People Kill People

[rubicon]

Two weeks ago in the city of Kunming, China 33 people will killed by deadly knife attack. Yesterday in Beijing 5 people will killed by an attacker with a knife. (WSJ 3/15/14). Now if only someone could have a brought a gun to a knife attack maybe jus maybe some innocent folks could have been saved?
Just saying.................

[JourneyOfLife]

Agreed. But it is not that simple. I am sure you know it too!

Some methods/weapons are more efficient and can easily harm a lot of people quickly.

I can run from a lunatic with a knife and at least have a chance.

[rubicon]

Agreed. But it is not that simple. I am sure you know it too!

Some methods/weapons are more efficient and can easily harm a lot of people quickly.

I can run from a lunatic with a knife and at least have a chance.

You may be right but at least 38 people in China did not have that opportunity. Ever see a scene were a killer comes up behind a guy and slits his throat. My point is that there are plenty of ways and opportunities but the POINT of my thread is that irrespective of choice of weapon people kill people.

[BS Beef]

Rubicon i agree with you and understand your point. But you have way bigger…..well you're more courageous than I. At least thicker skinned to post something like that here. Know you have my support while you're getting :boxing2:

[Taltarzac725]

Two weeks ago in the city of Kunming, China 33 people will killed by deadly knife attack. Yesterday in Beijing 5 people will killed by an attacker with a knife. (WSJ 3/15/14). Now if only someone could have a brought a gun to a knife attack maybe jus maybe some innocent folks could have been saved?
Just saying.................

This is true. But pushing your reasoning if the same large group of Chinese were attacked with some of the much more modern weapons like automatic rifles, grenades, bombs, etc., the outcome would have been much worse. Think of trench warfare in WWI? If they all had swords rather than artillery, machine guns, grenades, poison gas, etc. there still might have been wholesale slaughter like with Hannibal and the Romans at Cannae http://www.thefinertimes.com/Ancient-Wars/battle-of-cannae.html , but it would not have lasted for four years like WWI.

[justjim]

With all due respect, You have a point that I won't argue pro or con---however, there is no way you can protect yourself from a mentally deranged person if you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[Taltarzac725]

With all due respect, You have a point that I won't argue pro or con---however, there is no way you can protect yourself from a mentally deranged person if you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

There does seem to be some deeply disturbed people out there. Jared Lee Loughner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Eagan_Holmes And some who look like they are just evil and had full control of their mental faculties like various serial killers like Ted Bundy. Ted Bundy killed with knives, bats, rocks, crowbars and the like if I am not mistaken. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy

[rubicon]

Taltaczac: My point was in intent"". Whether you are a conqueror a serial killer a jealous husband you are going to find a way to realize your intent

justjim: you are right about the mentally ill. However keep in mind that the % of mentally ill who would harm you is much smaller than the average population. I know that sounds wrong given the mass killings recently.

However the issue is that there are more because the government shut down mental facilities for political reasons leaving the most vulnerable in our society to fend for themselves and it has come back to haunt us. Additionally state/federal laws are counterproductive and leave family members who want to help helpless.

My people kill people theme is simple deal with people's problems and you will reap results such as changing mental health laws that make sense and for providing care to truly people who need care vis a vis those on the dole to pursue their passions.

My theme is about changing the conversation from enforcement to proactive policies.

[Taltarzac725]

Taltaczac: My point was in intent"". Whether you are a conqueror a serial killer a jealous husband you are going to find a way to realize your intent

justjim: you are right about the mentally ill. However keep in mind that the % of mentally ill who would harm you is much smaller than the average population. I know that sounds wrong given the mass killings recently.

However the issue is that there are more because the government shut down mental facilities for political reasons leaving the most vulnerable in our society to fend for themselves and it has come back to haunt us. Additionally state/federal laws are counterproductive and leave family members who want to help helpless.

My people kill people theme is simple deal with people's problems and you will reap results such as changing mental health laws that make sense and for providing care to truly people who need care vis a vis those on the dole to pursue their passions.

My theme is about changing the conversation from enforcement to proactive policies.

