Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.wbaltv.com/news/15205396/detail.html

Bail Denied For Teenager In Family Slaying

COCKEYSVILLE, Md. -- A teenager accused of killing his parents and two younger brothers has been denied bail by a Baltimore County judge. Meanwhile, counselors were on hand Monday at two area schools to help students deal with what happened.

Nicholas Waggoner Browning appeared in court Monday through a video link. He was wearing an orange jumpsuit and sat in a plastic chair with his hands folded in front of him. He was asked if he had been made aware of the charges and answered yes. Officials said he was composed and polite during the hearing.

Browning has been charged as an adult in the slayings of his father, John Browning, 45; his mother, Tamara, 44; and his brothers Gregory, 14, and Benjamin, 11, according to Baltimore County police.

Defense attorney Steve Silverman asked for $1 million bail, noting that Browning did not have a criminal record, is an honor student and a student athlete and is one interview away from being an Eagle Scout. The prosecutor asked that Browning continue to be held without bail, and the judge agreed.

The victims were found dead Saturday evening inside a home in Cockeysville, north of Baltimore. A small, silver-colored crucifix was hanging from the Brownings' mailbox Sunday, and a vigil was held at the scene Sunday night.

Police spokesman Bill Toohey said Browning was formally arrested at 1:05 a.m. Sunday.

"Early Sunday morning, he did indeed admit that he killed them," Toohey said.

Toohey said Nicholas Browning, a student at Dulaney High School, had a disagreement with his father and used his father's handgun to kill his family Friday night while they slept.

After the slayings, police said, he threw the gun away in bushes near his house.

Toohey told WBAL TV 11 News that the youth spent Friday night and all day Saturday with friends. When the friends took him back to his house at 5 p.m. Saturday, Browning went into the house and came back out to say that his father was dead.

"He was taken into the precinct almost immediately after he reported it, which is standard operating procedure," Toohey said of Nicholas Browning.

Police said the teenager eventually confessed and led them to the gun, but Silverman is questioning how that confession was obtained.

"I'm just concerned. You have a 15-year-old boy -- a traumatized 15-year-old boy, in light of these circumstances -- who gave a confession in the wee hours of the morning in a police station after denying these charges for several hours without and adult or attorney," Silverman said.

In court, investigators said there's no indication the teenager abused drugs or alcohol, and there's no evidence he'd ever been in trouble before.

The neighborhood was quiet Sunday morning; no police officers remained at the scene and there was no sign of investigation or any other activity. The grounds of the two-story home were neat and there was a basketball backboard outside.

John Browning had been an attorney for 19 years with Royston, Mueller, McLean & Reid, and was a partner in the law firm in the county seat of Towson, about six miles from the family's home.

Nicholas Browning is being held at the Baltimore County Detention Center in a special section for juveniles.

Counselors were available Monday to meet with students at Dulaney High, said Charles Herndon, a county school spokesman.

Neighbors, Friends Cope With The Loss

"I've watching them grow up over the last seven years, so there's a warm spot in my heart for the family," said Rev. Bill Brown, the family's pastor at Epworth United Methodist Church.

Brown said he counseled the teen in jail on Sunday. He said that there has never been any indication from the boy that he would ever act that way.

"He was, as everybody has said, a normal boy," Brown said. "They were a wonderful family. Very well liked, well loved."

Neighbors who talked to 11 News reporter Melissa Carlson said the family had lived in the home for more than 12 years and described them as quiet, friendly and active members in the community.

Residents called each other throughout the night to talk about the shootings, said resident Mike Thomas. He said one of his sons had been in Boy Scouts with one of the Brownings' sons and that Browning remained involved in scouting.

"These people would do anything in the world for you -- just incredible people," Thomas said. For instance, Thomas said the Brownings would pick up debris along the street.

A woman who lives across the street from the Cockeysville teenager's home said Monday that the boy is "a very polite, well-mannered, average teenage boy."

Jennifer Welsh said that her son is the same age as Nicholas, and that the two boys played lacrosse together and have been friends for seven years.

Welsh said her heart goes out to the family and to Nick. She added that she and her son are wondering why the shootings happened. She said she did not know the nature of the dispute between Browning and his father that police said allegedly led to the shootings.

lol

lol too

My prayers go out to the family.

"You made me play second base!"

geez.....

What?

His mom should have brought him that chocolate milk.

They probably had it coming.

Originally posted by JacopeX
is an honor student and a student athlete and is one interview away from being an Eagle Scout.

does this mean we can blame the public school system, their athletic programs, and the boy scouts for this? i hope so. would be a refreshing break from all the bitching over those mtv video games.

Originally posted by Schecter
does this mean we can blame the public school system, their athletic programs, and the boy scouts for this? i hope so. would be a refreshing break from all the bitching over those mtv video games.

