Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

I'm pretty sure that such a quiz could be defeated simply by answering "No" to the question of whether you intend to harm a child, though.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Yeah, but just asking it might've made them think twice.

State, schhmate. I'M interested in revenge. I'm interested in them not contributing anything to this planet ever again... Imagine yourself in the room when this occurred. How could you not think anything but "do unto others"??

---

Quote:

---

Your tellin' me you wouldn't bash his empty brain in if you caught him doin this to YOUR child??

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
What is sooo wrong with finding a way to improve child-rearing standards?? You have a better suggestion?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
To me? You really wanna? Okay, no. It's not. I won't give you the power to enslave the black race because you dug up a brutal child murder.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Yeah, but just asking it might've made them think twice.

State, schhmate. I'M interested in revenge. I'm interested in them not contributing anything to this planet ever again... Imagine yourself in the room when this occurred. How could you not think anything but "do unto others"??


Your tellin' me you wouldn't bash his empty brain in if you caught him doin this to YOUR child??

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

I'm pretty sure that such a quiz could be defeated simply by answering "No" to the question of whether you intend to harm a child, though.

---

Mike, in case you missed the earlier disussion, this is at me because I said that parents should not have to pass a test given by social workers in order to be allowed to have children, which is a pretty open door to eugenic IMHO. It was in the thread about the woman with 15 kids.

---

Quote:

---

Anyway, Wishimay missed the point, I guess.

Does seem an awful lot of these in Great Britain. What gives?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

If I were there, he would be dead, or I would be.

That's why they don't let the family of the victim sit on the jury. Pretty good idea, if you ask me.

Oh, I'm telling you I'm quite certain I *would* kill this guy. But I am not the justice system, and I very well might be charged witha crime if I did kill him. I'm saying I'd be fine with being charged, because his death would have been worth it TO ME at the time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:



Also, chill. I don't think that feeding violent imagery into a discussion of policy really helps things, including feeding in dead or nearly dead babies.

I'd really like to be out of it before it turns into the mass freeforall than it undoubtedly will

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Yeah, I got that. I'm with you on that one, though, and would reiterate that it is quite easy to spoof such tests. I'm sure you already know this, though.

---

Not sure, spoof?
I know spoof, but do you mean lie your way through it? Not sure I get you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Channeling Sig there? You used to be such a nice girl.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
I've seen worse in the states.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Yes, DT.
I'm not so young I'm ignorant to the "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" schtick.

Who said GOVERNMENT, btw??

I said HOSPITAL, yanno, heathcare?? As in "caring" about the welfare of people?

---

Quote:

---

If a quiz, oral or written, helps ONE child, how could it be a bad thing?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Channeling Sig there? You used to be such a nice girl.

---

This is one of those times I'm not nice, this is onea those times I'm angry.

---

Quote:

---

If I was Mal, and I'd just kicked this "parent" through an engine, wouln't part of you cheer?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Yes, DT.
I'm not so young I'm ignorant to the "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" schtick.

Who said GOVERNMENT, btw??

I said HOSPITAL, yanno, heathcare?? As in "caring" about the welfare of people?

---

WHICH hospitals? Who runs them? Governments? Corporations? Are you more comfortable with a for-profit enterprise telling you whether or not you can keep your child than you would be with a government agency saying so?

Quote:

---

If a quiz, oral or written, helps ONE child, how could it be a bad thing?

---

If it hurts millions.

What would you do with a woman who is eight months pregnant and fails your test? What's your solution? What is the fate of that baby?


And yes, I'm instantly suspicious of any "solution" that brings up the "it's for the good of the children" meme. I've heard it too many times before.


If you want to help children, maybe we should all just pass a law that says it's illegal to do evil. I'm sure it would help at least one child, after all...

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

---

Exactly this. I don't really have anything to add, Mike, you make me redundant.

