I choose to not take jiro123´s post serious because his/her post make no sense over parental issues. It shows her/his lack of knowledge and feeling. This is so.
and headache. 
Still, it's very interesting to read those. 
correct. that's what I did.
Several times? Could you kindly point out what sources I have used from wiki?
Oh is there a class to learn how to be a parent? Just because Leibling or anybody who delivered a baby automatically makes her qualified of knowledge and expertise? I can show you other moms who have completely opposite view of Leibling's. so let's just leave at that....
Since you said your specialty is clinical and Ph.D candidate. hhhmmmmm....... that hardly qualify you as an expert in criminology or forensic psychology. You are more of an expert on studying and understanding the patient's dysfunctional being or whatnot but not exactly an expert since your scope of experience is limited to research, papers, and perhaps some shadowing. Have you interviewed with criminals? Have you conducted studies on criminal-related? I don't but I rely on words of experts and I agree with them.
O'RLY?
Didn't I just explain my political view before? I said "I listen to both side and come up with my own which is in the middle that both side has to compromises."
I've shown the data and you have still NOT shown me any single single ONE PIECE of evidence/statistic/data that support your cause.
I have repeatedly asked you to show it to me and we have yet to see it....
What she said is that she raises their kids in a proper care and a full of love and goodness until one of her children turns in a serial killer. Liebling will very confuse and wonder what she have so wrong, she only want to understand why her child do it so wrong way?
Clearly, she did not mean she will raise their kids as bad/evil children. Of course, she would not do that. I know she is not that kind of person to do so.
I am somewhat, personally, disagree with Liebling because it may not her fault if she do raise their kids very well. It must be some situations effect on one of her children. But, on the other hand, Liebling may be right. I meant, it may be her fault if she don't realize she teach her kids in a slight wrong way. Really, that depend.
correct. that's what I did.
Several times? Could you kindly point out what sources I have used from wiki?
Here you go. Copied and pasted from your post: It will give peace of mind to public if they were executed. Do you want Henry Lee Lucas alive in prison? (he confessed to 3,000 murders)... Andrew Cunanan (murdered 5 people including Gianni Versace)... Gerard john Schaefer (cop who killed 34 women/girls... so on Go back to your post and you will find that the names link directly back to Wiki.
Oh is there a class to learn how to be a parent? Just because Leibling or anybody who delivered a baby automatically makes her qualified of knowledge and expertise? I can show you other moms who have completely opposite view of Leibling's. so let's just leave at that....
Actually, yes. There are parenting classes. However, I was not referrring to Leibling's parenting. I was referrring to your inability to asess that for which you have niether the education nor the experience. Not to mention the liscense. You cannot make an asssessment regarding the parenting skills nor the motivations of a parent psychologicallyt with an intro course under your belt. Not to mention one that you have not even completed.
Since you said your specialty is clinical and Ph.D candidate. hhhmmmmm....... that hardly qualify you as an expert in criminology or forensic psychology. You are more of an expert on studying and understanding the patient's dysfunctional being or whatnot but not exactly an expert since your scope of experience is limited to research, papers, and perhaps some shadowing. Have you interviewed with criminals? Have you conducted studies on criminal-related? I don't but I rely on words of experts and I agree with them.
Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about. I suggest you gain a little more information on the field of clinical psychology. And yes, I have interviewed criminals. My experience is not limited to research, papers, and shadowing. I have field experience. And, as I told you, I also have a minor in sociology and anthropology. Many of those course are directly related to the criminal population. In fact, my supervisor for my soc methods class is a criminologist. Two of my soc classes were taught by the Asst Warden for one of the largest prisons in my state. I did field work under both of them. And I find it ironic that you would question my experience and expertise when you obviously have none of what you are questioning, yet you expect us to accept your posts as knowledgeable.
O'RLY?
FBI Behavioral Science Unit
" The unit's personnel are primarily Supervisory Special Agents and experienced instructors and veteran police officers with advanced degrees in the behavioral science disciplines of psychology, criminology, and sociology. The Behavioral Science Unit professional personnel also include a clinical forensic psychologist, research analyst, a management analyst, and a technical information specialist."