I do agree that we need more carefully thought out pro-active policies to those who have been labeled mentally ill. That's a huge number in the US with respect to anyone who has been depressed, alcoholic, etc. https://www.nami.org/ And, remember that the powerful can and do label people with political agendas mentally ill if they do not like what they are saying and have no other way of countering their criticisms. This seems to be a very common tactic in totalitarian regimes. There also seem to be vested interests in keeping people on drugs when they might be better off with some kind of therapy.

[rubicon]

I do agree that we need more carefully thought out pro-active policies to those who have been labeled mentally ill. That's a huge number in the US with respect to anyone who has been depressed, alcoholic, etc. https://www.nami.org/ And, remember that the powerful can and do label people with political agendas mentally ill if they do not like what they are saying and have no other way of countering their criticisms. This seems to be a very common tactic in totalitarian regimes. There also seem to be vested interests in keeping people on drugs when they might be better off with some kind of therapy.

We totally agree Tal. Perhaps I should have emphasized earlier that people seem to confuse "method" vis a vis "intent" when discussing this issue. Method can incorporate any means from guns to a household item but the intent" is always the same "to kill"

The above-stated comments is what we ought to do. We need to change the conversation and we need to have the ensuing conversation in an unemotional and purposeful state.

Where I am really at is I am tired of the reactive and emotional responses to societal problems in this country. We have lost our ability at critical thinking and problem solving. Cool heads prevail but that is not what I am seeing with leadership where is a Bill Buckley when you need him. he may not be everyone's cup of tea but at least you could sit down with him and have a cogent discussion.

[Tennisnut]

Don't we have a rule here about political posts? I ask because it appears this post seems to address whether gun control need to be addressed or that would be an emotional or reactive response to our societal problem. It appears other policies such as people killing people in Iraq/Afghanistan are are considered political posts.

[getdul981]

Two weeks ago in the city of Kunming, China 33 people will killed by deadly knife attack. Yesterday in Beijing 5 people will killed by an attacker with a knife. (WSJ 3/15/14). Now if only someone could have a brought a gun to a knife attack maybe jus maybe some innocent folks could have been saved?
Just saying.................

While I applaud what you are "Just saying", I have to question your reasoning for starting something like this. You KNOW that you are just going to stir up a stink. But, then again, maybe that was your intention.

[rubicon]

While I applaud what you are "Just saying", I have to question your reasoning for starting something like this. You KNOW that you are just going to stir up a stink. But, then again, maybe that was your intention.

Hi getdul: No No my purpose was illustrative only. This issue is a social issue with social remedy and it can be broken down into three parts.
intent, method, reason and to focus only on method is to stop the conversation altogether. We have lost our ability to have candid conversation because some people seem offended at just about anything
and so important societal issues just are left hanging out there.

Why have we become so adverse to debate? Why have we become so polarized?

[PennBF]

I don't understand why these "Terrorists" are not called what they are "Sociopaths". There is no difference between a Serial Killer Sociopath and these people who kill people using bombs that just go off and kill people at random. Let's stop calling them Terrorists and call them "Sociopaths". That is more
of an accurate description of these sick and demented people. :rant-rave:

[Taltarzac725]

I don't understand why these "Terrorists" are not called what they are "Sociopaths". There is no difference between a Serial Killer Sociopath and these people who kill people using bombs that just go off and kill people at random. Let's stop calling them Terrorists and call them "Sociopaths". That is more
of an accurate description of these sick and demented people. :rant-rave:

These people probably have consciences unlike sociopaths. They believe that they are in a just war. Some of them might be sociopaths but in my mind sociopaths usually could care less about some cause or another except whatever kind of pathology they enjoy.

