Edward Flores4 said:Living with a chronic illness—it’s just one of those things that changes everything about how you navigate the world, isn't it? It isn't just a single bad day or a passing flu; it's this constant, underlying weight that stays with you through the highs and the lows. It's like trying to run a marathon while carrying around a heavy backpack that you can never quite set down—you get used to the strain, sure, but you never actually forget it's there. It affects the little things, too—how much energy you have when you wake up, whether you can make it through a full workday at the office, or even if you'll feel up to grabbing dinner with friends later in the week. You start learning this whole new language of listening to your body, constantly checking in to see where your "battery" is at. Some days you're cruising along, and other days, it feels like the engine just won't turn over, no matter how much you coax it. It’s a deeply personal journey, and honestly, it takes a lot of mental grit to manage that uncertainty every single day.
So, you're asking if Hitler built those concentration camps out of pure fear? It’s an interesting way to look at it—trying to find the psychological root behind such massive, systemic horror. If we're talking about the mindset driving that kind of madness, it wasn't just simple fear; it was more like this toxic, paranoid obsession with control. It’s like when someone becomes so terrified of losing their grip on a situation that they start building walls—not just physical ones, but entire systems designed to crush anything they perceive as a threat. They convince themselves that total domination is the only way to stay safe, even though that very paranoia is what eventually leads to their own destruction. It’s less about being "afraid" in the way we usually think of it, and more about a pathological need to eliminate any possibility of opposition.
Is it possible that this whole phenomenon is actually a bit bigger than just your narrow little perspective?
Do you honestly get that I can smell the refinery every time you pump gas into your car? It’s like the scent follows you home. And don't even get me started on the sight of those massive industrial feedlots—it makes my stomach turn just thinking about the meat you eat, let alone the leather on your shoes.
Should I keep going with this, or did you manage to catch my drift?
Look, if I haven't made it clear enough yet... I can always just sit down and draw it out for you. ☕
Quincy:
Look, Interceptori... you’ve finally stumbled onto something here—something you probably wouldn't have ever wrapped your head around otherwise. You're starting to see that a real solution actually exists. The rest of this post isn't even worth a response—honestly. It’s just someone rambling in their own little bubble of historical fiction, completely detached from reality.
Any time you try to pin the entire weight of a tragedy on just one single person, it feels like a massive act of hypocrisy—honestly, it’s just pure denial. Nobody lives their life in some kind of social vacuum, right? We aren't born on isolated islands. If a society creates the very conditions that drive an individual toward those kinds of extreme actions, then that society is at least just as responsible as the person standing there in the middle of it all. It's a systemic issue, not just a solo performance.
It’s always so much easier for you to just call for someone to take a bullet to the head than it is to actually face the music—you know, acknowledging that you're at least partially responsible for how things turned out. Honestly, this whole thing feels like nothing more than a smug, middle-class attempt to scrub your own conscience clean. You’re just dressing up your guilt in these fancy, high-minded words, acting like some sort of modern-day inquisitor hiding behind a thin veil of secular superiority. ☕
Just dig into some history... it’s all pretty straightforward if you look at it. For instance, you could just track oil prices over the last year—I don't want to waste anyone's time explaining the basics here. You've got those weirdly structured funds, similar to how some government stimulus programs operate, and eventually, the infrastructure will follow. By the way... what do you actually do for a living?
What does any of this have to do with how much responsibility society bears for individual crimes?
Look, someone who is hungry enough—they're going to steal. So, who's really at fault for that "crime"? Why is that person starving in the first place? Is society somehow off the hook?
It’s pretty obvious we aren't talking about moral guilt here. You punish the thief to protect YOUR own stuff from them, but at the end of the day, YOU are the one responsible because they have nothing to eat, which leaves them with no choice but to steal.
So, are you suggesting Adolf Hitler built concentration camps because he was afraid?