I said FBI agents do not have the power to diagnose. And by your posting, you have admitted that they have one clinical forensic psychologist on staff. "A" means "one." And the person whom you quoted is not the one. Therefore, his quote is useless to your point as he does not have the expertise to diagnose.Excerpted from Princeton Review
"A criminologist studies normal social behaviors and how certain factors influence deviation from that norm. They work with and often for law enforcement offices (both local and federal), analyzing the behavior and methods of criminals for a variety of reasons: to increase the chances of criminals being apprehended; to predict patterns and motives for behaviors in certain demographic groups; and to assess the responsiveness of crime to various methods of law enforcement. These duties border on the territory of the statistician, and many of the same skills are required of the criminologist, but the additional analytic component of psychological insight and sociological patterns of behavior make this profession unique. Criminologists’ duties can be as distant from police work as reviewing a pattern of behavior among a certain demographic group and writing a profile of the pressures that increase that behavior. Or they may involve going to crime scenes, attending autopsies, and questioning potential suspects to see if they fall into the general psychological profile constructed of the suspect for that crime. One criminologist said the work can be “gruesome,” but the type of personality that likes the intellectual task of understanding patterns and deviations from patterns is well challenged in this profession."
"The overwhelming majority of criminologists are sociology and psychology majors. Coursework should include statistics, writing, computer science, and logic. While many enter the profession with only a bachelor’s degree, a significant number continue for graduate work in the behavioral sciences, and those who wish to teach are expected to pursue a doctorate in psychology or sociology. Since most criminologists are employed by law-enforcement agencies, background and security checks are standard. Employers look for candidates who have demonstrated responsibility, creativity, and logical thinking. Criminologists must know how to design and construct sound research projects."
"Criminologists work closely with many law-enforcement officers, and the few who leave often pursue a variety of law-enforcement careers. Criminologists become police officers, FBI agents, and state medical examiners more often than any other careers. A number use their psychological training as springboards to careers as therapists, psychologists, and counselors."
I know exactly what criminologists are. How many sociological theories can you apply to criminology? I can apply several, and have done so in numerous papers. Criminologists are scholars in sociological and psychological theory as applied to the cause of deviant behavior. Shall we discuss the theoretical foundations of deviant behavior?
Didn't I just explain my political view before? I said "I listen to both side and come up with my own which is in the middle that both side has to compromises."
And I explained to you that your judgemental tendencies places you decidedly on the right.
I believed I also said "show me the statistic saying capital punishment does not work and only increase the crime rates UNLESS you can SUFFICIENTLY, BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, with overwhelming arguments by experts and reliable data that capital punishment DOES cause crime rates to increase. Then I will support abolishment of capital punishment and join your cause." Until then, I stand by death penalty and ignore others' reasons to abolish it because all they have are cry cry cry and religious anecdotes.
Firstly, I never said that captial punsihment increases crime rates. Evidently, you are misreading things. Perhaps that accounts for your errors. What I said was, it does not decrease the rate of murder or violent crime. Given the fact that you seem to believe that you are so informed on sociological, criminology, and psychology, those reasons should already be obvious to you. You are looking at the situation from a very superficial perspective, but that is typical of one that has completed only an intro level course.
I've shown the data and you have still NOT shown me any single single ONE PIECE of evidence/statistic/data that support your cause.
Sweetie, you showed statistics that supported both Liebling's claims and mine. So far, you have shown no data, nor have you provided any links to academic sources that would support your claim. Would you like me to teach you how to go about accessing some real research?
The whole purpose of debate is to show the audience a convincing argument accompanied by data/statistic/etc. Not to show who is more qualified in terms of profession. If that is the case, then you should be able to easily knock me out of stand with your research/statistic proving me wrong and win this debate.
Yes exactly! The kids do not live with parents forever. They move out at age of 18 (or whatever) and it's out of parents' control on their life. Things could happen to kids on their own so it's not parents' faults for making them a killer. Could be peer influence by wrong crowd, environmental factor, etc.
If the parents divorce, the child would feel he did something wrong to make them hate each other. That is absurd in most cases, right??? unless.... he is actually worse than Dennis the Menace who drove them apart
What she said is that she raises their kids in a proper care and a full of love and goodness until one of her children turns in a serial killer. Liebling will very confuse and wonder what she have so wrong, she only want to understand why her child do it so wrong way?
Clearly, she did not mean she will raise their kids as bad/evil children. Of course, she would not do that. I know she is not that kind of person to do so.
I am somewhat, personally, disagree with Liebling because it may not her fault if she do raise their kids very well. It must be some situations effect on one of her children. But, on the other hand, Liebling may be right. I meant, it may be her fault if she don't realize she teach her kids in a slight wrong way. Really, that depend.
Anyway --
I saw many posts, here, this make me go
Actually I have known some adults still live with their parents. But not all of them turns out badly just because they live with their folks.
Ah.... it's just reference to their names so that audience knows who are they. If you would like me to give you government file on them instead of wiki, I can do that. We both know that is not necessary because it'll say something. Again you haven't showed me that I used wiki for my sources (other than murderers' background).
