When will they ever learn?

[Doug S.]

Look, you guys: I look at mentally ill people all the time as part of my job, and these folks aren't mentally ill. I see mentally ill people all the time, and yes, they do attack people, and from time to time someone mentally ill does kill people, but I don't think the Oslo terrorist was mentally ill. I don't think McVeigh was either. Or Kaszynski.

I agree with you about McVeigh....and Breivik.....and even Kaszynski, as bizarre as he was.

However, this Jared Lee Loughner, the guy who attacked that political rally in Arizona....now, he sounds like someone who really COULD float an insanity defense. Right now he's in solitary lockup on suicide watch, paces all the time, holding his head, complaining that he hears voices from a radio station (no kidding, I knew a guy who could hear radio, it turned out to be a concrete company's CB base station. He wasn't crazy....soon as he had his metallic dental fillings replaced, the "voices" disappeared).

You are all on the wrong track with trying to assign political beliefs to these folks. Ok, they write manifestos etc etc, but look: the desire to kill a lot of people is independent of political beliefs or political position. It is a separate point of view- the idea that innocent lives are expendable in the pursuit of political power and dominance. THAT is the idea that is so repulsive to all of us.

In this case, though, Breivik's own "writings", his "manifesto", specifically mention his ultra-conservative political views and his intentions to cause "mayhem" (my quote marks) with his act of terrorism in an effort to spurn all other like-minded Europeans into a form of racial genocide...aimed primarily at mid-Easterners. His target for the shootings was a youth camp run by liberal minded folks...he targeted the children because they would carry forth the political ideas of those who "educated them" into the future and he wanted to stop that from happening.

Still doesn't make him insane...quite the opposite, in my book. It DOES make his acts despicable, though, and in this case (IMHO) I think the time he took to compose that 1,500 page manifesto is what created the desire to kill in him....absent any evidence that the manifesto followed the plot to kill so many.

Time will tell more. I hope, though, that this monster is denied the opportunity to gain a public audience for his nihilistic rhetoric...he doesn't deserve it and we shouldn't have to put up with it!!

Cheers from Doug!!

 

[craig]

Doug..Insane or not insane does it really matter? what possible worthy contribution can any of these "criminals" give towards humanity?
I understand your point but why split hairs over a murdering piece of crap?
just snuff out his or her life and move on..

 

[Pat Buckley]

Cheap shots, guys, but totally in line with what I and other reasonable Americans have come to expect from the radical right.

"Hit and run" attacks like this are in their own way as cowardly as the manner in which this individual accomplished this terrible slaughter. A bomb....how brave is that, set a bomb and then run away from the scene so you don't get hurt, too. Appearing at a gathering of children dressed as a policeman (whom we have taught our children they should trust), motioning for them to come gather around him and then opening fire...how brave is that?

Yet, I'm not surprised....this is TYPICAL of the radical right, make an unsupportable comment and then excuse themselves.

IF (and I always say "IF is the biggest word in the English language") this deranged individual in Oslo committed these acts due to an agenda of racial/cultural hatred, as his manifesto and attempts to gain a public forum for his "explanation" would indicate, then this desipicable acts SHOULD elicit enraged indignation from ALL Americans, regardless of political orientation.....it was, plain and simple, a cowardly "hit and run" act of immense magnitude.

However, Veek and Pat, there's no need to adopt his tactics for your protestations on this forum or in this thread. If you have a belief, be "brave" enough to offer supporting evidence.

I'm not holding my breath, though....I've seen it SO many times here on the forum and particularly in the political discussions in the Paddock.

Get a grip.....your cowardly protestations, your "hit and run" tactics, do nothing more than make you look like a radical right-wing, TEA partying KOOK, the kind who engages in cowardly attacks and then runs away to hide out of....what, infantile fear that someone might just have a differing opinion?

Grow up, for God's sake!

