Comment by bgutierrez
18 years ago
Contempt and scorn are appropriate feelings to have for murderers.
I thought this article was interesting because the author had spent a lot of time watching Reiser in court and might be speaking some truth about Reiser's personality.
Is there anyone here that knew Reiser more intimately than this journalist, and could give us some feedback?
"Contempt and scorn are appropriate feelings to have for murderers."
Oh really? What about those trained to kill? Such as those in the military?
This is a tangent, but I'm curious...
The definition of murder as "the unlawfully killing of a human with malice aforethought" is a good one that applies well to Hans Reiser and shows the importance of motivation in determining whether or not someone is a criminal.
When soldiers are learning to kill an enemy that may not even exist, they have very different motivations when compared to someone that is planning to kill a personal enemy.
I believe that both individuals and nations have the right of self-defense, so I don't hold contempt for anyone that is learning to kill in order to defend himself or the people he has a responsibility to defend.
Hmm. That is a good point.
1 reply →
I find the motivation behind his contempt and scorn to be not that of someone who despises a murderer, but that of someone who is envious of someone's superior intellect.
Notice how he attempts to belittle Reiser, how he throws in the "genius" word . . .
I have been the focus of that sort of envy before, and it is written ALL over that nitwit's piece.
He's pathetic.
Assuming some basic threshold of intelligence, it's much more important to most people how pleasant someone is to be around than how smart they are. If you do fit into this "antisocial genius" archetype (which you're tossing around every bit as loosely as the author of the article), chances are good that how people treat you has nothing to do with envy, and everything to do with how you treat them.
Just saying, is all.
Interesting that you would state that I am "tossing around" an "'antisocial genius' archetype" "every bit as loosely as the author of the article" . . . first off, WHAT "'antisocial genius' archetype"? . . . (there someone goes again, playing armchair psych, which has been my point all along) second of all, just WHERE did you get this "'antisocial genius' archetype" from in my posts? Serious. Please quote me. Please.
You make no sense whatsoever dude.
9 replies →