Discussion in 'World Events' started by cosmictraveler, Nov 9, 2008.
What do you think should be done with this child, if anything?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
The child should recive consoling for the fact that he is going to grow up knowing he killed his father and assuming it was the father who let him get access to that gun then no further legal action should be taken.
However if it wasnt the father then i think whoever DID leave the child with access to the gun should be charged with negilant homicide as they might as well have shot the guy themselves.
What if the kids turns out to be a sociopath?
then that would be a compleatly different issue.
If you actually read the post i posted 8 year olds dont have the moral reasoning to be concidered sociopaths. They are still working under concreate authority based morality (ie mummy or daddy said not to do this so it wrong)
there is no ability to determin if he is a sociopath because the nesasary aprasial of morality hasnt developed yet any more than its possable to determine if he will be a scientist or a pilot
Recruit him into the Black Ops.
I've seen some stuff about how you kids do demonstrate sociopathic tendencies when they're young, and only through really intensive therapy do they stop putting pins in their little brother or not.
It's not a matter of having the right moral conditioning, but lacking an empathy box.
8 year olds or 10 year olds (and above) roman?
It makes a huge difference, 10 year olds are starting to develop autonomious morality (ie dont do this because it will cause pain so is wrong), 8 year olds dont have the cognative ability to determine that yet.
I sugget you read up on Piaget and Erikson (who would call a kid erik erikson BTW, thats just cruelPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!)
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
But a characteristic of children is a reduced ability to empathise with others. Being able to empathise is both inherent (depends on brain development), and also learnt (you're taught to feel a certain way in particular circumstances).
bells the artical i was just reading says that in every single australian juristiction a child younger than 10 CANT be charged PERIOD. 10 - 14 its up to the procution to actually PROVE that they knew they were commiting a criminal offence then we get into the difference between states. 14-18 in MOST juristictions offences are delt with as a juvinile but in some states that is 17
So concidering that in australia an 8 year old cant even be charged and concidering the psychological assesment i posted which states that an 8 year old hasnt got the moral development nessary or even the COGNATIVE development to understand what death is.
Do you really think charging this kid AT ALL, let alone trying the poor kid as an adult is the right call?
I agree with everything except "yanks." Do we really need the racial slur?
To answer a question you posed me in a previous post.. a case like this would not cross my desk.
If an 8 year old did something like this, it would go through the family court most probably and he would then end up in care with extreme counseling... most probably..
As an aside. No one can speculate as to why he did it. As to what was passing through his mind when he pulled the trigger or decided to pull the trigger. We don't know what led up to it.. We don't know of any events, if any, that could lead to an 8 year old child shooting his father and his father's friend.. There are a plethora of causes that could lead to a child doing something like this.. All we can do now is speculate.. It could very well be as Baron stated that this child could have just been curious and shot his father in play.. It could very well be that the man who taught him to use a gun never informed him or told him of the dangers of firearms. We simply do not know.
I am reminded of the two 10 year old's in England who murdered James Bulger.. Those two boys faced an adult trial and were sentenced to a juvenile facility until they were released as adults. The trial itself received condemnation from the European Court of Human Rights, who criticised the manner in which the boys were tried and deemed it to not be a fair trial. Did this 8 year old boy plan his attack on his father and boarder like Bulger's killers? Or was it a spur of the moment shooting?
Either way, I personally don't think children that young should face or be tried as adults in a system that is designed for adult offenders. An 8 year old may not have the capacity to understand the complexities of his trial.. Regardless of the outcome of his psychological exam, this child will need a lot of therapy and counseling. Not only for what may have led up to the shooting (if anything at all) but also to help him come to terms with the fact that he killed two people. If the examination finds that he is a sociopath or lacks the ability to care, then counseling and time in a facility that deals with such disorders is vitally important for his rehabilitation. One would hope he would not be sent to an adult prison facility, something I doubt would occur. Either way, this case is, for lack of a better term, a fucked up case.
bells it seems you missed 2 important points in my posts
a) though a psych exam may find abuse if there was any it WONT find sociopathic tendancies. The reasons are quite symple
1) no child can be diognosed as a sociopath at least until mid 20s because they have to have been fully deleloped and showing those symptoms for over 5 years to be diognosed.
2) ALL children are sociopaths, as i stated before and leading on from point 1 any child who was ranked against the clinical symptoms of sopathic disorder would be diognosed as a sociopath. They dont have the moral reasoning to judge right and wrong the way an adult can
on your second point about the family court i would be interested in more infomation about the reasons for a family court case.
