The Tragedy in Las Vegas

[Jack]

Just thought a nature vs nurture discussion on the topic of violence would be interesting. There are no specific questions, no.

If there's something specific you want to debate or have answered, let me know, and but I'm not trying to write a thesis on something as incredibly broad and depressing as the origins of violence just to entertain you. 

Okay. Then just tell me what you think about what I said. You seemed to present the point that violent criminal acts are rooted in social influences. That's a fairly common stance and not too difficult to argue. I purposely said society doesn't encourage anyone to be violent criminals, hoping you might point out the falsehood in that statement. My taking the stance that they have a chemical imbalance and basically they can't help it would be much harder. What do you think of the idea of monitoring and managing the testosterone levels of people convicted of violence? Violent crime goes well beyond the topic of guns, so even removing guns from the equation might no make a huge difference. Don't think people always fit some mental health diagnosis to be violent, but do think it's interesting criminally violent acts don't automatically qualify one for mandated mental health care. Do you think medically treating violence as a mental health condition would be beneficial, or is it more important to address culture?

[Al Swearegen]

I think she simply likes the opportunity to dump on white cishet males and if they are rich or christian too, all the better. Its all about the oppressor/victim hierachy structure of tge Progressive stack. It is evolved Marxist theory.

[Al Swearegen]

Men are at fault, blah, blah.

Les is wasting his precious time on this earth to debate within this atmosphere of  misandry.

You are right Redface. Progressive Politics and progressive Feminism suck all rationality out of any discussion.

[Lestat]

It is not that simple as violence boiling down to more endogenous androgenic steroids=more likely to rob little old ladies, beat up kids and  were unaware, autism has also a tie-in with elevated test levels. Also, Males who are not on the spectrum, but who have an XYY karyotype (frequency-approximately 1/1000) are usually tall, but have typically few if any other distinguishing phenotypical features and do not tend to show ill health due to the aneuploidy. They have been studied, also, specifically with angles examining rates of violence and the two have been found not to correlate, at least according to the wikipedia article on XYY, although I haven't gone so far as to read the cited studies, if anybody wants the papers and they are paywalled, just ask and I'll upload them somewhere.

Also, to the best of my knowledge, XXYY karyotype males also, don't show an increased propensity towards criminal violence. Although interestingly there is apparently a correlation with being on the autistic spectrum, as well as for certain health, fertility problems and for a higher rate of learning or other cognitive disabilities.

And it shouldn't be forgotten that whilst people can be altered biochemically, generally what is not there to begin with does not manifest. For example, get two people absolutely staggering, batshit drunk or give the benzodiazepine sedative-hypnotics either to a degree where their inhibitions are taken away, and let one of this pair be of a mild-mannered, caring, gentle disposition not through force of will and iron self-discipline in order to fit in with society, but be he such as to whom this manner is an inherent trait and part of who they are, and the other to be considered, let him be when sober, behave himself well in manner and without malice, but let it also fall upon this man to require a conscious (or subconscious) effort on their part to keep their anger in check, to refrain from being domineering and altogether unpleasant.


Get both intoxicated to the point where they are in an equally dissociated state, and without provocation, observe the situation unfold. I should very much think that the first man, the one by nature mild mannered and of good character would of course, end up a drunken, shambolic, quite possibly gobby, uncoordinated mess. But the second example, the man who by day and when sober keeps his domineering personality and his propensity towards violence as it were, held on a tight leash, is going to be more likely to assault somebody. Whilst in the case of the gentleman by character they are IMO unlikely to for example, rape somebody, batter them, or both. Because it is a lot easier to unmask a trait hidden, than to create de novo one which formerly is not there under the surface, however deeply buried.

Easy enough to bring out somebody's inner bastard, but an awful lot harder to make a thug from a tender, caring, loving and unaggressive person, at least when out of the critical phase of childhood, and internalizing the values of others, of society etc. etc. You can breed a cunt, but not really magic one up. So to speak.

