When I think about issues like school shootings, it goes something like this: Well, good parents would know if their kids bought guns and wanted to shoot people, and then managed to do it. Putting the kid in jail is not doing enough to stop this kind of crime, because teens can be stupid and if they are able to get guns and go to school and shoot people, some of them will, and so we need responsibility on adults involved, to really take a bite out of this kind of crime.
I am kind of against punishing kids "as adults." I think it's b.s. If you are a kid, you are a kid. IMO if you are still dependent on your parents then they pretty much own you. They control what you do unless they kick you out and disown you.
So if your kid does something stupid, I think you should take some of the punishment, because some adults need to. If your kid goes to school and shoots mine, you should get some kind of punishment that makes you, joe bad parent, REALLY give a shit. Like, how about if your kid shoots my kid, you can't drink beer for a month? I wonder if that would prevent some school shootings. Or if you have to become poor and stop driving around your BMW to buy random crap to impress other people who don't care.
No, we should have jail time. Jail time if your kids fuck up other kids. There is not enough of a deterrent there for bad parents. They lose a kid, they cry, so what, they can have more, and they can just be mad at the kid and be sad a little. They won't act the same as they would if they actually were risking their life. Some parents "should," but not many really will.
The principle works for me. For instance if someone is walking a dog, and it bites someone, it's you're fault. If your 3 year old sets my house on fire, it's definitely your fault. Someone is responsible for these kids at all times. And if your teen crashes a car into my house, you bear some of the responsibility because the teen "isn't adult" yet. It shouldn't just be reduced punishment for the teen. It should be punishment shifted onto their parents. Same goes for violence. If your teen beats up my teen, you should be charged with some kind of 3rd degree assault, same as if your dog bit me.
Well not every bad situation that is caused by kids is because the parent was negligent. I agree, in some cases, the parernts should should,er some of the blame. Like i said in the gun thread, if your kid shoots up the school with a gun that you left unlocked, then yeah, you should get punished. If the kid somehow smashed your lockbox and got it, you're saying parents should get punished as well? I think that's a little harsh.
There's other examples too. Say dirnking and driving. Say if youre 18 year old was drinking at your house and you let him leave and he crashes, then yeah, you should get hammered as well. But if your kid is out, you have no idea what he's doing. If he gets fucked up and crashes, how can you possibly blame the parents?
Uh... I think you're just trying to pass the buck to someone else. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? At some point you're responsible for what you do. Yes, there are negligent parents, but in the case of school shootings I'm sure there are cases where the parents are great and they are absolutely shocked their kid did something like that.
What age is are kids fully responsible for their actions? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure most 12 year olds know the difference between right and wrong. People who are negligent with their kids should ideally be punished long before anything catastrophic happens... by taking their kids away.
If I wanted to buy a gun, I could, my parents wouldn't have to know, I could hide it somewhere, keep it until I wanted to do the shooting. It's not that difficult. If the kid is some crazy person who wants to shoot everyone, then his parents wouldn't always know. I for instance have shot plenty of guns, from a glock to a revolver down to a shotgun, and my parents have no clue. Needless to say I still live with them. There are plenty of parents who work double shifts at work just to pay rent so obviously they don't have enough time to spend with their children and figure it out. If someone was truly dedicated to do something, he could do it without the parents knowing.
Like LengendaryDreams said,
parents shape our growth, they dont shadow our growth and take our faults.
the parents could and sometimes should be held responsible yes, in addition to the kids. just cause you're "not adult" yet doesn't mean you don''t understand the consequences of your actions.
Half the time these kids probably hide their feelings and their parents think they are normal kids, then one day something horrible happens and they are in disbelief that their little angel could do something like that.
The only time a parent should have part of the blame (but unless they help they should never get jail time) is if they actually see behavior that points towards self harm or harm to others and don't try to get their kids help.
If your goal is "to stop this kind of crime," then I have to say that that is impossible. There will always be the kind of person who chooses to shoot others. I don't think all teens should be generalized, likewise, I don't think all parents should be generalized. Everyone's brain is different so blaming all teen shootings on poor parenting skills or unresponsibility is wrong.
