The Major Factor underlying the Increase in Rampage Killings

Post Reply New Topic

I think the comment that people are looking for their 15 minutes of fame and a blaze of glory, is very possibly associated, but certainly a measure of a mental disturbance. The mental disturbance factor seems to be a consistent issue across time from the record that exists. The expectations of society are as large as they have ever been before.

But, why the sudden demographic of young adult males and even children? That is a factor that has only recently significantly come into play in the last two decades. Obviously age itself is not a causal factor, but without that under 26 demographic in the last two decades, the number of actually killed would be much lower, as it seems that for whatever reason, the larger more notable body counts that linger in the media are coming from individuals under the age of 26, in the last two decades. And this seems to be part of the reason that the attention seems higher amplified against what is perceived as a younger person's disorder, that has never been recognized officially in the last 3 decades of these rampage killings.

I suppose all the other factors are working together broadening the demographic to almost any age of male, but still almost no females.

Is mental illness at a higher rate than before?

Something in common with many of these people is mental illness (mental disorders), especially with the high profile ones: AS (Anders, Bryant, Lanza), Schizophrenia (Joker and Giffords), Anxiety and Depressive Disorders (Cho and Anders), ADHD (Columbine), Narcissist PD (Anders), and anti-social PD (Columbine and possibly Bryant).

Whilst one can say firearms are a common factor, and they are, but firearms aren't a cause for someone's actual behavior, unlike psychiatric conditions that are defined by behavior. "Mass killing" isn't listed in any of the diagnostic books, of course, but "mass killing" is an emotional act -- it's not something robotic (though can people be programmed for these things via media and society at large? A relevant question). Mental disorders can and will affect emotions to a greater extent than the normal population.

At least from the timeline provided in the US, it seems that guns are the main weapon of choice in every killing in the last 30 years, and again, most of which were purchased legally. But as far as limiting which mentally ill person could own a gun, that's close to 25 percent of the population to determine where to draw that line if someone attempted to expand it.

The line is fairly high now, which in effect protects people from themselves more from others, but even that line is not effectively enforced with the system that exists.

I don't see how that could be pursued much differently than it already is, but what exists could potentially be more effectively enforced.

And, I don't see in many instances where that would have made a difference, in recent cases.

In some countries, if there is any evidence of a mental illness one doesn't register and purchase a gun. Such as Israel. I'll have to check it out but for some reason I doubt close to 25% of their population is diagnosed with a mental illness. Or perhaps more do and that is part of the reason they only have 7 guns per every 100 people as opposed to close to 90 in the US. The United states does not have a particularly high level of social health, compared to many other countries. Too many factors there to discuss in one book.

I suppose it says something advantageous about basic human nature that these things don't happen more often everywhere. Perhaps the price of the kind of variety of freedoms that humans have the opportunity to enjoy with out much limitation.

There is always a risk based cost/benefit analysis. Does the joy of purchasing a popular "assault" rifle used for paper targets and collection only for the most part, that a few people choose to purchase or obtain from someone else that purchased them legally for a rampage killing, exceed the actual potential benefit, however small that potential might be that a life might be saved.

Again, where does one draw the line. With broad band access to information and nationwide conversation, no action of the past is no longer considered a viable one.

Last edited by aghogday on 23 Dec 2012, 5:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

I am saying that mental illness isn't a strong enough factor. Let's clarify because mental illness is such a broad term.

What do you mean by "mental illness"? Do you mean someone who is diagnosed under the DSM? If you do, that's now a lot of Americans who cannot purchase a gun. People who were diagnosed with ADHD, dyslexia, post traumatic stress disorder, gender identity disorder, social anxiety, asperger's syndrome, bipolar disorder, and clinical depression. And it doesn't matter how stable they are. They can't purchase a gun, because they are clinically "mentally ill" or have been diagnosed in the past.

That's what I am against. When I say "mental illness" I mean a clinically diagnosed mental illness.

If you mean people who have a certain subset of mental disorders or behaviors common to those who commit gun related crime and massacres then I could see your point.

I have been diagnosed with mental illness. Due to child abuse, I've had two mental breakdowns when I was a teenager. While I still struggle, I've been stable for a long time. I've never been violent nor verbally aggressive even during my breakdowns. I want a gun to protect myself. It would be in a safe at my home locked and concealed until I needed it to protect myself and my family.

Sorry, but you can't take away my rights just because of a very small subset of people.

That's difficult to determine in reality, kind of like the autism prevalence thing. There is no doubt that more people than ever are diagnosed and being treated for mental illness in the US. Doctor's commonly prescribe SSRI's for stress and pain. My understanding is that up to 25% of youth have some type of disorder that could be diagnosed. If the DSM5 serves it's purpose and health care reform works well, 50% of the people in the country could eventually get a diagnosis of some disorder, at least at some point in their life. Those things don't go away in the medical record.

