In a bizarre switch everyone EXCEPT the government goes mad

[Killian Kalthorne]

Freed psychopath kills again on release - another example in the press

 

I pay my taxes so I can be protected from what are essentially human predators. If attempting reform doesn't actually reform then it's not a cheaper option. It's a waste of money. Incarceration is ridiculously expensive, but very very few murderers are likely to kill me while they are still in jail.

 

Very very few murderers are likely to kill you if they are already dead.

[Walsingham]

You should NEVER take the Daily Mail seriously. However, buried in the article was a point I hadn't mentioned, which is that thanks to Labour infighting and general malaise we are now on our fourth Home Secretary this Parliament. At a time when one could argue the Home Office is the most crucial department after the Treasury we've got complete no-hopers at the helm.

[213374U]

Freed psychopath kills again on release - another example in the press

 

I pay my taxes so I can be protected from what are essentially human predators. If attempting reform doesn't actually reform then it's not a cheaper option. It's a waste of money. Incarceration is ridiculously expensive, but very very few murderers are likely to kill me while they are still in jail.

Is this in relation to that .45 ACP construction appliance you posted in the other thread?

[Oblarg]

It's hardwired into the brain that killing others of your species is generally bad - it's even observable in other animals. This is a fairly simple evolutionary trait.

 

Of course, it's possible to break this preconditioning. It's also possible to be born without it. As to which of these actually happened in this case, I don't think we know enough to determine. I certainly don't think that it was an emulation of what they saw on TV, as was implied by an earlier post.

[Rosbjerg]

It's hardwired into the brain that killing others of your species is generally bad - it's even observable in other animals. This is a fairly simple evolutionary trait.

 

Of course, it's possible to break this preconditioning. It's also possible to be born without it. As to which of these actually happened in this case, I don't think we know enough to determine. I certainly don't think that it was an emulation of what they saw on TV, as was implied by an earlier post.

 

Dogs kill dogs and cats kill the offspring of other cats - most animals have absolutely no problem with killing their own kind - but their own "social" group, now that's a different story. Humans are much the same, luckily for us our layer of 'civilization' or 'culture' or whatever you might want to call it, marks everyone else (as long as they pose no immediate threat) as part of our group. Add just the right amount of apathy or desperation and you see just how thin that layer really is.

[Orogun01]

It's hardwired into the brain that killing others of your species is generally bad - it's even observable in other animals. This is a fairly simple evolutionary trait.

 

Of course, it's possible to break this preconditioning. It's also possible to be born without it. As to which of these actually happened in this case, I don't think we know enough to determine. I certainly don't think that it was an emulation of what they saw on TV, as was implied by an earlier post.

 

Dogs kill dogs and cats kill the offspring of other cats - most animals have absolutely no problem with killing their own kind - but their own "social" group, now that's a different story. Humans are much the same, luckily for us our layer of 'civilization' or 'culture' or whatever you might want to call it, marks everyone else (as long as they pose no immediate threat) as part of our group. Add just the right amount of apathy or desperation and you see just how thin that layer really is.

That sounds like an anecdote

 

Care to share it?

Edited March 17, 2010 by Orogun01

[Rosbjerg]

Sure.. I worked the evening-shifts at an institution for the neglected, addicts and alcoholics for almost 2 years, at the same time I worked the day-shift in a kindergarden where kids of said group attended along "normal" kids to give them a better start. I've travelled around the poor and desperate places of over 12 countries on different continents and I've been involved in volunteer work for some of the poorest people in Europe..

 

What's your anecdote?

[Walsingham]

Sure.. I worked the evening-shifts at an institution for the neglected, addicts and alcoholics for almost 2 years, at the same time I worked the day-shift in a kindergarden where kids of said group attended along "normal" kids to give them a better start. I've travelled around the poor and desperate places of over 12 countries on different continents and I've been involved in volunteer work for some of the poorest people in Europe..

 

What's your anecdote?

 

Awesome. You get my full attention. My ears are pinned way back, and I want to learn. What do you think this problem revolves around?

[Gorgon]

Well it's pretty well documented, for instance in the case of natural disasters, that our layer of civilisation peals off very quickly when the control mechanisms are disabled, and when those control mechanisms are part of the problem ; Rwanda, Auswitch, Pol pot, Stalin. Etc. etc.

 

I suppose the point is that people can become divorced from their sense of belonging or lose their moral compass as a result of negative influence or experience. 'Good' and 'evil' are ideals, and they are nice to have, but acting either way is still reward seeking behavior. We are driven by much baser principles than we care to admit.

[Walsingham]

Well it's pretty well documented, for instance in the case of natural disasters, that our layer of civilisation peals off very quickly when the control mechanisms are disabled, and when those control mechanisms are part of the problem ; Rwanda, Auswitch, Pol pot, Stalin. Etc. etc.

 

I suppose the point is that people can become divorced from their sense of belonging or lose their moral compass as a result of negative influence or experience. 'Good' and 'evil' are ideals, and they are nice to have, but acting either way is still reward seeking behavior. We are driven by much baser principles than we care to admit.

