This kid has no conscience

[Mirrorglass]

How would you predict that a specific individual would do something like this? And what specificity would you do to prevent it?

First of all, who ever said anything about "this specific individual"? There are a lot of things that can be done on a large scale to pre-empt crime. Things such as making firearms more difficult to get, building adequate social safety nets, offering work or other means to survive, offering proper education, offering medical examinations to young people..

And the last few of those would actually have gone a long way towards preventing this specific crime, as well. Given that the boy had already been convicted of a crime, there was ample reason to wonder about his mental health; was any support offered to him upon his release? What was his childhood like, and did social workers make sure he had everything a child needs?

I don't think anyone is claiming such social support in America is adequate (it isn't in Scandinavia, either), and in my opinion, that is what this case is about. Not "scumbag murders two and smiles" but "sick kid is left to run free, ends up a murderer".

It's easy to talk about how society is responsible in some vague indeterminate way. But don't you think that society also has a responsibility to people that manage to run their lives without murdering convenience store clerks?
I don't think it's fair to others in the society to roll the dice and hope if you turn him loose he doesn't repeat something similar. The reality is, that if you permanently lock this person up, this specific individual can't be a danger to others.

I'm not saying he should just go free. Of course society has to play it safe.

But "lock him up and throw away the key"? What are, we, Romans? And how is 20-30 years of therapy followed by carefully supervised parole, if psychiatrists judge the man to be safe, then, in any way similar to "rolling the dice and turning him loose"?

The problem is that people view these things as black and white. Bad person kill, bad person go away forever. No more baddie. Me must be safe now! Only it doesn't work that way. "Bad" people are often sick people, and sick people can sometimes heal. And even if you don't care about healing a sick person, it's also better for everyone in the long run to treat people like they're human.

Anyway, my issue isn't just with this case; it's idiotic to judge someone with no chance of parole, but that probably can't be helped. What annoys me is people speaking as if this was some kind of a victory for justice. Like hell it was. A boy is going to prison for the rest of his life. It's a tragedy, and people should be angry because it has to be done, not happy because it will be.

 

[Cainkane1]

First of all, who ever said anything about "this specific individual"? There are a lot of things that can be done on a large scale to pre-empt crime. Things such as making firearms more difficult to get, building adequate social safety nets, offering work or other means to survive, offering proper education, offering medical examinations to young people..

And the last few of those would actually have gone a long way towards preventing this specific crime, as well. Given that the boy had already been convicted of a crime, there was ample reason to wonder about his mental health; was any support offered to him upon his release? What was his childhood like, and did social workers make sure he had everything a child needs?

I don't think anyone is claiming such social support in America is adequate (it isn't in Scandinavia, either), and in my opinion, that is what this case is about. Not "scumbag murders two and smiles" but "sick kid is left to run free, ends up a murderer".



I'm not saying he should just go free. Of course society has to play it safe.

But "lock him up and throw away the key"? What are, we, Romans? And how is 20-30 years of therapy followed by carefully supervised parole, if psychiatrists judge the man to be safe, then, in any way similar to "rolling the dice and turning him loose"?

The problem is that people view these things as black and white. Bad person kill, bad person go away forever. No more baddie. Me must be safe now! Only it doesn't work that way. "Bad" people are often sick people, and sick people can sometimes heal. And even if you don't care about healing a sick person, it's also better for everyone in the long run to treat people like they're human.

Anyway, my issue isn't just with this case; it's idiotic to judge someone with no chance of parole, but that probably can't be helped. What annoys me is people speaking as if this was some kind of a victory for justice. Like hell it was. A boy is going to prison for the rest of his life. It's a tragedy, and people should be angry because it has to be done, not happy because it will be.

I hate to keep bringing up the name Randy Dobbs but this kid who killed a pizza delivery girl for a joyride in her van was actually seeing a psychiatrist once a month. He was a violent juvenile offender and his parents were trying to help him. It didn't work. He killed the girl anyway.

Putting a teenager in prison for life is tragic but the protection of society comes first and society needs it object lessons to prevent other punks like this for murdering someone else.

There is a such thing as deserved punishment. Having a psychiatrist sitting down with this little monster and trying various therapies sounds great but theres a problem. There exists a variety of criminal that isn't stupid. They are just mean as hell. Randy Dobbs wasn't stupid as he made average to decent grades in school. He just enjoyed hurting people and I don't believe any amount of therapy would stop him from wanting to do harm to someone else. He enjoyed it too much. The mental image I have of the kid in my OP is the same vibe I have about Randy Dobbs. The kid lied about killing those clerks to keep them from identifying him. He did it because he enjoyed it and he's laughing and joking to the newsmen because he wants to do further hurt to society. If you can't execute him and Iowa has no death penalty then keep him locked up and never release him.

