Charleston Church Shooting: 9 Killed in What Officials Call a Hate Crime

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by rob666

I know you didn't, but if you go in the conspiracy action there there's a whole slew of people that get irate of you try to question it at all

I dunno, it just seems like there are a lot of people out there, alex jones is only one, promoting ideas they know are bullshit to make a buck.
They're creating a lot of dangerous people in the process IMHO.

Just like you mention, the obsession, then they feel threatened, then they act on it.

Yea, unfortunately, like i've been trying to point out. People on ALL sides are to busy trying to push an agenda, expose a conspiracy, or create a disgruntle all while totally ignore the real problems.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by cortdb

thanks for this post man. I live a couple hours from this and I fucking hate the fact that this didnt get ANY national attention. For fucks sake they kept this woman in a trash can and made her perform oral sex on them and tried to kill her with drain cleaner.

It is fucked up when you pay attention to what makes national news and what doesn't.

And these days it seems when the mainstream media hear about a horrible crime. The determining factor on whether it's important or not is the races involved, and which person of what race did what.
Black person walks up and shoots a Asian person no story.
White person shoots a black person, send the news van to his house for prime time interviews.

[rob666]

Originally Posted by niknik

It is fucked up when you pay attention to what makes national news and what doesn't.

And these days it seems when the mainstream media hear about a horrible crime. The determining factor on whether it's important or not is the races involved, and which person of what race did what.
Black person walks up and shoots a Asian person no story.
White person shoots a black person, send the news van to his house for prime time interviews.

And how many times have you been on here parroting what you've heard about minorities taking over? About non Christians taking over? I've read more of that garbage out of you than just about anyone else still here.

[CrunchyCripple]

Originally Posted by niknik

It is fucked up when you pay attention to what makes national news and what doesn't.

And these days it seems when the mainstream media hear about a horrible crime. The determining factor on whether it's important or not is the races involved, and which person of what race did what.
Black person walks up and shoots a Asian person no story.
White person shoots a black person, send the news van to his house for prime time interviews.

Try and tell people the same thing about Pit Bull attack being reported on, but not other breeds mixes, and you'll be told it's bullshit and that the breed is unstable.

Media loves to twist things around and paint a very specific and skewed picture. People only notice, when they belong to the skewed group/topic.

[rob666]

Originally Posted by CrunchyCripple

Try and tell people the same thing about Pit Bull attack being reported on, but not other breeds mixes, and you'll be told it's bullshit and that the breed is unstable.

Media loves to twist things around and paint a very specific and skewed picture. People only notice, when they belong to the skewed group/topic.

Well, when 75% of attacks are attributed to 2 breeds of dog..........

[Azimuth]

Originally Posted by TheVrist

I'd fry him either way. Point isn't rather he should be excused for his actions at all. Point is, the media focus applying yet another stigma to an already diminishing social standing.

racist or not, mentally healthy people don't sit around doing drugs and plotting mass murders.

I didn't read any of the essays in this thread, my comment wasn't a comment about/to any of them. Just my opinion.

This is another opinion--(But I don't think anyone who has ever successfully used the insanity defense was doing so to excuse their actions. It was the REASON, not the EXCUSE.) You know what I mean?

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by azimuth

I didn't read any of the essays in this thread, my comment wasn't a comment about/to any of them. Just my opinion.

This is another opinion--(But I don't think anyone who has ever successfully used the insanity defense was doing so to excuse their actions. It was the REASON, not the EXCUSE.) You know what I mean?

Insanity pleas were not to excuse, or to find grounds of cause. the pleas were in place to determine a fair trial.

If he was deemed insane at the time of the incident, then he couldn't with a clear mind take part in a defense.

In history, quite a number of cases were lost to the state by plea of temporary insanity, and or full onset insanity.

[Azimuth]

Originally Posted by TheVrist

Insanity pleas were not to excuse, or to find grounds of cause. the pleas were in place to determine a fair trial.

If he was deemed insane at the time of the incident, then he couldn't with a clear mind take part in a defense.

In history, quite a number of cases were lost to the state by plea of temporary insanity, and or full onset insanity.

I am so dumb sometimes, I embarrass myself. This has been one of those times, well, the last couple of days has been. I think I may have had a stroke.

[OhJstFkOffAlrdy]

Originally Posted by TheVrist

Insanity pleas were not to excuse, or to find grounds of cause. the pleas were in place to determine a fair trial.

If he was deemed insane at the time of the incident, then he couldn't with a clear mind take part in a defense.

In history, quite a number of cases were lost to the state by plea of temporary insanity, and or full onset insanity.

What a lot of people also fail to realize is that many states require that any defendant entering an NGRI plea must be remanded into the custody of an inpatient psychiatric facility for a predetermined amount of time so that pre-trial rehabilitation may be attempted in the hopes of re-establishing the defendant's competency. If after such time the defendant has not been successfully rehabilitated, then they are often sentenced to remain there.

