The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

12 year old girl shot dead by 9 year old brother over video game controller

gsdx said:
Oh, undoubtedly. And it would be interesting to see how the parents deal with it as well.
Click to expand...

Oooooh, I don't think they'll be dealing well. And there should probably be people coming in to check on the kid and parents at intervals, make sure the parents aren't directing their own failing and misery on the boy.
 
aristomaniac said:
9 year olds, while still should be developing their sense of morals, ought to know right from wrong with the more severe offenses. Sure, they still struggle with knowing that lying is wrong. But surely, a 9 year old ought to know that there is no recourse from killing his sister?
Click to expand...

I see you used the word recourse. What makes you think that 9 year olds have a firm grasp of long-term results? All children not properly minded have the probability of doing all sorts of nasty, dangerous things; - and the long-term results are not what 9 year olds tend to ponder during rage.

If they're having difficulty figuring out when lieing is wrong during everyday situations they're unlikely to be able to consider longer term effects during heat-of-the-moment. A progression of thought is involved that children are far from always privy to.*

*Not that adults always are but we've got a much firmer grasp than kiddlet relatives no matter how intelligent said relatives are.
 
I guess I don’t have much faith in a 9 year old knowing better from a family who leaves their gun lying around to where he is able to get said gun to kill his sister over a video game controller.

I mean I don’t think 9 year olds are dumb or anything or don’t understand, I actually tend to believe children are smarter than we give them credit for.

Though again, we have teenagers who throw things off overpasses that kill drivers because of the impact of the object. Maybe I’m talking about more of knowing better before you do something like this, rather then right from wrong. Either way I would still think that generally most 9 year olds are not going to know right from wrong, especially in situations like this. Or at the very least, understand the ramifications of their actions to prevent them from doing something like this in the first place.

Part of knowing right from wrong is understand why something is “right” and something is “wrong.”
 
MakeDigitalLove said:
I mean I don’t think 9 year olds are dumb or anything or don’t understand, I actually tend to believe children are smarter than we give them credit for.
Click to expand...

Eh, I think they're about as knowledgeable in their actions as we give 'em credit for, which often gets confused with how intelligent we consider 'em as individuals when contrasted with the group's overall unlikeliness/inability to have a broad, personal knowledge base to draw from and impulse control issues.
 
luckynumbah7 said:
I see you used the word recourse. What makes you think that 9 year olds have a firm grasp of long-term results? All children not properly minded have the probability of doing all sorts of nasty, dangerous things; - and the long-term results are not what 9 year olds tend to ponder during rage.

If they're having difficulty figuring out when lieing is wrong during everyday situations they're unlikely to be able to consider longer term effects during heat-of-the-moment. A progression of thought is involved that children are far from always privy to.*

*Not that adults always are but we've got a much firmer grasp than kiddlet relatives no matter how intelligent said relatives are.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said there. Which is why I think better care should have been taken to keep that gun out of the reach of that 9 year old.

I'm not saying a 9 year old will be able to go through the thought process for the ramifications and long term results of shooting his sister in the back of the head. But at the same time, I do believe they are capable of thinking at least one step ahead, which is that killing his sister is not a good thing.

As I mentioned before, I have 9 nephews and nieces. I babysat most of them and watched them grow up. I was always aware of what they understood where the limits were for most things. Would I have trusted any of them at that age with a gun? Absolutely not! But at the same time, I trust that had they gotten their hands on a gun that there was very little chance they would have pointed the gun at me or anyone else with the intent to kill.
 
aristomaniac said:
But at the same time, I trust that had they gotten their hands on a gun that there was very little chance they would have pointed the gun at me or anyone else with the intent to kill.
Click to expand...