Or at the very least, it is a lot harder to do so in the good mannered subject, than it would be to provoke somebody who is already going about their day-to-day business whilst having to check impulses to let their inner bastard slip the leash. The closer to the surface it is in somebody's nature, the easier it is going to be.

I am not for the 'nature vs nurture' argument setting. Rather, both are very important. You can start with somebody who's basest makeup is to surrender to their animal instincts, and save for the extreme cases, psychopathy etc. 'train' and educate them, surround them with a loving family as a child and hopefully have them grow up to be decent human beings, but starting out, would be people who either left to their own devices would grow to have their inner bastard not only slip the leash but who'd never fit it with a collar to begin with, or those who could go either way, yet place someone in a dysfunctional pestilence of a household and it is likely to end up carrying over, the apple falling not far from the tree.

Although the converse does happen, there do seem to be people who, albeit in the worst kind of way possible, learn from their own awful experiences that they would never want to become that which had abused them. To me, its quite obvious that both are important. Both inherent disposition and their upbringing. Nature and nurture both, are critical.

[Fun With Matches]

Despite people not always appearing how they really are, some people clearly have "creep" stamped on their faces. And no, I'm not talking about a bunch of male aspies ever accused of being a creep.

Thing is, if high profile people like him were predicted to become mass murderers, nothing could be done to prevent it anyway because of their positions.

[Lestat]

Yeah I know what you mean FWM. Some people seem almost BORN with a birthmark in the shape of the sigil of baphomet and the letters 'C R E E P'
on their foreheads at the points of the inverted pentagram

And for those of that sort who aren't, then there are plenty who need tattooing.

My former housemate showcases a good example (in two ways, the second being that she was a klepto, real nutcase klepto that'd do anything from my catching her running into my old man's bedroom when he woke up and went for a piss, and yank a fucking bunch of banknotes out of his wallet and quletly dive back out and into her at the time bedroom, now reconverted to better purposes than housing that fucking hell-whore, namely part of my lab.
She'd bloody pinch things that had neither value monetarily nor even entertainment value, old man once saw her steal a little coil of hair-fine wire thats of no use outside electronics development and fabrication. Had to be solely for the fuck of it. And if confronted she would lie her dick  off her face in spite of being seen doing something)

Even worse, she was an ultra-rapid cycling bipolar, borderline PD (in hindsight, and after being warned about her by kassiane S, now obviously so) fucking piece of gutter infesting dog waste of the worst possible kind. Slowly, I found out later, had been stealing my meds, although she couldn't take them herself, wasn't a drug abuse thing since she is apparently allergic, potentially fatally so to hydrocodone (vicodin etc), we don't use it here but my pain meds, morphine and oxycodone are very close chemically and it wouldn't be at all surprising if they would trigger her allergy. In hindsight, that would have been great had I thought of it at the time, could have poisoned her, offed the bloody bitch and gotten away with it. Rather than using them, or antiseizure meds, she'd hide them, found a great fucking pile she'd stolen of all sorts of meds off me after she snapped her last shred of sanity and attempted to gut me with a katana, and ended up kicked to the curb after having the snot knocked out of her, and narrowly avoiding ending up with a bullet in her ugly face.

Stashing the meds, and forcing me into WD, trying to trick me into thinking I was just wasted and didn't know it. I wasn't, she'd been systematically fucking with things so she could try to get a handle on me, and offer her own pain meds and fucking temazepam/valium if things were done her way.

Stole (at least) two kittens. Who from I don't know but one day there wasn't a cat in her room the next there was. That one escaped so another, looking just like the one who got away from her, only a kitten, age-wise, that one stayed, wasn't really much I could do other than end up feeding and caring for the poor wee mite. Even if I'd known where the kitten came from, there would have been one hell of a lot of explaining to do, IF they weren't of the type to just shoot the messenger first and read the message later, no idea what I'd be walking into, so he stayed.Stole (at least) two kittens. Who from I don't know but one day there wasn't a cat in her room the next there was. That one escaped so another, looking just like the one who got away from her, only a kitten, age-wise, that one stayed, wasn't really much I could do other than end up feeding and caring for the poor wee mite. Even if I'd known where the kitten came from.


