E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Connecticut medical examiner has asked scientists to analyze the DNA of Adam Lanza, the 20-year-old who killed 27 people, including his mother, two classrooms full of small children and teachers, before killing himself on Dec. 14.
Investigators hope that studying Lanza's DNA for mutations or other abnormalities may shed some light on the tragedy. Connecticut's chief medical examiner, Dr. H. Wayne Carver II, called the University of Connecticut a few days before Christmas asking for help from the UConn Health Center’s Department of Genetics and Developmental Biology, said UConn spokesman Tom Breen.
“They have agreed to offer any assistance they can to help the chief medical examiner in his investigation,” Breen said. Of Carver, Breen said, “He wanted help in conducting tests relating to genetics involving the shooter in the Newtown massacre.”
Breen said did not know what specific tests would be conducted. He said UConn was happy to help.
“This is such a terrible thing,” Breen said. “Everybody in the state has been affected by this.”
Will a DNA analysis help explain Lanza's rampage?
The study of Lanza's DNA would be for research purposes, not to find a diganosis for his acts, says Arthur Caplan, Ph.D, NBC News contributor and head of Division of Bioethics at New York University Langone Medical Center in New York City. While there has been prior research on genetic mutations and violent behavior, looking at someone’s genes "is like hunting in a DNA haystack," Caplan says.
"We don’t have a database that says there’s a correlation between genes and propenstity to violence or crime or propensity to mental illness," he says. "A particular DNA message may indicate a propensity to behavior, but at best you might find associations to greater risk. You won’t find a gene that says I’m going to be a mass murderer or a terrorist or an assassin."
James Fallon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, Irvine, who studies serial killers and other violent criminals, argues it will be fruitless to try to pin Lanza’s acts on his genes alone. Genetic data only paints part of the picture, he's found.
"The genes by themselves don’t tell you. If you just have a PET scan or MRI you can’t tell," Fallon said last week. "The psych report alone won't tell you. You put those things together you really get a lot of information." And some of what's been found by Fallon and other researchers provides some surprising insights.
Take for instance the “warrior gene”, the monoamine oxidase-A, or MAOA, gene that, has received widespread media attention, said Fallon.
“People know about the warrior gene and that it is associated with psychopaths and with killing,” Fallon said in a telephone interview.
Only a handful of diseases, such as cystic fibrosis, cause symptoms based on a single mutated gene. Most require thousands of changes and interactions. “So the idea that you have the warrior gene, therefore you are a warrior, it doesn’t hack it,” Fallon says.
It takes something more than just a genetic predisposition to make someone violent.
Fallon says there is no scientifically acceptable body of work on the genetics of violent behavior. "I don’t know of a case where even one killer has been studied genetically to an appropriate level, " Fallon said.
Likewise, brain studies have shed some light but can’t explain or predict the most extreme behaviors, said Dr. Martin Teicher, director of the Developmental Biopsychiatry Research Program at Harvard Medical School and McLean Hospital in Massachusetts.
“I don’t think we have the answer from neuroscience,” Teicher said. “Given the millions of people there are, the tiny handful of people who did these things are quite rare … We are drawing generalities from people who have had bad experiences, and who are maybe more prone to get into a fight, but they never would do anything like this.”
There is something that many violent people do have in common, however. Research done by Teicher, Fallon and others shows that violent criminals are, in fact, excessively anxious and fearful.
“Individuals at risk for violence often suffer from tremendous anxiety,” Teicher said. “It’s one of the most striking things I have noticed.” He’s treated high school students expelled or suspended for violence, but when they are in his office, they are anything but threatening.
“These are the frightening children in high school, yet they are essentially sitting in their mother’s laps,” Teicher said. “They were ridden with anxiety.”
And in some cases, this is combined with an inability to “read” other people. Teicher’s found this in some patients.
“We found differences in the (brain) cortex of violence-exposed individuals that play a role in social perception,” Teicher said. “These are regions involved in being able to infer what other people are thinking.” Brain scans show that the blood isn’t flowing normally in those brain regions. “They may be prone to misattribute thoughts and feelings,” Teicher says.
Such deficiencies can be immensely stressful to a young man or teenager, Fallon says. “He looks at people and doesn’t understand what they are feeling,” he said.
On top of this, Teicher has seen differences in parts of the brain’s frontal cortex that are involved in impulse control. “Misreading people and having difficulty controlling impulses may foster inappropriate actions,” Teicher says.
And while schizophrenia or bipolar disease do not usually lead to violent behavior, they can contribute to dangerous acts if patients are also racked with anxiety and not getting any sort of treatment.
“The late teens, early 20s, are when people have these psychotic breaks," Fallon said.
Most young people with these developing psychiatric conditions may feel anxious or threatened, but they don’t actually act on their feelings in part because they are unable to, Fallon said. Studies show the adolescent brain lacks the connections to initiate certain actions.
The brain is still growing, making new connections and cutting unneeded circuits, until the early 20s, Fallon said. The prefrontal cortex, involved in “executive function” or decision-making, is the last part of the brain to mature.
In an anxious young man, unable to understand people around him, perhaps ascribing all sorts of mistaken intentions to others, this could come to a climax, said Fallon, who studies how message-carrying chemicals such as dopamine and norepinephrine act in the brain.
The young man's brain is still growing and changing until, finally, the prefrontal cortex matures. The amygdala, the part of the brain responsible for fear responses on the most basic level, is at the same time being flooded with corticotropin-releasing hormone, which is involved in the brain's stress response.
“He is finally able to take action,” Fallon says. “Now the moment has come for him to carry out the ultimate act. If you turn it around like that, it makes a lot of logical sense."
Lisa Flam contributed to this story.
Related stories:
Leave a Comment:
While you're at it, look into the potential homicidal and suicidal effects related to prescription psychotic medication, which just about every mass killing has been related to.
This is true expat7... a lot of times these people who are already known to be seeing a mental health professional get put on anti-phsych or depression meds that only make things worse. Seems to me they don't give enough time to test these drugs to see exactly what consequences they have after taking them for a certain period of time. I remember one that all of a sudden made people (all over the world) commit suicide until they finally took it off the market.
Also, who knows what these meds they give to autism kids will do in their future? Half of those diagnosed as such don't have autism anyway, the docs just assume and drug them up because what, it's easier? I believe some parents force the doctors into such a diagnosis as well just because they can't control their own kids - NOT all of them however; I'm not trying to say that autism doesn't exist, but just like getting an antibiotic for a cold some people swear helps them - which it does not - the same goes for mental health diagnoses. It's easier to blame bad behavior on an illness as opposed to bad parenting.
Thankfully my 14 yr old has never had any of these problems aside from typical child behavior - tantrums, etc, but never to such a degree that I did not handle myself without incident. Even now when she gets sick I don't rush her to the doctor. What's the point? Be put on a medication that she does not need, such as an antibiotic for an ear infection that will clear up either on it's own or with the help of 2 benadryl a day? I've done that for years and she has built no tolerance to these drugs, unlike most kids. Add a little Motrin for pain if needed and she's good to go. What happens when kids are constantly on antibiotics anyway, aside from developing a tolerance to them? Never read any studies on that, and God knows what any type of drug you ingest can do to you in the future since they're all manufactured.
