• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Seven dead in drive by California shootings

....And this was my point. He was clearly VERY mentally ill.

Why are many of us so quick to blame this on whatever ideology he held when HE WAS CLEARLY VERY MENTALLY ILL?

I think it's very safe to say that people with very serious mental problems kill more people on average than guys who go to YouTube to try and figure out how to get women to like them.

(Edit: Oh, it should go without saying, but I don't mean to say that people who have Asperger's are necessarily VERY MENTALLY ILL or likely killers. I have worked with a number of folks who have that concern. They're brilliant and good-hearted...just not the best with social cues.)

That's not the point. The interesting thing is this: Did the ideologies of this mentally ill person influence his killing? Because not all very mentally ill people kill either. And they are also influenced by their surroundings.
 
Last edited:
(Edit: Oh, it should go without saying, but I don't mean to say that people who have Asperger's are necessarily VERY MENTALLY ILL or likely killers. I have worked with a number of folks who have that concern. They're brilliant and good-hearted...just not the best with social cues.)
Thanks for that edit. Aspergers Syndrome can cover a VERY wide range of symptoms. At one extreme they are difficult to distinguish from shy people. They're pretty much normal. The other extreme shades into autism. Without knowing more about this guy, we don't know where he fits on the spectrum nor whether it contributed to his killing spree.

PS: If I sound defensive, I am. :(
 
That's not the point. The interesting thing is this: Did the ideologies of this mentally ill person influence his killing? Because not all very mentally ill people kill either. And they are also influenced by their surroundings.

I guess that makes sense. I also like to ponder such things. For example, the good people at Vigilant Citizen don't blame drugs or mental illness for the crack-up Amanda Bynes had.

http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/what-is-happening-to-amanda-bynes/

It was MK Ultra Illuminati mind control, the same programming given to Michael Jackson and Disney stars such as Miley Cyrus and Britney Spears.

(Oh, and I would love to bet money that the Hollywood angle will result in many similar articles about this shooter.)
 
....And this was my point. He was clearly VERY mentally ill.

Why are many of us so quick to blame this on whatever ideology he held when HE WAS CLEARLY VERY MENTALLY ILL?

I think it's very safe to say that people with very serious mental problems kill more people on average than guys who go to YouTube to try and figure out how to get women to like them.

(Edit: Oh, it should go without saying, but I don't mean to say that people who have Asperger's are necessarily VERY MENTALLY ILL or likely killers. I have worked with a number of folks who have that concern. They're brilliant and good-hearted...just not the best with social cues.)

Hmmm...nah. If the guy was, say, schizophrenic, I could see trying to say that we're overlooking the fact of his schizophrenia by focusing on his misogyny, because there have been a lot of killings and other violent crimes perpetrated by people who are schizophrenic.

As far as I know, there's been nothing to suggest that a higher than base number of crimes have been committed by people with Asperger Syndrome. It's not automatically in the same bucket as any crime committed by anyone with any mental problem.
 
Hmmm...nah. If the guy was, say, schizophrenic, I could see trying to say that we're overlooking the fact of his schizophrenia by focusing on his misogyny, because there have been a lot of killings and other violent crimes perpetrated by people who are schizophrenic.

As far as I know, there's been nothing to suggest that a higher than base number of crimes have been committed by people with Asperger Syndrome. It's not automatically in the same bucket as any crime committed by anyone with any mental problem.

We certainly have limited information at some point. But you really don't think that a guy who goes around on a shooting spree and takes out a half-dozen people and who has three dead bodies in his apartment and who wrote a 100,000-word manifesto and whose parents tried to get him help a few months ago MIGHT have a little more going on in his head than misogyny?

That's like saying Jeffrey Dahmer was motivated to kill primarily by hunger.

(And also keep in mind that his statements reflect misandry as well. We seem to be forgetting that he hated men, too.)
 
I guess that makes sense. I also like to ponder such things. For example, the good people at Vigilant Citizen don't blame drugs or mental illness for the crack-up Amanda Bynes had.

http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/what-is-happening-to-amanda-bynes/

It was MK Ultra Illuminati mind control, the same programming given to Michael Jackson and Disney stars such as Miley Cyrus and Britney Spears.

(Oh, and I would love to bet money that the Hollywood angle will result in many similar articles about this shooter.)

Yes, clearly, "People are influenced by ideology" is akin to "illuminati mind control".
 
Here's a first amendment issue that I'll just throw into the pit because why not?

