Mass murder in California

Pretty much sums it up. In any group of primates (chimps, gorillas, humans) some will go ape-shit (no pun intended) and some won't. Obviously modern society is a little more complex, but our brain wiring is still the same. We evolved as primates over hundreds of thousands (even millions) of years but our current civilized society is very recent on a larger time scale.

The implication one gets from the Tumblr/Twitter feminists, is that ALL culture is "rape culture".

How do you fix THAT??

Awareness programs? Special classes?
Bullshit.
They want to ban porn, and water down TV and music.
Just like the religious puritans.
They're the same wolf under different colored wool.
Same old bullshit.

Like I said in post #348, it's Nazi book burning.
And it doesn't even accomplish its stated goal.
Never has.

Go after the crazies, and leave the rest of us the fuck alone.

Also, as a larger observation,....

Has anyone noticed how many fucking jails and looney bins we're having to build to get to utopia?

Never imagined utopia having so many fucking jails, but there they are...

Weird, huh?

You seem to be laboring under the impression that mass murderers would be impossible to identify, but as has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread, there were a number of signs that he had mental instability for years before he ever started killing people. That alone should have prevented him from being able to purchase guns.

Methinks the only reason you're so concerned about this is because you're incapable of telling the difference between "normal" and "abnormal" behavior. Paladin's right that it'll be impossible to spot them precisely, but knowing more than we currently do about such individuals can go a long way to stopping them, or at least reducing the number of their victims. Had someone spotted his YouTube video shortly after it went up, and recognized it not merely as the ravenings of a douchebag, but a definite indicator that he was going to harm someone (be it himself or others) soon, at least some of his victims might still be alive.

Even if in 99% of the cases where someone just as crazy and just as intent on killing people as this particular douche was, the authorities did nothing, until after he went on his spree, those 1% of the cases where they acted first, would save lives.

We're told that we've "got to be hyper-vigilant about Muslim extremists, because if we only stop 99% of them from killing people, that 1% of the time they succeed, it will be horrible!" yet proposing to do anything about just identifying people prone to violence is somehow seen by some folks as an effort to "grab guns." Neither extreme is necessary. Ever heard of Charles Whitman? Former Marine who "suddenly" went crazy one day, killed his family, then started shooting people at the University of Texas. He left a note asking that an autopsy be performed on his body after his death, because he knew there was "something wrong" with himself for him to have been acting in such a manner. The doctors found a brain tumor that potentially caused the behavioral problems that led to the massacre.

One wonders how many doctors have since decided to look for brain tumors in their patients who've complained of headaches since then. What if 1 out of a 1,000 of those people who had their tumors spotted would have been another Charles Whitman if the condition had been left untreated, or if the family hadn't been told that the condition could lead to violence? If it stopped even just one shooter, don't you think that it was worth the cost of the autopsy? Such exams certainly didn't require the violation of anyone's rights, and nobody had to be placed under police surveillance as a result of being treated for a brain tumor.

^Law enforcement is largely "reactive" Tucker and NOT "pro active".

And you are coming dangerously close to a VERY dangerous idea. Trying to validate something by saying more or less "if it saves only one life"

Again, you're ignoring the case of Charles Whitman. Nobody is suggesting that the first choice is to call the police, except you. What I, and other people in this thread are saying, is that by understanding Rogers there's a chance that future killers could be stopped. Perhaps there's specific neurological structures which can be identified in a brain scan that only people who're intent on going on killing sprees have, perhaps not. We won't know, unless we study him and people like him.

The alternative is to simply say, "Well, there's nothing we can do. Just have to let them go crazy and kill people." And if we're going to adopt that attitude about mass murderers, why not do the same about infectious disease? If you'll recall, back in the '80s, there were people saying that there was "nothing we can do about AIDS, so we should just lock them all up in 'leper colonies' to keep them from spreading the disease." Other people said, "No, let's study the disease and see if we can't figure out what causes it, how its spread, and if we can treat it." Not only has the second approach allowed people with AIDS to live longer lives, its also let to treatments for diseases other than AIDS and HIV. I'm advocating that we do something similar. You seem to think that I'm for the 'leper colony' idea. No doubt because you're worried, since the term "misogynist" is so often applied to you, that you'll get your guns taken away. As Paladin pointed out, all that Rogers misogyny did was give him a target for his gun. If we can find out what made him different than other misogynists, then we can save lives. That does not mean we have to put every misogynist under police surveillance. So you're safe. We just need to study as much as we can about him, and compare him to other mass murderers to see what kind of a pattern emerges.

^What makes you think there is any kind of pattern or anything to learn about him (and others).

In regards to myself. All I have is a single shotgun that my daughter fires more than I do.