The key here is to make sure these people with the mental issues not fall through the cracks, as so many of them do. There is a big problem with this, and I'd rather see these professionals go overboard rather than assume everything will be okee dokee with their patients because of the meds they're put on. I don't know what else can be done though, but something needs to be, and soon.
Expat, few of the school shooters had a psychiatric diagnosis. See the study by the U.S. Secret Service. Clearly, most of the shootings can't be easily explained by medications, as you are stating. Here's the study: http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/PDFs/061002_Safe_Schools.pdf.
@Bill Dedman
Thank you! I think the whole mental health thing is a red herring in this debate.
The only sensible thing is to BAN Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines NOW! Nothing else will do!
When I was teaching high school, mostly in large inner city schools, I was shocked by the poor problem-solving skills my students had.
I don't know if they didn't have good parental models or were psychologically incapable of learning these skills. Maybe the only problem-solving they learned was to physically hurt someone - like in video games - when they felt hurt or frustrated. They had very limited verbal skills as well and had difficulty even identifying or describing the problem.
I don't like big high schools. It's too easy for kids to get lost and develop the mentality that they can just hide until someone else solves the problem for them.
When a student can't even figure out how to get to school - on time or even at all - you know they have a basic flaw.
"The prefrontal cortex, involved in “executive function” or decision-making, is the last part of the brain to mature"
Yep, I remember when I was young, dumb and full of .... We all have been there folks! You couldn't tell us anything we already didn't know! We had beautiful young vibrant bodies without a lick of sense.
God, nature or whatever you want to call it is cruel that way... Can you imagine had we had the body and the wisdom at the same time????
Thanks for the reply Bill. I'd like to see that study but your link doesn't work for me. Fix? Thanks.
I do understand Columbine shooters, or at least one, was on Luvox. I also do know for a fact that at least one medicine, Adderall, can absolutely have a negative impact on personality, converting people into control freaks. I also know that some of these meds absolutely can make people suicidal. Brain chemistry is something that is hardly understood. Consequently medication to alter it is dangerous territory in my opinion, particularly when it's a fact that everyone's brain chemistry varies, just as our body chemistry does.
To me, common sense should make it obvious that psychotic medication can have to an extent, unpredictable results from one person to another, and that a few people could easily be made homicidal and/or suicidal by them. And it only take one person in 300 million to commit a mass murder like the one we just saw to make national news.
There are some 270 million guns in the USA. Skipping the principled argument and going right to the pragmatic one, you'll never be rid of guns no matter what bans are attempted, so your proposed solution not only fails but does worse, as the criminals will keep them.
And since one can easily commit mass murder with things other than guns, it is the talk about guns that is a red herring. Guns have been around for hundreds of years, but mass shootings like the recent ones we've seen only in the last 10-12. What's changed?
expat7,
I'll tell you what changed; putting anti-bullying rules into place at our schools and giving every kid who shows up to a sporting event an award just for breathing will do for starters.
The first thing that society has done wrong is the every-child-is-a-special-little-snowflake attitude of the last couple of decades. As a child growing up in the '60s and '70s, I didn't win awards constantly in school. Once in a while, there was an achievement like an A on a test, or the award you got in gym for doing the President's physical fitness challenge, but I was just average. When I did achieve something that was recognized, I knew it was because I worked hard to achieve it.
Nowadays, kids just have to show up at a sporting event and they get a little trophy that's labeled MVP. They start this in preschool and it ends just about the time the child turns 10. And then the kid asks "why am I not getting an award or ribbon for participating?", and I, as the parent, while knowingly letting my kid participate in these events despite hating this system of awards in order for him to have some kind of team experience, have to explain about that thing called hard work and practice and doing the best the kid can do and maybe someday he'll get that award. But I think at this late age, it is too late for the kid - he's been conditioned to expect an award just for showing up. There is no hard work involved!
The anti-bullying rules in place at our schools prevent our kids from learning how to resolve conflicts in real-life situations. I was born in 1960, so I am nearly 53 years old. From my experience growing up prior to anti-bullying rules, kids were picked on in school for various reasons ranging from the color of their shirt to all-out fights-every-day at the bus stop or elsewhere. The small things like getting picked on because of your clothes, you learned to cope - every bully is going to find something to pick on. I got picked on, my brother got picked on, but we survived. As for the fist fights, this was real training for life because sometimes you really had to stand up for yourself without mommy and daddy getting involved. You earned respect if you stood up for yourself and the bullying eventually stopped once the bully realized you weren't going to take his crap. Did it hurt? Sure it did, but it was good training for life because you learned to cope with the hurt and finally figured out that what you wore or what stuff you had was not as important as the kind of person you were. Once you left school and had to enter the adult world, you knew how to solve problems. And it wasn't with guns, but your brains.
Now, add the frustration of the kid who expects to be a winner in everything and has been not taught how to cope with reality with things like violent video games and movies, and they learn problem solving through violence. Someone's bothering you, shoot 'em. You don't like the way your life is going, shoot up a room-full of people.
That, IMHO, is what is wrong. That and parents who do not parent their kids and shelter them from every little life crisis - I think in Lanza's case, his mother sheltered that kid and did not seek out the appropriate help and schooling for him, but this all will come out as the investigation proceeds.
^^^ Smart mom in NJ!!
For a moment I thought I was listening to my own mother in my head while reading what she wrote!!
Damn, she is right!
C NJ Mom, For the most part, I agree with you. While I agree that kids need to learn to work things out on their own - there is a point when the adult needs to step in. I have a son that was bullied horribly from Kindergarten through Second Grade (he's in 3rd/4th grade now). The bullies were in third - fifth grade at the time (when he was in K, they were in 3rd, and so on). He was thrown into a dumpster, punched, kicked, had his privates grabbed and twisted, etc.,etc. He would come home from school with bruises. I contacted the kids parents, I was told to "F--- Off, my son wouldn't do that" (yet I saw it happen, and other people that lived in the neighborhood saw it happen). I contacted the school - the principal said "well, we prefer to just let them work it out". Finally it stopped when they broke my son's arm and I called the cops. The rules at the school changed after this incident - now, they do take it seriously when someone complains of a bullying problem.
Yes, kids need to be allowed to work things out - but, when 3rd graders are beating up a kindergartener, 4th graders are beating up a 1st grader, and 5th graders are beating up a 2nd grader, something needs to be done to put a stop to it. Allowing kids to figure out how to negotiate these problems is important; however, when they are unsuccessful in getting the problems to end, and are unable to defend themselves (either they are significantly younger, smaller, physically incapable, etc., etc), then we, as adults, have to make it stop. If someone is insisting on being a bully, then they deserve to be punished appropriately for their actions.
C NJMom you have some good points but that is only one of the problems. The number of people suffering from mental illness is on the rise while health services for them have decreased. The number of guns has also risen. Yes, I was born in 1960 as well. I didn’t have to worry about someone coming to school with a gun. Most parents didn’t own one. If they did, they didn’t have it available for little junior. The other problem is that parents really aren’t putting enough time into their kids. Trolling is the favorite pass time, and parents can all tell you which kids are getting very low supervision. It really is the parent’s job to teach compassion and many just don’t do it. Check out article from ABC: “Study Shows More Mental Illness, but Decline in Getting Help”, Mother Jones: “More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence?” Let’s not forget 1 in 5 kids Bully. These Bullies have new tools called Cyber bullying. It really is time to get more involved as a parent.
