Types of people

[Tetrahedrite]

My point here is, you want him to die but you are not willing to do it yourself, you want someone else to do it.

I believe that still makes anyone who condones state sanctioned murder complicit in that persons murder.

 

What if that victim's family did not want the man to be executed (this is quite often the case in capital murder charges), would your thirst for revenge still justify murdering him?

 

What if the victims had no direct family (such as an elderly person), would you then volunteer to murder him?

 

Lets take this eye for an eye rubbish a little further.

If a person shoots a shopkeeper in the leg in the course of a robbery, and the shopkeeper loses that leg, should the state then also chop off the robbers leg? The very thought of the government mutilating or killing or torturing criminals is horrendous and barbaric and belongs in the third world countries. I'm sure your parents have told you that two wrongs don't make a right, this is especially true when we are considering state sanctioned murder!

 

The US is supposedly a beacon for human rights and development, and really it should wake up to itself!!

[Tetrahedrite]

I am sure I could. I had to kill my dogs when I was young' date=' ala Ol' Yeller. I loved my dogs and they were good. I value their lives over a psychotic killer any day.

I am not playing God. If I were God, I wouldn't allow people like this to exist.[/quote']

Ok, the guy killed some people and then you kill him. The order of events doesn't really matter here, you are both murders.

In most civilised countries this would be the case.

[john5746]

You can't just look at a result and make them equal. Intent is also important. A soldier kills, not necessarily in self defense.

 

If I kill him on my own, against the law, then yes it is murder. If I am ordered to kill him, then no it isn't murder.

[Aardvark]

I don't like what I'm saying either' date=' because it's not really me, and now I'm sorry I brought something so personal up. I think I have a dark side.

 

Bettina[/quote']

 

Everyone has a dark side, its part of being human.

 

Have you heard the maxim 'hard cases make for bad laws'.?

 

It is quite easy to find an extreme example, for instance the child murderer you mentioned. We can look at this example and say, 'yes, this man has committed acts so wicked we should kill him'. The problem is that we then draw general moral principles from this specific case.

 

If we use this case to justify capital punishment then we will have a law which results in the execution of people who commit crimes that are not nearly as clearly evil as this. If we allow our laws and behaviour to be decided by the acts of the most extreme evil we will be giving lethal injections to women who killed abusive spouses. Or to people who suffer from paranoid schizophrenia.

 

We can say that the most extreme punishments would be reserved for the most extreme crimes, but it is objectively not possible to distinguish how bad or monsterous someone is. As the law must be applied equally to all if we make a harsh law because of monsters, we will have to live under that law as if we were monsters too.

[-Demosthenes-]

It all comes down to this: Is murder for the right reasons okay?

I say not, murder is always wrong.

[Tetrahedrite]

It all comes down to this: Is murder for the right reasons okay?

I say not' date=' murder is always wrong.[/quote']

I whole-heartedly agree, as does most of the civilised world.

[Macroscopic]

Originally posted by -Demosthenes

It all comes down to this: Is murder for the right reasons okay?

I say not, murder is always wrong.

Really? It's easy to say that when it doesn't personally concern you. If those were your daughters, your set of morals would be very different.

Murder is needed sometimes. Picture this:

You walk into your daughters room and there is a guy in there with a knife and is going to rape her. He doesn't know you're there, and he's in a position where you can easily kill him. If you try to stop him without killing him, he'll kill your daughter, then you. In this situation would you really not kill him to save your daughter? I doubt it. Almost anyone would kill him, and believe it was the right thing to do.

[-Demosthenes-]

In defense of someone else, or myself, of course. But not for revenge.

[Macroscopic]

"I say not, murder is always wrong." "In defense of someone else, or myself, of course." Here you say murder is ALWAYS wrong. Then you say it's ok to murder someone if it's in defense. Always and sometimes don't go together. What you have said is self-contradictory and doesn't add up.

[-Demosthenes-]

Sorry about that, I think that if it is in self defense or the defense of others then it would be ok. Sorry, I didn't think of that.

[Macroscopic]

"Sorry about that, I think that if it is in self defense or the defense of others then it would be ok."

Agreed

[Tetrahedrite]

Self defense, or defense of your family, is not murder

[Bettina]

You guys can stop now.....I want him to live. The thought of him in solitary confinement for the rest of his life is more than enough to satisfy me that justice is being served for the monster he is.

 

Bettina

[john5746]

In defense of someone else, or myself, of course. But not for revenge.

 

You are running to save your friend, you pull the gun, but the monster's sword slices through your friend's neck.

