• 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.

School shooting Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeggster said:
I disagree ... level headed, sane people do not do this kind of thing, its simple as that.
Click to expand...

But under American law, that isn't the definition of "sanity" needed to mount an insanity defense. To be judged insane, you have to be unable to distinguish right and wrong
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Got an example?

I suppose if you take, 'has really serious anger management issues' out of the insane column you might have a case.

I keep it in the insane column myself when it is so extreme it leads to acting out like this.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of articles like this:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...r-myth-1-theyre-mentally-ill-or-evil-geniuses

Psychopathic serial killers such as Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy and Dennis Rader (BTK) are entirely aware of the illegality of murder while they are in the process of killing their victims. Their understanding of right and wrong does nothing to impede their crimes, however, because psychopaths such as Bundy, Gacy and Rader have an overwhelming desire and compulsion to kill that causes them to ignore the criminal law with impunity.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry for stuffing up the quotes. These words are SG's not mine:

I keep it in the insane column myself when it is so extreme it leads to acting out like this.
Click to expand...

I will ask it be fixed.
 
Meadmaker said:
But under American law, that isn't the definition of "sanity" needed to mount an insanity defense. To be judged insane, you have to be unable to distinguish right and wrong
Click to expand...

Quite right and we agree ... As I metnioend IMO he should stand trial as it is already been stated he feels sad .. so he KNEW it was wrong .. so he is not insane enough o get out of a trial.

But he's still crazy as a loon in my opinion, insane! ... just about levels.
 
William Parcher said:
How about the FBI hacking into cellphones when they don't have the password? Should the phone manufacturers cooperate and open that door for law enforcement?

Quick answer so it isn't a derail.
Click to expand...
There is no quick answer, there are risks and benefits. I don't like the dichotomy. I'd like a third option where warrants are involved and the information is released rather than a USAPATRIOT Act military state, free to roam around in our data willy-nilly, solution. The FBI has proven themselves untrustworthy when they investigated war protestors and currently with their obsession with "Black Identity Extremists".
 
JeanFromBNA said:
Does anyone in the U.S. have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they post threats on social media? I wouldn't think so. Or are you thinking of other ways of making threats?
Click to expand...

I'm not following your point here. Maybe if you re-read my post.
 
Civet said:
Thing is, multi-victim shooting are so frequent here that it is quite simply never the time to have that talk if we have to wait for some cooling off period.
Click to expand...

Sadly, that NRA talking point has gotten too old to be meaningful any longer. Sadly as in we've had that many mass shootings.
 
lionking said:
SG said:
I keep it in the insane column myself when it is so extreme it leads to acting out like this.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of articles like this:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...r-myth-1-theyre-mentally-ill-or-evil-geniuses
Click to expand...

Here's the exchange:
Yeggster said:
Yes my opinion is NO sane person kills 17 defenceless person ...

Now if you mean "legally insane" as far as answering in court ... NO I agree with you there ... it's all about levels of insanity.
Click to expand...
LK said:
I don't even agree with your first point.
Click to expand...
So did you miss his second part where he noted the difference in the legal definition vs a psych definition? Because your link is all about legal insanity. :confused:
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
Here's the exchange:
So did you miss his second part where he noted the difference in the legal definition vs a psych definition? Because your link is all about legal insanity. :confused:
Click to expand...

That's not correct. What I quoted was a psychological definition.

The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), released by the APA in 2013, lists both sociopathy and psychopathy under the heading of Antisocial Personality Disorders (ASPD).
Click to expand...

ASPDs do not constitute insanity as defined by psychological authorities. I am not talking about legal definitions.
 
In their rush to pin the shooting on The Left it seems Gateway Pundit doxxed a totally innocent person then deleted their article.

http://archive.is/g4SKM

Interestingly they misspelled "Florida" in both their doxxing article and in their follow up where they blame "other sources" for the mistake.
 
I hate this gun control debate because you can never be on the right side. If you do not mention or speak out(even a little) against gun control you are a TERRIBLE HUMAN BEING and disrespecting those who died and if you are a white male you are worse than the shooter himself. However to the other side if you even speak out a little in favor of some gun control you are again a TERRIBLE HUMAN BEING trampling on the rights of millions of free gun owning Americans and are literally a fascist for supporting such a move. Oh yeah and the shooting was probably a hoax meaning that your also defending a murdering lying government YOU SHILL.

So no matter what you say or do your still a horrible human being who never should have been born. So I won't say anything about this and I'll go isolate. myself from the outside world until this whole thing is forgotten in about 2 weeks. See ya, bye!
 
Last edited:
lionking said:
That's not correct. What I quoted was a psychological definition.

ASPDs do not constitute insanity as defined by psychological authorities. I am not talking about legal definitions.
Click to expand...
You have to search for the right terms:

Intermittent Explosive Disorder DSM-5 312.34 (F63.81)
The DSM-5 defines intermittent explosive disorder as “recurrent behavioral outbursts representing a failure to control aggressive impulses.” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Intermittent explosive disorder, which can be diagnosed in children as young as six, is characterized by a wide variety of aggressive outbursts. Intermittent explosive disorder is extremely common, as more than half of youth and young adults have experienced at least one angry outburst.
Click to expand...

I think you'll find the rest of the article worth reading.
 
Last edited:
lionking said:
Sorry for stuffing up the quotes. These words are SG's not mine:

I will ask it be fixed.
Click to expand...


You were well inside the edit window when you posted that. In fact you're still inside the edit window and have plenty time to fix it yourself.
 
Funny how the gun used for the shooting is a "constitutional right" but the healthcare for the survivors isn't.
 
Wayward son said:
Breivik's 77 victims were also almost entirely white too. White supremacists don't just hate non-white people. They really, really, really hate the vast majority of white people (race traitors) who are perfectly content allowing their white society to be polluted by the influx of others.
Click to expand...

Breivik's victims were social-democrats. They weren't shot because they were in the "vast majority of white people" but because neo-nazis like to shoot up anti-capitalist leftists.

Ugh, liberals...:rolleyes:
 
caveman1917 said:
Funny how the gun used for the shooting is a "constitutional right" but the healthcare for the survivors isn't.
Click to expand...

Not sure how that is funny, but I think anyone reading your post has already come to the conclusion that the 2nd amendment is part of the Constitution.

I am certain also that people are also familiar with National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius holding
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom