Senseless Brutality

User45701

I came accross something during lunch wanted to get peoples views, i would considermyself VERY hard to offend, some of my close mates would know how to annoy me but i dont get offended or "disgusted" by offensive things.
But... I find pointless voilence/brutality hard to understand, i know sometimes there are motives that are only know to the attacker/attacked and not the media but I came accross this topic on cnn news and well it was just what the topic says senseless brutality, http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/08/22/iraq.boy/index.html

What i want to know is what could someone so young have done to deserve that?
Or why would someone do that to someone for no reason,
Also for crimes that are pointless like that and random stabbings for phones ect whatever

Sorry, I am rambleing. Murder 1 is when you plot the murder right? and to plot a murder/revenge either
1.Someone has done something VERY bad and you want revenge
or
2. Your insane and the person has really done nothing wrong, its all in your head

The point i am trying to get across is that someone who for no reason decides to stab/attack/burn/kill/rape should be punished more sevearley than someone who plots it because to plot it you as i said are either not of sound mind or in someway justified. Examples, Someone rapes your wife/sister/anyone, someone hurts you,your friends or family, i dont need to go on you know what i mean, everyone has in there mind the few crimes that disgust them the most, for me violence for no reason is worse than violence for a reason and i was wondering what other peoples views in this are.

Jigsaw

I would agree with this. Violence for a reason, even an unjustifiable reason, is easier to comprehend than completely random violence.

That said, I don't condone any use of violence but that is me talking with my rational head on. If someone did something terrible to me or one of my family I'd be the most vengeful, bloodthirsty, scary person you'd ever met.

Wacker

I'd be inclined to believe that someone who commits random acts of violence as described is more likely to be insane than someone who pre-meditates their violence, and thus it can often be treated.
It has to be evaluated on a case by case basis though. I voted NO, which may have been a mistake on my part. It is hard to generalize about such things.

In the case of the example you gave, I'd say that was definately a pre-meditated attack as opposed to a random attack. They may have chosen their victim at random (or not, who knows?), but they must have planned the act in advance, as they had the masks, gas, etc.

seamus

Wacker wrote:

In the case of the example you gave, I'd say that was definately a pre-meditated attack as opposed to a random attack. They may have chosen their victim at random (or not, who knows?), but they must have planned the act in advance, as they had the masks, gas, etc.

The last line of the article says that the boy's father is a security guard who can't be named, so I would suspect there's something in that.

User45701

seamus wrote:

The last line of the article says that the boy's father is a security guard who can't be named, so I would suspect there's something in that.

Hmm i dint actually read that i didnt read the article properly i was reading it then posted the topic but yes, your right the kid was probbley hurt over his father, maybe he didnt do something he was asked to do and instead of forcing him they went for his family?

Anyway, talking about the poll, i asked my mates one of them was saying that justafiable revenge should be taken into account in extreme cases and = lesser sentenses in extreme examples like some raping your doughter and you going after him, killing him.