What will happen if poor people "punish" society?

It's great that you have the luck of not being a pedo but I still wonder why the person in your example would focus on these particular victims.

 

In this scenario, the "individual" is cherry picking his persecutors, and the subsequent tragedy that he perpetrates is meaningless, and the result of a disorganized, lazy and self-indulgent thought based on a tragically narrow and superficial view of the real injustices that have resulted in the "individual's" disillusionment and alienation. The individual is also deluding himself with regard to the chain of copy cat murderers (because we are in fact talking about the cold blooded murder of innocents, favored by society or not, still as undeserving of abuse, persecution and murder as the "individual"). and the result, which would never occur and is so utterly impossible that it exists only and forever in the realm of one man's self-indulgent fantasy. Throwing one's own life away after taking another's in the name of a misguided cause based on an incomplete understanding of a poorly understood problem is a wasteful mistake, so heinous, that it eclipses the evil of the original injustice that spawned it in the first place. This "tragedy" would be SO useless, SO meaningless and it would ultimately deserve its inevitable mischaracterization and subsequent dismissal as the result of an evil and twisted mind.

Murder, War, Violence has no effect on psychopaths - in fact, Murder, War and Violence are their trade and tools, it's all they have to support their inexhaustible lust for power and wealth. The wealthy elite don't care about your "minor girls" anymore than they care about the planet or the poor, the rest of society might, but they don't - to the elite, they're just another commodity, like you and like me. The "individual" needs to find a better way, the "individual" needs to take the higher road and inspire others to do good, not evil, to seek justice, not revenge.

 

Because he is looking for victims that will cause as much societal outrage as possible. If he killed boys instead of girls, there wouldn't be NEARLY as much public anger. Society favors girls over boys and he wants to offend society, that is why he chooses girls.

He kills girls below 18 because that will cause significantly more of an outcry than if he killed women 18 or above.

Do note that he does NOT inflict any pain on the girls he kills. He just rapidly executes them in such a manner that they aren't even aware of the attack. This should help you and others understand that he gains no sexual pleasure out of killing those girls.

Equally significant is that these girls have no idea of the impending death. No suffering before the death, no suffering while dying. Just a clean & bloodless death free of any agony.

 

You do realize plenty of "young girls" also live in poverty right?

 

"COLD-blooded"? Absolutely not. It is hot-blooded.

Let me explain the difference.

Cold-blooded acts of mistreatment are perpetrated without any emotion OR out of pleasure from causing harm.

Hot-blooded acts of mistreatment are perpetrated out of indignation. Indignation is anger resulting from injustice.

In the story I wrote, society is the cold-blooded entity while the impoverished individual is the hot-blooded entity.

 

I think killing mothers would cause even more outrage so I don't really agree with your very specific example.

 

So long as the suicidal individual referenced above can recall the birth trauma of profound currents of inexorable attraction clamoring to fuse in rapturous Love to form matter from subatomic stuff traceable to the first silent, violent unfoldings of the universe, he will be able to ascertain that he is inarguably, thru no fault of his own, indescribably condensed and there will be no need assasinate anyone.

 

Very unlikely. Most mothers are at least 18 and therefore adults.

Society is more protective of minor girls than adult women. This means, a man killing the former will be the target of significantly more public anger than a man killing the latter.

 

Most people are protective of children, not just female children.

 

I have entertained your ideation Warm Heart,as a certain kind of schematism - but at the end of the day you must realize that we have to love the kids.There is no intellectual justification for harming children.If you feel outraged by injustice I suggest you shift your gaze to more positive horizions,this line of thinking won't solve your problems or those of society.

 

Fine "Hot-blooded". I still don't see how perpetrating one "mistreatment" is going to wake society up to another "mistreatment". Violence begets violence, but lately, in this society, violent actions, like the one you describe, only beget more apathy towards violence - in much the same way as a televised War (with proper media/propaganda spin) can beget more apathy toward the massive violence of war.

Let me ask you this: if we started drafting female minors into front line/canon fodder positions in our various wars, and they started coming home en masse in body bags, how long do you think it would take this society to shrug its shoulders, if the media raised them up and celebrated them as heroes? I'm guessing our media/propaganda could accomplish this in less than a decade.

Step one, release a "critical acclaimed" block buster war movie franchise with minor females cast in the hero/cannon fodder role.

Step two, release a "critically acclaimed" video game franchise featuring a cast of minor females cast in the hero/cannon fodder role.

 

Society -- in any human culture -- would be strongly against any of what you describe. There would be massive worldwide violent public outrage against these uses of female minors. Which gets back to my point about the poor person whose aim is to anger the public into providing for poor people. The logic is that if society doesn't care for the poor, then the poor will keep doing things that outrage society. At some point society will be so paralyzed with rage that it will do anything to preventing the actions [committed by the poor people] causing its anger. In desperation, society will start catering to the needs of the poor even though it doesn't want to.

 

The thread was closed. In the interest of Free Speech, I re-opened it so that everyone would be free to give their opinions to the OP.

 

Since we're all speaking hypothetical, why doesn't this person focus on Washington DC? Sure, it wouldn't be "revenge" against society, but said person would be a national hero.

 

This is ridiculous. I hate this society as much as the next guy but I think its important to retain a pure soul in the midst of madness. Otherwise, how are you any better than your oppressor?

You know what Ghandi suggested to fight an evil and corrupt society? Not killing innocents. Not even killing the guilty.

He suggested spinning. Hand-weaving. Turning away from an industrial society and taking the smallest step towards self-sufficiency.

If you hate and want to change society doesn't it make more sense to change yourself and set an example of change for those around you? WTF does killing girls contribute towards positive change????

It doesn't. It contributes to the evil in the world. It feeds into the whole reason why I've been walking around in a depression since I heard about the Sikh shooting. Society is EVIL.

Society is evil but most individuals are good, and it is only through small actions of the individual that society will see change.

 

OP has mental problems

 

:iagree:

 

I am interested in OP's ideas and wish to subscribe to his newsletter.

 

OP; Listen to mel. Wanting to murder people to somehow "get back at society," is contributing to the evil aspects of society. I get sick when I see these random shootings and acts of violence.

Don't drag innocent people into your bullshit.

 

seeing your post as well in other threads, you and OP should start your own newsletter together