Originally posted by Schecter
does this mean we can blame the public school system, their athletic programs, and the boy scouts for this? i hope so. would be a refreshing break from all the bitching over those mtv video games.

Grand Theft Auto videogames and rap music will end in this somehow

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
They probably had it coming.

Originally posted by chithappens
Grand Theft Auto videogames and rap music will end in this somehow

They took over his soul using him as a meat puppet to carry out their twisted machinations. It really happens, I saw it on CBN once.

Maybe it's this guy's fault:
This guy

Or this

Wow! That's ****ed up.

that kid is metal

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c166/Impediment/Toki.jpg

Some mouth.

This story is fascinating. I would REALLY like to know what happen. Why did he kill his family?

I want to know all of the details!

What if there is some sort of conspiracy here?...like something big? What if it IS over something stupid like chocolate milk or his dad telling him that he could not hang out with his friends.

Yes, to all your questions.

Sounds like gay incest.

Originally posted by queeq
What? the STORY, man.

Yeah I got that. I just wanted to know what you thought about it.

Originally posted by queeq
Yes, to all your questions.

I would have gone with maybe...

But "yes" doesn't make sense.

Originally posted by queeq
Yeah I got that. I just wanted to know what you thought about it. I think that the kid had some serious deep seeded mental issues.

Maybe he just wanted to do it.

-AC

Yes, and that would mean he has deep seeded mental issues.

Seems like it. Prolly the whole family was one short of a six pack.

could be, but its far to easy to blame the parents.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Yes, and that would mean he has deep seeded mental issues.

Not really.

You think humans aren't capable of such atrocities without being mental? Wake up.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Not really.

You think humans aren't capable of such atrocities without being mental? Wake up.

-AC Its not normal for a young boy to slaughter a group of people, especially his family.

Neither is it normal to eat dogs, but they do in China, and I doubt they are all mental.

-AC

There are theories which aim at the idea that sanity is a social construct. For example, in many tribal societies it would be perfectly acceptable to kill any kind of rival, over practically anything. The trouble is that sanity is in ways a man made phenomenon. I'm sure I'll get all the psychology brigade screaming at me about enlarged ventricles and excess dopamine levels, but when it boils down to it - what's sane and insane is entirely dependant on societal structure and shared morals.

Don't get me wrong, in this case I think the boy must have been a bit mental.

I just dislike reaching for the "INSANE" stamp whenever a horrific crime occurs.

-AC

Was he the kid who got a SIXTY-FOUR?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Its not normal for a young boy to slaughter a group of people, especially his family.

It isn't?

Originally posted by queeq
It isn't? I'm sure you realise what you just started here.

Insane in the membrane! INSANE IN THE BRAIN!

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Neither is it normal to eat dogs, but they do in China, and I doubt they are all mental.

-AC yeah, choice of cuisine and taking multiple human lives is a good comparison.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
There are theories which aim at the idea that sanity is a social construct. For example, in many tribal societies it would be perfectly acceptable to kill any kind of rival, over practically anything. The trouble is that sanity is in ways a man made phenomenon. I'm sure I'll get all the psychology brigade screaming at me about enlarged ventricles and excess dopamine levels, but when it boils down to it - what's sane and insane is entirely dependant on societal structure and shared morals.

True. Sanity is a measurement of something that societal norms determine and that is relative to the society.

People call me insane all the time...I kindly disagree because I am fully in control of all my mental faculties....except I forget a lot and I have a short attention span.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
yeah, choice of cuisine and taking multiple human lives is a good comparison.

lol...you're on a roll today.



On a side note, it is perfectly plausible for a person to kill another person and be completely sane, even when measured by America's norms.

Originally posted by dadudemon
True. Sanity is a measurement of something that societal norms determine and that is relative to the society.

People call me insane all the time...I kindly disagree because I am fully in control of all my mental faculties....except I forget a lot and I have a short attention span.



lol...you're on a roll today.



On a side note, it is perfectly plausible for a person to kill another person and be completely sane, even when measured by America's norms. yes, I agree, but a whole group of people, his FAMILY? Thats not normal, man.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
yeah, choice of cuisine and taking multiple human lives is a good comparison.

I'll say it slower.

Normal. "Normal". NORMAL.

That word there, pay attention to it.

Not being "normal", to Rogue Jedi, does not mean it's insane. Something not being normal to ANYBODY doesn't necessarily make it insane.

My point is, people shouldn't immediately go "THEY'RE INSANE!". The more you pull that card, the less we're actually going to learn about this kind of criminal.

-AC

THEY'RE INSANE!

Haha, you old card.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'll say it slower.

Normal. "Normal". NORMAL.

That word there, pay attention to it.

