Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Do you think there's a connection between Boston Bombing Suspect Tsarnaev's age and his crime?

Posted by   + Show Post

19-Year-Old Bombing Suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Is Just a Kid & His Brain Proves It (VIDEO)

by Jacqueline Burt

Dzhokhar TsarnaevHas anyone else noticed that more and more acts of horrific violence are being committed by especially young men? Boston Marathon bomb suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is 19 years old. Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooter Adam Lanza was 20 years old. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, better known as the "Columbine killers," were 18. John Allen Muhammad, accomplice to the Beltway Sniper, was 17 when he helped to murder 10 people. At 24, Aurora Theater suspect James Eagan Holmes was slightly older at the time of his shooting, but still under 25 years of age -- the point at which the human brain is fully developed (a fact scientists only recently discovered).

Of course we can't blame crimes of this magnitude solely on the teenage brain, but the connection is too obvious to be ignored. What are we missing here? Not just as a society, but as parents?

According to Dr. Igor Galynker, director of the Family Center for Bipolar in the psychiatry department at Beth Israel Medical Center in New York City, it's a combination of factors that can lead to disaster. Attachment issues and insecurity make the immature brain especially vulnerable to influence, which is why, Galynker explains, "Very often, these are pairs of perpetrators, one dominant figure who has psychopathic tendencies and the other a dependent figure."

Dzhokhar and his 26-year-old brother Tamerlan certainly seem to fit this profile. Tamerlan is being painted as a strong-willed, influential religious extremist; Dzhokhar a laid-back college student with a reputation for smoking pot and hanging out. Even the suspects' mother says Tamerlan had a huge influence on Dzhokhar:

"They loved each other. What Tamerlan was said was law for Dzhokhar. That's how I raised them. What the elder brother says, the younger brother has to do. That is according to Islam."

Again, obviously we can't excuse these criminals because of their age and the company they chose to keep, but maybe going forward, we can start to pay a little bit more attention to troubled teenage boys. Again, not that they're ALL going to turn violent. But it can't hurt.

 

Do you think there's a connection between Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's age and his crime?

by on Apr. 23, 2013 at 12:54 PM
Replies (41-50):
prommy
by Silver Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 7:45 AM
1 mom liked this

 A 12 year old knows it's not OK to murder innocent people. This kid and his brother are terrorists and no amount of analyzing them will make them anything else.

lancet98
by Silver Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:01 AM
1 mom liked this

It's absolutely ridiculous to lump together all the people that guy lumped together.   Stupid, too.   About the brain not being 'fully developed til 25', the answer actually is 'kinda sorta - No'.

It depends on how you define, 'fully developed'.   The brain is generally quite capable of  supporting very 'adult' behavior long before that.   Some of 'adult' behavior depends on learning and environment, and more of it depends on one's God-given makeup - genes, epigenes, etc.

But 'fully developed at 25' is also kind of a joke - your brain is always changing, all your life.   It goes through periods of intense change not once but many times prior to 25.  

Now to lumping all those people together.   That's a really stupid construct.

James Holmes and others who are suffering from severe mental illness, are in a category by themselves.  

It just so happens that several major mental illnesses, usually start to be obvious, at about 18-25 in males.   That isn't due to the brain being 'immature' at all.  

A few weeks before schizophrenia starts, brain cells die.    Hearing voices?  A small group of brain cells died a few weeks before, in the hearing center of the brain.   Seeing things?   Ditto, but in the visual areas of the brain.   These die-offs don't occur because the brain is 'immature', but because an entire disease process is culminating.   In other words, they don't occur because of normal brain development, but due to a disease process that throws that process into a disarray.

They are doing these horrible things not just because their brains are malfunctioning, but also because they aren't getting the treatment they need.   Because our health care sucks, and because the illness itself causes them to avoid getting help.

There's a very different category of 'gullible and easily led'.   Some young people are just plain stupid.   Our high school was full of them.   They very easily got drawn into drugs, drinking, and every 'cause' you could possibly imagine from the Irish radical bombers to becoming Amish and chopping wood.   Some young people simply are like that.   They are VERY easily drawn into all sorts of groups and philosophies.

Then there's the category of raised in hatred and bitterness, perhaps with good cause if one is from Chechnya and caught in the crossfire.   And that easily gets turned twisted and directed at any government.  

