Kids who kill, evil or misguided?

[oumahexi]

It's been difficult not to hear about child killers in the last few weeks. References to two brother killers in Liverpool, the eldest of which was aged 10, another at age 11 and of course the boys who killed the Bulger boy back in 93. All carried out wicked mutilations on their victims.

Todays press would have us believe that these crimes are directly related to the desensitisation of our children through computer games; TV and films. However, I found a rather interesting article that records child killers as far back as the 1800's.

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/weird/kids2/index_1.html

Many psychologists believe that it is their background that causes them to turn into cold blooded killers, many non psychologists believe that these people are born evil.

Is it possible that a child can be born evil?
Or is it just their bad luck to be born into bad circumstances?
Why is it that some people can be brought up in the exact same circumstances (eg a sibling of the killer) and not react in that way?
Should we send them off to summer camp in the hope that a nice little holiday will change them?
Or should we bang them up for the rest of their lives believing that they will never change?

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

I don't expect there to be a single phenomenon all or even most of these cases - more likely, it's an assortment of different combinations of factors, which in some cases combine (along with random chance and opportunity) in such a way as to trigger an incident.

For example (hypothetically): some people have congenital mental issues that make it hard for them to empathise or connect with other people, but moral upbringing, social conditioning, random events and happenings might mean that those issues get expressed as mere eccentricity, or in other cases, sociopathic violence.

Or some people might not have the underlying mental predispositions, but may be exposed to extremes of social conditioning, may experience an upbringing that utterly fails to impose a moral compass, etc, and might still end up doing harm.

Wherever we can, we should try to prevent the harmful outcomes happening, but that's often not easy or possible to do. I've no idea what is an appropriate reaction to it all - locking up the perpetrators does prevent further incidents (if they would have happened, which I expect we can't always tell) - rehabilitation is good, wherever possible...

Dunno... I think there might be a case for saying something like "We're removing you from society to protect it - we'll try to rehabilitate you so that you can have as normal a life as possible, but because of the gravity of your actions, you cannot ever be trusted to be released again"

 

[oumahexi]

I don't expect there to be a single phenomenon all or even most of these cases - more likely, it's an assortment of different combinations of factors, which in some cases combine (along with random chance and opportunity) in such a way as to trigger an incident.

For example (hypothetically): some people have congenital mental issues that make it hard for them to empathise or connect with other people, but moral upbringing, social conditioning, random events and happenings might mean that those issues get expressed as mere eccentricity, or in other cases, sociopathic violence.

Why, do you think, some people exposed to these random events will turn out to be killers, some spouse abusers (females can be as guilty of this crime as men), and yet others turn right around and try to help society?

It is said that most people who are abused as children will continue on to abuse their own children, however, this is not always the case. What makes the exceptions special? Could it be as simple as a chance encounter with a phenomenal teacher or other adult?

Or some people might not have the underlying mental predispositions, but may be exposed to extremes of social conditioning, may experience an upbringing that utterly fails to impose a moral compass, etc, and might still end up doing harm.

Wherever we can, we should try to prevent the harmful outcomes happening, but that's often not easy or possible to do.

True, that would require social services to work with them and so many already fall through the gap, even babies being abused by adults go undetected until it’s too late. As a social worker I’m sure it would be very difficult to believe that a child was capable of such atrocities. They don’t have an easy job, when do you decide that it’s necessary to pass the case over to someone more qualified? What do you do when the authorities claim they are overloaded and one more case is just too much?

I've no idea what is an appropriate reaction to it all - locking up the perpetrators does prevent further incidents (if they would have happened, which I expect we can't always tell) - rehabilitation is good, wherever possible...

It does seem like a good idea. Often the perpetrator is also a victim in such cases, however, if you were the parent of a child that fell foul to their crimes would you still feel that rehabilitation was a good thing or would you want to seem them removed from society for the remainder of their lives?

How do we know that rehabilitation is successful?

 

[JamesLast99]

It's been difficult not to hear about child killers in the last few weeks. References to two brother killers in Liverpool, the eldest of which was aged 10, another at age 11

Which two where? I have missed this? Recently?

 

[oumahexi]

Which two where? I have missed this? Recently?

It's been on the news just about every night lately, two brothers, I'm sure it was in the Liverpoor area, who attacked and killed a little boy and severely injured another, very recently, in the last month or two. I'll take a further look when I get home. Can't check here as we're not allowed to see any sites that mention violence, just in case we get any ideas...

 

[JamesLast99]

This is the closest as I have seen recently to what you decribe
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7987950.stm
though they weren't killers and are in Yorkshire? The eldest was 11 - the youngest 10.
I may have missed it though. It certainly worrying if it had happened - I haven't seen it or have forgotten about it.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

Why, do you think, some people exposed to these random events will turn out to be killers, some spouse abusers (females can be as guilty of this crime as men), and yet others turn right around and try to help society?

It is said that most people who are abused as children will continue on to abuse their own children, however, this is not always the case. What makes the exceptions special? Could it be as simple as a chance encounter with a phenomenal teacher or other adult?

I don't really know enough to be able to speculate, other than that it's bound to be a complex system, and I know that complex systems with many variables can often produce widely different results from similar inputs.

True, that would require social services to work with them and so many already fall through the gap, even babies being abused by adults go undetected until it’s too late. As a social worker I’m sure it would be very difficult to believe that a child was capable of such atrocities. They don’t have an easy job, when do you decide that it’s necessary to pass the case over to someone more qualified? What do you do when the authorities claim they are overloaded and one more case is just too much?