That's what happened to a Thibodaux man man who decapitated his disabled son and was standing on his front porch looking at the head laying in the driveway when the cops showed up.

[OhJstFkOffAlrdy]

Originally Posted by TheVrist

A suicide bomber that has lived the idealised way yes, and American recently converted one that completely lives outside of the idealistic doctrines of muslims all together, NO

Which in the case of the few "lone wolves" in america, most were found to be heavy alcoholics, drug users, and so forth. That just suggest they too became obsessed on a particular driving point.

The sandy hook guy himself became so obsessed with mass shooting, it became emotionally moving to act out the events. Something both psychopaths, and sociopaths both do when they "cross the line" they simply chase that high.

The manifestation is when they bump into a subject, an event that gives a slight emotional pulse, even anger is a high for them, they follow it, obsessively seeking more. It's like some guy fapping to porn, eventually seeing a couple do boring softcore shit, they click on more aggressive porn link, the new act makes them blow an amazing load, so they will exclusively watch that till the same cycle starts again. yes, I know a huge difference in comparisons, but I know you can relate, since you're at shemale porn level

Adam Lanza was also very autistic. To me, that sets him apart from the others in that it wasn't just a personality or emotional disorder that predisposed him so heavily to his actions. In terms of socially crippling effects, autism trumps bipolar and narcissism any day of the week. Even psychopaths have it better, since they're at least able to feign empathy and can fully process social cues. That's not to say that cognitive and emotional developmental impairments are strong predictors of future violent behavior, but the social detriment that autism imposes removes the subject's options for integration by limiting their actual neurological capacity in ways that personality and mood disorders do not. One could argue that simply anti-social or psychopathic individuals can at least try to forge social connections, or at the very least rationally internalize the need and social acceptability of things like guilt and empathy to the point that an awareness of society's expectations of them can produce socially acceptable behavior even in the absence of a hard-wired or visceral motivations.

In other words, assuming that the capacity to read and understand social situations is present to at least a normal degree, then enlightened self-interest and awareness of the nature of social landscapes can produce in psychopaths and narcissists and the like behavior that approximates that of socially well-adjusted individuals even in the absence of the types of "hard-wired" feelings and emotions that make normal people the naturally social creatures that they are. Lacking the capacity for such situational awareness, autistics often do not have that option. It could be argued that were it not for his disability, Mr. Lanza would not have been so affected by environmental factors to the degree that he was.

Reliable reports show a trend of un-fundamental behavior among a lot of jihadists, especially the sleeper cell types that operate outside of the Middle East and within less repressive countries. If I remember correctly, most of the so-called Magnificent 19 were fond of things like gambling and booze and strippers. Some forms of radical Islam even allow for the pursuit and consumption of such vices if it occurs within a certain amount of time relative to the jihadist's actual martyrdom. So it's not so much about whether or not a "lone wolf" type is able to toe a dogmatic line; it's about what they use to rationalize their actions. Even the bad guys like to think that they're the good guys, and that need will drive a person to latch on to a cause that they consider "noble" or "just." This is especially true of narcissists and psychopaths as they are both high incapable of relating to or empathizing with others to the degree required to understand and respect the sovereignty of individuals aside from themselves; so naturally they will by way of self-righteousness assume that the cause is more important than the rights of others because they themselves believe in it. Choosing a cause which they perceive to be as requiring avenging as a means of defense only further reinforces that delusion. It could be the defense of religion (Nidal Hassan), the defense of race (Dylan Roof), the defense of liberty (Timothy McVeigh), the defense of the ostracized (Tseung-Hui Cho), et cetera, but in such cases the offender champions a cause or group that harbors victims of its own and thus is merely balancing the equation when he victimizes those whom he perceives as being on the opposing side.

Very rarely will spree killers simply say, "I just wanted to kill a whole bunch of people because it's a rush." They'll even point to their own perceived victimization (Harris & Klebold) as justification before they'll admit such a simple truth. Mental gymnastics often abound. Sometimes persecution complexes and even schizophrenic delusions of being somehow attacked or influenced by forces unseen (Aaron Alexis) play a part (although the latter is, counter-intuitively enough, by itself a very poor predictor of future violence). There are a few who will cop to doing it because they thought it would be funny, or because they wanted to get off on it, or because they just wanted to be world-class assholes, or because it was very much personal between them and a group of victims known to them (all apply to T.J. Lane, who qualifies as a mass shooter despite his relatively low body count), but that's usually more of the logic that drives serial killers who keep their per-incident victim count low and accumulate their atrocitities over long periods of time as opposed to rampagers who just explode all at once in spectacular fashion.

Again, anger is the fuel and obsession is what leads to de facto rationalization. All three are required to push a person who is naturally predisposed into undertaking the mass murder of strangers, and environmental factors perceived to be channelling them along that course are usually also present.