Gut Rumbles

June 02, 2005

when did I know?

I read stories such as this one and I wonder... how old was I when I had a clear understanding between right and wrong? I know that I grasped the concept before I was six years old, because I remember knowing right from wrong when I was a boy in the coal mining camp.

I don't remember HOW I learned (although I'm certain that my parents had a lot to do with it), but I damn sure knew the difference between playing cowboys and Indians and staging spectacular fake death-scenes and actually KILLING somebody for real. I cannot remember a time when I DIDN'T know the difference.

How the hell does a seven year-old boy "beat his baby half-sister to death with his fists, feet and a two-by-four?" That's not confusion between right and wrong. That's just plain sick, especially when the police say that the boy showed "so little remorse" for what he had done.

What's wrong with a kid like that? What pieces that make people refrain from that sort of inhuman behavior are missing from this kid's puzzle at such an early age? I don't understand it and I probably never will.

I must have been raised differently.


If you are over 50 years of age, you were taught this at an early age by both parents. They drilled it into your head everyday. These kids now have no leadership and most of them have no daddy or mama, we were very lucky to have both parents that loved us very much.

Posted by: catfish on June 2, 2005 11:20 PM

Those parents must be a real piece of work. Couple that with a biological sociopath and there you go.

Posted by: Grand Fromage on June 2, 2005 11:38 PM

It says in the WorldNetDaily story that the parents WITNESSED this. Hows that for terrifying?

Posted by: Alli on June 3, 2005 12:30 AM

Gotta be a sociopath. Bad seed. No hope for a life. Should be lobotomized and put in custodial care. Safer for society and more economical too.

Posted by: Indigo on June 3, 2005 12:37 AM

The article says,

"Police said the father and his girlfriend were outside visiting with neighbors when the boy came to them about midnight on the night of the attack and told them the baby was ``bleeding.'' They found the girl with a bloody nose and said she wasn't breathing..."

The father and his GIRLFRIEND, sitting OUTSIDE at MIDNIGHT.

There's your answer, right there, it was a broken home, with little to no supervision and, no doubt, the boy wasn't being raised with the proper set of morals and values commonsense would expect.

Posted by: Rob on June 3, 2005 02:22 AM

a little less of the normal dosage of lethal injection outta work fine on a 7 year-old. too drastic? dunno, prolly not! but from an economic position, now ya talkin!

Posted by: johndeerebilly on June 3, 2005 06:02 AM

Glad to know I'm not the only one who thinks killin' the little bastard is a good idea.
Oughta sterilize both "parents" (or all three) while we're at it.

Jesus, man.
We kill DOGS, senseless, instinct-driven dogs, for killing (stupid human) babies.

This piece of shit IS (allegedly) human.
Instead of taking this incident for exactly what it's worth, which is a HUGE warning about this boy, nothing will be done to him, now or ever, because "he's just a baby" himself... (/whiny, "kids-are perfect", idiot's voice)


Thin the herd.
Put 'im to sleep.
Just like he did his sister.
Little asshole....

Posted by: Stevie on June 3, 2005 07:26 AM

Sticking the needle in this little nut will help to clean up the gene pool

Posted by: GUYK on June 3, 2005 07:53 AM

Some people are simply bad stock. This kid along with both his parents need to be dragged off and shot. The little bastard is worthless and will always be worthless. If we let him grow up, he will make more worthless babies. We need to nip it in the bud. I don't understand why our society can't see that some people just need to be taken to the woods and have a bullet put in their head. Got-dammit !

Posted by: assrot on June 3, 2005 08:43 AM

You people are all fucking wingnuts. What the hell is the matter with you? Yeah, let's kill the 7 year old who quite possibly has NO concept of what he has done...that will teach him.

This is not a black and white kind of issue. Obviously there is something WRONG with the child (and the family), but does that mean that we should write off a 7 year old as 'unreformable'? Most kids that age, unless they have experienced the death of a close loved one, have no point of reference where death is concerned. They don't realize the finality of it or believe that real life death is just like what they see in cartoons. Combine that with some sibling jealousy and parents who don't teach their kids how irreversible death is, and you've got yourself a pretty sticky situation. Yes, he may just be a 'bad seed'...but I'd want to know a fuck of a lot more information than this article gives before even making a judgement call about what should be done to him.

I am seriously sickened by those of you who can so easily call for the death of a child without considering all of the possible reasons for this tragedy.

