Elementary School Shooting

[Guest]

I think it's more likely that he had an UNtreated mental illness, and find your comment offensive and inappropriate for this thread.

[Wingnut]

I think it's more likely that he had an UNtreated mental illness, and find your comment offensive and inappropriate for this thread.

Agreed, on both counts.

[Backroads]

If indeed the shooter was one of the student's fathers... I can't describe the pain and sorrow I feel for his family.

Scratch that: I feel pain and sorrow for his family no matter who he is. There are no victors here.

[Wingnut]

If indeed the shooter was one of the student's fathers... I can't describe the pain and sorrow I feel for his family.

I'm actually reading updates right now that say that the shooter was the son of of one of the teachers, and that he drove all the way from NJ to the school. There was also a body found at his home in NJ.

[Backroads]

I'm actually reading updates right now that say that the shooter was the son of of one of the teachers, and that he drove all the way from NJ to the school. There was also a body found at his home in NJ.

How incredibly awful.

[NeuroTypical]

Police were questioning another man but are not calling him a suspect, a source with knowledge of the investigation told CNN.

Ok. Sounds like no 2nd shooter on the loose. That's good.

[Wingnut]

Ok. Sounds like no 2nd shooter on the loose. That's good.

I read that they had a second suspect in custody that was being questioned for possible connections, not that he was on the loose.

[NeuroTypical]

Folks, it's in our nature to start guessing as to causes, and shoulds and shouldn'ts. We'll argue this one for a long time. Just remember that right now we're all in shock and hurting.

Also remember this:

3. Personal attacks, name calling, flaming, and judgments against other members will not be tolerated.

4. No bickering and nit-picking toward others. Realize that sometimes it is very difficult to be able to express how one feels through written words. Please be courteous and ask for a further explanation, rather then trying to attack and find holes in someone else's post.

[NeuroTypical]

I read that they had a second suspect in custody that was being questioned for possible connections, not that he was on the loose.

If the police did not shoot the bad guy, and he did not shoot himself, I would guess someone else stopped him. If that is the case, the person who stopped the shooter would be in custody being questioned.

[Vort]

I think it's more likely that he had an UNtreated mental illness, and find your comment offensive and inappropriate for this thread.

I took his comments differently and found myself wondering if they might be true. I am shocked at the overabundance of psychoactive drug use in our society. I have shared my own experience of being misdiagnosed as "adult ADHD" followed by several months of psychoactive prescription drug use (primarily amphetamine), until finally being re-diagnosed as not being adult ADHD, but suffering from sleep apnea.

These days, the diagnosis du jour appears to be "bipolar disorder", which I understand is the same condition that was called "manic depression" when I was a child. I find it odd and more than a little suspicious how the worldwide rate of this debilitating mental disorder is 2.2%, or more than one in fifty. Just imagine if the rate of Tay-Sachs disease or rheumatoid arthritis were that high. Evolutionarily speaking, it seems extremely unlikely. I find it even more odd and frankly shocking that the bipolar rate in the US is 4.2% -- nearly twice the worldwide rate! (By comparison, India has a diagnosed rate of 0.1%.)

Are Americans really twice as likely to be bipolar as anyone else? Perhaps. Or perhaps this statistic is a symptom of the overdiagnosis of certain conditions -- ADHD, bipolar, perhaps Asperger's Syndrome, and so forth -- that achieve a certain pop culture status. When such "trendy" diseases are routinely treated with psychoactive medication, the very real probability occurs that many people are running around overmedicated or inappropriately medicated. We all cringe at crimes committed by meth addicts, but what about when we create the meth addicts?

Anyway, this is what I understood Traveler to be suggesting. If I am correct, then the same thought often occurs to me in such situations. Though in this particular situation, I am pretty much plugging my ears and singing to myself to drown out the insanity-provoking news of such an unthinkable atrocity. That's what it is, unthinkable, and I don't care to think about it. La, la, la.

[selek]

I agree this is most sad.

