Y DO SUICIDES MURDER THEIR FAMILIES ?

Quote:

Im having a problem with the whole "children having guns thing".

7 year old Mr. Yates had an important problem
with the child NOT HAVING a gun thing.
The DEATH penalty was inflicted upon him,
for being unarmed.

Quote:

True my dad taught me to shoot when I was 12
but he instilled in me the fear of god to ever touch a rifle without him there.

I need not consider theoretical specultion,
on this point. When I arrived in Phoenix, Arizona
at the age of 8, I found many kids in the neighborhood
being well armed. During the 5 years and one day
that I resided there, no one complained of any person,
of any age, showing bad manners with firearms.
It was just not done.

Sometime in the 1990s, I remember a broadcast of the ABC
World News, wherein they showed the school where the students
MUST bring guns to school. They interviewed a group of blonde,
wholesome looking students aged 8 - 12 who brought rifles to school
each day, because of predatory fauna, in the Northwest US.
They showed how when they arrived, they put their coats on the coatrack,
put their hats on the hatrack, put their guns on the gunrack,
studied arithmetic and geografy ( but sadly, no fonetic spelling ),
and at the end of the day they took their stuff and went home, with no trouble.
They were not as stupid as too many folks make them out to be.

Quote:

I just don't think children (7 yrs old as you stated before)
have the mental capacity yet to understand what it means to shoot someone
and when its appropriate.

I am sure that they understand what a defensive situation is.

Quote:

True you could say that its the parents responsibility
to teach the child gun safety (like my father did)

Do u accept the concept of compulsory education ?
Teach them safe and accurate handling of guns alongside history and English.

Quote:

, but then doesnt that make it difficult to use that gun against the parent
if the parents gone gonzo and is trying to kill them?

Maybe the victim will keep a gun handy
somewhere around the house for swift use.

Quote:

Chldren rarely have the ability to stand up to their parents,

Remember the old adage
that Sam Colt made men [ of any age ] equal ?

Quote:

thats a trait learned later in life, specifically in their teens.

Do u deny that he 'd learn it fast,
if Dad were chasing him with an ax ?

Quote:

All I can see is a child being more familiar with the gun and accidently
blowing off a friends head while playing with it.

If he is FAMILIAR with it,
then he will not blow it off ACCIDENTALLY,
tho murderers have been represented in all age groups.

I remember 2 English boys around 10 years old
who kidnapped a boy around 2 years old
and stuffed rocks down his throat, for the rest of his life
( maybe half an hour ). I doubt that they 'd been trained
in the safe handling of stones, but they had their way anyway.

Quote:

No one can possibly know or even guess as to what is going thru someone's mind
when they do something so horrrendous.

I thought that YOU did a good job of it,
when u said that:

" I think many times the suicidal person wants to just leave this life,
but is afraid that their children won't be cared for -
so they take them with them "

Quote:

But arming children?
What about when the kid's being punished and decides that he's got the upper hand
because he's got a gun in it?

It is the difference between life and death,
in the Yates family and in the Benoit family.
The death penalty is inflicted upon the unarmed.

However, I agree with u
that a gun is an instrument of liberty.
Maybe Mom or Dad had better resort to use of REASON,
verbally explained reason, instead of punishment.

Quote:

The only way to stop something like that from happening
is for family and friends to take notice and be aware of what's going on
in a family and if they see something amiss to notify someone - a doctor,
clergy, police if necessary. Too many times family members will say that
they noticed something different or odd going on but didn't know what
to do about it, or didn't want to get involved, or didn't want to upset the
person in question.

I see problems with that:
1. It assumes the existence of additional family and friends
2. It assumes their willingness to become spies.
3. It assumes their ability to detect.
4. It assumes that a doctor will know what to do about it;
( do thay TEACH that in medical school ? )
What will a clergyman do with that information ?

I agree about the police,
if a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is being planned.

