Juvenile Delinquents

[CottonBolus]

Do you know of any? What is your opinion of them?

Though many of them don't turn out well; the ones that do make it out of that world go very far in life. I've personally befriended one juvenile delinquent that really turned out poorly, but there is one juvenile delinquent that I heard of that went on to become the CEO of a major bank in my country. I've also very successful relatives that used to be juvenile delinquents, in other words, they were in gangs when they were young.

Imo, I think being in a gang, being a juvenile delinquent can actually contribute greatly to a successful life. Now I'm not talking about the average gangster, I'm talking specifically about the gang leaders. You need a lot of skills to be a successful one. What are your thoughts?


The cat gangster

[RonR18]

I used to be a juvenile delinquent when I was a young teen, and committed a lot of senseless vandalism as a result of bottled up rage from being terrorized by my parents.

[CottonBolus]

I used to be a juvenile delinquent when I was a young teen, and committed a lot of senseless vandalism as a result of bottled up rage from being terrorized by my parents.

from being terrorized by my parents.

Ron, I am deeply sorry to hear this.

In cases like this, I think there is nothing wrong with vandalism, and related forms activity because it does not harm anyone and it helps release your pent up rage.

Because you went through this, you have a lot more life experience than the rest of us, which is valuable in the corporate world.

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

they work in goverments law sicence medical finace media etc so on fa eons

awsum is

thankyou

[CupidBoy]

The only delinquents I'm here for is....

[RonR18]

from being terrorized by my parents.

Ron, I am deeply sorry to hear this.

In cases like this, I think there is nothing wrong with vandalism, and related forms activity because it does not harm anyone and it helps release your pent up rage.

Because you went through this, you have a lot more life experience than the rest of us, which is valuable in the corporate world.

Thanks CB, I appreciate that. As a result of all the abuse I was subjected to as a child, I think I know more about human nature than the average person, and would make a good psychologist. My car was vandalized a few years ago and it didn't bother me a bit, as I knew the type of emotional pain the vandal was experiencing. Basically, I just felt sorry for him, even though my insurance didn't cover the loss.

[pat grimshaw]

Juvenile Delinquents who commit crime should be held responsible for their crimes

[RonR18]

Juvenile Delinquents who commit crime should be held responsible for their crimes

Knowing what I do about the subject, I disagree. I think the parents should be held criminally responsible if it's determined they've been abusing the child. And it's not really that big a jump from the way they're already held civilly responsible for the damage their kids do.

[kevin23]

from being terrorized by my parents.

Ron, I am deeply sorry to hear this.

In cases like this, I think there is nothing wrong with vandalism, and related forms activity because it does not harm anyone and it helps release your pent up rage.

Because you went through this, you have a lot more life experience than the rest of us, which is valuable in the corporate world.

Bull feathers. Deliberately harming or damaging someone or someone's property just to make you feel good is crap. If you really wanted to deal with being "terrorized by your parents" your school had counselor's to help you. You chose to cause damage to public or private property because it made you feel like a badass, and likely got accepted and encouraged by other deliquentents. What you did was a cowardly act, harming property of people you didn't know or had caused you no harm.

It would be intresting to know what you consider terrorism by your parents.

And Cotton, you feel there is nothign wrong with vandalism? This statement is not worth commenting on, you would likely not understand anyway.

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

Juvenile Delinquents who commit crime should be held responsible for their crimes

all them bankas governemintys business dickys media law medical dingdongs so many it a gonna be happy jail house

ha

[RonR18]

Bull feathers. Deliberately harming or damaging someone or someone's property just to make you feel good is crap. If you really wanted to deal with being "terrorized by your parents" your school had counselor's to help you. You chose to cause damage to public or private property because it made you feel like a badass, and likely got accepted and encouraged by other deliquentents. What you did was a cowardly act, harming property of people you didn't know or had caused you no harm.

It would be intresting to know what you consider terrorism by your parents.

And Cotton, you feel there is nothign wrong with vandalism? This statement is not worth commenting on, you would likely not understand anyway.

RE: "Deliberately harming or damaging someone or someone's property just to make you feel good is crap."

Agreed. Butt I didn't do it to "feel good." I was simply lashing out through rage and anger.

RE: "If you really wanted to deal with being "terrorized by your parents" your school had counselor's to help you."

That's easy for you to say, butt immature young teens don't think like adults.

RE: "You chose to cause damage to public or private property because it made you feel like a badass, and likely got accepted and encouraged by other deliquentents. What you did was a cowardly act, harming property of people you didn't know or had caused you no harm."

