> To consider that a "robbery with a weapon" is to make that
> phrase meaningless.
It's already meaningless: robbery is ALWAYS VIOLENT. It's in the definition of robbery. Look it up! You got charged with it, you ought to at least know what it means. Adding a firearm to the mix is just an aggrivating circumstance. This has nothing to do with whether you had your gun with you; it has to do with why you were charged with robbery instead of something else. I'm sure one of the lawyers on the list will pop up, but this has got to be a law school level mistake: there's no robbery if there's no person.
Are you sure you got charged with robbery?
> if you consider mine or the above examples "violent crimes" ...
I didn't say I agreed you had commited a violent crime; I was agreeing with your earlier characterization of you being a dumbass. I think I even characterized your, uh, crime as "simple" ...
> There was absolutely nothing violent about my stupid college prank
> ...
Ahem. A prank is when you give it back and everyone laughs. Or allow your 'victim' to come into your house and see it on display like the rest of your friends. And then you all laugh.
It sounds like what you did wasn't a prank.
> Everyone in prison is violent by your standard.
All hyperbolic statements are false.
/jordan