Not being "normal", to Rogue Jedi, does not mean it's insane. Something not being normal to ANYBODY doesn't necessarily make it insane.

My point is, people shouldn't immediately go "THEY'RE INSANE!". The more you pull that card, the less we're actually going to learn about this kind of criminal.

-AC when did I say insane? I never said insane.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
when did I say insane? I never said insane.


You said it right there.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
yes, I agree, but a whole group of people, his FAMILY? Thats not normal, man.

I agree...that is not normal.

*looks that he just made a new post*

yeah...you just confirmed what I said. (So I interpreted you correctly.)

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
You said it right there. said what? I said the kid had deep seeded mental issues, I never said insane. You gotta elaborate, man.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
said what? I said the kid had deep seeded mental issues, I never said insane. You gotta elaborate, man.

Exactly, you've gotta elaborate.

Mental issues usually is said to mean insane. What do YOU mean?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Exactly, you've gotta elaborate.

Mental issues usually is said to mean insane. What do YOU mean?

-AC so if someone has any type of mental issues, they are therefore insane? no matter how minor the issue?

Would you consider his issue to be minor, RJ?

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Would you consider his issue to be minor, RJ? Theres no way I can know that. I would wager he needs to be evaluated by a professional, at least.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so if someone has any type of mental issues, they are therefore insane? no matter how minor the issue?

"deep seeded mental issues" implies you mean he's insane, but just using an euphemism.

And this story is screwed, but it's not like its not unseen today.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
"deep seeded mental issues" implies you mean he's insane, but just using an euphemism.

And this story is screwed, but it's not like its not unseen today. It could mean alot of things, insane being one of them. If I thought he was insane, I would have said insane.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
"deep seeded mental issues" implies you mean he's insane,

Nah...you can have really bad mental problems and still not be clinically insane.

inimilist! Where are you when we need you?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
It could mean alot of things, insane being one of them. If I thought he was insane, I would have said insane.

So you don't think he's insane?

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
So you don't think he's insane? I just posted there is no way for me to know that.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
said what? I said the kid had deep seeded mental issues, I never said insane. You gotta elaborate, man.

it was a joke.

In the very post that you made saying yui never said it, you did, in fact, say it twice.

it was kinf of a short "haw haw I c wat u did thar", kinda thing.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so if someone has any type of mental issues, they are therefore insane? no matter how minor the issue?

I asked you to elaborate on what you meant by mental issues, since when that phrase is USUALLY said, people USUALLY (True or not), mean "Insane.".

Why couldn't you just say what you meant? Why does everything have to be dodge 'em cars with you?

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I just posted there is no way for me to know that.

That's the exact point AC has been making, I believe.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I asked you to elaborate on what you meant by mental issues, since when that phrase is USUALLY said, people USUALLY (True or not), mean "Insane.".

Why couldn't you just say what you meant? Why does everything have to be dodge 'em cars with you?

-AC I said "dude had deep seeded mental issues"....you are saying that I said "he is insane".....I clarified for you, numerous times, that I never said he was insane, that there is no way for me to know if he is insane, and now you are making a mountain out of a molehill about it.


theres no dodging, no evasion, no weaseling. I posted my opinion of the kid, you took it the wrong way, I clarified what I meant in plain english. Explain how I am dodging.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I asked you to elaborate on what you meant by mental issues, since when that phrase is USUALLY said, people USUALLY (True or not), mean "Insane.".

Why couldn't you just say what you meant? Why does everything have to be dodge 'em cars with you?

-AC

Really? I didn't think that that is what people meant when they said "deep seeded issues"...I always thought people meant "insane" when they said "insane" and really deep mental issues when they said "deep seeded mental" issues...like he was abused as a child or some psychological stuff like that.

It looks like you are trying to pin on him your interpretation of that phrase and he has made it quite clear that your interpretation is not his interpretation.

Like I said before, one can be sane but still do something that society deems as "not normal".

You were dodging, you aren't now.

So what do you mean by "mental issues"? Elaborate on your opinion of the kid.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Really? I didn't think that that is what people meant when they said "deep seeded issues"...I always thought people meant "insane" when they said "insane" and really deep mental issues when they said "deep seeded mental" issues...like he was abused as a child or some psychological stuff like that.

It looks like you are trying to pin on him your interpretation of that phrase and he has made it quite clear that your interpretation is not his interpretation.

Like I said before, one can be sane but still do something that society deems as "not normal".

He has NOW, he didn't before.

He has since cleared it up and there were crossed wires. Some people say the exact thing they mean, others don't, and then use the excuse "You should know what I meant.", as RJ has done in the past.

He has since cleared it up.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You were dodging, you aren't now.

So what do you mean by "mental issues"? Elaborate on your opinion of the kid.

