Criminal profiling: What makes them tick?

mistyhound said:Look, here's how I see it: if a healthy person wouldn't kill anyone regardless of how selfish they were, then why would someone like Paramount do what they did? It’s because they're sick. Honestly, the only thing that bugs me is all the name-calling—why not just lock them up and be done with it?

If we actually followed that logic, we would probably have to provide disability pensions to every single person who has ever stepped foot on a battlefield, so let's be careful about how we frame these arguments.😛

I agree with you. People like that require assistance rather than condemnation. There is a distinction between committing a crime out of greed and doing so due to mental instability, even if society continues to lump them together today... And as you noted, there are things you wouldn't do for all the money in the world, yet he simply sees an "opportunity" and his impulses take over.

Paravinja is perfectly mentally stable. He was fully aware that his actions constituted a criminal offense. The alternative scenario would be if he were psychotic at the time of the offense—for instance, if voices were commanding him to act. That is the fundamental difference. Such an individual would be found not criminally responsible and would be sentenced to mandatory psychiatric treatment in a forensic facility.

The most tragic part is that these individuals are never given a chance at recovery because of such primitive perspectives. It is easier to lock someone in prison and isolate them from society because they are guilty than it is to attempt treatment, uncover the root cause, or help them adapt. It isn't as if the techniques don't exist. Every time I reflect on this, I am surprised that we are in the 21st century and our methods remain as hollow as they were in the early days.

Personality disorders cannot be cured, nor can one truly determine the cause (though that is ultimately irrelevant), and they certainly cannot be "adapted." If diagnosed early in youth and met with intensive psychotherapy, perhaps something can be achieved; in all other instances, unfortunately, nothing can be done.

I recall reading about a case where a criminal tried to hide behind genetics, leaning heavily on scientific studies that suggested a strong hereditary component to their behavior. In response, the judge finally quipped, "Fine then, I sentence your genes to XY years in prison..."

At the end of the day, whether there’s a genetic predisposition or not, someone actually has to take responsibility for their criminal actions.

goldenscout14 said:I recall reading about a case where a criminal tried to hide behind genetics, leaning heavily on scientific studies that suggested a strong hereditary component to their behavior. In response, the judge finally quipped, "Fine then, I sentence your genes to XY years in prison..."

At the end of the day, whether there’s a genetic predisposition or not, someone actually has to take responsibility for their criminal actions.

Sure, but then you run into the whole issue of punishment—do you actually throw someone in prison, or do you send them to some kind of rehabilitation facility?

The real question is whether an environment can influence a person enough to make them commit a crime. To be more specific, if someone who has never killed and would never dream of killing suddenly kills during a war, is there some latent aggression inside them that war just unlocks? Or are they simply being forced into it by circumstance? And if it's just about being forced, why are there still people out there who physically cannot bring themselves to kill, even when their own lives are on the line?

Alright, look, I’m not even talking about war here—though man, I wouldn't care if that happened either! I'm just talking about life in general.

Alright, if you don't mind me expanding the topic a little—can I touch on war? I was thinking about this while reading all those news reports about wartime conflicts and various criminal prosecutions. My takeaway was that while someone might be forced into killing because of their circumstances (like, say, a war), you can never really be "forced" into rape. To me, it feels like a predator who commits sexual assault during wartime would just do it anytime if there wasn't something stopping them. On the flip side, someone who wouldn't commit such an act would never resort to it, even in the middle of a war zone. It’s almost as if rape isn't a necessity for survival or self-defense—whereas people argue that killing sometimes is—so it suggests that some people just have that specific "glitch" or impulse inside them, and they just needed the chaos of war as an excuse to let it out...

Thomas Collins60 said:Alright, if you don't mind me expanding the topic a little—can I touch on war? I was thinking about this while reading all those news reports about wartime conflicts and various criminal prosecutions. My takeaway was that while someone might be forced into killing because of their circumstances (like, say, a war), you can never really be "forced" into rape. To me, it feels like a predator who commits sexual assault during wartime would just do it anytime if there wasn't something stopping them. On the flip side, someone who wouldn't commit such an act would never resort to it, even in the middle of a war zone. It’s almost as if rape isn't a necessity for survival or self-defense—whereas people argue that killing sometimes is—so it suggests that some people just have that specific "glitch" or impulse inside them, and they just needed the chaos of war as an excuse to let it out...