Or is this whole phenomenon actually much larger than your incredibly narrow perspective allows? What are you even on? Do you truly grasp what you just wrote? Your obsession with Adolf Hitler is glaringly obvious across your various posts—honestly, that’s a far more relevant parallel than any talk of camps.
"So, Adolf Hitler built concentration camps out of fear?" 🤣 Where on earth did you pull a conclusion like that from? Even little Peter knows that was the Final Solution.
Aside from your so-called "revelations," I don't see any other phenomenon at all.
And really, isn't a narrow perspective better than no perspective at all? Or are you just feeling jealous?🤷
dustyskipper3 said:Well, since we have all shared our thoughts on the subject without actually getting any closer to a real answer, I suppose it might be best to summarize things here. It seems to me that there are really just two kinds of people participating in this thread:
I guess for those who are actually interested in the truth behind the Jeffrey Dahmer case—specifically what was going on inside his head, the psychological state of everyone around him, and what this says about an American society that seems to tolerate such horrors right under its nose until they become too obvious to ignore—there might be some lessons here. I mean, we have cases like Natasha Kampush where it feels almost impossible that neighbors, or even her own mother, weren't aware of something being wrong. It’s a heavy thought. If we want to find answers that are actually useful for ourselves, and really for humanity as a whole, we probably need to look deeper into how these things slip through the cracks. Maybe there is something there to learn, I suppose.
I guess there are those people... those who feel that eliminating someone like Jeffrey Dahmer with a bullet, or perhaps through some other means entirely, might actually solve the core issue. They seem to think that by doing so, they could finally settle the matter and, I suppose, quiet their own consciences. Maybe.
As someone who considers themselves a rational individual engaged in intellectual pursuits, I find myself leaning toward the first option. I suppose I can see why a certain type of "practitioner" might favor the second approach, if that's how they see things. But, well, let's look at history—if we really examine what those kinds of practitioners have actually achieved throughout the years.
In the realm of history and high-stakes politics, I suppose there isn't much room left for love; it seems to be nothing more than cold reason and self-interest. Enemies are typically just eliminated or assimilated—much like how they handle things in Star Trek, I guess. We are the Borg... and I suppose you'll just be assimilated. It almost looks like some sort of caricature, doesn't it? But then again, I guess that's just how real politics often plays out. They just go ahead and install their own hand-picked person to lead the country, and then that individual basically tells the rest of the citizens what to do. It's all very strange, I suppose. I-am-Locutus-the-Borg...except, I suppose, you just can't see the antennas sticking out from the back of his head.
There are exceptions to the rule, I suppose. One case that most people are probably familiar with is when the British King, Edward, abdicated his throne just so he could marry Wallis Simpson. Maybe that whole decision was influenced by time spent on one of our beautiful islands, the kind known for legends about tragic love—you know, where the place is supposedly cursed, so anyone who visits ends up staying or keeps finding their way back forever. Then there is a case that isn't as widely known, involving a so-called "morganatic" marriage involving a former Austrian heir and his Sophie (whose full name was Sophie Chotek von Chotkowa und Wognin). The reason they couldn't have a standard wedding was basically because being "just a countess" wasn't considered high-class enough for a future queen; she really needed to come from the highest levels of nobility. During court receptions and grand balls, the heir's wife would have to walk quite a distance behind him, keeping company with the lower nobility or even the servants, which was considered perfectly normal at the time. They actually used to enjoy vacationing on that same island, which was part of their territory back then. Also, in that country, a lot of things were considered normal that simply aren't today—for instance, certain pogroms that were permitted, or even tolerated, by someone as "wise" as Maria Theresa. It was just how things worked, because that nation, and the Holy Roman Empire it grew out of, didn't really believe that all citizens had to be equal in the way Jesus suggested when he said: I suppose... if you were to do even the smallest thing to my brothers, you’ve essentially done the same to me. I mean, that's just how it works, I guess..