 

[Mirrorglass]

I hate to keep bringing up the name Randy Dobbs but this kid who killed a pizza delivery girl for a joyride in her van was actually seeing a psychiatrist once a month. He was a violent juvenile offender and his parents were trying to help him. It didn't work. He killed the girl anyway.

So? Does this prove psychotherapy is never worth it? Nothing is foolproof. Does that mean we shouldn't even try?

There are people who escape from prisons and kill, so couldn't I argue that sentencing the kid to jail is useless, too?

 

[dtugg]

It is not a tragedy that a scumbag murderer is going to prison for the rest of his life. The tragedy is that he murdered two people over a small amount of money and some cigarettes. Thankfully, however, America doesn't coddle pieces of **** like him so he won't get a chance to repeat his crimes.

 

[Cainkane1]

So? Does this prove psychotherapy is never worth it? Nothing is foolproof. Does that mean we shouldn't even try?

There are people who escape from prisons and kill, so couldn't I argue that sentencing the kid to jail is useless, too?

Trying psychotherapy is fine and dandy but do you want to put society at risk by releasing this kid? Sure it may be possible to rehabilitate this murderer but what about the risk to society? I hate to keep bringing this up but society and the lives of innocent people come first.

Like I said there exists a type of person who isn't stupid just mean as hell and they can lie and tell a psychiatrist what they want to hear. Why should we risk releasing him when we don't know for sure he's cured?

You also have to take into account the feelings of the victims family. The killer sitting in jail may give a measure of comfort which they deserve. No need to molly coddle him. Lock him up and keep him out of society till he dies.

 

[sgtbaker]

I hate to keep bringing up the name Randy Dobbs but this kid who killed a pizza delivery girl for a joyride in her van was actually seeing a psychiatrist once a month. He was a violent juvenile offender and his parents were trying to help him. It didn't work. He killed the girl anyway.

I am not judging the parents because there are many reasons why he was only seeing a psychiatrist once a month but if his behavior was attributed to a disorder; sociapathy, conduct disorder, etc, a once a month visit just won't cut it. Of course, therapy and medications aren't a guarantee but for behavioral issues and social disoders to even have a chance, one would need behavioral therapy, cognative therapy, anger management courses, etc. Sorry but it's no surprise that once a month therapy failed, in that case.

 

[Cainkane1]

I am not judging the parents because there are many reasons why he was only seeing a psychiatrist once a month but if his behavior was attributed to a disorder; sociapathy, conduct disorder, etc, a once a month visit just won't cut it. Of course, therapy and medications aren't a guarantee but for behavioral issues and social disoders to even have a chance, one would need behavioral therapy, cognative therapy, anger management courses, etc. Sorry but it's no surprise that once a month therapy failed, in that case.

I seriously doubt if Randy Dobbs was on medication. Just because you prescribe medication doesn't mean they will take it. Psychiatric patients are known for not taking their meds.

People like the punk in the OP and Randy Dobbs feel great about themselves. Kicking some body after they knock them down gives these kids the same feeling of accomplishment as another more decent kid would get say for winning a trophy for the best model car. Hurting people is what they enjoy doing. Its their hobby.

They resist psychotherapy because it goes against their nature and deprives them of their greatest pleasure. Do you really want someone like this walking around free?

 

[Rolfe]

It is not a tragedy that a scumbag murderer is going to prison for the rest of his life. The tragedy is that he murdered two people over a small amount of money and some cigarettes. Thankfully, however, America doesn't coddle pieces of **** like him so he won't get a chance to repeat his crimes.

But are your chances of being a victim of that sort of crime significantly less in America compared to places where you do think this "coddling" goes on? I'm genuinely curious.

Rolfe.

 

[dtugg]

But are your chances of being a victim of that sort of crime significantly less in America compared to places where you do think this "coddling" goes on? I'm genuinely curious.

Rolfe.

I think you know that the murder rate is higher in the USA than it is other civilized countries. Not that this proves anything besides that we have a worse crime problem.

Anyway, there is a zero percent chance that I would be murdered by a scumbag that is locked up forever (unless he escapes). There is a non zero percent chance that I would be murdered by a scumbag who is coddled and released.

