Park Slope Pigeon-Killing Eight Year Old

That parents of pigeons from Jersey are typically irresponsible.

Someone please explain to me why a pidgeon would hit an 8 year old boy with a stick? That is just plain horrible!!

Brooke Lynn Knight wrote: This neighborhood was a great place before all these uppity pigeon moms with their double-wide Bugaboos invaded our nice, diverse, working-class neighborhood.

I've seen them gathering at Perch.

before these avian agitators arrived park slope children and squirrels competed for food in a respectful manner

but no more

i heard that bad bird was charged wih a felony assault

Sprite
I don't agree that a lot of normal children are usually cruel to animals. That's not normal at all.
:thumbdown:

caseopele wrote: Dakotas way, I agree with you. Out of everyone I know or have known maybe one or 2 were cruel to animals as children.

Out of everyone I knew grewing up, maybe 1 or 2 were redheads. Is that not normal?

Mind you, I personally didn't see *anyone* tease or bait an animal when I was a kid. But I certainly saw many kids act cruel to other kids. You'd think that would worry people looking for the next serial killer, but no seems to find it abnormal. Hmm.

I agree totally that kids can be incredibly cruel to other kids. Especially those most vulnerable, like the poor kids who don't "fit in" to whatever the norm is supposed according to the other kids. That is a sure sign of emotional immaturity and disconnection of compassion on the "normal" childrens part.
Even those awful kids most times won't injure an animal.
And actually, unfortunately, it is sometimes those poor souls who are ridiculed by the bullies that act out against those who have made their lives a living hell.
Anyway, what I'm saying is it's all wrong whether kids torture kids or animals and should be addressed appropriately.
Never should it be addressed as youthful indescretion. And, Sprite, it was nothing personal. Just an observation.

Brooke Lynn Knight wrote: Attacking those that are powerless and defenseless against you -- not to mention innocent of bothering you in any way -- that signifies that something is seriously wrong in your head.

Actually, I'm not sure this indicates that a person is crazy. If anything, picking on the weak makes a kind of twisted sense. Why attack someone that may well give as good as he or she gets? I suspect that's why there's so much abuse of children.

I guess I'm bothered by the assumption that anyone who commits a barbaric act MUST be mentally ill because it's too easy. According to the American Medical Association, "5.8% of males and 1.2% of females showed evidence of a lifetime risk" for antisocial personality disorder. That means if 100 guys show up to watch a dogfight, only 6 have the lifetime risk of being sociopaths. So how come the other 94 aren't revolted by the event?

I want to say again that I am NOT CONDONING cruel behavior, whether to people or animals. But I think this veneer of civilization that we see around us is just that - a veneer, and thus easily stripped away given certain circumstances. (Though I admit, it's hard for me to imagine any circumstances that might cause a normal person to punch a toddler or an elderly lady in a walker.)

sprite wrote: I guess I'm bothered by the assumption that anyone who commits a barbaric act MUST be mentally ill because it's too easy. According to the American Medical Association, "5.8% of males and 1.2% of females showed evidence of a lifetime risk" for antisocial personality disorder. That means if 100 guys show up to watch a dogfight, only 6 have the lifetime risk of being sociopaths. So how come the other 94 aren't revolted by the event?

No. Attending a dogfight selects for "antisocial personality disorder" so that more than 6% of the audience would have it. "People who attend dogfights" is hardly a random segment of society.