As for angry people, no, it's not a trait I generally care for. The only one who really gets away with a high level of anger here for me is Frem, not because I think his anger is completely justified, I think it's sometimes over the top, but in part because he brings some much more at the same time as he's being angry, and in part because it's clearly in his blood, so it's a whole package, you have to take the whole Frem or no Frem, there's not like "oh he gets that way sometimes I'll wait until it goes away."

And CTS, gets very focused sort of anger that doesn't spread, it's very tolerable. Byte as well.

PN doesn't get away with it, I just let it slide, in part by not reading when he's angry at jews. I think he's always angry at jews. Maybe once or twice he said good things about jews.

Mike, you get angry at Rap. When the two of you get into it you remind me of Olbermann and O'Reilly, I just find myself thinking that the two of you should get a room. Or a divorce.


ETA: Byte makes an interesting point about another flaw in the nazi parent screening policy, that momentary lapses in judgment like this are random. I suspect they come from the same place as spree killing and probably suicide, not a logical place. These people might well have passed the parenting test at the time.

Sometimes drugs bring this sort of thing on, other times it's some sort of stress snap. I'm not sure this is a sort of thing though, it might be a one off, as the British would say.

Anyway, at the moment I'm voting for Mike.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:



If it hurts millions.

What would you do with a woman who is eight months pregnant and fails your test? What's your solution? What is the fate of that baby?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

And yes, I'm instantly suspicious of any "solution" that brings up the "it's for the good of the children" meme. I've heard it too many times before.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Thing is, SHOULD the judge be the one to make all the big decisions?

A certain judge in Texas seems to be a pretty good indicator that the answer to that question is also "No."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

And yes, I'm instantly suspicious of any "solution" that brings up the "it's for the good of the children" meme. I've heard it too many times before.

---

Then by all means, let's do nothing for the sake of the kids...Less suspicious now?

---

Quote:

---

And no, past conversations have no bearing on how I feel about you or anyone. I actually have an incredibly crappy memory and will likely forget the details of any conversation tomorrow. Helps in a marraige, too.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Thing is, SHOULD the judge be the one to make all the big decisions?

A certain judge in Texas seems to be a pretty good indicator that the answer to that question is also "No."

---

Fine, down with judges, too. No one should make any decisions, because in truth, humanity is a disease. Gotta start somewhere, though.

I'm making the decision to go ta bed.

May all the kids you know be safe tonight

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Does seem an awful lot of these in Great Britain. What gives?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
If I was Mal, and I'd just kicked this "parent" through an engine, wouln't part of you cheer?

---

Quote:

---

Now, what am I talking about? Who is this kid? What are his characteristics? (And when I say "his," obviously there are female delinquents who also fit within this category. So far, their numbers are relatively small so there's been little focus on them. So when I use the term "his" or "he," picture in your mind that the terms are somewhat interchangeable with "her" and "she"). This kid is characterized by a complete lack of apparent empathy for other human beings. He feels no pain but his own. This is the type of kid who will kill three people on separate occasions for no apparent reason, commit a subway robbery, do a push-in mugging, blow somebody away because they "looked at him wrong." He will show no remorse, and then come into the office of an institution just enraged, veins bulging out of his neck, sweat pouring off his forehead, eyes wild, incoherent almost to the point of tears ... all because someone broke his portable radio. And he'll see no contradiction whatsoever. He simply does not feel anyone's pain but his own. This is a learned response. People are not born like this.

---

Quote:

---

The second characteristic is lack of perception of the future. He has none. If you ask a kid like this, "What are you going to be doing next year?" you will get an absolutely blank stare. Not because he's stupid, but because he simply cannot conceptualize such a distance from right now. If you want to speak with this kid, you have to speak within his time frame, and that time frame isn't ever more than a few hours from the present.