I find myself agreeing regarding those rapists; there was certainly a massive wave of such violence during the war, but honestly, if a commander orders you to fire, and you shoot out of pure survival instinct, it is a world away from seeking out sexual violence or the depravity seen in concentration camps. I understand how propaganda works, but there are certain lines that simply shouldn't be crossed. For predators like this one and Bull, the war felt less like a tragedy and more like a holiday tailored specifically to their dark impulses.
It might be that they aren't inherently encouraged by their actions, even if they harbor those desires—there are many people who dream of such things but lack the courage to act due to selfish reasons or a total lack of empathy—but the war essentially gave them a green light. Consequently, I fear this entire region will remain haunted by this shadow for at least fifty years. 😢 These individuals weren't punished; instead, they were actually rewarded for their crimes during the war, and we are all fools for not standing up and acknowledging that all three sides were harboring maniacs. War is a filthy, messy business, and while I won't play the blame game, once the chaos starts, moral boundaries tend to evaporate. Because of this, families like the Beslics and the Billings have lost their entire future—parents, sisters, the whole lineage has been frozen in time, and things will never return to how they were... largely because of extradition laws and similar legal hurdles. It is profoundly tragic. 😢 The individual responsible for killing little Shushnar clearly harbored a hatred for women, much like all rapists, yet his own mother tried to shield him... it's such a textbook pattern that it almost feels cliché. I recall similar instances occurring back in Central California as well. These are often seemingly respectable people, some even active in local politics; they aren't some isolated oddballs living on the fringes, but rather productive citizens with families. I can only imagine the hidden dynamics within those households; it takes a significant amount of effort to cultivate a true psychopath or a maniac. 👎

Maybe I shouldn't have brought up war—I don't want this whole conversation to spiral into a political debate 😳

But if we're acting like someone’s genetic code determines whether they'll be a criminal or not—and then deciding to test newborns (if that were even possible) just to flag these "critical" markers—well, that’s getting dangerously close to those old eugenics programs where people tried to wipe out anyone who didn't fit a certain mold. I mean, is DNA really enough to decide if someone becomes a villain? In my view, you can find all sorts of traits in someone's genes that might look like a "criminal profile," yet that person turns out to be perfectly fine. At the end of the day, the human spirit and how we actually live our lives carry way more weight than just biology 🙂

Zachary Mendoza2 said:The purpose of prison isn't about punishing someone just because we hate them or because they're different. It's about protecting future victims. Some people will refrain from committing crimes simply out of fear of the law, which protects others. The world is objectively better because prisons exist. They are also considered "humane," though that's a bit of a stretch. Honestly, the world would be even better if we just eliminated such criminals instead of feeding and housing them, only to release them after a set period. Many just go right back to their criminal ways. In fact, for many, prison acts as a school for crime—a place to learn how to commit offenses and evade justice, while building connections within organized crime networks.

As for the philosophical debate over whether they are guilty by nature, guilty by choice, or merely products of a broken society—leave that to the philosophers to babble about over drinks. As far as I'm concerned, providing protection to innocent victims is far more important. If the perpetrator suffers a little in the process, so be it. You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. Besides, who cares. It is only natural to be responsible for your actions and face the consequences, just as it is natural to experience things in life that you didn't deserve. That's just how it works. 🤷

I'm with you on this.👍

Exactly. The penal system is repressive in certain aspects, certainly, but our framework is formally built on rehabilitation.
As for inmates complaining about poor food quality and going on hunger strikes—I couldn't care less. What do they think this is, a luxury resort?😕🙄
They have no idea how lucky they actually are.
I would be the first to vote for changing the Constitution regarding forced labor. Then we could move to more direct methods: shotguns, K9 units, and if you dare, you better run. After that, it’s back to manual labor. Let them earn their meals and their beds.

A couple of days ago, I was scrolling through USA Today and stumbled upon this commentary from some physiotherapist or whatever... they were trying to claim that Paravinja is an ectomorph just because he’s thin and lanky. Their whole argument? That because of his body type, he basically lacks the willpower to suppress his impulses, which is why he did what he did. It felt a bit off to me.

Has anyone else run into this kind of thing? Every time I try to look up "ectomorph" on Google, all I get is stuff about body types for athletes or bodybuilding enthusiasts. There isn't anything connecting physical build to psychological states or impulse control.

Edward Booth9 said:A couple of days ago, I was scrolling through USA Today and stumbled upon this commentary from some physiotherapist or whatever... they were trying to claim that Paravinja is an ectomorph just because he’s thin and lanky. Their whole argument? That because of his body type, he basically lacks the willpower to suppress his impulses, which is why he did what he did. It felt a bit off to me.

Has anyone else run into this kind of thing? Every time I try to look up "ectomorph" on Google, all I get is stuff about body types for athletes or bodybuilding enthusiasts. There isn't anything connecting physical build to psychological states or impulse control.