Expat and CNJMom,
In the 1960 we handled bullying by fighting back. I did it and never had to worry about it again. I was very strong and capable but that isn't going to work against a gun in the hands of someone who is Mentally Ill. There are loopholes that need to be closed.
James Holmes should have been in the hospital, but he got guns through the internet.
“James Holmes spent months stockpiling thousands of bullets and head-to-toe ballistic gear without raising any red flags with authorities.
The suspect in the mass theater shooting availed himself of an unregulated online marketplace that allows consumers to acquire some of the tools of modern warfare as if they were pieces of a new wardrobe. The Internet is awash in sites ranging from BulkAmmo.com, which this weekend listed a sale on a thousand rifle rounds for $335, to eBay, where bidding on one armored special forces helmet has risen to $799.”
It is time to get rid of the loopholes. This guy was seeing a doctor and was diagnosed with mental illness.
Psych drugs are a problem - not just for people who kill. The difficulty, as someone mentioned, is brain chemistry. A drug that works great for one person may drive another off a cliff. A drug that has worked for a long time may suddenly drive a person to obsess on suicide. A drug used to combat depression can cause mania if someone is bipolar. Combine these side effects with a young man who is naturally going through the raging hormone phase and it can be deadly. I have also wondered about these drugs and the many military suicides, as well. The drugs can be helpful, and an adult may be able to recognize when symptoms go awry, a young person, especially one who is not self-aware, may not.
It sounds like his mother may have coddled her son also, and perhaps not used very good judgment. Getting a kid into guns when he has acknowledged mental health issues? This happened with Kip Kinkel in Springfield Oregon. Kid had problems, parents bought gun to give him "something to do," Kip kills parents, 2 at school and 20 wounded. This just doesn't make sense. I have also observed something else parents do that, I think, is a big one. Example. A friend's son would nag her when she said no. He would plead, mom said no. This would escalate until he was yelling and acting aggressive, when she would finally give in. "No" always meant to him bully her into "yes." I told her once she was raising a date rapist. Of course, she was pissed, but, surprise, he did become a date rapist, and served time. This is frustratingly common.
I'm totally against the kid having to fight the bully at school because bullies are often older and bigger. It is our responsibility as adults to create an atmosphere that is uncomfortable for bullies, and for parents and teachers to stop being sucked in by those manipulative, little "angels." Sure, fighting the bully can work sometimes, but it doesn't stop the bully, he or she just seeks a new victim. They, then, grow up to be bullying spouses/parents, bosses, or teachers. Yet, problem-solving doesn't seem to be a valued skill for many. In fact, if we really self-examined, we would probably find that parents have the capacity to be more dangerous than guns.
People seem to have the impression that just because they can give birth, they know how to be parents. I've seen this repeatedly, too. The other day in the grocery store, a woman had her toddler in the cart. He was holding his crotch and crying, "pee, mommy." She just kept sorting through the meat. There was a bathroom in the store. Finally I said, "mom, your son needs to pee, and you need to take him." She told me to mind my own business, and kept sorting. My grandma-mode kicked in and I told her to take her son to the bathroom now." She cussed me out all the way down the aisle at the top of her lungs. This was in a grocery store in an affluent neighborhood. Think she would have known better? Not hardly. Parents need to drop their arrogance and self-righteousness, and work with others to raise good kids. Many raise them like they were taught, but we have much, much more knowledge about cognitive and emotional development than our parents ever did. Knowing this, I can't figure out why parents would allow video games or tv to be babysitters. We can raise children who are self-aware and compassionate. Kids who have activities and opportunities to succeed, whose minds and bodies are challenged, who receive guidance and are allowed to make mistakes and to deal with the consequences generally grow up to be pretty good adults. We have changed our behaviors many times as a society. Cigarettes, drinking and driving, seat belts, safety measures, nutrition, exercise, caring for the old, working conditions - all areas where as a society we said we wanted something better. We can change our attitudes about violence, as well. Violence and bullying address the lowest level of human consciousness. Some may want to stay in that world, many of us want society to evolve to higher levels of awareness.
Bill Dedman, pondering things a bit, I gotta call you/MSNBC to the table here.
I've seen news reporters at press conferences come down pretty dang hard on politicians and such, asking every question under the sun when there's a controversial issue. No stone is left unturned. Reporters are well trained and experienced in the field to ask every question imaginable. I've been amazed at questions reporters have been able to come up with.
So tell me, why are NO reporters ever asking about the possible role of prescription psych meds in the recent shootings? Why is it that the possibility that this shooter might have been on prescription drugs not even mentioned in a single MSNBC news report? Your prior response to me above suggests that the answer is because of a single study supposedly issued by the Secret Service (I've never heard of the SS ever conducting or releasing studies, BTW) that concludes that psych meds can't reasonably be responsible for these mass killings.
But anyone who's familiar with "studies" knows they are often erroneous, and multiple studies very often reach conflicting conclusions, and often funded by parties that are biased toward one conclusion or another.
Now at the top of this screen I'm typing on right now, I see an advertisement for something called "Axiron" which is apparently some kind of "testosterone topical solution" with a note "ask your doctor if AXIRON is right for you". Obviously MSNBC is receiving funds from at least one prescription drug making company, so now I'll play the aggressive reporter Bill, and I want to know from you, is MSNBC is under any pressure from drug making companies to NOT report on any possible role of prescription drugs in the recent mass killings?
How many drug making companies does MSNBC accept advertising funds from?
Are any of those companies also makers of drugs like Prozac, Luvox, Zoloft or Paxil?
Do you feel MSNBC can remain unbiased on the possible connection between prescription psychotic meds and the shootings at Sandy Hook and Aurora when it accepts advertising dollars from drug making companies?
Is there any disclosure by MSNBC of possible conflicts of interests related to it's reporting of shootings by mentally unstable people and it's accepting funds from psychotic drug making companies?
Finally, if there is, in fact, a connection between these shootings and prescription psychotic meds made by companies that advertise on MSNBC, is MSNBC willing to ignore the possible role of psychotic meds in shootings at the risk of allowing more such shootings in the future if it helps MSNBC continue to earn money from drug making companies?
Tough questions, I'm sure Bill, but ones I'm confident that MSNBC can answer. I do hope to see a response. Thank you.
Re: fighting bullies
I agree that children should not have to tolerate bullying from older/bigger kids. The odds will be against the bullied child. However, a kid that is being bullied who can fight back and best the bully, should be allowed to do so and not have to fear some anti-bullying rules at school that the bullied kid can't fight back. These rules take control of the situation from the bullied child - and you wonder why so many kids who apparently bullied when they were younger come back and shoot up their schools.
From personal experience, bullies are cowards. If the bullied kid stands up for him/herself and fights back, the bullies usually run or will not pick on the kid again. And the bullied child claims victory and self-confidence. JMHO.
Over the weekend I was discussing the recent shootings with family members and suggested that the current partisan methods of "news reporting," might play a role. My brother, knowing that I tend to favor liberal positions, and always enjoying being a contrarian, looked to dismiss my argument, saying that both sides are culpable of partisan reporting. I agree, however I am also of the opinion that conservative reporting looks to evoke a greater level of rage and hostility and plays to a vulnerable audience. As is stated in the article:
"There is something that many violent people do have in common, however. Research done by Teicher, Fallon and others shows that violent criminals are, in fact, excessively anxious and fearful.