Doug

Doug - do me a favor and fuck off, thanks. Put m e on ignore or whatever but please just go away. I'm not interseted in your lame assed comments.

At least YOU can spell though.....

 

[Cliff Beer]

I don't understand how there can be a suggestion that a guy like this guy in Norway is not completely insane? Just because somebody has command of the English (or other) language, walks and talks in general, and can write a lengthy document filled with hate, and suggest they have a political agenda, doesn't mean they're sane. If you shoot innocent children under no duress then you must be, by definition, insane.

Who is history's greatest example of compelling insanity? Hitler. That guy had the power of public speaking, conviction, arguments that made complete sense to him, walked and talked like a human being, possessed some degree of polite manners, etc. But he was completely insane. His ability to act like a human being and harness his oratory powers allowed him wreak havoc on the human race to a horrific degree. In short, he wasn't human, he was an animal. And he died like one...dead down in a hole.

 

[Graham]

Doug - do me a favor and fuck off, thanks. Put m e on ignore or whatever but please just go away. I'm not interseted in your lame assed comments.

At least YOU can spell though.....

Wowser...:thumbsdown:

People in glass houses etc...

Nice, erudite comment there, backed up by perfect grammar and spelling (not). There are many people who probably aren't interseted in seeing posts like this one of yours too.

 

[Nick]

Wowser...:thumbsdown:

People in glass houses etc...Nice, erudite comment there, backed up by perfect grammar and spelling (not).

:thumbsup: from another bad speller, who took English O level 3 times. Maybe it's an asset after all

Doug..Insane or not insane does it really matter? what possible worthy contribution can any of these "criminals" give towards humanity?
I understand your point but why split hairs over a murdering piece of crap?
just snuff out his or her life and move on..

Craig,

I have never really understood this argument, i.e. you have committed the worst heinous crime a human being can commit by taking a life. To set an example to others of how revolting and repulsive the act of taking life is we are going to punish you, by........ taking your life.

 

[Jim Rosenthal]

OK- I'll enlarge on what I said:

There is a difference between crazy on the one hand (insane, if you will) and cruelty and meanness on the other. I agree with the comment above that Jared Loughner is insane, more than likely (note that being crazy does not mean an inability to plan in fairly complex ways) Where does the distinction get drawn? Common hallmarks of insanity are not just hearing voices, but also include delusional thinking, paranoia, ideas of reference, magical thinking- the list isn't a short one.

What I have a problem with is this: someone commits an act or series of acts that is by our definition astonishingly cruel or sadistic or malignant, and because we feel that sane people would not do such a thing, we then define the perpetrator as insane. This is turn leads to a situation where the person is essentially excused from the consequences of their actions, because they are held to be crazy. This seems to me to involve some elements of circular reasoning, ie: you can't be sane if you do things we define as crazy, because just doing those things defines you as crazy. I don't agree with that- I think virtually everyone, including some crazy people, are responsible for their own actions, and should be held to account for them.

The law does try to draw distinctions here- even people who are held to be insane are also required to prove, essentially, that they could not perceive the difference between what sane people describe as right and wrong. My problem with all this is that society demands retribution, which I think is entirely appropriate, and that all too often allowing the perpetrators of criminal actions to define themselves as insane excuses them from punishment. Thus the desire for justice is thwarted, and the victims and their families and friends are deprived of justice.

The attorney for Breivik is already taking steps to define his client as insane, stating that his client feels he's in a war, etc. This is nonsense- the man himself understood what he was doing in murdering defenseless children and adults. The real tragedy here is that Norway is unlikely to have the death penalty, so they will have to support this criminal and take care of him for the rest of his natural life. They may not even have life imprisonment. One can only hope that the long arm of the victims' families will be able to reach him in prison and award him the death he so richly deserves.

