Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 13, 2014 7:12:50 GMT -5
With the wave of recent shootings in the news, the familiar chorus of "where are the psychiatrists?" has been notably absent--and for good reason: the psychiatrists have been right there. In the case of Isla Vista's Elliot Rodger, a small army of psychiatrists and therapists was administering care at the time of the shooting. Seattle's Aaron Rey Ybarra also had a long history of mental issues and was being treated by a psychiatrist and mental health therapist when he rampaged through Seattle Pacific University June 5th. Details are still in short supply in the case of Jared Michael Padgett (the recent Oregon shooting), but early indications are that he was also receiving treatment from a psychiatrist. While it is not my intent to deride mental health professionals (I see a psychiatrist quite regularly) or question the effectiveness of treatment (for all I know, these shootings and dozens more would have occurred in the absence of treatment), it has struck me on several occasions that society doesn't "get" one of the major pitfalls of mass shootings, which is the public's near-obsessive desire to uncover the motivation behind these shootings. I speak of two problems in particular. They say a picture is worth a thousand words, and the following editorial cartoon fairly summarizes the first problem. Suffice it to say that I share Ms. Sorensen's concern. The other problem--and my intended focus for this thread--is asking what happens when a hysterical society goes too far in its attempts to prevent school shootings. Some might say we can't go too far in preventing such things, but I submit to you the ongoing saga of Ethan Chaplin and the State of New Jersey. I won't summarize the article here, but I'll provide a link to the same short YouTube video. Suffice it to say that schools, cities, and even states can "go nuts" in their attempt to suppress what psychologists call "non-conforming behaviour". I see this second problem as related to the first one in that both stem from society's preoccupation in determining why, why, why these mass shootings happen. What is the universal ingredient? What is it that Ethan Chaplin isn't telling us, and how can we prevent him from becoming the next Rodger, Padgett, or Ybarra? I submit that there is no universal ingredient. If there is, an army of mental health professionals in direct contact with the shooters obviously weren't able to detect it or do anything to prevent the shootings. And Ethan Chaplin's case clearly demonstrates that ratcheting up authorities' powers to aggressively intervene could have disastrous consequences. Acknowledging that our fascination with what motivates such individuals is presently doing more harm than good, isn't it perhaps time we gave up our obsession? Is it still worth it? Will we soon learn what motivates these individuals so precisely that we can pinpoint the Rodgers and Ybarras to forcibly, aggressively rehabilitate them while leaving the Ethan Chaplins untouched? Or is our quest to find order in chaos just a cog in the fame-generating machine that glorifies the very type of act we're trying to prevent?
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Jun 13, 2014 10:03:01 GMT -5
Imho the problem in the Chaplin case is that "public health and welfare" has changed into "public health and welfare industry" manned by beaurocrats with jobs and territories to protect
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 13, 2014 12:56:08 GMT -5
Imho the problem in the Chaplin case is that "public health and welfare" has changed into "public health and welfare industry" manned by beaurocrats with jobs and territories to protect Possibly. I suspect it's also because bureaucrats aren't able meet and interact with the families they're serving. They have procedures to follow. If every family in the system is just a case to be processed and file to be pushed around, every family gets a generic treatment. There's no differential diagnosis or case-specific problem solving. One-size-fits-all procedures are easier to implement, easier to train for, and easier to defend in the (increasingly likely) event of a tragedy. A bureaucrat wants the ability to say that (s)he checked boxes A thru M, requisitioned all the necessary forms, collected all the necessary blood work, etc. When it comes time for heads to roll, a by-the-numbers bureaucrat can wield procedure like a shield while a bureaucrat with non-standard practices, regardless of the effectiveness of those practices or their relevance to the tragedy, becomes a prime target. I'm willing to accept that one-size-fits-all is the best government can do. That being the case, I'm loathe to granting them greater powers so they can run around like a bull in a china shop.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jun 13, 2014 13:44:44 GMT -5
Fear sells. Reality and reason not as much. In another thread I posted from a Yahoo answer that had a total gun death rate that wasn't suicides of about 11,000/yr.
I'm not sure we have in total 110 fatalities from mass shootings this year. This would make it a 1% problem. Yet people are afraid of the unpredictable so the media is making money on covering these events over shooting deaths that are more predictable and hence less scary to most people.
I think the cry for psychiatry is the similar cry for gun control. Many people don't want these events occurring and in their fear they don't even care if its likely or doable without losing most of the freedoms and the life they enjoy now.
I'm very aware psych meds like many meds can have the effect of making worse the very problem they are trying to fix. Sometimes things can not be fixed or made the way you'd like them to be. I do worry about the misguided belief that psychiatry can prevent mass shootings or anything in general with 100% certainty.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 13, 2014 14:09:06 GMT -5
All I know is that after the Virginia Tech shooting I was listening to the radio and thinking that the MSM couldn't have glorified Cho (the shooter) more if they'd tried.