Are you 100% certain that being an ectomorph is causally linked to an inability to inhibit impulses?😕
Or perhaps this is more accurate: 😂

If that were true, half the people on my street would be murderers.🙄

I was just digging through the trash earlier—not from USA Today, mind you, but a July 3rd, 2011 edition of the New York Post where Ljiljana buhač, who works as a communications consultant and physiognomy trainer, wrote this piece.

...Paravinja falls under the ectomorph personality type. They’re characterized by a thin, almost gaunt appearance. People of this type tend to be hypersensitive, mostly because they have such a large surface area relative to their body mass. They possess intense nervous energy, struggle to relax, and can be intellectually volatile. It’s difficult for them to find harmony between mind and body, making them prone to fragmentation. They deal with deep insecurities, often masking them through aggression or violence. Emotionally, they can be stunted or schizoid. In these types, the connection between head and body seems severed; they often have elongated necks and heads that tilt away from the body's central axis...

So, basically, all that fluff is just a way to sell a column?

Physiognomy? It’s about as scientific as reading tea leaves...

communications consultant and physiognomy trainer

😁

Honestly, we would have been better off getting advice from a lady at a local farmers market...
It isn't funny; it’s just pathetic.😢

Edward Booth9 said:A couple of days ago, I was scrolling through USA Today and stumbled upon this commentary from some physiotherapist or whatever... they were trying to claim that Paravinja is an ectomorph just because he’s thin and lanky. Their whole argument? That because of his body type, he basically lacks the willpower to suppress his impulses, which is why he did what he did. It felt a bit off to me.

Has anyone else run into this kind of thing? Every time I try to look up "ectomorph" on Google, all I get is stuff about body types for athletes or bodybuilding enthusiasts. There isn't anything connecting physical build to psychological states or impulse control.

Weight isn't even the main concern for an ectomorph—honestly, if you have this body type, you probably worry more about catching a cold when a strong breeze kicks up! The biggest hurdle is that most people with this build only eat when they actually feel hungry. To see any real progress on the scale, you have to break that habit. I highly recommend sticking to high-calorie meals and eating more frequently, specifically by increasing your portion sizes beyond what feels "normal." "



Oh man, I’m actually starting to get a little intimidated by people who are super skinny and even taller than me!😲😲😲
😂😂😂

Personality tests should be conducted periodically and mandated for every citizen—it would provide a solid foundation for drawing meaningful conclusions after a few years.

To be honest, I find it quite unsettling that psychology, as a scientific discipline, cannot predict who might turn into a killer due to standard life stressors. It’s essentially like physics being unable to determine if a bridge is going to collapse or not. (After all, the entire purpose of scientific theories is to forecast outcomes and ensure those results align with reality.)

Personality tests should be mandatory and conducted periodically for every citizen. Over a few years, this would provide a solid data set for drawing meaningful conclusions.

God forbid.😲 We might as well just implant microchips or barcodes in us at this point.

Personally, I find it terrifying that psychology, as a science, cannot predict who will turn into a killer due to standard life stressors. It is akin to physics being unable to determine if a bridge will collapse. (The entire purpose of scientific theory is to predict outcomes that align with reality).

There are exact sciences and there are inexact ones.
Even if such predictions were possible, what utility would they serve? You cannot judge or imprison someone for a crime they haven't actually committed.

I know I’m probably going to get roasted for saying this,
but when you look at cases like Paravinja, I honestly think the death penalty is the most humane option available—
both for the individual and for everyone else out there... because let’s be real, it’s highly unlikely someone like that would ever actually come "rehabilitated" from prison or some state facility, which means they'd just stay a threat to society... and even if they did have some sudden moment of clarity or enlightenment later on, I doubt they could even live with themselves after what they did (assuming they even became "normal"), so I guess I see it as the only real solution..

Zachary Kelly said:I know I’m probably going to get roasted for saying this,
but when you look at cases like Paravinja, I honestly think the death penalty is the most humane option available—
both for the individual and for everyone else out there... because let’s be real, it’s highly unlikely someone like that would ever actually come "rehabilitated" from prison or some state facility, which means they'd just stay a threat to society... and even if they did have some sudden moment of clarity or enlightenment later on, I doubt they could even live with themselves after what they did (assuming they even became "normal"), so I guess I see it as the only real solution..

I would prefer life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
Naturally, an individual like Paravinja cannot be cured or rehabilitated; that isn't even what prison is for. The purpose is to isolate him and lock him away to prevent further crimes.