I don't want to ban anything, but lock those fucking things up already.

It was reported that they paid another kid $80 to keep his mouth shut which shows intent. They had a plan for one kid to kill the girl with a knife while the other kid would use the gun to keep anyone from interfering. This looks pretty well thought out.

Authorities should also me going after the grandfather and the brother, neither of which appears to have a lick of sense. The grandfather gives the brother access to the gun and the brother just leaves it laying around. I would like to know if there are any charges that could be filed on the grandfather and brother. And the parents are not really responsible either.

Knives - that is a tougher potential weapon to secure.

The parents should be scared to death with the children they have raised. These kids could have just as easily attacked a family member.

Who on earth would ever want these boys to be anywhere near their home, children, or their children's school?

who have not been properly socialized, including the older brother (who should have had the gun locked up). And if the kids were being bullied, their seems to be some culpability with the school system. Not totally the schools fault because bullying is also learned in the home. Parents saying "my baby would never do that, he's an angel" because they try to be their friends instead of their parents. At least no one was physically injured or killed. Mentally?

I would like to hear what other children have to say before making a determination as to whether there was bullying involved. There is a difference between kids being kids (and some kids have no filters in what they say and they come up with rude comments) and a full blown bullying situation. Other kids who are not directly related to any incident with the girl could give you a clearer picture of what was taking place. It also sounds like they weren't not going to stop at one victim. It was been reported that they were going to lure other children one at a time. I wonder if there is any evidence that either boys had tortured or killed any animals. If so, that would be a really bad sign.

The school may or may not have to deal with how they handle bullies. However, not all incidents of "meanness" are bullying situations. Kids have made nasty comments to one another for generations. Each situation has to be looked at individually to determine how far the line has been crossed. I don't necessarily place all of the blame at the doorstep of the schools. Parents have just as much to blame when a child is identified as a bully. I also look at how a child is raised and what is their home life like. A child who acts out as a bully could be a symptom of a child who might not be in a good home situation or are not being properly parented. The whole thing may not be as cut and dried as one might think.

However, if a child is acting out in a way that these children are, they are in an extreme situation and can be a danger to themselves, their families, and other people. Do you think that the school and the parents of all the other children at that school want those to boys to ever be allowed near that school again? I don't think so. If those boys are able to get out again (from a psychiatric, juvenile, or adult facility) they will be total pariahs in that community. The families would be smart to pack up and move elsewhere in the hopes that they can have a fresh start. That said, I know that i would not want them living in my neighborhood.

in accord to the article cited. They intended to kill the girl because "she's rude and always made fun of me and my friends," the younger boy told investigators, according to the documents." I guess it is difficult to decide what is bullying and what isn't. The response to what the little girl did, was very extreme. I did not see anything in the article to indicate the boys were going to lure anyone else into the fray.

I didn't place the blame at the doors of the school totally either. I may not have made my stance as clear as it should have been. In fact I think I am in total agreement with you. I suppose I should have expounded a little more. These young boys are for sure coming from a problem home and it did indeed create an extreme situation, which is why I am glad no one was physically injured.

As to the little girl, I don't know where meanness and bullying are one and the same. That being said, being mean should not be an accepted behavior, and indicates a possible problem in the little girls home life. I certainly don't think it is cut and dried, but there are enough bad activities going on to indicate some intervention on many different people and levels.

I would not want these boys living anywhere near me either. Not sure I would like to live near where the little girl lives either

The boys, accused of conspiracy to commit first-degree murder despite their tender ages of 10 and 11, also planned to harm other students by luring them away one at a time, said Tim Rasmussen, a Stevens County prosecuting attorney.

Edit to add: If that statement is correct then you cannot lay the entire blame for their actions on the shoulders of one girl. There is a lot more going on that needs to come out.

I read that article a couple times and for some reason did not see that. Sorry.

And you are then correct that there is indeed more to come out.

The differences between how children are socialized at a very early age in E. and Central European states, compared to the US is very telling. Subsidized daycare allows parents to get their work done while the children are busy socializing with each other. In the US, not so much.

