16-year-old-boy slays Great-Grandmother with Katana after being told to stop playing video games - Polidicks

After reading this: [QUOTE=JesterUK;38566226]step up senpai[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=cdr248;38569184]He doesn't look very [I]sharp[/I].[/QUOTE] I kind of [B]had[/B] to make this: [IMG]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/51088732/fp/verydangerousprince.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Andokool12;38559442]what a winner[/QUOTE] Please don't post things like that. If the kid comes on FacePunch and sees that then he is going to feel really cool about what he did. Think before you type.

[QUOTE=GeneralMoosen;38564222]Reminds me of this story I heard about this Russian boy who was pulling all nighters online and his dad grounded him from his computer. So in the middle of the night he snuck into his dad's room and killed his dad with a sledge hammer.[/QUOTE] really now? that's as horrible as this katana killing.

[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;38559551]what game was he playing, this is crucial[/QUOTE] Shogun 2 total war, katana for vanilla, pellet gun for fall of the samurai

[QUOTE=Native Hunter;38559459]what a dick, i mean what kind of person would do such a thing?[/QUOTE] A huge dick, that's who.

Woah... What the fuck?

[QUOTE=Infab;38559650]Killing someone with a katana, then shooting at the police with a pellet rifle sounds like something out of Grand Theft Auto.[/QUOTE] Must have been the game he was playing. Reminds me of that one mission in San Andreas where CJ duels the master swordsman in a swordfight.

I seriously wonder what was going through his head when he did it "Shit great-granny says I should stop playing today BETTER WHIP OUT THE KATANA,also I'll cut other-granny's foot while I'm at it" "OH SHIT THE POLICE ARE GONNA ARREST ME,I GOTTA SHOOT THEM CAR WINDOWS WITH THE PELLETGUN BECAUSE SCREW THE POPO"

[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;38563575]god social darwinists are so fucking stupid[/QUOTE] Just to play the Devil's advocate here for a second - why not? I mean, think about it for a moment. Fetuses (feti?) aren't scientifically recognised to be conscious or self-aware. If you can identify which fetuses will develop into humans who will have violent sociopathic tendancies then does it not make more sense to abort them before they develop than risk putting people who are already conscious and self aware in future danger of death? I mean it's not an easy concept to swallow or come to terms with, but if you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that somebody is going to become a violent monster is it not the safer and, hell, 'better' thing to do to make sure they're not born in the first fucking place?

[QUOTE=Butthurter;38570566]it amuses me that two of them intend the same thing but difference is one plays the "chance given, lets take his life" which is highly supported for god knows why, and the other is just "should have aborted and neutered the parents" which is viewed negatively despite being just as much as a nazi as the previous[/QUOTE] Because in the first case, it has been absolutely demonstrated that said person is an abomination, because he has already carried out his acts. In the second case, we cannot know for sure: genes don't control everything, and furthermore, we don't even fully know how genes control our behaviours, and to what extent. To suggest that a fetus should be aborted just because his genomic makeup has been correlated to a slightly higher predisposition to violence is a very, [i]very[/i] big jump that should not be made.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;38571961]Because in the first case, it has been absolutely demonstrated that said person is an abomination, because he has already carried out his acts. In the second case, we cannot know for sure: genes don't control everything, and furthermore, we don't even fully know how genes control our behaviours, and to what extent. To suggest that a fetus should be aborted just because his genomic makeup has been correlated to a slightly higher predisposition to violence is a very, [i]very[/i] big jump that should not be made.[/QUOTE] I think the deciding factor would more be looking at the way the brain is forming than just looking at segments of genes. Although the problem even with that is that the brain is still forming and changing until about the early to mid-twenties. That said, usually people who wind up being sociopathic monsters show the signs in early childhood, so I guess there must be something quite specific going on. I'm not a neurologist though, so I couldn't say for a fact.

[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;38559551]what game was he playing, this is crucial[/QUOTE] [img]http://magisterrex.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/blogdaikatanafront.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=sltungle;38571929]if you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that somebody is going to become a violent monster is it not the safer and, hell, 'better' thing to do to make sure they're not born in the first fucking place?[/QUOTE] Yeah I also liked this idea when people used it to justify genocide

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;38559475]poor woman, if only he had an inferior weapon she might have survived, but i can't imagine even a young healthy woman surviving the mixture of both grace and deadliness which is the katana[/QUOTE] >cut a person in half >you get hit by two people instead of one

half-zatoichi is op

I thought it said he SLAPPED her with a katana. For once, I wish I'd been wrong.