---

Quote:

---

This kid does not relate behavior to consequences. He does not see a causal connection between his acts and a response. What do I mean? To this kid, life is a lottery. Everyone rolls the dice, but not everyone pays the price. He has no perception as to how the dice will come up. In his world, everyone commits crimes. Everybody. Some smaller percentage of that number are arrested. A still smaller percentage go to court; an even smaller percentage go to trial. A smaller percentage still are actually found guilty (or "adjudicated delinquent" if you prefer), and a smaller percentage of that group are committed to a youth authority. Lastly, an even smaller percentage are actually incarcerated.

In his mind, everybody commits these crimes. He sees no connection between his acts and the consequences. He is marked by a chronicity of violence, usually an escalating pattern. Violence permeates his existence until it is his existence.

---

Quote:

---

Now here's the question: is he beyond our reach? If we can't say "No!" to that, we should give it up. We've been ducking and dodging that issue for too long a time. If we face reality, this is what "prevention" is all about. Part of the profession wants to say: "We can't deal with this kid; this kid is (you fill in the blanks with whatever you want ... an animal, a beast, a lunatic); we can't deal with him. Let the adult system take him. We'll work with the good kids, the other kids." Now part of our profession wants to accept and acknowledge our collective responsibility for this kid. But even that part doesn't say: "I'll take him." No. What we say is: "We're going to prevent him. We're going to stop this deadly flower from reaching full bloom." Well, people, that's a joke, a real joke. And the joke is on you and on the American public. You cannot prevent this kid if you persist in starting where you have been. There's a continuum of production that results in this kid being among us. There's a virtual assembly line, with components being attached at each stage until this human being has reached his full dangerous growth. By the time you start to "prevent," it's already too late.

---

Quote:

---

Where did this kid come from anyway? Is he a bio-genetic mutation that has evolved after hundreds of years of reproduction in the human race? I hope you don't believe that, and I hope you don't believe that he's a cultural aberration. Or that once the economy gets back on its feet, he will disappear. I hope you don't believe it's as simplistic as a "breakdown of family values." Let me tell you something. He comes from us. He is a product of the human services profession.

I have never seen one of these kids that hasn't been within our child protective and child-caring system for years and years before the juvenile justice profession is asked to "intervene." We have to create the beast. It cannot be born whole. If you look at adult life-style criminals (and again I emphasize life-style, not people who made a lot of headlines with one explosive act), you can be guaranteed to see one thing in their background. No matter where such people are politically or socially: from a berserk neo-Nazi like Charles Manson to a prison-created revolutionary like George Jackson, from the Boston Strangler to Carryl Chessman, from John Dillinger to Gary Gilmour, to Carl Panzram to Clyde Barrow (of Bonnie and Clyde). They all did time as juveniles. Amazing, isn't it?

You probably never heard of Carl Panzram. He was a mass murderer who killed more than a couple of dozen people at different times in his short life. He killed for the fun of it. He liked to kill people. The only things he liked better than killing people were sodomizing little boys and arson. He caused more destruction than a small army.

Finally, Panzram, who was intelligent despite his lunacy, decided he wanted to die. But the state wouldn't kill him. He kept killing, but he didn't die. Finally, he killed a prison guard and ended up on trial for his life. Do you know what lie he told the jury? "I am what you made me. You put me in that training school for boys and you trained me that the greatest joy in life is sodomy and murder. And if you don't kill me now, while you have the opportunity, I'm going to kill some of you. The state gave me birth, let the state take my life." The state finally did.

Now I'm not Carl Panzram's attorney. I'm not trying to excuse his behavior.

Even if I could explain it, he was too dangerous to walk among us. But he spoke the truth. When Charles Manson said, "You can see me in the eyes of your ten-year-olds," that was not an original line. We have been producing the life-style violent criminal for generations, and the factory has been the child protective and juvenile justice system.

In order to create the kind of sociopathic, non-empathetic, violent human being I've been talking about, you need an institution. You need a controlled environment. You need an environment where might makes right.

You need an environment where there is a hierarchy of exploitation; where the rule is "be exploited or exploit others." For many, many years we have run our institutions on a jungle model where the strong not only survive, but thrive. And when the beast is released, we all pay.

---