Posted by: Chablis on June 3, 2005 09:25 AM

They don't realize the finality of it or believe that real life death is just like what they see in cartoons.

Actually, I've seen a study that showed that children as young as five knew the difference between cartoon violence and real violence. They distinguished between "temporary" and "permanent" just fine.

Would you be willing to raise this feral child?

Posted by: Scott Crawford on June 3, 2005 10:15 AM

Ok, what do you do with this little animal? Where do you draw the line? He will spend the rest of his life in some form of institution being supported by tax payers or he will be released at 18 and end up killing someone else. Somethings are not nice to deal with but they need to be done, you seem to be good at avoiding the truth or hiding behind a typical liberal view of life.

Posted by: James Old Guy on June 3, 2005 10:22 AM

"I am seriously sickened by those of you who can so easily call for the death of a child without considering all of the possible reasons for this tragedy."

Perhaps he could move in with your family, you could study the problem, "feel his pain", and you could get back to us after a month or so with your findings.

Posted by: YaThink on June 3, 2005 10:26 AM

If you're even still alive, that is.

Posted by: Stevie on June 3, 2005 10:39 AM

Scott Crawford: Yes, children as young as 5 can distinguish between temporary and permanent provided they have been given the life experiences in which to formulate that realization. That does not mean that ALL children at 5 years of age have a point of reference to draw upon.

James: So what do you do with the little animal? Fucked if I have all the only point in my first post was that forming a virtual lynch mob ready to KILL a 7 year old child was a bit extreme, don't you think? I am sickened by a society that can so easily call for extreme measures against a child when we have NO idea what that child's life experiences had been thus far. If this kid was older, I would quite possibly feel differently. I'm all for personal responsibility, however in all cases like this, I believe that the responsibility lies with the PARENTS. I'm not a huge supporter of rehabilitation (nor do I possess many liberal tendencies, you fucknut), but I would like to think that if ANYONE can be rehabilitated, it might possibly be a 7 year old.

Yathink: I have had many similarly troubled children (though, thankfully, no murderers) in my home as a foster parent and, just like adults, some can be helped/fixed...some can't. Your argument is moot.

I'm not going to turn Rob's comments into a pissing contest, so this will be my last response. I only wanted to express my disbelief at those of you who would so easily toss around thoughts of killing a child. Call me a Pollyanna if you'd like, but I think 7 years old is a bit too young to be cast aside like so much trash.

Posted by: Chablis on June 3, 2005 11:48 AM

If you uncouple a culture from their food, livelihood, schooling, religion, government, private property, et......what the heck do you THINK you are going to get? You will get folks who are uncoupled from being human beings.

Posted by: Robert on June 3, 2005 12:35 PM

Somewhere I am missing something here. The same people ( I know, a strawman argument ) who find excuses for the little murderer also have no problems with aborting a baby who might not be a little monster. At least by cleaning up the gene pool with this kid we know what we have killed.

Posted by: GUYK on June 3, 2005 02:53 PM

If we get absolute confirmation on this, I'd like to ask the kid's parents if they ever bothered to discipline him at some point in his life. I don't like the thought of executing kids, even if they're murderers, but there's only so much we should tolerate before saying "Alright, this is wrong, you KNOW it's wrong, and you aren't going to get any second chances, because thanks to you, your sister lost her only chance."

Posted by: JG22 on June 3, 2005 05:04 PM

"I have had many similarly troubled children (though, thankfully, no murderers) in my home as a foster parent and, just like adults, some can be helped/fixed...some can't. Your argument is moot."

I gave no argument, only a suggestion that you put your money where your mouth is. If you have some experience with "troubled kids", as you claim, you'd recognize this kid is on the extreme end of the "troubled" scale.

Bleeding heart bromides do not solve the problem. Neither does giving the kid a pass, nor a lethal injection.

I'm reminded of the kid down in Florida that was convicted of beating a 6 year old to death, was sprung from jail on a technicality, and was busted last month for armed robbery and assault. Guess he didn't learn HIS lesson from the kindness shown him.

Anyone suggesting lenience should be willing to step up and submit their family to the perp's tender mercies before unleashing them on the rest of society. Live what you preach unto others. Volunteer today.

Posted by: YaThink on June 3, 2005 05:57 PM

Here is a launch pad for understanding -

Posted by: Indigo on June 4, 2005 10:58 PM
Post a comment

*Note: If you are commenting on an older entry, your
comment will not appear until it has been approved.
Do not resubmit it.