Teen who killed dad angry he couldn't use Internet

[joelunchbox 0]

about the "buds" comment.

As a parent, I feel I should focus on the long term view of what I do and how it affects my child. If I concentrate on the short term goal of making him/her happy i.e. being their bud, I think that will negatively impact him later on in life.

My son turned out amazingly well. I do not take full credit for him--my ex is extremely dedicated to him and expended a great deal of time with him. I found myself in the position of gently having to push him back towards a center because his mom was basically spoiling him. I always treated him with respect--but with a view toward him as an adult. I always gave him as much responsibility as he could handle--and never berated him if he couldn't do something.

How did he turn out?

Not a loner, not a joiner. Top 10% of his class (AP everything he could and completed A&P votech school in high school), not a slave to fashion--could be that he was given a set amount of money to buy (almost) anything he could afford. So, he decided he liked black and he wore -and wears-black. He grew a rat tail sometime in grade school and it bothered him when it would come into fashion. It wound up getting cut off by accident about 5 years ago and he hasn't grown it back. He really is a 40 year old man in a 21 year old's body. I trust his judgement more than just about anybody else I know. We are as good friends as a father and son can be--hey, you never stop being a parent and that does get in the way of being friends sometimes.

does he own video games? Yes, it is ancient and he bought all the games that didn't come with it, with his own money. He has expressed no interest in the game du jour--he is too busy, working, reading and planning his life. He made the decision to go to Iraq while I was in Tashkent last November--I didn't especially like it but, he made that decision on fact, not emotion or alcohol--so I accept it.

The answer to video games is apparently having a life and responsibilities. If this doesn't apply to someone, good.

I will soon have a (step) daughter-I hate saying step!!- and I am already worrying about how she may turn out. Not quite to the nightmare stage but...

I hope she will turn out like her mom--strong willed, intelligent and very family oriented. I just have to figure out what I can do to help. I don't think I will be buying her a video game, though. I do expect to spend a lot of family time with my two ladies. I look forward to dancing--I won't lack for a partner!! and conversations about movies and whatnot. I expect to learn a lot from my daughter and wife and I hope they learn a little from me, too.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I do not agree. Some reports needs to be questioned that exposure to violence is the perpetrator that lead to the bad behavior. A kid needs someone to think for them, and guide them. Watching violence on TV or such and communicating with the kid about it from day one will prevent stuff like this to happen.

Soldiers coming back from war are also a good example of this. Keep in mind they are adults.

You rarely see a kid who comes from a good honest loving family end up like this. Loving family means being involved in each others lives. Means parents setting limits for kids. Look at who kids hang out with etc. Lots of parents fail to realize that buying an ipod or other junk for their kids does not equate to being a loving parent.

Bill Cosby was on Oprah yesterday and had a lot of good points with relation to parenting. http://www2.oprah.com/tows/slide/200710/20...de=more20071017

The article doesn't give much of an indication as to the kids family background, or indeed his relationship with his parents. That would be presumptuous and not too different to that other argument about "bud" parenting.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

im sorry i just have to give a comment on this..........

i have a nephew that has been allowed to play video games most of his life from age 2 until now age 13.......he does not connect with the real world he lives thru the games..........he has no idea how to be social.........unless it involves games.....

when the games have been taken away because of poor grades he becomes with drawn.....argumentative....angry and acts out........at times i have left their home because he is so hateful if he has no games to play......i think that being addicted to the games is as harmful as an substance abuse there is.........i think that some people become to involved in the games that they would do anything to be able to play them much like a substance abuser will do anything for their next fix because it is their world their reality

Well the problem there, as always seems to have more to do with an addictive, obsessive personality rather than the content of the games. You can blame games for your nephews problem all you like, but in the end its not all that dissimilar to an alcoholic blaming a nearby liquor store for his/her drinking problem. The fault lies with the psychological flaws in the individual - IMHO.

yes there is a lot of merit to what ur saying but the main problem is that i dont know how u would be able to know a child at such a young age if they have the psychological flaw that makes the individual subjective to this behavior.....i dont blame the games in truth i blame the parents for not sitting limits......but in the real world people tend to use what ever they can to entertain their kids with out thinking of the consequences ......in my sisters case she was just to lazy and didnt want to be bothered most parents take more care and interest in what their kids are doing.....

