General Discussion

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)

93. Hm. Maybe. I guess so. I don't relate to that way of thinking, though.

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 03:36 AM

Dec 2012

I know I'm incapable of killing a child. I'm simply incapable of it, deep in my soul. I WOULD have to be insane, to do that. Even then, I don't think it's anywhere in me, for such a thing to come out for any reason (but then, insanity is not about reason, so...). Just like I know I wouldn't kill a dog, except in self defense. So I have no problem accepting the sanity of such people. But they have something ELSE that's wrong with them, that enables them to do such a thing.

What I think it is...just my lay person's opinion, when I've thought about it and put myself in the shooter's place...I think they've objectified the victims. They are not innocent, helpless, vulnerable children. They represent something else. Even if it's only that they represent the "glory" that the shooter will have in the shock that it will have on the community. That's how I imagine his brain working.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

158 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why are people buying the line that this was driven primarily mental illness [View all] Pretzel_Warrior Dec 2012 OP

I don't think sane people do anything like that. rrneck Dec 2012 #1

Sane men rape, torture and kill children every day. There's a diff. between insanity & something Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #72

Maybe. rrneck Dec 2012 #74

They can be sane, and they often are. So say the court appointed psychiatrists. Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #75

That's a good point. rrneck Dec 2012 #76

"Insanity" in the world, generally, differs from insanity defense in a courtroom. elleng Dec 2012 #84

Thx. Yes, that's how I think of insanity... Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #92

Sociopaths are never considered insane, legally speaking laundry_queen Dec 2012 #86

Interesting. I saw an FBI guy on TV... Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #89

I think you're right. rrneck Dec 2012 #122

Neither can I. Jamastiene Dec 2012 #123

It's hard for me to believe that anybody could look at a child and then shoot them Jamastiene Dec 2012 #110

I agree. rrneck Dec 2012 #121

If he was a sociopath, just think - OhZone Dec 2012 #129

i don't post much but you have to be kidding... blue sky at night Dec 2012 #2

Yup, sane. Scootaloo Feb 2013 #151

Because it should be clear to any rational person elleng Dec 2012 #3

Right. So if he wasn't insane why did he do it? allrevvedup Dec 2012 #12

He WAS insane, and he DID it. elleng Dec 2012 #17

There's no indication he was insane. nt Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #79

There is EVERY indication he was elleng Dec 2012 #81

People are stuck on the courtroom definition of insanity. immoderate Dec 2012 #131

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #18

Was the 20-year old a professional assassin? allrevvedup Dec 2012 #23

The 'evidence that's emerged so far' is not available to us. elleng Dec 2012 #26

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #34

That's ridiculous muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #38

We shouldn't feed the trolls, just alert on them. nt geek tragedy Jan 2013 #142

Well, John2 Dec 2012 #41

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #43

Virtuoso shootong skill? pangaia Dec 2012 #58

Especially if they were huddled in the corner. HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #66

My post the other day was hidden for suggesting as much. nt valerief Dec 2012 #59

You're lucky you didn't get banned for Sandy Hook trutherism. nt geek tragedy Jan 2013 #143

At the time of that post, I hadn't realized how easily these over-the-counter death machines valerief Jan 2013 #148

This message was self-deleted by its author devilgrrl Jan 2013 #144

Please Make this clear for me. hrmjustin Jan 2013 #145

Where is "unrec" when we need it. GoneOffShore Jan 2013 #147

Well that just flat out CT nonsense. Agschmid Feb 2013 #149

OJ was innocent too right? BootinUp Feb 2013 #150

Of course sane people kill children. nt Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #78

I agree elleng, oddly though depending on the circumstances and crime Puzzledtraveller Dec 2012 #126

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #4

So, what exactly was the "assassins" motivation? NT Llewlladdwr Dec 2012 #73

Can someone ban this insane gun nut troll please? nt geek tragedy Jan 2013 #141

This isn't an either/or situation. We need gun control *and* more mental health surveillance. reformist2 Dec 2012 #5

5 myths about mass shootings.... Myth#1. The shooter is insane riderinthestorm Dec 2012 #6

This should be it's own OP. cliffordu Dec 2012 #27

Thank you for the welcome and the great info Pretzel_Warrior Dec 2012 #45

That is referring to the legal definition of insanity. Live and Learn Dec 2012 #53

+1. Insane: Zorra Dec 2012 #62

Makes sense. I think some people confuse "mental problems" with "insanity." 2 diff. things. Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #82

+1! uponit7771 Dec 2012 #96

best post on the thread Redfairen Dec 2012 #130

Because a sane person does not shoot up an elementary school davidn3600 Dec 2012 #7

"Something wrong" with someone does not equal insane. Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #85

I personally think laundry_queen Dec 2012 #88

Hm. Maybe. I guess so. I don't relate to that way of thinking, though. Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #93

Yea, you are correct nolabels Dec 2012 #107

Because.. primarily.. IT IS mental illness.... lib2DaBone Dec 2012 #8

Because it's a convenient scapegoat population that has enough trouble protecting itself. (nt) Posteritatis Dec 2012 #9

+1. Its NRA framing to deflect attention from the real problem - the guns. riderinthestorm Dec 2012 #15

Eh, it's not just an NRA thing. People in general are pretty damned ignorant on the topic. Posteritatis Dec 2012 #19

I agree most mentally ill people are non-violent, but so are most gun-owners. HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #47

Oh but I believe this is precisely the point: is a "right" to live greater than your right to guns? riderinthestorm Dec 2012 #50

The Constitution guarantees both rights. HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #68

Exactly. cliffordu Dec 2012 #29

+1000000 Jamastiene Dec 2012 #111

How is that scapegoating? Silent3 Dec 2012 #115

What I don't understand is why point at the mentally ill when Jamastiene Dec 2012 #118

Who "point[ed] at the mentally ill"? Silent3 Dec 2012 #120

Except that, yes, most of the discussions *do* open it up to "all forms of mental illness." Posteritatis Dec 2012 #137

i volunteer at a homeless shelter blueknight Dec 2012 #10

Because I believe it is true, as do the others that replied. ellaydubya Dec 2012 #11

So does cancer. Cetacea Dec 2012 #133

Because that is the official NRA backed talking point. Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #13

Time to call their bluff and say we need to discuss mental illness *and* gun control! reformist2 Dec 2012 #14

No we need to get the guns under control independent of any other discussion. Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #16

Sorry, you're not going to get a single-issue discussion, nor should you. reformist2 Dec 2012 #30

exactly. We need to address both gun control and mental illness. liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #61

So you are suggesting that Adam Lanza was not crazy? davidn3600 Dec 2012 #36

To be truthful, we don't have any answers on that. But stigmatizing the mentally ill by association riderinthestorm Dec 2012 #39

Yet you stigmatize gun-owners... HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #48

Considering the raw numbers you have a few too many nines there. Pholus Feb 2013 #152

50 million is far too low HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #153

Son, you're bringing a knife to a gun fight. You should know better. Pholus Feb 2013 #154

So you want to include injuries? HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #155

I can understand why you want to change the topic. Pholus Feb 2013 #156

Uh, YOU were the one who indtroduced injuries into the discussion, HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #157

Troll? I guess that's your version of Uncle? Pholus Feb 2013 #158

quoting articles is like quoting the bible liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #60

agree. why should we believe any details we are fed on this story. Pretzel_Warrior Dec 2012 #87

"why should be believe any details we are fed on this story" geek tragedy Jan 2013 #146

No. I am stating explicitly this a deliberate deflection from the obvious problem with gun control. Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #109

Maybe. In a court of law, sanity is not defined by a Dx of mental illness or not. MichiganVote Dec 2012 #20

It's NRA diversion tactic # 290. nt sufrommich Dec 2012 #21

Correct. Which is especially sad, them co-opting the subject. Because it is a REAL issue kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #55

Because someone who kills 20 5 year olds, at close range, for no reason... Marrah_G Dec 2012 #22

If you've been reading everything and you think Adam Lanza was normal dkf Dec 2012 #24

You are right. Sane people commit horrible acts all the time. Was Hitler insane? Walk away Dec 2012 #25

After doing a bit of research... backscatter712 Dec 2012 #28

He was obviously not playing with full deck.... Sekhmets Daughter Dec 2012 #31

I think this act deserves its own special category of the criminally insane. Old and In the Way Dec 2012 #32

because he WAS mentally ill. nt Raine Dec 2012 #33

I am not sure if that is the case, however, it is in human nature to try and rationalize the still_one Dec 2012 #35

Yes there is the line between EXTREME anger an mental illness loyalsister Dec 2012 #37

