[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by Metal Mike ↗

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.

Yeah, well this is where the fine line that use to separate a sociopathic serial killer, and a mass psychopathic killer has finally been blurred to the point of failed definition.

In the mid to late 90s, they used to have clear definition of a sociopath, and a psychopath. They were completely different mindset, and easily identified as being different.

Sociopaths, were cunning, manipulative, highly intelligent, OCD, antisocial but pleasantly quiet, and well mannered, they are very dominant, but will subdue to authority figures. They could easily adopt social skills, and possessed in appearance of self worth. they could complete task, become successful in marriages and even careers. they just simply lacked emotion, empathy for others, and had a hard time emotionally connecting with anything. But for most part they were very well connected with reality. They just didn't "feel" the wrong in their doing.

The psychopaths were complete opposites in terms of their personas. Most show very little self worth, antisocial , but only for most part because they couldn't keep friends because of erratic behavior. They were often time doing things that would be considered dumb. They refused to conform to any rules, or authority figures, and never really being able to focus or complete a task. They often found themselves in sticky situations and for them, they would often do things without "consciously" realizing they did things, or why. They were able to have empathy, and even emotions, problem with them was their emotions would send them into fits of rage, and cause them to do what we consider stupid shit. They usually are attracted to causes that are outside of social standards, are that targets another group of people. They usually are obsessive over certain events, or groups.

Now on to the killers. because BOTH could easily live a full life term, and never commit any crime.

Sociopathic killers.
When a sociopath commit the act of murder, he still applied all of the natural standards that defines a sociopath. They are very articulate on their targets, often taking part in a ritualized hunt. They would connect with the victim, long before they would ever meet. The actual killing are very precise, and with every intention of never getting caught. The purpose for the killing is an emotional augmentation to the act. If it is dominance, then the victims will experience a dominant role by the killer before meeting their own fate. But overall, the sociopath is very well connected with what he is doing.

psychopath's killing match their same definition. It is imprecise, never really planned, but often fantasized. They would dwell on the idea of the act, and even play out the role of doing the act over and over, most of the plans if ever laid out matched their intellectual level. So very few psychopaths expressed very well predetermined plans, many of which looked like a 10 year old playing with crayons. Often times they would marvel themselves a hero, a super villain, or some sort of justice seeker while they live inside their fantasies. When the fantasy finally surface, and becomes reality, it almost never pans out the way the planned, most will report not even realizing that they were actually in the act of their fantasy in reality. So for most part, they still assume WHILE doing it, they still think they are just living it out in their head.

Then there are the ones that simply snapped from an emotional outburst, reacting in such an unplanned way that they follow through with it. But again, they usually report episodes of not knowing if they are dreaming, or actually doing.

So this brings us to the millennium time where they started muddling the definitions. Remember I said in a prior thread how they started to try and shift the idea of leaders being sociopaths. Well that is in part true. Many presidents, and other leaders started showing classic signs of what they called "sophisticated sociopathic behavior" That didn't sit well because people like charles manson was also labeled that

In the late 70s, and 80s, the judicial system ruled out sociopaths as being clinically insane, keeping them from being able to enter a plea of insanity in the courts. That still left psychopaths with the option though, so well into the mid 90s, and into the millennium there were efforts to do away with the insanity pleas. But the only way to do that was to redefine the sociopath, and psychopath to virtually be the same. It was killing two birds with one stone, they started swaying the whole "sociopath" stigma from our own leaders, and started labeling psychopaths with sociopath tags, so that they couldn't enter a plea of insanity.

In the case of this Guy, he shows all implications of a classic psychopath. His plans were not to just kill black people, he just fantasized on killing period. He was just a week prior, drinking vodka with his black friend and was expressing his fantasy to shoot up a MALL. not a church, with black people. What he did was never planned with the so called cause behind it. It most likely was something that evolved into his fantasy. His ability to control what was inevitable to happen depreciated as it got closer to the act. Friends report his moods to be constantly shifting, he would be one minute true to his black friends, the next going into racial hate fits. Not to mention the booze, and drugs, were most likely enhancing his lack of control.

Needless to say, he snapped. I am sure once reality sets in, he will be just like the rest of the mass shooters, and his whole demeanor and outlook on things will dramatically change. I mean we all knew what the theater dude looked like his first week

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by Metal Mike ↗

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.

I think in legal terms, it has gotten to that point. However the shift did change in the mid 80s, to 90s, because people who entered a successful plea of insanity, often times ended of eventually got a clear bill, and released back into society.

So many suits were filed for unconstitutional rights being broken, keeping seemingly sane people behind "medical bars" that they just wanted to diminish the possibility for insanity pleas. i mean it IS logical just to adjudicate a nutcase guilty, sentence him to life, if he becomes sane he has no way out

[monkeywrench]

Idiot wont last 3 days in the slammer and he looks a little soft, so he best get ready to face the masses in the clinker

[OhJstFkOffAlrdy]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Yeah, well this is where the fine line that use to separate a sociopathic serial killer, and a mass psychopathic killer has finally been blurred to the point of failed definition.

In the mid to late 90s, they used to have clear definition of a sociopath, and a psychopath. They were completely different mindset, and easily identified as being different.

Sociopaths, were cunning, manipulative, highly intelligent, OCD, antisocial but pleasantly quiet, and well mannered, they are very dominant, but will subdue to authority figures. They could easily adopt social skills, and possessed in appearance of self worth. they could complete task, become successful in marriages and even careers. they just simply lacked emotion, empathy for others, and had a hard time emotionally connecting with anything. But for most part they were very well connected with reality. They just didn't "feel" the wrong in their doing.

The psychopaths were complete opposites in terms of their personas. Most show very little self worth, antisocial , but only for most part because they couldn't keep friends because of erratic behavior. They were often time doing things that would be considered dumb. They refused to conform to any rules, or authority figures, and never really being able to focus or complete a task. They often found themselves in sticky situations and for them, they would often do things without "consciously" realizing they did things, or why. They were able to have empathy, and even emotions, problem with them was their emotions would send them into fits of rage, and cause them to do what we consider stupid shit. They usually are attracted to causes that are outside of social standards, are that targets another group of people. They usually are obsessive over certain events, or groups.

The shift was probably the result of the discipline's realization that it was reading comorbidity all wrong. Perceptions of self-worth, for example, are influenced by a completely different set of pathologies than psychopathy/sociopathy. Similarly: mania, bi-polar disorder, clinical depression, and other such mood disorders that operate along different channels. The psychopath as you described above reads as more manic than anything else given the prominence of impulsive, risky, thoughtless behavior. It's possible for someone to hate themselves yet still feel indestructible and on top of the world during a manic episode. And singular obsessions can easily be the product of a dismal world view that excludes a desire for experiences and pursuits which would take time away from said singular obsessions; chronic depressives and those who suffer anxiety are known to fixate on their fears in what amounts to a vicious cycle that has a very deleterious effect on their cognition of things as they really are.

It's never just a single disorder that drives mass shooters. "Crazy" is usually a very complex quilt of personal demons.

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Now on to the killers. because BOTH could easily live a full life term, and never commit any crime.

Sociopathic killers.
When a sociopath commit the act of murder, he still applied all of the natural standards that defines a sociopath. They are very articulate on their targets, often taking part in a ritualized hunt. They would connect with the victim, long before they would ever meet. The actual killing are very precise, and with every intention of never getting caught. The purpose for the killing is an emotional augmentation to the act. If it is dominance, then the victims will experience a dominant role by the killer before meeting their own fate. But overall, the sociopath is very well connected with what he is doing.

Not every sociopath kills that way. Some work for the mob and figure that the guy must've done something to deserve what they're doing to him. Others break into a man's house in the middle of the night and then kill him out of indignation that he could have possibly had the gall to defend himself and his home. They're not all Gacys and Dahmers and Fish, oh my.

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

psychopath's killing match their same definition. It is imprecise, never really planned, but often fantasized. They would dwell on the idea of the act, and even play out the role of doing the act over and over, most of the plans if ever laid out matched their intellectual level. So very few psychopaths expressed very well predetermined plans, many of which looked like a 10 year old playing with crayons. Often times they would marvel themselves a hero, a super villain, or some sort of justice seeker while they live inside their fantasies. When the fantasy finally surface, and becomes reality, it almost never pans out the way the planned, most will report not even realizing that they were actually in the act of their fantasy in reality. So for most part, they still assume WHILE doing it, they still think they are just living it out in their head.

That's why so many witnesses report either blank stares or elated smiles on the faces of mass shooters (at least the ones who didn't wear gas masks): they're either convinced that they're watching a head movie, or they're convinced that this is what God must feel like. But remember, mania and narcissism each have similar cognitive and emotional aspects to them. I'm convinced that it's never just one disorder or one gene.

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Then there are the ones that simply snapped from an emotional outburst, reacting in such an unplanned way that they follow through with it. But again, they usually report episodes of not knowing if they are dreaming, or actually doing.

And countless healthy, sane, rational people do this very same thing with similar recollection after the fact when environmental stressors interact with their temperament and perceptions. Usually in such cases, it's a very unfortunate string of catastrophically-timed setbacks, frustrations, kicks in the nuts, et cetera.

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

So this brings us to the millennium time where they started muddling the definitions. Remember I said in a prior thread how they started to try and shift the idea of leaders being sociopaths. Well that is in part true. Many presidents, and other leaders started showing classic signs of what they called "sophisticated sociopathic behavior" That didn't sit well because people like charles manson was also labeled that

In the late 70s, and 80s, the judicial system ruled out sociopaths as being clinically insane, keeping them from being able to enter a plea of insanity in the courts. That still left psychopaths with the option though, so well into the mid 90s, and into the millennium there were efforts to do away with the insanity pleas. But the only way to do that was to redefine the sociopath, and psychopath to virtually be the same. It was killing two birds with one stone, they started swaying the whole "sociopath" stigma from our own leaders, and started labeling psychopaths with sociopath tags, so that they couldn't enter a plea of insanity.

This is exactly why laws and precedents applying to NGRI pleas are careful to illustrate the understanding that simple moral depravity is not enough to fulfill the criteria. Too many sociopaths were "walking" because of the absence of empathy being perceived as innate. The sad part is that such a standard does not apply to pleas of debilitating "affluenza."

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

In the case of this Guy, he shows all implications of a classic psychopath. His plans were not to just kill black people, he just fantasized on killing period. He was just a week prior, drinking vodka with his black friend and was expressing his fantasy to shoot up a MALL. not a church, with black people. What he did was never planned with the so called cause behind it. It most likely was something that evolved into his fantasy. His ability to control what was inevitable to happen depreciated as it got closer to the act. Friends report his moods to be constantly shifting, he would be one minute true to his black friends, the next going into racial hate fits. Not to mention the booze, and drugs, were most likely enhancing his lack of control.

Needless to say, he snapped. I am sure once reality sets in, he will be just like the rest of the mass shooters, and his whole demeanor and outlook on things will dramatically change. I mean we all knew what the theater dude looked like his first week

I think any racial tendencies he had were an extension of his propensity towards and affinity for hatred in general. Just like you described in your porn analogy, one flavor all the time gets boring and people sometimes feel the need to push the envelope in different directions.

[OhJstFkOffAlrdy]

Originally Posted by monkeywrench ↗

Idiot wont last 3 days in the slammer and he looks a little soft, so he best get ready to face the masses in the clinker

He's years away from general population, if that's even in his future at all. Chances are he'll never see an actual pod.

