TOTALLY GEEKED!

Squeakers wrote:

---

I've read he has a history of violence and was on anti psychotics.

---

 If he had committed a crime--then this kid maybe should have been locked up--although, depending on the severity of the crime, he wouldn't be locked up permanently in any case. 

We just can't predict with 100% accuracy who will commit a violent crime.

Not every bed-wetter is going to go on to murder people. Not every kid who ever killed a cat is going to go on to kill people.

We just can't imprison for life people who "might" do something bad. The justice system simply does not work that way.

Squeakers wrote:

---

I don't know if I nexessarily agree. I don't want to lock up all the crazies but there should be an option for parents who know their child is dangerous to act BEFORE someone is dead.

---

But even they don't "know" for certain until the violent act occurs.  

No but maybe it could get the kid in prison for true mental health help. That seems to be what needs to happen before these children seriously get the help they need.

Squeakers wrote:

---

No but maybe it could get the kid in prison for true mental health help. That seems to be what needs to happen before these children seriously get the help they need.

---

But someone said earlier there is no "cure" for this.  I'm not sure they aren't right. 

 

Sure, lock them up for a few years--but there is no guarantee they won't be a danger after you let them out.

 

So, the alternatives are either to keep someone in prison for life because they "might" do something bad--or you have what we have now. 

 

Sometimes there just isn't an answer.   

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Squeakers wrote:

---

No but maybe it could get the kid in prison for true mental health help. That seems to be what needs to happen before these children seriously get the help they need.

---

 I agree.  It gets them help where there is none  otherwise.  But if you don't want to do that just leave them all alone and let them grow up to kill dozens of people.  Hey, we have choices.  Then everyone will scream about why the kid wasn't helped and nothing was done earlier.  That's right.  It's easier to just complain.

---

 You assume something CAN be done.

 

There is no guarantee that anything done will prevent future violent acts.  Again, there is no way to predict that.

 

 

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Squeakers wrote:

---

I don't know if I nexessarily agree. I don't want to lock up all the crazies but there should be an option for parents who know their child is dangerous to act BEFORE someone is dead.

---

 This.  Adam Lanza's parents knew their son was a danger but had no outlet where they could have him locked up.  Not only did they know, they had him in treatment, he was on meds, etc.  Many other parents have similar issues with their kids, but beyond school counselors and therapists, they have no help.  Often, they keep the kid in their homes into adulthood at which point they are killed by that "kid".  Has happened 4 times in the past 3 months in the Boston area.  I am sure it happens a lot more.

---

But for every Adam Lanza, there are 20 kids with the same issues who don't carry out violence.  

 

There is just no mechanism for locking up people for what they "might" do--nor should there be.   

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Squeakers wrote:

---

I don't know if I nexessarily agree. I don't want to lock up all the crazies but there should be an option for parents who know their child is dangerous to act BEFORE someone is dead.

---

 This.  Adam Lanza's parents knew their son was a danger but had no outlet where they could have him locked up.  Not only did they know, they had him in treatment, he was on meds, etc.  Many other parents have similar issues with their kids, but beyond school counselors and therapists, they have no help.  Often, they keep the kid in their homes into adulthood at which point they are killed by that "kid".  Has happened 4 times in the past 3 months in the Boston area.  I am sure it happens a lot more.

---

But for every Adam Lanza, there are 20 kids with the same issues who don't carry out violence.  

 

There is just no mechanism for locking up people for what they "might" do--nor should there be.   

---

 Seriously?  Umm no, they all do.  Perhaps they are stopped dead in their tracks so it doesn't make national news. but they are out there and just as dangerous.  And there should be a "mechanism' for locking up crazies.  It is not difficult to know who those 'crazies" are that are dangerous.

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Squeakers wrote:

---

I don't know if I nexessarily agree. I don't want to lock up all the crazies but there should be an option for parents who know their child is dangerous to act BEFORE someone is dead.