-AC you need to point out where I dodged. quote me. show me where I dodged.

I already stated my opinion of the kid, he has deep seeded mental issues. Without having a degree in psychology and examining him, theres no way in hell I can make that call, theres no way I can tell how deep the issues run.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
you need to point out where I dodged. quote me. show me where I dodged.

I already stated my opinion of the kid, he has deep seeded mental issues. Without having a degree in psychology and examining him, theres no way in hell I can make that call, theres no way I can tell how deep the issues run.

You could have just answered my original question, you didn't. You dodged and just asked ME questions.

I said "Mental issues is generally (Correct or not) said as meaning insane. What do YOU mean?" and asked you to elaborate. You chose not to in your reply, just to ask me questions. This is all irrelevant now, let's focus on the topic.

So you say: "he has deep seeded mental issues". Not "He might have.", but "He has".

Then: "Without having a degree in psychology and examining him, theres no way in hell I can make that call.".

Clarify. What's your stance? Just that he had issues?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You could have just answered my original question, you didn't. You dodged and just asked ME questions.

I said "Mental issues is generally (Correct or not) said as meaning insane. What do YOU mean?" and asked you to elaborate. You chose not to in your reply, just to ask me questions. This is all irrelevant now, let's focus on the topic.

So you say: "he has deep seeded mental issues". Not "He might have.", but "He has".

Then: "Without having a degree in psychology and examining him, theres no way in hell I can make that call.".

Clarify. What's your stance?

-AC I never dodged, you are delusional, go back and read it again.

Clarify what? His mental state, or why I cant make that call because I am not a trained professional?

His mental state: Again, he has deep seeded mental issues. not MIGHT, he definitely has a screw or two loose.

Why I cant elaborate on his mental state: BECAUSE I AM NOT A PSYCHOLOGIST.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
you need to point out where I dodged. quote me. show me where I dodged.

I already stated my opinion of the kid, he has deep seeded mental issues. Without having a degree in psychology and examining him, theres no way in hell I can make that call, theres no way I can tell how deep the issues run.

So any person on the street can brand someone with having mental issues, can they? Is it only in severe cases when it needs a professional's opinion? It seems to me that no matter what you meant, you assumed you knew something that you clearly don't.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
So any person on the street can brand someone with having mental issues, can they? Is it only in severe cases when it needs a professional's opinion? It seems to me that no matter what you meant, you assumed you knew something that you clearly don't. yeah, cuz any person on the street goes home and slaughters their entire family, Maybe he should be a guidance counselor, you think?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
yeah, cuz any person on the street goes home and slaughters their entire family, Maybe he should be a guidance counselor, you think?

There are plenty of killers who have been deemed completely mentally stable, by professionals, not by people on an internet discussion board.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
There are plenty of killers who have been deemed completely mentally stable, by professionals, not by people on an internet discussion board. And even more who have been deemed completely whacko.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
And even more who have been deemed completely whacko.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you to provide evidence of that.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I never dodged, you are delusional, go back and read it again.

Clarify what? His mental state, or why I cant make that call because I am not a trained professional?

His mental state: Again, he has deep seeded mental issues. not MIGHT, he definitely has a screw or two loose.

Why I cant elaborate on his mental state: BECAUSE I AM NOT A PSYCHOLOGIST.

You did, but it's irrelevant.

Why make the call then say you can't make the call? Seems a bit odd to me. Is that as far as you go? Just saying he has issues?

You're very contradictory here. Either remove the claim that you need to be a psych to know, or remove the claim of "He definitely has issues.". They don't connect.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
And even more who have been deemed completely whacko.

Deemed. Many people deem many people many things that they aren't.

-AC

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you to provide evidence of that.

ZOMG!!! LOL!

Let me try...

I afraid I'm going to have to ask you to provide evidence that "There are plenty of killers who have been deemed completely mentally stable, by professionals...".

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You did, but it's irrelevant.

Why make the call then say you can't make the call? Seems a bit odd to me. Is that as far as you go? Just saying he has issues?

You're very contradictory here. Either remove the claim that you need to be a psych to know, or remove the claim of "He definitely has issues.". They don't connect.

-AC Thats my opinion, that he has something wrong in his head, but hey, I could be wrong. I wasnt there, I dont know him, I didnt know his family. I dont know about the kid personally, but I would say that anyone who does that to his family is fvcked up in some way.

Fair enough point.

-AC

Originally posted by dadudemon
ZOMG!!! LOL!

Let me try...

I afraid I'm going to have to ask you to provide evidence that "There are plenty of killers who have been deemed completely mentally stable, by professionals...".

Well there are plenty. I don't know if there are more or less than those who've been deemed mentally unstable, that's why I wouldn't claim that there were more.

Well first of all, let's examine a basic scenario.

A serial killer is put away because he is a danger to society and his crimes are, to most, "f*cked up". He is not definitely mental just because he did "f*cked up" things, people need to remember that there's a difference, but because it's "f*cked up", people assume you'd HAVE to be mental to do it.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'll say it slower.

Normal. "Normal". NORMAL.

That word there, pay attention to it.

Not being "normal", to Rogue Jedi, does not mean it's insane. Something not being normal to ANYBODY doesn't necessarily make it insane.

My point is, people shouldn't immediately go "THEY'RE INSANE!". The more you pull that card, the less we're actually going to learn about this kind of criminal.

-AC Ironically, I was making that same point on youtube discussing paedophilia. Some guy said that paedophiles should be castrated because they're evil. It's hilarious isn't it?

"What? She's only 15 you evil bastard, you're going to rot in jail and have your balls chopped off. Things like this should not be tolerated."

Hehe, I bet I sound like a Conservative now.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
And even more who have been deemed completely whacko.

I'm pretty sure it's just the opposite actually.

"Whackos" often lack the ability to plan out a crime (despite what L&A or CSI will tell you) so they're usually responsible only for spontaneous emotionally driven killings. Considering that sane people have all manner of reasons and ways to kill people (not to mention that there are a lot more of them) I find it hard to believe that a majority of killers are found to be insane or mentally unfit to stand trial.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Well first of all, let's examine a basic scenario.

A serial killer is put away because he is a danger to society and his crimes are, to most, "f*cked up". He is not definitely mental just because he did "f*cked up" things, people need to remember that there's a difference, but because it's "f*cked up", people assume you'd HAVE to be mental to do it.

-AC

Exactly. If most of them were "f***ed up", they would not go to prison, jail, etc. They would go to a mental institution for the criminally insane.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Exactly. If most of them were "f***ed up", they would not go to prison, jail, etc. They would go to a mental institution for the criminally insane.

Exactly what is your argument? This is what you said to me 1 page ago.

Originally posted by dadudemon
ZOMG!!! LOL!

Let me try...

I afraid I'm going to have to ask you to provide evidence that "There are plenty of killers who have been deemed completely mentally stable, by professionals...".

You don't actually have an argument, do you?

Important Topical Question (That Will Probably Be Ignored)

What will you accomplish by punishing people unreasonably that do things you don't like?

Originally posted by JacopeX
Defense attorney Steve Silverman asked for $1 million bail, noting that Browning did not have a criminal record, is an honor student and a student athlete and is one interview away from being an Eagle Scout. The prosecutor asked that Browning continue to be held without bail, and the judge agreed. HOLY SHIT!!! THIS NIGGAS A BOY SCOUT! HEZE INNOSENT!!! Lulz.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Important Topical Question (That Will Probably Be Ignored)

What will you accomplish by punishing people unreasonably that do things you don't like?

You stop them from doing thinks that you don't like. I can't even being to imagine where that question came from.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Exactly what is your argument? This is what you said to me 1 page ago.


Uhhh...that doesn't make sense because I didn't say that one page ago. Are you sure you edited your post right?

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
You don't actually have an argument, do you?

LOL!!! I saw your post before you edited it...I guessed you realized that it wasn't the "grouchy smartass" that you like to portray on teh forumz, didn't you? You originally said something about the two questions and how they are compared to each other and that not being your point or something...I was a little surprised that it wasn't the typical "grouchy smartass" comment that you like to put out there...so I can understand the edit.

Because you have to ask about my "argument", you missed my point for asking the question in the first place.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Uhhh...that doesn't make sense because I didn't say that one page ago. Are you sure you edited your post right?

We are now on page five, that quote is from page four.

Originally posted by dadudemon
LOL!!! I saw your post before you edited it...I guessed you realized that it wasn't the "grouchy smartass" that you like to portray on teh forumz, didn't you? You originally said something about the two questions and how they are compared to each other and that not being your point or something...I was a little surprised that it wasn't the typical "grouchy smartass" comment that you like to put out there...so I can understand the edit.

Because you have to ask about my "argument", you missed my point for asking the question in the first place.

No, I just missed out a question mark by accident, before the edit. I'm not sure whose post you were reading.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
We are now on page five, that quote is from page four.

Still doesn't make any sense. I need you to go through all my posts in this thread and quote the one you were referring to. The burden of proof is on you because you accused.



Originally posted by chillmeistergen
No, I just missed out a question mark by accident, before the edit. I'm not sure whose post you were reading.

You're right. My bad. Forgive me because I was posting while at work and I guess I lost my place....this is the post I was referring to:

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Well there are plenty. I don't know if there are more or less than those who've been deemed mentally unstable, that's why I wouldn't claim that there were more.