You're obviously PWC (posting while clueless), as you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Now go to your room!

[AWP82]

"Delinquentents"

[Nishin]

juvenile delinquents and Communitarianism



Masters ceremonies,
Lunatic
So is life: chaos and harmony.
Weapons and money evoke power in the corrupted minds.
Son, don’t be of those who are mistaken,
Real power is uninterrupted, eternal.
Seen from above, the world is peaceful
At our level, it's discrimination, segregation, elimination
Among nations and generations
Black man, we underwent too much, we’re here to get our due.
Determination has our bodies for residence
Soldier, to live is an honor.

We came to spit our hatred
Brother. This comes from the Hauts d'Seine
And it’s the same everywhere
A long time ago we were kings
Today it’s fucked but we will not be their preys
Fight, it’s the only thing we know
And we’ll return with their money, their blood and their clothes
Above their laws, because we were always denied,
We believe this, the last shall be the first.

[CottonBolus]

Bull feathers. Deliberately harming or damaging someone or someone's property just to make you feel good is crap. If you really wanted to deal with being "terrorized by your parents" your school had counselor's to help you. You chose to cause damage to public or private property because it made you feel like a badass, and likely got accepted and encouraged by other deliquentents. What you did was a cowardly act, harming property of people you didn't know or had caused you no harm.

It would be intresting to know what you consider terrorism by your parents.

And Cotton, you feel there is nothign wrong with vandalism? This statement is not worth commenting on, you would likely not understand anyway.

Deliberately harming or damaging someone or someone's property just to make you feel good is crap.

He was venting negative emotions. It is better and more healthy that he vents than let it build up inside him.

If you really wanted to deal with being "terrorized by your parents" your school had counselor's to help you.

A juvenile may not know of such resources and even if these resources were known, a child who's experienced physical and/or emotional abuse would experience trust issues and may choose not to tell anyone their pain.

Plus, the quality of counsellors in high school, and elementary aren't that great. Counsellors may end up making things worse.

You chose to cause damage to public or private property because it made you feel like a badass, and likely got accepted and encouraged by other deliquentents. What you did was a cowardly act, harming property of people you didn't know or had caused you no harm.

It is less destructive if you compare it to other acts like physical/sexual assault, suicide, homicide, persistent harrassment of peers and torture of animals.

You are making delinquency sound like a choice; it is not a choice, it is a last resort. The world is not fair and resource allocation is uneven. I stand behind what I said earlier which is that in Ron's case, I see vandalism as being okay.It helped release his pent up rage.

And Cotton, you feel there is nothign wrong with vandalism?

I did not say there is nothing wrong with vandalism, I said in Ron's case, vandalism can easily be forgiven.

This statement is not worth commenting on, you would likely not understand anyway.

Having experienced theft myself, and robbery vicariously through friends, I can say that vandalism is a lot easier to forget than something as serious as murder, physical/sexual assault, and harrassment.

In the perfect world, going to a counsellor would solve everyone's problems, but I seriously doubt it. The virginia Tech massacre proves this. Many teachers try to counsel Cho but to no avail.

[DanikShade]

Bull feathers. Deliberately harming or damaging someone or someone's property just to make you feel good is crap. If you really wanted to deal with being "terrorized by your parents" your school had counselor's to help you. You chose to cause damage to public or private property because it made you feel like a badass, and likely got accepted and encouraged by other deliquentents. What you did was a cowardly act, harming property of people you didn't know or had caused you no harm.

It would be intresting to know what you consider terrorism by your parents.

And Cotton, you feel there is nothign wrong with vandalism? This statement is not worth commenting on, you would likely not understand anyway.

Spot on. I notice the response by RonR18 was vague and lacked specifics. My mother was and is one of the most hateful judging spiteful emotionally and physically abusive humans to ever walk the planet. I didn't vandalize, I didn't beat people up, I didn't blame rich people for their wealth, etc etc etc. I started working at 16 and on my 18th birthday I got the fuck out. I made damn sure not to treat my own son in any way like I was treated. The best revenge is living well and doing well. Excuses blow regardless of the reason.

Anyone who commits a crime needs to pay for it, and if the person is a constant repeat offender then yes, mom and dad not only need to pay for the damage, they need jail time to.There should also be a 3 strikes law. I get so sick of people giving a damn criminal an excuse and a buy off. Or poor dear! Your life sucked! We understand sweetums. Fuck that. How about you fucking do that shit again and you're going to pay in ways you can't imagine. Leave people's property the fuck alone.