I once saw a movie, purportedly based on historical fact,
wherein the husband and father was planning to massacre his family
before he committed suicide. Slowly, over several months, thay began to suspect,
and even to discuss it with him, in an unsuccessful effort to disuade him.
I remember yearning and craving for them to ARM THEMSELVES against him.
Thay did not.
Thay got murdered; he committed suicide.

I think many times the suicidal person wants to just leave this life, but is afraid that their children won't be cared for - so they take them with them

Quote:

I think many times the suicidal person wants to just leave this life,
but is afraid that their children won't be cared for -
so they take them with them

Miller wrote:

Quote:

I don't. I think the suicidal person kills their wife and kids because for some reason,
he blames them for his unhappiness.

I am sure that it has happened BOTH ways,
thru out the decades ( centuries ?? )
In some cases, it has been done out of mean-spiritedness and vengeance
( e.g., an ex-girlfriend, or ex-wife, marries someone else )
and in other cases the murderers intend to plunge the victims into non-existence
as a means of protecting them from the dangers of existence.
I 've even seen animals do that.

Quote:

Drugs, steroids. etc. can distort a person's thinking.

Yes.
I remember, about 35 years ago, I was in a nasty mood,
quietly believing that someone had offended me with rudeness.
After a fine ( wonderful ) Italian meal,
I felt very, very good.
I was struck by the stark contrast in my states-of-mind.
The change was very abrupt.
I realized that whereas I had attributed my ill humor to discourtesy,
in fact, it had resulted from low blood sugar, in my state of low-grade hunger.
David

happycat wrote:

Quote:

No one can possibly know or even guess as to what is going thru someone's mind
when they do something so horrrendous.

I thought that YOU did a good job of it,
when u said that:

" I think many times the suicidal person wants to just leave this life,
but is afraid that their children won't be cared for -
so they take them with them "

Quote:

But arming children?
What about when the kid's being punished and decides that he's got the upper hand
because he's got a gun in it?

It is the difference between life and death,
in the Yates family and in the Benoit family.
The death penalty is inflicted upon the unarmed.

However, I agree with u
that a gun is an instrument of liberty.
Maybe Mom or Dad had better resort to use of REASON,
verbally explained reason, instead of punishment.

Quote:

The only way to stop something like that from happening
is for family and friends to take notice and be aware of what's going on
in a family and if they see something amiss to notify someone - a doctor,
clergy, police if necessary. Too many times family members will say that
they noticed something different or odd going on but didn't know what
to do about it, or didn't want to get involved, or didn't want to upset the
person in question.

I see problems with that:
1. It assumes the existence of additional family and friends
2. It assumes their willingness to become spies.
3. It assumes their ability to detect.
4. It assumes that a doctor will know what to do about it;
( do thay TEACH that in medical school ? )
What will a clergyman do with that information ?

I agree about the police,
if a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is being planned.

I once saw a movie, purportedly based on historical fact,
wherein the husband and father was planning to massacre his family
before he committed suicide. Slowly, over several months, thay began to suspect,
and even to discuss it with him, in an unsuccessful effort to disuade him.
I remember yearning and craving for them to ARM THEMSELVES against him.
Thay did not.
Thay got murdered; he committed suicide.

Ok, I can see first by your avatar, and second by your responses, that you are a gun toting, gun loving, gun nut that thinks all things can be accomplished with a gun.
You shot down (ha!) any suggestions that other people could offer help before something terrible happens, and you want small children to be in possession of guns.
Your sentence above is creepy in itself: while watching a movie, you yearned and craved for the characters to have a gun? I don't think you can separate movies from reality.
Reality is that if you arm little kids, you'll have more little kids dead as a result of accidents and stupidity.

I'll bet anything you aren't married, have no kids and live alone. (Well, I hope so anyway.)

OmSigDAVID wrote:

happycat wrote:

Quote:

No one can possibly know or even guess as to what is going thru someone's mind
when they do something so horrrendous.

I thought that YOU did a good job of it,
when u said that:

" I think many times the suicidal person wants to just leave this life,
but is afraid that their children won't be cared for -
so they take them with them "

Quote:

But arming children?
What about when the kid's being punished and decides that he's got the upper hand
because he's got a gun in it?

