AngelRho wrote:
Being on the spectrum doesn't help things, for sure. "Regular" folks may get upset, angry, and mention something about wanting to kill someone or making a threat to do it. MOST people recognize their own lashing out and wouldn't in a million years act on such an impulse. They know it's wrong, so they don't do it. People on the spectrum, on the other hand, aren't necessarily expected to understand the difference between saying something in anger and taking action. For some, it appears that those who don't act on murderous impulses are weaklings and cowards, and a REAL man will take action against people who are bothering him. Jail/prison doesn't matter, because the other guy is still dead. Or if he gets killed in the process, well, he's dead either way. Might as well make it quick and take some of THEM with him.
When you've been bullied for so long, a situation I'm all too familiar with, it's easy to get THOSE thoughts stuck in your head. My first thought after the Pearl High School shooting, which happened the year after I graduated high school, was why it took so long for someone to finally get the guts to do it? Then there was Jonesboro and Colombine. Again, not really surprised. And I have a difficult time imagining that people really are as shocked as they appear to be. As far as I'm aware, none of these particular guys are on the autistic spectrum. But, hey, if a couple of marginalized NT's can get pushed in a corner and shoot up a school, why would anyone be shocked if guys with asperger's who get kicked further out on the fringe pulled the same thing or even worse?
Anyway...keep in mind that correlation does not mean causation. Found this interesting study from last year:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2634865/Recipe-serial-killer-revealed-Childhood-abuse-autism-head-injuries-common-murderers-study-claims.htmlA) You're confused as to what the subject is.
B) The article you link to also seems to be confused- the author cant keep track of what he himself is talking about!
The subject is
serial killers. Not mass murderers/spree killers.
If you kill one victim at a time (say pick them up as hitchhikers on the road) , once a month, for a year you are a 'serial killer'. If you go to a shopping mall with an M-16 and mow down a dozen people all at once- that makes you a "mass murderer" (aka "spree killer"). Not really the same thing.
The Columbine killers, the San Bernadino couple, Sandy Hook, Aurora, Andre Brevik, are all examples of "mass murderers" . None are examples of "serial killers".
Examples of serial killers would be: Jack the Ripper, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, and Jeffrey Daumier.
The Columbine type spree shooters are sometimes portrayed as having been bullied, and are often rumored to be autistic. But you dont hear that sort of thing said about the likes of Ted Bundy, or Gacy.
Spree killers might be motivated by anger at being bullied. But your typical serial killer doesnt seem to have that kind of motive.Anger has nothing to do with it.
The serial killers listed above were all "recreational killers" who did if for the sexual sadism. Of course there are other folks who happened to have also killed many individual victims over a long time period who would also be classified as "serial killers" like John Dillenger, or Ted Kozinski.
There seems to be a special category of "serial medical murderers". You hear about psychos who work as nurses in hospitals who get a kick out of causing patients to die and rack up big body counts. The worst example might be that British village doctor, Harold Shipman, who murdered 250 people over a several decade career. But I digress.