I also think cities could easily recoup their missing funds like this: First driving violation $500.00. Second driving violation $1000.00. Third driving violation $2000.00, and keep doubling up from there. Can't afford the fine? Don't drive like and asshole. Unexpected result? A pleasant commute because idiots that usually whip in and out of traffic would be terrified of getting $$$$ tickets.

[RonR18]

Spot on. I notice the response by RonR18 was vague and lacked specifics. My mother was and is one of the most hateful judging spiteful emotionally and physically abusive humans to ever walk the planet. I didn't vandalize, I didn't beat people up, I didn't blame rich people for their wealth, etc etc etc. I started working at 16 and on my 18th birthday I got the fuck out. I made damn sure not to treat my own son in any way like I was treated. The best revenge is living well and doing well. Excuses blow regardless of the reason.

Anyone who commits a crime needs to pay for it, and if the person is a constant repeat offender then yes, mom and dad not only need to pay for the damage, they need jail time to.There should also be a 3 strikes law. I get so sick of people giving a damn criminal an excuse and a buy off. Or poor dear! Your life sucked! We understand sweetums. Fuck that. How about you fucking do that shit again and you're going to pay in ways you can't imagine. Leave people's property the fuck alone.

I also think cities could easily recoup their missing funds like this: First driving violation $500.00. Second driving violation $1000.00. Third driving violation $2000.00, and keep doubling up from there. Can't afford the fine? Don't drive like and asshole. Unexpected result? A pleasant commute because idiots that usually whip in and out of traffic would be terrified of getting $$$$ tickets.

RE: "I notice the response by RonR18 was vague and lacked specifics."

I notice your post saying I was vague is vague, in that it lacks specifics. In what way was I "vague?"

RE: "lacked specifics"

The only "specifics" it lacked was that I didn't respond to kevin23's bait, "It would be intresting to know what you consider terrorism by your parents." As I have no desire to dredge up specific details of those ugly memories, and then have to argue about them with trolls/instigators. Even if my skull had been fractured and both of my arms broken multiple times, there'd be a know-it-all waiting in the bushes to snap at my ankles and piss on my leg. Desperate to get a fix for his low self-esteem, he'd claim his head had been cut off as a child, butt yet he didn't sink low enough to commit vandalism... "because he's so much better than me."

RE: "My mother was and is one of the most hateful judging spiteful emotionally and physically abusive humans to ever walk the planet. I didn't vandalize,"

Butt what if she had been 5 times worse than that? And what if your father had been 10 times worse than her? Can you honestly say how you would have reacted with TWO psychopaths abusing you throughout your childhood? If not, then who are you to judge someone else, when you don't have a clue what it was like to be in his shoes?

As you get older and (hopefully) become wiser, you'll realize that not everyone is like you. And different kids react to different levels of abuse in different ways. Some become severely emotionally disturbed, to the point they're put in a psychiatric facility and given electroconvulsive "therapy." Some become severely depressed and commit suicide. Some murder their abusers. Some commit vandalism. Some keep their anger bottled up into adulthood and become so hateful, they can't even express their opinion without being verbally abusive.

Your above post is a prime example of the latter, in that it's literally dripping with aggression, anger, hostility, contempt, resentment, etc. You come across as someone who's deluded himself into believing he's "Mr. Perfect," butt has a chip on his shoulder the size of a fence post, and is extremely eager to pick a fight with random strangers. Although the abuse you suffered may not have been enough to send you out into the night committing vandalism as a kid, you're doing far more damage to society with your bottled up rage. In that you'll undoubtedly be spreading your verbal venom around for a lifetime.

RE: "I didn't beat people up, I didn't blame rich people for their wealth, etc etc etc."

Huh? Where is that coming from? You're so eager to pick a fight with me, you're resorting to making stuff up? All I mentioned was vandalism, period.

RE: "I started working at 16 and on my 18th birthday I got the fuck out."

Good for you. Just be glad you weren't emotionally disturbed from being physically/mentally tortured and terrorized by 2 psychopaths from hell, that's all I can say. Because there's no telling what would have happened to you if that had been the case.

RE: "Excuses blow regardless of the reason."

You're obviously PWMAMOOY (posting while making a monkey out of yourself). Because if I had merely stated, "I used to be a juvenile delinquent when I was a young teen and committed a lot of senseless vandalism," common sense should tell you that people would want to know WHY I did it. In other words, what motivated me, what was I thinking, etc. Butt because I included the explanation with my post, clueless know-it-alls use it as ammunition to bash me. Anything to get their much needed self-esteem fix for the day, and release some of their bottled up anger.

