son kills father because of video games
- Thread starter Jenbu
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Andalusian_Guard said:
What are you talking about?
You said he worked on his instinct "kill parents = no problem" but he didn't kill both of them, did he?
Instead he wrapped his father's head in plastic, smashed him in the face with a sledge, woke up his mom, told her to retrieve the ****ing keyboard, took her phone and locked the door.
That's complicated and requires rational thinking, not something a kid does on his instinct, it doesn't require advanced knowledge in psychology to notice that.
QuailLover
Marquis
Andalusian_Guard said:
So I'm working on my Criminal Justice degree, and I have to say this.
In the US if the crime is "horrible" enough, or if the minor shows quite a bit of premeditation, (like this one) the defendant will be tried as an adult. The fact that he smashed his dad's head in with a sledge hammer is not going to win any sympathy with a jury, or judge, so I doubt he is going to get a "not as harsh sentence".
Andalusian_Guard
Sergeant at Arms
QuailLover said:
of course because most people believe in law as an external constraint.
Andalusian_Guard
Sergeant at Arms
Radalan said:
most of my comments were based on the information in the initial story posted by the OP which simply claimed the boy killed his father for taking away his video games which sounds impulsive and based on emotion.
Andalusian_Guard
Sergeant at Arms
Radalan said:
still doesnt refute my original point that an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex makes teenagers do stupid stuff and probably had something to do with the stupid thing this teenager did.
Andalusian_Guard
Sergeant at Arms
Ambalon said:
you bet
i think the trouble is youre unable to understand just how i am comparing them but im tired of explaining it to you.
im done with this thread and moving on.
I laughed at the discourse of this thread. AG's mental process is a rare one that most people consider alien, and therefor wrong. There are some people that cannot accept that a person is not thinking to make a conclusion. They are so focused on the conclusion that they will insert one into people's points if one is not present and not even realize it. Allow me to point out the features of AG's mental process, correct me if I'm wrong.
1) Its focused on the mental process, not the conclusion
2) It presents insights and connections without linear progression.
3) logical thought is not linear, but weblike. Thought is not a game of listing bullet points, but connecting dots. Its a flowchart, not a list.
4) It is not concerned about the facts unless they are absolutely critical to the mental construct in play, if not they are exchangeable context. If the facts conflict with the mental construct, the conversation is not about the facts anymore, but a hypothetical situation in which the mental construct could be true.
5) Conflicting examples do not disprove the construct, they merely prove its not always true.
6) Despite the stubbornness of the construct, it is very adaptable, but its interdependent structure means it must be altered in very large chucks at a time. Refuting single points merely weakens the construct, it does not break it because it is not linear. Remember that the process is more impoortant than the conclusion, this means the debate with vigor but don't really care where it leads.
7) Believes the burden of communication is on the speaker, and will speak with precision, expecting the listener to interpret verbatim. A well defined vocabulary is very important in understanding this type of communication.
1) Its focused on the mental process, not the conclusion
2) It presents insights and connections without linear progression.
3) logical thought is not linear, but weblike. Thought is not a game of listing bullet points, but connecting dots. Its a flowchart, not a list.
4) It is not concerned about the facts unless they are absolutely critical to the mental construct in play, if not they are exchangeable context. If the facts conflict with the mental construct, the conversation is not about the facts anymore, but a hypothetical situation in which the mental construct could be true.
5) Conflicting examples do not disprove the construct, they merely prove its not always true.
6) Despite the stubbornness of the construct, it is very adaptable, but its interdependent structure means it must be altered in very large chucks at a time. Refuting single points merely weakens the construct, it does not break it because it is not linear. Remember that the process is more impoortant than the conclusion, this means the debate with vigor but don't really care where it leads.
7) Believes the burden of communication is on the speaker, and will speak with precision, expecting the listener to interpret verbatim. A well defined vocabulary is very important in understanding this type of communication.
dscape750
Banned
Not really entirely surprising. I see AGs point honestly. No friends of mine killed their father over a video game, but I knew some kids growing up that beat the **** out of a fat nerdy kid until he passed out and woke up in a fit going crazy. People do that **** all the time. Some girl was killed and left by the tracks. Some guy walked into my school after I left there and raped some girl in the bathroom then casually walked out. Just goes back to what I've been saying. People are in their own corners, we divide ourselves so distantly from each other that these things aren't even shadows for us. You don't see them at all and you think, "Oh, that will never happen here." But it does. I think it has a lot to do with the parents. I think kids expect certain things, certain expressions of affection and they immitate the aggression they see. This kid obviously felt this was normal. You will be amazed at what the human mind can take if he or she thinks it is normal. Obviously no one ever taught him otherwise. Violence was something that had to already be there for him to so casually walk in and take a hammer to his father's head.
But I don't know. All I know is the world is sometimes a sick place. That's all I know for certain.
But I don't know. All I know is the world is sometimes a sick place. That's all I know for certain.
now wait for Jack Thompson and his cronie to come back.
****ing kid deserve a beating then deserve to be hang from the neck British style..
that the kind of person that give Anti-video game Crusader Ammo.
****ing kid deserve a beating then deserve to be hang from the neck British style..
that the kind of person that give Anti-video game Crusader Ammo.
Pfft, it's nothing but the superior form of this particular lineage eliminating the previous, and therefore inferior, form. Makes perfect sense to me, it enables the current host full use of resources which would have otherwise been tied up by the previous host, as a bonus also preventing the previous host from creating any further lines which may compete.
Unless he now marries his mother, then it's just the old Oedipus complex again.
Unless he now marries his mother, then it's just the old Oedipus complex again.
And that one never ends up well, right?
Similar threads