Some countries provide a social norm where some women take great pride in female genital mutilation. Circumcision is a social norm for the more "advanced" cultures. Culture programs everyone, there is no escape.

What does reality become if all one does is play violent video games. It eventually becomes one's culture, and as long as it remains inside of the screen and one's mind there is not much danger to others, in sharing that culture in real life.

While not as often reported in the US, there are more than a few parents in China that have been reported killed over the suspension of video game privileges. It's not likely those privileges come easy when committed. It's never easy to lose one's culture, if one doesn't want to lose it. It's even harder to escape it.

Of course this is nothing new as individuals proudly defend their countries and die for them when convinced wars are justified even if they are not. It's hard to escape one's culture. Rampage killings happen on our soil. The experience is likely similar on other soils for those that fall prey to different points of views. Almost anything is possible if one becomes convinced of their reality. Most people live by the social norms of others. Only a relative few make anything close to their own.

Other, a combination of environmental and social factors and potentially genetic factors if traits that person has or issues they have play a role in it. Society likes ignoring the potential social factors most of the time as it points to there being a problem with the society...they love to jump on mental illness however.

I'm surprised excessive media coverage and sensationalizing isn't on the list.

The news channels and journalists should really be ashamed of themselves. I should be ashamed of myself for even making this post.

You do know that mental illness doesn't have a clear dividing line and can easily become a slippery slope that you get caught in as well...and it can end up affecting a lot more than guns!

"Mental illness" includes pretty much the whole DSM-IV-TR, just FYI and all.

Want to go hunting? Nope, Asperger's
Want to go target shooting? Nope, Asperger's
and it goes on and on

With the expansion of media, comes greater competition for the attention of a limited audience. A solution to that issue could be government controlled censorship of the media promoting a picture without any violence at all, not unlike the fifties, and early sixties; providing a Polly Anna version of life. "The Leave it to Beaver" years.

Media of all types with no limits or boundaries has replaced the culture of the front porch and the neighborhood for many in the country. It started with radio, central heat and air and has expanded out to an almost unlimited access and variety of 24-7 porn and violence for anyone with access to the internet for the vicarious thrill of an alternate virtual reality. It's more difficult for journalists to compete with than the "Leave it to Beaver" years.

It's a different thrill than the warm comfortable nurturing oxytocin/empathy experience many in the culture shared, widely reported, associated with the "Leave it to Beaver" years. A virtual "human" reality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ra ... :_Americas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarcerat ... ted_States

According to the expanded link above for Rampage Killings that does not raise the bar to 4 deaths for a rampage killing, there was only 1 rampage killing for the period of time from 1950 to 1964. It wasn't like that before or after, with rampage killings reported almost every year, with multiple occurrences in some years.

People haven't inherently changed, culture has. One overall answer seems clear; culture. It is running a fever and rampage killings are a type of thermometer, that can be viewed on a historical basis.

While it's a comfortable feeling that most all other crime rates have gone down, that aren't of the first offense rampage killing and suicide variety, there is a hidden thermometer that most do not participate in when vicariously experiencing the world. The incarceration rate of the US, is now the highest in the world. A graph that has sky rocketed right along with the decline in crimes of most kinds.

Of course it's not as simple as "Leave it to Beaver", that's only an artifact from a time long past, that can't be revived with a re-run.

There are many people living out their social roles in Prison, instead of society in a time long past. And a still rare group of others finding a horrifying way out.

So where can we define Culture? What you would like to think, or what the ugly truth is?

More people locked up than anywhere ever, a good thing? 600,000 being released every year, after having served half of 40 years for a crack rock? Is this a Justice System?

Congress is a bunch of thugs paid to enforce corporate goals. If Haliburton wants Saddam whacked, it can be arranged, along with 100,000 to a million bystanders. Do their lives have a lesser value?

Now that was a spree killing, body parts everywhere!

It was not just something that happened, Abu Greb went on for years, questioning by nameless contract rapists.

The slaughter of the Branch Davidians? The Government had a right to do that because they had titty badges, and were wearing costumes?

The invasion of Panama, where a lot more people were killed than you heard about, to send the Army to arrest someone, in a country where we were illegal aliens commiting murder at best. Because that was our Cocaine!

Who sets cultural values? Blame video games, ignor the news?

Those who disagree with the overlords, will have Hellfire missiles targeting them, their family, the grandmother holding the baby, because our god is better.

Assasins captured then killed Osama, in a country where they were illegal aliens, and murders.

How did it change? Nixon OKed Watergate, and had to resign. That amounted to snooping.

