A Unique Perspective on a 'Game-Related' Tragedy
Megnatron writes "Penny Arcade has a letter from the stepmother of one of the kids who was recently charged with killing a homeless man. Her article is an extremely sobering tale of the problems dealing with troubled teen. She explains how, in this situation, the parents did everything they possibly could. And, in a refreshing twist, she absolves the games industry of any blame for the tragedy these kids perpetrated. From her missive: 'Video games DID NOT make this kid who he was, and it's unfortunate that the correlation is there. The thing that really gets me with this whole thing is that the kid knows full well that by equating what he's done to a video game, that he will generate controversy and media coverage. It makes me sick that the media is jumping all over this, because that is exactly the result that he wants. The only good thing (if there is such a thing) that has come out of this whole ordeal is that the kid is behind bars. That is exactly where he needs to be.'" Her letter is a passionate, troubling story, but well worth reading.
My word.
It's quite impressive really, how a web-comic that deliberately sets out to be juvenile and offensive so often ends up involved in a reasonably respectable way in some pretty big news stories.
I know this probably isn't the most appropriate comment, but I this whole thing really does remind me strongly of this book. In fact, the echos are bordering on being uncanny. I guess it all boils down to the question of whether somebody can just be "born bad".
The evidence both from this case (if the account here is to be believed) and my own experiences is "yes, they can". I'm not sure anybody in the political or academic estabishments really want to face up to the implications of this, though.
But I'm curious how PA has verified that this person is who she claims to be.
Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
I usually like to blame the parents, as it is often their fault. You read these stories where the parents had no idea what was going on (Colombine: pipe bomb building in the garage???). Or where the parent just defends them ("Little Johnny never would have done that. The other kids made him do it.").
I gotta say reading that was kind of scary. If I had to take a guess I'd say he is a sociopath (literally), but that's just a guess. He is obviously very intelligent (calling people abusers). The fact they kept investigating it doesn't surprise me (what if it was true one of those times) but he knew how to get power. Kids can also act out like that if they are being abused, so that would lend "credibility".
I'm sure the divorces and remarriages in his life didn't help, but if it really is sociopathic, that probably wouldn't matter. I can offer suggestions of things that might have helped him (if he was help-able). Military boot camp, having him sent to jail those times the police came. Making him a ward of the state. Trying to give him possession of his own life (can't remember the term, basically having him declared an independent adult).
She said she tried "everything" so I don't know which of those were done. I'm amazed that she put up with it for so long.
This kid is REALLY the exception to the rule. He would have been exactly the same if this happened in 1960.
Too bad this kid will probably be the example of what video games do to kids that the media trots out constantly.
People like him (from her description, assuming it's true), are one of the things that make me believe in true evil.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
...beating doesn't work either. He's a full blown psychopath, and about all you can do is drug him into a stupor or lock him up. We don't know how to fix them. Would probably be kinder (for him AND the other prisoners) to euthanize him. Much better than graduating him from prison in 15 years...he's going to be a real, grown up monster then, with all that lovely prison lore and culture burned into him. You can blame the liberals AND the conservatives for his continued existence. I think he falls under both of their "sacredness of life" category.
Just because it has a humanoid form does not make it human.
Sadly, the children know this and manipulate it. Have been doing so for a very long time -- they know you have no actual authority over them if they choose not to listen to you. You can't actually compel them in any way to listen.
There were enough cases of child abuse in the past that all of the agencies are now required by law to investigate all claims of abuse. Denial by the accused abusers is basically ignored as all guilty people would deny it. They basically have to presume you're guilty in order to try to protect the child's welfare (it's well meaning, but not often reliable). And, in the end, it's difficult to disprove such claims.
