Does this punishment fit the crime? 3 cyclists jailed for going thru Grand Canyon

[Thorn]

Sorry, Silver, didn't mean to misinterpret.

It is sad that there is such a disparity in punishments. Reform is long and tedious, although I'm not sure why it has to be.

Still, while most people thought the 48 hours in jail was excessive (perhaps, but the law says you can be held for 48 hours and, just maybe it was meant to make them slow down and think), I liked the fact that they tailored the punishment to the crime. "You disrespect our parks? Then we won't let you back in." But, mostly, I like the forcing them to remove all postings that were inviolation and to post the apology. That's creative on the judge's part. And, while the 48 hours in jail gets them sympathy from some, my gut feel is the web site changes affected them more.

[spokewench]

I agree with most posters here that the punishment fit the crime. The thing that really gets me about these young boys is that activities like this hurt bicycle advocacy and trails access more than they know. These kinds of infractions make it to the forefront of the media and then the people who would like to block access to national parks, etc. that might be good places for bikes get a lot of negative ammunition and hurt the fight for access for bicycles to parks (not saying that bikes should have access to the grand canyon).

[farrellcollie]

I think it is too harsh and wastes resources better used on violent offenders. Communty service fixing trails or something would better serve community and miscreants. But then again - I am a criminal defense attorney.

[salsabike]

I think the punishment is a fitting one. And I think it matters.