 

I'm sorry but my mental ears are pointing directly at Rosbif, like a pair of very well trained spaniels.

[Gorgon]

Maybe I gave the impression that I was hijacking his train of thought, I wasn't and he isn't here, so I thought I would share while we wait to be showered with his experience of the human condition.

[Rosbjerg]

All right, maybe I sounded a little superior there, sorry for that.. I'm not more versed in human suffering than most of you I wager, I simply feel like I've learned a huge personal lesson, by working in these areas and travelling.

 

Mostly I just saw the quiet desperation we are all capable of feeling, like a certain underlying current of the local culture (which was also true for the addicts etc).

As if it had been conditioned into them that they had to work three times as hard, simply because they were also fighting their own weakness.. Poor people would blame themselves for their misery and the addicts were detached from themselves, as if a part of them would not recognize themselves in this situation - and this detached self was slowly tearing them down, by questioning their motives their desires and hopes. It's that shame that got me the most - and what I had the hardest time figuring out.. people who were slightly better off would blame everyone else, but once you got to a certain point apparently all that blame would collapse in on you, crushing your hope. And it's in that situation that people try to survive in any way possible - looting their neighbours, killing for a loaf of bread to stave off death and starvation for another day. I guess hope also ties in to your "horisont". Can you see yourself getting out of this? or is it simply about doing something/anything right now..

 

For the addicts and neglected it was the underlying shame of being shunned and abandoned by family and friends that really tore them up.. They felt so removed from "normal" life at times that I had problems reaching them.. slowly they would build up anticipation again, when the next day was marginally better than the last - but it often took months, or even years for the worst off.. It's important to note that most drug addicts are perfectly normal people, just with an addiction - these were the kind of people who had been abused, beaten, downtrotten and shunned for most of their childhood and young lives.

 

How does this relate to these kids? If they belong to said group - then this gruesome act could be a desperate attempt to feel something, anything.. if they've been neglected all their lives then I wager that they believe themselves incapable of loving, in a kids intangible way - preferring simply to mentally detach and follow whatever current of emotion that comes into them.. We saw that plenty of times in the rehab, when some of the kids would try to sexually abuse, molest or just hurt other kids (we caught them before anything happened 99,9% of the time) and all the time the perpetrator would be emotionally devastated when we didn't just yell at him/her, but instead sat down, supported and tried to work out what had happened. They were slowly learning what was right and wrong.

 

We all have random thoughts of evil I think, we just have a cultural escape mechanism, much similiar to theirs, who take us away from those feelings instead of towards them..

 

That's my 2 cents anyway - take them with a grain of salt.

[Walsingham]

Sorry. I wasn't having a go at how you sounded. You've obviously got experience and I try to listen when someone does. I think it's vital to temper ANY scientific study and research with first hand experts accounts.

 

I see what you mean about wanting to feel anything. Like eating leaves or paper when you're starving. That makes very good sense in its own way. Thanks for giving your perspective.

 

My next question is the obvious one. Once someone takes the step of going beyond and actually committing serious crimes of violence and sadism do you think they can come back from that. And if so, how reliably?

[Rosbjerg]

As with anything human it's always on a case by case basis.. there are guidelines and theories sure (social/psychological and anthropological in given circumstances) and they help alot, but at the end of the day each individual may respond drastically different than the most celebrated expert may predict. One thing you can count on though, is that all but the most insane (or stoic self-reliant types) really deeply wants to be appreciated/respected and given attention.

 

It also depends on what you mean with "come back" - can they become 100% normal functioning individuals? no, because as they develop a sense of right and wrong then they begin to experience a sense of deep regret for what they did, which usually causes depression and mild suicidal tendencies later in life - and they will have enormous difficulty building solid relationships with a potential partner - so that's an imbalance that causes unhappiness as well. They'll be punished for the rest of their lives no matter what route they take, if they are "pure evil" then they get locked away.. if they are rehabilitated then their own guilt when inhibit their dangerous tendencies, as they do with us, but to such a degree that they tend to isolate themselves emotionally again.

 

But can you "bring them back" to the point that they are not a danger to society - yes, that's actually not so difficult all things considered. It just takes time and patience and during that time they will break the law a few more times, but usually minor stuff like theft, burglary and funny enough often financial crimes (trying to scam an insurance company etc).. This is because (according to the theories we worked with) because of the arrested development that usually comes in these cases, causing them to get the early "teen-rebellion" around 16-30 - directed at "the man" instead.. Since they were brought up in an institution.

[Walsingham]

OK, so Ros, what do you think of this particular situation? I know you aren't qualified per se, but your reaction's interesting and valuable nonetheless.