 Anger and bitterness is the most vile of poisons.     

lancet98
by Silver Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:11 AM

 

I disagree with you about the mother.

There is no proof she is a terrorist.

However....it is possible that something is quite wrong with her mentally.   I read that she was arrested for shoplifting 1600 dollars worth of expensive women's clothing from Lord and Taylor. 

That behavior doesn't make any sense.     It is peculiar.  

If she really is a devout Muslim, she wouldn't be stealing expensive Western-style women's clothing from the very symbol of Western decadence.

Her angry, loud denials, I would expect that.   But there was something odd about that too that I can't really put my finger on.

In other words, she may not be a terrorist herself, but she might have taught her son to be, either unwittingly or deliberately.

Just keep in mind, there is a step one has to take, from devout to radical.   And the step to radical, does not always include devout.

There is some speculation, for example, that the older brother may have killed 3 young men.   There's been speculation as to why, but the murders were also peculiar.   They don't seem to have been motivated by robbery.   The 3 men who were killed, were found with money and marijuana scattered over them.

One of them had been a friend of the older suspect(yes, if he is not tried in a court of law and convicted, he is a suspect).

Quoting prommy:

 A 12 year old knows it's not OK to murder innocent people. This kid and his brother are terrorists and no amount of analyzing them will make them anything else.

 

 

prommy
by Silver Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:18 AM

 


Quoting lancet98:

 

I disagree with you about the mother.

There is no proof she is a terrorist.

However....it is possible that something is quite wrong with her mentally.   I read that she was arrested for shoplifting 1600 dollars worth of expensive women's clothing from Lord and Taylor. 

That behavior doesn't make any sense.     It is peculiar.  

If she really is a devout Muslim, she wouldn't be stealing expensive Western-style women's clothing from the very symbol of Western decadence.

Quoting prommy:

 A 12 year old knows it's not OK to murder innocent people. This kid and his brother are terrorists and no amount of analyzing them will make them anything else.

 

 

' I didn't say anything about the mother...maybe you meant to answer someone else's comments?

lancet98
by Silver Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:22 AM

Wrong on both counts.  

What happened is that  I haven't had my coffee yet and my vision is all blurry because I'm sneezing and coughing like mad, so when I read the comment I quoted, I thought it said 'mother' instead of 'brother'.

I'm just going to leave the comments as is though, because I think it's important to understand that 'radical' doesn't always develop from 'devout', and even if it does, there is still a pretty big step to make to get to 'radical' (by 'radical' I mean really, 'radical and violent').

lga1965
by Ruby Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:30 AM
Excuse me....."glorifying terrorism"....that's ridiculous. Studying and research is essential. Or are you one of the members of the "we don't need no education " group here at CM ?

Quoting tooptimistic:


I don't think it will prevent a thing. I think it is glorifying terrorism. 


Quoting autodidact:


was the Milgram experiment sick? 

I think it's worthwhile examining what goes through the minds of those who do these things, it could help prevent further attacks.


Quoting tooptimistic:

More than a little sick of trying to find a justification for the actions of a terrorist.

I think he knew what he was doing when he placed a bomb in a backpack next to an eight year old.  Dzhokhar did that, not anyone else.  He decided to that.

He wasn't mentally ill.  He went to a party after the attack.  There is NO JUSTIFICATION.







Posted on CafeMom Mobile
prommy
by Silver Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:39 AM

 


Quoting lancet98:

Wrong on both counts.  

What happened is that  I haven't had my coffee yet and my vision is all blurry because I'm sneezing and coughing like mad, so when I read the comment I quoted, I thought it said 'mother' instead of 'brother'.

I'm just going to leave the comments as is though, because I think it's important to understand that 'radical' doesn't always develop from 'devout', and even if it does, there is still a pretty big step to make to get to 'radical' (by 'radical' I mean really, 'radical and violent').

I also didn't mention anything about being radical or devout. I could give a rats ass about the religious background of these two. I'm just a believer that anyone who commits an act of terror is a terrorist. Sorry if I'm nit-picking but I don't want to be associated with any comments that look like I am blaming religion for this attack.

 

lancet98
by Silver Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:53 AM

 

 

 

I think you're being a little excessively fussy.  

There isn't any reason I have to be that strictly confined in what I write because I quoted you.   I already said I misread one word of your post.