With regard to the death penalty: without getting into another lengthy argument, there is a world of difference between the act of murder by a person, and the act of taking a person's life as punishment by society. I agree that we set a high value on life just by defining the death penalty as the ultimate punishment. But I think societies have the right to define their own criminal codes and specify the punishments they think are appropriate. My guess is that the Norwegians will wonder whether they did the right thing in abolishing the death penalty in Norway, if indeed they do not have it on their books. Norway is one of the more peaceful and law-abiding countries in the world, but a generally peaceful population can still contain devils like Brievik. They may wish they still had the death penalty. I would certainly vote to execute him were I on the jury. As I said earlier, his acts are criminal, not political, and deserve the strongest criminal penalty.

 

[Doug S.]

Doug - do me a favor and fuck off, thanks. Put m e on ignore or whatever but please just go away. I'm not interseted in your lame assed comments.

At least YOU can spell though.....

Geez, having a bad day, Pat :idea: ?

No, I won't put you on ignore...I "ignored" trader because of his deranged thought patterns, like I said Charlie Sheen made more sense during his drug-fueled "WINNING" rants than trader did. You, on the other hand, are just a hate-filled, antagonistic dead-head who can't stand that anyone would have a different opinion and don't seem to have the ability to formulate a coherent defense for your positions; ergo, your spiteful, hate filled comments when taken to task for your actions rather than posting a sensible response.

You, sir, deserve to be challenged when you engage in your TEA Party's favorite tactic, hit with angry (and often unsupportable) statements and then run away and hide like an angry child who couldn't get his way. Reasonable folks on these threads appreciate a reasoned response, but in fact I sorta like your UNREASONABLE responses like the one above, it shows your true nature.

Grow up, for God's sake, Pat...stop acting like a :furious: pouting 2-year old who just got told "NO".

...or is that too much to ask (I suspect so, given your :evil: behaviors on previous threads like this one)?

Jeers to you, Pat, from Doug!!

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

We have facilities to house the criminally insane because of the potential and probable harm they can and will do to others. The cost in tax dollars runs into the millions per detainee. We do this in hope that one day a light bulb will snap on and we can judge them sane and possibly release them. Why not a simple injection to start? End of a hopeless situation and justice for the lives taken.

 

[Jeff Young]

Because a civilized society doesn't play God like that.

Next thing you know, it's deformed kids. Or those with "incorrect" political beliefs.

Not sure that ever happened historically...oh wait.....

We have facilities to house the criminally insane because of the potential and probable harm they can and will do to others. The cost in tax dollars runs into the millions per detainee. We do this in hope that one day a light bulb will snap on and we can judge them sane and possibly release them. Why not a simple injection to start? End of a hopeless situation and justice for the lives taken.

 

[Doug S.]

Who is history's greatest example of compelling insanity? Hitler. That guy had the power of public speaking, conviction, arguments that made complete sense to him, walked and talked like a human being, possessed some degree of polite manners, etc. But he was completely insane. His ability to act like a human being and harness his oratory powers allowed him wreak havoc on the human race to a horrific degree. In short, he wasn't human, he was an animal. And he died like one...dead down in a hole.

Cliff, I don't think Hitler was clinically insane at the beginning...but at the end, after the syphilis had run its course, of course he was deranged.

However, his acts at first were, IMHO, merely the acts of a "politician" who was overly impressed with his own powers and was posessed by the demons of his aspirations of world dominance...much like this perpetrator in Olso.

Even people who seem to be quite reasonable at times can act crazy. If you don't believe me, take a look at what Pat/2124 recently said:

Doug - do me a favor and fuck off, thanks. Put m e on ignore or whatever but please just go away. I'm not interseted in your lame assed comments.

At least YOU can spell though.....

See what I mean? A reasonable person, with rational thought patterns, would realize how deranged that response was...if he is, as he says, "...not interseted [sic] in your lame assed comments", me putting him on an "ignore" list won't do any good, he needs to put me on his "ignore" list...yet, his deranged thought patterns prohibit him from coming up with a rational solution.