 

[chillzero]

What do you have to say against the fact that if this monster is in prison for the rest of its life it cannot murder any more convenience store clerks for a little bit of money and some cigarettes again?

Having a psychiatrist sitting down with this little monster and trying various therapies sounds great but theres a problem.

'It' is not a monster.
He is a human being.

This is part of the issue with dealing with these kinds of things. People feel a need to dissassociate from perpetrators by labelling them as something else ... something less than human. What this does is imply that there is something different about these people that can be seen, and the truth is more complex, otherwise they could be stopped beforehand.

 

[Cainkane1]

'It' is not a monster.
He is a human being.

This is part of the issue with dealing with these kinds of things. People feel a need to dissassociate from perpetrators by labelling them as something else ... something less than human. What this does is imply that there is something different about these people that can be seen, and the truth is more complex, otherwise they could be stopped beforehand.

Define monster. The Websters dictionary defines a monster seven ways. The sixth definition says A person who excites horror by wickedness. Cruelty etc. Ok so by that definition he is a monster. A human monster. He's a human moonster who needs to be "permanently" removed from society.

He won't be executed. He can read the papers, books and magazines and watch TV and listen to radio. If he can adjust to life in prison the way Charles Manson did he won't even be sexually deprived. The foods crappy but he looks like a McDonalds eater anyway. Quit worrying about him and start worrying about the victims famiilys and friends and of coourse worry about society if he ever gets out of prison.

 

[Vic Vega]

So? Does this prove psychotherapy is never worth it? Nothing is foolproof. Does that mean we shouldn't even try?

Never worth it? It depends on who we are talking about. If it's the person being discussed here, probably not. If he is what he appears to be (a sociopath), then there is no treatment. Psychotherapy is ineffective for that condition.

 

[Cainkane1]

Never worth it? It depends on who we are talking about. If it's the person being discussed here, probably not. If he is what he appears to be (a sociopath), then there is no treatment. Psychotherapy is ineffective for that condition.

I can't stress this enough. They don't want to be treated for what society perceives to be their mental disorder. They don't want to change. They like themselves.

I read once that a psychopath feels like they are the only "real" person and that everyone else in the world is a type of ragdoll that they can tear up if thats what they want to do. The cannot empathise or identify with anyone except themselves. How are you going to cure something like that?

I forget what the name of the portion of the brain that controls empathy is but its located in the center of the forehead. If a person is born without one or if this organ is damaged or is underdeveloped then they can't really regret anything they do. They can kill someone and sleep like a baby at night. They are relatively free of fear and they remain dangerous all of their life.

They aren't stupid and they can actually be a genius. Most people like this see how society is and adding two and two together they decide that staying out of prison is better than having a little fun via torture and murder and lead a productive albeit strange lonely life.. I've had the misfortune to run into people like this off and on all of my life.

Hell there was a lady here who poisoned two boyfriends for just a moderate amount of insurance money. She was caught, tried and sentenced to life with no parole and looking at her face during sentencing she didn't look like it bothered her and its my guess that it didn't because she purely and simply couldn't understand what all the fuss was about.

This is why the kid in my OP is smiling and its while Randy Dobbs smiled when he was arrested. These kids were proud of themselves. It was fun while it lasted.

 

[quadraginta]

Ah, the old "kill all the lawyers!"

That way they wouldn't take clients who are guilty!

So, if they are divorce lawyers, do they also get half?

Could they afford the pay cut?

 

[technoextreme]

Never worth it? It depends on who we are talking about. If it's the person being discussed here, probably not. If he is what he appears to be (a sociopath), then there is no treatment. Psychotherapy is ineffective for that condition.

Thats actually false. There are treatments for sociopathy. I don't know how effective they are but they were reported on in Scientific America.

 

[blutoski]

I can't stress this enough. They don't want to be treated for what society perceives to be their mental disorder. They don't want to change. They like themselves.

While it's true that PDs have terrible prognoses and no real treatment, there are factors to consider here:

• there is no such thing as a teenager sociopath - it's an adult diagnosis. research on adult behavioral therapy outcomes does not tell us much what happens to teenagers. teenagers are jerks, but most of them grow out of it.
• PDs like NPD or APD seem to resolve on their own - the incidence is very concentrated in young adulthood years, 20-30. these people normalize in their middle age. It's not understood why, but the most credible model is that they acquire insight over time.

I forget what the name of the portion of the brain that controls empathy is but its located in the center of the forehead. If a person is born without one or if this organ is damaged or is underdeveloped then they can't really regret anything they do. They can kill someone and sleep like a baby at night. They are relatively free of fear and they remain dangerous all of their life.