“Individuals at risk for violence often suffer from tremendous anxiety,” Teicher said. “It’s one of the most striking things I have noticed.” He’s treated high school students expelled or suspended for violence, but when they are in his office, they are anything but threatening.
“These are the frightening children in high school, yet they are essentially sitting in their mother’s laps,” Teicher said. “They were ridden with anxiety.”
And in some cases, this is combined with an inability to “read” other people. Teicher’s found this in some patients."
Isn't the target audience of the Limbaughs and Hannitys and the majority of the Fox News contributors, people who inclided to believe, in varying degrees, that others can't be trusted and are out do get them? Didn't O'Reilly even write a book with a title "Who's Looking Out for You," or something of that nature, as if no one else could be trusted? Don't they play to the fears of the anxious fearful individuals while the likes of MSNBC and PBS play to intellectuals (a not quite as hostile group)? I wish Murdock and Ailes would think about that when they are looking to delegate blame.
C NJ Mom: I don't disagree with your post #1.15 at all. I have no problem with kids defending themselves, and attempting to resolve problems on their own. As adults, we need to teach our kids how to deal with these situations, we also need to be willing to step in when the problem is beyond the child's abilities to resolve safely. We need to teach our kids that it is ok to defend themselves though.
I don't have a problem with anti-bullying rules, so much as I have a problem with zero-tolerance rules. Zero-tolerance rules prohibit teachers and others that work with children from allowing kids to defend themselves when appropriate. Anti-bullying rules can be a good thing - but only when applied appropriately. Zero-tolerance rules prohibit appropriate application of anti-bullying rules (and other rules).
John, I agree. I've watched this happen in my family and with friends. My bro is a particular example. He has always been conservative, but we could talk and agree on some things. When he started driving an hour and a half to get to work, he listened to talk radio. Although he makes great money, has a good job, and secure life, he has gotten increasingly conspiracy-minded, sends insulting emails, and expresses anger about things most people would just shrug. It's frustrating because we can hardly talk anymore.
This lanza kid looked 99 cent short of a dollar! I'm sure he was bullied growing up as a kid. They need to cut his brain open and see if there are some helpful findings.
Should look at the Mothers DNA .... Now she was Crazy...he was sick.
@NJ Mom
I do agree with over coddling of kids these days but I find your attitude of "bullying is OK it teaches our kids lessons" attitude to be disturbing.
The concept of the anti bullying campaigns are to get all the kids to unite and stand up against the bully. Not only does it flush out the bully it teaches them that working together they can solve a problem.
Your theory about standing up to the bully will show them you will not take their crap and they will go away is very "A Christmas Story" and all but it's far from the truth. It may have worked that way in the 60's and 70's (I doubt it did but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt) but that was a long time ago and does not apply today or even when I was in school in the 80's and 90's.
Say a kid stands up to a bully, the kid is more likely to get in trouble for fighting and have action taken against him/her and the bully is then "the victim". At least that is how it was when I was in elementary and middle school. So much for your analogy about standing up to the bully, it works in the movies and on TV but that's about it.
C NJ MOM, I grew up in the same era and experienced the same things. IMO you're absolutely correct. Kids these days have no conflict resolution skills, the present "system" is failing them, and us. Excellent post.
Here's a different take: the young man who used to be Adam Lanza's caretaker (told to never turn his back on the boy) stated that the child was incapable of feeling pain, which is a rare physical condition requiring constant supervision, lest the person hurt himself and not realize the seriousness. What if you had never felt physical pain? When I was a child about to get my first vaccination, I asked my mom "Will it hurt?" She said something very wise: "Yes, but you can handle it." This is what physical pain teaches us, essentially. By extension, would a person unable to feel physical pain be able to handle emotional pain? The emotional pain that comes with being different from the other kids, or from your parents' disappointment with you, or from your parents' divorce, your brothers' departure, your sad prospects in the world? I think not. Further, physical pain teaches us compassion, i.e., to 'feel with' other people; many of us refrain from hurting our fellow humans because we know how much it hurts, having been hurt ourselves. Not this kid. He didn't have a clue, and he was never taught, because his mother thought the way to deal with his problems was to protect him from their consequences. I hope the researchers take a look into the ramifications of his rare biology. We, however, will never stop shaking our heads.
The system may be failing them by turning dna over to universities to attempt to point the finger at some other thing other than Big Pharma and meds they fill our children with when they know they are bad for the children. Covering up the reason for mental breaks isn't the answer. If it turns out this kid was on psychotropics than it is time to have a serious discussion about the ethics of giving these powerful dangerous drugs to children and the idiocy of giving vaccines to pregnant mothers. Big Pharma is not the answer, it is the problem. Media has to make a choice between it's advertiser and it's moral obligation to be truthful with humanity.
CNJ Mom, while I agree with you (being only 5 years younger than you), we must recognize the differences in the world children face today and the world we faced when WE were growing up. Yes, there are some similarities but there are distinct differences. Yes, I'll admit those differences are a little difficult to pinpoint exactly, but my gut feeling tells me there are some. Perhaps it's a matter of perception but allow me to give an example.
A fight in back of the school back when we were kids usually (but not in all cases) went like this: you fought - with fists, slaps, roll around in the dirt, whatever - and whoever won, as determined by last one standing when a teacher broke it up and said "that's enough," well that was the end of it. You might not have ended up friends with that person but they left you alone after that. Today it is more likely to go like this: Repeated tauntings, beatings, and more intensive threats, and escalation to recruitment of additional buddies to get in on the "fun" and violence with weapons. The teased somehow becomes the enemy and/or that which fuels the bully's incredible craving for self esteem.
Add in the combination of declining morals where everything is relative, desensitization to violence, the disintegration of family and community, poor parenting skills and/or reduced coping ability to deal with the mounting pressures of sheer survival, the ever-declining quality of mental and physical healthcare, the shrinking middle class...ad nauseum. I'm not offering EXCUSES, but simply pointing out the differences in what the children of today face. I fear for my grandchildren, as to what they world will be like when THEY are young adults. It has already become a "do whatever the h*ll you want, nobody cares" world.
@Headintothewind
Well spoken, that pretty much sums up what school and dealing with bullies was like when I was young. The stick up for yourself and everything will be okay attitude does not work in today's world.
That statement hits close to home because that is what happened more often then not when I was young.
C NJ MOM - I disagree with you 100% Bullying should not be allowed with or without anti-bullying rules. I was bullied every day of my miserable life when I was growing up, crying every day. That has made me who I am today and sometimes, I must say, I do NOT like myself too well. I can see how kids can go off when they've had enough. Do I condone it? NO! But something has to stop the bullying and not just by growing a spine. Teachers and parents alike need to be aware of the bullying problems that continue to grow. I had a teacher who once sent me out in the hall "to compose myself" rather than sending the little bitches bullying me to the office for discipline.
I have always, always corrected my daughters when they would speak ill-will towards another person (child or adult - it didn't matter). You don't make fun of people for the way the look, where they live, their clothes or anything else. No one person on this earth is any better than anyone else, and that includes Lanza - no one was any better than him - not even now.
And the "young adults" of today have not one iota of respect for someone our age (we're the same age). When we teach the young kids to respect others then the bullying will stop. We won't read about school shootings, bus monitors and the like.