Another telling difference is the lack of children in adult settings: shopping, dining out, etc... in other cultures. Whereas, in the US, because of lack of subsidized day care, parents routinely tow their children along to Wal-Mart and other shopping centers. How many times do you see children screaming, "I want that!" in a supermarket or big box store? - making for perfect little consumers to become big consumers later - perfect for the US.

Communities over there also offer more outlets for children that are free or close to it. Whereas, in the US, wannabe soccer moms need lots of cash to do every little thing. Or Little Junior or Miss Junior needs to pay for every little thing or beg the money from their parents.

It would be interesting to see studies in this area.

Just throwing these two very troubled boys away is wrong. They need intense therapy and intervention. They are not mentally or emotionally capable of truly understanding what they contemplated. You can credit media for giving them such ideas. Where is your compassion?

The boys came up with a well thought out plan, bribed a potential witness, and only got caught because another kid saw the knife and reported it. I think that they probably knew exactly what they were doing. If you investigate these boys further there is probably earlier warning signs that there were serious problems. You can't just blame the schools. You also need to investigate the families. The gun culture of this country does not help at all. Guns are too readily available. There was a grandfather who gave a grandson (brother of one of the kids) the semi-automatic gun. First question - what on earth does any kid need with a semi-automatic gun? And then the gun is left laying around. Second question - When did it become acceptable for a kid to leave a semi-automatic gun just laying around? People like this should not even be reproducing.

You can give these kids all of the psychiatric therapy in the world and there is no way that I would ever want them anywhere near a child of mine or want them living in my neighborhood. I would never ever ever trust them.

I knew a guy years ago who got his degree in Psychology and went to work at the Maine Youth Center. He began his job with hopes of being able to help troubled children and to make a difference. Later on he told me that actual real world experience taught him that most of the kids should have been locked up for good and the key thrown away. He told me a few stories about some of the kids he dealt with, like the kid who liked to act up in order to be sent to the state mental hospital in Augusta. His goal - to get out on pass where he had a record of killing small animals. That kid was a serial kid in the making.

are old enough to know the difference between what is right and what is wrong. That is proved by the fact that one was going to stand "guard" while assaulting the girl, and any others they had in mind. They may not be capable of knowing the devastation of killing someone and probably could get some benefit from some counseling. But they indeed need to be separated from society and more than likely from their home life.

They know to stand guard because they have learned that is what you do.

They are sociopaths. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, it just predisposes them to certain kinds of lives. But sociopathy can be channeled. I know from experience.

She talks shop a lot, and reviews a lot of collateral material for the opinions she offers in federal court. When your very first crime is something like rape or murder, and it is at such a young age, it does not bode well for your future. Rehabilitation is real, but for someone like this? It's hard. It may be that one of the boys was the prime mover in this and the other was a follower, and this may not count as an attempted murder, "only" conspiracy, but this is not one of those cases of authorities overreacting. It's deeply troubling, and at least one of these boys has a serious problem that will probably last a lifetime. Hopefully they will never have the chance or inclination to end anyone else's lives in the future.

Homicidal ideas are fairly normal, but for kids this young to get as far as they did is a sign of some serious problems. One would think that at least one of them would have told someone because they realized it's wrong to kill someone over a matter of hurt feelings.

This sort would never be the leader in anything sinister and are frequently nice people who are frequently very gullible, naive and sometimes exceptionally under confident and weak willed. But they tend to develop such a strong need to please the one they are dependent on that they tend to become blindly obedient. Of course that would be exactly the kind of person a psychopathic or sociopathic personality would want to have under their control. Unfortunately for the person with the dependent personality disorder their loyalty and sense of subservience to the one leading them could result in a nice kid performing absolutely horrendous acts under blind loyalty and obedience, Of course I am not a professional in this matter. But I can imagine how that could happen. I can see how a good kid could be used by a bad kid in this way. In this case I wouldn't be surprised if that dynamic had taken place.

