Sign Of the Times?

Jason Kilgore, useful idiot of the Joyce Foundation links this article:

Nearly two-thirds of U.S. adolescents have experienced an anger attack that involved threatening violence, destroying property or engaging in violence toward others at some point in their lives. These severe attacks of uncontrollable anger are much more common among adolescents than previously recognized, a new study led by researchers from Harvard Medical School finds.

Now I have some questions of the study, and the questionable “Disorder” the study points to, I wonder how much the unintended consequences of society is to blame.

I remember as a kid I got mad at a classmate and lashed out at them. I will also note said classmate was a LOT bigger than me, and was one of the rough kids in school. I’d call him a “Bully”, but really that’s a bullshit term. All young kids are vicious monsters, and really “Bully” just seems to be the term the weak monsters pin on the stronger monsters. People teased this guy (including me) and I was teased by others. Just this guy was bigger and would hit you when you pushed too far.

This one time I got pissed at him and took a swing at him, I got a few well placed fists to my face, and went sobbing to the teachers. They knew our report, and probably had a good idea of how things went down, so their reaction could be best described as lackluster.

Of course things used to be even more liberal than that. I remember a teacher of mine telling stories of running home after school to change out of their good clothes so they could get in an after school fight without incurring the wrath of mom for scuffing the good clothes.

The above story was told to me out of speculation that some of the crazy violence in schools might be a result of zero tolerance towards fighting. He suspected kids bottle up their anger and rage until it becomes so severe that a bloody nose won’t cut it…they want death and destruction.

That’s just as dubious, but I wonder if this story points to some odd mental disorder…or just a world where breaking an asshole’s nose is ALWAYS taboo. You see, when consequences are squashed, people get more bold.

Of Course Mr. Kilgore wants to simply ban guns to stop this….but really is an irrationally angry and violent child any worse with a sword any better?

Also it gets me thinking about people talking about how carrying firearms has changed them. You see when you carry a gun you tend to have more of a plan for when things get ugly…and when you think of those plans, you realize you DON’T want to be in that situation.

Back before I carried I’d honk my horn and flash my finger at stupid Massachusetts drivers. No longer. You see if the other guy gets out of his car and charges me, or starts following me to my destination, I might be in a situation where using my gun is the best option….and I don’t want to be there. I know of people who would get angry when somebody would call them names or question their manhood. Not such an insult when you’re carrying. I can shoot you, and I really don’t want to…so go ahead and call me a “Pussy”, I’ll just keep walking.

Just food for thought!

This entry was posted in Safety, Self Defense. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Sign Of the Times?

  1. Thirdpower says:

    Seriously, a ‘history of anger attacks’?
    “Nearly two-thirds of U.S. adolescents have experienced an anger attack that involved threatening violence, destroying property or engaging in violence toward others at some point in their lives”
    Sounds like another excuse to pump kids full of drugs.
    “What!? You got into 3 fights in as many years?! You broke one of your toys once? You’re diagnosed w/ ‘IED’ and need these prescriptions to control it”.

  2. I remember as a kid I got mad at a classmate and lashed out at them. I will also note said classmate was a LOT bigger than me, and was one of the rough kids in school. I’d call him a “Bully”, but really that’s a bullshit term. All young kids are vicious monsters, and really “Bully” just seems to be the term the weak monsters pin on the stronger monsters. People teased this guy (including me) and I was teased by others. Just this guy was bigger and would hit you when you pushed too far.

    Bullshit! A bully can be labeled the instigator. I was by no means the big kid in elementary school, even in middle school where I had weight on people I took shit for being big. Here’s the thing though, I never once started a fight. Never.

    I bloody damn well finished them though. Every time I got into a fight I was left alone for a while until some other kid decided that I was the guy to pick on. It wasn’t until high school where I kicked someone’s ass basically in front of the whole school that it was done. The seas parted and I went where I damn well pleased and people just left me the hell alone.

    Bullies are pretty damn easy to spot because they’re trying to be the alpha male (or female in some cases). Verbally I’d ignore them unless they sent something my way I could easily just shut the down with. Even if I did that usually would provoke a physical response. I did like it when they got physical because I had something they didn’t, drive. I knew I could do anything and everything necessary to win and I would NOT be in trouble as long as they swung first. I also knew if I won odds were my dad would take me out for ice cream.

    I kept to myself. Would I verbally give people shit, yeah but again I wouldn’t start it. Maybe it’s because I’m an introvert, who knows. But the title of bully is pretty damn easy for me to spot and that is the person who instigates the shit. I was raised in a house where I kept my thoughts and hands to myself. If I hit my sister and she fought back, she’s not getting in trouble for it. I took that outside the home and ran those same rules because I would get no sympathy if I started it.

  3. TS says:

    What is Baldr’s conclusion? Bar 2/3rds of citizens from gun ownership because they were angry teens once? Or is it bar everyone from owning a gun if a teenager lives at the house because chances are they are violent?

    • Weerd Beard says:

      2/3rds??? Why be so cautious! BAN 3/3rd! Its the only way to be sure! 😉

      But not swords, because those are fun to play with while wearing your jammies!

      • Jack says:

        Agents of the state are exempt of course.

        Nevermind what happens if you have a populace full of psychotic bullies and you decide to empower one group above all others.

        I’m sure it’ll work out just fine.

  4. Jake says:

    I’d call him a “Bully”, but really that’s a bullshit term. All young kids are vicious monsters, and really “Bully” just seems to be the term the weak monsters pin on the stronger monsters.

    I’m going to have to join Barron in calling bullshit on this. Bullies are the instigators, the ones who actively seek dominance over others. Many of them never grow out of it, and become either criminals or politicians.

    He suspected kids bottle up their anger and rage until it becomes so severe that a bloody nose won’t cut it…they want death and destruction.

    I’m not quite so skeptical about this as you are. Adolescent emotions – driven by increased and changing hormone levels – are both stronger and more unpredictable than what they are used to controlling. Then consider that during a fight emotions, especially anger, become heightened and focused. Take away the natural emotional “safety” venting of your (previously) typical schoolyard fighting, and when the fights do occur they can become much more vicious simply because there is a lot more anger built up that is suddenly focused on one person, by someone with very little experience at handling strong emotions.

  5. Jack says:

    Weer’d, your experiences carrying show the full meaning of “An Armed Society is a Polite Society.”

    Someone is less likely to get into a conflict if they’re aware of the consequences and know what escalation will entail.

  6. Gosh Mr. Beard, according to Mr. Kilgore’s line of thinking, we should ban martial arts, and maybe even teenage sports like wrestling……cause those activities are simply means to practice your skills for physical violence…..

    • Archer says:

      Not martial arts, no. Even though less than 1% of the population ever seriously study a martial art, Baldr/Jason does, so we’re not allowed to touch it.

      But then there’s football (no need to learn to tackle someone), baseball (why on Earth would you need to know how to swing a bat effectively?), golf (see comment for baseball and apply to a golf club), soccer (kicking things for fun is just wrong), and a myriad of others.

      But there’s no reason to stop there. We should also ban things like chess clubs and debate teams, because they teach kids to (gasp!!) think, and thinking is an unacceptable behavior for good “Progressives.”

    • Sendarius says:

      I think Mr Kilgore actually wants to ban MARITAL arts.

      He (like many others of his ilk) seems to actively dislike, despise, and detest “people”, and would only be happier if there were fewer of them soiling the planet.

Leave a Reply to Jake Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *