Mass shooting ChCh NZ

[ReneeA]

It's horribly sad.

I think what gets people all fired up about these incidents being chalked up to mental illness is that is never the first instinct when it's a minority attack on white culture. Then it's always widely touted as terrorist and evil automatically while the mental health of the offender is rarely brought up.

When the White nationalist offenders are often FIRST labelled as "mentally ill" rather than give the the same label as the terrorists, it is feeding into the Nationalist's agenda. You aren't automatically classifying them in the same manner because why? I don't think most (if any) do it consciously, but many social scientists could definitely explain that it's a reason why we have such a uprising of these groups now. They are not supported, but they do not get the same amount of vitriol and disgust by the mainstream as your most classic looking terrorist.

 

[Hikergirl]

It's horribly sad.

I think what gets people all fired up about these incidents being chalked up to mental illness is that is never the first instinct when it's a minority attack on white culture. Then it's always widely touted as terrorist and evil automatically while the mental health of the offender is rarely brought up.

When the White nationalist offenders are often FIRST labelled as "mentally ill" rather than give the the same label as the terrorists, it is feeding into the Nationalist's agenda. You aren't automatically classifying them in the same manner because why? I don't think most (if any) do it consciously, but many social scientists could definitely explain that it's a reason why we have such a uprising of these groups now. They are not supported, but they do not get the same amount of vitriol and disgust by the mainstream as your most classic looking terrorist.

Anyone, anyone, who can callously end a person's life has mental issues.
What they are, why they are there, I don't know and don't pretend to know. But I think that if you are capable of murder, capable of causing someone to cease to exist, then you are evil and broken mentally.

What is the "classic" looking terrorist? Isn't that phrasing also feeding into the Nationalist's agenda?

 

[LSUmiss]

So, we shouldn't discuss the very real possibility that these (in this case) terrorists are mentally unstable?

There are plenty of studies and research mentioned here that one can look in to further if so inclined.
https://www.treatmentadvocacycenter...3626-serious-mental-illness-and-mass-homicide

Of course, anyone can discuss anything. But, being unstable & having true mental illness are different things. In the link you sent, it says it’s believed that 1/3 of ppl who carry out mass killings have serious mental illness. I can agree with that. But,
that means that’s 2/3 aren’t mentally ill. Of course, having not personally assessed him, I can’t say which category fits this person. He could be mentally ill. My concern is the tendency for ppl to assume that everyone who does this is mentally ill. The reason it matters is b/c if someone is sick, then IMO, it makes them less culpable for their actions. I don’t think ppl like this should get that excuse unless they are actually mentally ill.

 

[luvsJack]

Of course, anyone can discuss anything. But, being unstable & having true mental illness are different things. In the link you sent, it says it’s believed that 1/3 of ppl who carry out mass killings have serious mental illness. I can agree with that. But,
that means that’s 2/3 aren’t mentally ill. Of course, having not personally assessed him, I can’t say which category fits this person. He could be mentally ill. My concern is the tendency for ppl to assume that everyone who does this is mentally ill. The reason it matters is b/c if someone is sick, then IMO, it makes them less culpable for their actions. I don’t think ppl like this should get that excuse unless they are actually mentally ill.

Honestly, I think for you (and rightfully so), you talk about and mean the clinical definition of mental illness. For a lot of people they mean “something ain’t right with that guy” kind of thing but it’s hard to express that without using the term “mentally ill”. I hope all that makes sense.

A pp mentioned rage within someone and perhaps that is what these horrible people have in common. But what makes that rage? Are they born with it or does something happen in their lives to make them that way?

 

[LSUmiss]

Honestly, I think for you (and rightfully so), you talk about and mean the clinical definition of mental illness. For a lot of people they mean “something ain’t right with that guy” kind of thing but it’s hard to express that without using the term “mentally ill”. I hope all that makes sense.

A pp mentioned rage within someone and perhaps that is what these horrible people have in common. But what makes that rage? Are they born with it or does something happen in their lives to make them that way?

My opinion is that ppl are born with the propensity for it & environmental factors shape or enhance it.

 

[ReneeA]

Anyone, anyone, who can callously end a person's life has mental issues.
What they are, why they are there, I don't know and don't pretend to know. But I think that if you are capable of murder, capable of causing someone to cease to exist, then you are evil and broken mentally.

What is the "classic" looking terrorist? Isn't that phrasing also feeding into the Nationalist's agenda?

Yes, forgive me. Poor wording on my part. I obviously mean the people typically villianized by the Nationalists.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

I will be interested to see if NZ has a better response to this than doing nothing.

 

[mummabear]

I will be interested to see if NZ has a better response to this than doing nothing.

The PM had said our gun laws will change:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/111...of-christchurch-terror-attack?cid=app-android

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I will be interested to see if NZ has a better response to this than doing nothing.

In reading the article it does seem they are looking at how "gun radicals" (their phrase in the article) in the U.S. amount to not much being done:

"There is no place in the upcoming debate for the radical gun lobby which has made its presence felt in previous attempts to make our country safer. That input undoubtedly contributed to the rejection of most of the select committee recommendations on tightening our gun laws. We have seen what happens in the United States when gun radicals are involved. Nothing. That is not good enough for New Zealand."

The article does though say ""There have been attempts to change our laws in 2005, 2012 and after an inquiry in 2017..." while that is not the same sort of history you have with the U.S. New Zealand hasn't appeared in the past, at least according to the article, to have snapped their fingers and gun laws up and changed.

 

[kimblebee]

I will be interested to see if NZ has a better response to this than doing nothing.

Took them about 24 hours to decide to ban assault rifles. I guess their thoughts and prayers work faster.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I despise listening to the vitriol some people spew about. But I respectfully understand their right to have the opinion even as I despise it.

There is no acceptance in violence though and unfortunately some of those groups their main goal is to perpetuate violence