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by Metal Mike ↗

The shift was probably the result of the discipline's realization that it was reading comorbidity all wrong. Perceptions of self-worth, for example, are influenced by a completely different set of pathologies than psychopathy/sociopathy. Similarly: mania, bi-polar disorder, clinical depression, and other such mood disorders that operate along different channels. The psychopath as you described above reads as more manic than anything else given the prominence of impulsive, risky, thoughtless behavior. It's possible for someone to hate themselves yet still feel indestructible and on top of the world during a manic episode. And singular obsessions can easily be the product of a dismal world view that excludes a desire for experiences and pursuits which would take time away from said singular obsessions; chronic depressives and those who suffer anxiety are known to fixate on their fears in what amounts to a vicious cycle that has a very deleterious effect on their cognition of things as they really are.

It's never just a single disorder that drives mass shooters. "Crazy" is usually a very complex quilt of personal demons.



Not every sociopath kills that way. Some work for the mob and figure that the guy must've done something to deserve what they're doing to him. Others break into a man's house in the middle of the night and then kill him out of indignation that he could have possibly had the gall to defend himself and his home. They're not all Gacys and Dahmers and Fish, oh my.



That's why so many witnesses report either blank stares or elated smiles on the faces of mass shooters (at least the ones who didn't wear gas masks): they're either convinced that they're watching a head movie, or they're convinced that this is what God must feel like. But remember, mania and narcissism each have similar cognitive and emotional aspects to them. I'm convinced that it's never just one disorder or one gene.



And countless healthy, sane, rational people do this very same thing with similar recollection after the fact when environmental stressors interact with their temperament and perceptions. Usually in such cases, it's a very unfortunate string of catastrophically-timed setbacks, frustrations, kicks in the nuts, et cetera.



This is exactly why laws and precedents applying to NGRI pleas are careful to illustrate the understanding that simple moral depravity is not enough to fulfill the criteria. Too many sociopaths were "walking" because of the absence of empathy being perceived as innate. The sad part is that such a standard does not apply to pleas of debilitating "affluenza."



I think any racial tendencies he had were an extension of his propensity towards and affinity for hatred in general. Just like you described in your porn analogy, one flavor all the time gets boring and people sometimes feel the need to push the envelope in different directions.

There is my point in the definition of the two though. A sociopath -sophisticated or not- is still well in their own mind aware of what they do. I guess for most part a sociopath killer, does the killing then relives it in their own mind over and over, until they need to push the envelope.

A psychopath generally lives out his fantasy in his head over and over until it consumes him enough to become any list of maniac mode.


Now just to set the bar even though, Sociopaths have been known to drive themselves into more a psychopaths, generally they begin to diminish control, get sloppy, and even uncontrollable urges, and maybe it is because they, like the psychopath lose touch with reality vs a relived fantasy.

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by monkeywrench ↗

Idiot wont last 3 days in the slammer and he looks a little soft, so he best get ready to face the masses in the clinker

Every state has a med-camp. He will spend his days out in PC, locked down 23 hrs a day. He will have to for most part beg the warden, who will have to do some filing himself, to ever see gen-pop.

Chances are also, that he will do that, after a few years of sitting in his cell pumping out push up, eating fine prison dining, come out twice his size, and welcomed with open arms into the aryan brotherhood. In the end, he will be sucking white cock for protection.

[Azimuth]

He's on suicide watch?!

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by azimuth ↗

He's on suicide watch?!

Anyone with high profile crimes get put on that watch. Many times people get thrown in jail usually takes a day or two for the reality of their lives being done to set in.


I'd slip him a razor though.

[OhJstFkOffAlrdy]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Anyone with high profile crimes get put on that watch. Many times people get thrown in jail usually takes a day or two for the reality of their lives being done to set in.

I'd slip him a razor though.

It's not exclusive to high-profile offenders. Even drunks are relieved of their belts and shoelaces when they get to processing and lock-up. What gets reported as "suicide watch" is usually no more than standard-issue PC with the addition of a facility nurse signing off on an acknowledgement of the guy as a potential suicide risk.