So, there you have it. Scientists have discovered the "gay" gene, the "fat" gene and soon to be the "crazed lunatic" gene. All three of these have everything to do with learned behavior, lack of self control and nothing else.
Sorry, but the reason we are here today talking about DNA is that there is no transparency in these investigations. We already know the government is in bed with the drug mfgers AND the media helps in this process by NOT talking about the real issues. #1 We MUST HAVE blood samples taken at the scene from a Qualified 3rd party who will do a complete blood workup on the so called perpetrator. #2 We MUST HAVE full transparency with the investigation and all pertinent information. #3 We need to know exactly where the CIA and ALL government and government contractors are with their Psychotropic Drug experiments.#4 We need to bust up the media monopoly. We as a people and as owners of this country cannot get the information we need to run our government unless we are given the truth and we are NOT BEING GIVEN THE TRUTH.
Several good points being made in this thread, I can see a
combination of each side. I feel you need to throw in the “instant 15 minutes
of fame” you get when the video your friend takes of you surrounding someone
and bullying/beating them goes viral on U Tube. This pack mentality, the need
of seeking acceptance outside through violence is what has changed. Nobody needs to be bullied or beaten, but sometimes you need to fall down and skin your knees when you're learning to walk so you know how it feels.
Well, Justme, I too was bullied, and while I did not like it, I grew up and learned how to handle conflict. My experience made me more confident in myself.
It is said that if life gives you lemons, to make lemonade. You must have had enough confidence to have relationships and have children. If you say that you don't like yourself, please explore this with a counselor - perhaps you'll find out that you have more strength and confidence than you realize.
Peace, and a Happy New Year to you and yours.
This tragic story defined 3 things for America.
1. Not selling a gun to a person with a disorder, will never stop him or her from acquiring one illegally.
2. Creating laws that make it illegal to bring a weapon to a school yard means nothing to a killer with a criminal mind.
3. Disarming the sane person will make him a victim to a deranged person that we know will always be able acquire a gun illegally.
devils ad.
why try it with drugs for so many failed years
because we try to fix cowardice, guns promote it on all sides
coward
Medications have to be a factor in the violence/shootings like in CO and CT. The term "going postal" came about a number years ago after a KY postal worker on Prozac went into his workplace, firing on coworkers. It's just gotten worse.
They could study his dna to try and prevent this kind of thing, but if it turns out some big product from some mega corporation has a link, the study will just get buried. If they find out what caused this, they may just use it to create a more perfect killer for covert operations. somehow, I think we the people will lose out anyway.
Bill Dedman, Lets have a look at that study. First thing you see is the time frame 1974-2000 over 12 yrs. old. does not include any incident for the last 12 yrs. ok. 37 incidents were studied. Here are a few findings from that study: "most attackers had no history of violent or criminal behavior." also "most attackers showed some history of suicidal attempts or thoughts or a history of feeling extreme depression or desperation." " THE ONLY INFORMATION COLLECTED that would indicate whether the attackers had been prescribed psychiatric medications concerned non-compliance (i.e., failure to take medications as prescribed). 10% were found to be non-compliant". No data on how many took psych. drugs, Bill. Essentually you have a room full of Psychologists and Psychiatrists deciding drugs have no culpability unless the patient is non-compliant. We need a new study focusing on meds not ignoring them.
Great post, OCinLA. A 12 year old study, which also predates most of these mass shootings. Heck, in any medical study of the effectiveness of a medicine, even a partial diviation between the test group and the placebo group is considered significant, so if the percentage of shootings involved people with these psychiatric drugs differed from cross appropriate sections of the general population, that WOULD BE statistically significant.
But it does seem we won't get any answer from NBC on this.
We are still in the "nature vs. nuture" debate. Yet the scientists quoted here appear to have developed quite a bit of data showing characteristics and traits common to violent young people. The key would be to identify thses problem children, isolate them and monitor them so they don't hurt anybody.
Its much better to impinge on the personal freedom of a troubled kid, then expose him to the innocent public.
That is the idea or narrative that we need to get out into the public perception. Enough of the "least restrictive environment" concept for the mentally ill!
The reality is that these biological factors are only one part of the equation. Many people have the MAOA gene but are not at all violent. In fact, one of the researchers in this field (who I will not name to respect their privacy) discovered during their investigations that they themselves has this gene but has never been at all violent. The problem is that there are many factors involved, so to treat someone differently based solely on there having this gene would be completely unreasonable. We can not punish someone when they have not yet done anything wrong just because they may have a certain biological factor that may place them more at risk of becoming violent.
I agree Jeff, but will it ever be done? Go a little overboard rather than hurting someones feelings or going to possible extremes if the situation calls for it?
Do we know that it's the bullies in school that do these massacres? I don't think so, as it's usually the ones being picked on instead. The parents need to monitor their own kids and they're not doing a very good job of it either. I'm a parent and know the moods of my daughter very well and make sure I'm involved in what's going on in her life. I have to, as my responsibility as a parent in general.
This was an interesting and enlightening article, but more needs to be done and it has nothing to do with gun control. People will always find a way to get a gun regardless of what the gov't dictates. It's keeping up with the people with mental problems/issues that needs to be watched very carefully, and continually. Of course, the question here too is whether we have, as a nation, the resources to do so. With the economy the way it is and everything being cut back, these people are all losing and it seems like we can't do a damn thing about it.
Jeff, no, the study of school shooters shows that there is no profile that fits, no "type" of person that allows you to say, these people are more likely to commit such acts. There are behaviors that sometimes can be interrupted (grievances, planning, communicating intent, acquiring weapons), but no type of person, nothing that would, as you suggest, allow for isolation of people more likely to be school shooters. The study: http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/PDFs/061002_Safe_Schools.pdf
I seriously doubt any time in the near future we will be able to pick out, with any certainty, those problem children who are more likely to act out violently. As mentioned above, it is a complex dance between any number of genes AND environment with no one specific trigger (no pun intended) to set someone off. I have a sibling on the autism disorders spectrum, on anti-anxiety and antidepression meds, who will never be violent as these shooters became - one due to gender (female - rarely violent like this) and age (46.) She did have some fierce mood swings as a teen, more of a degree than kind compared with normal teen hormonal outbursts, largely due to the frustration of not understanding people and them not understanding her. Time and meds quelled that. Our father was a police officer - and to this day I'm not sure whether he even had his gun at home or kept it at the station. We never saw it and I don't recall him ever needing to draw it in 38 years on the force. So for us, firearms were a non-issue. I think a lot of the furor over guns IS linked to anxiety and fear, the anxious and fearful among us feeling a "need" to be armed, to make themselves feel more powerful or safe and secure. The non-anxious types among us are either non-gun owners or those who use one only as a tool for basic hunting. The mega-clip, high speed, high powered guns and ammo seem to act like security blankets for the nervous.
"problem children, isolate them and monitor them so they don't hurt anybody" -- argument for a prison planet gmab with this. How about we stop allowing Dr's and Government mandate pharma on children and mothers instead of imposing a prison planet fear mentality on society. How about less instead of more. Anyone with any common sense can do a search for impact of psychotropics on children and the connection to specifically these type of shootings. If you need help finding it check out cchrint org
"Problem children" and violent "young people" to be studied = male.