Now we have an open Hitman in Chief, The Two Crime Families of Washington are running the Protection Racket on the rest of the world.

Drugs bring in a hundred container loads of hundred dollar bills, every year, and none of it has ever been discovered? It takes a big laundrymat to wash that much. 50,000 from other gangs killed in Mexico, but no drug shortage in America.

So the British sold Opium to China at gun point, it's a business, and we are just businessmen. 40,000 murders a year, maybe 30,000 just vanish, seems organized and systematic.

Selling guns to the Cartels, when caught, is called an investigation. Selling guns is what we do worldwide. We supplied the terrorist in Libya, Sryia, assinated University Professors in Iran.

We are Number One! But could not scramble some fighters over New York, Washington, when it was known there were several planes hyjacked, and the first one hit the World Trade Tower.

Why? Because there are a Trillion dollars of minerals in Afganistan.

This is our Culture, from the top, guns, murder, selling drugs, the Taliban stopped opium production, we have production up above historical levels.

We burn corn in our cars so the price of grain worldwide has doubled. Most of the world spends 90% of income on food.

The Joint Crime Families of Washington just want to kill everyone and take everything, and the rest is called Trickle Down.

They have also thrown the population into endless debt servitude, where the earnings of generations to come will barely pay the interest.

The only point to having power is to use it.

Now half of all people have a mental illness, and need regulation beyond free people, and the other half must be armed police.

This is not new, there are names for government like this, ugly names, and it ends with bodies hung from lamp posts.

Have a Nice Day!

I think there are a number of factors that have contributed to increasing these rampage killings.

1. Our society's unhealthy obsession with technology.

2. Our society's unhealthy obsession with money and materialism.

3. Our society's unhealthy obsession with violence and sex.

4. An ineffective mental healthcare system.

5. Failure to educate the public about neurological and psychological conditions, and most other things for that matter.

6. Unstable sense of identity related to conflicting values and beliefs.

7. The immorality and irresponsibility of members of government, authority figures, and celebrities.

8. Extreme differences in amount of income.

Other.
Not necessarily in this order but here are a few.
1. Diminished direct contact with others: By that I meant too much reliance on texting and internet communication in lieu of face to face contact. Too much gaming, too. Instead of playing war games in the woods (or wherever) with other kids or playing football in the nearest field too much time is spent gaming on the play station or PC.
It all boils down to lack of contact and remoteness so the potential victims become dehumanized.
2. Stigma with mental healthcare: Still too much apprehension with seeking mental health counselling/treatment. The fear of being labeled, having rights suspended, commitment to an institution, unprofessional caregivers (e.g. incompetence, over prescribing of potentially harmful drugs, etc..)
3. Erratic economy: The economy sucks right now and could get worse. Even if it gets better it'll go downhill again sooner or later. That has a temendous impact on a person's mental state (trust me ).
4. Soft targets: Too many people and places are soft targets and weakness invites attack. When the issues above and others take their toll and cause a person to (or plan to) go off the deep end there has to be a last line defense against them. Yeah, this pretty much means the ability to shoot back.

/\ Those are what comes to mind first at the time. Some are easier to fix than others and others, for all practical purposes, wont be fixed.

I also think these are all contributing factors. Guns (and I don't like guns, but they) don't cause people to want to kill other people, they're just a tool. All mass murders haven't been carried out with guns. Does no one remember the Oklahoma City bombing? The Unibomber? The Manson murders? Many mass murders have been non-gun-related. While I don't think anyone who's unstable should be able to get a gun, I have trouble defining that as necessarily meaning mental illness, because there are a lot more people with mental illness who are unlikely to ever kill than who are, and there are people without diagnosed mental illness who do kill. But the ease of getting some of these weapons is beyond incredible. Still, that's not what causes mass murder. I think it's an accumulation of things, and we definitely have a lot of people in our world today, especially in the US with our veneer of affluence, who feel marginalized for one reason or another. That can't be helpful in trying to prevent violence of any kind.

I'm sorry, but other countries have violent video games and entertainment, and lack positive role models. And when haven't there been crazy people? The fact is, most mentally ill persons aren't the perpetrators of crime, but are the victims. The fact of the matter is, the one thing Americans have that other countries don't is the unlimited access to most guns. To deny that as the crux of the problem is to live in self-delusion.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Other countries generally have a more servile population. Even without gun control they'd have minimal crime.
I don't know what you mean by "unlimited access". The anti's love to screech about how just anyone can run into a store and buy a dangerous "assault weapon". I've actually heard that or words to that effect and, of course, I've gleefully ripped it to sheds for them.

Really, for those of you who think you'd feel safer in Europe or Japan please relocate to there. I'll help you pack.