[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;38559551]what game was he playing, this is crucial[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/9/2011/12/dddd50b5358fa623c53c9aef043556cd/340x.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE=sltungle;38572041]Just to play the Devil's advocate here for a second - why not? I mean, think about it for a moment. Fetuses (feti?) aren't scientifically recognised to be conscious or self-aware. If you can identify which fetuses will develop into humans who will have violent sociopathic tendancies then does it not make more sense to abort them before they develop than risk putting people who are already conscious and self aware in future danger of death? I mean it's not an easy concept to swallow or come to terms with, but if you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that somebody is going to become a violent monster is it not the safer and, hell, 'better' thing to do to make sure they're not born in the first fucking place?[/QUOTE] As far as I know, your genetic makeup can give you a [I]propensity[/I] to develop a certain condition, not automatically give you cancer or schizophrenia. I don't think your genes should dictate your fate, only your actions. Just because some says I have a genetic predisposition to become a murdering psychopath doesn't mean I'm going to be one. If we start terminating fetuses just because they [I]could[/I] develop into dangerous people then by that logic we should also terminate all fetuses with a predisposition to cancer or heart conditions since they [I]could[/I] die anyway.

Watch this turn into justification for banning swords, somewhere.

[video=youtube;j5SNOAcD3ak]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5SNOAcD3ak[/video]

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;38576271]Watch this turn into justification for banning swords, somewhere.[/QUOTE] would that even be a bad thing that affects any number of people seriously what significance do they have? they are not tools, and in most states they have no cultural significance.

he even looks like a fuckin loser

[QUOTE=Judas;38559656]I'm sorry, but you must be very sheltered.[/QUOTE] Yeah, it's the new trend for kids these days to swing swords at elderly women. Completely normal. #grannystabbing #katanaswag

[QUOTE=cdr248;38569184]He doesn't look very [I]sharp[/I].[/QUOTE] "Say that to my face not online and see what happens"

If your gonna kill someone with a sword, do it with one that's cool. Fucking Zweihander or Highland Claymore, or a Gladius or something, Katanas are so overused. [editline]25th November 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr.Heal;38561056]People have already stated in the thread that this kid is a psychopath, but the APA doesn't recognize psychopathy officially as a mental illness, which is concerning to say the least! A psychopath doesn't have to kill anyone to be a psychopath, often people who display psychopathic tendencies find themselves in the business world, law enforcement, as lawyers, medical professionals. [URL="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/10/081110fa_fact_seabrook?currentPage=all"]Have this very long article about psychopathy[/URL], if you're interested. I just wrote a paper analyzing studies that have looked at aggressive behaviour and violent video games and laid down criticisms of research (It was an introductory course in Psychology). This news is not something I wanted to read ever, more so after handing in a paper like that. Very disappointing, something tells me we're going to start hearing about the [I]terrible effects[/I] of violent video games on the news again.[/QUOTE] I just read that, and I'm experiencing some of the signs. Well, I was gonna find out somehow.

[QUOTE=Moustacheman;38585949]I just read that, and I'm experiencing some of the signs. Well, I was gonna find out somehow.[/QUOTE] AFAIK most people display one or two signs of pretty much every disorder you can name. For example, some people are irritated by asymmetry and like to wash very often - that doesn't necessarily mean that they have OCD. Unless you're, like, mutilating small animals to prove that you're more powerful than they are or something like that, it's probably nothing. And that's why you should never self-diagnose based on stuff you've found on the Internet, Go see a real psychiatrist if you're really that convinced, but don't go around telling dudes that you're a psychopath; imagine modifying your life around a disorder, then finding out that you didn't actually have it. [editline]25th November[/editline] then again, you [I]did[/I] just get banned for advocating genocide

Gunz Online player probably...

[QUOTE=Butthurter;38570566]it amuses me that two of them intend the same thing but difference is one plays the "chance given, lets take his life" which is highly supported for god knows why, and the other is just "should have aborted and neutered the parents" which is viewed negatively despite being just as much as a nazi as the previous[/QUOTE] Probably because my option only says kill him after he's proven he's a psychotic little shit (for crying out loud he murdered his great grandmother with a fucking sword over a goddamn video game), while Alcohol's option says kill him before he's ever done anything and unnecessarily neuter his parents. Just because they have one psychotic child doesn't mean they all would be.

[QUOTE=Forumaster;38591383]Probably because my option only says kill him after he's proven he's a [B]psychotic[/B] little shit.[/quote] Wow. So yeah lets just kill people when we prove that they have a psychiatric disorder that is beyond their control.

[QUOTE=Forumaster;38591383]Probably because my option only says kill him after he's proven he's a psychotic little shit (for crying out loud he murdered his great grandmother with a fucking sword over a goddamn video game), while Alcohol's option says kill him before he's ever done anything and unnecessarily neuter his parents. Just because they have one psychotic child doesn't mean they all would be.[/QUOTE] See, I think you're defining "psychotic" as "just a crazy dick for no reason," rather than "somebody who's mentally ill." Also, if it apparently needs to be proven that you're a "psychotic little shit" before anything will be done, what exactly does shooting him solve?