The other half of the population is just fine, except for having to endure and try to live amid all the violent males, that is.
there currently trying that with me
no what a blevy is
is the biggest gas line in the world under san pedro in albq nm, hmmm makes you think what else i can get away with saying
cowards
@ littlechanges lol Women don't do the killings, they just drive men crazy till they kill.
Do you know why men die before their wives? because they want to. lol
And our society is based on the premise that individuals are innocent until proved guilty. It is going to be a difficult battle to restrict the rights of an individual because he or she MIGHT commit a crime. At this time mental health care is very limited to even people with insurance, that plus you can't force an adult (over 18) to take medications or to accept voluntary commitment leaves a very big hole in the fight against these types of crimes. Most involuntary commitment holds are 72 hours and anything longer requires a court order. It will be easier to restrict gun ownership than it will be to restrict individual's rights. I'm not saying that is the right answer, it is just the most logical at this time.
Thank you for your comment. Yes, the problems you mention are exactly the reason we need change to a more restrictive environment for people with signs and symptoms of mental illness. Many people are tired of having to tolerate the behaviors of those who have no business being out in public, whether it is agressive, paranoid and angry homeless panhandlers, or people who commit vilolence as in Conn.
We need wholesale change in America in regard to uninhibited freedoms. We have too much freedom sometimes, and it affects the quality of life for everyone. Its not about taking away constitutional freedoms. It s about managing the mentally ill.
I don't think we have too much freedom, in fact we have less and less, for example in New York they are not even allowed to sell big size sodas anymore (which is ridiculous). However, I agree that some people shouldn't have as much freedom, the people who have psychological or neurological issues that cause them to be violent, therefore to be a danger to others, and to themselves.
Also in the article they mention a difficulty to read others, but in at least some cases, it is also the inability to feel sympathy or empathy for others (even if they are told and know what the others are thinking - which is something psychopaths, among others, may struggle with), which may lead a person to underestimate what others do for them (as it does not matter how much they do, or how much they love them, the person who is self-centered to the extreme - I mean due to a neurological or psychological issue - may still feel the exact same way about the people who take care of them, or have sympathy for them, or love them, etc), which can lead to unjustified anger.
It's too late to restrict gun ownership. There are 300 million guns out there with billions of rounds of ammunition. The public is rushing to buy more everyday & will not give them up voluntarily. What is most troubling is the widespread use of mind altering new psychiatric drugs pushed on the market by big pharma with poorly understood side affects. Equally troubling seems the reluctance of mainstream media to examine the link between such drugs & mass shootings. The huge amount of big pharma advertising in today's mass media may explain this.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/school-shootings/psychiatric-drugs/prweb10257504.htm
It's not too late to restrict new ownership, and never too late to require treating existing guns like cars: require gun owners to be trained, tested (including physical, like eye exams) and licensed subject to periodic renewal; register and insure every individual firearm; require, or at least allow, physicians to notify officials if a gun-owner has developed physical or mental health issues which should limit gun use (blindness, uncontrolled seizure disorders, paranoid schizophrenia etc.); put an annual ad valorem tax on each firearm as some states do with cars, and direct those funds to community mental health centers; no straw man purchases allowed, period. If a gun is stolen, fine the owner for not keeping it secure; if no police report is filed, fine the owner big time. If used in the commission of a crime, jail time for the errant owner whether or not they had anything else to do with the crime. Once again allow manufacturers to be sued - if the firearms they sell do not have the equivalent of a VIN on each and a record of its markings on bullets on file for law enforcement. There are lots of ways to sensibly rein in firearms without violating anyone's 2nd amendment rights. It is not absolute, any more than speech is.
At least get rid of all the loop holes.
Who is it that is going to decide whether someone's freedom should be restricted because they MAY become violent??? YOU, preachers, the local sheriff, one mental health professional, a school teacher? And then, does society support all these restricted crazy people? A lot of people don't even want to feed hungry children. Concentration camps for the mentally ill? There are those who want that for gays - we could have wholesale "gated" communities for everyone that the perfect in society don't want to deal with.
And who is going to start rounding up all the abusive fathers and husbands? What if, to the outside world, he seems the most upstanding kind of guy, while he is terrorizing his family? Better to restrict the freedom of people who MIGHT be violent, rather than restrict the behavior of someone to have semi-automatic weapons.
If we are going to start restricting the freedoms of those who might be violent, we could just start from scratch and put all males into a reformatory school from the first day of school. Since, after all, men are much, much more likely to use violence than women. Perhaps that way they can be taught other ways to deal with anger, frustration, anxiety, etc. Then, we can start sorting out the girls, and lock away the little girls who are manipulative, game players.
Get rid of loopholes, ban automatic weapons, and hold gun owners responsible if their gun is used to commit a crime. If the gun is stolen, maybe he will learn to be more careful about how he stores them.
Call for Federal Investigation of Psychiatric Drugs
Despite 22 international drug regulatory agency warnings on psychiatric drugs causing violent side effects including aggression, mania, violence, psychosis, suicidal and homicidal ideation and 14 recent school shootings committed by those under the influence of, or withdrawal from, psychiatric drugs, there has yet to be a federal investigation into psychiatric drugs causing violence.
Sign this petition to 'clarify' gun ownership requirements:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/create-28th-amendment-gun-ownership-privilege/tRJtD6L7
The world will someday become weary of violence and the enormous toll it extracts from all of society. The expense of nutty violent males is also a factor. They are the primary reason most people have double locks and an alarm system or two on their home and car, while constantly looking over their shoulder for some soulless rapist, or can't let their kids play in their own front yard. I long for the day when these broken brain birth defects can be detected in utero, around the globe. Until then, every creature on Planet Earth has little choice but to live in fear, buy better locks, and dodge bullets of innumerable genetically broken warriors, esp. the entitled little bast*rds fed a steady diet of violent American media and games that plant the seeds that grow into a paranoid schizophrenic fantasy grudge against total strangers.
You all do know that the military has there hands in all this right?
Someone who can kill children without a second thought and so many people (HAS to have something in there DNA worth exploiting - this is a military mindset)
The Military will learn much from his corpse, oh boy.
Finally someone is starting to understand the skewed thoughts creating false perceptions in a sick mind. What isn't mentioned is that those thoughts can be hidden and kept private until it is too late. I like to compare it to vertigo. People need to be educated as to what are normal thoughts and what are not, so they are the one seeking the help. It doesn't work to tell someone to get help unless they understand they are sick.
Pilots and divers are trained to recognize vertigo before they experience it so they can fall back on sound training which will pull themselves out of a dangerous situation. We don't teach people what to look for in a sick mind when they are healthy. So, when sickness comes, it is a sick mind with false perceptions trying to heal itself. Mental health training needs to be done in healthy minds before a sickness occurs.
Education as to when to seek help is imperative. Just as important, is reducing the negative stigma with mental health so that when you know your sick, there are no obstacles in the way of getting help. Obstacles such as loosing a job, qualifications or respect. Schools need to do a better job teaching what good mental health is and how to keep it. Then we need to know what starts these mental break downs. I personally believe that it starts with a moral injustice that you perceive is inescapable. Anxiety grows from that perception and anxiety can over take your body. Ask anyone and they will tell you they can run faster scared than they can mad. When you are scared due to false perceptions, anything can happen.