If you read carefully what I wrote to Leibling, you will see that I did not claim to be an expert. I merely said "it seems like...." Police Officer does not need medical license or graduate-level courses to determine if you pose a danger to public or not if you were pulled over for drunk driving.
and I find it ironic that you still have not been able to prove to me with solid data/statistic that death penalty is ineffective and harmful. We ALL are still waiting for it. deathpenalty.org is not a great site to convince us.
He was not diagnosing the criminals. He was given reports by . President Bush speaks at the podium to discuss about the danger that Iran poses to us. He does not have expertise to diagnose either. The intelligence analyst is certainly not going to speak at the podium! President Bush was given details and such before he speaks. Same thing for FBI Special Agent John P. Skillestead. He's merely reading from reports and conclusions compiled by professional with advanced degrees.
Sure please share with us! I've mentioned previously that if you can convince me with overwhelming and sufficient arguments accompanied by empirical data, then I will fall to your side to abolish death penalty. Until then, I'm on my beach chair with pro-death penalty group.
Sure why not? They have sufficiently argued their position. Therefore I agreed with them. I'm not on their side when it comes to gay rights and pro-corporation rights.
To say that capital punishment does not decrease the rate of crimes... hmmmm that's interesting. Could you support your claim with reports? I believe I've counter-argued that claim. As said by Wesley Lowe - "Dismissing capital punishment on that basis requires us to eliminate all prisons as well because they do not seem to be any more effective in the deterrence of crime."
I went back and I still haven't found any. All I got is you expressing concerned about executing wrong person. Guess what? Justice Antonin Scalia of Supreme Court said "... in the recent American history, there has not been a single case - not one - in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit."
Ah.... it's just reference to their names so that audience knows who are they. If you would like me to give you government file on them instead of wiki, I can do that. We both know that is not necessary because it'll say something. Again you haven't showed me that I used wiki for my sources (other than murderers' background).
If you read carefully what I wrote to Leibling, you will see that I did not claim to be an expert. I merely said "it seems like...." Police Officer does not need medical license or graduate-level courses to determine if you pose a danger to public or not if you were pulled over for drunk driving.
and I find it ironic that you still have not been able to prove to me with solid data/statistic that death penalty is ineffective and harmful. We ALL are still waiting for it. deathpenalty.org is not a great site to convince us.
and why don't you elaborate more on your nature of studies with criminals so we can get some better idea of your expertise in this nature of issue. what were your research about? what kind of criminals are they? what are the demographic statistic on them?
He was not diagnosing the criminals. He was given reports by . President Bush speaks at the podium to discuss about the danger that Iran poses to us. He does not have expertise to diagnose either. The intelligence analyst is certainly not going to speak at the podium! President Bush was given details and such before he speaks. Same thing for FBI Special Agent John P. Skillestead. He's merely reading from reports and conclusions compiled by professional with advanced degrees.
Sure please share with us! I've mentioned previously that if you can convince me with overwhelming and sufficient arguments accompanied by empirical data, then I will fall to your side to abolish death penalty. Until then, I'm on my beach chair with pro-death penalty group.
Sure why not? They have sufficiently argued their position. Therefore I agreed with them. I'm not on their side when it comes to gay rights and pro-corporation rights.
To say that capital punishment does not decrease the rate of crimes... hmmmm that's interesting. Could you support your claim with reports? I believe I've counter-argued that claim. As said by Wesley Lowe - "Dismissing capital punishment on that basis requires us to eliminate all prisons as well because they do not seem to be any more effective in the deterrence of crime."
The most striking protection of innocent life has been seen in Texas, which executes more murderers than any other state. According to JFA (Justice for All), the Texas murder rate in 1991 was 15.3 per 100,000. By 1999, it had fallen to 6.1 - a drop of 60%. Within Texas, the most aggressive death penalty prosecutions are in Harris County (the Houston area). Since the resumption of executions in 1982, the annual number of Harris County murders has plummeted from 701 to 241 - a 72% decrease.
[click for PDF]
Series of academic studies within the last six years show that the death penalty does indeed act as a deterrent to murder. These analysts count that between 3 and 18 lives would be saved by the execution of each convicted murderer. Naci Mocan, an economics professor at the University of Colorado at Denver, co-authored a 2003 study and re-examined a 2006 study that found that each execution results in five fewer homicides, and commuting a death sentence means five more homicides. In an interview, he states: "Science does really draw a conclusion...There is no question about it. The conclusion is there is a deterrent effect. The results are robust. They don't really go away. I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty (deters) - what am I going to do, hide them?"
another proof -
do you require anything more?
I went back and I still haven't found any. All I got is you expressing concerned about executing wrong person. Guess what? Justice Antonin Scalia of Supreme Court said "... in the recent American history, there has not been a single case - not one - in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit."
I rest my case