And so, I suppose, that nation just rotted away from the inside out. Every single attempt to save it... well, they all seemed quite futile in the end. It collapsed under its own massive weight and supposed sanctity. Then, the heir to the throne was shot—along with his wife, who, I should add, wasn't even at fault in any way—by some kid who thought he was solving the "problem of evil." They went down in history as losers, I guess. Not much good was ever written about them, mostly because they were actually trying to rescue a decaying country, only to see it torn apart right after they were gone. I suppose... I mean, if one were to consider the concept of national dwarfs... It's a bit of an odd thought, isn't it? Perhaps some sort of niche cultural phenomenon or a specialized group within the American landscape. I don't quite know how to frame it properly. Maybe it's just a curious way of looking at things. I guess it's worth pondering, though.It was quite a disorganized mess, really... including that little Austrian "midget" state, those former pieces of America and the NDH, even tiny fragments of what used to be Great Canada, and so on. In this new little Austrian entity, little Adolf was born to Mrs. Schikelgruber, who would eventually decide... To strike back. I suppose... if one feels it is necessary. It’s a complicated thing, really. One doesn't just react without thinking about the consequences, though sometimes the impulse is simply too strong to ignore. Maybe there is a right way to handle it, or maybe there isn't. I guess it depends on the situation.It’s very much in the vein of Spielberg’s later take on Darth Vader—who was probably an inspiration for this, I suppose—and as a sort of indirect consequence of all that, much later on, we end up with a case like Jeffrey Dahmer. It's like a stray grenade that just sits there, exploding decades after it was actually thrown. I guess it reminds me of how people here still talk about landmines lurking under fields that were supposedly cleared long ago from old wars. And it feels particularly relevant today, as our national little players are once again coalescing into some new big shot who still needs to establish his own set of rules. But then again, if history has taught us anything at all, things like pogroms and discrimination really ought to be a thing of the past by now. Maybe.
I I suppose there are still people today who think just like Gavrilo Princip and operate under that same kind of logic. Princip—the bullet. And even now, they have their own monuments, much like how Princip had his monument and museum back in Ottawa, right by the river. When I was very young, someone took me there and said, Look, they actually put up a monument to a killer here. That man is long gone now, after enduring those intense prison interrogations and all that government harassment, and the monument itself is gone too—it was torn down by people who I guess truly believed in Gavrilo’s principle.
Nations might vanish, but a principle... well, it stays.
You present yourself as such a rational, level-headed individual, but I am making the responsible claim that you simply aren't telling the truth. It’s pretty clear that your ability to draw a logical conclusion is non-existent—just look at what you wrote above. On top of that, you're being incredibly rude by completely ignoring the questions I actually asked. How can we have a real conversation if you refuse to address the points being made? Based on everything you just said, I’d really appreciate it if you would just apologize. You’re essentially implying that we have something to hide, which is a pretty serious accusation that honestly deserves a formal reprimand. I honestly thought I would never be the one to ask this, but you can rest easy now. You’ll be happy to know that I was finally able to quiet my conscience, just like you claimed I could.
Edward Flores4 said:Living with a chronic illness—it’s just one of those things that changes everything about how you navigate the world, isn't it? It isn't just a single bad day or a passing flu; it's this constant, underlying weight that stays with you through the highs and the lows. It's like trying to run a marathon while carrying around a heavy backpack that you can never quite set down—you get used to the strain, sure, but you never actually forget it's there. It affects the little things, too—how much energy you have when you wake up, whether you can make it through a full workday at the office, or even if you'll feel up to grabbing dinner with friends later in the week. You start learning this whole new language of listening to your body, constantly checking in to see where your "battery" is at. Some days you're cruising along, and other days, it feels like the engine just won't turn over, no matter how much you coax it. It’s a deeply personal journey, and honestly, it takes a lot of mental grit to manage that uncertainty every single day.
