Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

California fires started by boy with matches, should he be charged??

  • Thread starter Thread starter the_clockwork
  • Start date Start date
I lit part a forest on fire once. It was fucking scary how fast that thing went up. Same thing, just a couple of 13yo kids doing what 13yo kids do. Thing got out of control VERY fast. Once the blaze was taller than us we just got on our bikes and booked it. Heard the fire engines blazing towards us. Went back that night and saw a huge clearing in the woords, charred trees and shit. Lucky for us the fire was put out before it reached any of the nearby homes.
 
the_clockwork said:
"He admitted to playing with matches and accidentally starting the fire," Hecht said in a statement.

For any charges to really hold, I'm pretty sure they need to prove some sort of malintent. If it was a child who was simply playing and accidentally started something that completely unbeknownst and unpredictable to himself happened to explode out of control, then I certainly don't see any charges coming against the kid or family... only some negative media coverage and embarrassment.



:cow:
 
samoth said:
For any charges to really hold, I'm pretty sure they need to prove some sort of malintent. If it was a child who was simply playing and accidentally started something that completely unbeknownst and unpredictable to himself happened to explode out of control, then I certainly don't see any charges coming against the kid or family... only some negative media coverage and embarrassment.



:cow:



I am pretty sure all they have to have is negligence - i.e. a reasonable person not only could have forseen the possible outcome but would have taken steps to prevent said outcome, etc...

At some point, negligence can and is criminal.

The thing is - the 'reasonable person' test is alot more of a touchy area when it comes to youngins. Not sure how old he is or what his maturity level is but that would most certainly play into it. There are some pretty fucking smart and onery kids out there....

I know for myself that there was never a point in my life that I was capable of playing with fire but wasn't aware of the seriousness of my actions....
 
jh1 said:
I am pretty sure all they have to have is negligence - i.e. a reasonable person not only could have forseen the possible outcome but would have taken steps to prevent said outcome, etc...

At some point, negligence can and is criminal.

The thing is - the 'reasonable person' test is alot more of a touchy area when it comes to youngins. Not sure how old he is or what his maturity level is but that would most certainly play into it. There are some pretty fucking smart and onery kids out there....

I know for myself that there was never a point in my life that I was capable of playing with fire but wasn't aware of the seriousness of my actions....
When I started the forest fire I described in an earlier post - I never once thought that could happen. I was just having some fun with a torch.
 
reno240 said:
When I started the forest fire I described in an earlier post - I never once thought that could happen. I was just having some fun with a torch.



1. How old were you?

2. Where'd you get the torch from?
 
Top Bottom