...Because its easy to scapegoat a group that really doesn't have a voice. etherealtruth Dec 2012 #40

I appreciate everyone's thoughts. I just think "mental illness" Pretzel_Warrior Dec 2012 #42

It may be one of their weapons but it doesn't mean it doesn't merit attention. Live and Learn Dec 2012 #65

I agree the two are not mutually exclusive Pretzel_Warrior Dec 2012 #67

Because it is mental instability that makes a person shoot another. HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #44

We can turn that around - 99.9% of the mentally ill won't shoot anyone either. riderinthestorm Dec 2012 #46

Right. There's a .00001% overlap that is the problem. HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #49

Gun owners can have all the guns they want. They just can't be reckless with them. kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #56

I agree with that. HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #64

Nope. No more AKs and Bushmasters and the like. kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #70

Now you're just being silly. HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #83

Hmm, let's balance their "hobby" vs "a person's life" when it comes to restrictions riderinthestorm Dec 2012 #57

A hobby that's a constitutional right. HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #63

Many, many sane German Wermacht committed mass killing against unarmed civilians LanternWaste Dec 2012 #134

I'm not most people know right from wrong........ Historic NY Dec 2012 #51

Probably because they are afraid to imagine Warpy Dec 2012 #52

Mental problems played a role, but those guns were not stored securely by their owner. kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #54

I'm bothered by the same question. frustrated_lefty Dec 2012 #69

The 2 things aren't mutually exclusive. One is the CAUSE, the other is the METHOD of violence. Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #71

Because it was certainly not driven by rationality jberryhill Dec 2012 #77

Because a sane person would not shoot up a bunch of helpless children. n/t Lil Missy Dec 2012 #80

Because it's the easy, lazy, and fills the need for a group to blame. cliffordu Dec 2012 #90

So you joined yesterday just to post this? n.t Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #91

no. I joined to have a conversation about a lot of things. but this spurred me to join. An Pretzel_Warrior Dec 2012 #94

whether or not he met the legal and technical definition of insanity is one thing - but of course he Douglas Carpenter Dec 2012 #95

This society was perfectly willing to invade and occupy a country (Iraq) under coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #97

He was diagnosed with mental illness lbrtbell Dec 2012 #98

I'm not even sure Aspergers qualifies as a mental "illness". OrwellwasRight Dec 2012 #99

Aspergers is an autism spectrum disorder. 299.00 Autism is listed in the 2000 revision HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #103

Yes, I know quite well what it is, but I don't know that that qualifies as a mental "illness" OrwellwasRight Dec 2012 #135

The reason it has a diagnostic code is because it's recognized as a disorder. HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #138

Again, that is my point. OrwellwasRight Dec 2012 #139

You can think what you want about the semantics, I'm good with that. HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #140

Because it is not a line. The man's mental health issues were part of the Skidmore Dec 2012 #100

Ironically, much aggressive violence against others by the mentally _IS_ reactive defense HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #108

Both get the red out Dec 2012 #101

It's possible he was simply a rotten, evil, little SOB. Buns_of_Fire Dec 2012 #102

Because people are looking for any scapegoat they can find. It is misplaced aggression. Jamastiene Dec 2012 #104

This event created tremendous emotion stress and triggered deep fear HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #112

Horrible events like the school shootings seem to create a need for mental help Jamastiene Dec 2012 #117

Yes, they do create that need. HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #119

Anyone that shoots a bunch of kids in cold blood is insane. Non-debatable statement. Zorra Dec 2012 #105

It would be great if society could operationalize that certainty so that it becomes HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #113

Res ipsa loquitur Freddie Stubbs Dec 2012 #106

It's the intellectually lazy way to get themselves off the hook. Zoeisright Dec 2012 #114

That may be some of it, how much I don't know... HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #116

you aren't seriously suggesting that there wasn't mental illness in the case. librechik Dec 2012 #124

Because Big Pharma pays the corporate media a lot of money to divert attention No Compromise Dec 2012 #125

because sane Dyedinthewoolliberal Dec 2012 #127

Because obviously mental illness was the root cause of the tragedy slackmaster Dec 2012 #128

People seem to have a problem with the words "vast majority" Cetacea Dec 2012 #132

Just don't buy the idea the kid was emotionally unstable Pretzel_Warrior Dec 2012 #136