Well the short answer is you can't. But I would be surprised if there weren't warning signs in this kids behaviour. What he did, and his "whatever" reaction to it are so extreme and aberrant that its hard to believe he just, suddenly snapped.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Just which games is your nephew playing? There are games that are and aren't appropriate for certain age groups. Contrary to popular opinion, video games are not the "play things" of children. Game developers are not parents. They have no responsibility to protect someone's child -- that's the parent's job. A game developer's goal is sell their product, plain and simple.

This doesn't mean they can market games involving evisceration, beheadings, torture, prostitution or whatever else is usually considered "adult" to children. There's a reason why the ESRB exists and even the original anti-game pundits -- such as Joe Lieberman -- have admitted that the game industry has cleaned up its act and made the situation reasonably safe.

People can't realistically expect to blame games or the industry itself when they end up purchasing M-rated titles with names such as "Grand Theft Auto" or "Soldier of Fortune" or "Manhunt" and then act shocked when they see their seven year-old playing something they probably shouldn't be at that age! It's not the kid's fault, but the adult. The warnings were there. If the parent fails to take the time to read the rating, the title of the game and perhaps the description of what happens inside the game itself, then they have no one else to blame but themselves.

I realize it's impossible to monitor your children 24 hours a day, seven days a week, but there's a difference between taking an active interest in what your child is doing versus tossing him (or in some cases, her) a game when you lack even the slightest idea of what the content contains. Going so far as even to point out that just because so-and-so shot or drove over someone in a game that it's not "okay" to do that in real life may make a big impact on a young, developing mind.

Edited March 7, 2008 by DeadPoolX

[PetraPerson101 0]

Ugh video games. It's not video games. It's their heads.

I grew up playing these "video games" - hours on end. I didn't kill anyone, shoot anyone, rob stuff, etc -

Man - I don't even own a gun (yet) - and that's all I ever played ( Quake, Quake 2 )

I, personally, think it's emotional and mental. Children who are sheltered by parents -

"Don't go outside, you might be kidnapped."

"Don't play with this toy - it's for ages 10 and up."

"Go to bed at 9:30pm - and you can't watch TV."

"Don't watch [insert show] - it's too violent."

"You can't go play with your friends."

I mean, this whole nanny state thing - sheltering kids, not letting them be ... kids. Overworking them in school, standardized testing, hours of homework ... it's hurting their development.

Kids are kids. They should enjoy themselves, they should play, they should learn the rules of the world, have fun, and respect their parents.

If you're just an obstacle in everything they do - they'll resent it. If you allow them to be children, within means - they'll develop into fine adults.

How did you grow up for example? Did you need to follow those "ages 10 and up" labels on toys? I sure as hell didn't. If I wanted to ride my bike up the street, whatever. I didn't wear a helmet or kneepads or other ####### - come on. Seriously, if you're gonna die, you're gonna die ... don't matter if you're wearing a helmet or not.

Even worse yet - TV. OMG. I'd rather have a kid watching the Sopranos - and swearing up a storm & playing pretend mobster out back - than watching the Disney Channel. Sexualization of preteen kids ... omg, that is absolute MURDER on their minds, in my opinion.

But of course, the whole thing - is deeper than what I could explain right here in this post. My whole point - kids should be allowed to be kids.

+ a little whoopin' never hurt anyone. And, I don't think anyone who got one ever killed their parents. ( I'm taking a good smack on the bum - NOT child abuse. )

That's the whole problem.

*cough*

Though, video games are breeding a generation of little Jabba the Hutts ... if you got kids, make em go outside and play. Think of video games as ... a plague or sorts. Ya heard it from me - the ex-chronic gamer. LOL!

Edited March 18, 2008 by KyanWan