815 Discussion discussion

Noodles and E both stole to get the things they wanted and believed they needed, be it for clothes, money, respect. In a court of law, should they be punished equally?

Make sure you provide at least two details to support your response. I recommend using RAFTAT!

In a court of law both Noodles and E should be punished equally because they both did steal. For example a courtroom the judge and jury aren't going to really care if you didn't intend to steal or if you stole for a good reason. The matter is that they both stole and that they should be punished for it. Another example is that although E had good intentions for committing the crime he had still stolen from the houses to buy new clothes, shoes, and help his mom pay the bills. However, E had other alternatives for getting extra money or clothes if he had asked for help from the government or other charities, E didn't have to steal from others to help his family. E had chosen the easier way to get money. However, E wasn't the one who stole from Ona's house so he shouldn't get punished for that crime but for the other robberies he was in he should be punished.

In the court of law I think both Noodles and E should be punished equally because they both did steal. Even though E stole to help his family and no longer be respected. No one is going to feel sorry for him because he stole to help his family either way it comes out as he was stealing other peoples things that didn't belong to him. Noodles stole because he just wanted money which is a even worse reason because he was being selfish and only caring about himself and the money he needed. Also, there were many other ways that E could've gotten money but instead he chose the easier way so he should be punished for what he decided to do.

In a court law I think E and Noodles should be punished equally. For example, they both stole from houses to get what they wanted which was new clothes, shoes, and even to be noticed by others. When they robbed houses they did it at the same time and did it together. It was basically their intention to steal from these houses. This shows that on this account they should be punished equally. Another example is that even though E didn't trash and steal from Ona's house he shouldn't get punished for a crime that Noodles did. Not only from stealing houses but E should also get punished for stealing a pair of jeans from the store every year. Well, it depends if he admits it to the court. This shows that they should get punished equally but E shouldn't get punished for what Noodles did. However, if he ever admits to the court that he stole a pair of jeans every year he should get punished for that. Even though he didn't steal from someone's house, stealing an item from a store that you didn't pay for is as serious as stealing someone's personal property without them giving you permission.

In a court of law I think E and Noodles should not be punished equally because they both did steal, but Noodles stole and trashed Ona's house so I think he should get a different punishment because he did something worse than E. For example, E stole so he could take Ona to the dance, wear new clothes, and help out his family. This shows that E stole because he had no other options. Another example, Noodles always tries to get money off of girls at the mall. He also steals all the time and messed up Ona's house which he should not have done. This shows that Noodles should not be punished equally as E because he steals very often, and trashed/robbed someones house. Also E felt bad about stealing and robbing Ona's house while E did not care about stealing or trashing her house.

When E and Noodles go to court i think that they both should be punished equally. One example of why i think this is because they both committed the crime and people in court won't let one of them slide. I think this because both of them robbed from the houses and committed the same crime. Another reason i think they should both get equal punishments is because they are both bad kids and also E didn't need to say that he hated Ona's father because then Noodles took it to seriously and destroyed Ona's house. So i think that E and Noodles should both receive the same punishments.

In a Court of law, Noodles and E should be punished equally. For example, Noodles and E both stole from the same person on the first night they attempting a robbery of $600. This shows that Noodles and E both should have the same punishment because they both stole the same amount of money from the same person (together). Another example is when Noodles came back from robbing Ona's house. If I was E, I would've stayed with Noodles to make sure he didn do anything bad to Ona's family. This shows that Noodles and E should be punished equally because E didn't do a very good job of making sure that Ona's family was safe of Noodles' robbery. Therefore, Noodles and E should be punished equally.

When E and Noodles go to court I think both should receive equal amount of punishment. If they go to court for a different reason than Noodles should be punished if Ona's father report that they were robbed to the police. For example, Noodle was the one that went into Ona's house and took everything that will get him some money and destroyed her house. Another example, is both kids are bad and they committed the same crime together. E needed the money to support his family. While Noodles didn't say anything.

In a court of law, Noodles and E shouldn't be punished equally.For example, Noodles went and stole more than E. This shows that in real life, they changed the type of punishment depending on what you did. Another example is that Noodles vandalized Ona's house and he stole from them. E didn't part take in this event so he shouldn't be held accountable. This proves my point on why E shouldn't be punished the same way Noodles is getting punished.

I dont think that E should get punished like Noodles is going to be. Noddles did worse things than E, for example, Noddles wrote cuss words, and peed all over Ona's house. E just stole from other houses. I think that E should get punished too, he stole, for himself, nothing important to steal for, so I think he should get punished, but a different kind of punish.