Why go into genetics when we ignore symptoms and/or signs, such as threats, violence, anger, abuse, or battery in so many of these cases? We live in a society where we ignore and do not adequately respond to the obvious, but feel compelled to find an underlying cause after the fact. Talk about getting your cart before the horse! How many protection orders are issued every year after a violent/threatening episode? How many die in those kind of relationships? Where is the prevention/protection? It's always easier to place blame than it is to actually address the problem. Do some research. Columbine was planned as a bombing (they wanted to blow up the school) and the guns were to be used to shoot those that ran from building. The bombs failed. You know the rest of the story. If you want to blame guns, I guess that's your right. But remember, it was an anti-government veteran extremist that killed 187 people (including children at a day care) with a truck bomb in Oklahoma City. You fool yourself into thinking you've eliminated this problem by removing the means.....until the violent, sick and warped move on to other means.
Seems pretty cleat that former military McVeigh wasn't wrapped right, doncha think? I'm no fan of intrusive govt. or unfair tax policies but I'm also not XY, not a paranoid narcissist, don't have an arsenal in the basement and never in several million years would even think to blow up anything, let alone anyone. These guys who act out always seem to think the world is against them, when, in fact, the world could give a crap about them. Perhaps the real motivation of these violent nutbags is an immature and sick, twisted need for attention.
Both this shooter and the one in Aurora were already diagnosed with mental illness. I personally wonder what meds they were on, but the articles do not say.
Possibly they weren't on any meds, or if some had been prescribed, the shooter may have been "off" them because they didn't like the side effects.
A doctor can prescribe meds for a person, but if that person is over 18 no one can force him/her to take them.
Should we not allow people to have gun permits because they have been issued prescription meds for mental issues? Is that right? Is it legal? Just because a person is on meds for depression, PTSD whatever that doesn't mean they are potentially violent?
wrong i was force rispreidone at nm pres
either take it or stay and well get a court case
i threatened to kill so many people i think they figured out what is going on because im still free, kinda
someday someone will finally understand that the medications make it possible to pretend better, not to be better. you want to know what was going on in his head? Bees,angry bees on meth. He probably decided to do what he did about a nano second before he pulled the first shot. He didn't exist in our reality. He lived and breathed in his own world and you can call it whatever name you want to call it and give him as much medication or therapy as you want, until we grow up and put on our big kid pants and admit some people are not balanced and therefore possibly dangerous we will have these things. He didn't intend to kill children. he was playing some sick psycho game in his own mind and never ever knew what he did. he was sick. he walked thru heavens gates with the same children he sent on their way moments before.
Off your meds again?
Uh no, he did not walk through heaven's gate with the children he sent there.
You can't fix stupid or crazy!
Stupid, I agree. "Crazy" depends on what the diagnosis is - some can be treated, even cured (e.g. from a brain tumor that can be removed) and other diagnoses, not so much.
Some of the side effects can be worst than the condition. You see it on tv all the time. Take something for a skin rash and end up getting lymphoma. go figure. Radiation kills both bad and good cancer cells. tit for tat and ying for yang. Good and Evil. The list goes on.
Doubtful the Columbine, Aurora, Newtown or long list of other mass murdering pricks did it because they were on athlete's foot medication or had cancer. Humans are part of the animal kingdom and some animals are just born bad, others become rabid. There have always been males who shot up schools (i.e, women and children). No one needs them or misses them when gone. Too bad so many of them actually live long lives, given how many old geezer murderers and rapists are in prison.
BWTCHN: He probably decided to do what he did about a nano second before he pulled the first shot? No, no, no. These were planned executions, starting with his mother. He smashed his computer hard drive for reasons we will never know. He put on a bullet proof vest, obtained weapons from his own home and drove to a school where he executed children and educators. This plan did not take a nano second as you claim. This took organized planning and intent that did not *take a nano second* to carry out. Adam knew exactly what he was doing.
I say make your best bet on figuring out all these genetic or environmentally screwed up mutants, line them up at a young age and shoot them BEFORE they commit their murders. If you make a few mistakes, it doesn't matter. There's plenty of others to go around.
If this Conn school shooter guy was black, there would be not one discussion on analysis of brains and all that. The media and main street would simply call him a thug. And we would be discussing how to improve the lots of all black people. If this shooter had brown skin and or a Middle Eastern background, he would be labeled a terrorist and we would be discussing on the perils of admitting middle eastern people into this nation. However, he happens to be "white". Therefore, he is everything but a terrorist and the fault lies in some mental disease, lack of adequate mental health facilities and all that. Simply hilarious !
Although serial killing is predominantly a white man's crime, there have been plenty of blacks and Hispanics guilty of this too. We whites just seem to have cornered the market on serial killing. This is more a spree kill than a "serial" kill anyway. And researchers will welcome the brain of any of these types of killers to study as long as the family agrees. We have a lot to learn and (thankfully) very few to learn from. The D.C. killers weren't labeled as thugs and certainly 99.9% of Middle Easterns are not terrorists.
As an aside, though, since I sense a bit of hostility from Mr. Mukherjee, which nations are the most peaceful and which nations are always at war, fighting, killing, bombing, etc? We don't hear much about that from the northern european countries, but we DO from the lesser civilized, warmer climates. And I don't remember the last time my neighbor told me they went to the latest "stoning."
Well, your 'theory' has been shot to hell, Top four serial killers by number of victims is Hispanic...A white man from the U.S. doesn't even enter the list until number five...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_murderers_by_number_of_victims
A lot of places, like India, parts of the Middle East and most of Africa, don't admit to having a serial killer problem and aren't included...
He was also priviledged, living in a nice county with a rich mom. Thats what most of these people are (he is jewish by the way). White, young, broken homes, well off parents that give them anything they want /spoiled little brats.
Which nations are "always at war fighting , killing, bombing"?
How many wars had Europeans engaged in AMONGST THEMSELVES since the fall of the Roman Empire?
How many wars for empire had Europeans engaged in during their "Age of Discovery/Age of Imperialism"?
How many Europeans died at the hands of other Europeans through our two World Wars? How many Russians and Germans and Slavic peoples were bombed to dust in the name of European (or in some cases Ayran) superiority?
How many non-Europeans were killed in Cold War neoliberal campaigns of expansion in Asia, Africa, South America, etc.?
Who committed engaged in campaigns of genocide all through Europe and Africa and Asia and South America and North America all in a quest to comoditize indigenous natural resources and claim soveriegn territory for Northern European interests (the hint is in the question, BTW)?
How many nuclear bombs had non-Europeans dropped on anybody?
And, sorry cookie, of the last 61 mass shootings 60 were committed by white men.
I know the culture of make believe has you thinking white men are so noble and above criminal scrutiny - just like our culture of make believe has you thinking that European culture is superior to all others because they have taken over most of the Earth through the last 500 years of imperialistic expansion - but everywhere you can point to the so-called cultural superiority of Northern Europeans I can point to offshored hostility and displaced aggression on "others" all through their warlike history.
In fact, there would be no European cultural dominance today if Europeans hadn't refined the art of aggression so well they began to take over all other parts of the globe and chalked it up to "Manifest Destiny" or "White Man's Burden" so don't give me that European exceptionalism innocence crap. The world's bloodiest hands are lilly white underneigth.
Yeah that kid that shot up all those people at Virginia Tech was some strange looking spanish kid alright. WTF are you talking about? White people (young males) are more prone to do this than any other race.