It is the difference between life and death,
in the Yates family and in the Benoit family.
The death penalty is inflicted upon the unarmed.

However, I agree with u
that a gun is an instrument of liberty.
Maybe Mom or Dad had better resort to use of REASON,
verbally explained reason, instead of punishment.

Quote:

The only way to stop something like that from happening
is for family and friends to take notice and be aware of what's going on
in a family and if they see something amiss to notify someone - a doctor,
clergy, police if necessary. Too many times family members will say that
they noticed something different or odd going on but didn't know what
to do about it, or didn't want to get involved, or didn't want to upset the
person in question.

I see problems with that:
1. It assumes the existence of additional family and friends
2. It assumes their willingness to become spies.
3. It assumes their ability to detect.
4. It assumes that a doctor will know what to do about it;
( do thay TEACH that in medical school ? )
What will a clergyman do with that information ?

I agree about the police,
if a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is being planned.

I once saw a movie, purportedly based on historical fact,
wherein the husband and father was planning to massacre his family
before he committed suicide. Slowly, over several months, thay began to suspect,
and even to discuss it with him, in an unsuccessful effort to disuade him.
I remember yearning and craving for them to ARM THEMSELVES against him.
Thay did not.
Thay got murdered; he committed suicide.

Quote:

Ok, I can see first by your avatar, and second by your responses,
that you are a gun toting [ ? ], gun loving, gun nut that
thinks all things can be accomplished with a gun.

I love my gun collection, as I love my cars, my real estate, and my old gold coin collection.
( I surmise that u think that is BAD; that guns shud not be loved. )

Man is a tool-making being.
That is how we rose to the top of the food chain,
which is the best place on it to be.

Guns are to be found among vast numbers of available instruments
that can be toted to, and used for, different jobs.
For purposes of the preservation of a man 's life ( at ANY age )
from the dangers of predatory violence, guns are probably your optimal choice of emergency equipment.

I do not think that "... all things can be accomplished with a gun. "
For instance, I don t think that swimming, nor calculating your tax liability,
nor changing the oil in your car are best accomplished with use of a gun.
U have exagerated and distorted my position.

Quote:

You shot down (ha!) any suggestions that other people could offer help before something terrible happens

Yes; that idea struck me as awkward, and unlikely to succeed.
Practical measures are necessary to take care of the situation;
matters of a defensive nature.
Guns are the tools of defense.

Quote:

and you want small children to be in possession of guns.

Yes.
I armed myself with a 2 inch .38 revolver, at the age of 8,
and I wish everyone else to be as well prepared to defend himself.
The life u save may be your own.
Safe and accurate, hands-on gun handling practices
shud be among the courses taught in the early grades of school.

Quote:

Your sentence above is creepy in itself:
while watching a movie, you yearned and craved for the characters to have a gun?

It is STRANGE for you to wish a nice, innocent family
to be ill equipped and unprepared to defend their lives
and to get killed, because of their helplessness.
It is STRANGE ( maybe "creepy" ? )
that you like and enjoy helplessness and weakness in innocent victims.
( Do you root for the BAD guy ? You want him to remain intact ? )

I thought that thay were nice people who shud take the measures
( defensively ARMING themselves ) that will cause them to contine to LIVE.
You believe that is " creepy ".

Quote:

I don't think you can separate movies from reality.

The movie was based upon the REAL murders of the suicide 's wife and children.
I thought I made that clear.

Quote:

Reality is that if you arm little kids,
you'll have more little kids dead as a result of accidents and stupidity.

When I lived in Arizona, between ages 8 and 13,
I was surrounded by well armed little kids,
who caused no trouble, nor occasioned no complaints of bad manners with firearms.
YOU are speculating.
I am reporting 5 years of observed fact which disproves your hunches.

Quote:

I'll bet anything you aren't married, have no kids and live alone.
(Well, I hope so anyway.)

Your wish has been granted;
however, over the decades, I have had young ladies living together with me.