I don't find 'religion' to be a 'reason' for this attack, but I do think that religion is a factor, as in 'misuse of and misinterpretation of religion to justify violence'.

The younger suspect has been quoted as saying 'Islam' was a reason for the attack.

I don't see it as a reason, strictly speaking.

If someone chooses to interpret ANY religion as a reason for violence, I think they are barkin up the wrong tree.   They were violent because they chose to be violent. 

What was going on in their mind, how they view what they did, is useful information in so far as allowing us to detect and stop others (or catch them after the fact), but my opinion remains that it is a misinterpretation for one's own reasons.

Almost all religions, at one time or another down through the ages, have a 'history of violence', not because 'religion is violent', but because in the past, governments and rulers had 'state religions' and religion was, wrongly, in my view, made an issue of government.

The main reason our forefathers wanted to take the ruler's religion out of his rule, was that it was made abundantly clear to them that it resulted in very bad things.

Quoting prommy:

 

 

Quoting lancet98:

Wrong on both counts.  

What happened is that  I haven't had my coffee yet and my vision is all blurry because I'm sneezing and coughing like mad, so when I read the comment I quoted, I thought it said 'mother' instead of 'brother'.

I'm just going to leave the comments as is though, because I think it's important to understand that 'radical' doesn't always develop from 'devout', and even if it does, there is still a pretty big step to make to get to 'radical' (by 'radical' I mean really, 'radical and violent').

I also didn't mention anything about being radical or devout. I could give a rats ass about the religious background of these two. I'm just a believer that anyone who commits an act of terror is a terrorist. Sorry if I'm nit-picking but I don't want to be associated with any comments that look like I am blaming religion for this attack.

 

 

 

prommy
by Silver Member on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:55 AM

 


Quoting lancet98:

 

 

 

I think you're being a little excessively fussy.  

There isn't any reason I have to be that strictly confined in what I write because I quoted you.   I already said I misread one word of your post.

I don't find 'religion' to be a 'reason' for this attack, but I do think that religion is a factor, as in 'misuse of and misinterpretation of religion to justify violence'.

Quoting prommy:

 

 

Quoting lancet98:

Wrong on both counts.  

What happened is that  I haven't had my coffee yet and my vision is all blurry because I'm sneezing and coughing like mad, so when I read the comment I quoted, I thought it said 'mother' instead of 'brother'.

I'm just going to leave the comments as is though, because I think it's important to understand that 'radical' doesn't always develop from 'devout', and even if it does, there is still a pretty big step to make to get to 'radical' (by 'radical' I mean really, 'radical and violent').

I also didn't mention anything about being radical or devout. I could give a rats ass about the religious background of these two. I'm just a believer that anyone who commits an act of terror is a terrorist. Sorry if I'm nit-picking but I don't want to be associated with any comments that look like I am blaming religion for this attack.

 

 

 

It's fussy for me to ask that you not put words in my mouth? Wow! That's a new one even for CM.

 

tooptimistic
by Kelly on Apr. 24, 2013 at 8:56 AM



Give me a break.  "His brain wasn't developed" or "his brother made him do it" is an excuse.  What are we going to study exactly?  We have studied and developed a profile of a terrorist.  People get upset if the government profile certain groups.  All of this attention and trying to find an excuse for this monsters behavior is ridiculous.  There is no way we keep people from being radicalized like these two were.

He put a bag with a bomb down next to and eight year old boy knowing what was going to happen.  It was his choice and knew what was going to happen.  There is no excuse or justification.


Quoting lga1965:

Excuse me....."glorifying terrorism"....that's ridiculous. Studying and research is essential. Or are you one of the members of the "we don't need no education " group here at CM ?

Quoting tooptimistic:


I don't think it will prevent a thing. I think it is glorifying terrorism. 


Quoting autodidact:


was the Milgram experiment sick? 

I think it's worthwhile examining what goes through the minds of those who do these things, it could help prevent further attacks.


Quoting tooptimistic:

More than a little sick of trying to find a justification for the actions of a terrorist.

I think he knew what he was doing when he placed a bomb in a backpack next to an eight year old.  Dzhokhar did that, not anyone else.  He decided to that.

He wasn't mentally ill.  He went to a party after the attack.  There is NO JUSTIFICATION.









Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured