Guest Speed Racer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Again – you have zero proof of this. He carried out a mass shooting on innocent individuals = he was out of his gourd. There is no better proof than that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 He carried out a mass shooting on innocent individuals = he was out of his gourd. There is no better proof than that. We both know that doesn’t prove he is insane. Sane people are fully capable of performing insane acts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 We both know that doesn’t prove he is insane. Sane people are fully capable of performing insane acts. I never said he was insane - truly, legally insane - did I? But he ain't right in the head. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I never said he was insane - truly, legally insane - did I? But he ain't right in the head. The use of “out of his gourd” to describe his mental state, suggests, to me, the inference that he is insane. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Well yes, but it seems you are pointing to the legal definition and I'm pointing to the one where, regardless of whether you know it's right or wrong, you shoot a gun into a crowd of innocent people. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The High Heat Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 New York Times story on Loughner's behavior, drug use and his participation on extremist political internet sites. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Well yes, but it seems you are pointing to the legal definition and I'm pointing to the one where, regardless of whether you know it's right or wrong, you shoot a gun into a crowd of innocent people. True, as I thought the actual definition of insane was what we were discussing. Not what you and I define as crazy. A psychotic break, which, keeping in mind I’m not a lawyer, is one criteria by which someone can be found to be legally insane. So, if he’s not truly insane, can tell right from wrong, isn’t (or wasn’t) suffering from some form of psychosis, organic or inorganic, we have to start looking for other contributing factors – such as, say, his environment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Healthy people don't shoot other innocent people. Come to think of it, even moderately unhealthy people don't either. I guess I have a low bar for insanity, on a personal if not professional or intellectual level. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Healthy people don't shoot other innocent people. Sure they do. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kidsmoke Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 You know, I have to say that I'm rather impressed at the level of civility and even respect that you folks have been showing one another in most of this thread. I mean that sincerely, not sarcastically. With such hot-button issues, it's really refreshing seeing our members allow each other to voice their thoughts without being insulted or attacked. Let's try to continue this discussion, passionately if you choose, but without losing it on each other. Thank you, The Management Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Sure they do. Examples? (This with the idea that we will not agree ultimately, but see that one of us is more quick to apply the label of healthy, right or wrong, sooner than the other.) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Doug C Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Well yes, but it seems you are pointing to the legal definition and I'm pointing to the one where, regardless of whether you know it's right or wrong, you shoot a gun into a crowd of innocent people.This is half smartassed/half serious so feel free to half answer. What if the shooter, free of a diagnosed mental illness, had, according to his logic, a belief that not one person in the crowd was innocent? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 You know, I have to say that I'm rather impressed at the level of civility and even respect that you folks have been showing one another in most of this thread. For god's sake, stay on topic. This is half smartassed/half serious so feel free to half answer. What if the shooter, free of a diagnosed mental illness, had, according to his logic, a belief that not one person in the crowd was innocent? According to one's own logic, one can never be wrong, no? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Doug C Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 According to one's own logic, one can never be wrong, no?So would that make him out of his gourd or still in it? Wait... the above was the half answer I requested wasn't it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The thing that disturbs me, outside of the absolute carnage this man caused, is how he fell through the cracks. This wasn't a guy who his few friends and neighbors proclaim as being a nice quite man who kept to himself. Some of the statements attributed to his associates are troubling. This guy was a powder keg and there was nothing that anybody could or would do to get him help. That and he was able to obtain firearms. With my personal experience, I can see how things can spiral sickeningly out of control. People need to reach out to others in need and extend a lifeline. It may not be successful. But even the failed attempt may serve as a wake up call. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Sane people are fully capable of performing insane acts. actually, no. sane people are capable of committing horrendous, unforgivable, unfathomable acts, but if it's an insane act, then it's an insane actor, however permanent or temporary. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The thing that disturbs me, outside of the absolute carnage this man caused, is how he fell through the cracks. This. All of the accounts I've read are very quick to provide detailed red flags that popped up throughout his life, but no one ever did anything but pass him on to someone else like a hot potato. These people bear more responsibility than any talking head, in my opinion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Examples? (This with the idea that we will not agree ultimately, but see that one of us is more quick to apply the label of healthy, right or wrong, sooner than the other.) (Speaking dispassionately here) Must one be unhealthy (by “unhealthy” I’m assuming you mean, not of sound mind) to shoot a spouse, for say, a large insurance payoff, an act of infidelity? What about folks in the military who open fire on innocent civilians – a fairly common occurrence by military standards. Or, someone so convinced that certain government officials are hell bent on destroying the country, that they feel it is their duty to stop them by taking the “second amendment remedy" as suggested by Nevada Tea Party candidate, Sharon Angle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kidsmoke Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 For god's sake, stay on topic. Oops, sorry...so this guy was clearly less balanced than a California budget. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Speed Racer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (Speaking dispassionately here) Must one be unhealthy (by “unhealthy” I’m assuming you mean, not of sound mind) to shoot a spouse, for say, a large insurance payoff, an act of infidelity? I don't think so, necessarily. I wouldn't make a sweeping judgment on a case like that, and for infidelity I would go so far as to say any otherwise healthy person could be consumed with white-hot rage over infidelity. Without the tools to deal with that rage productively, violence could bubble up easily. What about folks in the military who open fire on innocent civilians – a fairly common occurrence by military standards. These people are an entirely different classification of ill - but are definitely (and sometimes only temporarily) ill. Or, someone so convinced that certain government officials are hell bent on destroying the country, that they feel it is their duty to stop them by taking the “second amendment remedy" as suggested by Nevada Tea Party candidate, Sharon Angle. But this hasn't really happened, has it? What we have here is a man who everyone says, in every single article, was out of his gourd. Off. Not quite right. Prone to uncontrolled outbursts. This man killed old ladies in a crowd. He was not at war with anything but himself. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 You know, I have to say that I'm rather impressed at the level of civility and even respect that you folks have been showing one another in most of this thread. I mean that sincerely, not sarcastically. With such hot-button issues, it's really refreshing seeing our members allow each other to voice their thoughts without being insulted or attacked. Let's try to continue this discussion, passionately if you choose, but without losing it on each other. Thank you, The Managementpreemptive moderation Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kidsmoke Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The thing that disturbs me, outside of the absolute carnage this man caused, is how he fell through the cracks. This wasn't a guy who his few friends and neighbors proclaim as being a nice quite man who kept to himself. Some of the statements attributed to his associates are troubling. This guy was a powder keg and there was nothing that anybody could or would do to get him help. That and he was able to obtain firearms. With my personal experience, I can see how things can spiral sickeningly out of control. People need to reach out to others in need and extend a lifeline. It may not be successful. But even the failed attempt may serve as a wake up call. I agree so much. It's so much easier to look away, to stay uninvolved...and truthfully, there are times this is even necessary, for our own safety...but far more often, there are ways in which we could be kind and caring humans, and maybe make a huge world of difference by not shying away. Once again, the signs were there and people didn't act. If someone had, maybe those people would be alive still, and their families wouldn't be shattered with grief. I'm going to recommit myself to doing better and try to be more help. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 How 'bout some love for the lady who grabbed the magazine out of the dude's hand? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kidsmoke Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 preemptive moderation Is a good thing, yes? How 'bout some love for the lady who grabbed the magazine out of the dude's hand? Somebody raised that one right! A hero, in my eyes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This is going to only make things a lot fucking worse.That is to say: no one's going to tone down anything in the national discourse.Most likely, this will bring the Left and the Right even farther apart. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.