Scott Reynolds <sar@gol.com> wrote in message news:<bf0uct$6el$1@newsflood.tokyo.att.ne.jp>...
> On 7/15/2003 4:27 AM, Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> 
> > Scott Reynolds <sar@gol.com> wrote in message news:<bet3e1$7bc$1@newsflood.tokyo.att.ne.jp>...
>  
> >>Wow! This is the first time I've seen you come down so strongly on the 
> >>"nurture" side of the nature-nurture debate, Eric. 
> > 
> > Then you haven't been reading for years. And I don't believe that
> > people are "born" so screwed up in the head that they don't know such
> > a thing is not right.
> 
> But you now seem to believe 

Now? No, it's the same as always.

> that whether a person grows up to be a 
> lawbreaker or a law-abiding person depends on how they were brought up. 
> In that case, how can people be blamed for committing crimes? It's their 
> parents' fault, right?

It's possible the parents are at fault, as I've always said.  But it's
still the person's choice. They are not born to be multiple kidnapper
sex offender murderers. And we don't drag and behead criminals'
parents.

> > Harsh punishment is for when people make the choices to screw up when
> > all else fails. People would get so much help that there would be no
> > excuse for failure. You'd know this if you read more closely instead
> > of only picking out the punishment parts as "EricWorld". That still
> > does not mean there is any excuse right now for what happened in this
> > case, or what the boy is accused of doing at least three times
> > previously this year.
> 
> Why is there no excuse if, according to what you said earlier, he is not 
> the one responsible for his crimes?

I didn't say the boy was not responsible, nor was he born that way.