Yes, quite. There's an obvious double standard here. For instance, a family living in a ghetto (black. Shouldn't matter, but it is a major point in this case) had a child that they had been sending to school for a long time. It was very hard for the boy, because he was constantly harassed by a small gang of other kids that was at the same high-school as he was. The boy is fifteen. His parents went so (poor family remember) far as to get a SECURITY SYSTEM INSTALLED, to make sure the boy was safe. They spent most of their savings on it. So, you can see the severity of this problem, right? One day, a number of the bullies were at her door, and the mom couldn't take it any longer. She grabbed a gun, and gave one to her son. They fired into the crowd, mostly to scare them off, with (as far as I can tell/know) no intention of hitting anyone. Was this the right move? Of course not, but people are people, and they can only take so much. The mother actually iht someone by accident. They are going to be fine, but the mother and the son are in jail. They are going to be tried in an upper-city court, mostly white, wealthy.
So they decide they want to try the boy as an adult. Why? He never hit anyone, and it's not likely (by a LONG shot) that he convinced his mother to do this. Moreover, it's more likely it was the other way around! He's been bullied for a VERY long time, now he's probably going to get ass-raped in juvie, and then they want to try him as an ADULT!
I thought we were past this kind of thing, put apparently, once again, I put too much faith into man-kind.