As well, in your eagerness to pick a fight with me, you totally mischaracterized what I said. As I didn't offer abuse as an "excuse" to justify my delinquent behavior, I indicated the behavior was "a result" of the abuse.

RE: "Anyone who commits a crime needs to pay for it"

I got caught and did pay for it.

I'm not going to dignify the remainder of your clueless diatribe with a response, except to say that if I'd had normal parents, I would have been in my room at night doing what boys normally do, instead of sneaking out my window committing rage fueled vandalism.

Now, get down and give me 100 pushups, and then go to your room...



And NO bananas for you today!

[Hard-up1]

Explaining vandalism and excusing it are two different things.

Whereas the victim of vandalism has the prerogative of forgiving it, as Ron did, the crime tolerated nonetheless is an encouragement for the crime to continue.

As for there being no one "harmed" as Cotton suggests, it is a bit simple to make physical beating and abuse the sole standard for measuring immoral or criminal behavior. The old "as long as no one gets hurt" is more of an anti-societal view that ignores commerce, and other valid social concerns.

If a man builds up a business, and becomes the target for the taggers just because he owns a spot to be painted, how is he not harmed when his property is defaced?

How is society not harmed when children see the tagging and are "taught" that the solution to internalized frustration is to find a victim and attack his property surreptitiously at night in order to alleviate the internalized anger?

Although tagging is damaging in and of itself, that rationale is also used to justify robbery, theft, rape, and other forms of acting out.

If we follow that line of reasoning, Ron's parents should be excused because their abuse of Ron was just their way of coping with their day-to-day frustrations of dealing with work, parenting, and social change.

[MTLDude]

This thread reminds me of this classic:

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

Explaining vandalism and excusing it are two different things.

Whereas the victim of vandalism has the prerogative of forgiving it, as Ron did, the crime tolerated nonetheless is an encouragement for the crime to continue.

As for there being no one "harmed" as Cotton suggests, it is a bit simple to make physical beating and abuse the sole standard for measuring immoral or criminal behavior. The old "as long as no one gets hurt" is more of an anti-societal view that ignores commerce, and other valid social concerns.

If a man builds up a business, and becomes the target for the taggers just because he owns a spot to be painted, how is he not harmed when his property is defaced?

How is society not harmed when children see the tagging and are "taught" that the solution to internalized frustration is to find a victim and attack his property surreptitiously at night in order to alleviate the internalized anger?

Although tagging is damaging in and of itself, that rationale is also used to justify robbery, theft, rape, and other forms of acting out.

If we follow that line of reasoning, Ron's parents should be excused because their abuse of Ron was just their way of coping with their day-to-day frustrations of dealing with work, parenting, and social change.

is not it wot lands world ova dodo everyday fa eons ans wet puddin public go dat okay

defo civil ization luv run same script fa eva

thankyou

enjoy da reruns

[DanikShade]

Explaining vandalism and excusing it are two different things.

Whereas the victim of vandalism has the prerogative of forgiving it, as Ron did, the crime tolerated nonetheless is an encouragement for the crime to continue.

As for there being no one "harmed" as Cotton suggests, it is a bit simple to make physical beating and abuse the sole standard for measuring immoral or criminal behavior. The old "as long as no one gets hurt" is more of an anti-societal view that ignores commerce, and other valid social concerns.

If a man builds up a business, and becomes the target for the taggers just because he owns a spot to be painted, how is he not harmed when his property is defaced?

How is society not harmed when children see the tagging and are "taught" that the solution to internalized frustration is to find a victim and attack his property surreptitiously at night in order to alleviate the internalized anger?

Although tagging is damaging in and of itself, that rationale is also used to justify robbery, theft, rape, and other forms of acting out.

If we follow that line of reasoning, Ron's parents should be excused because their abuse of Ron was just their way of coping with their day-to-day frustrations of dealing with work, parenting, and social change.

Well said. A justification is an excuse.

