« Lincoln's Laws of War and Our Own | Main | The Spiritual Crisis of Zionism »

September 26, 2012


That's more than a troll.

That's an actual good old fashioned stalker.

For me the ending was not surprise. I figured the stalker/troll has to be someone the author knew.

One of the middle schools in a nearby city was plagued by bomb calls. Every time someone phoned the police to report a bomb the whole student body would have to stand around outside for a hour or so while the buildig was searched. This happened te or eleven times.

Most people thought a student was making the calls. A student did get involved but as a imitator, not as the initiator. The inititator turned out to be a lonely disabled man who lived across the sreet.

That's not the same as a seventeen year old who makes a game out of viciousness, of course. I'd have some real concerns about that kid's character if he was my offspring.

Did the kid truly appreciate the effects of what he was doing and enjoy it because of that appreciation, or did he not really understand the reality of his actions? Either way, it's some sort of problem, but the possiblility exists for (at least) two very different problems. Both involve some level of meanness, but the former would require more than the latter.

I'm thinking, given his reaction when confronted with reality, he didn't really get it. He was in cyber-la la land. He wasn't being good, and he knew it. But I don't think he knew just how bad he was being.

Like the man said, "I'm not just a little avatar of an eye." His point being, "You need to understand what it was you were doing to real people."

since it's an open thread, and i know there are always lots of lawyers lurking hereabouts...

since pot is banned by federal law, and multiple international treaties, what do the various states think they're accomplishing by trying to decriminalize it?

are they just going to stop making local police arrest people while counting on the fact that the FBI & DEA aren't big enough to arrest everybody the local police would have arrested? can they really let people commit a federal crime?

"Did the kid truly appreciate the effects of what he was doing....."

One of the key features of sociopathology (aka antisocial personality disorder) is that the individual lacks the ability to empathize with other's pain. Others are seen as pawns to be used for his amusement and his amusement and other needs are predominant, by far, over those of others.

Actually, I do think that sociopaths can empathize with others to some extent, but it's just that the ability is stunted and there is a capability of compartmentalizing or shutting off the ability when it suits the sociopath's needs.

Sociopaths are also very capable of imitating appropriate social responses when it's to their advantage. Feigning guilt or remorse when caught red handed would be an example. All sociopaths are con artists. They are constantly "gaming" to get over on others. Getting over is what pumps up their self image as master of all they see and interact with.

What this kid did smacks of true sociopathology. It went way beyond a simple poorly thought out prank and even farther beyond internet trolling, though I am sure he is most happy to have his parents and victims believing that's all it was.

The target was not anonymous because he would not be able to view the effects of his actions as well on an anonymous target. It had to be someone that afforded the ability to observe first hand - or second hand in the case of listening to his parents relate their friend's suffering in the course of conservation - his power over others.

The kid has a serious problem. He is not truly remorseful and he will do similar things in the future. If he has learned from this experience, the learning is only how to not get caught next time. If he has learned well, he will escalate to even more serious offenses.

"since pot is banned by federal law, and multiple international treaties, what do the various states think they're accomplishing by trying to decriminalize it?"

I'm not a lawyer, but this topic interests me.

1. Challenging federalism (a minor revolt of sorts).
2. Sending a message in hopes that with a loud enough and long enough sustained voice stupid and wasteful laws will be vacated.
3. Managing their own jurisdictions as the people see fit knowing it's unlikely that the fed.s can practically interfere too much.

what do the various states think they're accomplishing by trying to decriminalize it?

I think they are trying to do two things:

1) communicate the message that the law (Federal, as well as state) is doing nothing constructive, and needs to change. If enough states make the change, the members of Congress will likely read the writing on the wall and change the Federal law, too. (And if the US quits driving the treaties which ban drugs internationally, most of them will collapse in short order.)

2) quit wasting money that they need for other things -- and state budgets are seriously squeezed nationwide. After all, even if you think that marijuana should be illegal, why spend state money on enforcing it is the Feds will do it for you? Which, so far, they will.

Good news:


(The comments are a real hoot.)

The comments to this entry are closed.