I'll never understand a man's reasoning for doing that. How can one be an arbiter over the lives of your partner and kids...
post
Was she going to divorce him or something? These pieces of shit always lose their minds over women leaving.
Its usually caused by either that or money. Says she was a substitute teacher.
I bet it was money related.
Why can't these absolute cunts do themselves in before taking out their families?
So like. What happened right before this? I'm not trying to justify it I'm just genuinely curious.
Was this just a crazy man who finally snapped? A crazy man pushed too far by outside influence? A spur of the moment murder suicide?
Outside of mental issues I'm not really coming up with many ideas on how this shit occurs
Seems like he was essentially the sole breadwinner and lost his job.
Oh boy the USA really is some shithole if people are offing themselves (and others) over something trivially as loosing a job.
Also, if this one job is the thread at which everything hangs, why even make children? So they can enjoy the same poor life? Awesome.
I'm pretty much an antinatalist, so I don't get it either. But a lot of people are on the Life Script™ and don't really think about this.
This happens so much, their is a name for it "Family annihilation" or Familicide. It's almost always the patriarch who does this. Women do it too, Andrea Yates comes to mind, but that's much more rare.
I've always found it interesting that while men do familicide often, we forget about it. (Psychology Today puts the rate at 1 every 5 days in the US) Meanwhile women who do the crime like Yates or Smith become notorious for decades. Admit it, you've forgotten the name Kristopher Karolkiewicz from the article you just read, but you remember Susan Smith from 30 years ago.
I don’t remember any of their names, even the ones you wrote.
Nah, I don't remember any of them.
I don't remember like any names of stuff like this, but it seems like the general understanding among all the people I've ever discussed these topics with is that it's primarily men who do this shit.
just chiming in to say anecdotally that maybe people have a better understanding of things now
what always surprises me, though, is the rates. the US is big, but 1 every 5 days still seems so fucked up to me
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Familicide
You don't have to kill yourself to be classified as family annihilation killing multiple members of your family fits the criteria.
That men are the ones who do it most is no doubt but that other person is wrong with their comment I don't remember any of their names in fact the only one I remember is the dude who did that and lied and they made Amityville Horror about it.
Only one I remember killing kids that's a woman is Casey Anthony but it was really because of how broken the US justice system was that let hergo.
We can all acknowledge men are the prime perpetrators statistically with this type of crime without making up sexist things like "everybody only ever remembers the 2 women who do it" that isn't true.
Yes I never said she was I said "the only woman killing kids I remember" is her.
Which kind of proves a point that I don't even remember one single woman family annihilators name. Just one woman that killed her kids (I know that isn't the same) and only because the whack ass justice system let her go Scott free.
And yeah that's why I said that other persons comment wasn't correct.
And I don't even remember the dudes name Amytiville Horror is about either I just rememevr the movie and what really happened
Ok so multiple children died and this person says
"PEOPLE ONLY EVER REMEMBER THE NAMES OF WOMEN WHO DO THIS"
and you said "great comment"
So I pointed out that I don't know the names of any family annihilators and only one name of a woman who killed her kid at all and it was only because they just let her walk away with no repercussions.
That seems very on topic with the comment that was made.
Also your handful of anecdotal evidence doesn't prove his comment correct either, and neither does theirs.
The claim about moslt men doing it is 100% corect and provable. The claim that "people only remember the women who do this" is anectdotal and not provable at all.
It was kind of weird to turn an article about children being murdered into an opinion piece on how society treats men and women different, to be honest.
Now if there was a whack court case and they let him go or something I could very much see why someone would make the comment but out of the blue to voice an unprovanle opinion like that sure was weird on an article about multiple children being murdered.
That user never stated that you made that claim. You left all the context out of your quote for some odd reason...
That men are the ones who do it most is no doubt but that other person is wrong with their comment
But then you go on to edit your original comment and claim this user is "being salty"
great comment
Why, because it portrays men as evil? Because that seems to be your whole point, simplifying the problem to be based around sex, and not overall societal concerns. And what does entitlement have to do with 90-95% of family annihilators being male, are you labeling all men as entitled?
What kind of nonsense is this? Nobody is claiming all men kill their family.
It's like you didn't even read a single word of my comment, kinda funny.
I read the entire thing (it's not that long), and that's what I'm responding to. And in it, you seem to be complaining that people are calling all men evil and entitled, which is not something anyone said. Just that the majority of family murderers are men, which is simply a fact. In fact, I strongly suspect the majority of any kind of murderers are men. But that doesn't make all men murderers; that's a fallacy and not a logical conclusion to draw.
that's a fallacy and not a logical conclusion to draw
Which is exactly my point, as the person I was replying to was clearly implying that being male had something to do with the problem. If you don't see that with their phrasing, then you're being intentionally obtuse.
"Amanda Karolkiewicz was a substitute teacher" as someone who substitutes while unemployed I can say it does not help much. They make it sound nice but more than likely she would have liked a full time position. No mention of the fathers job situation. It could be the typical thing but with the us having dumped on what few bits of help low income people have I kinda wonder.
I agree, but what's really weird for me is this part:
he wouldn’t say whether a firearm has been recovered from the fire-damaged residence
Yet the autopsies show that they were all shot. I imagine that the autopsies also show that he was the one to do it based on time of death, but odd that the article doesn't present that evidence.
all 84 comments