As of this morning, I believe Baltimore's murder rate is at 178 for the year. Most of those were young people with guns killed by other young people with guns.

Omsigdavid, our cities aren't the wild west, nor are they the wilderness where people have to protect themselves from animal attacks. Children should not have guns because their brains are not fully developed enough to understand the ramifications of firing a gun at another human being.

And, I don't think yours is fully developed either.

Although few studies have been done, Dr. Heide, drawing on earlier work by others and her own cases, delineates the common characteristics that emerged among 50 cases of adolescents who committed such a personal crime:

o Evidence of family violence

o Attempts to get help, which failed

o Attempts to run away or commit suicide

o Isolation from peers

o Increasingly intolerable family situation

o Children feel helpless to change the home situation

o Inability to cope with what is happening to them

o No criminal record

o A gun available in the home

o Alcoholism present in parents

o Amnesia reported after murder

o Victim's death perceived as a relief by all involved.

An in-depth analysis of the FBI Supplementary Homicide Report for this period shows that, in the great majority of cases, the child who killed was a white male.

Almost invariably, the killers are adolescents. Why are the killers teenagers? Preadolescents, those under 11, typically do not understand the concept of death and have tremendous difficulty in accepting that their actions lead to an irreversible result. Adolescents are more likely to kill because the normal turbulence of adolescence runs up against constraints they perceive have been placed upon them in a setting of limited alternatives.

happycat wrote:

As of this morning, I believe Baltimore's murder rate is at 178 for the year. Most of those were young people with guns killed by other young people with guns.

Omsigdavid, our cities aren't the wild west, nor are they the wilderness where people have to protect themselves from animal attacks. Children should not have guns because their brains are not fully developed enough to understand the ramifications of firing a gun at another human being.

And, I don't think yours is fully developed either.

Gotta agree with you there... most people shouldn't be allowed around guns.
There'd be a lot fewer deaths if people just used their fists.

Quote:

As of this morning, I believe Baltimore's murder rate is at 178 for the year.

Do u believe that 7 year old Dan Benoit
was contemplating the murder rate of Baltimore
while his dad was strangling him to death ?

Do u believe that 7 year old Mr. Yates
was thinking of that, as a homicidal maniac ( his mother )
was dragging him to his final bath, after he fled thru the house ?

Quote:

Most of those were young people with guns killed by other young people with guns.

Thay shud be held accountable for their robberies and murders,
like anyone else; maybe BANISH them,
but u have no right to punish FUTURE VICTIMS of violence
for the crimes of these bad guys,
nor shud u violate the rights of self defense of those future victims.

Quote:

Omsigdavid, our cities aren't the wild west

The West was not very wild.
We know from the newspapers of Dodge City,
at its worst, as a town with no police, just a stop over
for cowboys and cows on the way to the Railroad,
that the in the worst year for murders,
there were 6 murders.
However, there WERE occasional Indian raids.
The wildness was largely made up for pulp fiction.

Quote:

nor are they the wilderness where people have to protect themselves from animal attacks.

I saw on TV, a homeowner whose kitchen was invaded
by a mountain lion; he was trapped inside, pointing a little rifle at him,
until the dog catcher showed up.
The LAPD arrived and refused to enter and refused to help.



I was attacked by a giant dog.

His name was Boris.
He sank one of his fangs into my left forearm.
It looked like a hole from a .22 caliber bullet.

Quote:

Children should not have guns because their brains are not fully
developed enough to understand the ramifications of firing a gun
at another human being.

Wud u explain that to Mr. Yates, as he was being drowned ?

or to 7 year old Dan Benoit,
as he was being strangled to death by a professional wrestler ?

In my opinion,
it is BAD ENUF to be attacked and beaten to death,
or stabbed or strangled or drowned, by itself,
but to sabotage whatever chances the murder victims have to survive,
by making it MORE DIFFICULT to get their hands
on the means of defense and survival is an unspeakable outrage against decency.
I do not believe in the existence of any devil,
but if there were one HE 'D LOVE GUN CONTROL.