There is no specific part of the brain that 'controls for empathy'. At least not in this context.
Emotional empathy appears to be a high level function.

There some new research on 'mirror neurons' that possibly facilitate emotional empathy, but they're distributed throughout the premotor cortex, the supplementary motor area, the primary somatosensory cortex and the inferior parietal cortex.

In these experiments, though, the term 'empathy' is more about the ability to recognize agency in another creature than a high-level cognitive emotional feature.

eg: a wolf demonstrates empathy when catching prey, in the sense that he knows the prey can think and act in an effort to escape capture - the wolf is not feeling emotionally inclined toward the prey despite demonstrating empathy. This type of 'empathy' is merely understanding that "there's somebody in there".

(When this type of empathy is lacking, the effect is Autism Spectrum Disorder)

APD (sociopaths) have a normally functioning empathy in the sense that is associated with these experiments.

They aren't stupid and they can actually be a genius.

PDs are independent of intelligence. The IQ distribution in this axis is exactly the same as the general population. Some are geniuses; some are mentally delayed; most are inbetween somewhere.

Most people like this see how society is and adding two and two together they decide that staying out of prison is better than having a little fun via torture and murder and lead a productive albeit strange lonely life. I've had the misfortune to run into people like this off and on all of my life.

Possibly; possibly not. Diagnoses are hard to do without proper format and structure. It's pretty common for laypersons to overdiagnose and see mental illness everywhere (like a first year med student who temporarily becomes a hypochondriac until geting proper perspective on symtoms).

Polymorbidity is quite common. NPD and APD can and often do coincide, and these are completely independent of whether they have an actual interest in harming other people.

There's also a huge socialized component. Various militaries have invested centuries of research in the question of how to cultivate soldiers who have these asocial features and do not hesitate to execute orders and kill all designated targets. They've proven people can be socialized into this mindset. It follows that probably people can be socialized out of it, too.

Hell there was a lady here who poisoned two boyfriends for just a moderate amount of insurance money. She was caught, tried and sentenced to life with no parole and looking at her face during sentencing she didn't look like it bothered her and its my guess that it didn't because she purely and simply couldn't understand what all the fuss was about.

This is why the kid in my OP is smiling and its while Randy Dobbs smiled when he was arrested. These kids were proud of themselves. It was fun while it lasted.

I still think it's unreliable to guess what people are thinking based on trial photos. It's a pretty clear that the subjects are aware they're being observed and I expect they maintain a persona of their choice.

 

[Cainkane1]

While it's true that PDs have terrible prognoses and no real treatment, there are factors to consider here:

• there is no such thing as a teenager sociopath - it's an adult diagnosis. research on adult behavioral therapy outcomes does not tell us much what happens to teenagers. teenagers are jerks, but most of them grow out of it.
• PDs like NPD or APD seem to resolve on their own - the incidence is very concentrated in young adulthood years, 20-30. these people normalize in their middle age. It's not understood why, but the most credible model is that they acquire insight over time.

There is no specific part of the brain that 'controls for empathy'. At least not in this context.
Emotional empathy appears to be a high level function.

There some new research on 'mirror neurons' that possibly facilitate emotional empathy, but they're distributed throughout the premotor cortex, the supplementary motor area, the primary somatosensory cortex and the inferior parietal cortex.

In these experiments, though, the term 'empathy' is more about the ability to recognize agency in another creature than a high-level cognitive emotional feature.

eg: a wolf demonstrates empathy when catching prey, in the sense that he knows the prey can think and act in an effort to escape capture - the wolf is not feeling emotionally inclined toward the prey despite demonstrating empathy. This type of 'empathy' is merely understanding that "there's somebody in there".

(When this type of empathy is lacking, the effect is Autism Spectrum Disorder)

APD (sociopaths) have a normally functioning empathy in the sense that is associated with these experiments.






PDs are independent of intelligence. The IQ distribution in this axis is exactly the same as the general population. Some are geniuses; some are mentally delayed; most are inbetween somewhere.






Possibly; possibly not. Diagnoses are hard to do without proper format and structure. It's pretty common for laypersons to overdiagnose and see mental illness everywhere (like a first year med student who temporarily becomes a hypochondriac until geting proper perspective on symtoms).

Polymorbidity is quite common. NPD and APD can and often do coincide, and these are completely independent of whether they have an actual interest in harming other people.