I don't honestly know if we can do much more than we are doing. It's never going to be perfect, and in all but extreme cases, you can't lock someone up on the basis of what you think they might be capable of - so for that reason, there will probably always be tragic incidents that seem as though they should have been avoidable.

 

[oumahexi]

I don't really know enough to be able to speculate, other than that it's bound to be a complex system, and I know that complex systems with many variables can often produce widely different results from similar inputs.

I don't honestly know if we can do much more than we are doing. It's never going to be perfect, and in all but extreme cases, you can't lock someone up on the basis of what you think they might be capable of - so for that reason, there will probably always be tragic incidents that seem as though they should have been avoidable.

It's a worry though, bad enough that parents need to watch every adult their child encounters without also having to keep an avid eye on other children too.

Perhaps more studies should be made, not just to their backgrounds but to their brain patterns, genes etc...

 

[Fifty2One]

Public flogging, dismemberment and hanging goes a long way in preventing re-occurence of these heinous crimes and quite effectively stems the cycle of violence whether it is genetic or educated

Charging a few £ to attend the public event or a couple of £ to view on pay per view television would definately fill the government coffers and put an end to countries in debit.

 

[ColinEssex]

It's the fragmentation of families. Families these days are never together, they seldom eat together at the table.
The parents decide to have the kids, yet the kids are either 'latch-key' kids or are raised by complete strangers called childminders. Mother works all day, Father comes home late and the kids are in bed. (That's even if there is a father) Massive mortgages force the parents to be out working.

It seems the parents care little about the kids' upbringing and care more about earning money to pay for their holiday to exotic places.

As long as the kids are quiet playing their PS3 (or out on the streets) the parents can relax in peace.

Parents should not have kids if both parents have to work, it's not fair on both the parents nor the kids.

Col

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

Public flogging, dismemberment and hanging goes a long way in preventing re-occurence of these heinous crimes and quite effectively stems the cycle of violence whether it is genetic or educated

Are you serious?

In which case, does it really?

Certainly an offender who is dead cannot re-offend, but do brutal punishments really provide a reasonable deterrent against these sorts of crimes?

 

[Rich]

Are you serious?

In which case, does it really?

Certainly an offender who is dead cannot re-offend, but do brutal punishments really provide a reasonable deterrent against these sorts of crimes?

Surely it would depend on the definition of the term "brutal", after all Bliar tried to take away the right of caring parents to chastise their children citing the EU human rights against adults etc yet still maintaing the right of the police to crack an adults head open with a truncheon as justifiable, I'm reminded of a conversation with a teacher who pointed at that the children most likely to be turned into bullies are those who had never been smacked since they didn't know what it felt like to be on the recieving end

 

[Alc]

I'm reminded of a conversation with a teacher who pointed at that the children most likely to be turned into bullies are those who had never been smacked since they didn't know what it felt like to be on the recieving end

The most active bully when I was at school was an amateur boxer, just not a good one, which seems to fly in the face of your teacher's theories. He got hit more often than most people and used to take it out on other kids on a regular basis.

 

[Rich]

The most active bully when I was at school was an amateur boxer, just not a good one, which seems to fly in the face of your teacher's theories. He got hit more often than most people and used to take it out on other kids on a regular basis.

But most kids aren't masochists

 

[Alc]

But most kids aren't masochists

Most kids aren't bullies, either.
I take your point, though.

In his case, he clearly wanted to be 'tough' and since he was proving incapable when facing people who were trained to fight back, he was taking it out on those who weren't. The same guy later boasted about dropping out of school before taking any exams, so he could join the marines only to fail the entrance test and end up joining the merchant navy.

 

[oumahexi]

Public flogging, dismemberment and hanging goes a long way in preventing re-occurence of these heinous crimes and quite effectively stems the cycle of violence whether it is genetic or educated

Charging a few £ to attend the public event or a couple of £ to view on pay per view television would definately fill the government coffers and put an end to countries in debit.

Certainly seems to work in some eastern countries, but I'm not sure what the EU would say to that

 

[oumahexi]

Parents should not have kids if both parents have to work, it's not fair on both the parents nor the kids.

Col

Nor is it fair to society.

But is it ok for people to have children when neither parent needs to work (because face it, they'll be able to sponge throught their lives without too much bother) and can spend the day out of their face on drugs and/or drink??

 

[Alc]

Nor is it fair to society.

I apreciate it's sometimes difficult to tell which of Col's posts are just attempts at wind-ups and which are genuine, but it's not usually the same for you.

If both parents work, they shouldn't have kids and it damages society as a result?

Both of my parents worked and all of my grandparents worked.
In what way did this harm them, me, or society?
All of us have always worked, always paid taxes, never been arrested and I now have a family of my own. How should I lessen this damage we're causing?

 

[oumahexi]

Sorry Alc, is that better? I just thought there was something missing from that post of Cols...

Of course, as the perfect Stepford Wife, I would never have considered reproduction should I have felt the need to go out and work in the real world. I don't know where women get the time for such antics anyway, they're houses must be filthy, where do they get the time to work full time and keep up with darning their husbands socks, baking bread etc??

 

[Brianwarnock]

where do they get the time to work full time and keep up with darning their husbands socks, baking bread etc??

You're having a laugh again,
hands up all those who still have their socks darned.

i see no hands.

brian