[refujiunderground]

well, 10, 11, 12 years ago and even growing up in the late 90s, that would have been really easy in my case. i could have been a juvenile delinquent but luckily, i was disciplined by my parents especially my mom's and her asswhipping skills, *sigh* the school that i went to , and to a degree, myself. sheit, i honestly think if none of those factors played a part in my life, i probably woulda had a long ass rap sheet, been in and out of jail, even been incarcerated or dead even. i had the personality already that would have easily led me into a lifestyle like that but i guess the love and the fear instilled into me at an early age made me think twice about doing something fucked up before i did it. even though i still have thoughts of doing crazy shit, i can control myself where i don't act on those thoughts and do something better with my time instead like play the video game and studying. there's nothing that is keeping me from going out, selling drugs, robbing people and etc. it's that i CHOSE not to. hell, at this age, if i did that shit, i'm going to prison. as a juvenile, you're likely to get many chances to screw up unless you screw up in a major way like killing somebody. then again, i remember my former karate instructor who used to work at the youth house telling me all the horror stories about what the crazy ass kids did in there from burgers made out of feces and feeding it to the c.o.'s to kids stabbing other kids in the nuts.

it really depends on your environment and who you're around. if you in a bad neighborhood, come from an abusive home, and violence is a normal part of everyday life, chances are you WILL go in that direction and once you go in that direction, it's HARD to get out of it. if you don't, you are one of the lucky ones. as cliche as this fucking sounds, count your blessings. wtf?

[CottonBolus]

Explaining vandalism and excusing it are two different things.

Whereas the victim of vandalism has the prerogative of forgiving it, as Ron did, the crime tolerated nonetheless is an encouragement for the crime to continue.

As for there being no one "harmed" as Cotton suggests, it is a bit simple to make physical beating and abuse the sole standard for measuring immoral or criminal behavior. The old "as long as no one gets hurt" is more of an anti-societal view that ignores commerce, and other valid social concerns.

If a man builds up a business, and becomes the target for the taggers just because he owns a spot to be painted, how is he not harmed when his property is defaced?

How is society not harmed when children see the tagging and are "taught" that the solution to internalized frustration is to find a victim and attack his property surreptitiously at night in order to alleviate the internalized anger?

Although tagging is damaging in and of itself, that rationale is also used to justify robbery, theft, rape, and other forms of acting out.

If we follow that line of reasoning, Ron's parents should be excused because their abuse of Ron was just their way of coping with their day-to-day frustrations of dealing with work, parenting, and social change.

I'm not looking to solve certain problems in society, because at the moment, I don't have the power to do so. When I look at issues like juvenile delinquency, I look to minimize the damage done, i.e. do as much damage control as possible.

Ron committed vandalism when he was a juvenile. A child should not be held to the same standard as an adult; this is why there is a law that states that it is mandatory to report child abuse, but there isn't a law around reporting of the abuse of older adults. What people experience as children has a large impact on their adult life.

If an adult commits vandalism that would be a different story.

[CottonBolus]

Just to add: children are extremely fragile and are considered vulnerable. An adult, in other words, someone in their 20's and 30's would have have more defences than an child.

[loveguys72]

People need to be held accountable for their actions. If we as a society can help individuals resolve the root causes of their criminal behaviors, we should. If the person can't or won't be helped, he must be incarcerated for the good of society in general.

[RonR18]

Explaining vandalism and excusing it are two different things.

Whereas the victim of vandalism has the prerogative of forgiving it, as Ron did, the crime tolerated nonetheless is an encouragement for the crime to continue.

As for there being no one "harmed" as Cotton suggests, it is a bit simple to make physical beating and abuse the sole standard for measuring immoral or criminal behavior. The old "as long as no one gets hurt" is more of an anti-societal view that ignores commerce, and other valid social concerns.

If a man builds up a business, and becomes the target for the taggers just because he owns a spot to be painted, how is he not harmed when his property is defaced?

How is society not harmed when children see the tagging and are "taught" that the solution to internalized frustration is to find a victim and attack his property surreptitiously at night in order to alleviate the internalized anger?

Although tagging is damaging in and of itself, that rationale is also used to justify robbery, theft, rape, and other forms of acting out.

If we follow that line of reasoning, Ron's parents should be excused because their abuse of Ron was just their way of coping with their day-to-day frustrations of dealing with work, parenting, and social change.

So you're comparing an emotionally disturbed child who's being physically and mentally abused, with adults who merely need an outlet for their day-to-day frustrations?

[Hard-up1]

No, I'm comparing a teen, a proto-adult in most situations, who is able to be out at night and commit vandalism. Somehow, that doesn't conjure the image of a child, but of an adolescent. And your precept that emotional disturbance is the source of vandalism is not proven; it is just as likely simple malice.

Adolescents drive cars, have sex, drink, and work at jobs.