Falsely cried rape against her then bf when she had, it appears, bled him dry and had no further use for him; she was a really spiteful, nasty and vengeful little slag. Cried rape against her own parents although whether that was true or  false, or even a joint effort between her and her parents to get rid of her to somebody else, since they won't have been able to stand her anymore
than I can. Also made the same claim against a previous BF, again short term, who she used for a plane ticket here after deciding to flee the US, allegedly, according to the whore from hades, because of her abusive parents and then claimed raped her.

Although I am somewhat dubious about that guy even with HER history of bitch-dom. He's got creepy scumbag written all over him (quite a natural partner for her then ), since he WAS a stalky creep, who's best friend is a mentally twisted piece of shit who stalks a dead baby, and has gone to the baby's parents house expressing 'a closeness' and 'sympathy', who IIRC also has some weird fucked up thing for babies shoes and possibly diapers.

So that I could see actually being true. Kassi told me a few things about him too and his friend that were...shall we say, rather less than favourable or complimentary.The kinds of things most people here wouldn't ask questions and move straight to slamming his head into the nearest brick wall should they hear them and he subsequently be found in the same US state as their kids. Or for that matter, for those without kids, beaten senseless on sight, on general principle of it being the correct thing to do for the good of the species, his diaper-molestering, dead-baby-stalking companion and his existence being expediently removed from being part thereof being unarguably a damned good thing indeed )

Not sure if that guy DID rape her, given her history and the fact she is a lying creep and a total psychotic cunt, but if he did, good. Serves her right (no, I'd not usually say this about ANYONE, but given she's lied about exactly that most likely at least twice, minimum once and potentially, four times that I know of. I hope she does. I sincerely some sick piece of shit does kidnap her, torture her and rape her, and dump her out in the wilderness to walk back to the civilization she is not and never will be part of; only to seek help and end up being told to eat shit and die, and have nobody believe her; so she can suffer for the rest of her vile, miserable days as she so richly deserves)

People who make claims like that for no more reason than they have either tired of somebody or have bled them dry of resources and need a fresh victim with money and shelter,  deserve everything they get and so much the better if they do end up raped, their face stamped to a pulp and thrown in a back alley for the crows to pick at, going unbelieved by the pigs because of their history. Serves the fuck right if she was raped by that prick. In all honesty I'd just as soon round them both up, nail their ankles, knees and arms to a wooden plank atop a pyre and burn them both alive. Slowly, so CO poisoning or suffocation wouldn't end their suffering any faster or more mercifully, but leave them to slowly cook over a fire until the wooden plank they are nailed to are consumed and their raw, bleeding bodies can be salted before they die and left spasming and twitching to roast until the juices run clear when a knife is stuck in them. Especially the hell bitch. I've had the displeasure of running into some deepply unpleasant people at times before, but this creature, she was a real weapons-grade creep, and a borderline fucking bitch who deserves nothing less than to die screaming. She is as close to true cold, calculating, utterly depraved an example of actual evil as I have ever met or ever could wish not to.

God I fucking hate borderlines.

[Jack]

It is not that simple as violence boiling down to more endogenous androgenic steroids=more likely to rob little old ladies, beat up kids and  were unaware, autism has also a tie-in with elevated test levels. Also, Males who are not on the spectrum, but who have an XYY karyotype (frequency-approximately 1/1000) are usually tall, but have typically few if any other distinguishing phenotypical features and do not tend to show ill health due to the aneuploidy. They have been studied, also, specifically with angles examining rates of violence and the two have been found not to correlate, at least according to the wikipedia article on XYY, although I haven't gone so far as to read the cited studies, if anybody wants the papers and they are paywalled, just ask and I'll upload them somewhere.