I believe and am concerned that death is not the worse threat to our children. Nor do I believe that the evil crazed mind that murders children is likely to be the predator most likely to harm the most of our children.

Sadly I will not be surprised to learn that the shooter had previous and known mental problems has been treated by mood altering drugs that are so popular in our culture for fix such things.

The Traveler

I think it's more likely that he had an UNtreated mental illness, and find your comment offensive and inappropriate for this thread.

There is, in my opinion, an unfortunate tendency in our society to pathologize crime.

It is easier to dismiss evil acts as the result of unbalanced minds rather than to simply acknowledge that some people are simply, irredeemably evil.

To my mind, to define anything act we cannot comprehend as mental illness is intrinsically unhealthy, in and of itself.

As Vort pointed out, there are a startling number of people being treated with psychoactive drugs.

"Bipolar" is one of the current watchwords. Less than a decade ago, it was "ADHD".

It seems to me that, as part of the unhealthy trend to pathologize evil (and thus, to excuse it), that the mental health community goes through various "fads".

As evidence, one can recall the sudden rash of philandering politicians who were suddenly diagnosed as "sex addicts" in the wake of the Clinton impeachment.

It wasn't their fault, you see, that they couldn't keep their pants zipped. They were addicts. It wasn't poor moral character and access to power and easy women. It was illness that made them chase skirts.

In any case, I agree with both Traveler and Eowyn (and with Vort).

It is simply too early to speculate whether the shooter(s?) were mentally ill- or merely evil.

I did find one contrast particularly interesting:

The Fox News anchorette interviewed their on-call psychologist, who immediately jumped to the mental illness angle (not surprising). He stated that this situation was at least partly societies fault because we do not spend enough money on mental health (no conflict of interest, there) and lack the legal power and authority to detain and interrogate people who say questionable things.

He was absolutely certain that- in hindsight- those closest to the shooter would find clues that indicated that the man was not-right-in-the-head and that had they acted, this tragedy could have been prevented.

I have a lot of issues with that line of reasoning- not the least of which is that hindsight is always 20/20.

Contrast that with the former FBI agent whom she interviewed next. When asked how he could reconcile such heinous acts, the former agent replied (and I'm paraphrasing here), "There's evil in the world. Get used to it."

Having stood the long watches of the night to separate the sleeping citizen from the wolves in, I am more inclined to agree with the latter than the former.

Edited December 14, 2012 by selek

[Guest]

I understand the opinion and agree to a degree, but do you think a thread where we're mourning something awful happening is a place for that kind of soap box?

[selek]

I understand the opinion and agree to a degree, but do you think a thread where we're mourning something awful happening is a place for that kind of soap box?

I'm sorry- I wasn't the one who preremptorily announced that certain opinions were inappropriate, invalid, and illegitimate.

How silly of me to try and defuse a tense situation by showing that both sides of the coin have legitimate concerns.

What could I have been thinking by pointing out that a rush to judgement- either of the mental health of the shooters or of the motives of friends with whom we disagree- is premature, at best.

Edited December 14, 2012 by selek

[Backroads]

I motion we save speculation and discussion on just what made this man tick for a later time.

[selek]

I motion we save speculation and discussion on just what made this man tick for a later time.

Second.

All in favor?

[Vort]

I understand the opinion and agree to a degree, but do you think a thread where we're mourning something awful happening is a place for that kind of soap box?

I don't know, Eowyn. Maybe. You probably haven't noticed, but sometimes I say or do things that other people consider inappropriate, and sometimes other people say or do things I consider inappropriate. In some ways, it would be nice if we all operated under the same rulebook so that such offense is never given.

[Guest]

Second.

All in favor?

That's all I was saying.

[MarginOfError]

I'm sorry, I know this isn't a good place or time for soap boxes, but some of this is just wrong.

It's wrong to flat out demonize the shooter in this case. It's wrong to paint him as a vicious monster and ignore any context from the rest of his life.

Sane and healthy people with proper support networks and loving relationships don't do these things. Something beyond the normal life has to happen to cause someone to stray that far from the light of Christ. It may be anger, depression, insanity, or abuse... We don't know what this man's struggles were.

