|
|
Post by palealeman on Jul 4, 2018 20:17:26 GMT -5
RJ, that is something that probably needs to be decided at levels above us. But we use different standards for different purposes -- beyond a reasonable doubt vs a preponderance of evidence, e.g. Courts take into account a defendant's background in determining sentences. There are also reasons why charges aren't prosecuted, but the totality could influence certain decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by kemmer on Jul 5, 2018 0:25:18 GMT -5
I would say the thing he, and the other mass killers of strangers, have in common is an excess of self-esteem. There's a reason Pride is named the first of the Seven Deadly Sins. (That would be overweening pride, of course.) Let us remember that the public schools of America embraced the "self-esteem movement", teaching kindergartners to sing songs like: "I am special, just because I'm me." Public schools have, also, moved strongly against "bullying"-- to the point of defining bullying as "not wanting to be friends with somebody." We've done a lot to infect our children with toxic narcissism (yeah, and helicopter parents aren't blameless here, either, wanting their little darlings to provide them with bragging rights.) Could it be possible that these mass killers actually have a low self-esteem; feelings of exclusion, loneliness, and abandonment? They try to cope day to day by denying these feelings until an event occurs that causes their emptiness to surface and experience rage? Kind of like pure sodium dropping into water? That's entirely possible; it's hard to know a person's inner judgment of himself. Many highly successful people suffer from "imposter's syndrome", the certainty that they don't deserve the accolades, the corner office, the Nobel prize--and fear someday they'll be exposed for the ordinary folks they really are. (Obviously, I have a problem with the whole "self-esteem" movement. Did you know American students, who generally score poorly on international tests of math, tend to consider themselves excellent mathematicians. Asian students, who outscore everyone else, generally identify themselves as average, at best. Maybe, just maybe, believing you have to work hard to succeed leads to working hard to succeed?) In this case, the killer may have suffered a lifetime of abandonment. Our foster care system produces an abundance of children who get bounced around from house to house, without ever finding a secure home. They tend to have difficulty trusting others; often they fail to form the bonded relationships necessary to create stable marriages and families. Many fall into criminality, where the gang rules require only obedience and solidarity, with neither trust nor intimacy involved. They rarely, perhaps never, become mass killers of strangers (except with stray bullets, of course.) Maybe this knife-wielder failed to find a gang to take him in. I dunno. Fact is, most of these mass killers-- this one is an outlier, an anomaly-- tend to come from stable families, usually with two parents. They don't act in a sudden fit of rage. They plan. They write out their plans. They post their plans on social media. They BRAG about what they're planning to do. And then, if they don't off themselves in a blaze of "glory", their lawyers step up with the "He was bullied" excuse... intended to make their act appear justified? |
|
|
|
Post by kemmer on Jul 5, 2018 0:55:29 GMT -5
Another idea being pushed is to encourage the press to never publish the mass killers names or stories, it is not proposed to make this a law, but social pressure can be applied to news organizations who fail to comply. This supposedly could reduce the 30% or so copycat killings that regularly occur within 12 days of a mass killing. I would also encourage the news to use the least flattering terms to describe (not name) these deranged individuals. I agree. The press already "neglects" stories about suicides from major bridges. They do this because they know such stories lead to more suicides. Think about it. I'm sitting here in Baltimore. Do I need to be informed (via BREAKING NEWS! BREAKING NEWS! BREAKING NEWS!) that somewhere in Seattle a bunch of people were murdered? Should the story take up half of the local news, every night? Yeah, yeah, FEAR SELLS! Blood and gore keep us riveted, and, heck, who cares who wins my county's executive race? Then, three days later, the newsroom plays the released 911 tapes. What a surprise! People in an office or a school where gunshots are ringing out call 911. Whodathunk? And-- get this-- sometimes, they sound really, really scared. OMIGOD. What insights! I would have never known... Seriously, unless there's a question of response time, how is a 911 tape ever newsworthy? *sigh* Totally agree about using unflattering terms. Every time I hear a terrorist called a "lone wolf", I cringe. It's an insult to wolves. "Lone weasel" is a better term, or "lone swine". (We speak English, so we can insult swine without denigrating the noble and intelligent pigs. It's an unintended benefit we received from the Battle of Hastings.) |
|
|
|
Post by howarewegoingtopay on Jul 5, 2018 9:42:00 GMT -5
