the guy's insurance company would have gone after him and his family with a civil suit for the damages done to the car, but that's another matter.
Anyhoo, gone for the weekend 
Adios.
To serve is to survive
:lol::lol:
