Weeping Infant Killed For Disturbing Dad's Gaming

BoogieManFL

New member
Apr 14, 2008
1,284
0
0
What if instead of video games he read books during that time. Would that be reported, I wonder?
 

mattttherman3

New member
Dec 16, 2008
3,105
0
0
antipunt said:
Soo...this guy can reproduce, but I can't find a date.

*forever alone*
Plentyoffish.com, eventually, someone will go out with you man, I thought the same thing, I have been on dates with 5 diffrent people in 4 months, one went for over a month, but yeah, it works, be wary of those with multiple profiles though(they are crazy)
 

Easton Dark

New member
Jan 2, 2011
2,366
0
0
The7Sins said:
Honestly I'm ok with this. The dad helped bring the kid into the world. He should have every right to take him out of it whenever and however he wants.
Also I hate kids so stories like this give me warm fuzzies inside.
Well that's not... he has no right to kill a defenseless infant.

Even if I agreed with your kid hatred, shouldn't he have to talk with the other person who was involved in the birth, you know, the mother, before doing anything?
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Abandon4093 said:
Therumancer said:
To be honest with overpopulation I've been a big fan of mandatory, reversible sterlization on all people in the USA or anyone living here, and requiring people to get permission from the goverment to have kids, which would be granted only after being able to prove the abillity to support them, and an appropriate amount of parenting knowlege before the birth.


We DON'T have an overpopulation problem and we never will. To say that we have or are going to have is to completely misunderstand how population demographics work.

What we have is a population distribution problem and in the western world, an ageing population.

Neither of which could be solved by a sterilisation program. And it would actually make the latter worse.

That's not to say I'm completely against the idea, I think there should certainly be some sort of standards test that has to be taken before being legally allowed to have a child. Taking into account mental health and monetary situation aswell as testing basic parental knowledge.

But that's not to solve some mythical population problem, it's purely for the well being of the child. Because far too many children are born into abusive, neglectful and incapable homes. And in all truth, some sort of agency could probably have predicted it in most cases.

Not quite sure how such an agency would operate. But one can but dream.
Your in denial, one of the few things enviromentalists are right about is dwindling resources. They really aren't kidding about the rate at which rain forests (and forests in general) are disappearing, or how The Middle East is inevitably going to run out of oil at the rate of current consumption, never mind if it raises production to meet increasing international demand from nations like China. Then you have things like metals, and the sheer number of mines that are getting tapped out to meet demands for ore, leading to people trying to find more mines, and when that isn't possible literally tearing into the planet for trace elements that can be extracted, which also hurts the abilliy of the planet to produce new veins of ore and replentish what was tapped out to begin with.

The differance between me and the enviromentalists is that they are concerned about the enviroment in of itself, where my point of view is more humaneocentric in how simply running out of these things is going to effect us.

The bottom line is more people, means more resources needed to support those people at a decent standard of living. Those resources don't just appear magically, they all have to come from somewhere.

I understand your points, and they would be valid if it wasn't for greater concerns. Rather the fallout of reducing the population as I suggest is one of the problems we are going to have to deal with to solve even bigger problems. Economics and the relative ages of people and their abillity to produce are big deals, until you consider that you need to have societies in existance for that to matter. The point I'm making is that we're heading for a collapse caused by too many people for the planet to support, a catastrophe far bigger than the one your talking about.

Basically, in a worst case scenario along with the birth control we might have to impose a policy where anyone above a certain age who isn't productive is to be executed, and keep that going for a few generations. You might be going "OMG, that's evil" and according to current morality you'd be right. It brings to mind all kinds of facist dark future fiction, "Logan's Run" being just the tip of that ice berg. However when your talking about the survival of the species you have to prioritize.

That said, I think the problem while a big one, is not something that would have to be handled by anti-geriatric death squads, that's just a worse case scenario. In short, your correct on things getting bad, but one sad truth of this sucky world is that things generally have to get worse, before they can get better.
 