Also, to the best of my knowledge, XXYY karyotype males also, don't show an increased propensity towards criminal violence. Although interestingly there is apparently a correlation with being on the autistic spectrum, as well as for certain health, fertility problems and for a higher rate of learning or other cognitive disabilities.

And it shouldn't be forgotten that whilst people can be altered biochemically, generally what is not there to begin with does not manifest. For example, get two people absolutely staggering, batshit drunk or give the benzodiazepine sedative-hypnotics either to a degree where their inhibitions are taken away, and let one of this pair be of a mild-mannered, caring, gentle disposition not through force of will and iron self-discipline in order to fit in with society, but be he such as to whom this manner is an inherent trait and part of who they are, and the other to be considered, let him be when sober, behave himself well in manner and without malice, but let it also fall upon this man to require a conscious (or subconscious) effort on their part to keep their anger in check, to refrain from being domineering and altogether unpleasant.


Get both intoxicated to the point where they are in an equally dissociated state, and without provocation, observe the situation unfold. I should very much think that the first man, the one by nature mild mannered and of good character would of course, end up a drunken, shambolic, quite possibly gobby, uncoordinated mess. But the second example, the man who by day and when sober keeps his domineering personality and his propensity towards violence as it were, held on a tight leash, is going to be more likely to assault somebody. Whilst in the case of the gentleman by character they are IMO unlikely to for example, rape somebody, batter them, or both. Because it is a lot easier to unmask a trait hidden, than to create de novo one which formerly is not there under the surface, however deeply buried.

Easy enough to bring out somebody's inner bastard, but an awful lot harder to make a thug from a tender, caring, loving and unaggressive person, at least when out of the critical phase of childhood, and internalizing the values of others, of society etc. etc. You can breed a cunt, but not really magic one up. So to speak.

Or at the very least, it is a lot harder to do so in the good mannered subject, than it would be to provoke somebody who is already going about their day-to-day business whilst having to check impulses to let their inner bastard slip the leash. The closer to the surface it is in somebody's nature, the easier it is going to be.

I am not for the 'nature vs nurture' argument setting. Rather, both are very important. You can start with somebody who's basest makeup is to surrender to their animal instincts, and save for the extreme cases, psychopathy etc. 'train' and educate them, surround them with a loving family as a child and hopefully have them grow up to be decent human beings, but starting out, would be people who either left to their own devices would grow to have their inner bastard not only slip the leash but who'd never fit it with a collar to begin with, or those who could go either way, yet place someone in a dysfunctional pestilence of a household and it is likely to end up carrying over, the apple falling not far from the tree.

Although the converse does happen, there do seem to be people who, albeit in the worst kind of way possible, learn from their own awful experiences that they would never want to become that which had abused them. To me, its quite obvious that both are important. Both inherent disposition and their upbringing. Nature and nurture both, are critical.

Not suggesting targeting everyone based on testosterone levels, but rather people who have been convicted for violence. Studies of prison populations show a person could basically walk in and separate the violent crime from the non-violent crime based only on testosterone levels and be less than ten percent wrong. Correlation doesn't always prove causation, but these are scientific results that deserve attention. Even if it's true that nurture is important, should anyone care? It may be too late to treat their nurture. Am questioning if society could benefit from taking a medial approach to violence.

[El]

Just thought a nature vs nurture discussion on the topic of violence would be interesting. There are no specific questions, no.

If there's something specific you want to debate or have answered, let me know, and but I'm not trying to write a thesis on something as incredibly broad and depressing as the origins of violence just to entertain you. 

Okay. Then just tell me what you think about what I said. You seemed to present the point that violent criminal acts are rooted in social influences. That's a fairly common stance and not too difficult to argue. I purposely said society doesn't encourage anyone to be violent criminals, hoping you might point out the falsehood in that statement. My taking the stance that they have a chemical imbalance and basically they can't help it would be much harder. What do you think of the idea of monitoring and managing the testosterone levels of people convicted of violence? Violent crime goes well beyond the topic of guns, so even removing guns from the equation might no make a huge difference. Don't think people always fit some mental health diagnosis to be violent, but do think it's interesting criminally violent acts don't automatically qualify one for mandated mental health care. Do you think medically treating violence as a mental health condition would be beneficial, or is it more important to address culture?