Quote:

And, I don't think yours is fully developed either.

Your doubts are reciprocated.
David

Quote:

Happycat lets not resort to name calling,
I may not agree with his gun-happy opinion but he has a right to it.

The opinion concerns either of 2
7-year-old boys being strangled to death
or dragged to a bathtub where he has seen his brothers have been drowned.

The opinion relates to the juvenile victims having the means
to defeat 2 homicidal maniacs ( father and mother ) from murdering them.
Is this what u consider " gun happy " ?
To my mind,
I 'm gun happy when I have a joyful day at the gunnery range.

Quote:

In that same ilk, OmSig i think what it comes down to is arming the munchkins
is not a very reliable, safe or responsible choice.

When u say that, my mind goes back to another incident
that I saw reported on TV some years ago; a horrible incident.
Another boy, of the same age, went out riding his bike after dinner.
A pervert grabbed him and cut his throat from one side to the other.
Before leaving him for dead, that pervert cut off his victim 's penis
and took it with him. The criminal was caught by the police,
and the victim survived his wounds, but with no penis.
Having anticipated Happycat 's wish,
I do not have any children, but if MY son had been confronted with such
criminal abuse, I 'd have wished that I 'd armed him, in his own defense.
If I had not, then I 'd have felt irresponsible.
The Second Amendment does not warrant that u will win every fight,
but at least it provides for the victim to have a closer to even chance.

Quote:

1) In response to your story about children being armed on the way to school
in order to defend themselves against predatory animals,
its hard to draw a direct correlation between shooting a wild boar and shooting a person, especially a parent.

I disagree.

If one is beset by man or beast with blood in his eye
and conspicuously predatory plans,
then the job lies in front of the victim:
defend his life OR not.
In order to do it, one needs to be well equipped
to address predatory emergencies,
including sufficient training and practice to evoke proficiency;
i.e., to qualify on the weapon. That 's what schools are for.

Quote:

2) The Sam Colt adage just doesnt ring true.
As much as you'd like to think people with a gun in their hand have equal abilities
as everyone else, its just not the way it is.

Well, if the innocent victim is armed with a gun
( hopefully one with which he has practiced )
then he is CLOSER to being equal than he 'd be without one.
Will u DENY that ?

Quote:

When children are faced with danger they run and they hide.

If thay are unarmed,
that may well be the best thay can do.

Well armed police, soldiers or Marines have also taken cover,
when faced with danger, depending on the circumstances.

Quote:

What did Yates son do? He ran

Yes; his mother told us that.

Quote:

He could have picked up an iron and bashed her head in,
he could have gone to the kitchen and picked up a kitchen knife and stabbed her a good couple times.

She did not tell us THAT.
Will u reveal the source of your information, on those points ?

Quote:

Why didn't he?

I suspect that he did not have the opportunity,
tho I was not a witness.

I imagine that knowing that she had already murdered
his 3 brothers and sister, he 'd have killed her if he cud have,
tho, admittedly, I don 't know whether his personality was pacifistic or defensive.

Quote:

Cause he was a poor kid that was scared to death
and did what his instincts told him too, that is:
get the hell out of there.

Evacuation can be a good strategy,
if it is available. That did not prove to be the case.

Being " scared to death " is motivation for both fight or flight.
When I was a kid, we had a peaceful house,
but I remember thinking, in contempation of such
circumstances that I 'd be very counteraggressive.

Quote:

3) "Maybe the victim will keep a gun handy somewhere around the house for swift use. "
You trust a child to keep a loaded gun in a safe place?

I am philosophically opposed to trusting human behavior,
but I believe that his rights to self defense shud be acknowleged
and respected. When I was a kid, I left it in the end table next to my bed at night
( which is the same thing I do now ).

Quote:

I can't get my nephews to pick their underwear up off the floor!

Underwear is not usually emergency equipment.
Thay can probably live without that,
but when u need a gun,
the penalty for NOT having one is DEATH, with no appeal,
at the discretion of a violent predator; he 's not likely to argue about their underwear.
David