---

 This.  Adam Lanza's parents knew their son was a danger but had no outlet where they could have him locked up.  Not only did they know, they had him in treatment, he was on meds, etc.  Many other parents have similar issues with their kids, but beyond school counselors and therapists, they have no help.  Often, they keep the kid in their homes into adulthood at which point they are killed by that "kid".  Has happened 4 times in the past 3 months in the Boston area.  I am sure it happens a lot more.

---

But for every Adam Lanza, there are 20 kids with the same issues who don't carry out violence.  

 

There is just no mechanism for locking up people for what they "might" do--nor should there be.   

---

 Seriously?  Umm no, they all do.  Perhaps they are stopped dead in their tracks so it doesn't make national news. but they are out there and just as dangerous.  And there should be a "mechanism' for locking up crazies.  It is not difficult to know who those 'crazies" are that are dangerous.

---

????  Yes, it is.  We can't predict with 100% certainty--hell not even 10% certainty who will commit a crime or who won't--even if there are all the "signs" in the world.  Not even the most trained criminal psychologist would make such a claim.   

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Everybody keeps talking about killing cats or other animals. Is there ANY evidence this kid did any of those things?

---

There isn't--so that blows one theory. 

 

 

When in doubt, just keep bringing it up as if it is true.

PotteryChick wrote:

---

IKWTDS, I agree with everything you've posted here.

---

 Thanks, some think I am a cold hearted person, fact is I care, and I know there are people who need to be locked up and parents who are at a loss as to what to do and are on their own.

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

I have repeatedly said, that means OVER AND OVER AGAIN in case you don't know the meaning of repeatedly, that THIS KID hasn't killed any animals TO MY KNOWLEDGE. That doesn't mean he hasn't and we don't know. I also said REPEATEDLY that killing animals is JUST ONE SIGN OF MENTAL ILLNESS. THERE ARE MANY. I was using that one thing as an example. Would you like me to list them all?

---

So if a person shows ONE sign of mental illness we should lock them up for life?  

I think if a kid is killing animals, NOT THAT THIS KID DID!, then they need help whether or not they exhibit any other signs or not. Killing people/things is not normal. There are many signs. I think EXPERTS know the signs to look for and know whether someone is a danger. I think it should be a combination decision by the parents and doctor. Unless, of course, the doctor feels the child is in danger of doing immediate harm to themselves or someone. Maybe one sign is enough to lock them up a long long time. Maybe you need six or seven. I guess it would depend on what the signs were, how bad they were, and how many were present. I don't think there's a clear cut case. But yes, if all my kid did was intentionally kill animals, you better believe I'd be getting them help.

Let's just all admit that husker is right and the rest of society is wrong. All those parents who KNEW their kids had problems and tried to get help were wrong. They didn't REALLY know. NO ONE can know. I mean even the parents who WARNED people their kids were going to do this were wrong.

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Let's just all admit that husker is right and the rest of society is wrong. All those parents who KNEW their kids had problems and tried to get help were wrong. They didn't REALLY know. NO ONE can know. I mean even the parents who WARNED people their kids were going to do this were wrong.

---

Actually, the rest of society agrees with me. 

There is no mechanism for locking people up for any appreciable length of time because we think they "might" do something.    

huskerbb wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Let's just all admit that husker is right and the rest of society is wrong. All those parents who KNEW their kids had problems and tried to get help were wrong. They didn't REALLY know. NO ONE can know. I mean even the parents who WARNED people their kids were going to do this were wrong.

---

Actually, the rest of society agrees with me. 

There is no mechanism for locking people up for any appreciable length of time because we think they "might" do something.    

---

 How arrogant. the "rest" society does not necessarily agree with you. There are signs to a seriously disturbed child.  Therapists and school counselor's hand's are tied due to the lack of support from our gov't, the one area they should take a stand on and allow the asylums to be re-established.  Do you not get that parents who have bad seeds know they have bad seeds but have no where to turn?  I get it.  I am so grateful none of my kids are bad seeds, but if they were I would be searching for help.

