How about neither? The Ft. Hood shooter was a terrorist attacking his enemies. The Tuscon Safeway shooter was a mentally ill homicidal maniac.
I see no comparison whatsoever from an ideological standpoint, unless the supposed ideology involves culling the herd based on some methodology of killing people with handguns. Both were crazy nutbags with guns and that’s about as far as that goes, at face level.
It doesn’t have to be irrelevant… you could hold yourself to a higher standard.
I think most could figure out the topic and the points of comparison if intrested in “debating” the subject. I’m mostly interested in what others have to say.
I think Marley’s standard is way above yours if the posts / contributions to this thread are any indication. Nice dart throwing though.
I’m not sure how this complaint was worth this much effort to you but stating a topic wasn’t. Oh well. I don’t have anything else to say about this.
We’re not discussing a creative work, and if you read a book by King, you might wonder where he gets his ideas but you don’t get the impression he thinks monsters are out to get him. A few people have found his work disturbing, but it doesn’t follow from that that he is ill.
“I define terrorism” would set off alarm bells for a lot of people. You asked earlier about disturbing people. Now you’re saying weird, which is not the same thing. Most weird people are not disturbing, and this guy obviously unnerved many people he came across. Especially people who did know him and saw he was unraveling. That’s not proof on its own that he was going to kill anyone, but it does put him in a different category from someone who wears mismatched socks. No, they would not know for sure he would become violent. Even most people with illnesses like this don’t get violent. But I don’t think most of us encounter a whole lot of people like this on a daily basis.
Obama is scheduled to speak from Tuscon tonight, by the way. Here’s what he said at Fort Hood, if anyone is interested.
Best not to let anyone be armed. That’s a truism.
That’s basically my point, in a roundabout way. Had Loughner been able to channel his demons into a creative work (bizarre rants on YouTube do NOT count) then he would have become an artist, not a psycho. And thanks to our free society, artists are remarkably stable – even the most troubled masters (Van Gough, Hemingway, etc.) were only a danger to themselves, not others.
Who knew he was breaking, though? Only his family – and they probably weren’t alarmed enough to raise the alarm until their son was beyond redemption. According to today’s press release, Mr. Loughner chased his son into the desert, but AFAIK did not call 911. Why not? What secrets are Randy & Amy hiding? Or…did they merely assume that Jared Lee was “being himself” and would return to the house in due course of time?
The good news (if anything news can be defined as “good” at this point) is that the parents are finally cooperating, and the shooter himself is still alive. Once he gets stabilized on medication, he may or may not speak about the demons in his mind – assuming he even remembers what the voices told him to do. 
Well, everyone on the planet has at least 1.98 arms already…
Have you read any news articles that interview his former friends? They all say he was deteriorating. One friend said Loughner kept calling him late at night to ask if he was spying on him. Things like that. So yes, people were alarmed. The fact that he did get psychiatric help doesn’t show that he was flying under the radar.
I have no idea. That may come out in time, but unless there is further mental illness in the family I can’t see how they would not know he was in serious trouble.
Armed with… what? What weapon do you think criminals will not be able to get their hands on? There are an infinite number he could have used. He could just as easily have driven his car through the crowd and killed 6 people and then backed up and killed six more. You think you can tackle a car?
Naturally, the media’s playing up that part. Not that I have any reason to doubt their veracity, but AFAIK they were worried about him – and that’s it. They just didn’t know what he was likely to do.
The latest news reveals that Lougher was pulled over by police for running a red light, three hours before the attack – so if Arizona’s finest couldn’t detect that he’d “Gone Travis Bickle”, how could anyone aside from God prevent the attack??? Even an FBI spokesman on CNN said this tragedy was “extremely rare” and “unpreventable, unfortunately.”
When did Loughner receive psychiatric aid? If it’s true, I must’ve missed that particular cite.
I don’t think he ever made his intentions clear. I think there have been enough comments about him from his friends, college, and acquaintances that they realized something was seriously wrong and a few of them felt he was dangerous. I’m saying that’s really not in the same sphere as all the weird people you may meet in a typical day.
By that point, yes, it was probably unpreventable unless the police happened to find his weapon (if he had it with him). But he was stopped by traffic cops, not psychiatrists.
That was supposed to say “didn’t.” As in “The fact that he didn’t get psychiatric help doesn’t show that he was flying under the radar.”
Even if he was receiving psychiatric care he wouldn’t be on anyone’s radar. He would still be able to purchase a gun.
True. But I was talking about people who knew him being alarmed by his behavior.
The story about the traffic stop goes like this:
There was no probable cause for the office to search the car and he didn’t do anything unusual. It’s one of those close encounter historical footnotes, I guess.
Wouldn’t surprise me to find out he was out target shooting in the park.
The problem with mental illness is that there is no mechanism to connect a person under treatment and society’s need to be aware of it. I know of parents of adult children who are powerless to commit their child even though it would benefit everybody concerned. He is not safe to be around if he goes off his medication.
In the U.S., at least, I daresay more violent crimes are committed by Quakers than Muslims, just for demographic reasons, but I never heard of one “in the name of” Quakerism.
There have been some reports that he had threatened other people. Those same reports say that the sheriff did not do his job and did not take him to jail.
IF true, then he should have been arrested, put in jail/prison, and he never would have been able to buy a gun. I think we all want to find out about the investigation of the sheriff to see if this entire mess could have been prevented if the sheriff had arrested him for threatening other people.
If he had been put in jail, then he could not buy a gun, nor drive a car, nor harm a Congresswoman .
Getting arrested might have slowed him down and maybe his illness would have manifested itself behind bars.
Still, crazy is hard to fight.
Back to the topic at hand… The only real similarities between these two whackos were they killed a bunch of random people with a 9mm pistol, and the fact that there were plenty of actionable warning signs well before the rampages took place.
Throw in Va Tech and Columbine. Now you have four-of-a kind. There’s many more, but for the sake of brevity they all have the one exact same thing in common: Lunatics that finally snap and decide it’s time to go on a killing spree.
So does going on a killing spree, by definition, mean you’re crazy? Seems to be that way from what most people write. What about robbing a bank? Serial rape? Mail fraud? Where’s the line here?
It seems to me that when a white male whacko (Tucson and Columbine) goes on a rampage, its safer for the opportunists to go after the guns or their political opponents.
I didn’t see the same activity after Va Tech or Ft Hood… some after the matter but not nearly as much.
Originally Posted by Susanann
There have been some reports that he had threatened other people. Those same reports say that the sheriff did not do his job and did not take him to jail.
IF true, then he should have been arrested, put in jail/prison, and he never would have been able to buy a gun. I think we all want to find out about the investigation of the sheriff to see if this entire mess could have been prevented if the sheriff had arrested him for threatening other people.
If he had been put in jail, then he could not buy a gun, nor drive a car, nor harm a Congresswoman .
Making death threats, multiple death threats, are serious crimes that can put you in prison or a mental institution for a very long time.
If it is true that he had made death threats in the past, then the sheriff was incompetent( or worse!!!) for not having him safely locked up behind bars and 6 people would not be dead.
If the sheriff had not arrested him for the death threats, and even more importantly if the sheriff had pressured citizens to not bring charges, then they have a very bad situation in that county in Arizona.
Whatever we find out about this sheriff , either way, as a general rule, once again, trusting in the police for your protection… does not protect you.