I think that when E and Noodles go to court they should be punished equally. I think that they should be punished equally because they both essentially did the same thing. When Noodles broke in to Ona's family's home, he stole and vandalized their entire house. E broke in to multiple houses and stole a lot of money and valuable items. I think that in the court of law, they would penalize the same for vandalizing, breaking and entering and multiple cases of robbery and breaking and entering. I think that what Noodles did was worse because he didn't just break into the house and steal, he totally trashed it too. I think that they both did bad things and they should be punished equally.

In a court of law they should be equally punished. I understand E did it so he can provide for his brothers, sisters and mom but what they did was wrong and you can not justify that. He stole large quantities of money from people and that was a terrible thing he did. It wasn't like he stole twenty or thirty dollars. He stole hundreds of dollars from people and that is a very bad thing. In court they won't care the reason he stole the money. All they care about is he stole the money along with noodles. Noodles stole for himself and for no one else which was wrong but unfortunately they both stole. They would be treated equally as thieves and they would both be punished equally.

Noodles and E both stole things they wanted and thought they needed. In a court of law, I think that they should be punished equally. For example, Noodles broke into Ona's house and stole things from her and vandalised. But E did the same thing, except in different houses. He stole clothes and money and used things in people's houses. So they committed the same crimes, which means that they should be equally punishable by law. Also, they both kind of had the same opinions on society and Ona's dad. They both really disliked Ona's dad, but Noodles actually did something about it. Thought Noddles was the only one that did something about it (by trashing his house,) E wasn't THAT upset about getting hauled away because of it. I think he felt that it was his fault also, but it was because he told Noodles about how he had been treated by Ona's dad.

In a court law I think E and Noodles should be punished equally. For example, no one is going to care whether or not one person was stealing for a better reason. They both stole and it was not the right thing to do. They both made a super bad decision and need to be punished for it. Another example is that E could have gotten money another way, a legal way. Instead, he choose to steal from people. He took advantage because Ona told E that people did not lock their doors. E should not get punished for destroying Ona's house because it was not his doing.

In a court of law Noodles should be punished a bit more than E, because although they did both steal, Noodles trashed Ona's house to get back at her father for "disrespecting" E. Reading the story, me being in the jury, I wouldn't punish E nearly as much as Noodles. He was a manipulative trouble making "friend." Though in a court of law it's not about personal feelings, so I'd punish Noodles slightly more, because they both stole, Noodles just trashed Ona's house.

I think that Noodles would be in bigger trouble because theft wouldn't be the only crime he committed. He also vandalized Ona's apartment and that's well vandalism. E on the other hand may still get in trouble. The reason he stole money from homes was not for a need but for a want. It's not like he stole bread because he couldn't eat. But once again it's up to the judge if she fells sympathy or not.

I think that Noodles should go to jail just as long as E because they both committed crimes, and maybe Noodles just did it for kicks and E did it for Bills (with some money on the side) but they both did it. It was a bad decision that had terrible consequences and if they hadn't done it.

I believe that in a court of law, Noodles and E should not be punished equally. I think that Noodles should have a greater punishment considering he committed a greater crime, and E should have a lesser punishment because he committed a lesser crime. I think this because although in the beginning, Noodles and E both went to that first house and stole the $600, in which they divided evenly, Noodles went back and took advantage of his knew knowledge to rob and trash Ona's house, where E did not participate. When Noodles went to destroy Ona's house he did it under hatred and meant to ruin because he wanted to prove a point. E did not agree with the point Noodles wanted to make at all bud still he did not do anything about it so that fault is on E. All in all, Noodles committed the same crime that E did, but then kept going further with it to try and hurt people. Therefore, that is why in a court of law I think that Noodles should get a little greater punishment than E.

I think that Noodles and E should not be punished equally. Noodles was the one that stole stuff from Ona's house and did other bad things. Also, E was pressured that he had to steel stuff or do it for some respect. E likes Ona so it was hard for him to try and do these things. Noodles should get more punished than E should as well.

In a court of law both Noodles and E shouldn't be punished equally. First off Noodles steals and cheats and lies way more then E does. If I stole a lollipop and my friend stole a t.v, we should be punished MUCH separately. You can't possible think that stealing a little is equivalent to stealing a lot, because it isn't. Besides Noodles is always stealing from people, he must be punished big time for all his action, but for E, he stole a little (compared to Noodles), he should not be as penalized as Noodles should be. It's like weighing out a crime. What Noodles did to what E did. Noodles needs to learn a lesson with time, but for E, this is his first warning.