When my father killed himself, one of the first things my mother said to me was, “Thank God he killed himself first.” You see, my father had threatened for years to kill us and then himself. The last six months of his life, I was terrified I was going to go to my parent’s house and find blood and bodies everywhere, or worse, bodies and my father nowhere to be found. And then I hear footsteps…
For years before he died, I had nightmares about him hunting me down and killing me. That was the reason I insisted on seeing his body. I wanted to know that the motherfucker was dead. Even seeing him lying there in the casket, I didn’t believe it until I went up and touched him, and he was cold. My mother and brother both breathed a sigh of relief. He was really dead. I haven’t had any of those nightmares since he died, but my mother still has nightmares that he’s alive and he’s coming for her…
So, in at least in one case, the bastard killed himself first. And yeah, the general response to his death was pretty much relief that he hadn’t taken anyone else with him. Had he killed us all, they wouldn’t have found a soul who would have expressed surprise.
Another theory for how these things can sometimes pan out:
A few years ago, on Christmas Eve, the father of a seemingly happy family that lived a couple of blocks away from me in my small hometown killed his wife and children, leaving the youngest (a toddler) to wander amongst the dead bodies until someone found the poor kid.
As it turned out, the father was sexually abusing his older daughters and they were about to blow the whistle on him.
For whatever reason, he chose not to commit suicide afterward and now sits on death row, but I’m guessing that others in his situation would have just as soon offed themselves in the process.
The human brain doesn’t match that of a dog until something like 1 or 2 years old. Dogs aren’t self-aware as such. So unless you think that fetuses decrease in intelligence just shortly before they are born, I’m going to assume that they aren’t.
No disrespect when I ask this, but did that sort of emotional trauma leave you kinda fucked up as an adult? Or were you lucky and manage to sail through it relatively unscathed? I ask this because a lot of us have “abusive” fathers who get drunk and beat on the wife and/or the kids (certainly my father did) and there’s no denying I grew up extremely passive and timid as a defense mechanism to somehow avoid the old man’s wrath. I can only imagine how hard it must have been to have grown up with a father who had murderous thoughts going on.
In most of the cases I read about, it seems like there’s a lot of anger and fighting and getting-back-at and revenge. I suppose a percentage of them might be “the world is too awful for these children”-type killings, but from what I know of furious, frustrated people who feel powerless, I’d guess that most of these killers are MORE concerned about offing the children than about killing themselves. Offing the children is the revenge/denial/you-can’t-make-me part, killing yourself is just tidying up/evading consequences.
But thanks for your post. I never cease to be amused by all the humorless pussies around here who get pissy and self-righteous over obvious tongue-in-cheek posts. I guess some people have a hard time parsing meaning unless there’s a retarded smiley to lead them by the hand.
I asked if murder should be expected to be fair and justified; why are you using suicide as an example?
Again, should we expect murder to be fair and justified? I’m confused as to the cognitive dissonance people appear to be experiencing because a particular murder wasn’t fair and justified. Horrific and illogical compared to what? “Regular” murder?
Really, you post a statement that has been used a million times by pro-abortion people (those with poor arguments to back up their positions) and I’m supposed to know that you’re actually not that stupid? Get a grip. You respond to a poster that requests a cite from a different poster with a supposedly cocked up sarcastic response and we’re to know that you weren’t serious?
And I don’t think I was getting self-righteous, I was merely responding to a tired argument with a simple rebuttal. As of now you don’t know which side of the fence I fall on, pro-life or pro-abortion.
Let’s re-evaluate your post in question, you know, just for shits.
Remember, this is in direct response to a request for a cite by Lemur866 of SageRat’s claim that a fetus is not self-aware.
Sarcastic? Quite.
Serious? Sounds like it.
Now, as I said, this is a tired argument. You seem to be implying that if the fetus is not self aware that termination is acceptable (taken from context of thread and previous posts). This argument (if you believe it) should then extend to newborns or at least pre-mature babies since they aren’t magically “self-aware” the minute they’re born. That’s the point I was making. Simple. I’m not implying that you would be wrong if you held a pro-abortion stance, simply that this paticular argument doesn’t hold water. Unless you believe we should be able to terminate the life of an already born child.
Sorry, I thought the part about a fetus never having written anything was enough of a clue that I wasn’t serious.
Doesn’t matter which side of the fence you fall on. I was responding to your tone, which struck me as humorless and self-righteous. Certainly those attributes can apply to either side of the abortion issue. If you say you weren’t being self-righteous, I’ll take your word for it.
I wasn’t actually implying anything about the acceptability of terminating a fetus whether it’s self-aware or not. I was replying to a dipshit who asked for a cite for something that’s un-cite-able. I happen to be pro-choice, but that had nothing to do with my response.
From my dealings with grocery/department stores, airlines, restaurants, etc. I’d have to honestly say there are quite a few already-born children I wish someone would terminate, but I don’t think it should be a matter of policy.
Thanks. I take back the “humorless” tag (when applied to you; there are still plenty of others hereabouts who fit it).
You seem to have some trouble with reading comprehension. I was talking about killing one’s own children as being even more illogical than suicide, not just suicide alone.
Are you a complete idiot? No one is “expecting murder to be fair and reasonable.” However, most people (as well as the legal system) recognize there are different degrees of reprehensibility involved in killing someone. Many people would feel that killing someone who had raped, tortured, and murdered your loved one would be justified (even if illegal). Killing someone in a fight under provocation is considered by most people less reprehensible than killing someone in cold blood (though it would still qualify as murder.) For gangsters, killing witnesses is perfectly logical, even if “unfair” to the victim.
Some murders are understandable to most people, even if they would not do the same themselves. Others, especially murdering one’s own children, are completely incomprehensible. If you are really “confused” by this I wonder how socially unaware you are on other things.
You’re right. I shouldn’t call him/her a dipshit. I should describe them as someone who said something utterly dipshittish. As I do the same thing often enough, I guess I shouldn’t judge too harshly. Though it is quite fun.
You seem to have some trouble with being an asshole.
When did I assert otherwise?
No. Are you a complete asshole?
Yes, that was my point, thank you. Are you really so dense that you don’t understand a rhetorical construction? Jesus Christ, you must be one stupid motherfucker. Seriously.
Honestly, though - how often does that happen in real life as opposed to the movies? When we hear about a murder, 99.999999% of the time it is not justified. I don’t understand the attitude of being aghast when a murder isn’t justified. Uh, pretty much none of them are justified.
That’s manslaughter.
I disagree. Being a ganster is not logical. The risk of being caught or killed outweighs any material gain from the illegal enterprise.
A rhetorical construction would be where someone asks a question without really expecting an answer, frequently used when the answer is thought to be blindingly obvious.
Right. It’s blindingly obvious that murder is not fair and justified. So when I ask “Why does it surprise you that this murder was not fair and justified - did you expect murder to be so?”, that’s rhetorical.
Like when you were a kid and your dad said, “Did you think life was supposed to be fair?”, he wasn’t literally asking for a response. Or when you haggle with a shopkeeper and he says, “Do you think I’m in business to lose money?” - he doesn’t literally believe you think he wants to lose money.
So Colibri’s response: “Are you a complete idiot? No one is ‘expecting murder to be fair and reasonable.’” is ridiculous. It’s a literal response to a rhetorical construction. Clear?
I can’t believe I’m actually having to explain this.