....would be codependency, instead of "dependent personality disorder."

in this case, I, and most psychologists, would be much more likely to diagnose one of the young men, if the case warranted it, with the beginnings of a dependent personality disorder.

Codependency is not a universally recognized psychological disorder. It is a part of the addiction model of recovery. In that model, there is no treatment outcome. With DPD, the goal of treatment is to encourage autonomous actions instead of some sort of mythical independence. Some temperaments are more desirous of connections. DPD is an extreme pathological expression of that base temperament. In a positive expression, it may describe an individual who is capable of commitments with high levels of intimacy and who enjoy being in groups where they have no desire to ever be the leader.

I worked at a large treatment center in Tucson for several years. I watched 'co-dependents' either encouraged to flip flop into extremes of aggressiveness and independence or shamed for their innate desire to be in committed, intimate groups while being a follower and not a leader.

These boys are 10 to 12 years old. We are looking at innate temperaments, shaped by cultural and familial circumstances, that have supported them in sliding into pathological expressions of planned violence. Even if this young girl was 'mean', that is not the same thing as bullying. There may be a reason for their behavior, but there is no excuse. I applaud the authorities for taking this very seriously, because as one poster above mentioned, this type of violence at a young age does not bode well for future rehabilitation or mental well-being. Sadly, I once worked with a young man who at about this same age raped and strangled a girl a few years younger than himself. He is, and still remains, a convicted violent sexual predator in permanent resident at the Arizona State Hospital.

(the Columbine killers) said Harris was a sociopath, but Klebold was just a sad, lonely, often bullied follower who was dominated by Harris.

but rather simply educated.

My intent is always to share information that will clarify, edify, and educate.

I was thinking of one of my wife's cases where someone with a lifelong history of sex offenses was looking to get out of prison. His first offense had been to rape and murder a girl with MS when he was 15. Some things, there's no coming back from, even though none of the stuff he ever did thereafter was nearly so bad as that.

drive a car, old enough to quit school and get a job and live on their own, old enough to purchase alcohol and old enough to vote - then they are certainly old enough to be tried as adults.

So, no, they are not old enough.

And there is at least one case of such a hanging (It was in Britain). Under the Common Law, it was a rebuttable presumption that someone between the age of 7 and 14 had the mental capacity of a "Normal" 14 year old. If the Court found that a 7 year old had the mental capacity of a 14 year old, that child could hang for the crime he or she committed. On the other hand, if the court found that the Child did NOT have that mental capacity, the child could not be convicted of a crime.

Under the Common Law the age of consent for sex or marriage was 12. In Pennsylvania this came up in the late 1990s, when a teacher was found having sex with his 12 year old student. His defense was they had entered into a Common Law Marriage, and under the law any consensual sex among married people is legal. The case went all the way to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which ruled that since the State Legislature had NEVER put any restrictions on Common Law Marriages, the traditional Common Law Rules applied. i.e the 12 year could consent to entered into a valid Common Law marriage and any consensual sex was legal.

The age to leave one's home is more complicated. Most states restrict when someone can quit school, but then permit exceptions to that rule. 16 is the age one can quit school in many states (No state is lower, other states are higher, generally 18).

http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB40raisingcompulsoryschoolage2012.pdf

As to signing a binding agreement, in my home State of Pennsylvania all you have to be is an "Emancipated Minor" and that is a term NOT defined as to age, but means any child NOT under the "Care, Control, or Supervision" of another due to the act of the child's parents. If a six year old could survive AND is not under the "Care, Control of Supervision" of another, that could be an emancipated minor. The cases tend to be teenagers, not people younger, and many of these cases were decided decades ago, but no law has been passed to change the above. i.e. it is still the law. Thus there is no real bottom age to signing a contract, if you are dealing with an emancipated minor (Through the burden of proof would be on the side claiming the emancipated minor was actual emancipated when he or she signed the contract).

Please note Children and Youth has jurisdiction over any minor under age 18, if that minor is in "Danger". If the Child has housing, income and going to school (if under age 17 in Pennsylvania, if 17 NOT required) and that child is NOT in any Danger, Children and Youth has no jurisdiction over the child.