In contrast, the response of the Amish community to the 2006 West Nickel Mines School shooting (6 dead, 5 injured) was humbling. They buried their dead, grieved privately, emphasized forgiveness for Roberts (the shooter), and erected a new schoolhouse. Media attention dried up in less than a week, which was an exceptional feat at the time. Most people don't even remember the shooting, let alone Roberts' motives.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jun 13, 2014 14:16:36 GMT -5
All I know is that after the Virginia Tech shooting I was listening to the radio and thinking that the MSM couldn't have glorified Cho (the shooter) more if they'd tried. In contrast, the response of the Amish community to the 2006 West Nickel Mines School shooting (6 dead, 5 injured) was humbling. They buried their dead, grieved privately, emphasized forgiveness for Roberts (the shooter), and erected a new schoolhouse. Media attention dried up in less than a week, which was an exceptional feat at the time. Most people don't even remember the shooting, let alone Roberts' motives. I remember the shooting, I remember some of the aftermath, I don't remember much about his motives.
What I've noticed in recent reporting is little is reported about potential motive unless the shooter is dead. In general, I expect I'll never know, and I've decided it may not matter anyway. The motives seem to be unique and hence not that useful for predictive purposes.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2014 14:20:38 GMT -5
I think there is a little more to the cause than attention starved kids. Studies have shown that there is a link between aggression, hyperactivity and poor diet. If you take a kid, deny him parental attention, feed him crap, dose him with toxic mind-altering drugs, to curb his hyperactivity and then let him witness violence, what is to be expected?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 13, 2014 14:25:13 GMT -5
All I know is that after the Virginia Tech shooting I was listening to the radio and thinking that the MSM couldn't have glorified Cho (the shooter) more if they'd tried. In contrast, the response of the Amish community to the 2006 West Nickel Mines School shooting (6 dead, 5 injured) was humbling. They buried their dead, grieved privately, emphasized forgiveness for Roberts (the shooter), and erected a new schoolhouse. Media attention dried up in less than a week, which was an exceptional feat at the time. Most people don't even remember the shooting, let alone Roberts' motives. The motives seem to be unique and hence not that useful for predictive purposes. Precisely. And I'll add that shooters' behaviour prior to the shootings is similarly inconsistent, making it more-or-less useless for prediction. The public doesn't get that. So many are convinced there must be universal diagnosis and a universal set of preventative measures. I think there is a little more to the cause than attention starved kids. Studies have shown that there is a link between aggression, hyperactivity and poor diet. If you take a kid, deny him parental attention, feed him crap, dose him with toxic mind-altering drugs, to curb his hyperactivity and then let him witness violence, what is to be expected? It's certainly possible. I'll just say that there are more than a few communities out there that blame parents in particular, media in particular, or pharmacy in particular. And there's no rule anywhere that prevents the truth from lying in all of these factors and a hundred others besides.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2014 14:35:17 GMT -5
It's interesting that we don't see women doing these shootings. Has anyone thought about why that is?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Jun 13, 2014 14:43:04 GMT -5
It's interesting that we don't see women doing these shootings. Has anyone thought about why that is? Women tend to gravitate towards self destructive behaviors when mentally ill. I don't know why.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 13, 2014 14:58:26 GMT -5
Women are wired differently from men. That includes pathological behaviours. It is what it is.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2014 15:06:10 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2014 15:07:11 GMT -5
Women tend to gravitate towards self destructive behaviors when mentally ill. I don't know why. The only thing I've seen women gravitate to when stressed out is credit cards and shopping malls. Yeah, and we can do a lot of mass damage with those cards, too.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 13, 2014 15:38:43 GMT -5
It's an interesting article on the million and one things we don't know about mass shooters.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 13, 2014 16:34:22 GMT -5
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 13, 2014 16:41:51 GMT -5
Fear sells. Reality and reason not as much. In another thread I posted from a Yahoo answer that had a total gun death rate that wasn't suicides of about 11,000/yr.
I'm not sure we have in total 110 fatalities from mass shootings this year. This would make it a 1% problem. Yet people are afraid of the unpredictable so the media is making money on covering these events over shooting deaths that are more predictable and hence less scary to most people.
I think the cry for psychiatry is the similar cry for gun control. Many people don't want these events occurring and in their fear they don't even care if its likely or doable without losing most of the freedoms and the life they enjoy now.
I'm very aware psych meds like many meds can have the effect of making worse the very problem they are trying to fix. Sometimes things can not be fixed or made the way you'd like them to be. I do worry about the misguided belief that psychiatry can prevent mass shootings or anything in general with 100% certainty. Agree with much of what you have to say- especially that which I bolded above. That being said, there is a copy-cat effect, and political leaders and journalists used to be a lot more careful not to give these people something they are seeking: attention. Yes, even posthumous attention. And while I'm not sure how you measure it, I would say that of the recent highly publicized shootings, reasonable thinking people have to conclude that some are copy-cat crimes. People who feel ignored, unimportant, picked on, bullied, and what have you-- look at their sources of information and they see these shooters getting attention. If they're mentally disturbed, suicidal- or both, they have to be inspired.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jun 13, 2014 16:45:11 GMT -5
So the fact he wanted to kill women should be far less important than an overuse of therapy. Because some guy says so?
I preferred Lone's link as at least the guy has studied a part of the issue.
"A 2001 study looked specifically at 34 adolescent mass murderers, all male. 70 percent were described as a loner. 61.5 percent had problems with substance abuse. 48 percent had preoccupations with weapons; 43.5 percent had been victims of bullying. Only 23 percent had a documented psychiatric history of any kind―which means three out of four did not."
"Violence is not distributed at random. If you look at the victims of homicide, for example―young African American men are far more likely to be victims of homicide.
We need to think of violence itself as a communicable disease. We have kids growing up exposed to terrible trauma. We did a study some years ago, looking at [violence risk] among people with serious mental illness. The three risk factors we found were most important: first, a history of violent victimization early in life; second, substance abuse; and the third is exposure to violence in the environment around you. People who had none of those risk factors―even with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia―had very low rates of violent behavior.
Abuse, violence in the environment around you―those are the kinds of things you’re not going to solve by having someone take a mood stabilizer. "
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jun 13, 2014 16:46:33 GMT -5
Paul, I do agree the media coverage is encouraging copycat crimes.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 13, 2014 16:49:55 GMT -5
It's an interesting theory, I'll grant you that. For those not interesting in working their way through it: the author (Brendan O'Neill) suggests that in an effort to provide a comfortable atmosphere and bolster self-esteem, therapists inadvertently create conditions highly conducive to narcissism and an obsessive focus on the self. The motivation for Rodger's actions in particular was deeply narcissistic. But of course now we're engaging in the very kind of speculation I've criticized in the OP. Are we really going to stop sending kids to therapy because in some cases... possibly... therapy may actually exacerbate problems? Is there something actionable here, or are we just giving Mr. Rodger more screen time?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 14, 2014 8:01:01 GMT -5
It's an interesting theory, I'll grant you that. For those not interesting in working their way through it: the author (Brendan O'Neill) suggests that in an effort to provide a comfortable atmosphere and bolster self-esteem, therapists inadvertently create conditions highly conducive to narcissism and an obsessive focus on the self. The motivation for Rodger's actions in particular was deeply narcissistic. But of course now we're engaging in the very kind of speculation I've criticized in the OP. Are we really going to stop sending kids to therapy because in some cases... possibly... therapy may actually exacerbate problems? Is there something actionable here, or are we just giving Mr. Rodger more screen time? I think there's something to giving Rogers "screen time", but I am not sure that a thoughtful article in reason, or in a psychiatric journal is the kind of screen time we need to be concerned about. The mainstream screen time he and most news now gets is Facebook-- in fact, I find out about most of the garbage that goes on from FB friends. I rarely turn on the TV anymore to get news. Rush doesn't talk about this stuff- until the politicians get into the game, or the news breaks into the show to tell us. I ignore a lot of "news" these days.
|
|
Artemis Windsong
Senior Associate
The love in me salutes the love in you. M. Williamson
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:32:12 GMT -5
Posts: 12,320
Today's Mood: Twinkling
Location: Wishing Star
Favorite Drink: Fresh, clean cold bottled water.
|
Post by Artemis Windsong on Jun 14, 2014 10:02:34 GMT -5
My view is stop giving the name of the shooter so they don't become famous. Canada did just that recently. No name.
BTW. Canada has severe restrictions on firearms.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2014 10:30:40 GMT -5
I'd love to see federal law that prevents the media from identifying the shooter in any way.Talk about the victims, the helpers, the heros all you want but not a peep about the shooter. Removing the perceived moment of glory would help.
The problem here is too many rights for the off balance or insane. Near impossible, and very expensive, to get someone committed. You can know that someone is spiraling down, is likely to do something drastic, and can do nothing about it.
From huffpost "The journal, recovered by police from Ybarra's truck that was parked near the shooting, reflects Ybarra's admiration for the school shooters at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School but does not clearly explain why he targeted the Seattle college, Satterberg said."