Yeah the V-Tech shooter was very white s/
Why would someone commit ANY sociopathic crime, whether mass-murder…or even rape or anyone s3xually desiring minors/pedophilia, for that matter? That is the bigger question. One might also ask, outside genetics, if all criminals are lashing out in destructive ways (much like a very young child who throws toys) because perhaps they are stunted in emotional growth/intelligence, lacking the ability/skills to express themselves maturely…or are they emotionally "damaged"—do they all feel trapped/lost/"choked up inside", unable to express themselves at all, due to societal expectations they simply can't reach, repeated social rejection or abuse, not feeling that they can relate to others around them, etc? I would think those traits would certainly put a person at risk for boiling over like a broken pressure-cooker. Perhaps that is what we need to watch for in the general population: who is feeling like an outcast and lacks the skills to express their feelings verbally, clearly, maturely, before it's too late.
"We need wholesale change in America in regard to uninhibited freedoms."
Jeff H., I have to respectfully disagree with you. Freedom is what makes us different - and better - than any other place. Many of us are willing to accept any consequences for having more freedom - we think it's worth it. If you want more restrictions on freedom, move to any other country. See how you like it.
the amount of cortisol a person is a exposed in the womb ,and early in life seems to make for a more aggressive violent personality .
Bottom line some people are born evil.
Damaged, or wired wrong, and it doesn't always show. There's nothing supernatural (e.g. the devil) about it, and the behavior is often more Amoral than IMmoral. Sorry, don't mean to quibble with words but "evil" implies intent (one has to act, not simply be) and we don't know there is active intent on the part of some of these individuals to be evil or behave in an evil fashion as commonly understood. Some have no understanding of what we call normal human feelings, there is no empathy, and that I suspect is an accident of birth.
Floretta,
I find myself agreeing with EVERY post you make. So tired of the "evil" comments people make about others. Like they are "possessed". People are not born evil. Personally I don't believe there are evil people. I believe people who commit such crimes are either mentally ill or have other significant psychological disorders-- ie personality disorders---that lead to poor decision making or unable to have normal human feelings (as you mentioned). That doesn't mean people are not responsible for their actions. Jails are full of murderers that could probably be diagnosed with some type psychological disorder.
A warrior doesn't murder defenseless children. To convey the idea to a bunch of sicko cowards that they are warriors is really stupid.
I would like to address the fact that Adam's mother knew for years she had a mentally challenged child. He was pulled in and out of schools because of his behavior. His father and sibling has not had contact for over 2 years with her or her son. Yet she bought weapons and trained her "challenged" son in the use of these weapons. Should not most of this "problem" rest with the parent? And the type of environment the child is raised in?
It is unbelieveable that People still believe anyone who kills is a mentally ill wack job that needs to be in a mental hospital. Just because you dont fit in with society doesnt make you a monster. This childs mother had obvious problems herself, She liked to hit bars, She was divorced an owned a houseful of assault rifles an weapons. That doesnt make you mother of the year, it makes you a messed up person. She was obviously pissed off over the fact that not only was she alone , but she had to deal with a child she couldnt understand. So we load these kids with drugs for mental illness an wonder why they act out in school an go nuts. Face it mom was abusive an her son responded to it in the worst way possible. Even Ted Bundy started out as a likeable kid, Then it went down from there... Remember even the sweetest dog will bite your ass if you abuse it long enough, an sometimes the worst abuse of all is mental abuse....
I think the real question here is WHY would a mother who had a mentally challenged child that continued to have mental problems through to adulthood have weapons in the house and also taught him how to use them?
DJohn9,
The mother was clearly in denial that her son was so seriously mentally ill as he actually was. She was in denial by home schooling him, thinking she knew more than the schools. She lived of a $300,00.00 a year alimony check and chose to build her life around her guns and her son. She told his sitters not to turn their back on him, but took off for days for her own vacations. (She was gone for 2 days before the shooting) Some mentally challenged people can take meds and lead productive lives. She did not encourage this. She called him a genius but encouraged his total dependence on her. She was a fixture in the local bar, known to brag about her gun collection. In short, she was not your typical mom. She clearly made a lot of mistakes. Twenty-six lives have paid for her mistakes. A tragic situation brought about by her denial.
I would like to ask the question WHY would a mother with a mentally challenged child from Elementary School age to almost adulthood keep weapons and teach her son how to use them in her home? Should not some blame be put on the parent?
Sorry people. Am a first time comment person but am from Newtown. Did not know how to use this blog.
We are sorry for your losses in Newtown, DJohn9.
I have the same questions that you do. It appears that Mrs. Lanza did not provide the appropriate education nor care for her son by reported accounts. My son is slightly autistic, not anywhere as bad as Adam, and I have to wonder how Adam got a hold of these weapons if mom was a "responsible" gun owner.
This was a very very angry young man. I am so sorry...but I have seen others who were abandoned by their fathers because they did not want to put the effort forward to raise a family. It pains me greatly. Of course I do not excuse the mother for bringing guns into the house. What was her problem?
Apparently - as reported in some news accounts so take it with a grain of salt - she was a "prepper", a survivalist preparing for some coming economic and/or sociopolitical disaster. I don't get it myself but see comments above on anxious and fearful people.
Well she was living in a half million dollar home and getting close to 300,000 a year support. My lord, she was a little off the charts too, don't you think?
I didn't really consider The 10 Commandments a religious concept but a REAL good social skills 101. Sure wish they taught good social skills now
When will we see that "parents" need to step up to the plate also? Where is the modeling of valid morals and perimeters. Why is it allowable for any child to cause an outburst in a classroom? Why is it so hard for parents today to say "NO". I have been a teacher for over 30 years and what I am seeing now is scaring me! Parents do not have control over their children and what is worse is they expect the schools to take over where they have failed! And they blame the schools for not doing enough. Is anyone listening?
I have a challenged kid adopted from foster care. Constantly disrupting the classroom. Failing most subjects most of the time. Socially promoted even when we requested he not be. I even go to school with him. Consequences? He's had In School Suspension, Out of School Suspension, placement for a day in juvenille detention school, etc. NOTHING and I do mean NOTHING matters to him. He's been abandoned by bio mom, bio dad, an aunt & uncle, AND foster parents. So we're the fourth family.... so he "knows" its all going to end at some point. He cares about nothing except being in control. Disrupting the class IS the prize, there's no consequence that would negate that. He takes over for the teacher and RUNS the show. He's beyond charming and everyone adores his antics except the teachers. HE wins. Our house is very stable, very scheduled, very predictible, very consistent. We have taken ALL electronics, play time, tv time, computer time, bike, scooter, sports, activities, parties, etc. but there's nothing he values MORE than being in control. He has ADHD and takes meds, which do help, but only so much. His problems stem from abandonment. Easy to get.... what about the bio kids from stable wealthy families? What causes them to "tick" so differently from the other kids from stable wealthy families? Not saying wealth makes a better person, but the means to obtain help for kids in those families is obviously greater. I could never have weapons in the house with MY kid, let alone a kid who has even greater coping problems. What on earth was that kid's mother thinking???
Obviously, she wasn't thinking at all.
Been There, You have made a great sacrifice and show great compassion to help that boy. Thank you for your service.
Dear Maggie,
Have not seen your comments here or anywhere on any article you have written. Comments?
"Folie A Deux" A madness shared by two!