Just pointing out that these children could entered into a Contract, under the right set of facts, one was within one year of being able to marry without his parents consent if he runs off to a Common Law Marriage State (A judge in Colorado has commented that Colorado Common Law Rule is similar to Pennsylvania's old rule, and thus it may be legal for 12 year olds to entered into a valid Common Law Marriage in Colorado to this vary day).

As to driving, no state permit 10 year olds to drive on the HIGHWAYS, South Dakota is the state with the Youngest age, 14 years, 3 months
http://www.iihs.org/laws/mapunsuperviseddrivingage.aspx

As to driving NOT on the public highways, many states have NO RESTRICTIONS as to age (i.e. you can be one and drive off road), other states put restrictions if you operate a motor vehicle of PUBLIC LANDS, and some of these restrictions are as low as 8 years of age:
http://www.atvsafety.org/infosheets/atvchart-statereq.pdf


Thus today, a 12 year old can NOT consent to sex outside marriage, but once married he can consent to sex (Through this is permitted in only a few states, and most of those state, like Pennsylvania in the 1990s, do not even know it).

An 10 year old can sign a valid contract, depending on what states he is in (and the right set of facts as to his emancipation). HE can operate a motor vehicle (but not on the Public Roads) in many states (Thus can drive a "car", provided he or she stays off the highways).

Yes, he can not drink, quit school or vote, but if he can live on his own if he is not under the care, control or supervision by his parents by the act of his parents AND he can take care of his needs (i,e, NOT in danger).

children are protected largely because it is accepted that children are too young to make certain decisions. If a child of 10 or 12 or 13 is to be held responsible for their actions the same way an adult would be held responsible - then there really is no rational basis for age of consent laws or laws requiring children of that age to attend school if they don't want to or restricting a child of that age from buying and consuming alcohol. I recall specifically one poster here who would demand that an eleven or twelve year old be tried as an adult and the very same poster would demand that anyone who had sexual relations with someone under 16 should be subjected to the death penalty. I don't think that is logically consistent. A child of that age cannot be both incapable of consent and responsible for their actions.

And I know of the UK having a horrific child murder committed by 2 10 year olds in 1993. They've been released and given new identities (Jon Venables is the one that seems to be in trouble the most and he's currently in prison). Apparently Britain has an "international gag order" but someone on Twitter released these pictures then removed them (too late). There was another case by Mary Bell (who was also 10 when she committed her first murder).

You have to teach children constantly that something like this is wrong. It depends on their home environment as well.

to develop a complex plan to kill/harm others. There is no doubt that their actions were pre-meditated. To show such behavior at such a young age does not bode well for their futures. Even if they get extensive psychiatric behavior I do believe that there should be a public registry for people of all ages who have displayed sociopathic behavior. Sociopathic people have just as much a chance of harming others as pedophiles. I cannot even begin to tell you how upset I would feel if one of these kids moved into the house next door. I would be installing the tallest fence possible (and if I could electrify it that would be even better). As anti-gun as I am, I would probably be buying one.

I agree. It was horrifying that they did it but it was even more horrifying that they were 10.

close friend then by any objectified sociopath. It far, far more likely that you would be robbed or your children would be molested or you would be assaulted by a spouse, a close family member or a close friend than any objectified bad guy. That is reality.

but it's the conspiracy to commit which is going to tip this over into the horrific category.

there's no getting around that there was premeditation involved in this.

You want to put a 10/11 year old away for life?

You'd just give up on them?

Do you have a lower limit on this "try them as an adult" mentality? We have you at 10.

9-8-7? In the womb if one of twins comes out dead...try the obvious murderer "other" as an adult?

people of legal age. I had a friend who graduated with a Psych degree and went to work at the Maine Youth Center with the belief that he could make a difference and help the kids. After awhile experience taught him that most of the kids should have been locked up and the key thrown away. You would not believe the stories that he told me.

We live in a country with one of the highest, if not the highest, incarceration rates. Private prisons is a growth industry with corporations having no interest in rehabilitation which would cut into their long term business plans.

Too many parents coddle their children instead of teaching them to treat others as they would like to be treated, to be responsible for their actions, and they inundate them with all sorts of electronic toys which impinge on their ability to properly socialize with people. Too many parents do not insist that their children treat their teachers with respect and behave at school. Being blind to your children's faults and misbehavior never does them any good.

deliquent youth in the 70s. I don't know about the Maine place, but at our school, our kids were not there as a result of being coddled. Our kids included a 7-year old armed robber (a loaf of bread - he had a knife. Trying to feed his hungry 4-year old sister, mom in the wind). Also an 11-year old drugstore cowboy (wicked smart, completely neglected by alcoholic parent). He had successfully bypassed a sophisticated alarm system in a drugstore where he was caught on a fluke (owner returning unexpectedly). We tested this boy's IQ at 146 or thereabouts as I recall.

Not all kids are irredeemable. And I'm not being all touchy-feely, I'm not going to say "they just need love."

What they need is ATTENTION. From people who can help them, not violent, adult prisoners.

Those programs where kids are matched with an animal of some sort seem to awaken their souls. It's hardly coddling. Waking up at 4am to take care of a colt or calf is not coddling.

But it is a living thing that will respond to them and love them. Something many of these kids have never had.

I've heard of this program. Unfortunately it's not practical for many children. It wouldn't be fair to the animal to introduce it into a dysfunctional, sometimes violent household.

I had to quit my job at the school; it just got to be too much. We lost too many kids to the system, and it was damned depressing. We were so underfunded too - our school was in two ramshackle houses connected by a walkway.

An animal just cast into the same nightmare the child is living would be likely doomed.

I think it's sick to advocate trying young children as adults no matter what the crime.

Keep the little monsters away from children they could harm.

Rule number one: Don't brandish your murder weapon on a schoolbus on the way to a schoolhouse murder.
Rule number two: Don't plan a schoolhouse murder, or any other murder for that matter.

that children this age know the difference of what is right and what is wrong. And he was younger than the almost perpetrators.

been exposed to some serious stuff to even dream up a plan like that.

and hear about all of the mass shootings that take place on a regular basis.

but lots of them watch a fuck of a lot of violent tv and play violent games. that's more likely.

is watch TV or go to the multiplex. I'm guessing their parents put no restrictions on them in that regard.

Too many parents feeding their kids a constant diet of glorified violence and revenge.

and I am a trained psychologist & follow a secular ignostic Zen path.

Despite the emotional gut reaction to such games, time and time again, studies show that violent video games and violent music simply do not correlate with increases in violent behavior among kids or adults.

They may be 'drawn' to them, but their violence is not 'caused' by them.

According to you, I would fit the profile for a violent offender because I play a shitload of violent video games and watch a lot of TV where characters on the screen wave around guns.

No study--none--has ever conclusively proven a link between violent video games and real-life violence. I am sick of hearing about it. It has never been about the games and it has everything to do with a) the parents' willingness to moderate or limit the media their children are exposed to and b) the ability to distinguish fantasy from reality.

"taking out" untried enemies with drones. Stealth killers.
The "Sneak Up Behind Your Foe and Kill Them Before They Even Know You Are Their" model of justice and how to use strength and power.
These kids are surrounded by adults, who use violence to solve problems, or at least use the threat of violence and or use violent language. These factors likely exist in these boy's homes and they certainly exist in their community and in the wider culture at large.
Plus, children often fantasize about ways to equalize their lack of power with those who have more. Weapons do, of course, make the weak stronger.
Still, that does not explain or excuse the boys for hatching such a plot.
I don't know the nature of the conflict that the boys had with their intended victim but their plan was not appropriate, regardless of the behavior of the girl. Since the boys paid a third boy $80. to keep quiet (what will be the consequence of his not alerting adults of the plan?) and confessed the intent to use violence to deal with other students, with whom they had troubles, it seems they had left the realm of childhood fantasy and need to be treated with more severity than one would administer to a child.
They are dangerous but they are not adults.