Astoria

New member
Oct 25, 2010
1,887
0
0
Some people just can't put the needs of others before their own can they. Rather than take some time out from him gaming to give his child what he needed or at the very least give him to his mother he goes ahead and kills him. I'm curious to know what he did after he realised the child was dead.
 

deathzero021

New member
Feb 3, 2012
335
0
0
from the sound of it, i don't think it was intentional. i think this dude is just a complete f***ing idiot.
 

RaikuFA

New member
Jun 12, 2009
4,370
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
Don't ban videogames!
BAN FLORIDA!
YES!!! Espesially with the Zimmerman thing, the biggest SO population I know of, that place makes me sick.

CAPTCHA: whoops a daisy, Escapist, you have a sick sense of humor.
 

gunner1905

New member
Jun 18, 2010
223
0
0
Therumancer said:
gunner1905 said:
Therumancer said:
To be honest with overpopulation I've been a big fan of mandatory, reversible sterlization on all people in the USA or anyone living here, and requiring people to get permission from the goverment to have kids, which would be granted only after being able to prove the abillity to support them, and an appropriate amount of parenting knowlege before the birth.
I know this is off topic, but people like you who wants that kinds of laws should really do some reading about population and productivity. I agree that overpopulation is a problem if productivity of the people is not increased, through technology or education, but your idea of decreasing the younger population is dumb because old people are living longer, less young productive people are born (no matter what you think of someone, they produces something through participation in the economy), over time it increases the number of people that needs to be supported (old people) over the number of productive people (young people). See the Europe (especially GB) and Japan for real life examples.
Also do you really want someone else violating your body without your consent.

OT: The guy's dumb.
I see it as being nessicary, simply because if the population does not decrease drastically we're all dead. It's easy to make arguements about why we shouldn't do something extreme like this, but in the final equasion we're running out of resources, it's not a matter of production and producing enough stuff, but that things like wood, oil, metal and similar materials are being depleted faster than the planet can recover, and in the effort to sustain the current usage we're crippling the planet's abillity to replentish them at all through things like strip mining.

You are correct, what I propose would absolutly suck for a while, and would cause a number of problems that would have to be dealt with, quite probably with extreme brutality, in ways that would be offensive to current morality. It is however the right move in the long run. At least for a generation or four we need a massive decrease in the global population and then to stabilize it at that level.

As far as not wanting the goverment (or anyone else) modifying your body like that? In my opinion that's tough cookies. People knew that we needed ZPG (Zero Population Growth) generations ago and instead the population continued to expand. Like it or not, people have generally proven to be incapable of holding back their reproductive urges, so thus society as a whole needs to step in if the problem is going to be dealt with.

A lot of what I say is VERY nasty, and to many (on this subject and others) I seem like the devil. The thing is that it's all about the big picture, not simply the immediate effects over the next few years or even decades, but about what needs to be done when you look at things in terms of hundreds or thousands of years.

Sure it sucks to see a small young generation, and a huge old generation, and then to have to realize your going to have to basically leave those old people un-supported or dispose of them for a generation or two until society adapts to the much lower birth rate, but that's a comparitively small price to pay in the overall scheme of things, if we wind up depleting the world's resources we're going to wind up destroying ourselves. I could go into it point by point, but really it's not the time or place. It's something that has come up for discussion in the past.

In general this, and a lot of my personal politics and idealogy comes down to reality sucking, and trying to pretend that it doesn't just makes things worse.
If we don't want to think about the morality of it, it's a better policy to kill of the old people then killing of the young people and destroy our environment to get all the resources.

Anyway I don't really buy that we're running out of resources, oil (and other vital resources) prices are rising not because it's running out but because it takes a lot of other resources to get to those oil, better technology will get us to those resources at lower prices, probably at the cost of the environment but we don't seem to care anyway.

Also if the production of something is reduced the market will (some say sadly) assign those resources to the ones who are willing (and able) to pay for it (even for vital resources, so yes if it does go that far some will die but not all) and in the end producers will enter that market to increase production again (having advantage through better technology or techniques). It has to be said that better technology and techniques will always be invented because it's in the producer's incentive to do so. Even if there's no way to get some resources there will always be substitution, probably shittier substitution but it's a substitution.