The implication that youth is a defense of crime is as offensive as suggesting it is alright for your parents to abuse. Neither are alright.

And, to Cotton's point, arguing that children are vulnerable is simply a non-sequitur. It is apples and oranges. If one could protect children from abuse by letting them vandalize property, it might be worth discussion, but it is not true.

Every criminal out there, robbers, pimps and whathaveyou, can readily argue poverty and abuse in his background, but that is not a basis to go forward and justify crime, only an explanation of anger that is the seed of crime. The answer is not to wink at the offense.

The root of the argument of this thread is more along the lines of "the victims of vandalism are the haves and the kids who commit it are have-nots, so I approve." Gaining a sense of empowerment and self-esteem through the destruction of another's property is not commendable, nor is it the legitimate way to address one's angst.

[RonR18]

No, I'm comparing a teen, a proto-adult in most situations, who is able to be out at night and commit vandalism. Somehow, that doesn't conjure the image of a child, but of an adolescent. And your precept that emotional disturbance is the source of vandalism is not proven; it is just as likely simple malice.

Adolescents drive cars, have sex, drink, and work at jobs.

The implication that youth is a defense of crime is as offensive as suggesting it is alright for your parents to abuse. Neither are alright.

And, to Cotton's point, arguing that children are vulnerable is simply a non-sequitur. It is apples and oranges. If one could protect children from abuse by letting them vandalize property, it might be worth discussion, but it is not true.

Every criminal out there, robbers, pimps and whathaveyou, can readily argue poverty and abuse in his background, but that is not a basis to go forward and justify crime, only an explanation of anger that is the seed of crime. The answer is not to wink at the offense.

The root of the argument of this thread is more along the lines of "the victims of vandalism are the haves and the kids who commit it are have-nots, so I approve." Gaining a sense of empowerment and self-esteem through the destruction of another's property is not commendable, nor is it the legitimate way to address one's angst.

RE: "No, I'm comparing a teen, a proto-adult in most situations, who is able to be out at night and commit vandalism."

I was 13, with the maturity of an 11-year-old, and I would sneak out my window after they went to bed. You can call it what you want, butt I was a child in every sense of the word.

RE: "And your precept that emotional disturbance is the source of vandalism is not proven;"

I didn't say it's the source, just that I was emotionally disturbed. Basically, I was mentally ill, because my parents had driven me crazy, and I had virtually no control over my compulsions to lash out in anger.

RE: "it is just as likely simple malice"

I already made it clear in this thread that I was driven solely by rage.

RE: "The implication that youth is a defense of crime is as offensive as suggesting it is alright for your parents to abuse."

That's complete nonsense. Read up on emotional disturbance, as well as what I said above. Then look at yourself judging the irrational mind of a mentally ill child who had the maturity of an 11-year-old, who was being physically and mentally tortured by psychopaths, and be man enough to admit how ridiculous that is. No one has the right to judge me who wasn't there in my shoes, experiencing the same abuse.

RE: "Gaining a sense of empowerment and self-esteem through the destruction of another's property"

That comment makes it extremely clear that you haven't read my previous posts, so until/unless you do, there's no point in me discussing this with you any further. As for Cotton's points, I've got enough sense to let him speak for himself on those issues.

[pat grimshaw]

I can't give an opinion in this thread because I can't quantify the amount of vandalism and the amount of abuse being talked about. We need a video or some more facts.

But the thread seems to illustrating the notion that our society used to be controlled by patriarchs but now we're living in an infantocracy.

[Hard-up1]

What is the relevance of separating rage from malice?

Mental illness is a clinical determination, not just pique or vented anger or frustration. It is not a catch-all for unhappiness.

No one is minimizing your suffering, but it doesn't necessarily follow that your application of mental illness as a diagnosis is what society means by the term.

In any event, dismissing every detractor by denigrating his intelligence or comprehension is just self-serving. Claiming one has no self-control does not make the claim true.

A discussion thread on a forum is more than looking to find sycophants who are eager to agree in a frenzy of sympathetic posts. Vandalism is not a necessary end when one assesses teen angst.

Whether you acted out as a result of your feelings at the time is not the basis for assessing whether vandalism as a broader problem is justified in society.

Many of us on this forum had abusive parents. Implying that we somehow are unsympathetic with suffering is inaccurate. We can suffer without finding rationalization to cover our criminal behaviors. Likewise, not condoning crime is not tantamount to not sympathizing with suffering. Bad logic.

[RonR18]