You are throwing this way out of context and need to understand community.
No, I quoted the statement and understand it quite well. Your (and the_Monk's) concepts of Utopian (word = doesn't exist) Society are idealistic, and/but are unreal. People come in all shapes/sizes/etc. They don't all buy into your concepts. Education/re-education don't change behavior permanently in most cases. I can't get folks to take the medicines they came to me for correctly, no matter how many times explained. That's because they're people, make mistakes and think they know better. Can't be helped, just re-explained.
The issue in the OP was very concrete. A group of people violated the law. Then they went a step further and physically endangered others.
They need to be dealt with by a court of law. If guilty, I believe the sentence should not be light.
You wish to believe and feel otherwise - ok, that's fine.
Reasons, mitigations etc. don't really cut it since they are not going to deal with these criminals nor prevent others. Not in this nor in several generations. Why? Because of a simple fact (or facts): One size does not fit all, and people are people.
Very powerful tools are put in the hands of the immature without adequate supervision/limitations. Worse, judgment does not fully develop until age 21-25. These are observed fact. Not theory. The world has to relate to these facts, and adjust access to them and the range of what can be done with them accordingly. They are exposed to violent films and games. Because it's in the T.V. or computer, it isn't real. Maybe. Maybe that partially fosters the "I'm invincible/impervious" attitude of the young. I don't know and hazarding a guess? Neither do you. There are undoubtedly many factors.
I wish things could be different, but willful children cannot be put behind the wheel of a car or airplane. I wouldn't give a 5 or 10 year old a hand grenade to play with. Would you? No, of course not. They lack the judgment to prevent disaster.
Similarly, I believe that if a younger person can demonstrate responsibility (school grades, behavior, testing) then allowances can be made with supervision. I don't presume to know who should make these judgments. Possibly parents, if responsible.
The key to what I feel, as you can see, is responsibility and accountability together with what one can reasonably expect. I believe that when people can demonstrate responsibility, then a degree of trust can be given.
I don't believe in grandiose, idealistic plans. They simply don't work, and the wide necessary consensus does not exist to create such a plan.
I also don't believe in huge social engineering schemes. They have been tried in the past without success (thankfulness here). I don't believe anyone knows what's best in all circumstances for all people, nor 'the right way' to build society. I believe that is what is being suggested here, and I am opposed.
When it comes to doing things which endanger the lives of others, the response must be quick, and firm. Nothing less.
And, myfist0, if you don't like the topic, no one is forcing you to participate.