This will be my last post on the matter. You have a very valid question. The answer is nothing. Your impression of my thoughts of him really put him in a better light then I would. The fact is its not illegal, its not a protected area and they are not an endangered species. It does not make what he did right. No I think the kid has some real issues. Thats in itself isn't even the issue. Anyone that stupid really wont make it to far in life and most of the damage they do will be to themselves. My problem is with the way this has been handled from the start. If you have read this thread and the other thread and you cant see the issue then nothing I say will change that. Even bad people who do bad things have rights. If we infringe upon those then we set ourselves up for the same, its just a matter of time. People write news to suite whatever the current need is. We could paint you to be murderer or a troubled teen, we could call murder self defense or say that you stalked your prey. All of which with out any input from you. We could take away you ability to defend yourself and paint the worst picture of you, that you can imagine. With little or no repercussions. This kid has not been found guilty of a crime yet he is being treated like a child molester. Pictures of him sent to all the dive shops... Really? Why would anyone think they have the right to be judge jury and executioner? Self empowered mob seems to come to mind... I can't continue down this road as I fear this subject will likely get the better of me so i'm done.
I think this needs to be read as a sort of an apologist explanation.
As divers at a site like this one in Wa, or at a site like we have here in Fl with the Blue Heron Bridge Marine Park, we do not have much protection from government for an area that has become a virtual petting zoo. All who visit either, know this.
For the site to remain viable, a collective will forms, to protect the area. The divers essentially govern themselves. This becomes it's own social system, with mores and norms, and boundaries. When a person at these sites crosses the boundary on purpose, and shows a predisposition to do it frequently in the future, the collective must organize a response, if it desires the resource to remain optimal and healthy. Laws and government might help in a decade, should these sites someday become legally protected like a Yellowstone, but for the areas to ever reach a shot at such protection, they need to remain healthy, and to be protected by the local population.
As to this kid, I need to use an analogy to make my point...another extreme "black and while" analogy that will annoy some that don't realize I am just trying to explain this easily....
Imagine you live in a neighborhood and have a young daughter. At some point, you discover a neighbor's child is tearing the wings off of bats and birds, shooting dogs with pellet guns, and essentially killing and creating terror for the sheer joy of it....You realize that these are all the early warning signs of the early years of what may become a serial murderer, a psychopath.
You see something very wrong, and now you have some actions to choose.
First, you obviously will prevent your daughter from having any social contact from this kid, and attempt to ensure she is always protected from exposure to him.
Next, you will see if there is anyway the authorities will do anything, but you know that as he has done nothing illegal yet, there will be nothing they will do. At least they will have him as a "person of interest"...and one day, this may shorten the length of time it takes to solve a kidnapping or murder.
Next, you consider options like either moving your family entirely out of this neighborhood, or, you look at the options to get the neighborhood to become aware of the potential threat, and to begin taking steps that may one day remove this kid or family from the neighborhood. ( in this analogy, I am not talking about a mistaken case of a kid that made some poor choices but is really a kid that can grow up to be "normal"...I am talking about you seeing behaviors that can lead to no doubt whatsoever, that this kid has all the makings of a serial killer). If you believe this to be true, and you have the education, the background, and the insights to read such things correctly, then you have a duty to attempt to prevent your child's death, or those of some other neighbor's. If you don't have this background, your duty is to find someone that does, and get their read on this.
Consideration of this poor kid's future , after the neighborhood meeting on him, is not the priority, any more than worrying about the future of a kid that robs and kills in the burglary, goes to jail, and because of jail, may not have a nice future shot at life....the past actions of the kid prevent this concern from being considered, as it is overshadowed by concern for your own child or the children of neighbors.
This kid that killed the octopus, and bragged about it having eggs, and that he would be doing this daily, purposely showed himself as someone without a conscience, or remorse for a bad act. It also shows a person that enjoys killing for the sake of killing, and likes people to see his handiwork.
We don't know enough about this kid to know for certain if he will become a serial killer, or if he will become a loving teacher some day. Each of us will need to "stereotype" him, to place him in a place in our minds we use to determine who is safe, who is not, who we need to look out for.
I think Bob did what had to be done, given the behavior of the kid. Bob had a duty to the local dive community, and a duty to the environment.
The kid sounds like he needs help, may be beyond it, but at least now, maybe someone will be aware that he needs help, and maybe someone will help him...Maybe it is not too late for him to learn appropriate social behaviors.
