Hahaha I'm bringing it back. Look out!
In reply to this comment by hpqp:
Damn you acidspine, damn you to eternal shinyblurry commentary!

In reply to this comment by acidSpine:
This is actually a clip from the Jamacian hidden camera show Smile mon, you be on Candid Camera

This is actually a clip from the Jamacian hidden camera show Smile mon, you be on Candid Camera

@DerHasisttot

In response to your final question (about the education of firearm owners), it varies depending on the state. Some states require training in firearms safety when you make a legal purchase (of course, some people choose to buy illegally or through unlicensed vendors, but that's a different issue). Other states require a child-lock on the gun at all times when you're not using it. The NRA (National Rifle Association) in the US, which obviously is pretty pro-gun, are huge advocates of training all kids (whether their families are gun owners or not) about how to safely handle firearms. My family never owned a gun, but our neighbors did and they showed me how to treat a rifle with respect.

I've seen in the U.S. hidden camera video of kindergartners playing with an (unloaded) firearm that was left unsecured in a room with them and clearly they didn't understand the danger it presented--they aimed at other children in the room and pulled the trigger laughing. But I'm guessing this is because they assumed it wouldn't fire.

When interviewed afterwards, they all looked horrified and uncomfortable when the reporter doing the hidden camera story asked them what they would have done if the gun had accidentally gone off for real. They clearly understood it could seriously hurt another child. They just didn't think the gun they had found would actually go off. That's why I'm a bit suspicious when you say it takes from 8-10 years of age to understand the concept of death. Those kids were kindergartners (around 6 years old) and they clearly got the idea, although they hadn't thought far enough ahead to realize that would be the consequences of their actions at the time.

I agree with you partially about the glorification of violence in society--particularly U.S. society. I feel that all too often violence is portrayed in the media as an acceptable solution to problems that really could have been solved non-violently. In the U.S. we seem to take perverse pride in people who are behaving badly "getting what's coming to them" (i.e. violence). But I don't think this particular video glorifies that aspect of violence.

On the other hand, violence is a part of life. Violence and the threat of violence is necessary to maintain a stable society. For example, police need to be able to use violence to stop criminals who are actively attempting to hurt others and/or the officers. There are certainly times (self-defense) where individual violence is necessary. I don't think it does anyone--particularly children--any good to stick our heads in the sand and hide from that fact that violence is a part of human nature. As long as we are educating children about the moral and ethical implications of violence, I have no trouble with them viewing it.

And that includes videos like this which include imaginary violence. Let's face it, imaginary violence is fun! The reason is that it is free from the horrible consequences that accompany real violence. When we play cops 'n robbers as kids, we pretend to shoot each other. But part of the fun is that when everyone is "dead" we can all get back up and play again. And most kids (unless they've had some kind of psychotic break with reality) "get" the fact that this is because there is a difference between imaginary violence (the kind they see on TV or in video games) and real violence.

Like I said before, that's why I find this video to be one of the most artful music videos I've ever seen. It gets us to look at that imaginary violence of play in a new way. It is much more "realistic" than we expect. At the same time we realize it is still imaginary violence. Yet, though we realize it is imaginary it still makes us feel uncomfortable! Artistic brilliance, in my opinion.

To be honest, I'd love to see one of those "Kids watch..." videos that have been floating around the Sift tackle this video and get real children's ideas about the violence portrayed in this vid. I think it would be really illuminating.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'boobs, bewbs, funbags, sweatermeat, hooters, gazongas, melons, femmeballs, womounds' to 'boobs, prank, hidden camera, thermometer, bewbs, funbags, sweatermeat, hooters' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^Tymbrwulf:
It is not illegal to release the name of anyone who committed a crime who is over the age of 18. Some people just don't understand the consequences and repercussions that can occur when laws are broken. This is a tough lesson on both students that they will never forget, and they could be made example of to deter others from attempting to do anything similar.
Asian chick was pretty cute, tho.


If they weren't caught now they may have repeated this life wrecking form of bullying again and again. I wonder if his cell mate is going to have a hidden camera...?


By the way, what's with the 'blip' bit? Maybe he was just gay....

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by Sarzy.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by ponceleon. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/A-hidden-camera-prank-ends-in-tragedy

It's a dupe btw: http://videosift.com/video/A-hidden-camera-prank-ends-in-tragedy

Your video, TYT: Hidden Camera Sex Tape Suicide Tragedy, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^NordlichReiter:

>> ^Gallowflak:
Their actions didn't cause his suicide, he did. What they did was a disgusting violation of privacy and completely immoral and irresponsible. They definitely deserve a punishment appropriate to the situation, but I don't think he would've killed himself if he felt as though he had the support of those who mattered to him.
There's something odd about our society when someone can be so distressed, when the truth of their sexuality becomes apparent, that their first reaction is to end their life. I can't imagine anyone would do this if they were straight and caught having sex... So yes, punish the voyeurs. But they're not the only problem here.

There's something strange when a society will destroy a person based on their sexuality. Loose women, libertine men, gay, and lesbians alike can all suffer from their private lives being broadcast on the internet without consent.
The only possible way for anyone to punish the defendants for the suicide would be Wrongful Death Claim. Which is a civil matter, and the preponderance of doubt is all that is needed. Could they prove that the persons who did the taping had a hand in the suicide, quiet possibly but that is up to the courts. Given this statement from Wikipedia, I think that it would be very possible to successfully sue for wrongful death.

Wrongful death is also the only recourse available when a company, not an individual, causes the death of a person; for example, historically, families have tried (both successfully and unsuccessfully) to sue tobacco companies for wrongful deaths of their customers.

>> ^Gallowflak:

Their actions didn't cause his suicide, he did. What they did was a disgusting violation of privacy and completely immoral and irresponsible. They definitely deserve a punishment appropriate to the situation, but I don't think he would've killed himself if he felt as though he had the support of those who mattered to him.
There's something odd about our society when someone can be so distressed, when the truth of their sexuality becomes apparent, that their first reaction is to end their life. I can't imagine anyone would do this if they were straight and caught having sex... So yes, punish the voyeurs. But they're not the only problem here.


There's something strange when a society will destroy a person based on their sexuality. Loose women, libertine men, gay, and lesbians alike can all suffer from their private lives being broadcast on the internet without consent.

The only possible way for anyone to punish the defendants for the suicide would be Wrongful Death Claim. Which is a civil matter, and the preponderance of doubt is all that is needed. Could they prove that the persons who did the taping had a hand in the suicide, quiet possibly but that is up to the courts. Given this statement from Wikipedia, I think that it would be very possible to successfully sue for wrongful death.

Wrongful death is also the only recourse available when a company, not an individual, causes the death of a person; for example, historically, families have tried (both successfully and unsuccessfully) to sue tobacco companies for wrongful deaths of their customers.

>> ^jimnms:

Their actions caused his suicide, they'll most likely be charged with manslaughter.


That's not how the justice system works. They'll be charged with whatever is provable in court, which, in this case is invasion of privacy like they said in the video.