Just a Rotten Kid

I have been reading the post on this thread. Some are saying they would kill if...they would stand by someone who is guilty of murder if...
I'm not a power puff. Most of my life has been under the barrel. I've know some pretty bad people. My life has been in danger many time. I have never come to understand how someone can say, "I would take a life."
Most I my childhood, I was my own mother, and father. A few years I lived with my grandfather. As a child I gave myself rules for life. One rule has always been very clear to me, and never in question. "Do not take the life of another, even if it cost your own."
I believe the strength of a man is how he lives, not dies.
I know there is a lot of if's...if this, or if that.
The question is always left..."Do you become a murder, to stop a murder?"

Dick

How many people did Ronnie physically harm?
He told eveyone off and was rude

Tourrett's syndrome comes to mind.

My contention is that
God only knows what a person will or will not do.

The parents job is to rear the child the best that they can-- teach him/her right from wrong.

If the child turns out to be dangerous and murderous, society will deal with them. No pre-emptive strikes by the parents.

The defense will now rest. No one needs to agree with me.

Abe F. March wrote:

There has been numerous references to Hitler as a tyrant and an evil man. I was wondering what would happen if someone came up with a title to a book that made Hitler look good. It would certainly get attention.
"Hitler was not as bad as people think." (Huh?)
"The good that Hitler did." (one can almost see the dander rising)
"Hitler had a good heart." (well, it did beat)
Can you think of other absurd title that would grab attention?

Abe, are you familiar with the work of Alice Miller? Much of her work is now available online, including the entire book, For Your Own Good, where she tells the story of Hitler's childhood, and his relationshop with his father:

http://www.nospank.net/fyog13.htm#introduction

Quote :

My desire to learn more about Adolf Hitler's childhood did not emerge until I began to write this book, and it took me quite by surprise. The immediate occasion was the realization that my belief, based upon my experience as an analyst, that human destructiveness is a reactive (and not an innate) phenomenon either would be confirmed by the case of Adolf Hitler or--if Erich Fromm and others are right--would have to be completely revised. This question was important enough for me to try to answer, although I was very skeptical at first that I would be able to summon up empathy for this human being, whom I consider the worst criminal I have ever known of. Empathy, i.e., in this case the attempt to identify with the perspective of the child himself and not to judge him through adult eyes, is my sole heuristic tool, and without it, the whole investigation would be pointless. I was relieved to discover that for the purposes of my study I was successful in keeping this tool intact and was able to regard Hitler as a human being.

Alice, he physically harmed anyone smaller or weaker than himself in every way possible - hitting them, kicking them in the head and kidneys, rubbing dirt in their eyes, shoving worms in their mouths, almost anything you can think of. Mentally, he did tremendous damage to many.
No dog or cat or any other animal was safe when he was around. He didn't just kill them, he tortured them until they died in agony.
About 10 years later we had another one like that here. His name was Jeffery Dahmer. He grew to maturity.

Thank you, Dick, He should have been locked up. His parents should have committed him.

They couldn't have kept him locked up forever. And what about the other inmates? Would he have been their teacher?

E. Don Harpe wrote:

... Shelagh, I can honestly say that the circumstances under which my child killed someone would dictate whether or not I stood by them.

Whereas you are making a literal statement, the mother was speaking figuratively -- she knew she would never find herself in that situation to know exactly how she would react but she was expressing her willingness to be there for her child in the most extreme circumstances.

Dick Stodghill wrote:

They couldn't have kept him locked up forever. And what about the other inmates? Would he have been their teacher?

He fits the criteria perfectly for a mental commitment. He might have stayed locked up forever.

I don't think they would have him teaching anything.

Go away for a day and look what I've missed!

The problem isn't with any one individual (i.e., Hitler, et. al.), it's with what society will allow and what they accept as "normal." Killing people is unacceptable. When society decrees that it's okay to kill someone if they are ________ (fill in the blank), where does it stop? Who decides? It may start as something that seems reasonable to many and ends up with all people with blue eyes must be killed. It sounds ridiculous, but once the pendulum starts to swing, how will we stop it?

This reminds me of the following quote (I think it is paraphrased, I just snagged the first Google quote I could find, but you get the gist):

"When they came for the Jews, I did nothing, for I am not a Jew. When they came for the Socialists, I did nothing, for I am not a Socialist. When they came for the labor leaders, the homosexuals, the gypsies, I did nothing, for I am none of these, and when they came for me, I was alone, there was no one to stand up for me."
-- Martin Niemoller, a Lutheran pastor from Nazi Germany

It's an excellent quote, Merri, where or whenever you found it.

Ann

Good News! Dave agrees with me.

He does not adovcate the killing of chidlren.
In gratitude for his opinions I will allow him to visit our grandchildren.

It is a good quote, Merri, it's also an old one. Many people over the years have used it to justify a lot of different things. I personally have used it on message boards, and probably will continue to do so.

The question of whether to kill or not is also very old, and is never resolved. Those against killing remain against it, and those if favor of it remain in favor of it, regardless of the points made by the other side.

I am one of those who think that some people, by their actions, have no right to continue living, and I see getting rid of them as being beneficial to society as a whole. They say that the death penalty does not deter others from commintting the same crime, but I know for a fact that the one who is put to death will never harm another human being. That works for me.

I imagine that the Jekell and Hyde premise is true. Each of us has the propensity for great goodness or great evil. It really is a chemical matter. Sometimes a 'decent' upbringing has not one thing to do with the set of a mind and Hyde will arrive early or late. As much as I would like to think that evil does not exist, it does. It is a human fact.