I think it's important that we remember that 27 people died to day. Not 26 people and a monster. 27 people. One of those people is in greater need of the Atonement than any of us, or any of the other 26. One of those people is going to feel more shame and sorrow than any of us, or any of the other 26. But I say with all the confidence I can muster that Christ will, without judgment, embrace 27 souls today. While I understand it will be difficult for the families of those affected to hold the same attitude (nor do I expect them to), more of humanity needs to learn to recognize the divine worth of all 27 of those souls.

[NeuroTypical]

Breaking news - shooter's mother was a kindergarten teacher, and one of those killed. As was his brother.

Monsters exist, but we don't have enough info to tell if the shooter was one or not. (Actually, we fallible, error-prone humans often lack the tools and data to ever cast righteous judgement one way or the other.)

[selek]

Moe, I agree with everything you said except for the following two points:

Sane and healthy people with proper support networks and loving relationships don't do these things. Something beyond the normal life has to happen to cause someone to stray that far from the light of Christ. It may be anger, depression, insanity, or abuse...

Nonsense. Sane, rational people commit violent crimes every day. The murders in Connecticut are an extreme example, but it is not without precedent.

Children from good homes and good families choose evil over good every day of the week.

More to the point, however, with this statement, you are both begging the question and contradicting yourself.

Withholding judgement means not condemning him without the facts. It also means not absolving him of responsibility without the facts.

You are correct when you say that we don't know what this man's struggles were.

To acknowledge that and yet turn around and speculate that he must have been the victim of mental illness, of anger, depression, and/or abuse is to speculate ahead of your facts.

But I say with all the confidence I can muster that Christ will, without judgment, embrace 27 souls today.

I suppose that depends upon what you mean by "embrace", doesn't it?

If this man was truly insane, then he bears no responsibility for his crime. There was no sin because there was no agency. He will be welcomed as yet another victim of this tragedy.

If, on the other hand, he was sane and cognizant of his actions, then he bears the taint of his actions.

For you to assume that he will be welcomed "without judgement" is to assume that he bears no responsibility for his crimes- an assertion not anywhere in evidence.

For you to assume that he is but another victim in this tragedy is to assume that he was not responsible- again, an assertion without any evidence behind it.

I also find the "without judgement" qualifier to be counter-scriptural, at best-.

We are taught quite explicitly and clearly in Scripture that 1) we cannot be saved in our sins, and 2) that no unclean thing can enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

Finally, we are taught that Christ is our penultimate judge and advocate.

If by "embrace", you mean "welcome him, weep with him, and try to comfort him", then I can agree.

If by "embrace", you mean "welcome him without judgement and with forgiveness and sanction" then you are presuming... much.

While we don't know his heart, his mind, or the state of his soul, Christ as our Lord, Savior, advocate, and judge does know.

And this man will be judged by Christ, accordingly.

Perhaps it would be best that- as you insist that we not judge the man- that you practice some of that restraint yourself.

Edited December 14, 2012 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[HoosierGuy]

It's always the innocent people that get wiped out in these massacres. Always the innocent people. Never the ones that do real harm to the country. If those in the ivory towers were subject to the same random massacres the every day people face everyone would be for tighter gun control.

[Vort]

Oh, brother.

[annewandering]

It's always the innocent people that get wiped out in these massacres. Always the innocent people. Never the ones that do real harm to the country. If those in the ivory towers were subject to the same random massacres the every day people face everyone would be for tighter gun control.

That is a horrible idea. I thought the idea was to become more civilized not less.

[NeuroTypical]

No really people. Site rules.

We're just deleting violations right now. We're going to start issuing infractions and closing the thread soon.

Keep it civil, or don't click the post button.

[Vort]

No really people. Site rules.

We're just deleting violations right now. We're going to start issuing infractions and closing the thread soon.

Keep it civil, or don't click the post button.

Huh. And I'm not a part of it.

Will wonders never cease?