[Rosbjerg]

Well it's now 17 years after it happened right? So if they have been rotting a cell, with a few therapy hours a week, then honestly I don't think any good will come of them - unless they (and that would be a small miracle) have actually developed a sense of morality completely on their own, which isn't simply "going to prison is bad - therefore .. don't get caught"

 

If these kids had been taken to a professional center, from the moment they were sentenced guilty, where every single one in the staff had been trained in handling these kinds of individuals and the family had also been taken under care, then I think they would've had quite a fair chance of holding jobs and actually giving back to society today.

 

Of course this little setup costs millions pr 'inmate' a year.. so it's a little difficult to justify when there are genuinely poor and honest working people suffering just outside the center.

[Walsingham]

Ok, but the cost efficiency is a seperate issue. You genuinely think there's a fighting chance that they could be rehabilitated?

[Rosbjerg]

If we hypothetically rewind time and get them into a good center.. then yes I do, especially given how young they were.. The younger they are the easier it is to undo the damage. If it gets time to settle in, then it's harder to teach them how to operate through life.

 

Can they be rehabilitated now, as in 17 years later - I doubt that..

[Walsingham]

OK. So I for one am happy to take that as true, in the context of this discussion. You make a good case.

 

The question then becomes one of decision making regarding doing good. I see the equation as having several components. You have the offender's good, you have the victim's 'good' (they may after all be dead), you have those who feel the pain of the victim (family and wider), and you have the people who could benefit from alternative use of resources.

 

I assume this isn't too contentious so far.

 

Has anyone got suggestions for how the outcome should balance those factors?

[Orogun01]

OK. So I for one am happy to take that as true, in the context of this discussion. You make a good case.

 

The question then becomes one of decision making regarding doing good. I see the equation as having several components. You have the offender's good, you have the victim's 'good' (they may after all be dead), you have those who feel the pain of the victim (family and wider), and you have the people who could benefit from alternative use of resources.

 

I assume this isn't too contentious so far.

 

Has anyone got suggestions for how the outcome should balance those factors?

In an utilitarian setting, perpetrators lose. Because:

 

1-They will never be completely rehabilitated

 

2- The victim's pain or their relatives

 

3- The spending of resources

 

In a humanitarian setting you would rehabilitate the perpetrators because of faith on mankind and all that

 

But is my fear that we may be making a loophole for them to escape. This case was obviously premeditated assault and the lack of guilty mind should have no bearing on the outcome of a trial. I don't think that resources should be spent on specific and rare cases that could be treated by already existing facilities.

 

@Rosbjerg: You wanted my anecdote? I'm Cuban, 'nuff said.

If you want specifics we'll go to PM.

[Walsingham]

Orogun, we already presumed for the sake of this discussion that full recovery was feasible, given sufficient resources. We accept this because it makes the question more interesting. Clearly if recovery is impossible, then emphasising recovery is epic fail.

 

I take your point about humanitarians saying we have to have faith in humanity and all that. but I struggle with this. How can it be said to be truly caring if you take sufficient resources to help thousands and instead spend it on one guy? Never mind that fact that his sole qualification for this largesse is that he has been an especially unpleasant arsehole.

[Rosbjerg]

and victims don't always feel better just because people are locked away, it can actually help them to see that the perpetrator genuinely feels sorry and won't do it again. Which is often one of their most tangible fears.

 

To be perfectly honest, I am a little ambivalent towards the whole rehabilitation approach.. Since in essence some people deserve that money a lot more than the criminals do - but if the choice is to either lock 'em up (which is also expensive) or rehabilitate then I would chose the latter and lesser of two evils.

[Orogun01]

Both of you make good points, the solution is on balancing.

No sensible human being would deny care to a sick person, so a compromise is not out of the question. Using existing facilities instead of building a few that specialize on these young criminals, is a more feasible option. There are already mental facilities for the youth, a ward dedicated to criminal cases could be added and rehabilitation could be funded by the state as it were an individual paying.

Of course that would only leave the matter of balancing that expense.

 

As for "rehabilitation"; I believe it to be futile to some degrees. While it can turn them into functioning members of society, I question the quality of life that these individuals will enjoy. As they will carry the stigma of their actions for all their lives, which is why I don't really believe in successful rehabilitation. At the cost of sounding cynical I will say that the main concern is not to heal, but to prevent a repeat of the act and to assimilate them into the economic structure of society. These are mental illness after all, there is not really a cure there is just learning to live with them.

[Walsingham]

My real issue with rehabilitation was that it is unreliable to the point of posing significant risk. The aspiration is to make rehab both more moral and more economical than life imprisonment. But I doubted whether it would be. We have assumed that it is at least possible, but is it feasible with the resources available? I suggest that what we do instead is simply tick some boxes and hope for the best.

[Calax]

realistically we're fooling ourselves if we think we can rehabilitate anyone with our current system. If anything, "correction facilities" are where you go to learn how to do things like kill, steal, rape, pilliage etc and get caught less. Mainly because while there is programs to teach you stuff but they don't push the inmates to enter them, and the prison culture is one where you HAVE to fight like a rabid dog just to stay alive and in control of yourself.