While Pat may be displaying deranged thought patterns here, I prefer to think of him as simply an "ignor"amus (although, actually, I think the REAL word in Pat's case should be "ignoranus" :idea: ):

Ignoramus - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Cheers from Doug!

 

[Jim Craik]

Jeff,

Rest assured, that when President Limbaugh decides it time to start rounding up the liberals, he won't have any trouble finding troopers

I really do not think these folks have any idea what they are advocating.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Because a civilized society doesn't play God like that.

Next thing you know, it's deformed kids. Or those with "incorrect" political beliefs.

Not sure that ever happened historically...oh wait.....

Yes it does, we have punishment for crimes, if you break the law, your freedom to move about is revoked, you are put in jail. Being deformed or having different beliefs is not breaking the law. If you kill someone or lots of someones, the same "God" that puts you in jail for breaking the law should turn your light off. Why should tax payers be penalized for the acts of a killer? Is it civilized to keep a human being in a 5'x9' cell forever?

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Jeff,

Rest assured, that when President Limbaugh decides it time to start rounding up the liberals, he won't have any trouble finding troopers

I really do not think these folks have any idea what they are advocating.

It always come back to this, no matter the topic.

 

[craig]

Because a civilized society doesn't play God like that.

Next thing you know, it's deformed kids. Or those with "incorrect" political beliefs.

Not sure that ever happened historically...oh wait.....

So we can't kill a killer but we can kill babies?
The hypocrisy never ends..

 

[Jeff Young]

I understand your point, but there is a different. Turning the light out is permanent. Someone who is locked up, even for life, always has a chance. Proving innocence. Proving sanity. Etc.

The turning the light out is one step too far, and can become far too arbitrary.

Yes it does, we have punishment for crimes, if you break the law, your freedom to move about is revoked, you are put in jail. Being deformed or having different beliefs is not breaking the law. If you kill someone or lots of someones, the same "God" that puts you in jail for breaking the law should turn your light off. Why should tax payers be penalized for the acts of a killer? Is it civilized to keep a human being in a 5'x9' cell forever?

 

[Jeff Young]

It's a far more difficult question than that and I'm pretty sure you knew that even before you posted a pretty stock response.

We have to make a call as to when a mass of cells becomes a human. I agree with you once science/society makes that call, then abortion after that point should not be allowed. Before that it is a personal decision.

But up to that point, if you are saying that all "groups of cells" are human and "killing them" is murder, well, I'd suggest you not blow your nose.

So we can't kill a killer but we can kill babies?
The hypocrisy never ends..

 

[craig]

It's a far more difficult question than that and I'm pretty sure you knew that even before you posted a pretty stock response.

We have to make a call as to when a mass of cells becomes a human. I agree with you once science/society makes that call, then abortion after that point should not be allowed. Before that it is a personal decision.

But up to that point, if you are saying that all "groups of cells" are human and "killing them" is murder, well, I'd suggest you not blow your nose.

Jeff,sometimes staying politically correct involves abandoning all common sense..but you do a damn good job of it.:thumbsup:

 

[craig]

It's a far more difficult question than that and I'm pretty sure you knew that even before you posted a pretty stock response.

We have to make a call as to when a mass of cells becomes a human. I agree with you once science/society makes that call, then abortion after that point should not be allowed. Before that it is a personal decision.

But up to that point, if you are saying that all "groups of cells" are human and "killing them" is murder, well, I'd suggest you not blow your nose.

jeff..this is how I explained it to my kids....Once all the ingredients are mixed together its a Pizza..it may not be done cooking yet but its still a pizza:thumbsup:

 

[Jeff Young]

So you take the position that a single cell zygote is a human being?

I'm not being "politically correct" -- I'm trying to explain to you how sicence and the law views a fetus and when that fetus is given rights.

You understand there is debate as to whether terminating a pregnancy pre-viability involves a person. And that there is NO debate that doing so with an adult convicted of a crime does?