ONE HUNDRED AND ELEVEN TIMES?!

Sorry folks, but today is just FUCKED UP.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5416649,00.html

When I first read the article I read the title as “Ten accused of stabbing Mom to death”.

And I think the world will always be a fucked up place as long as there are lawyers to defend a teenager who’s making weapons at home (which could lead to another Columbine) and kills his own progenitor like that.

The world is fucked up when people exist to create the circumstances under which people would be driven to do stuff like Columbine.

It could very well be a public defender. Those do exist, you know.

I don’t think I’ve heard of a school shooting spree perpetrated with an improvised firearm; it usually seems to be a mass-produced firearm that the shooter borrowed or stole from someone close, and in those cases I’ve heard of it’s a family member. The gun the article describes is very likely a single shot thing, which I’m guessing would be of more use on a specific person.

Or he might not have been planning to use it on people at all. The article says he was arrested at his family’s cabin. Maybe he was going to take it into the woods and shoot at squirrels. Not the act of a well-adjusted person either.

As far as stabbings go, when rage is a motivation it’s not so hard for the murderer to rack up a high stab count. I’ve heard of victims being stabbed upwards of one hundred and <i>sixty</i> times.

This kid was fucked up. He had no impulse control and very little under the hood morally. The world had little to do with it.

Very rarely do stabbings go over 200 hits.

Even if you switch hands, the arm gets really tired after repeatedly stabbing someone. Especially if you’re hitting bone or cartilage.

You need a lot of practice to inflict 200+ stab wounds, but its worth it in the end.

Care to hypothesize a cause since morals are taught?

Or you could just use one, and make it count <_<

It may be true that stabbings don’t often go over 200 stabs, but what we see here is a little over half that. And like I’ve said, a properly motivated person can keep at something for a long time.

As far as morals go, he didn’t or couldn’t stop himself from becoming violent and killing his mother. Does that sound like upstanding moral character to you?

Morals are not entirely taught, either. We do have instincts that predispose us to behave in “moral” ways. Infants cry when they hear others crying and will look happy when they hear others laughing. Two year olds comfort their parents or other children when they see signs of distress. They don’t always know quite how to do it, but empathy certainly seems to be inborn, and evolutionarily it makes sense that it would be so.

Now, just for dilligence’s sake, you can sort of manipulate a child’s emotional reactions. For example, a cousin of mine, who still can’t quite walk properly, was running along in the mall one day and <i>totally ate shit</i>. I mean trip, pow! Face down and spread-eagled on the floor. You’d think a child would cry after that. But thankfully, before she could register what had happened, her father shouts “<I><B>SAFE!</B></I>” She gets up, dusts herself off, and goes off on her merry way. This is different from empathy, though. Her father’s reaction, because he didn’t gasp in horror or cry out, reassured my little cousin that everything was all right.

I suppose in the trial, provided anyone covers it, we’ll find out the exact chain of events. That may be interesting.

Oh, and Ren? Yes, you down there, in the next post? Why would a killer summon the patience to stick around and deal out those 100 or more stab wounds without being motivated by rage or hatred?

Going over 200 stabs is a matter of patience. You don’t have to do it all at once, you know. Wait a few hours or a day then come back.

Also, I don’t think going for 100+ is rage. It’s incompetence. A skilled killer does the job in one.

Thats what I’m saying Ren.

1-3 stabs indicates efficiency.

200+ stabs shows a focus on style.

~100 stabs is just half-assed. Kids today don’t have the respect to do things right.

Do you know that he couldn’t help himself? Do you know anything about this particular individual or this situation or his interactions with his family or his mother’s character, reaction, etc… that we don’t? Are you saying there aren’t any circumstances under which someone would want to kill their mom? What if the mom was abusive? I’m not saying its morally right to go around killing people. What I’m saying is that there are different shades to attribute to something depending on a lot of variable circumstances.

Firstly, you want to be very careful as to when you use the word “evolution” with me. Secondly, your paragraph said absolutely nothing about moral development.

Morals are relative and highly cultural. If you look at different cultural practices and taboos, there are a couple universal taboos like on incest, but the very few similarities add little to support that morals are an inherent trait found in all people at birth that grows in their skulls like an organ.

I said “didn’t or couldn’t stop himself.” He killed his mother after she discovered he was browsing porn and building weapons from plans he found on the internet. It’s possible that his mother was abusive. Hell, she may have even struck him and he counterattacked. Doesn’t make it right to kill her, much less mutilate her with excessive stabbing. Maybe he couldn’t because he had poor impulse control or something, which the porn might indicate (it would depend on how much he was consuming) and that he was basically out of his mind and couldn’t stop himself. It might be that he intended to use this pvc gun on his mother, in which case he simply didn’t want to leave her alive.

I suppose I should say empathy could be thought to confer a survival advantage, if not for selection. Helping behavior, which would be motivated by empathy in the abscence of a reward-giving authority, increases your chances of survival. Further, if you’ve noticed, when you’re nice to people they tend to reciprocate. Having lots of friends confers a selection advantage too, I’d think.

Murder seems to be one of those universal taboos as well. Whatever mechanisms a society has that can justify a killing, such as trial by combat or what-have-you, every society I’ve heard of contains the idea of a murder, an unjust killing.

Empathy, as I pointed out, doesn’t need to be taught. This isn’t some sophisicated moral organ in our brains, but it is a foundation for them to be built upon.

He didn’t have to be an incompetent killer to get 111 stabs. He could have gotten a few fatal ones, and while she was bleeding out or incapacitated, stabbed her some more just for the hell of it. Some also could have been defensive stab wounds in the hands.

111 hit combo~

Sweet wheels of shit.

I suggest we kill all teenagers at birth.

That’s about the most retarded thing I’ve read in a while.

Reminds me of the time Eric Cartman’s mom wanted to abort him - when he was already 8-years-old.

Starting with you Setz? Nah just kidding you’re humorous, we need you around.

There goes all arguments to eliminate YOU, too.

Wouldn’t she be exempt anyway? Not being a teenager and all…