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jun 14, 2014 11:38:54 GMT -5
Ybarra looked at other colleges up here...WSU, Central, Eastern. SPU was just close and small, with and an easily accesible campus and easy parking nearby. Seattle U was a bit further away from his house. The other schools are all in Eastern Washington. The UW has more serious security due to size.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 14, 2014 15:13:23 GMT -5
I'd love to see federal law that prevents the media from identifying the shooter in any way.Talk about the victims, the helpers, the heros all you want but not a peep about the shooter. Removing the perceived moment of glory would help. The problem here is too many rights for the off balance or insane. Near impossible, and very expensive, to get someone committed. You can know that someone is spiraling down, is likely to do something drastic, and can do nothing about it. From huffpost "The journal, recovered by police from Ybarra's truck that was parked near the shooting, reflects Ybarra's admiration for the school shooters at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School but does not clearly explain why he targeted the Seattle college, Satterberg said." We'd have trouble with that pesky First Amendment thingy. "Too many rights" does not compute. Sorry. And who decides who is sane? What we need to do is get the federal government OUT of as much of our lives as possible, not start passing more federal laws that abridge the right to free speech, freedom of religion, or freedom of expression; or, speaking of insane, start making crazy statements like "too many rights". People need to be left alone to defend themselves as they see fit- and by the way, not every solution is a gun (thought every solution should be on the table), check this out: Bulletproof Blanket: www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/12/bulletproof-blankets-body_n_5479885.htmlDoor Closer Arm Sleeve (lock): wqad.com/2014/06/10/muscatine-teachers-invention-could-save-your-childs-life/Like a great many things in a free society, the solution is self government- conscious, deliberate restraint, and human decency. Don't shoot people. Don't talk about or cover people that shoot people. But the ultimate solution for most of us is to simply choose not to participate in the drama. Sometimes the solution to a terrible problem plaguing society is to
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2014 15:29:35 GMT -5
I would be most interested in knowing why he first started seeing a therapist.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,612
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 14, 2014 16:41:39 GMT -5
My view is stop giving the name of the shooter so they don't become famous. Canada did just that recently. No name. BTW. Canada has severe restrictions on firearms. Canada must also have severe restrictions on the freedom of the press too.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jun 16, 2014 12:36:08 GMT -5
This may sound more callous than it really is, but I lump mass shootings in with the category of "shit happens" aka "bad things happen to good people." I don't really attempt to understand why they happen, they just do. Sometimes, someone is going to go crazy and shoot people. To me, it's just an unfortunate fact of life, like fatal car accidents, cancer, or foreign wars. I do feel bad for the victims and their families, but as I said, bad things happen to good people. I agree with Virgil that trying to find reasoning behind the crimes and aggressively trying prevent them is a futile exercise at best, and infringes on freedoms at worst.
I also think the relentless media attention is also a disservice. Violent deaths in the United States have significantly increased since the 60's, and the trend is ever downward. But the focus of the media gives many the impression that gun related deaths are higher than ever. Furthermore, they just inspire a new breed of criminals.
I do believe that if the media didn't focus so relentlessly on mass shootings, that it would prevent some of them from occurring. I think this is especially true of kids and young people. I don't think most young people would think of going to school and shooting up the place if not given the idea from the media.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 16, 2014 19:14:50 GMT -5
This may sound more callous than it really is, but I lump mass shootings in with the category of "shit happens" aka "bad things happen to good people." I don't really attempt to understand why they happen, they just do. Sometimes, someone is going to go crazy and shoot people. To me, it's just an unfortunate fact of life, like fatal car accidents, cancer, or foreign wars. I do feel bad for the victims and their families, but as I said, bad things happen to good people. I agree with Virgil that trying to find reasoning behind the crimes and aggressively trying prevent them is a futile exercise at best, and infringes on freedoms at worst.
I also think the relentless media attention is also a disservice. Violent deaths in the United States have significantly increased since the 60's, and the trend is ever downward. But the focus of the media gives many the impression that gun related deaths are higher than ever. Furthermore, they just inspire a new breed of criminals.
I do believe that if the media didn't focus so relentlessly on mass shootings, that it would prevent some of them from occurring. I think this is especially true of kids and young people. I don't think most young people would think of going to school and shooting up the place if not given the idea from the media. Thus far, all mass shootings have happened in "Gun Free Zones". It's time to try a different approach.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Jun 16, 2014 21:41:39 GMT -5
You're really going with that lame "gun free zones" crap?
Out of every possible explanation thrown out that has to be the worst- not to mention completely false. What other gems you have up your sleeve? Want to blame Ozzy or maybe Call of Duty? Action movies?
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Jun 18, 2014 2:03:29 GMT -5
As long as we let crazy people be in charge of their mental health care, this sort of thing is going to happen.
And not matter what you do, innocent people are going to get hurt. When you decide to institutionalize everyone you see as a possible threat, then invariably, some harmless person will get locked up. And since many mental health medications have nasty and damaging side effects, when you force someone to take their meds, you run the risk of damaging a person with a medication that didn't help or was unnecessary.
|
|