It didn't make sense that you would reply to my post more than once so I could have sworn that this was your original reply to my question and you edited your post with another portion of my question in it....I got a call from a lady who needed TLS security enabled in her IE to be able to run a "home grown" app right (I know you don't care...but she didn't have the appropriate rights to edit her Internet options) as I was reading your post and then work was "out" after I got her fixed up so I lost my place.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Still doesn't make any sense. I need you to go through all my posts in this thread and quote the one you were referring to. The burden of proof is on you because you accused.

The one I was referring to was the one I quoted. I quoted it because you seemingly changed your argument. One minute you seemed to be arguing that you believed more killers to be mentally unstable than stable, then the whole argument changed and you seemed to argue the exact opposite.

I may be wrong, but that's the way you've presented your side of the debate, as one that seemingly changes to the winning side.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
The one I was referring to was the one I quoted. I quoted it because you seemingly changed your argument. One minute you seemed to be arguing that you believed more killers to be mentally unstable than stable, then the whole argument changed and you seemed to argue the exact opposite.

I may be wrong, but that's the way you've presented your side of the debate, as one that seemingly changes to the winning side.

And that is why you are wrong. I never argued that. My original argument was about RJ getting ideals pinned on him that he wasn't arguing about. I also agreed that your point on the interpretation of insanity.

You missed the point of my question to you about killers and their mental stability. Do you know why I asked you that question now or do you need me to explain it?

Which question would that be?

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Which question would that be?


Originally posted by dadudemon
ZOMG!!! LOL!

Let me try...

I afraid I'm going to have to ask you to provide evidence that "There are plenty of killers who have been deemed completely mentally stable, by professionals...".

I already answered it. Plus, that's not a question, it's a request.

Wow... this thread has grown. I thought it'd die out in no time.

The term is "deep-seated," you goddamn morons.

EDIT: Also, I'm pretty sure that it's more normal to eat dogs than it is to treat them like minor deities (like we in civilized countries do, rather than the savages of the East).

Language, Zeal...

I'm using it, yes.

seeded, seated, point was made.

And corrected.

funny, those who were questioning me will claim to have noticed the typo but say they decided to overlook it.

MAybe they got what you meant and decided not to nitpick.

deciding not to nitpick is a foreign concept to them. Might as well ask them to breathe underwater.

Obviously they made an exception this time.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You stop them from doing thinks that you don't like. I can't even being to imagine where that question came from. N-No you don't. Most people agree that rape is bad, and lock them up for it, but they still rape, and there are still rapists. So obviously that doesn't work.

Originally posted by queeq
Wow... this thread has grown. I thought it'd die out in no time. I told you this would happen!

Originally posted by dadudemon
And that is why you are wrong. I never argued that. My original argument was about RJ getting ideals pinned on him that he wasn't arguing about. I also agreed that your point on the interpretation of insanity.

You missed the point of my question to you about killers and their mental stability. Do you know why I asked you that question now or do you need me to explain it? Killers aren't mentally stable? Oh god, this kind of weak-minded ignorance could only come from that of a religion. Anyone can have a change of mind you dolt, it's not as if anyone who does something you don't like is from a different planet and nothing like you. Someone commited murder, okay, we've all thought about killing people, this person was brave eough to actually do it, he's not mentally unstable.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Killers aren't mentally stable? Oh god, this kind of weak-minded ignorance could only come from that of a religion. Anyone can have a change of mind you dolt, it's not as if anyone who does something you don't like is from a different planet and nothing like you. Someone commited murder, okay, we've all thought about killing people, this person was brave eough to actually do it, he's not mentally unstable.

The military has found that most people cannot kill other people even in times of war. It takes a special type of training to over come this natural tendency to not kill. There are other things that can lead a normal person to kill, and mental illness is one of them. However, there are others like stress, or frustration. You do not know if he is mentally unstable or not.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The military has found that most people cannot kill other people even in times of war. It takes a special type of training to over come this natural tendency to not kill. There are other things that can lead a normal person to kill, and mental illness is one of them. However, there are others like stress, or frustration. You do not know if he is mentally unstable or not.

Sigh, this is not that simple a subject. First you have to bring up the way a person was raised, that civilization and so on (which allows for certain standards and blah blah).

That's as far as I'm willing to go into this convo

Originally posted by lord xyz
I told you this would happen!

Yeah, I was being positive again, and look what happened.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The military has found that most people cannot kill other people even in times of war. It takes a special type of training to over come this natural tendency to not kill. There are other things that can lead a normal person to kill, and mental illness is one of them. However, there are others like stress, or frustration. You do not know if he is mentally unstable or not. True, but it's possible for him to not be. He could have just overcome the nature of not killing like you said happens in the millitary.