So, you're asking if Hitler built those concentration camps out of pure fear? It’s an interesting way to look at it—trying to find the psychological root behind such massive, systemic horror. If we're talking about the mindset driving that kind of madness, it wasn't just simple fear; it was more like this toxic, paranoid obsession with control. It’s like when someone becomes so terrified of losing their grip on a situation that they start building walls—not just physical ones, but entire systems designed to crush anything they perceive as a threat. They convince themselves that total domination is the only way to stay safe, even though that very paranoia is what eventually leads to their own destruction. It’s less about being "afraid" in the way we usually think of it, and more about a pathological need to eliminate any possibility of opposition.
Is it possible that this whole phenomenon is actually a bit bigger than just your narrow little perspective?
Do you honestly get that I can smell the refinery every time you pump gas into your car? It’s like the scent follows you home. And don't even get me started on the sight of those massive industrial feedlots—it makes my stomach turn just thinking about the meat you eat, let alone the leather on your shoes.
Should I keep going with this, or did you manage to catch my drift?
Look, if I haven't made it clear enough yet... I can always just sit down and draw it out for you. ☕
Quincy:
Look, Interceptori... you’ve finally stumbled onto something here—something you probably wouldn't have ever wrapped your head around otherwise. You're starting to see that a real solution actually exists. The rest of this post isn't even worth a response—honestly. It’s just someone rambling in their own little bubble of historical fiction, completely detached from reality.
Any time you try to pin the entire weight of a tragedy on just one single person, it feels like a massive act of hypocrisy—honestly, it’s just pure denial. Nobody lives their life in some kind of social vacuum, right? We aren't born on isolated islands. If a society creates the very conditions that drive an individual toward those kinds of extreme actions, then that society is at least just as responsible as the person standing there in the middle of it all. It's a systemic issue, not just a solo performance.
It’s always so much easier for you to just call for someone to take a bullet to the head than it is to actually face the music—you know, acknowledging that you're at least partially responsible for how things turned out. Honestly, this whole thing feels like nothing more than a smug, middle-class attempt to scrub your own conscience clean. You’re just dressing up your guilt in these fancy, high-minded words, acting like some sort of modern-day inquisitor hiding behind a thin veil of secular superiority. ☕
Just dig into some history... it’s all pretty straightforward if you look at it. For instance, you could just track oil prices over the last year—I don't want to waste anyone's time explaining the basics here. You've got those weirdly structured funds, similar to how some government stimulus programs operate, and eventually, the infrastructure will follow. By the way... what do you actually do for a living?
What does any of this have to do with how much responsibility society bears for individual crimes?
Look, someone who is hungry enough—they're going to steal. So, who's really at fault for that "crime"? Why is that person starving in the first place? Is society somehow off the hook?
It’s pretty obvious we aren't talking about moral guilt here. You punish the thief to protect YOUR own stuff from them, but at the end of the day, YOU are the one responsible because they have nothing to eat, which leaves them with no choice but to steal.
Living with a chronic illness is an absolute marathon. It isn't just a single moment of pain or a temporary setback; it is a constant, unrelenting presence that reshapes your entire existence. How do you even begin to navigate a life where the rules change every single day based on how your body decides to behave? It’s more than just managing symptoms. It’s about the mental toll—the exhaustion of constantly having to advocate for yourself, the frustration of doctors who might not fully grasp the depth of your struggle, and the sheer willpower required to maintain a sense of normalcy when everything feels like an uphill battle. You find yourself planning your life around flare-ups and energy levels, constantly calculating whether you have enough "fuel in the tank" to make it through a simple grocery run or a work meeting. Does anyone else feel like they are perpetually playing catch-up with their own health? It can feel incredibly isolating, even when you're surrounded by people, because there is a specific kind of loneliness that comes from fighting a battle that is happening entirely inside your own skin. It takes a level of resilience that most people will never have to tap into, but man, I wish we didn't have to be this strong just to exist.
Let’s take a look at what the literature actually says... specifically regarding the term "chronic"—which implies something that is long-lasting, deeply established, or perhaps develops with that slow, steady medical progression.