There's also a huge socialized component. Various militaries have invested centuries of research in the question of how to cultivate soldiers who have these asocial features and do not hesitate to execute orders and kill all designated targets. They've proven people can be socialized into this mindset. It follows that probably people can be socialized out of it, too.







I still think it's unreliable to guess what people are thinking based on trial photos. It's a pretty clear that the subjects are aware they're being observed and I expect they maintain a persona of their choice.

Well the psychiatrist was completely, totally and utterly unable to treat Randy Dobbs. His parents did the right thing sending him to a doctor but the doctor was unsuccessful. Randy didn't want to change and he didn't and instead he went from mean as Hell to quite frankly murderous. His victim was unknown to him as I suspect the victims in my OP were unknown to him also. You say theres no such thing as a teenage sociopath but you could have fooled me. I'm no expert but I do observe.


First of all thank you for naming the organs of the brain I was talking about. I really don't know how to answer this part of your response but the wolf need to eat its prey. I guess the punk needed money and cigarettes but is that the same thing? Mainy I should have said sympathy instead of empathy. The punk had no sympathy. No heart no remorse to appearances.

yes some are smart and some are normal and some are stupid. Criminals come in all IQ's.

I strongly feel that most people who enjoy being deliberately cruel hold back from crossing certain lines to avoid jail. I've met some scary people in my time and I feel that if they thought they could get away with it they would kill.

Well I guess you're right. Putting on a brave or cruel facade may very well be what they are doing. The woman I'm talking about killed herself recently and for all I know thats what she was thinking about. Smiling while in chains and joking may very well be masking the thought. "Oh no what have I done".

 

[blutoski]

Thats actually false. There are treatments for sociopathy. I don't know how effective they are but they were reported on in Scientific America.

The PDs have terrible prognosis, unfortunately.

Lots of treatments; most don't seem to work better than nontreatment.

The mystery is why PDs resolve over time without treatment.

 

[blutoski]

You say theres no such thing as a teenage sociopath but you could have fooled me. I'm no expert but I do observe.

What I'm saying is that the diagnoses are not intended to be used for teens.

First of all thank you for naming the organs of the brain I was talking about. I really don't know how to answer this part of your response but the wolf need to eat its prey. I guess the punk needed money and cigarettes but is that the same thing? many I should have said sympathy instead of empathy. The punk had no sympathy. No heart no remorse to appearances.

What I meant is that in these experiments, they use the word 'empathy' to mean the ability to recognize agency. Even the most cold-blooded murderer has empathy for his victim with this definition because he recognizes the victim is a living person.

yes some are smart and some are normal and some are stupid. Criminals come in all IQ's.

I strongly feel that most people who enjoy being deliberately cruel hold back from crossing certain lines to avoid jail. I've met some scary people in my time and I feel taht if they thought they could get away with it they would kill.

Yes, but that doesn't make them sociopaths, and it's important to understand that lacking empathy is not the same as wanting to cause harm. Autists have terrible capacity for empathy (that's the nature of their disorder) but very, very few actually enjoy hurting others.

Alternatively, my impression is that most 'ruthless killers' have fully functioning empathy. An anecdote is a colleague of mine whose brother-in-law is in prison for slashing prostitutes. But she's aware that this guy is very protective of his own family and was beside himself when his daughter needed surgery for a congenital disorder.

 

[Cainkane1]

What I'm saying is that the diagnoses are not intended to be used for teens.






What I meant is that in these experiments, they use the word 'empathy' to mean the ability to recognize agency. Even the most cold-blooded murderer has empathy for his victim with this definition because he recognizes the victim is a living person.






Yes, but that doesn't make them sociopaths, and it's important to understand that lacking empathy is not the same as wanting to cause harm. Autists have terrible capacity for empathy (that's the nature of their disorder) but very, very few actually enjoy hurting others.

Alternatively, my impression is that most 'ruthless killers' have fully functioning empathy. An anecdote is a colleague of mine whose brother-in-law is in prison for slashing prostitutes. But she's aware that this guy is very protective of his own family and was beside himself when his daughter needed surgery for a congenital disorder.

People kill people for various reasons. The brother in law may have been slashing prostitutes because Jesus disapproved of their occupation while feeling that his innocent daughter was undeserving of her pain. He may have felt that way about all innocent children for all we know. Some people can pick and choose who they feel deserves to suffer and who deserves to live happily.

I personally know a man who seemed to loath his two innocent younger sisters for no apparent reason and abused them horribly but after he got married and had his own children he worked two jobs to put them through college.