Del. Charlotte Crutchfield proposes bill to ban felony murder charges for people under 25

[Anonymous]

Didn’t have to read the article to know this was a Democrat’s proposal. Not surprised at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Felony Murder" gets so abused as a charge; a lot of jurisdictions have eliminated it. It's been used to charge people with murder when a COP shoots someone else (I'm robbing a bank, a cop shoots my co-robber, I get charged with felony murder), which seems to be nonsense. Felony murder means that people who never intended to kill anyone, who never held a weapon, and who may not even have been in the room when someone is killed, can be charged with murder. Why not just charge them with the actual crime they committed?

If it's that awful why not propose eliminating it altogether then instead of restricting it to those 25 and older under the guise that those under 25 simply don't know better because their brains haven't fully developed?

DP. I'm ok with that (but I'm not a delegate to the Maryland General Assembly). Are you ok with that?

I'm pointing out that you're making a justification that the lawmaker advocating this bill isn't making. You're saying felony murder is unjust full stop. The lawmaker is saying felony murder is unjust only for those under 25.

Those are two different arguments.

[Anonymous]

So if brains aren't fully formed before age 25, should we abolish all criminal penalties under age 25 for:

Rape?

Drug distribution?

Statutory rape?

Pedophilia?

Maiming?

Breaking and entering?

Attempted murder (victim lives)?

[Anonymous]

^^^^ like, victim didn't even die. As compared to felony murder

[Anonymous]

I think the lawmaker didn’t go far enough. The felony murder is a terrible concept for any age. It’s devastated lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Felony Murder" gets so abused as a charge; a lot of jurisdictions have eliminated it. It's been used to charge people with murder when a COP shoots someone else (I'm robbing a bank, a cop shoots my co-robber, I get charged with felony murder), which seems to be nonsense. Felony murder means that people who never intended to kill anyone, who never held a weapon, and who may not even have been in the room when someone is killed, can be charged with murder. Why not just charge them with the actual crime they committed?

If it's that awful why not propose eliminating it altogether then instead of restricting it to those 25 and older under the guise that those under 25 simply don't know better because their brains haven't fully developed?

DP. I'm ok with that (but I'm not a delegate to the Maryland General Assembly). Are you ok with that?

I'm pointing out that you're making a justification that the lawmaker advocating this bill isn't making. You're saying felony murder is unjust full stop. The lawmaker is saying felony murder is unjust only for those under 25.

Those are two different arguments.

They are the same argument. You have to start somewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if brains aren't fully formed before age 25, should we abolish all criminal penalties under age 25 for:

Rape?

Drug distribution?

Statutory rape?

Pedophilia?

Maiming?

Breaking and entering?

Attempted murder (victim lives)?

You also don't understand what "felony murder" is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What jurisdictions have eliminated it? It’s very common and rightfully so. Don’t commit felonies because they quite often result in unintended consequences like someone dying.

So you think it's ok to charge people with something they didn't do? I don't.

So the victim's life means nothing to you?

George and Harry try to rob a store. The storeowner, John, pulls out a gun to defend himself, and accidentally shoots a customer, Tom. George and Harry are then charged with felony murder in Tom's death.

Do you think that George and Harry murdered Tom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if brains aren't fully formed before age 25, should we abolish all criminal penalties under age 25 for:

Rape?

Drug distribution?

Statutory rape?

Pedophilia?

Maiming?

Breaking and entering?

Attempted murder (victim lives)?

You also don't understand what "felony murder" is.

Trust me - I really do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What jurisdictions have eliminated it? It’s very common and rightfully so. Don’t commit felonies because they quite often result in unintended consequences like someone dying.

So you think it's ok to charge people with something they didn't do? I don't.

So the victim's life means nothing to you?

George and Harry try to rob a store. The storeowner, John, pulls out a gun to defend himself, and accidentally shoots a customer, Tom. George and Harry are then charged with felony murder in Tom's death.

Do you think that George and Harry murdered Tom?

Oh right. So if the robbers only stole a $1000 necklace, and somebody died as a result, your child dies, they shouldn't have any guilt? Just responsible for the necklace?

[Anonymous]

If a low life piece of s--- robs a bank and my kid gets shot and killed, no responsibility? Just stop

[Anonymous]

No. They get charged for what they did, they don’t get charged for some magical circumstantial bullshit.

It could happen to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. They get charged for what they did, they don’t get charged for some magical circumstantial bullshit.

It could happen to you.

But for their robbery, the child wouldn't have been shot to death. That's not just "some circumstantial B.S."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a low life piece of s--- robs a bank and my kid gets shot and killed, no responsibility? Just stop

Yeah? Your idiot kid is at a party, snorts coke with friends, someone overdoses and dies. They all go to jail for life. Enjoy felony murder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. They get charged for what they did, they don’t get charged for some magical circumstantial bullshit.

It could happen to you.

It's not magical or circumstantial. Robbing a store or a human being is a violent, destabilizing act. If as a result of your violent, destabilizing act, someone loses their life, then I think most people feel like you deserve to be held accountable.