The bottom line is this: You haven't actually said anything that isn't old news to you, but I have to admit, you managed to make me laugh. Even with a subject this morbid, there’s something about the way you kept circling back to those same questions... oh my god... Honestly, you didn't get a single thing right. It’s actually pretty painful to read. Why on earth would you jump into a discussion that wasn't meant for you just to show everyone how little you actually know about the subject? Could your industry actually handle this, if I’m not mistaken? Marketing Expert.
Now, maybe you could give that question another shot? To be honest, I’m starting to wonder if you actually grasped what was being asked in the first place, or if there's just a fundamental disconnect regarding the concept itself—not to mention the semantics of it all. Looking at what was presented above, it wasn't exactly pleasant, was it? So, if you don't mind, I’d like to add a little follow-up regarding the rest of the matter.
It isn't really about questioning whether anyone else is to blame here; the woman was completely broken, and her home didn't offer any kind of refuge or basement to hide in. The issue is that she didn't try to dig deeper, but then again, strange things happen when you aren't looking. The real problem is how some people stubbornly insist he’s just "unwell," so I’m going to take this opportunity to illustrate exactly what I mean by him being "a little" sick.
Picture this: Joe worked in Austria. He was an incredible employee—never late, knew his stuff inside and out, took immense pride in his work, and his boss at ExxonMobil was absolutely thrilled with him... days go by. Then, one Friday, Joe tells the boss he won't be in on Monday because he’s feeling a bit under the weather. "Oh, sure, no problem," the boss says. "Just get better and come back." And sure enough, Joe doesn't show up on Monday. But then Tuesday rolls around, and there’s Joe... working like a machine, absolutely crushing it, and the boss is just stunned by how productive he is. Two weeks later, the exact same thing happens. Joe tells the boss he’ll be "a little sick" again, and once more, the boss lets him off. Then Tuesday comes... and once again, Joe is back, working like a powerhouse. Two weeks pass, and Joe approaches the boss again with the same line: "I'm going to be a little sick." The boss lets him go again... When Tuesday hits, there's Joe, looking healthier than ever and working harder than anyone.
Finally, the boss asks him, "Alright, Joe, how is it that you know you're going to be sick every other Monday, only to be bursting with energy and health every single Tuesday?"
Joe just shrugs and says, "Well, boss, look... my brother-in-law heads out for field work every other Monday. I drive him out there to drop him off, then my sister calls me for coffee, maybe a little drink, some dessert, we sit close on the couch, and well... we end up in bed together all day. That's the whole story." The boss stares at him and says: "Joe, you *are* sick..." To which Joe replies: "Exactly what I told you. What's the problem?"
Thanks... you already have even though you know that number 42 has been yours for a long time now—it’s practically your signature.
I should point out that I actually have an case both regarding my claim about you, and for those ladies earlier
- direct links -
And don't doubt for a second that my response will be surgically precise without ever getting personal with you.
But honestly, it would be great if florine would step up and speak her mind here too. Personally, I believe in equality—women should have the right to defend themselves rather than just waiting on some guy to come along and save their honor. And let's be real, there are plenty of guys out there who aren't exactly "charming little boys"...
Aaron Morris56 said:Roughly speaking, things have leveled out now, so I don't think I have much else to add to the conversation. You feel differently?
Could you actually point to any specific tension? It seems to me that the only one, Ms. florin, who held a prejudice against what was written, was acting from a place of pure intention, and everything stated is the truth. I suspect she might have dealt with abuse herself, so wouldn't it be interesting to see if she actually studied the subject or if she just wanted to react differently? That would truly reveal her literary style and the depth of her perspective.
@ Aaron Morris56 They would have been considered great if you could provide just one single reason why they’re so beautiful—honestly, that’s the rule here, not just my personal whim... if you can do that, then we're good, right? What’s your take on this? I’m a big fan of hiking myself.
electrictiger70 said:It is highly unlikely. In most cases involving domestic abuse, the perpetrators themselves were victims of abuse during their childhood, which serves as the root cause for their future behavior. If I recall correctly, that was actually pointed out during the trial. People like that aren't going to be out there targeting random little girls in public parks; that simply isn't the same type of pathology. Obviously, this isn't an excuse, but it helps provide context for how such monstrous acts occur... It is difficult to develop empathy if you have never experienced it yourself.🤷
So, I agree with Florin that even when dealing with such monstrous crimes, we shouldn't view things through a purely one-dimensional lens.
Hello? Can we get back to reality for a second? What kind of "evidence" are we talking about when the facts are practically screaming at us? A one-dimensional perspective is just lazy thinking—it’s missing the entire point. Is everything perfectly fine as long as it isn't happening to you? I wonder how many victims are out there that you don't even know about, simply because they chose to carry their trauma quietly and stay "good"? There is absolutely no excuse for a crime. If someone claims they were just "mentally ill," that’s a very convenient way to dodge accountability when they can't face what they've done. Stripping away someone else's freedom, even if only temporarily, is one of the most heinous crimes a person can commit. Taking a life is really just an extension of that theft of autonomy.
I have to apologize once again, but I simply can't let this pass without adding my two cents:
hiddenhound3 said:I am asking simply because I require certainty before I can truly believe it.
I would genuinely appreciate it if you could explain to me where one finds any sense of aesthetics in the case of Jeffrey Dahmer, if you can manage such an explanation.
Sandra Parker3, I have no desire to engage in a competition with you regarding moral qualities, as I am under the impression that no single virtue exists without its corresponding flaw within the same individual. I merely ventured to express my own perspective, which is that I feel a profound concern for those who are too quick to pull a trigger... or do you maintain that such people are perfectly fine, even when their actions are framed as nothing more than a metaphorical joke?
edit: I neglected to mention something; I had also asked for your opinion on whether, had Jeffrey Dahmer not had his own daughter, he would have abducted a girl off the street to serve as a substitute? And in your estimation, would his crime have carried even greater weight in that scenario?
I am not particularly inclined toward speculating on "what if" scenarios; for me, only the concrete reality of a situation holds any significance.
What do you suppose I would have worn—sneakers or knit booties—had I been a resistance fighter during the war? 🙄
And lest I forget... since you are so firmly convinced that mortality, or specifically the death penalty, serves as a deterrent against monstrous acts, how do you account for the fact that such crimes continue to be perpetrated despite the execution of so many criminals? 😕
I’ve never been one to dwell on "what ifs." Why waste energy spinning webs of hypothetical scenarios? For me, there is only the reality right in front of my face—the concrete, tangible situation at hand.
What do you think I’d be wearing if I were a partisan fighter? Would I have opted for rugged sneakers or some kind of heavy knit boots? 🙄
And I shouldn't forget... since you’re so absolutely convinced that capital punishment can act as a deterrent against monstrous acts, how exactly do you account for the fact that these crimes just keep happening? If we've already executed so many criminals, why does the cycle of evil continue unabated? 😕 Haven't you heard about those four missing girls from that same timeframe? One of them was actually found strangled and assaulted, her body just discarded in a nearby lake. Isn't it chilling how these things happen? We tend to view our homes as sanctuaries—the one place where we should feel truly safe. When you see organized shelters being set up, it’s a clear sign of premeditated planning. It shows that someone hasn't just reacted to a crisis, but has actually "trained" for it. If you can't continue your daily life out on the streets, what does that say about the stability of our environment? Does it mean the systems we rely on have already begun to fail us?
As you mentioned yourself, you just don't truly grasp it until you've actually lived through it. It’s almost as if you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth—and I don't mean that as a personal jab. Rather, I'm talking about a certain detachment from the reality of those around you. It’s that mindset of "let them eat cake" when people are struggling to put bread on the table. Do you see what I mean? It seems like you’re hitting on the exact same issue we see with the "prevention is better than cure" philosophy. Your observations really tie back to the broader picture I’ve been painting in my other posts—specifically that one regarding the death penalty. It all points to the same fundamental dilemma, doesn't it? Some people are paralyzed by fear, too terrified to even attempt what needs to be done. But those who have already made up their minds? They’ll keep at it with the same relentless consistency as a sunny day, no matter how many times they have to repeat the process. Whether it’s driven by conscious intent or some deep-seated, "unconscious" impulse, it all stems from that same fundamental lack of empathy ingrained during their upbringing—which brings me right back to where I previously praised you. It’s essentially a fundamental law of nature: if you catch an illness early enough, you can get the necessary treatment before it has the chance to spread. Isn't that the whole point? If we don't intervene at the onset, how can we ever hope to contain the damage? Look, speaking from my own perspective as someone who lived through those wartime struggles, I’m certain she wouldn't have had the luxury of hair, let alone the ability to style it. Dealing with typhus back then was a brutal reality, so that's my direct answer to your "what if" scenario. How could anyone maintain an appearance like that under such conditions? Could you give this some thought? I’d really love to hear what you think about it.
hiddenhound3 said:I am quoting specifically what strikes me as problematic, and what happened to strike me was your attempt to justify a bullet to the head for the sake of more than one person.
My apologies, but: 🤮 👎 🙈 😱 🙂
It truly concerns and unsettles me that people are so quick and eager to pull the trigger.
There is no room for metaphors when you are discussing pressing a gun against someone's temple.
There is no such thing as righteous indignation; those are merely stories for teenagers—nothing justifies murder.
But what about the specifics—the when, the how, and the where? If everything is truly proven, does that change anything? I’m not suggesting people should go out and take justice into their own hands, but shouldn't we strive for a world where true justice actually becomes a reality?
hiddenhound3 said:Execution sites, guillotines, the death penalty, or any form of prohibition, mandate, or repression has never actually improved the collective mental health of humanity; therefore, the same logic cannot be applied to the murder of Fritz. You have misconstrued my intentions; I am not offering anyone applause, I am simply stating an observation. The man is mentally ill, period—I am not attempting to excuse him. Should we go ahead and kill a sick man under the assumption that doing so will somehow cure the sickness in everyone else? 😕 That would be your solution... wouldn't it? 🤷 Do you truly believe that tormenting and seeking vengeance against this man will return his daughter the years she lost, or alleviate the profound suffering they endured? 😕 I would bet anything that it will not.
One must accept the reality that humanity is flawed and that monsters of this nature will continue to be born indefinitely. It is a tragic truth that breaks my heart, but such things are impossible to prevent. As for revenge? What purpose does it serve? The man has already been sentenced to life in prison; what more could possibly be required?
To conclude my thoughts on this matter—people possess a fascination with execution sites; people hunger for the suffering of others; people harbor sadistic tendencies and find a twisted sense of satisfaction in seeing others tormented. Those who hold such views are no healthier in their minds than Fritz himself, but unfortunately, this is the general condition of mankind—if not to say, it is inherently human.
EDIT: My position is that no human being intends to commit evil. Evil arises as a consequence of psychological instability, and we often focus too much on the tip of the iceberg because it is easier than plunging our heads into deep, cold, dark waters to search for the actual root of the problem.
hiddenhound3, these conclusions are yours alone. Honestly, it feels like you haven't truly faced the realities of life yet, or perhaps you've just been lucky enough to avoid encountering true malice firsthand... which strikes me as odd given what you mentioned in a previous post. I agree that understanding the "why" is vital, but let's be real: some people simply refuse to leave the path of destruction. In fact, they fight tooth and nail to stay on it. I know for a fact that true evil exists.
It wasn't just his one isolated act; the way he set up that hidden compartment tells you everything you need to know about who he was. Similar patterns emerge every single day, it’s just that not everyone has the resources or the opportunity to pull it off. A childhood trauma served as the primary trigger, but honestly, isn't the role his wife played equally unsettling?
