And some are quick studies. I found my copy of “The Stranger Beside Me” by Ann Rule, who was Ted Bundy’s friend. He went from acting like an aimless child in a man’s body to “charming,” “damn he knows where he’s going” type of person after the break up with his first serious girlfriend.
What about sexual sociopaths? I’ve got to say that I think most of those are charming, so they can lure their victims in.
And you know…it’s funny they push themselves as being “charming” but there are always people who are creeped out by them. At my jr high the gym teacher turned out to be a pedophile rapist. He was SO popular, but he creeped me out.
I always assumed Dahmer was charming, with his being able to convince the police that a drugged 14-year-old boy was actually his lover and all. Surely that’s some pretty good manipulating.
Read the thread. Someone beat you to the punch with this oft-repeated anecdote.
He was in the same room–the FBI likes to have nice, casual conversations with these people to establish trust.
Ressler made the potential fatal mistake of trusting Kemper and thinking he could handle him on his own. He was taken in by his charm, and Ressler was the top expert in serial killers at the time.
Kemper was 6’9" and weighed around 300 pounds. Ressler is about 5’8" and maybe 180 pounds.
The FBI never sends one person to interview a serial criminal alone. These guys are just too damn easy to be taken in by, and then turn on you.
Well…
The alternative cartoonist Derf, who penned In the City, happened to grow up with Dahmer and wrote a comic book about it. My recollection is foggy, but “Charming” isn’t a word that would come to mind. Luckily we have wikipedia:
Buy it here! Only $2.95 plus shipping!
http://www.derfcity.com/store/store.html
http://www.derfcity.com/store/dahmerpage.html
http://www.derfcity.com/comix/jd/jd1.html
That’s about Dahmer in high school, though, not as an adult.
You’re saying you believe 80% of people who’ve spent time incarcerated would qualify for Antisocial Personality Disorder? Based on my understanding of the disorder, this would strike me as incredibly high. In fact, Quadgop’s 20% sounds high, but he’s the doc.
Both of those figures are actually correct - Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) and psychopathy aren’t the same thing, although that was the original intention of creating the ASPD diagnosis. As Dr. Hare puts it:
The DSM criteria for ASPD reflects a pervasive pattern of violating the rights of others that roughly 80% of the prison population will meet - that’s generally why they’re there in the first place. Psychopathy, on the other hand, isn’t just a general pattern of criminal behavior; it’s a cluster of attitudes and motivations underlying the behavior, such as grandiosity, glibness, shallow affect, manipulativeness, impulsivity, need for stimulation, criminal versatility, inability to feel guilt or empathy, and so on. 20% of the prison population will meet the criteria for prototypical psychopathy, and that 20% will cause 80% of the problems.
Ok, now we’ve defined Psychopathy. Qadgop the Mercotan believes that over 20% of US Congresspeople are psychopaths, if I understand him correctly. Color me dubious.
Clinton’s Definition of Is moment was plucked out of several hours of testimony. The man could have simply said that it he interpreted the question to be applicable to the present, as opposed to the past. [1] Moreover, politicians typically have pretty good impulse control, insofar as they learn to speak in a mealy mouthed manner whenever there’s a live mike around. Finally, last fall, any one of the 60 Senators in the Democratic coalition could have made excessive demands in order to secure their vote for health care reform: that only 2 did indicates to me a below average degree of assholery.
QtM had his reasons for what he said though. I’d be interested to hear them.
[1] Please note: the question here is not whether Clinton did the right thing. The question is whether he displayed clinically extreme and pathological behavior. My point is narrow: lawyerly evasion in the face of an openly criminal team of prosecutors (i.e. ones who routinely leaked Grand Jury testimony) isn’t especially surprising, given the stakes.
If the question is whether at least 20% of Congressmen need to be incarcerated, I’ll vote yes.
Perhaps you might provide some names and the charges of which they are accused of? Or are you proposing a repeal of the 5th amendment?
Wisecracking aside, I see a lot of broadsides directed against Congress, largely because nobody has incentive to defend the institution as a whole. But the practice is empty and the argument facile.
The 20% figure is a low estimate.
Keep in mind that you don’t want to exacerbate the crowding problem in federal penitentiaries.
Here’s an alleged serial killer who sounds quite charming.
“Certain personality disorders” are more prevalent does not mean that psychopathy is more prevalent.
You’re declaring that personality disorders are not mental disorders? And perhaps that they’re not real? This contradicts what is generally believed in the mental health field. That doesn’t mean it’s wrong, but let’s clearly label it as opinion, and a minority opinion at that. And I’m not sure how anybody who has encountered a full-blown case of Borderline Personality Disorder could say that there is nothing wrong with the person.
Natural selection does not favor what is “good for the species”. The widespread belief that it does is probably the most serious misconception about evolution that’s out there.
The way I see it, it’s a bell curve, with the metally ill at one end, normal people in the middle and sociopaths on the other. If anything, they’re *too *sane - they lack the essential insanities like empathy, guilt, fear and love that enable us to function as a society. Their behavior is strictly logical; if you programmed a computer to mimic human behavior and told it to look after itself, it would act pretty much exactly like a sociopath.
That may be how you see it, but it’s not how the mental health field sees it.
So sociopaths are saner than the rest of us? I’m not sure what notion of sanity you’re using, or why you equate mental illness with insanity (I wouldn’t describe clinically depressed people as “insane”). I also don’t see how, for example, delusional disorder, schizoid personality disorder, or major depression is at the opposite end of a spectrum from sociopathy.
What is logical about killing strangers for the sake of killing them? How does this amount to looking after oneself?
Fear is part of a mechanism for avoiding harm. It would seem to have evolved due to its usefulness for looking after oneself.
I’m not sure what “looking after itself” means for a computer program, but social interactions are an important part of human success. To the extent that emotions aid in this, they are part of mechanisms for looking after oneself.
I think this comes from Timothy Burton’s Bat-universe. Isn’t the Joker interpreted not as insane, but “hyper-sane” (or some such comic book trope).