Another idea being pushed is to encourage the press to never publish the mass killers names or stories, it is not proposed to make this a law, but social pressure can be applied to news organizations who fail to comply. This supposedly could reduce the 30% or so copycat killings that regularly occur within 12 days of a mass killing. I would also encourage the news to use the least flattering terms to describe (not name) these deranged individuals. I agree. The press already "neglects" stories about suicides from major bridges. They do this because they know such stories lead to more suicides. Think about it. I'm sitting here in Baltimore. Do I need to be informed (via BREAKING NEWS! BREAKING NEWS! BREAKING NEWS!) that somewhere in Seattle a bunch of people were murdered? Should the story take up half of the local news, every night? Yeah, yeah, FEAR SELLS! Blood and gore keep us riveted, and, heck, who cares who wins my county's executive race? Then, three days later, the newsroom plays the released 911 tapes. What a surprise! People in an office or a school where gunshots are ringing out call 911. Whodathunk? And-- get this-- sometimes, they sound really, really scared. OMIGOD. What insights! I would have never known... Seriously, unless there's a question of response time, how is a 911 tape ever newsworthy? *sigh* Totally agree about using unflattering terms. Every time I hear a terrorist called a "lone wolf", I cringe. It's an insult to wolves. "Lone weasel" is a better term, or "lone swine". (We speak English, so we can insult swine without denigrating the noble and intelligent pigs. It's an unintended benefit we received from the Battle of Hastings.) Thanks for pointing out the (Blood and gore) point, that is pretty significant to our society as a whole. The media push sensationalism and give the impression that the entire country is participating. We now live in a time where every crazy act is published nation wide, and probably world wide, this causes stress in individuals and society. I personally never see any crime, I go to bed at 8, get up at 3, and the world is a peaceful place. I am sure that most of the country is this way. For 20 years I lived rural and never locked my doors, just in the last year I moved to the city so my daughter could go to a larger high school (with stories for that as well), and I do lock my doors, and have had minor items stolen at night if left out in the yard, but generally my neighborhood feels safe. Maybe it is time that the press is held accountable for its sensational bias, the problem is that it takes energy to protest, conservatives seem to lack that level of energy (or crazy I sometimes think). |
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Jul 5, 2018 10:14:01 GMT -5
Kemmer, et. al., I don't think self esteem enters into the picture too much. In my experience, most killers are sociopaths or psychopaths. They have little emotional connection to be any consequences.
I spent a lot of time working in prisons. I interviewed probably thousands of inmates over the course of my career. That's what I saw very frequently -- murderers who wondered why they were in prison when they hadn't really done anything wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 5, 2018 18:43:59 GMT -5
Kemmer, et. al., I don't think self esteem enters into the picture too much. In my experience, most killers are sociopaths or psychopaths. They have little emotional connection to be any consequences. I spent a lot of time working in prisons. I interviewed probably thousands of inmates over the course of my career. That's what I saw very frequently -- murderers who wondered why they were in prison when they hadn't really done anything wrong. How many of them spent most, or all of their childhood parked in front of a monitor, playing video games? How many of them were addicted to the violent wasteland of Hollywood movies? How many were reared in single parent households, where the parent was gone most of the time, either working to support them, or looking for a drug score, or out with boy or girl friends? |
|
|
|
Post by kemmer on Jul 5, 2018 22:25:24 GMT -5
Kemmer, et. al., I don't think self esteem enters into the picture too much. In my experience, most killers are sociopaths or psychopaths. They have little emotional connection to be any consequences. I spent a lot of time working in prisons. I interviewed probably thousands of inmates over the course of my career. That's what I saw very frequently -- murderers who wondered why they were in prison when they hadn't really done anything wrong. But isn't the psychopath at the top of the scale of self-esteem, having so much, other people are just objects in the environment? |
|
|
|
Post by kemmer on Jul 5, 2018 22:57:32 GMT -5
Thanks for pointing out the (Blood and gore) point, that is pretty significant to our society as a whole. The media push sensationalism and give the impression that the entire country is participating. We now live in a time where every crazy act is published nation wide, and probably world wide, this causes stress in individuals and society. I personally never see any crime, I go to bed at 8, get up at 3, and the world is a peaceful place. I am sure that most of the country is this way. For 20 years I lived rural and never locked my doors, just in the last year I moved to the city so my daughter could go to a larger high school (with stories for that as well), and I do lock my doors, and have had minor items stolen at night if left out in the yard, but generally my neighborhood feels safe. Maybe it is time that the press is held accountable for its sensational bias, the problem is that it takes energy to protest, conservatives seem to lack that level of energy (or crazy I sometimes think). I agree. There used to be a difference between "genuine" newspapers and supermarket tabloids-- not so much anymore. Network news provides, perhaps, ten minutes of real news in a half-hour broadcast. (I don't watch cable news, except for CSPAN.)I subscribe to the Wall Street Journal, but it gets thinner every year. One problem is Google and Facebook get all the advertising money-- and neither sends journalists into the field to find and write the stories. I would think copyright law could be better used. I note that academic journals manage to make their articles available only to subscribers--or people willing to crawl around the stacks of college libraries. The fact is, it costs a lot of money to place journalists all over the world, as all major news outlets used to do. As you point out, the sensationalism makes crime appear "normal." I believe this is a major factor in teens murdering their classmates. It's become "the kewl thing to do" for emotionally disturbed teens; the mainstream media has become a kind of dysfunctional peer pressure. Side note: Some years ago, I read a report of a study that showed people who watched a lot of television news judged the world as more dangerous and crime-ridden than it really is. People who did not had a more accurate estimation of crime. Second side note: Many years ago, a local television station filmed a bloodstain of a stabbing victim for the 11 o'clock news-- not the first time I'd seen pictures like that. I picked up the phone, called the station, and told them it was "tacky." Maybe we should do that. It doesn't require an organized "protest"-- after all, we have e-mail now. Just a thought. |