 

"oh well, he's dead, can't kill the monster now."

 

yeah right.

[Hellbender]

I can't help but agree with Bettina here. I am very liberal, but I don't oppose capital punishment at all. Don't feel bad because you wouldn't mind knowing that some human monster is being killed.

[husmusen]

Sometime I'll have to post a more detailed reply to this.

 

In the meantime,

I believe it was Solzhenitsyn who said the line dividing good and

evil runs straight through the human heart.

 

I do not know if any of the people reading this have watched Babylon 5,

but if they have was Londo a good person, a bad person, or a monster?

 

Cheers.

[Aardvark]

I believe it was Solzhenitsyn who said the line dividing good and

evil runs straight through the human heart.

 

Thank you, i was trying to remember that quote. Very pertinent to the discussion.

[Tetrahedrite]

I can't help but agree with Bettina here. I am very liberal, but I don't oppose capital punishment at all. Don't feel bad because you wouldn't mind knowing that some human monster is being killed.

Where do you draw the line between a monster and someone commits a crime in desperation?

[Hellbender]

Thats not my job. People who simply murder and aren't insane and brutal are not "monsters". There are very rarely (I hope) some bad people put there. I think they should either get like 5 life terms or perhaps executed.

[reverse]

To the original post.

 

You are quite right, there are monsters.

 

I have done a great deal of reading on all the systems past and present devised to categorise people by type or personality.

 

Peoples who study the mind call this area abnormal psychology/criminal psychology.

These abnormal people do not think like you and I.

You can not consider them by your own thoughts.

their ways are totally alien to the normal mind.

Their types have been well documented.

This is what enables the FBI to create what they call "profiles".

Through these profiles the FBI can predict the age sex occupation etc etc of a particular monster.

 

The ability to feel what another person is feeling is called empathy.

this ability is missing from the mind of the monster.

Certain childhood behaviour (like cruelty to animals etc) almost predicts the way these monsters will develop as adults. Almost.

 

If I hear a bad crime on the news, I usually try and pick the relationships and situations leading up to the events and wait for all the details to come out later.

(to see how good the statistical models are)

 

they are pretty good, usually they predict exactly.

 

Certain chemical compounds can aggravate these latent behaviours,

which is a very very good reason to stay away from drugs.

You may be opening a door that you will not be able to close again.

[Bettina]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7190457/

 

I,m sorry for bringing up an old post, but I've been following this story for weeks hoping for some good to come of it, but it didn't.

You have no idea how much this bothered me. I had tears running down my face and now I can't get her out of my mind.

 

This girl was like me. She had no mother to speak of and lived with her dad. She was more like me in her personality too. I loved her without even knowing her.

 

Why did I post? Because I'm right in classifying people like I did, and I want to slap the faces of all of you who want to protect monsters like this. If I get banned from this board so be it. I won't care. I want this monster dead. I want his father to pull the switch and watch him fry and I want it done tommorrow. I don't want to wait 10 years to see justice done. I hate him.

 

To all of you who wish to protect these monsters, shame on you. Take a long look at her photo. If ever in the course of growing up I should ever remotely think like you then shame on me.

 

Don't bother with condemming me...I won't answer.

 

Bettina

[Aardvark]

Don't bother with condemming me...I won't answer.

 

Bettina

 

Bettina, in all your posts in this forum who has ever condemned or censored you? No one is going to be offended by your simply expressing a strong opinion.

 

I would suggest that you recognise that you are allowing strong emotions to control you. The harder and more dreadful the case the more need to remain calm and rational in considering its implications.

[coquina]

http://www.faqfarm.com/Q/What_is_a_sociopath

 

Antisocial Personality Disorder is also known as psychopathy or sociopathy. Individuals with this disorder have little regard for the feeling and welfare of others. As a clinical diagnosis it is usually limited to those over age 18. It can be diagnosed in younger people if the they commit isolated antisocial acts and do not show signs of another mental disorder.

 

Antisocial Personality Disorder is chronic, beginning in adolescence and continuing throughout adulthood. There are ten general symptoms:

 

not learning from experience no sense of responsibility inability to form meaningful relationships inability to control impulses lack of moral sense chronically antisocial behavior no change in behavior after punishment emotional immaturity lack of guilt self-centeredness

 

People with this disorder may exhibit criminal behavior. They may not work. If they do work, they are frequently absent or may quit suddenly. They do not consider other people's wishes, welfare or rights. They can be manipulative and may lie to gain personal pleasure or profit. They may default on loans, fail to provide child support, or fail to care for their dependents adequately. High risk sexual behavior and substance abuse are common. Impulsiveness, failure to plan ahead, aggressiveness, irritability, irresponsibility, and a reckless disregard for their own safety and the safety of others are traits of the antisocial personality.

