The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

2 injured, suspect dead in [Colorado School Shooting]

13»

Posts

  • JuliusJulius Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    I tend to sympathize with the "crazies gonna crazy" sentiment most people usually express.

    Now, if a part of an ideology does cause terrible things then I take issue with the ideology itself, but that clearly isn't what happened in this instance.

    I really dislike the 'crazies gonna crazy' sentiment. It suggests that all violent crime is perpetrated solely by clinical psychopaths & comes from some Other force; that violence in society is not only incomprehensible, but that we shouldn't even try to understand how it happens.

    Obviously it's stupid to attribute a blanket political ideology to violent crime or to suppose that there is some criminal behavior bomb fuse waiting to be discovered, but 'crazy' isn't even an appropriate label to begin with, and I think it's a very worthwhile pursuit to try and find out what environmental factors contribute towards violent behavior.

    But the problem is that shootings like these are statistically rare. And often enough it turns out that the person is a psychopath. Which means that looking at these cases to see what things contribute to violent behaviour is exactly the wrong way to go about it. The specifics of this guy aren't all that important, what we want to know is why violent behaviour itself is so high in society.

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    Julius wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    I tend to sympathize with the "crazies gonna crazy" sentiment most people usually express.

    Now, if a part of an ideology does cause terrible things then I take issue with the ideology itself, but that clearly isn't what happened in this instance.

    I really dislike the 'crazies gonna crazy' sentiment. It suggests that all violent crime is perpetrated solely by clinical psychopaths & comes from some Other force; that violence in society is not only incomprehensible, but that we shouldn't even try to understand how it happens.

    Obviously it's stupid to attribute a blanket political ideology to violent crime or to suppose that there is some criminal behavior bomb fuse waiting to be discovered, but 'crazy' isn't even an appropriate label to begin with, and I think it's a very worthwhile pursuit to try and find out what environmental factors contribute towards violent behavior.

    But the problem is that shootings like these are statistically rare. And often enough it turns out that the person is a psychopath. Which means that looking at these cases to see what things contribute to violent behaviour is exactly the wrong way to go about it. The specifics of this guy aren't all that important, what we want to know is why violent behaviour itself is so high in society.
    Even if each instance of this does turn out to be a singular psychopathic individual and not part of a larger pattern of violent behavior, we can still examine those cases for ways to address them in particular.

    That the individual is an outlier doesn't mean we can't figure out ways to prevent at least some of these cases. Even if it is through seemingly indirect methods, such as improved identification and treatment of people suffering from mental illness. "Whelp, crazy, wutyagonnado" simply isn't a useful response to this.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
    Caulk Bite 6
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades This is the water, and this is the well Drink full, and descendRegistered User regular
    edited December 2013
    I feel pretty comfortable saying that a person willing to kill other people and themselves is likely not in what we would consider to be a normal state of mind.

    My intention was never to say, "We shouldn't try to determine what in society was the cause of this." It was to say that once we open the door for political point of view to be a factor in shooting sprees (unless somebody explicitly says it was the reason they did it, and even then they are very likely not to be a major part of their chosen constituency), we blind ourselves to actual likely causes and make it more about politicians than the victims.

    joshofalltrades on
    The horse is the white of the eyes, and dark within.
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited December 2013
    spool32 wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Dibbit wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    From what the article above says, fairly liberal.

    While you are right, saying "Communism is fairly liberal" would be the same as saying "an anarchist is pretty right-wing"
    Communism as a system is a too specific of a system to just toss out as "ooh, it's a liberal idea"

    I wonder if he realized that he himself was the Bourgeois that he was trying to rise up against?

    Nothing I've read says he was communist. Only that he hated the GOP and espoused Keynesian economic ideas.

    cnn.com/2013/12/14/us/colorado-school-gunman-karl-pierson/?c=&page=2
    Senior Chris Davis, 18, was among many students Saturday trying to make sense of Pierson's shooting rampage.

    "He was a weird kid," Davis said. "He's a self-proclaimed communist, just wears Soviet shirts all the time."

    Pierson became easily aggravated, "always liked to be right" and didn't like losing, Davis said.

    npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=250900434
    Students and a teacher described Pierson as a smart and sometimes goofy student who often talked about his beliefs during class, sometimes even debating his teachers. They said he was outspoken about his Communist-leaning political views.

    cbsnews.com/news/sheriff-colorado-gunman-entered-school-heavily-armed-intending-to-harm-many/
    Students said Pierson held communist views and liked to discuss current events and issues, offering his own solutions. None said Pierson was bullied for his beliefs.


    And, of course, the right-wing blogosphere is on this like a fat kid on cake...I don't recommend a google search.

    I don't trust what any american I don't know calls "communist-leaning belief". They all Obama a communist.

    If his beliefs put him in conflict with the people around him, they may be conservative enough that progressive liberalism is what they call "communism".

    Not helping your case much to argue that bog-standard progressive liberalism is what motivated him. :p

    I'm just gonna add this to the list of reasons never to take your faux-hurt-feelings seriously.

    shryke on
  • KanaKana Registered User regular
    edited December 2013
    "He was a weird kid," Davis said. "He's a self-proclaimed communist, just wears Soviet shirts all the time."