This is a paper from the australian insitute of criminology and states quite clearly that below 10 years old a child "Cannot be charged with a criminal offence"
so unless the purpose was to try the parents with negligence or to run a coronors type inquest i cant see any purpose in running any court action period.
Your right however that the child will need ALOT of proffessional help to get over this tragity and a DOCS style investigation may be warrented. However any further investigation by the police is just a pure waste of time and energy as its probably going to just come to the conclusion it was an acident wether the child hunted them down or not.
This has to be a jury trial. No choice about it.
Do we need any further evidence for better gun laws ?
Yes.. but you are approaching this from an Australian legal standpoint. Doesn't apply to this case. And if you read some of the legislation that deals with juvenile offenders, it is quite specific in that the legislation does not pertain to children who have committed or are accused of committing a "serious offense".
If a child (in Australia) under the age of 10 committed murder, he or she would not be allowed to roam free without any form of legal proceeding against him or her. The Family Court would most probably order the child be placed in care for extensive therapy and counseling and rehabilitation. While the child could not be criminally charged, that child would come under the radar of the criminal justice system in that the court would ensure that child received the counseling and rehabilitation he/she needed.
It is a complex issue and one that is an ongoing debate in Australia and I am sure, in other countries as well. Does an 8 year old understand the difference between right and wrong? Does an 8 year old understand death and that shooting someone with a gun can kill them?
The devils in the bone
While even I have occasion to wonder if my esteemed friend's sharp disdain for things American hints at a form of geopolitical penis envy, I must confess that I am even more puzzled by the proposition that Americans are a race.
Come on, we're the United States of America. I've said worse of my fellow Americans on many occasions, both here at Sciforums and in life at large. And, to be honest, he does have a point. Some nations will execute rape survivors as adulterers. We like to think we're above that. So we pretend eight year-olds are adults, so we can lock 'em up for life. And, hell, if Justice Scalia and any number of my more politically conservative neighbors had their way, the kid would be facing the death penalty.
This kid's either a budding sociopath, a victim who lashed back, or a poor soul whose burden of expectation outstripped his capacity to understand. No matter how we cut it, he's absolutely fucked.
And still, there are those who want nothing more than to hurt him even more.
This world has gone, and
Drug us along, and
Nothing's the same,
And it will never be again.
It's never going to be the same.
And all these lives that make no sense,
And all along we cry in our defense.
And all of us go down slow,
And then we rise again.
Just like the tide out at sea,
We lower and rise again.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(Floater, "Endless Ii")
tiassa i do apologise for the slur.
That being said its hard to imagin a situation like this occuring anywhere else BUT the US.
Though you have suggested 3 possablilties the most probable reason is poor gun control. Even IF the child was abused there is very little chance that they would have the cognative reasoning to think "if i get gun and shoot him then the abuse will stop". This is projecting abstract reasoning onto someone who developmental psychology states is still dealing in concreate thinking. Its no more possable than my dog using that reasoning. Its the reason why children so young who report sexual abuse are automatically belived as to it happerning (though possably not the person they accuse), they symple cant make it up.
The other option, that he is a sociopath in the making is also unprovable. This requires a MUCH higher level of moral reasoning expected before that diognosis can be made.
However no matter which of the three is accurate it IS a fact that if the child didnt have access to this gun because either a) it wasnt in the house PERIOD or b) it was properly secured this situation would not have happened
inspite of your thinking my distain for the US is "penis envy" there are 2 things i compleatly dispise the US for INTERNALLY, ignoring all the external policies which deserve hatred.
The lack of gun control and the lack of freely avilable health care to your own citizans. Now im over the moon that the second is being fixed but as to the first the second amendment is something to me which makes me feel like beating my head against a brick wall.
In spite of these situations happerning, and the school macicures and the 8 year old who shot himself with an uzi and the extrdonarly high level of gun death in the US as a group you seem compleatly unable to realise that its the guns which are responcable for all these deaths.