(I know someone going through court now because a neighbor witnessed him hoist his child into the car, and then claimed she saw/though she saw him smacking the child around. When his wife decided to leave him for his best friend, she started coaching the 4 year old into claiming daddy was touching her in bad places -- in court, the child has admitted that mommy told her to say that. On the heels of the first erroneous claim, the second claim of now sexual abuse is very hard to dispell: basically it's compounded on him. Such things get very ugly quick.)
I find it scary that a child who is repeatedly in trouble could fool the teachers into thinking "I didn't do it, and by the way, my parents abused me". Especially when this child was over 6 feet and over 200lbs -- a very big 14 year old indeed.
I realize you can't suddenly start treating all accusations lightly, for fear of ignoring the problem. But, there has to be a better way of looking into these things. Unfortunately, an unfounded claim of abuse can ruin your life just as quickly and easily as a verifiable, documented case of abuse -- people will go after you with equal zeal and tar you with the same brush.
The fact that repeatedly, police and school officials were told that this kid was way out of control is scary indeed. The fact that an apparent "thrill kill" had to take place before anyone would believe them is appalling. Hopefully at least something good comes out of this in the long run.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
After reading the "stepmother's" reply I have to say yea it probably was the parent's fault. This kid seems to have been tossed back and forth between the "father" and the mother. The stepmother's language in her reply was what I would expect for a high school kid and not a parent of a child. In all the discussion of what they did and didn't do, I at no time heard the word love. I heard hate a lot but not love. Yea this kid might have had issues from the start but I have to say that didn't sound like he had much of a chance with the parents he had.
Yes he was unmanageable at 15 but what about at two? How about at five? How much love and time did he get at seven?
Read a bit more closely, and you'll catch this bit:
I am sorry this got so long. I have been reading PA since the very beginning, and I feel that both of you are very much like me. I think we are the same age (29) and I have been a lifelong gamer like the two of you.
If she's 29, then she would have been around 14 when the kid was born -- and remember, she describes herself as a kind-of stepmother. It sounds like she didn't get involved until he was already a teenager -- too late for her to have much impact, especially if she was only in her mid-20's herself.
So we can't draw any conclusions about her bad parenting when he was a baby. Also, note that he was living with his dad until he decided to leave -- and move in with his natural mom, who had even less control over the situation. If we must conclude that nurture had a larger role than nature, then we have to look at her role, long before the letter's author was involved.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
I really don't understand how you can blame the parents based on the information provided. Sure, the parents split up, but there are plenty of parents who divorce or separate and still have well-adjusted children. Beyond that, we simply have no idea what this kid's childhood was like. We also have no idea how long the stepmother has been on the scene, so I don't see how you can expect her to comment on how much love the child received at any specific age, much less support any conclusions based on the presence or absence of the word "love" in a letter.
It seems like a great modern fad (and fallacy) to blame parents for every lousy thing a kid does, as if people have become desperate to take nature out of the classic "nature vs. nurture" argument. But none of us are shaped purely by our environment, as the mention of the kid's younger brother being reasonably well-adjusted supports. We all have judgement and free will, so unless some actual evidence surfaces to support the notion that the parents somehow meaningfully contributed to these horrible acts, let's place blame back on the kid who committed them, shall we?
He would have been exactly the same if this happened in 1960.
In 1960 life was very different. His dad wouldn't be "grounding him" he'd have taken him to the wood shed and corrected his attitude. You only have to be course corrected a few times at an early age. The mother's mention of negative reinforcement probably did not include throwing the kid out the door into the street and telling him to only come home once he appecated what he had going for him in the form of a warm bed and three square meals a day.
School teachers in 1960 could beat you with a shaved baseball bat until you're buttocks were bruised so you couldn't sit down. His teacher's or their husbands would likely have been a WWII or Korean War veteran. Why mention that? Because if the little goblin had raised a hand to a teacher, he'd have drawn back a stump. His school Principal would have certainly been a) male and b) unsympathetic to his claim of 'abuse'. His Principal would very likely have a shaved baseball bat and two foot prints painted on the floor in front of his desk.