 

Socioeconomic status, gender, and genetic factors play a role. Males are more likely to be antisocial than females. Those from lower socioeconomic groups are more susceptible. A family history of the disorder puts one at higher risk.

 

There are many theories about the cause of Antisocial Personality Disorder including experiencing neglectful parenting as a child, low levels of certain neurotransmitters in the brain, and belief that antisocial behavior is justified because of difficult circumstances. Psychotherapy, group therapy, and family therapy are common treatments. The effects of medical treatment are inconclusive. Unfortunately, most people with Antisocial Personality Disorder reject treatment. Therefore, recovery rates are low.

 

 

Sociopath is the clinical name for this type of individual. It comes in all manner of extremes. The case you cited is certainly one of them. To me, Scott Peterson fits the definition even more so. He not only killed his wife and unborn son, he called Amber Fry and pretended to be in Paris, while a service was being held for his missing wife.

 

The most dangerous thing about them is that they are so ordinary. They do not look like monsters or act unusual under everyday circumstances, they are very good actors, but in fact, they have no feeling or regard for anyone but themselves. The only regret they ever feel is if they get caught.

 

They are wired so differently from the average human, that we have no conception of how they function. Actually, I think a better analogy would be "short circuited". Something in their brain is fried and there is no way to put it right.

 

I think there should be a special category of institutionalization for this type of person. IMHO, Sociopaths are criminally insane, and I don't think they should be mixed in with the general criminal population, because at least some of those people have the chance of rehabilitation. Exposing them to sociopaths can't be beneficial. Neither do I think someone diagnosed as a sociopath should ever, ever, have a snowball's chance in hell of getting out.

 

Should they be subject to capital punishment? If they have been convicted on the basis of substantial evidence (ie several people witnessed the crime, there is DNA, gunshot, ballistics, etc that supports it) I believe so. If they have been convicted on circumstantial evidence, I say no.

[Bettina]

http://www.faqfarm.com/Q/What_is_a_sociopath

 

 

 

Sociopath is the clinical name for this type of individual. It comes in all manner of extremes. The case you cited is certainly one of them. To me' date=' Scott Peterson fits the definition even more so. He not only killed his wife and unborn son, he called Amber Fry and pretended to be in Paris, while a service was being held for his missing wife.

 

The most dangerous thing about them is that they are so ordinary. They do not look like monsters or act unusual under everyday circumstances, they are very good actors, but in fact, they have no feeling or regard for anyone but themselves. The only regret they ever feel is if they get caught.

 

They are wired so differently from the average human, that we have no conception of how they function. Actually, I think a better analogy would be "short circuited". Something in their brain is fried and there is no way to put it right.

 

I think there should be a special category of institutionalization for this type of person. IMHO, Sociopaths are criminally insane, and I don't think they should be mixed in with the general criminal population, because at least some of those people have the chance of rehabilitation. Exposing them to sociopaths can't be beneficial. Neither do I think someone diagnosed as a sociopath should ever, ever, have a snowball's chance in hell of getting out.

 

Should they be subject to capital punishment? If they have been convicted on the basis of substantial evidence (ie several people witnessed the crime, there is DNA, gunshot, ballistics, etc that supports it) I believe so. If they have been convicted on circumstantial evidence, I say no.[/quote']

 

This "thing" was caught three times before. Once sneaking into a girls bedroom and kissing her. She was young too.

He admitted the crime of the Florida girl. I want him dead and all the lawyers who try so hard to set him free should be rounded up and burned too.

I hate him so much it hurts. I hate those lawyers and judges too.

I won't change my mind on what we should do with monsters like this.

 

Bettina

 

EDIT.....to all his supporters.....just try to think what that girl went thru the last 15 minutes of her life.....what he did to her......how she begged.....cried.....think about that!

[Aardvark]

Should they be subject to capital punishment? If they have been convicted on the basis of substantial evidence (ie several people witnessed the crime' date=' there is DNA, gunshot, ballistics, etc that supports it) I believe so. If they have been convicted on circumstantial evidence, I say no.[/quote']

 

 

That is a dangerous distinction to make.

 

Either someone has been found guilty or they haven't been. It is not possible either practically or ethically to distinguish between how strong the conviction is.