Suddenly these kid's behavior is shocking? I am sure in their minds it was all logical and justified.

Just like adults do when they plan stupid stuff.

It was nearly 35 years ago. A 2 year old boy disappeared. His body was found naked and tied up in an abandoned basement beaten to death. The police were looking into the possibility of some kind of satanic worship sacrifice.

Turned out the boy was killed by two 7 year olds. Since then I am never surprised when I hear about kids doing horrible things.

and I would bet any amount of money their parents are anti-government survivalist nuts.

It can be directed usefully. It requires rules applied equitably. But there is hope for the sociopathic child.

A sociopath can be taught that it's in his/her own best interest to behave a certain way and contribute to society, but in the end, if it's in that sociopath's own best interest to kill someone, or cheat or lie or steal....then a sociopath will not hesitate to do it on a moment's notice. A sociopath who appears reformed is only acting that way because in the moment that is what is what he/she perceives is to his or her benefit at that moment in time. It can change at any point.

Also, any kind of 'help' that a sociopath receives usually just makes the situation worse, because they learn new tricks on how to manipulate.

Such that it is always in their best interests to not act outside certain bounds.

Furthermore, any intelligent sociopath will recognize that certain social conventions must be respected. The consequences for extreme violations of norms to achieve one's ends are too severe, and if you sit down and think about this for a bit, you recognize it. As for manipulating people...well there is a time and place for that, used correctly.

and many individuals who procreate are not even adequate parents. While I would concede that we're evolving and have improved, we should not be surprised when very young children behave this way.

I recommend anything by Alice Miller (in particular, "Thou Shalt not be Aware" and "For Your Own Good.&quot , and "Magical Child," by Joseph Chilton Pierce.

as there have been a number of provocative comments throughout this thread. However, I want to make the pointed statement that the folks upthread talking about killing animals, serial killers and sociopaths, throwing away the key and locking down the community are frankly way over the top given the very little known information in this article.

The idea that this was a "well thought out plan" carried about by "sociopathic serial killers" is far outside the realm of what is presented in this story. Planning to knife a girl on the playground, or whatever, while holding off bystanders with a gun are hardly the elements of a well thought out plan. It is a ten and eleven year old plan that failed because they are ten and eleven year olds. What kind of knife did they have? A pocket knife? A butcher knife? Who knows from the story but it is certainly relevant. What is their cognitive level of functioning? Are these kids in regular classes, special ed, honors? Regular, desperate kids devise all sorts of fantastic schemes to cope, handle or solve overwhelming stressors. In my opinion, as a long time clinician working with kids in situations like this every day, we have no where near enough information to make the judgments that are made throughout this thread, most of which are themselves based on Hollywood caricatures of crime and mental health problems with a little hearsay, anectdotal evidence and first year college psychology course content sprinkled in for effect.

With all that said, in my opinion, the real moral of this story is this is another harebrained childhood scheme made very dangerous by yet another gun left lying around -- that is the actual, and I hope punishable, crime that was committed here.

my daughter is 10 and in 5th grade. I know what she thinks about and what makes her happy and it's not shooting or stabbing someone. That these kids could be thinking out a plan to murder one or more of their classmates is terrifying.

This whole lock 'em up and throw away the key mentality is disturbing and even more so when it is directed at children.

The things I'm reading here are horrific. Comments that these kids should be put away until they are 18, that they should never be able to return to school, they should be tried as adults, or they should be forced to move away as one poster said, "I certainly wouldn't want them living in my neighborhood."

If an adult gets a weapon and attempts to carry out a plan to kill someone, that is a crime. When a 10-year-old does it, that's just stupidity.

What a bunch of punitive cowards we've become; we are so frightened of even children that we are willing to bring the full force of the justice system to bear to exact retribution from fifth graders.

I wholeheartedly concur with these sentiments!!!

And welcome to DU!