I think it's a combination of both nature and nurture, like everything else.

How about actually linking these studies you keep mentioning?

Also, Jack, I think to you this is a fun and abstract thing to talk about and pick fights about.  It's none of those things to me.  I'm willing to engage with you because at least there's a chance of some kind of dialogue, but there's only so much energy I'm willing to put into it if someone's just trying to have an extra-spicy water cooler conversation for shits n giggles.

[Al Swearegen]

Just thought a nature vs nurture discussion on the topic of violence would be interesting. There are no specific questions, no.

If there's something specific you want to debate or have answered, let me know, and but I'm not trying to write a thesis on something as incredibly broad and depressing as the origins of violence just to entertain you. 

Okay. Then just tell me what you think about what I said. You seemed to present the point that violent criminal acts are rooted in social influences. That's a fairly common stance and not too difficult to argue. I purposely said society doesn't encourage anyone to be violent criminals, hoping you might point out the falsehood in that statement. My taking the stance that they have a chemical imbalance and basically they can't help it would be much harder. What do you think of the idea of monitoring and managing the testosterone levels of people convicted of violence? Violent crime goes well beyond the topic of guns, so even removing guns from the equation might no make a huge difference. Don't think people always fit some mental health diagnosis to be violent, but do think it's interesting criminally violent acts don't automatically qualify one for mandated mental health care. Do you think medically treating violence as a mental health condition would be beneficial, or is it more important to address culture?

I think it's a combination of both nature and nurture, like everything else.

How about actually linking these studies you keep mentioning?

Also, Jack, I think to you this is a fun and abstract thing to talk about and pick fights about.  It's none of those things to me.  I'm willing to engage with you because at least there's a chance of some kind of dialogue, but there's only so much energy I'm willing to put into it if someone's just trying to have an extra-spicy water cooler conversation for shits n giggles.

Pick fights about? She wasn't.

Hey Elle, stop pretending that you are some kind of victim. You aren't. You are just a dickhead

[Pyraxis]

Also, Jack, I think to you this is a fun and abstract thing to talk about and pick fights about.  It's none of those things to me.  I'm willing to engage with you because at least there's a chance of some kind of dialogue, but there's only so much energy I'm willing to put into it if someone's just trying to have an extra-spicy water cooler conversation for shits n giggles.

In what context do you think it should be discussed? Is it a professional boundaries thing, like a serious discussion is too much like your work? Or a personal objection maybe?

[Jack]

Just thought a nature vs nurture discussion on the topic of violence would be interesting. There are no specific questions, no.

If there's something specific you want to debate or have answered, let me know, and but I'm not trying to write a thesis on something as incredibly broad and depressing as the origins of violence just to entertain you. 

Okay. Then just tell me what you think about what I said. You seemed to present the point that violent criminal acts are rooted in social influences. That's a fairly common stance and not too difficult to argue. I purposely said society doesn't encourage anyone to be violent criminals, hoping you might point out the falsehood in that statement. My taking the stance that they have a chemical imbalance and basically they can't help it would be much harder. What do you think of the idea of monitoring and managing the testosterone levels of people convicted of violence? Violent crime goes well beyond the topic of guns, so even removing guns from the equation might no make a huge difference. Don't think people always fit some mental health diagnosis to be violent, but do think it's interesting criminally violent acts don't automatically qualify one for mandated mental health care. Do you think medically treating violence as a mental health condition would be beneficial, or is it more important to address culture?

I think it's a combination of both nature and nurture, like everything else.

How about actually linking these studies you keep mentioning?

Also, Jack, I think to you this is a fun and abstract thing to talk about and pick fights about.  It's none of those things to me.  I'm willing to engage with you because at least there's a chance of some kind of dialogue, but there's only so much energy I'm willing to put into it if someone's just trying to have an extra-spicy water cooler conversation for shits n giggles.

