Jason Booth25 said:Only a complete psychopath could actually do something like that.😠
Seeing stuff like this makes me physically sick.
Fair point. Whoever did this is clearly disturbed, but there's no sense being shocked or angry. The real issue is figuring out how to stop these crimes before people turn into monsters.
placidjackal36 said:It’s honestly fascinating to me how, regardless of which sub-forum these topics pop up in, you always attract the exact same breed of lunatics. They all spout the same repetitive nonsense: advocating for punishments that would qualify as crimes against humanity.
You people genuinely have no clue what kind of garbage is leaking out of your brains. I sincerely hope this constant stream of writing is just a byproduct of some deep-seated, pathetic frustration over your third life goal, rather than evidence that you’re actual psychopaths.
And I don't get it—I really don't—why none of you are being penalized for this, especially since it's one of the most clearly defined rules in the site guidelines.
What’s even more interesting is watching the textbook cognitive dissonance play out here. You’ll read a description of an atrocity that you would personally commit, yet you react with absolute outrage if that crime was committed against someone outside of whatever ideology you've decided to cling to.
If everything you spew across this entire platform were taken at face value—since much of it is actually illegal because it glorifies heinous crimes—the world would be a terrifying place. Just look back at the military camps from the American Civil War. Take, for instance, certain infamous concentration camps. I’m picking an example that hits particularly close to home on purpose. Those camps didn't just hold civilians targeted for their identity; they also housed the depraved psychopaths from various paramilitary "special units" who performed acts so vile that normal people weep just hearing survivors recount them.
Why mention Lara? Because it was one of those prisons where Americans, acting without any shred of hesitation and driven by pure sadistic malice, committed horrors identical to those committed by the monsters they fought. It doesn't matter. Whether it's gouging the eyes out of an innocent shopkeeper snatched off the street in a van in the middle of the night, or brutalizing a military policeman caught in some small town, it’s all the same. A crime. Horrific, devastating, and completely beneath the standards of human decency.
People spend their lives in prison for the very things you guys sit here celebrating. What’s next? Are we going to start glorifying corporal punishment for cat abusers, or eventually anyone who simply gets on our nerves? If war breaks out with our neighbors again, are you going to start shouting "Mexican on the hill"?
I don't have the authority to ban you over on Psychology, but if you bring this trash over to Natural science, you aren't going to like the outcome.
You truly have no idea what you're playing with. You are messing with the very foundations of a civilized, humanistic society.
Just remember it once and for all: a crime is a crime. THERE ARE NO EXCUSES.
The issue is that many criminals find justifications for their actions, and sometimes even the law fails (or chooses not) to stop them. So why be surprised when people get angry? I agree that vengeance is the wrong path and quite dangerous (I mentioned that earlier, along with several others, though you seem to think everyone participating in this thread is an enemy of humanity), but please don't act surprised by the public's rage. Criminals who go unchecked become a major threat to a civilized society, which triggers these rebellions. The problem is they don't realize when they themselves become bloodthirsty.
Anonymous said:Man, I can't believe a sane, normal person could actually write this stuff!
Who are you to judge people who just feel the need to express their opinions on these types of crimes???
Just like you accused those users of talking trash about those crimes, I can accuse you of talking trash about those users. It's the exact same thing.
If you've understood even half of what I'm trying to say, you won't dare show your face in the "Psychology" sub-forum ever again...
Why are you judging Endimion17, who feels the need to judge those who feel the need to judge "monsters"?😍
wanderinggull35 said:What really gets me is when people claim someone was just "born that way"... like there's no way to change them...
They talk big, but they can't actually prove help isn't possible...
What, we're supposed to take two kids and raise them completely differently?
If we teach one kid that killing is okay... then sure, once they grow up, they’ll kill people thinking they're doing something good...
Then we take the second kid and raise them to be decent, teaching them to care for animals because they're sacred beings... that child will believe animals are sacred and act accordingly. If you told that kid, "Nah, animals are just primitive creatures," you'd hurt them. Why? Because they're deeply convinced those animals are sacred...
The point is... don't go judging others before you've judged yourself...
To some people, it's not "normal" if you swear... even if swearing feels totally normal to you...
Understanding should come first, I guess...
We aren't talking about monsters here. We're talking about a person who grew up around people who weren't self-aware...
That person is a victim, not a monster...
Can a child even be a monster?????? Man, oh man... if that's true, then we're all monsters... 🙂
Prevention should be the priority. Understanding is fine, but one must also prevent the very people they are trying to understand. Tolerate the individual, but never the crime.
placidjackal36 said:How old are you, if you don't mind me asking? (That was a rhetorical question; if you need a definition for "rhetorical," go find a dictionary.)
Yeah, in case you weren't aware, there are plenty of people—and we're talking about the vast majority here—who don't commit crimes simply because they fear the consequences:
1. Consequences defined by a legal state (like losing your freedom or paying a massive fine)
2. Consequences defined by a holy book like the Bible or the Quran, where an invisible being threatens you with eternal burning beneath the Earth's lithosphere—basically, hell.
When government laws collapse—take periods of total anarchy caused by wars, for example—people act revoltingly. Most people start acting like animals.
A smaller segment might hold steady because of religion, but once they lose faith, they fall too.
An extremely tiny sliver of the population has enough actual character to keep them from committing atrocities.
