And frankly, families shouldn’t have to wait until said relative is exhibiting dangerous behaviors before the help kicks in. I think it’s far preferable for someone to get help before they’re so off the rails that they’re dangerous. This is why I’m hammering on support. Let’s divert people who are having issues from going down the road to violence before they ever think to set foot on it. Let’s deal with the issue while it’s still something like mild depression or adjustment disorder (for example) and not wait until it’s something like homicidal rage.
Okay, here’s a list of “school massacres” by “rampage murderers” by order of number of victims:
From the worst on down:
Most notable characteristics: liked to tinker with stuff, so much so he was a failure. Was intelligent and would get angry with people who disagreed with him.
He killed 48 people (and himself) and injured 58.
Clear warning signs, diagnosed with serious mental illness.
He killed 32 and injured 17
This is the one we are talking about. Currently, not much evidence of warning signs.
Killed 27 injured 2.
Several complaints about the perp’s inappropriate actions in respect of boys.
Killed 17, injured 15.
Was expelled from school for forging a medical certificate in order to take some days off. Doesn’t list any clear warning signs, at least on wiki or the articles it cites.
Killed 16 injured 1.
…
So of the top 5 school - rampage killers in history, 2 showed clear signs (nos. 2 and 4), 2 did not (nos. 1 and 5) and one the jury is still out on - but so far does not (no. 3).
According to Wikipedia, the National Institute of Mental Health has an annual budget of $1.5 billion, compared to $5 billion for the National Cancer Institute. Would increasing the amount spent on the NIMH help to prevent this sort of thing in the future?
Finally, some real information. However, it doesn’t clarify whether Lanza was exhibiting troubling behavior prior to the shooting. Aspergers isn’t typically associated with an increased likelihood for aggression, IIRC.
No-one doubts that many spree killers show clear signs of mental illness and other warning signs in advance. My point is that some apparently do not.
The reason I used a Wiki list and simply scooped the top 5 by victim count for this exact category of crime (school shootings) was that this appeared to me to be a (somewhat) valid way to avoid selection bias, for the purposes of a thread like this.
I have no doubt whatsoever that screening those who display warning signs is a good idea. I’m simply saying it will not be 100% effective, even if people are infallible in their diagnosis, because some reasonable percentage of perps don’t really display signs in advance (according to my very brief and unscientific survey) - at least signs that can be recognized above the “noise” of stuff people do all the time. In hindsight, of course, things that would otherwise be innocuous (like being introverted, or easy to anger) become sinister.
I saw a mention of those bulletproof backpacks somewhere, so I looked at the manufacturer’s website. The backpacks are $300, which is a lot. On the other hand, the average schoolkid has so many books in his or her backpack that the sheer mass is probably going to stop a bullet, so perhaps the bulletproofing isn’t really necessary?
I read an interesting column in the Washington Times today. The writer was questioning whether gun control or better mental health care would have prevented the shooting.
His conclusions? No potential shooter would decide not to kill anyone because the weapon they intended to use was illegal. So gun control is out. More attention to mental health would assure that the killer would be found not guilty by reason of insanity and he would get off scot-free. So what should we do?
Do nothing and let god sort it out. Magic! That’s the ticket!
In alot of states all that means is the defendent ends up in a state mental hospital rather than state prison. Often for longer than they would with a simple guilty verdict.
True, but you can stir up more trouble by saying that he was found not guilty and pretend that means you get to go home. There’s always someone who doesn’t know how the law works. If you’re counting on Jeebus to punish the guilty, you may not be paying a lot of attention to what happens in the interim.
I think he just regrets that the perp gets a long sentence in an institution instead of a quick trip to the electric chair. It’s harder to claim that someone is the devil’s pawn if there’s evidence that they’re insane. There’s a certain mindset that follows the motto “Kill 'em all and let Jesus sort it out”
The suggested gun reform would fall under the category of do nothing and magic. If you don’t address the problem then it won’t go away.
There are crazy people out there and a properly armed and trained person in the school directly addresses that problem. It wouldn’t require a full time guard. The cost of that could be directed into the training of a dozen staff members.
If you truly want to “do something” then the problem needs to be correctly defined and then action taken in the most cost effective way. That applies to all problems.