But I do think punishing kids as adults is absolutely ridiculous. They should be charged as kids who did really bad things. Laws for adults were written for adults, if the ones for kids aren't good enough, make some new ones. I don't understand how its possible to charge a kid as an adult, maybe someone who knows something about law can explain it to me.
Hell no... certain things should be tried as adults. You've got to be kidding me if a 13 year old killing some kid doesn't know right from wrong in that situation...
On November 08 2007 13:53 Hawk wrote: Hell no... certain things should be tried as adults. You've got to be kidding me if a 13 year old killing some kid doesn't know right from wrong in that situation...
I think Chapelle in the video makes some sense. Sure they know right from wrong, but are they as smart as they're going to be? Some of them are just stupid, and their parents really should be watching them more. My 15 year old is not going to pile driver somebody and kill them. Come on. Parents should be more scared of their kid doing something like that. Scared like, if their kid does it, they'll go to jail, scared. And the kid doesn't need life in prison for it.
I still agree with the sentiment, that punishing kids as kids, makes sense. They still are kids for a reason, they still have parents for a reason. We don't need to lock them up and throw away the key yet. They are already as scared of doing wrong as they're going to be, and that is mostly on their parents. But do parents necessarily give a shit if their kid is retarded? I don't think there is enough incentive for bad, stupid, parents, to pay attention. You might say, "yeah, yeah, but the kid is the most precious gift etc." Well obviously not, for some parents, who would obviously do a better job if they risked real punishment for what their kids did. I still stand by that. It might not always be 100% fair but if kids are your responsibility legally, then that should be the whole deal. Your responsibility, legally. Until they are old enough, qualified enough, to be taken as 100% adult, someone else should be watching their ass like its their own, and that means there has to be more teeth in laws for parents of kids who fuck up.
Whether you think a 15 year old is a kid or not is another matter. Whatever the age is, adult is adult, and the rest, have parents or "guardians" which should take responsibility. If you give them wiggle room like "it's not my fault if my kid breaks my locks, or gets a gun", yes it is, you raised them, you feed them, you give them shelter, you should know what they're up to and whether they are stupid or a criminal or not and be actively doing something about it like its your own ass on the line (cause it should be).
Why so much thought about punishment? Why not more thought geared towards prevention?
Why have schools, which lend themselves to all kinds of abuse by adults towards kids, and kids towards kids, and endless frustration and humiliation experienced by kids? People learned just fine before schools were around. Maybe better.
Why have guns? The only purpose of a gun is to kill.
Why do we, as a culture, choose to express ourselves through violence? Why do we think of violence as entertainment? Why do we consume so much violence in the name of entertainment and pleasure? Why do we glamorize warriors and warfare and violence? Why do we listen to music and play games that celebrate violence?
So that I am not misunderstood, I am not advocating more laws or more punishments. What is needed is serious thought and responsibility (for a change!)
I think school shootings represent a profound societal sickness. Some of you remark that this kind of violence is inevitable. I disagree so much!
The thing is, we must not become obsessed with revenge (what you might call justice.) There is an interesting concept called restorative justice, which seeks to heal people and communities by reintegrating criminals into society. In any event, I pity the parents of school shooters. Any person can be criticized for something, but the parents of school shooters must face such pain from the suicide or inprisonment of their own child and from the shame and outrage directed towards themselves. Forgiveness and acceptance are what is needed.
The only reason a child, or anyone else, would go on a killing spree, is that they are without hope. They see no way out, no possibility for justice or improvement in their own life, so they do something truly drastic and tragic. These children are outcasts and subjected to a painful existence.
It is amazing, America is a land of such wealth, yet so many citizens are so unhappy and disconnected. Wealth isn't everything. Where is love? Where is community? Where are the good examples? Where are alternatives? These children are raised on violent entertainment in a highly individualistic, competitive culture. They are pressured so hard by parents, by teachers, by clergy, and by other students. They are subjected to this hideous rat-race. (See TheGreatBeyonds blog on his problems for a small example.) Given such conditions, some children will explode. If we gave children more options, better role models, better ideals... If we built communities full of love and interdependence and connection... maybe these issues would not even arise.
What I am advocating is that we make sure the responsibility for children still lies somewhere. If not the parents, then who? And if we want to say they are really adults, then we should give them that status fully. Not only when it is convenient. If my dog killed your child, it would be my responsibility. And if my infant killed your child, that would be my fault. If we subordinate all people below a certain age to a less-than-legally-responsible status, all I am saying is that the responsibility shouldn't just disappear but should be taken up by someone else who has accepted it, such as a parent of a teen. If your teen manages to hate life, buy an arsenal, and go on a Keaaneyaau Reaves rampage, you deserve some responsibility for that, to your community and those that suffered because of it.
Responsibility is a part of holding communities together too. You might notice that the erosion of community has coincided with some erosion of personal responsibility as well.
On December 03 2007 23:32 lugggy wrote: If my dog killed your child, it would be my responsibility.
But a dog can't think like a human can, so that's not so great of an analogy.
Personally, I do think a lot of things should require minors to be charged as adults. Murder, rape, etc. These are all major things that you learn at a very young age—regardless of race, creed, social status, etc—that are major fuck ups thata you don't do. Still, I don't think the parent of a 16 year old should be held accountable if he shoots up the school.
I mean, like if they were found to be negligent in that he told them the day before as he's goin to school, 'bye mom, going to shoot up my classmates!' 'hahaha, funny, have a good one hun!' then yeah, they should get punished. But I really don't think a lot of situations are like this.
Luggy, I don't know that I really disagree with you on anything you said, but I am concerned about what being held responsible might entail in people's minds.
Certainly communities are very much eroded in the U.S. (I won't speak for any other countries, I live in the U.S. and that is what I know about.) On average, Americans do not even know their neighbors names, and the average American has 2 close confidants (that's all.) The average American's phone calls are primarily with just 4 other people. There is no solidarity, no sense of connection or mutual caring. No community. Is this because of a lack of responsibility? Could be, in part. I think it's also because of our individualistic way of doing things, our nonstop pursuit of luxury and status through consumption (status through consumption is only obtained in a *competitive* environment.) I think a lot of it has to do with how much we work, and the ubiquitousness of technology (which tends to mediate experience.) There are lots of reasons communities are eroded here, but the bottom line is that it is tragic.
I'm all for more responsibility, but not if it means that we are throwing more people in prison or finding other ways to torture those we consider responsible for terrible acts. The goal, in my mind, is to do everything possible to correct a bad situation. It's not to say we should let people do whatever they want and pretend everything is fine, but to have reform and healing as our goals, rather than revenge. If I had to boil my position down to its essence, it is that I believe in healing rather than revenge. Revenge appeals to the most base aspect in all of us, and it heals nothing.
Again, not sure I disagree with anything you said. And I certainly think we need to do a lot more to heal communities, because I think a lot of the crime going on in this country has to do with broken communities.
Well I think you have a couple of separate topics there that are relevant though. Certainly what has happened to the average American, esp. in the newer generation(s), is important. And the way prisons/jail sentences are used (and the way various people use the idea of this, to satisfy their idea of "justice" which is rationalized revenge, as you pretty much said) is also something I take exception to. But that is pretty complicated and maybe deserves a new blog.
The way imprisonment is used, executed, and justified in this country, is very far from how almost anyone would conceive it as a solution to any problem or set of problems, whatsoever, in my immediate and unresearched opinion. But this issue applies to everyone, and I think a solution is not to resist punishment in general where it is applicable. If people believe that typical crimes deserve 5, 10, 25 years in prison, then I think raising horrible murdering teens lies somewhere in there as well. Of course we both probably disagree with the execution of the imprisonment and the amount of years needed. But relatively (i.e., in today's standards), that's where such "responsibility" and "consequences" would fit.
I would make a blog or two about these topics myself if I had the motivation at this time to do it right. But to make a long story short, until the rest of the world is able to stand up to the U.S. and accuse it of human rights violations, change seems a long way off. And that time also seems a long way off, with all of the countries seemingly much more obviously hosting various wrongdoings etc.
On December 04 2007 00:41 lugggy wrote: But to make a long story short, until the rest of the world is able to stand up to the U.S. and accuse it of human rights violations, change seems a long way off.
You're refering to our jails and such and the death penalty about the human rights violations?
EPT