Zachary Patel6 said:Why does he think I’d take my own life over him? First, I'm going to dismantle him—then, and only then, will I end things. And honestly, it isn't because he holds any weight in my life; it's just that life itself is a total wreck. I really have no idea where my damn wits went.
Both grammatical and logical slips here... they point toward a specific intent.
"Life is worth nothing, but nothing is worth a life" - Andre Malraux
"Living isn't anything new, but dying isn't any newer either" - Mayakovsky
So, Zachary Patel6, life is one massive odyssey. Don't let the valleys of tears get you down; for every low, there is an equal high. Be grateful that you can still feel things at all.
You only have this moment, and this is it. Who knows? Maybe tomorrow someone will be waiting for Ty, and Ty might just let them down. As for those cowards, their punishment is a certainty—don't give them a second thought, it'll all work itself out in time.
You make a fair point, but honestly, people used to have way more breathing room for everything back in the day. At the end of the day, when you step back and look at the big picture, the aesthetic might change, but the underlying structure remains exactly the same. You just need a little nudge; with the sheer amount of information out there now—even if we can't trust all of it—you can pretty easily stumble upon the truth yourself. Unless, of course, someone is looking to "manage" the masses... There’s a perfect historical parallel in the French Revolution...
Dr. Gustav Le bon really hit the nail on the head with his observations—I actually have a vintage edition from 1920 sitting right here on my shelf! Do you all truly believe that people ever change? Honestly, it’s a fascinating question to ponder...
And one quick correction on my part... a whole bunch, not just bunches!
Honestly, you’ve finally found your footing, once you reach the summit, you'll realize that while plenty of paths lead to the top, the most beautiful ones are always the hardest—and that includes yours.
So, why not become a beacon for others? Or maybe just live by the spirit of that song "slap." That's actually what I'm trying to write about right now; the stretch of the road you're traveling might just end up lighting the way for someone else.
Samuel Davis16 said:Lethargy. Oh yeah, what a wonderful state to be in.😳😁 That's the only time you get any clarity, right? Only then can you predict things instead of just sensing them.
No, seriously—the meds brought me back to reality. My brain was running at 100 mph; I couldn't even keep up with my own thoughts, let alone anything else...
Now I'm fine. Not high, just steady.😁
Mind you, I can't make guarantees for every pill, every disorder, every issue, or every person out there.
If I remember correctly, even the ancient Greeks used to seek out that kind of lethargy as if it were some sort of perfect dream—but what happens when the sleep ends and the lights come on?...
So, what was occupying your mind the most? Like, what was your main driving force?... Most of us have these massive ambitions, and people call that "normal"—they call it youthful vigor, which explains everything, really. It's that deep-seated desire to build a whole new world....
Honestly, calling this "spending" is being far too polite; there’s a much more blunt word for it that we all know deep down.
I’ve been scrolling through some of the recent posts, and I noticed how many people—mostly women—seem to be really struggling with this. Of course, these aren't just minor issues; they are genuine hardships. Having to fight your way through this world on your own is nothing new, is it? But relying on pills isn't going to save anyone; all they do is induce lethargy. Once you truly understand what you're up against, you can actually start to anticipate the challenges instead of just guessing what might happen next. Personality quirks and outbursts are perfectly normal, just like you mentioned, provided everything else stays on the right track.
Honestly, you’re just wearing me down here. Do you really want me to prove my point by simply being present? Because I am... People, you seriously need to take action. Don't just let the wind blow you wherever it wants, unless, of course, it happens to be blowing you in the right direction.
Well, that’s exactly what I meant, though you interpreted it as being about the house—mostly because of my promise to be a mess. But honestly, my chaos follows me wherever I go; "I carry everything I am with me," a lesson I learned way back during my time in ancient Greece. If you don't work with him, the dynamic shifts. He isn't standing above you anymore; instead, you're on equal footing, and people often hate that because it means you were the one who chose to meet him where he is. Not everyone is like that (I haven't had enough experience with them to say for sure), or at least, that's what they claim.