    Man this was like, half the kids in my debate club

    Kana on
    A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
    lonelyahava
  • JuliusJulius Registered User regular
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Julius wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    I tend to sympathize with the "crazies gonna crazy" sentiment most people usually express.

    Now, if a part of an ideology does cause terrible things then I take issue with the ideology itself, but that clearly isn't what happened in this instance.

    I really dislike the 'crazies gonna crazy' sentiment. It suggests that all violent crime is perpetrated solely by clinical psychopaths & comes from some Other force; that violence in society is not only incomprehensible, but that we shouldn't even try to understand how it happens.

    Obviously it's stupid to attribute a blanket political ideology to violent crime or to suppose that there is some criminal behavior bomb fuse waiting to be discovered, but 'crazy' isn't even an appropriate label to begin with, and I think it's a very worthwhile pursuit to try and find out what environmental factors contribute towards violent behavior.

    But the problem is that shootings like these are statistically rare. And often enough it turns out that the person is a psychopath. Which means that looking at these cases to see what things contribute to violent behaviour is exactly the wrong way to go about it. The specifics of this guy aren't all that important, what we want to know is why violent behaviour itself is so high in society.
    Even if each instance of this does turn out to be a singular psychopathic individual and not part of a larger pattern of violent behavior, we can still examine those cases for ways to address them in particular.

    That the individual is an outlier doesn't mean we can't figure out ways to prevent at least some of these cases. Even if it is through seemingly indirect methods, such as improved identification and treatment of people suffering from mental illness. "Whelp, crazy, wutyagonnado" simply isn't a useful response to this.

    But these are things we already know. The crazies gonna crazy sentiment isn't talking about not doing anything about it, it's saying that examination of motive is either futile or nonsensical in cases like these. You're not going to learn anything from it.

    LostNinjaGnome-Interruptus
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    If that's the case, then we need to be looking somewhere outside of motive.

    This kid was suspended for making death threats against a teacher. Let's start there; male entering primetime for psychotic breaks makes violent threats. Obviously we as a society missed a step between "go home you asshole" and "shoots an innocent girl in the back of the head while returning for vengeance." That step probably included counseling of some sort, I would guess.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
    joshofalltradesWraith260Gnome-Interruptus
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Of course they are. Because why miss an opportunity to score cheap political points and rile up your base?

    What's good for the gun-control goose is good for the free-market gander I guess?

    Liberals don't get to be outraged about this aspect, especially considering the liberal outrage about how ineffective they were at political success on the back of the last couple of incidents.
    Let's not discount the hypocrisy running the other direction, though.

    If "right wing, anti-government type" isn't a reasonable point of conversation about a shooter, as we've been told time and time that it isn't, then "teenage conceptual communist" shouldn't be either.

    Let's see how that plays out.

    I agree with this.

    Caulk Bite 6
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Dibbit wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    From what the article above says, fairly liberal.

    While you are right, saying "Communism is fairly liberal" would be the same as saying "an anarchist is pretty right-wing"
    Communism as a system is a too specific of a system to just toss out as "ooh, it's a liberal idea"

    I wonder if he realized that he himself was the Bourgeois that he was trying to rise up against?

    Nothing I've read says he was communist. Only that he hated the GOP and espoused Keynesian economic ideas.

    cnn.com/2013/12/14/us/colorado-school-gunman-karl-pierson/?c=&page=2
    Senior Chris Davis, 18, was among many students Saturday trying to make sense of Pierson's shooting rampage.

    "He was a weird kid," Davis said. "He's a self-proclaimed communist, just wears Soviet shirts all the time."

    Pierson became easily aggravated, "always liked to be right" and didn't like losing, Davis said.

    npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=250900434
    Students and a teacher described Pierson as a smart and sometimes goofy student who often talked about his beliefs during class, sometimes even debating his teachers. They said he was outspoken about his Communist-leaning political views.

    cbsnews.com/news/sheriff-colorado-gunman-entered-school-heavily-armed-intending-to-harm-many/
    Students said Pierson held communist views and liked to discuss current events and issues, offering his own solutions. None said Pierson was bullied for his beliefs.


    And, of course, the right-wing blogosphere is on this like a fat kid on cake...I don't recommend a google search.

    I don't trust what any american I don't know calls "communist-leaning belief". They all Obama a communist.

    If his beliefs put him in conflict with the people around him, they may be conservative enough that progressive liberalism is what they call "communism".

    Not helping your case much to argue that bog-standard progressive liberalism is what motivated him. :p

    I'm just gonna add this to the list of reasons never to take your faux-hurt-feelings seriously.

    As long as you take my serious hurt feeling seriously, it'll all work out.

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    I mean, I can already see the setup from some corners of the internet: If you can't blame the right wing for a shooting, blame the right wing for pushing a progressive person into doing a shooting.

    IMO it's not really sensible to try and blame politics in almost all these cases. Even when the perpetrator expressly identifies a political element, it's still generally not a good idea to take his word for it. It's pretty crass to try and score political points on the backs of dead kids, regardless of which side is doing it.

    LostNinjajoshofalltradesKnuckle Dragger
13»
Sign In or Register to comment.