If none of that registered on him, in 1960, he'd of been shipped off to someplace like "West Texas Boy's Ranch" or "The San Antonio Boy's Town" or "Father Flanagan's Boys Town" or any of the other "homes for boys". He'd have had to work 30-35 hours a week growing the food he ate, tending the stock and still ride the bus 1-2 hours each way to attend school. He'd live in a "bay barracks" style dorm with 30 other kids. He would do laundry, muck out barns, peel potatoes and stack hay. Sunday he'd go to church and get a whole 5-6 hours to reflect the error of his way.
If he ran away and tried to 'go home' the Sheriff would run him down with dogs and drag him back to the county farm for recalcitrant youth or what ever the place was called. Then the keepers would move his bunk to the barn take his mattress and blankets way until he'd earned his spot in the dorm back.
Believe it or not the boy would be different. If this was 1960 he'd be different or he'd be dead.
This is not an example of what I am talking about. That particular issue can happen from either nature or nurture. Letting the kids get away with their shit is rewarding that behavior because it places them above other children for whom there is zero tolerance. Like me, for example. I was a mama's boy up until I was about 21, no joke. Total pussy pushover. I used to get attacked at school literally every day. If they weren't hitting me they were destroying my bicycle, that kind of shit. So one day a kid attacks me without any backup and keeps it up until I get pissed off - all 5'11" of me or so at that time. I've been pretty huge since about the end of sixth grade, that was the year I started getting the nonstop growing pains. So I beat the living crap out of him and got expelled.
Yeah, I have to agree completely with that.
The real problem there is that the system isn't interested in helping people anyway, or rehabilitating anyone. If they were, the prison system wouldn't be allowed to remain a mass of murder and rape that only begets additional violence and not only provides opportunities for people to learn to commit more serious crimes, but also provides them with incentive to do so because we continue to punish people after they have ostensibly served their debt to society. They cannot get many types of jobs, they cannot vote, et cetera. The only reason to disenfranchise ANYONE is so that you don't have to fix the problems that affect them. Disenfranchising felons means you don't have to fix the problems that create felons, because those people can't vote you out anyway.
No, if you stop that kid from being a bully now, you can't make money on him by placing him in prison.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Sounds like she was involved here for several years, I guess you can consider that 'quick' but most reasonable people wouldn't.
Speaking from experience, my sister is like this kid. This girl put my parents through 18 years of pure hell, was a contributing factor in their divorce and my mothers alcoholism. She currently is unable to hold any job, but has two illegitimate children. The kids do not even have proper beds to sleep on, but child services will not remove them from her custody. My mother offered to adopt them, and she refused to give up custody. This girl leeches off my father at age 22. She spends her money on cigarettes instead of food/clothing for the kids, then calls us for handouts. If you asked me what I thought of her, my response would be very similar to the step-mother who sent this letter. There is no love there, there is no respect or compassion. My life will only be better if I never interacted with that waste of a human being ever again.
But I guess by your standards, I just sold her out, and am a terrible person.
Do you know what the letter was in response too? She has the right to tell her side of the story when someone accuses her of failing or screwing up. She did not "sell out" this child. This child sold himself out when he went and MURDERED a man then played with his corpse. This kid has a HISTORY of ABUSING HANDIFUCKINGCAPED children. You know what else. He learned that he could get away with it to, as long as he said the right things.
She did not betray him. She did not sell him out. There was nothing to sell out in the first place. Hell what do you want her to do. Is she supposed to defend him? How do you defend a child like this? He was from a broken home, fine. He murdered someone. You either jail him, jail him for life in solitary, execute him, or give him a free pass because he couldn't fucking cope with the same shit alot of other kids do. What do you do when he gets out of jail and kills again? Another free pass? Hell the woman tried to do what she could.
You mad
Does the inability to perform evil make one good, or merely sub-human?
"A Clockwork Orange" was a vastly underrated book...