At the Gawker link Unabogie posted a little bit ago, it mentions that a news station received a 100,000-some-odd manifesto from an unnamed acquaintance of the killer on some bodybuilding forum. The article says this manifesto includes the planned details of the killing spree. It seems to me to go without saying that the police would very much like to talk to this guy, as having someone's murder-blueprint in one's possession and not acting on it might reasonably constitute a criminal act in itself.

Has this guy, however, in handing the manifesto to the news station, just made himself a "media source" whose identity the station is now under some ethical obligation to conceal from the police?
 
We certainly have limited information at some point. But you really don't think that a guy who goes around on a shooting spree and takes out a half-dozen people and who has three dead bodies in his apartment and who wrote a 100,000-word manifesto and whose parents tried to get him help a few months ago MIGHT have a little more going on in his head than misogyny?

Sure he obviously had a few things going on in his head; but it isn't the same thing. Of course we can wonder if having Asperger Syndrome had something to do with the killing spree he went on - sure. If you want to explore that, go ahead and find some links or post some points and get on with it. On the other hand it's rather silly to suggest that misogyny might not have played that big a role in his killing spree, given that he spent a great deal of time explaining in great detail exactly how BIG a role it played in his killing spree.
 
Why didn't he use a kitchen knife?

No, gun nuts, I'm not joyful about this. It's a tragedy, a horrible tragedy and I wish it would never have happened. But as long as you guys want to shoot guns, this will continue. I'm sure you'll all sleep well tonight.

Does that mean if someone owns a firearm but never fires it, they had nothing to do with it? Is there some magic number of times that a person has to discharge a firearm before they have an effect? I'm not sure what that the number has to do with "this will continue" although. There seems to be a minor flaw in your logic.

I haven't discharged a firearm for several decades so hopefully I will sleep well tonight. :rolleyes:
 
You know, with a dad that was a freaking Assistant Director on The Freaking Hunger Games, I wonder just how awkward he must've been to not be able to pick up any girls based on just that.

But isn't that movie series mostly a teenybopper thing? Perhaps he wasn't an underageophile.
 
Sure he obviously had a few things going on in his head; but it isn't the same thing. Of course we can wonder if having Asperger Syndrome had something to do with the killing spree he went on - sure. If you want to explore that, go ahead and find some links or post some points and get on with it. On the other hand it's rather silly to suggest that misogyny might not have played that big a role in his killing spree, given that he spent a great deal of time explaining in great detail exactly how BIG a role it played in his killing spree.

As I stated before, I am not blaming the rampage on his Asperger's. I am saying that a person who does such a thing CLEARLY HAS SOME MASSIVE MENTAL ISSUES OUTSIDE OF ASPERGER'S. Shouldn't we blame those before we blame misogyny? Or his misandry? Or his all-around disdain for humanity?

Are you saying that homosexuality was a motivating factor for Jeffrey Dahmer?

Are you saying that technophobia was THE PRIMARY REASON that the Unabomber did all of that Unabombing?

I'm just saying that when you look at this event, it's unfair to try and blame "MRAs" or whatever community he was into. He did something indicative of "crazy." Why blame misogyny instead of "crazy?"
 
Rampage mirrors threats made on YouTube video

Alan Shifman — a lawyer who represents Peter Rodger, one of the assistant directors on "The Hunger Games" — issued a statement saying his client believes his son, Elliot Rodger, was the shooter. It was unclear how the son would have obtained a gun. The family is staunchly against guns, he added.


I am aghast, aghast I tell you!

I'm sure this took everyone [who wasn't paying attention] by surprise.
 
We certainly have limited information at some point. But you really don't think that a guy who goes around on a shooting spree and takes out a half-dozen people and who has three dead bodies in his apartment and who wrote a 100,000-word manifesto and whose parents tried to get him help a few months ago MIGHT have a little more going on in his head than misogyny?

That's like saying Jeffrey Dahmer was motivated to kill primarily by hunger.

(And also keep in mind that his statements reflect misandry as well. We seem to be forgetting that he hated men, too.)

Wouldn't a better term be misanthrope?
 
Last edited:
Killing a bunch of people is indicative of a killer. It's not, in and of itself, indicative of "crazy". There has to be something more to it for that.

For surely the fourth time, we can blame misogyny because he gave it as his own motivation for the killing. If a guy confesses to killing his wife and her lover because he found them cheating, I would likewise need to see a pretty substantial reason to reject that as a motive.
 
His statements don't reflect misandry. He hated women for being women and not having sex with him, but his statements about hating the men they had sex with instead of him suggests jealousy, not misandry.
 

Back
Top Bottom