Originally posted by queeq
Yeah, I was being positive again, and look what happened. Damnit man, you're a mod. You should know not to be positive.

Originally posted by chithappens
Sigh, this is not that simple a subject. First you have to bring up the way a person was raised, that civilization and so on (which allows for certain standards and blah blah).

That's as far as I'm willing to go into this convo

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
There are theories which aim at the idea that sanity is a social construct. For example, in many tribal societies it would be perfectly acceptable to kill any kind of rival, over practically anything. The trouble is that sanity is in ways a man made phenomenon. I'm sure I'll get all the psychology brigade screaming at me about enlarged ventricles and excess dopamine levels, but when it boils down to it - what's sane and insane is entirely dependant on societal structure and shared morals.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Damnit man, you're a mod. You should know not to be positive.

This is not my jurisdiction.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Killers aren't mentally stable? Oh god, this kind of weak-minded ignorance could only come from that of a religion. Anyone can have a change of mind you dolt, it's not as if anyone who does something you don't like is from a different planet and nothing like you. Someone commited murder, okay, we've all thought about killing people, this person was brave eough to actually do it, he's not mentally unstable.





Yup...you're either an idiot or you didn't read any of the other posts in this thread...Come back to me when you know what I'm actually talking about. You should then apologize for your douche-baggery.

Originally posted by lord xyz
N-No you don't. Most people agree that rape is bad, and lock them up for it, but they still rape, and there are still rapists. So obviously that doesn't work.

B- but the rapists that are killed/jailed stop raping (or at least rape "persons of limited rights" rather than innocent people). Besides you seemed to be interested in the intent of extreme penalties for crimes.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
There are theories which aim at the idea that sanity is a social construct. For example, in many tribal societies it would be perfectly acceptable to kill any kind of rival, over practically anything. The trouble is that sanity is in ways a man made phenomenon. I'm sure I'll get all the psychology brigade screaming at me about enlarged ventricles and excess dopamine levels, but when it boils down to it - what's sane and insane is entirely dependant on societal structure and shared morals.

Insanity has a specific definition in terms of criminal law. An insane person is not fit to stand trial or unable to understand that a crime was being committed. If mental disorders are social or not (I think they are) doesn't matter when determining insanity for practical purposes.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Insanity has a specific definition in terms of criminal law. An insane person is not fit to stand trial or unable to understand that a crime was being committed. If mental disorders are social or not (I think they are) doesn't matter when determining insanity for practical purposes.

Criminal law is also different within different societies.

Also, insanity is not actually determined by the law, the law agrees with a professional's opinion or analysis on the subject. Insanity as a whole is a very strange and varied field, especially in criminal cases.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Criminal law is also different within different societies.

Fine.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Also, insanity is not actually determined by the law, the law agrees with a professional's opinion or analysis on the subject. Insanity as a whole is a very strange and varied field, especially in criminal cases.

But in this case it isn't about how odd the person is it is about how well a person understands what is happening. At least that's the impression I've gotten.

My point was that whether sanity is social or not competence to stand trial on grounds of mental disorder is meant to be as objective as possible.

A mother drowns her child while trying to teach it how to breath water. It's an extreme example, of course, but the mother would be insane in the eyes of most legal systems because she didn't understand that she was killing her child.

Obviously the line blurs for more complex cases but the basic concept remains the same. Correct?

My point is that the social aspects of people being weird (even extremely or clinically so) are not supposed to effect criminal cases involving insanity by my understanding, only understanding and competence.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
But in this case it isn't about how odd the person is it is about how well a person understands what is happening. At least that's the impression I've gotten.

My point was that whether sanity is social or not competence to stand trial on grounds of mental disorder is meant to be as objective as possible.

A mother drowns her child while trying to teach it how to breath water. It's an extreme example, of course, but the mother would be insane in the eyes of most legal systems because she didn't understand that she was killing her child.

Obviously the line blurs for more complex cases but the basic concept remains the same. Correct?

My point is that the social aspects of people being weird (even extremely or clinically so) are not supposed to effect criminal cases involving insanity by my understanding, only understanding and competence.

I'm not too sure on what the system is, but I believe you'd be correct, yes.

Though my point never actually coincided with my opinion, (one I'm yet to post), my point was that insanity, in itself is defined by the society which deals it out. I agree that the criminal law system in the USA has a direct definition of insanity, I however do not agree that this opinion is shared. This, no matter how you dilute or explain it, makes it slightly redundant. Surely, the same principles of mental stability should stand for all people, should they not?

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I'm not too sure on what the system is, but I believe you'd be correct, yes.

Though my point never actually coincided with my opinion, (one I'm yet to post), my point was that insanity, in itself is defined by the society which deals it out. I agree that the criminal law system in the USA has a direct definition of insanity, I however do not agree that this opinion is shared. This, no matter how you dilute or explain it, makes it slightly redundant. Surely, the same principles of mental stability should stand for all people, should they not?