PotteryChick wrote:

---

I would be interested in knowing how many counselors in my town offer pre-serial killer therapy. My guess is none. They could send me to the nearest city 80 miles away, maybe they have pre-serial killer assistance programs for parents.

---

 You have mocked me on several threads now.  I don't really appreciate it.  You talk very condescendingly to me.  I don't think there are "pre serial killer therapists".  So go ahead and make fun of me.  I do think there are therapists out there who recognize issues with kids.  Again, talk condescendingly to me if you wish but there are people out there that work with kids that recognize these behaviors.  Maybe not in your town, maybe not in most small towns, but they do exist.

It wasn't directed at you. It wasnt even mocking.

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Oh, and if the parents were so sure their kid was going to do this--why didn't they stop it?

---

 And how would you suggest they stop it?  You have all the answers. please solve solve it for us.

---

I said previously that sometimes there are no easy solutions. 

 

Not every ill in society can be solved.  

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Let's just all admit that husker is right and the rest of society is wrong. All those parents who KNEW their kids had problems and tried to get help were wrong. They didn't REALLY know. NO ONE can know. I mean even the parents who WARNED people their kids were going to do this were wrong.

---

Actually, the rest of society agrees with me. 

There is no mechanism for locking people up for any appreciable length of time because we think they "might" do something.    

---

 How arrogant. the "rest" society does not necessarily agree with you. There are signs to a seriously disturbed child.  Therapists and school counselor's hand's are tied due to the lack of support from our gov't, the one area they should take a stand on and allow the asylums to be re-established.  Do you not get that parents who have bad seeds know they have bad seeds but have no where to turn?  I get it.  I am so grateful none of my kids are bad seeds, but if they were I would be searching for help.

---

OK, the MAJORITY of the rest of society agrees with me.  That's why we no longer lock people up for what they "might" do.   

---

 Really?  You have data?  stats? on that?  or are you just being Husker where you arrogantly think everyone else have your same opinion?

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

PotteryChick wrote:

---

It wasn't directed at you. It wasnt even mocking.

---

 It came off as mocking.  To more than just me. 

---

 I didn't mean it to be mocking.  Sorry.

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Let's just all admit that husker is right and the rest of society is wrong. All those parents who KNEW their kids had problems and tried to get help were wrong. They didn't REALLY know. NO ONE can know. I mean even the parents who WARNED people their kids were going to do this were wrong.

---

Actually, the rest of society agrees with me. 

There is no mechanism for locking people up for any appreciable length of time because we think they "might" do something.    

---

 How arrogant. the "rest" society does not necessarily agree with you. There are signs to a seriously disturbed child.  Therapists and school counselor's hand's are tied due to the lack of support from our gov't, the one area they should take a stand on and allow the asylums to be re-established.  Do you not get that parents who have bad seeds know they have bad seeds but have no where to turn?  I get it.  I am so grateful none of my kids are bad seeds, but if they were I would be searching for help.

---

OK, the MAJORITY of the rest of society agrees with me.  That's why we no longer lock people up for what they "might" do.   

---

 Really?  You have data?  stats? on that?  or are you just being Husker where you arrogantly think everyone else have your same opinion?

---

Um, I'm using a thing called REALITY.

Maybe you live in some alternate universe where we can lock people up for what they "might" do--but that's NOT the way it ACTUALLY IS here in the U.S. in 2014. 

If a majority were not in agreement--the laws would be changed.   

---

 So what you are actually saying is you have no proof, just your opinion and assume many others have that same opinion. Yep get your type.

---

 LOL!!!  The proof is what the law actually IS. 

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Our laws are failing people left and right.

---

That could be. 

 

I don't think it's good for a society to simply lock people up for crimes they "might" commit, though. 

Are there some unfortunate consequences to that? Sure.

 

But there would be unfortunate consequences the other way, too--namely locking people up for years or even decades who have committed no crime.