Am not trying to pick a fight with you, but do think conversations with or between people who agree aren't interesting. I like having things explained to me, and I like when people challenge me to think differently about what I'm saying, and challenging them to think about what they say, even if it means contradicting them with things I don't even agree with. As said to someone else recently, disagreeing isn't always fighting, or something like that. Though correct, it's nothing more than an interesting topic to me. Do you really want links? Does it matter if they're abstracts or full access studies? Testosterone and violence have been studied for a long time so there's probably hundreds of them, but would be willing to take the time to sift for a couple of good ones if you could overcome my shits and giggles. If not, it's not that big of a deal.

[Jack]

I just think it's interesting that society doesn't look at people who are a danger to others, similar to how it looks at people who are a danger to themselves. There's something wrong with them. Testosterone connected to violence isn't a new idea. Since no one will contradict me, I'll contradict myself. There's also been post mortem brain studies which show the serotonin levels of suicide victims are comparable to murderers. Haven't read it said why serotonin would make some suicidal while others homicidal, but maybe hormonal imbalance is worth looking at as the difference. Is society partially to blame? Maybe it is, for locking these people in a cage and then letting them out later with no treatment. A key argument for the sociological foundation of violence is that it's a cycle. Maybe that's true too and some violent people are simply victims of violence.  If it's either, or, both, or none of the above, it still seems odd medical intervention isn't a primary course of action to balancing them, subduing them, breaking the cycyle, or whatever people want to call it.

[Pyraxis]

Medical intervention, if it took the form of drugging them against their will, could be seen as a more invasive punishment than simply locking them in a room.

[Jack]

Medical intervention, if it took the form of drugging them against their will, could be seen as a more invasive punishment than simply locking them in a room.

Mandated mental health treatment by a court of law already exists, not only for people mandated to mental health facilities or with outpatient commitments, but also people with mental health conditions in prisons, and as conditions for parole and probation. It does happen with criminals, but it's not the standard because criminal violence isn't considered a mental health issue on its own. It makes sense not all will accept treatment, and maybe can't or shouldn't be force to, but it's also not widely accepted that's what they need. Violent criminals need to be punished; that's what's widely accepted.   

[Lestat]

The cycle of violence point you make is more on the mark than you could possibly know.

There is little to no mental health help available for those who seek it, let alone those who outright need it, not until people start screaming it was the ghost of santa-claus that made them turn into satan's messenger and kill all those inmates with a sock full of pool balls and drawing messages on the walls using their brain matter as paint.

And they tend to keep people in primitive conditions, extreme overcrowding. Anybody particularly vulnerable mentally (physically they might get treated with some compassion by other inmates, but mentally, they are going to get thrown to the wolves without the least bit of doubt, and it won't change until and unless they do something drastic to somebody that the ravening hordes will back off.)

Its worse when the specific prison is full of young, hotheaded thug types. A lot better when it is lifers in max sec, they tend to be older, have cooled down and to just want to get on with as little conflict as possible. The other kind,  they have something to prove, in their own outlook, and are actively looking for a target to use to prove it. Its not pretty. Really, really not pretty at all.

And there is a cycle, a revolving door often enough. You take somebody who's spent a long time on the inside and had to adapt to those kinds of conditions, forever watching their back to avoid getting a shiv stuck in it, and they end up on an adrenaline-primed pre fight-flight response, a prolonged state of hypervigilance and alert, that tears at the psyche and is over a long term if not quickly overcome, going to wear somebody down into the ground. And thats if they don't, as a result, end up getting into a fight that the prison environment primed them for, or worse.

And then these people who may know little else, have had no counselling or similar pre-release help, are simply handed their property, whatever they might have, if they have anything more than a packet of smokes a box of matches and a few bits of food, the clothing on their back, and told right, get out of here.

That is no way at all to prime somebody for reintegration into society.