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 6, 2018 9:30:43 GMT -5
Thanks for pointing out the (Blood and gore) point, that is pretty significant to our society as a whole. The media push sensationalism and give the impression that the entire country is participating. We now live in a time where every crazy act is published nation wide, and probably world wide, this causes stress in individuals and society. I personally never see any crime, I go to bed at 8, get up at 3, and the world is a peaceful place. I am sure that most of the country is this way. For 20 years I lived rural and never locked my doors, just in the last year I moved to the city so my daughter could go to a larger high school (with stories for that as well), and I do lock my doors, and have had minor items stolen at night if left out in the yard, but generally my neighborhood feels safe. Maybe it is time that the press is held accountable for its sensational bias, the problem is that it takes energy to protest, conservatives seem to lack that level of energy (or crazy I sometimes think). I agree. There used to be a difference between "genuine" newspapers and supermarket tabloids-- not so much anymore. Network news provides, perhaps, ten minutes of real news in a half-hour broadcast. (I don't watch cable news, except for CSPAN.)I subscribe to the Wall Street Journal, but it gets thinner every year. One problem is Google and Facebook get all the advertising money-- and neither sends journalists into the field to find and write the stories. I would think copyright law could be better used. I note that academic journals manage to make their articles available only to subscribers--or people willing to crawl around the stacks of college libraries. The fact is, it costs a lot of money to place journalists all over the world, as all major news outlets used to do. As you point out, the sensationalism makes crime appear "normal." I believe this is a major factor in teens murdering their classmates. It's become "the kewl thing to do" for emotionally disturbed teens; the mainstream media has become a kind of dysfunctional peer pressure. Side note: Some years ago, I read a report of a study that showed people who watched a lot of television news judged the world as more dangerous and crime-ridden than it really is. People who did not had a more accurate estimation of crime. Second side note: Many years ago, a local television station filmed a bloodstain of a stabbing victim for the 11 o'clock news-- not the first time I'd seen pictures like that. I picked up the phone, called the station, and told them it was "tacky." Maybe we should do that. It doesn't require an organized "protest"-- after all, we have e-mail now. Just a thought. I still think that the inordinate amount of time people, especially kids, spend with video games, texting, and watching increasingly violent movies tends to disassociate them from reality. I think that people in general, and newer generations in particular, are becoming antisocial, because they don't have to actually talk to anyone, or associate with anyone face to face anymore. They can sit in their own little bubble, create their own worlds, and reality becomes a "societal construct" to them. For a tiny fraction, the ones that actually commit the heinous crimes, people they kill aren't real. Or they are video game creatures, that will arise again with a reboot. Sounds a bit strange for most of us, but that's how they act when they are caught. |
|
|
|
Post by howarewegoingtopay on Jul 14, 2018 12:17:26 GMT -5
My point, RJ, is that you seem fascinated with these mass murder stories. You post about them but never provide anything that could lead to a solution. But that's what unthinking partisans do == accept the regressive talking points and vomit them back. I agree that there's not much that can be done about stabbings. How abut this for shootings: require a permit, issued by either local or state police, before anyone can purchase any kind of firearm. The permit would be issued after a local/state and federal record check and could also look into things only known locally, e.g., like the claims brought against the Annapolis shooter. Sounds like a fairly common sense solution. Comments? Well it really isn't common sense, because commons sense would say that anyone intending murder would just get their weapon illegally. So how would you stop someone from getting an illegal gun? The same way we stop people from getting illegal drugs? That works well  |
|
|
|
Post by howarewegoingtopay on Jul 14, 2018 12:19:34 GMT -5
RJ,the NICS system is a compilation of what's reported by locals or states. A local/state check would pick up some things that are not reported nationally. A local search would have turned up more information on the Annapolis shooter, things that would never be in the national search. HAWGTP, the research on carry laws is mixed. You can make a case that open carry laws reduce violent crime, and also make a case that those same laws contribute to more violent crime. More research is needed. The problem I see with open carry is that it scares the heebee jeebees out of lefties and they tend to call the police when they see a gun. Concealed is much better because then the bad guy doesn't know who to shoot first. |
|