Animals other than humans are not afflicted with evil. I know that is true.

Love,
Betty

Although the desire to put an early end to things like the Holocaust would be strong, I would be afraid of changing the course of history and only making things worse.

If I did not have that worry, I think I would choose an axe as a preferred weapon for Hitler.

In the past, I have been able to control murderous instincts by considering the consequences. It would simply not be worth it. Not even when beaten did I ever do more than toy with the idea.

Darwin's theory of evolution would suggest that our behavioural patterns are predetermined for the greater good -- including all the evil people in the world since humans first evolved. The majority of humans are content to do very little and only a few are born with a desire to change the world. These few become leaders, form armies and attack their neighbours.

Humans are at their most inventive when under attack -- they learned over the years how to build castles that would be difficult to destroy -- it took millions of years of evolution to get to that stage. We have been building "castles" ever since.

If homes are bombed, communities destroyed, all hope seemingly gone, the human spirit rises up and refuses to be defeated.

If we removed all evil from the Earth we might still very well be living in caves.

Shelagh said:

Quote :

If we removed all evil from the Earth we might still very well be living in caves.

Jung would say we each have a Shadow, and that we are more likely to be guided by it if we repress it rather than admitting it exists and bringing it into our consciousness. When we are capable of committing evil but choose not to, we are better than when we deny the possibility and project the evil in us onto others, which gives us permission to retaliate. Kind of like Betty and Zada said in their posts.

Ann

Betty, Shelagh, Zada, and Ann,

s

I agree. I liked Betty's Jekyll and Hydd, Zada's making choices, Ann's shadow people, and Shelagh's castle analogy.

Years ago, I had a man in a group who was dying of cancer. He felt his insurance company had kept him from getting life saving treatment, and was extremely angry as you might expect. He told us what he did with the anger. Every night before he went to sleep, he would go over his "plan." He told us a very involved plan, a story that went on for about ten minutes, and everyone sat fascinated. I can still remember it, but believe me it was years ago and it never occurred. We knew it wouldn't, but in his mind it was real and it was his revenge. But like Zada, he knew deep down he could choose, and that choice was what gave him some power and control over his life. It wasn't the consequences for him, because what did that matter, but it was the consequences for others, he knew he did not want to leave.

Ill people like Jeffrey Dahmer sometimes seem to feel they have no choice. I remember listening to his words at his trial, that he was glad he had been caught, glad that someone had finally stopped him.

Carol

For Pete's sake, Alice, you must know how it works in any lockup. Those locked up teach each other. It isn't those in charge who do the teaching. What would you have done with Dahmer when he was torturing and killing animals? Told him it wasn't nice to do that or waited until he lured a stranger to his home and killed him, which he did? Whether you like to admit it or not there are some purely evil people in the world, including kids. Merely lock them up and they will infect all those around them. It happens all the time. Prisons are finishing schools for criminals. Being locked up with Lamm taught Dillinger and Pierpont how to rob banks.

As for killing always being wrong, what about those in the military? The sole purpose of an army is to kill. I'm not trying to defend myself by asking that because I don't care. But blanket statements don't cover every situation.

Dick,


I won't belabor the point. Killling in the military is different. I see it as a self-defense action. Kill or be killled.

Parents are supposed to protect and train their childlren

Medical help should have been sought. This child was severely deranged and mentally ill. He was grossly neglected and then killed? All of those folks should not have suffered because of him. At the first indication of this extreme cruelty he should have been evaluated .

Look, we don't need to agree on this. I am a mother who feels guilty for occasionally spanking her kids.--how would I live with myself if I had killed them?

As far as confinement goes --there is solitary.

You don't need to agree with me. I still admire and like you..

I feel bad about Rotten Ronnie and his folks, This is a tragedy.

I was wrong to post on this thread. I am a former schoolboard Chairperson and sat on Personnel Committee meetings. I am a child's advocate.

Don't be mad at me--I am not mad at you. Okay?

When we opened our mental health clinic in our small town, it wasn't that we were going to cure all the community ills. My father thought it was sad that we were doing so well, that there were so many problems. I told him the problems were always there and we were offering an option for people to deal with them. Not everyone can be helped and there were people who came there on deferred prosecution and some could be helped and others I said were merely on "delayed prosecution." And you know I also don't think parents are all powerful.

Dick, I wish you hadn't had to go and fight. I wish so many had not died in all wars. Adding all those numbers who died in all wars in the last two centuries is unbelievable. I honor you for your courage. I honor you for being part of an operation that brought down a tyrant. It is too bad Hitler hadn't drowned as a child. My gratitude to you and others is great. Who knows what would have happened without the war.

And the real tragedy in the story, is the tragedy to the family, the death of the father. What if the boy shot his father and then himself? Still tragic, and in essence that is what happened. The father was the victim, not the victor. The mother was the victim as well as all the other relatives. I have known people whose deaths were tragedies, but whose lives were more tragic.

Another thing to consider about rotten Ronnie, Alice: This was how long ago and what kind of help was available at the time? Society has made great strides in the past few decades.

Carol, we posted at the same time! Your words hold much wisdome, and I am also sorry Dick had to serve. I am very grateful he was able to return, and it was good the tyrant was defeated.

Alice, I could never get mad at you.

Actually there were good facilities for trying to cope with evil kids at the time. They couldn't cope with Ronnie.
As for the military, I'm not a bit sorry about being a rifleman. I even volunteered to do it again. I'm glad I had the experience but now I've had enough of it. Count me out unless the enemy comes banging on my door.

Dick,

Thank you--I like you. You already knew that though.