I have herd all sorts of excuses made here as to why gun control is a bad idea. From rampent paranoa that england will come back and take over the US if you dont have guns to cars kill more and i think this might be a good thread to go through some of the idiocy
if we dont have guns england will take over
did you ever think that england doesnt even WANT the US? They have there own problems and trying to rebuild your country from the ground up again isnt one they would want. Futher more australia recived its independence freely from england and the lack of guns here has never lead to england deciding they want us back
If i dont have my gun the US goverment will take away my rights
you do realise that this would require the complacency of the courts, the ENTIRE defence force and the police forces ect. Not to mention that even if they did try to take over, they have tanks and planes and you have what? a shot gun? not going to do much good there mate. Your democrasy isnt that fragile but if you are seriously worried start paying an interest in politics, get educated and actually get out there and protest, VOTE for christ sake because this is what will protect your rights, not your gun. The defence forces are there to "defend the consitution" as are the courts and nither is going to let the goverment walk all over it in the way you invisage
This is the 21st century, not the 1700's
Knives kill people
For starters in a country like mine those sort of knives are illegal as well as is there importation. Yes kitchen knives, pocket knives, fishing knives ect can be used as a weapon but they also have legitimate uses. A sniper rifle, a M16 and an automatic hand gun are only designed to kill people, it cant cut your steak or make a nice stew. There is NO legitimate use for them PERIOD.
Cars kill more people
possable correct, ever tried random breath testing?
cars are an important transportation device. Yes acidents and stupidity happens which is why the goverment spends so much money on trafic enforcement. If your that worried stop concidering random breath testing to be police harasment and start looking at it as a legitimate way to curb the number of drink drivers on the road. Trust me it doesnt hurt and only takes at most 3 min even if they are really busy
I need to protect myself
here is a tip, put pressure on your goverment to employ a better police force if you dont trust the one you have. You are more likly to be killed by your own gun (note thread we are in) than to have to use it to defend yourself. If you are in a situation where defence is nessary stab your atacker in the eye with your car keys, that hurts like hell. If your really that scared try learning self defence, it will probably be cheeper, help with your obesity problem and is imposable to kill you insted of the person your fighting.
I use a gun for sport
This is a fair argument (though im yet to see high powered sniper rifles or M16's in the olympics) but not a huge issue. If your that into the sport im sure you are a member of a gun club. No reason the gun cant be locked up there when not in use where they have super strong security
if you take away my gun only the criminals will have weapons
Possably true in the short term but if gun possetion is illegal without a VERY specific purpose and importation is banned then there will be less guns stolen each year. As the police take them out of cerculation they will become rarer and rarer. There are only 4 ways a criminal can get a gun, they buy it either legitimatly or illegally from a gun shop, they import it, they make it or they steal it
If there are less guns in cerculation this cuts down theft, stronger coustoms inforcement cuts down importation, cuting down the people with licences and stronger enforcement on gun shops cuts down buying them, which leaves making it themselves. How many gun smiths (home gun smiths) do you honestly think are in the country?
any others i have missed?
As for charging an 8 year old as an adult that is just blaming a victom for someone elses stupidity. Remove the gun you remove the shooting, symple as that
hope that explaines my "racisium" to you Diode Man and tiassa
Oh and see my comment in the "8 year old killed with an uzi" thread, and most paticually see the responce from barron max if you still cant understand my frustaration with your country
In Australia, the gun, ammunition and bolt are kept separate in different bags. Also, we aren't allowed semi automatic, and/or revolvers. Ammunition is also monitored.
I'd think a judge would be selected to work with the lawyers handling this case to insure the child gets psychosocial help with his problems first and foremost. After a few years of professional help then see what develops and readdress this case once again but keeping an eye on the child within a controlled environment all the time.
Lol @ asguard. I'm afraid children at any age would eat you alive, my friend.
This typical of the America of late.
Kids are killing themselves, their parents and eachother all the time it seems. I think it's simple breakdown of any moral code in society. The mainstream TV,music, video games, sports figures all spew a constant stream of filth. News outlets do their share to spread the fear of rapists, murderers, corrupt officials, child molesters and natural disasters.
Lately, in my neighborhood, there have been a lot of "good kids" killing themselves and others over cellphones, video game consoles and the like. Good ole' fashion anger and greed, I guess.
Verdict: Mass sensory overload....You can tell these kids that there is a god out there, yet when they look around it's obvious that no one believes it or acts on it.
That said, there are MANY, MANY, MANY kids this age that are trusted with .22 caliber riffles sitting around the house in America. Putting my above comments into context, we can have some hope thatthis doesn't happen everyday.
Well, that kid already violated two laws ....one in killing his father, the other in killing his father's friend. Laws against murder didn't stop him from doing that, why would other law have stopped him?
Gun safes? The kid could have violated that law by sneaking around and finding the combination.
Trigger locks? Same-o, same-o.
Get rid of guns on the whole planet? Well, then he could have used a knife or a baseball bat or a spear or a......
One more fuckin' law that can and will be violated by people who want to violate them. That's really what you think we need?
Separate names with a comma.