[ SECRET POST #4267 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4267 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 36 secrets from Secret Submission Post #611.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

07. https://abload.de/img/leatherpkfr7.png

[(Anonymous)]

Nah.

[(Anonymous)]

You trying to suggest he’s not retarded and being abused?

[(Anonymous)]

So? I still wouldn't hesitiate to shoot him in his borrowed face.

[(Anonymous)]

cool motive

still murder

[tabaqui]

If a person is deemed intellectually disabled to a certain extent, isn't that a mitigating circumstance in any prosecution? Rather like mental illness?

[(Anonymous)]

certainly not any, there have been mentally disabled people executed in the usa for murder

[(Anonymous)]

I would say that that's a question for trial and has nothing to do with whether someone has the right to his or her self against him.

[(Anonymous)]

I would imagine yes, to some extent, but I'm not sure how much of a difference it makes in practical terms. If the person has shown themselves to be a serious danger to others and there's no way to fix that, then keeping them away from the general population would be a necessary step, and thus "not guilty due to reason of insanity" doesn't mean they just walk free. That amounts to life in prison, or life in an institution, rather, which I guess may be nicer, but it still sounds like life in prison to me. Either way, the result is pretty much the same.

(My state hasn't had capital punishment for a bazillion years, so not getting sentenced to death due to mitigating circumstances is irrelevant around here.)

I think when victim's loved ones get angry over "not guilty due to reason of insanity" it's that trials don't just mete out punishments, but also determine fault in the eyes of the law, so it's like hearing "This guy murdered your son, but it's not his fault" and that can be pretty rough to hear, even though you know the guy is getting locked up anyway.

[(Anonymous)]

running far away from this secret with great alacrity

[(Anonymous)]

Someone hasn't seen the sequel. Leatherface is much smarter than you give him credit for. Also, not sure why you think he is abused (at least any more or less than anyone else in the family).

[(Anonymous)]

Idk what sequel you’re referring to, he’s mentally retarded in all of them except for the retcon in the recent prequel.

Did you see the scene where the uncle berates him over breaking the door and Leatherface cowers?

[(Anonymous)]

not the accepted nomenclature, dude

[(Anonymous)]

"he’s mentally retarded in all of them"

He knows what he is doing is wrong. He can choose who and who not to kill. He knows when and how to lie to get his way. He isn't some innocent baby. He decides 'I want to kill this person' and then does it if HE wants to.

"at least any more or less than anyone else in the family"

[(Anonymous)]

Doesnt he become mentally disabled at the end when he gets shot?

[(Anonymous)]

the term is intellectual disability or mental disability. the r-word is hate speech.

[(Anonymous)]

Calling someone a retard is, saying ‘mentally retarded’ is not.

[(Anonymous)]

They probably think if it's okay for the president to say, it's okay for them.

[(Anonymous)]

I worked in a mental health agency and at a hospital both (fairly recently), and "mental retardation" is still very much in use. "Retarded" is used in a medical sense all the time, whether talking about intellectual or psychical development.

[(Anonymous)]

"Evil" is such an interesting but useless word when applied to real people. What's evil? Knowing something is wrong and still doing it? But what is "knowing" - is it comprehending it on an emotional level? If so, even very smart people might not truly comprehend it. At any rate, someone - no matter how disabled - who enjoys hurting people is certainly pretty bad, not sure how they are inherently less bad than someone intelligent doing it.

[(Anonymous)]

Knowing something is wrong and still doing it?

Knowing something is wrong, or refusing to perform any reasonable amount of introspection or moral consideration which would lead you to know that something is wrong.

You don't get off being evil, if you're capable of mentally comprehending it, just because you refuse to think about morality

[(Anonymous)]

I think we would all say that evil actions have a root in mental illness a great deal of the time. Who can really say that, unless highly provoked or in self defence, murdering another human being is something that a sane person would do?

[(Anonymous)]

I mean, most murders aren't committed due to intense provocation or mental illness, to my knowledge. Most are due to rage (often a domestic abuser murdering their victim or one guy going too far in a fight) or greed (gang/mob shit). Of course, some are the crazy shit you see on Criminal Minds or whatever, but even in those cases, not all of those people are incapable of rational thought to the point where they'd be found not guilty by reason of insanity/"mental disease or defect" (yes, that's really what they call it).

[(Anonymous)]

He's a fictional character. So the main problem is that the creators of a horror franchise decided that, instead of going with "possessed" or "ghosts" or "fleetingly read Nietzsche in college" went for "mentally ill" as a reason why their killing machine does what he does. The problem is not viewers interpreting that message as it is sent rather than questioning it's basis. Let's face it, you go to see a horror film for the thrill factor, and not to evaluate treatment of the mentally ill, nor to deal with the question of how to react to criminal behavior by the mentally ill.

In the real world, people, regardless of their mental capacity, can be both perpetrators and victims of violence - and thus, both "evil" AND "good" at the same time (because people's goodness or badness isn't a fixed zero sum game since we're not Calvinists). Corollary is, someone can be sympathetic to the suffering of another person (from mental illness or victimization) AND also think "holy hell, this guy is wearing someone else's face! I need to get to safety ASAP, defending myself as best I'm able if he catches up to me, otherwise he's wearing my feet for creepy toe-sandles! As soon as I get to a place where the phones work, I'll for professionals to prevent him from hurting more people and for figuring out how to treat whatever made him do such evil shit".

[(Anonymous)]

Let's face it, you go to see a horror film for the thrill factor, and not to evaluate treatment of the mentally ill, nor to deal with the question of how to react to criminal behavior by the mentally ill.

Spoken like someone who doesn't have much understanding of the genre.