Well yes the US opinion is probably not shared universally (or even anywhere else for all I know).

The only way the same principles could apply to everybody would be if the was a single government. The DSM is supposed to standardize the opinions of psychologists on such matters, but again there is a huge bias toward the US.

Across borders there are different cases that have set policy over time. I doubt it would be possible to smooth that over (as reasonable as it would seem) without overhauling the criminal justice system of every nation on Earth.

Originally posted by dadudemon




Yup...you're either an idiot or you didn't read any of the other posts in this thread...Come back to me when you know what I'm actually talking about. You should then apologize for your douche-baggery.

You are intermingling threads and expecting everyone to follow it. That's no fair.

Life's not fair.

Originally posted by queeq
This is not my jurisdiction. You're a bad person. Hehe.

Originally posted by dadudemon




Yup...you're either an idiot or you didn't read any of the other posts in this thread...Come back to me when you know what I'm actually talking about. You should then apologize for your douche-baggery. Most people would agree with me that you're an idiot, so I won't do anything you say.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
B- but the rapists that are killed/jailed stop raping (or at least rape "persons of limited rights" rather than innocent people). Besides you seemed to be interested in the intent of extreme penalties for crimes.



Insanity has a specific definition in terms of criminal law. An insane person is not fit to stand trial or unable to understand that a crime was being committed. If mental disorders are social or not (I think they are) doesn't matter when determining insanity for practical purposes. How does locking someone up for 10 years stop them raping? Okay, they can't rape when they're in a cell, but you haven't taught them anything. Locking someone up is just avoiding the problem. It doesn't work.

Originally posted by lord xyz
You're a bad person. Hehe.

Thank you.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Most people would agree with me that you're an idiot, so I won't do anything you say.


On the contrary, most people would think you are an idiot and I am not. You obviously failed to see my point and it was quite clear. Calling me an idiot and trying to appeal to ass****s on this message board doesn't change the fact that you "berated" me for all the wrong reasons.

Now continue to post your ignorant and sheltered ideals because you like doing that.

I recently got told that China was intentionally poisoning us with lead because they had no morals, and that the chinese population "lives so well", that they "could".

I don't think they do it intentionally, I think they just don't care.

slaughter family hmm not a bad idea

Sounds like a new comedy: "The Mansons".

Originally posted by dadudemon
On the contrary, most people would think you are an idiot and I am not.

I think you're both idiots.

How nice.

Some things never change here

Well, they were assuming what the majority thought, as part of that majority - I believe I'm entitled to tell them what I think.

So the minority should shut up?

I don't know where on earth you got that idea from.

Me neither!

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Well, they were assuming what the majority thought, as part of that majority - I believe I'm entitled to tell them what I think.

Thank you.

You really do care about me.

thats sad. i hope that never happens to my family.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Thank you.

You really do care about me.

We all do, Shak!

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Well, they were assuming what the majority thought, as part of that majority - I believe I'm entitled to tell them what I think. Yes, you are a part of the majority, as I said the majority think he's an idiot, and you think he's an idiot. I don't know where he got the part where people think he's not an idiot. Probably a lie. I, however acknowledge people thinking I am an idiot, most times it's a misconception, but I won't go into detail with that. Why you think I'm an idiot, I don't know, probably you just being mean or due to some misunderstanding a while back. Oh well, can't please everyone.

Must you ramble on and on like an idiot?

hmm

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Well, they were assuming what the majority thought, as part of that majority - I believe I'm entitled to tell them what I think.

I think I'm inclined to agree with you. Not that I'm exactly a genius myself but I couldn't help laughing when they both thought they knew what the majority thought.

Originally posted by Quark_666
I think I'm inclined to agree with you. Not that I'm exactly a genius myself but I couldn't help laughing when they both thought they knew what the majority thought. I did know what the majority thought. This is retarded.

Originally posted by Robtard
Must you ramble on and on like an idiot? No, and I will stop.

Originally posted by Quark_666
I think I'm inclined to agree with you. Not that I'm exactly a genius myself but I couldn't help laughing when they both thought they knew what the majority thought.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I did know what the majority thought.



And to think I was actually expecting denial...

Originally posted by Quark_666
I think I'm inclined to agree with you. Not that I'm exactly a genius myself but I couldn't help laughing when they both thought they knew what the majority thought.

You can haz elrond?

Originally posted by lord xyz
I did know what the majority thought. This is retarded.

No, and I will stop.

Oops... he admits he was rambling...

Originally posted by dadudemon
You can haz elrond?

Huh?

Ignore...

Originally posted by Quark_666
Huh?



Bojankies.