In the end it's impossible for us to all die without some kind of mass extinction event because no matter how much we destroy, there's always a system to allocate the resources available and most will always get the resources available to survive, some will get more than needed, and the rest will get nothing (FYI those people die). So we don't really need to preemptively kill people the free market will :)
 

RaikuFA

New member
Jun 12, 2009
4,370
0
0
mattttherman3 said:
antipunt said:
Soo...this guy can reproduce, but I can't find a date.

*forever alone*
Plentyoffish.com, eventually, someone will go out with you man, I thought the same thing, I have been on dates with 5 diffrent people in 4 months, one went for over a month, but yeah, it works, be wary of those with multiple profiles though(they are crazy)
I've always had a problem with that site. Only one date after two years on there.
 

Unsilenced

New member
Oct 19, 2009
438
0
0
The7Sins said:
Honestly I'm ok with this. The dad helped bring the kid into the world. He should have every right to take him out of it whenever and however he wants.
Also I hate kids so stories like this give me warm fuzzies inside.
Oh man, you're so edgy and cool. I wish I could be like you.
 

Seaf The Troll

New member
Jul 6, 2010
160
0
0
thats it. am making a plan to make a big robot arm and going to shake that 20 year old to death. while that is working am going to play games
 

Eleima

Keeper of the GWJ Holocron
Feb 21, 2010
901
0
0
I wish you wouldn't have established a link between "disturbing dad's gaming" and "infant shaken to death". It's a sad fact, but children are shaken every day. It's absolutely appalling, but there it is. It doesn't matter if you're a gamer or not, if you're rich or poor, whatever, you are at risk of shaking your child. Newborns cry a lot, that's a fact of life, it's their only means of communicating their needs, their anxiety, their pain, you name it. Add sleep deprived parents in the mix, and everyone's at risk. The important thing is to be aware of the risk, and to prevent it. It's got nothing to do with video games.
That being said, he really shouldn't have been gaming until 4am, that's just ludicrous. When my little one was born, I took what sleep I could get!
 

Comando96

New member
May 26, 2009
637
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
Don't ban videogames!
BAN FLORIDA!
In the last few weeks... yeah... I've heard of nothing but bad coming from Florida...

----------------------------------

Well this is one broken individual who hates his existence... he's a shelf stacker... I'd hate that job too. Video games are his coping method with... life and he is not the sort of person who is responsible enough to look after a child... well dur, he just killed his baby...

Video games are not to blame. If not for video games it would be drugs or alcohol that drove him to ruin his child's life...

... shame our societies breed people who are just totally unfit to have kids.

Therumancer said:
To be honest with overpopulation I've been a big fan of mandatory, reversible sterlization on all people in the USA or anyone living here, and requiring people to get permission from the goverment to have kids, which would be granted only after being able to prove the abillity to support them, and an appropriate amount of parenting knowlege before the birth.
Oh I am so there with you.

We would of course need an effective method of reversable sterlization but that really sounds like the thing to solve many of our problems.

You could do something opposite to the pill. Have a pill which allows you to become pregnant via being the antidote to the chemicals in the water supply... hmm this is an interesting area to look into...

However it would do significant damage to the war on STD's...
 

C-Mag

New member
Jun 17, 2011
35
0
0
I know a lot of people are thinking that this man is some kind of crazy psychopath right now, but he isn't. Death by shaking is actually quite a common cause of infanticide, because the little tykes won't shutup.

I have nothing but sympathy from the man. Seriously, I know it's hard to understand, but babies really can just keep on crying for almost a day straight, and sometimes nothing a parent can do will quiet them.

After 15 hours of non-stop screaming, parents get stressed.

They are also tired.

They are VERY frustrated, and they make really bad, spur of the moment actions.

So please don't judge this man, he's probably already punishing himself enough. And what he did was, though totally wrong, an understandable action in his situation.
 

gnihton

New member
Mar 18, 2012
89
0
0
"The infant woke up and began crying around the time Hartley went to bed."

So, his gaming wasn't disturbed? This sounds like desperately trying to dig up old controversies that only brain damaged parents ever bought into in the first place.