Iowa Mom Gets Probation for Attempting to Sell 4-Year-Old Son to Pay for Wedding Dress

Iowa Mom Gets Probation for Attempting to Sell 4-Year-Old Son to Pay for Wedding Dress

www.foxnews.com

Marcy Gant, 32, was convicted in October of purchase or sale of an individual and could have been sentenced up to 10 years in prison.

Gant was arrested in October 2006 after offering her son to a retailer to settle a $200 bill for the dress. Police said Gant offered the trade at least twice.

(visit the link for the full news article)

What thell is wrong with people in this world. And I am not just aiming that at the idiot mother. The judge in this case found it fit to only give this woman probabtion?????

When I hear of anything in this world being perpatrated against children I just want to reach out and wring the neck of the person involved. Its quite obvious that this "mother" does not deserve to have children. How can you ever look your child in the face again, even if she sobers up, and say.....Yeah I tried to sell you once for $200.

Unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

She should get the death penality. If she would sell it for a dress God only knows what else she would sell it for.

Jeez, justice is served right? I mean, she didn't infringe on the profits of any corporation so she shouldn't have to be punished right?

Unbelievable. Simply unbelievable.
If it's not bad enough that she offered to sell the toddler in the first place, and it is, she offered him for a lousy 200 bucks.
Are you kidding me? Offering your child? Jeeez, I can't fathom that even crossing ones mind.
Personally speaking, I'll die defending my son. Truer words were never spoken.

This woman, if you can call her that, should have gotten an extremely severe sentence.

You know, I thought I'd read it all until today. I was wrong. What is going on with the world we live in? A woman selling her child for a dress?

I'm starting to think the world at large is the insane asylum and those who are institutionalized are the sane.

That's not the priority in this country's "legal" system. The priority is locking fools up for decades behind drugs.

The irony is that the very judge who sentenced her will likely be snorting powder this weekend.

She could have gotten much more than $200 for the kid if she knew where to sell it.

Not only that, but to offer it to a retailer? That's just stupid. What's he gonna do? Put a price tag on the kid and put him on a shelf?

It doesn't sound to me like she's completely in her right mind.

The death penalty comment was a bit over the top though. I say people who throw the death penalty around willy-nilly should get the death penalty.

reply to post by traderonwallst


The woman was an Alcoholic and substance abuser, she was not in any healthy state of mind when she was trying to settler her account with her children.

What I find very ironic is that she was able to have the children with her when she is obviously no fit to be a mother and provide for the them.

I wonder if is a father or family members around.

Anyone who commits a crime against a child has no place in society and as far as my tax dollars paying for them to live the easy life in jail, sorry. What will she do next start selling the kid for sex? You libs make me sick.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420


The death penalty comment was a bit over the top though. I say people who throw the death penalty around willy-nilly should get the death penalty.

A circular comment? Doesn't that add you to the group by suggesting using the death penalty too?

Don't get me wrong, love the death penalty and do wish it was used more. BUT this is definitely not a case for the death penalty.

reply to post by BigJoeNYC


It cost more to execute someone than it does to keep them locked up in jail. Little tidbit for you to mull over.

www.mindspring.com...

[edit on 7-12-2007 by Rasobasi420]

reply to post by traderonwallst


That was sort of the point of the comment. It was meant to be circular and contradictory.

I'll have to explain it better next time I guess.

Yeah, I know it’s a shame execution costs more. But there methods are all wrong...lethal injection and electrocution. How about this???? Did you know one 9mm round costs 2 cents when you buy them in bulk. I think this would do the job just fine and keep cost down.

reply to post by Rasobasi420


I would venture to say, that all depends how long you have them locked up. But thats just a guess. If you are locked up at the age of 20 for life and serve 60 years, I would htinkk it would have been cheaper to fry you after the conviction.

So, what does this have to do with ATS? I mean come on this is just another lame story you can see in the morning on NBC!

Please ATS news OMG!

reply to post by traderonwallst


From my posted link

the cost of keeping a 25-year-old inmate for 50 years at present amounts to $805,000. Assuming 75 years as an average life span, the $805,000 figure would be the cost of life in prison. So roughly it's costing us $2 million more to execute someone than it would cost to keep them in jail for life. This is just the dollar cost, the externalities will be discussed in a moment.

So even if they spent an additional 20-30 years in prison it wouldn't match the cost of their execution.

However this has nothing to do with this case, so lets save it for a death penalty thread.

I'm no fan of this woman, but she's obviously not in her right mind, so I pity her more than anything.

Sounds like fuzzy math to me. And I am sure they do not take everything into account to figure that out. If the inmate gets cancer, do they not treat him? If the inmate has a heart attack, do they not treat him?

These things my not be gaurantees to happen, but they should be taken into account if your going to assume taking care of someone for their entire life.

When my father was diagnosed with bladder cancer his medical bills were $680,000. That was just for 9 months before he succumbed to it. Thank God for insurance. My mother would have been wiped out, besides being devestated.

reply to post by traderonwallst


Your scenario would be in the most rare of cases, and that cost would likely balance out over the full cost of imprisonment and still be cheaper on average.

From Zi Wiki
en.wikipedia.org...

Opponents of the death penalty point out that capital cases usually cost more than life imprisonment due to the extra court costs, such as appeals and extra supervisions. Proponents counter this argument by stating that the severity and finality of death as punishment demands that the extra resources be expended. In the US in particular, the accused is allowed to plead guilty so as to avoid the death penalty. This plea requires the accused to forfeit any appeal arguing innocence on material or procedural grounds.

So even proponents don't debate that the cost is more, just that it's worth it to spend that much more. If that's the case, the "My tax dollars" argument is moot.

Originally posted by Keebie
So, what does this have to do with ATS? I mean come on this is just another lame story you can see in the morning on NBC!

Please ATS news OMG!

Do you understand what ATS is all about? Its not just about 9-11 conspiracies and UFO's and Bigfoot sightings. Its about debate of whats going on in todays world. The break down of society is something going in this world as the people of Omaha recently found out in a Mall shooting. There were multiple threads about that on here. Do they not belong here too? So do us a favor, either bring something to the conversation, or stay out of them. Your just wasting bandwith then.