Quote:
But that’s not why I want to talk about the media. I want to talk about the media’s effect on the shooters.
Put yourself in the shoes of one of these killers. One nice thing about playing the villain and being a punching bag for cops, soldiers, and permit holders is that you need to learn about how the bad guys think and operate. And most of the mass shooters fit a similar profile.
The vast majority (last I saw it was over 80%) are on some form of psychotropic drug and has been for many years. They have been on Zoloft or some serotonin inhibitor through their formative years, and their decision making process is often flawed. They are usually disaffected, have been bullied, pushed around, and have a lot of emotional problems. They are delusional. They see themselves as victims, and they are usually striking back at their peer group.
These people want to make a statement. They want to show the world that they aren’t losers. They want to make us understand their pain. They want to make their peer group realize that they are powerful. They’ll show us. The solution is easy. It’s right there in front of your nose.
If you can kill enough people at one time, you’ll be on the news, 24/7, round the clock coverage. You will become the most famous person in the world. Everyone will know your name. You become a celebrity. Experts will try to understand what you were thinking. Hell, the President of the United States, the most important man in the world, will drop whatever he is doing and hold a press conference to talk about your actions, and he’ll even shed a single manly tear.
You are a star.
Strangely enough, this is one of the only topics I actually agree with Roger Ebert on. He didn’t think that the news should cover the shooters or mention their names on the front page of the paper. So whenever the press isn’t talking about guns, or violent movies, or violent video games, or any other thing that hundreds of millions of people participated in yesterday without murdering anybody, they’ll keep showing the killer’s picture in the background while telling the world all about him and his struggles.
And then the cycle repeats, as the next disaffected angry loner takes notes.
They should not be glamorized. They should be hated, despised, and forgotten. They are not victims. They are not powerful. They are murdering scum, and the only time their names should be remembered is when people like me are studying the tactics of how to neutralize them faster.
Mental Health Issues
And right here I’m going to show why I’m different than the people I’ve been arguing with the last few days. I am not an expert on mental health issues or psychiatry or psychology. My knowledge of criminal psychology is limited to understanding the methods of killers enough to know how to fight them better.
So since I don’t have enough first-hand knowledge about this topic to comment intelligently, then I’m not going to comment…
According to his own words, he has little idea of what he is talking about here, per the psychology of the mass shooter, yet he conveniently attributes 80% of the demographic of mass murder killers as having a lifetime usage of psychotropic drugs (he heard it somewhere), where he incorrectly refers to Zooloft as a serotonin inhibitor. There are no factual statistics that come close to supporting this 80% psychotropic drug usage statistic among mass shooters.
He starts off his comment about talking about the media influence, but makes his own personal psychological profile of mass murder killers first.
I see where someone called him out on his incorrect statement in the comments section of his original article which he ignored, as he obviously could not defend it. This part of the author's opinion is likely associated with bias, to draw the focus of his readers on a potential causal factor of psychotropic drugs taken by those with Mental illnesses involved in mass murders, taking the focus away from the variable of guns.
He goes on to create another section about Mental Health Issues, and states he's not going to comment on psychological issues, after he just spent three paragraphs describing what he thinks the psychological profile behind the mass murders killer's motives are.
He's singing to the choir here, quite well, but this paragraph and the contradiction in his own words, is not going to convince those outside of his choir that can see through unsubstantiated claims and biased statements.
I'll check out the links and make an informed analysis based on actual research, but not on this individual's uninformed or misinforming opinions.
The study below, one of the most comprehensive studies of rampage killers over 5 decades, indicates 24 out of 102 were on psychiatric medication, where 14 out of 24 had stopped taking the medications before the crime was committed
It is an ill-informed and potentially risky statement, for those that might avoid potentially life saving psychotropic medication based on this opinion, to suggest that the psychotropic drugs are a causal factor of the crime, as they may be part of what may as easily be a factor that may deter an individual from committing one of these crimes. This puts the author of this opinion piece in my opinion in the category of Michael Savage and other right wing radio talk show hosts spreading this type of ill-informed or misinforming information about psychotropic drugs and mass murders, rather than evidence based information.
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/09/us/th ... all&src=pmQuote:
The Times found much evidence of mental illness in its subjects. More than half had histories of serious mental health problems -- either a hospitalization, a prescription for psychiatric drugs, a suicide attempt or evidence of psychosis.
Of the 24 who had been prescribed psychiatric drugs, 14 had stopped taking them when they committed their crimes. Mr. Clemons, for instance, ran out of drugs a week before his crime, according to relatives.
29 Dec 2012, 3:08 pm
) to ratchet up the fear, intentionally confusing people about the difference between auto and semi-auto, etc. Don't even get me started on "concealed carry killers", a feature so bankrupt of honesty that even other media outlets have pointed out their flawed methodology.