Basically, people are nasty, and they need artificial boundaries because they almost always find some way to justify their worst impulses.
You'll learn it in school.
I keep forgetting how much information spreads online. 🤦
No, it wasn't the law or any holy books that stopped me (I'm not religious)—it was my conscience. I have impulses just like everyone else.
Conscience isn't something you pick up in a classroom, nor does it flourish in an environment defined by insults, much like this thread. I agree with your point, though I suspect your approach to proving how dangerous their views are is flawed. You're talking about them the same way they talk about "monsters"—as if you're dealing with people of lesser value.
placidjackal36 said:So, are we saying people who aren't religious and don't follow societal laws basically don't exist? That there's zero such people?
Or are you trying to claim that religion or a legal system is a prerequisite for being human? Because they aren't.
Sure, I agree that a human being is pretty much a blank slate when it comes to their brain and their conscience at birth. Babies don't have a conscience. They only care about satisfying their own immediate needs.
Human morality, which is just a collection of standards derived from our sense of right and wrong, is something society developed over time. Don't worry, I'm not suggesting some deity dropped these ideas into our heads.
It's a fundamental pillar of civilization. It's inextricably linked to the very concept of society.
What about people who did bad things in the past? Heh, if we used that as an excuse, the world would be a permanent disaster. Life has turned my world upside down a few times too. Does that give me a free pass to do whatever I want? Of course not.
Does it mean that if I *do* act out, nobody has the right to hold me accountable? Hell no. People should judge me for it, not turn a blind eye.
Some people are perfectly aware of what they're doing, believe me. People access the internet (in a world where everyone is constantly online), and there are plenty of nasty, disgusting individuals out there. Just because someone uses a computer doesn't mean they're a decent human being.
Look, how you choose to interpret Themis is entirely up to you. But the sword? That represents executive power. It's an ancient symbol from back when "law" was often just whatever could be forced upon people at swordpoint.
You could make the exact same argument about a pen. A pen can kill, too. In fact, the pen has probably caused more death than the sword ever did.
That doesn't mean you get to go around stabbing and tearing people apart with the blade just because they committed a crime.
Similarly, just because Themis might hold a pen doesn't give anyone the right to hunt people down through systematic, written persecution.
We're talking about symbols here, not someone's personal desire to watch people bleed out or suffer in agony.
I suspect that turning a blind eye is exactly what drives people toward rage. When you're suffering and even the legal system makes no effort to stop criminals, you start feeling like taking matters into your own hands.
crimsontinker7 said:It’s a monstrous society. How is that little kid ever going to develop a conscience or a sense of right and wrong when the entire culture is raising them to be monsters? Sometimes, it isn't even the individual's fault...
I doubt anyone is solely responsible for their own actions. It would be useful to understand what turns a person into a monster, but more importantly, one must accept that there are no truly innocent people in this world.
casualharbor9 said:It’s tragic, really. So many kids grow up in dysfunctional, warped environments—take certain ideologies, for instance (I won't explicitly call them "wars," but you get the idea)... but how do you account for the monsters emerging from our own seemingly stable neighborhoods? I mean, even back home in the States, we had our share of intense conflict, yet some of the worst monsters today never even experienced it; sometimes they come from perfectly decent backgrounds. But at this point, does it even matter who's at fault? We should be focusing on how to actually stop it.
Let’s be clear: war isn't the only thing that can break a person. Where exactly are you getting this idea that monsters come from "pleasant" backgrounds? In what way are they pleasant? I highly doubt it. Most of them probably never felt loved, and if anything, the world likely failed them repeatedly. There are countless factors that turn someone into a monster; I find it hard to believe many of them ever had the luxury of a stable environment or the chance to choose otherwise.
Zachary Mendoza2 said:I would like to build upon what Endymion stated on the previous page regarding the forum rules.
A crime is simply whatever the law defines as such—and under American law, raping rapists, killing murderers, or imprisoning kidnappers is considered a crime. Our right to take such actions has been stripped away by legislation, categorizing those acts as offenses. This isn't because they are inherently criminal, but because the state demands to be the sole authority for justice within its borders; without that monopoly, its power would vanish. In different eras or different realms, different laws apply, if any exist at all. Whether something is a crime in a true moral, practical, or philosophical sense is an answer you won't find in any legal code. The law is merely our pale attempt to translate principles of humanity, morality, and dignity into common words.
The second vital point is the punishment for the offender. While it is effectively a penalty, its purpose is not retribution, but prevention. It exists to reduce or prevent future crimes by the perpetrator and those similar to them. It is not an ideal solution, but it is the one we currently possess. And like any solution that addresses a problem, it involves infringing upon the offender's human rights—meaning, in some measure, it is also a crime. If we are going to discuss crime seriously, we should establish a definition so we are all speaking the same language. It seems to me that Endymion holds a somewhat rigid preconception of crime, viewing it as an act where the "who" and "why" don't matter, only the "how." If we limit ourselves to that view, I fear we lose the broader context, specifically the issue of prevention—protecting individuals from criminals, the truly wicked ones. Without protection, there is no value in such a law; instead of protecting us, it would punish us for defending ourselves.🤷
As for everything else, you were all rightfully put in your place; you are truly being unpleasant.😁
However, I believe it is neither unusual nor necessarily bad to harbor such criminal thoughts amidst your self-righteous fury. As long as you do not act upon them.🙂
👍