See, I do not. It's the whole 'intent to kill thing' where you're losing me. There's often no intent beyond the moment and killing is generally not the goal. The goal in this case was to get a controller; the slaughter was secondary. When a kid gets their hands on an unlocked, out in the openish weapon it always seems to be either in a fit of rage or as an 'investigative procedure'/play'. Neither of those situations by their nature indicate the unlikeliness of someone being shot. And since intent doesn't matter to a bullet and children generally don't 'plan' these kinds of atrocities I don't see that a 9yr old's emotional intent is particularly relevant when there's such a weapon accessible.
 
luckynumbah7 said:
There's often no intent beyond the moment and killing is generally not the goal. The goal in this case was to get a controller; the slaughter was secondary.
Click to expand...

And there is the one-step-ahead thinking process of the average child. You'd have to consider the affects of shooting itself instead of 'the controller is free' to get to a second-step-ahead thought process.
 
luckynumbah7 said:
See, I do not. It's the whole 'intent to kill thing' where you're losing me. There's often no intent beyond the moment and killing is generally not the goal. The goal in this case was to get a controller; the slaughter was secondary. When a kid gets their hands on an unlocked, out in the openish weapon it always seems to be either in a fit of rage or as an 'investigative procedure'/play'. Neither of those situations by their nature indicate the unlikeliness of someone being shot. And since intent doesn't matter to a bullet and children generally don't 'plan' these kinds of atrocities I don't see that a 9yr old's emotional intent is particularly relevant when there's such a weapon accessible.
Click to expand...

Which is why I have said several times that children of that age ought to be able to think at least one step ahead. We are talking about 9 year old's here, not 4 year olds.
 
aristomaniac said:
Which is why I have said several times that children of that age ought to be able to think at least one step ahead. We are talking about 9 year old's here, not 4 year olds.
Click to expand...

There are age of criminal responsibility laws in most countries. Such laws assume that if the child is over the age set, it understands the difference between right and wrong. In many countries, 9 years old would be old enough to go to court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_infancy
 
aristomaniac said:
Which is why I have said several times that children of that age ought to be able to think at least one step ahead. We are talking about 9 year old's here, not 4 year olds.
Click to expand...

That was one step ahead for a kid's thought processes. There's the thought and then there's the step. "What do I want -> what could I do to get it". Multiple possible actions often don't occur to them and the consequences of 'what can I do to get it" often don't surface unless they think to think of them; it's partly why children are considered mindlessly cruel as a group. And there's usually no great breadth of usable personal history that pops to the fore in those limited thought processes, either - that's why they're limited.

We have different 'one steps ahead'. You're giving too many children entirely too much credit regarding impulse control and thinking through actions, emotional and otherwise.
 
aristomaniac said:
Forgive me, but a 9 year old ought to already know right from wrong.
Click to expand...
A 9 year old child might understand that a bullet comes out the end of a gun and hurts a person, but they lack the comprehension of long term ramifications. No understanding of the finality of death.
 
mikey3000 said:
A 9 year old child might understand that a bullet comes out the end of a gun and hurts a person, but they lack the comprehension of long term ramifications. No understanding of the finality of death.
Click to expand...

I agree to disagree. 9 year olds aren't idiots.
 
Maybe all the guns deaths in America
should be under 1 title because the deaths sounds cheap because it happens all the time. The title is

"AMERICAN GUN DEATHS"
 
aristomaniac said:
I agree to disagree. 9 year olds aren't idiots.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with intelligence as it's usually conceptualized.

All 'common sense' is, is the ability to catalog and recognize general trends with cause/effect. But you need a lot to do that, or you risk doing it ineffectively. An adultish brain would be a start, and 9 doesn't have it. A wealth of personal history to draw upon would also be good; they don't have that, either. The 9 yr old likely lacks these at any given point from many angles as the buggers are still learning how to think - kids aren't known for their rational reflections during emotional situations. In fact, they're not known for reflection 'before the fact' at all. They haven't been shown to have the ability to reliably understand or recall consequences with what I'd consider having an adult (that is, a firm) grasp on reality. A lot of them have a lot of 'basics'. None of them have enough basics to be considered not a probable hazard to themselves and others.
 
An excellent post lucky.

If there is to be any justice in this case, then it should be directed to the parents who left a loaded handgun within easy reach of a child, social services and the police should be hauling their sorry arse's into court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top