Technopunk said:
SgtMac,
I did read your link, It was to an article by a Times Reporter, he said:
"But the FBI and its team of psychiatrists and psychologists have reached an entirely different conclusion."
But it doesnt specifically state what their findings were, and this also goes against what I heard "From the Horses mouth" so to speak, in the two reports I suggested you watch.
Most of the Article you cited was about the findings of a single Psychiatrist, Dr. Robert Hare. Hare labels them as Psychopaths, citing work in their journals and on the web, had no real meaning, but the truth was in the fact that their letters to show remorse were written for effect, because their angry writing about the same subject was serious. but there was no specific information as to WHY he decided that the remorse was fake, but the anger about being caught was not.... unless you count the fact that he claims you have to ignore their hate speech as irrelevant, which he then goes on NOT to do. he also cites the fact that they lie, for pleasure, and if that is the case, could the entirty of what they wrote then be a lie, and if so, how does that effect his findings since what they wrote was a big part of what he used, at least as far as the article you sent me indicates?
Also, one other thing I noticed when I read that, which makes me question Dr Hare's "findings" in favor of the other reaserch I saw, was the fact that he claims they do not care about their victims or why they are and what they feel... I have to ask, if that is the case, how these "Psychopaths" managed NOT to kill or injure any of their other friends in the "Trenchcoat Mafia" when they were "indescriminatley" killing victims in theri psychosis driven rampage?
Watch the two reports I cited, as a basis for comparsion, and see if they dont, at the very least, seem more comprehensive and well thought out, as opposed to the findings of one Psychiatrists "beliefs" about what happened.
You still haven't pointed to one single victim that allegedly victimized these killers. Without that, you've already lost this argument. I've read the two reports cited, and they are driven by the worst kind of pseudo-scientific thinking. Try using some critical thinking skills. Number of "Jocks" killed 0 Number of innocent people killed 13. It's not that difficult, hard as you try to obfuscate the point. Don't fall victim to the trend I outlined in my last post. This type of victim dehumanization must end. Several people in this forum are already trying to defend Harris and Klebold as if they were victims, protests to the contrary that that's not what they are doing. Use your minds people. Understanding from an intellectual level is good, understanding of killers from an empathetic level is bad. It's mommy thinking. Hitlers mother loved him, but that didn't make him a good person. I would be willing to bet that almost every evil person who ever lived was loved by his mother if no one else. Remember, rational good, empathy bad, when it comes to understanding killers.
Of course this argument will go no where because I am coming at it from a purely rational point of view, and several of you have obviously got a lot of emotionalism and empathy invested in this, so this will likely deteriorate. It's obvious that my suggestions about these two sociopaths angers you more than the idea that they killed 13 people. That's truly bizarre.
What created these two monsters wasn't that they were bullied, it was that they were coddled. Brought up in upper middle class homes with parents they snowballed. They avoided consequences for all previous actions, they were given everything they wanted and told that nothing was their fault. Now the same treatment they received before they did this, they are receiving afterwards. We are teaching our children now that they are not responsible for their actions, they are the victims...victims of ADHD, victims of society, victims of poverty, victims of everything. Is it any wonder they act as if they are not responsible for their own actions. I see kids like Harris and Klebold every day, they aren't bullied, they are coddled and given every excuse by parents who are willing to give them everyting but discipline. I am called to these kids homes when they are 13, 14, 15, by the parents who never disciplined them, but now don't know how to make the child that has run amuk go to bed, do his homework, stop tearing up the house. So they want ME to discipline their spoiled child. The same child they will AGAIN make excuses for when he starts getting arrested at 16, 17 and 18. They will bail him out, they will hire him an attorney, they will rationalize that his is being bullied by the police, influenced by his friends, and is NOT responsible for his own actions. Oh, they are angry at 17, but it's not angry that they are BULLIED, they are usually angry when, at 17, after years of getting their own way, they finally run in to the realization that the rest of the world isn't going to coddle them the way their mothers and fathers did.
When people say "We need to understand them, so we can keep it from happening again" they really mean "We want to keep it from happening again, without having to actually teach our children that there are consequences and boundaries". Some people want simple answers that don't force them to have to reevaluate what they believe about themselves and the world around them. So we come up with "Bullying". We just claim that these poor, 17 year old kids, were the victims of a faceless entity, so we can have our power back. We can continue to believe the world is a wonderful place and discipline isn't really required. Just give your kids everying, and when you run in to a problem, call a psychologist to tell you what's wrong with your child, get a prescription of paxil, ritilin, some group therapy, and presto, all better. And we did it all without blaming little Johnny for his behavior, because, as we know, blaming him would be bad for his self-esteem.
It isn't bullying that created Harris and Klebold, it was excuses. Someone might want to write a new book "EXCUSED TO DEATH" or maybe "MOTHERED TO DEATH". Some of you folks might want to read it, before you forget that these poor, innocent, cherubic faced boys, cold bloodedly murdered 13 innocent people. People who's mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and friends will NEVER see again. Who's families and friends will mourn for the rest of their lives, because these two boys wanted to know what it felt like to have the power of life and death in their hands. Lets look past the natural mother instinct that causes us to see the faces of these two young, handsome, WHITE middle class boys, and want to simply forgive and forget. It's pure emotionalism at it's worst. What's more, I still haven't heard any of you mention the name of ONE SINGLE VICTIM.
That having been said, it's not my intention to offend anyone. I DO feel very strongly about this subject, as it is a trend I see occurring in American (I'll go so far as to say Western) society, and it is media driven. Things like the Time Magazine cover are prime examples. We spend our time trying to understand the killers, and we tell people subconciously that it is the killers life that is important. Some people are more succeptible to this suble power of suggestion than others, notably truly empathetic people (like my wife) who tend to wear their emotion on their sleeve. They tend to allow their mind to be clowded by their emotions.