You really don't understand how science works, do you? The only way to know if there's a pattern about Rogers and other mass murderers is to actually study them. Until you do that, you don't know dick about them. And there is always something to learn in such situations. Always. You might not learn how to stop a guy like Rogers, but you can find out things which enable emergency personnel to arrive on the scene faster, what kinds of things 911 dispatchers should listen for to let them know what kind of situation they're dealing with, or are there steps which people can take that will slow a shooter down?

Additionally, in the case of serial killers, by knowing the pattern of how they kill, its possible to identify their victims, as well as telling if the guy confessing to the crimes is telling the truth or just an attention seeking nutter.

I suggest you stand between her and the target the next time she takes it out.

But, again, this guy had all the markings of a sociopath and could memorize all the right things to say to the right people. As far as I can tell, he wrote that in his diary and didn't discuss that with his therapist......which oddly enough, that only works when the people in the sessions believe they have a problem. Sociopaths don't. My stepfather is a classic case that fooled us as well as his coworkers for years, amd he's a poor black Negro the The Man would be more than happy happy to lock away.

I can believe his parents knew he was off,but not the extent of it, especially if they wete off in their own world (the discussion of inattentive parents is a whole other can of worms).

It always amazes me how little some parents pay attention to their kids. I remember one of the Columbine killers' (don't remember which one) father saying he had no idea his son was making bombs in the garage.



You don't have to monitor your kids 24/7 to notice a little thing like that.

Liet that was the stupidest thing you've posted in quite a while.

Yeah the kid was a misogynist. So what?

He was also very mentally ill as we now know.

So was he a misogynist because he was a douchebag guy or was he a misogynist because he had a mental disease that prevented him from interacting with other humans properly?

There is a difference between the two which of course we can never answer which one the guy truly was.

That article you posted doesn't even mention his mental illness.

Nor does it mention that in essence he hated all humans, men and women, in his manifesto. It's just women took the top spot on the hate list.

No it won't.

Sorry. It will just serve as practice runs for the real thing.

In fact everyone will be top notch "Jack Bauer/Jason Bourne/Bryan Mills (guy from Taken)" like because they can practice in a holodeck until they've got it practically in their DNA on how to fight/shoot.

And someone like this killer isn't going to want to kill fake girls. He's going to want the real thing after a while.

You trap 'em in forever, and make 'em think it's real.
What, you think I hand 'em the holodeck, and go "play with this toy, I'm your pal!"?
Fuck that.

I've noticed.

The only way to get utopia is to eliminate anything that could be a problem. Which pretty much means everyone is going to the gulag or a mass grave.

You can't have utopia with 7 billion people. Nor 300 million, or a million. Hell I'd say even a thousand people would fail at making a utopia.

As long as humans are involved there will be no utopia. Life is going to be like Babylon 5 not Star Trek The Next Generation. But we may have some aspects of Star Trek technology like replicators. (which means more conflict)

There is only one way to make a utopia: BORG



But even that didn't work as evidenced by those crap Voyager episodes with rebellious Borg in the dream states.....

That requires you make holodecks in secret and never ever let the secret out.

*Covers the arch with a tarp*

As for the Columbine kids dad not knowing he was making bombs in the garage - maybe he thought he was filming a Caddy Shack II remake!

Every night after dinner I play a round of "instant action deathmatch" in Unreal Tournament. Kill 25 opponents fast as you can. Usually 4-5 minutes. I like to use the flak cannon at close range 'cause it blows them into mist.

Very theraputic.

Both of the Columbine killers very carefully and deliberately hid their murderous intentions with constant talk and planning for where they planned to go to college and what they hoped to study.

You can't know the mind of someone who truly does not want it known.

The building bombs in the garage tends to belie your statement of not being about to know someone's mind. If someone's talking about going to college, while at the same time constructing a large number of bombs, one needs to pay more attention to the bomb building behavior than they do the discussions about college. This should be obvious to even someone as dense as you.

You can thank the prison guard union for that:
http://www.npr.org/2009/08/13/111843426/folsom-embodies-californias-prison-blues

Don't forget about for-profit prison companies like Corrections Corporation of America.

Ummmm.....

While yeah prison unions and private prison companies are hot for more inmates nothing either of you posted has anything to do with Diacanu's point that to get to utopia you have to eliminate almost everyone in one way or the other.

Or more cynically, so we can all try to point fingers at whatever group we already don't like and want to blame for something else horrible.

Now this to me is ironic: blacks are imprisoned longer/more frequently than whites. Yet here in Georgia the majority of the prison staff (from guards to administrators/managers) is black. So are they "Uncle Toms" or just trying to do an honest days work? I choose the latter.

OMG!

OMGx 2

And perhaps if more folks realized that kids who build large numbers of bombs might be up to something more serious than a "little fun," folks would be less likely to overlook such things.