[DaleMN]

Nothing to see here....move along. The intent is obvious. :doh:

[PennBF]

The first sign of a "Sociopath" is that they believe they are "Victims". Does not mean all who think they are victims are in fact Sociopaths but it is a first sign.
Read "The Sociopath Next Door" as a great reference and intelligent discussion on the subject. All of these "Terrorist" believe in some way they are victims and can kill with no thought of the people, including children that they are killing. That is a pretty indication they are free of conscience. Unfortunately there is no cure for a "Sociopath" and therefore they will continue to kill at random.:rant-rave:

[Taltarzac725]

The first sign of a "Sociopath" is that they believe they are "Victims". Does not mean all who think they are victims are in fact Sociopaths but it is a first sign.
Read "The Sociopath Next Door" as a great reference and intelligent discussion on the subject. All of these "Terrorist" believe in some way they are victims and can kill with no thought of the people, including children that they are killing. That is a pretty indication they are free of conscience. Unfortunately there is no cure for a "Sociopath" and therefore they will continue to kill at random.:rant-rave:

I do not buy that approach. Look at what this psychiatrist has to say about Jodi Arias. Jodi Arias -- victim or sociopath? | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/03/11/jodi-arias-victim-or-sociopath/)

The book The Sociopath Next Door looks like its approach is quite more complicated than if someone sees herself as a victim or not. http://www.booksquawk.com/2011/07/sociopath-next-door.html

And that brings me to the heart of this book's thrilling challenge. As with the consideration of any mental disorder, language is all. While I can agree with Stout's assertion that sociopaths can't form attachments and can only treat other people as objects or pawns, I can't accept the stretch from that to her constant refrain that sociopaths are playing games with these pawns. That they seek only to win. I don't credit sociopaths conceive like that. She should have maybe stuck at the point of stating that sociopaths are all about domination and control, but not taken an imaginative linguistic leap to being game players. The inability to see other human beings as human, means they have no way of perceiving agency and causation like we do. But just when the book threatens to lose your confidence, she comes up with a brilliantly simple expression of how sociopaths can be so charming and convincing, by explaining they can ape conversational emotions; That is they can talk about love and parrot the buzzwords, without actually feeling them.

[Taltarzac725]

Take a look at the very good movie Captain Phillips. You can get a good idea of what motivates these Somali pirates. Only one of them-- (actor Barkhad Abdirahman playing Bilal) looks like a sociopath, i.e. someone who seems to have no empathy for other people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Phillips_(film)

[rubicon]

The first sign of a "Sociopath" is that they believe they are "Victims". Does not mean all who think they are victims are in fact Sociopaths but it is a first sign.
Read "The Sociopath Next Door" as a great reference and intelligent discussion on the subject. All of these "Terrorist" believe in some way they are victims and can kill with no thought of the people, including children that they are killing. That is a pretty indication they are free of conscience. Unfortunately there is no cure for a "Sociopath" and therefore they will continue to kill at random.:rant-rave:

PennBF: Here we are now focused on the intent (constant to kill) and reason ( variable) issue and the methods( variable)( reason) terrorist criminal
jealous husband greedy partner (method) gun, knife, bomb, hands, car poison.

Now we can logically work out the puzzle and develop an actual workable plan

[2BNTV]

People do kill people and most murders happen by people's immediate family members. It sometimes is all about emotions, and losing control of them.

However, this a thinly veiled attempt, at the gun control issue. Whether or not, people should have a gun.

We can beat this to death, but if the NRA wins, after what happened at Newtown, I wonder if anything effective, will ever be done?

We can all condone one's actions in the "what if game"?

Even Al Capone on his way to jail for tax evasion said, "I have only given the people what they wanted, women and booze". Obliviously, he forgot he killed about 30 people and if he could rationalize his actions, anyone can!!!!

[rubicon]

People do kill people and most murders happen by people's immediate family members. It sometimes is all about emotions, and losing control of them.

However, this a thinly veiled attempt, at the gun control issue. Whether or not, people should have a gun.

We can beat this to death, but if the NRA wins, after what happened at Newtown, I wonder if anything effective, will ever be done?

We can all condone one's actions in the "what if game"?

Even Al Capone on his way to jail for tax evasion said, "I have only given the people what they wanted, women and booze". Obliviously, he forgot he killed about 30 people and if he could rationalize his actions, anyone can!!!!

Hi 2BNTV: I stated at least twice that my reason for this thread was not "a veiled attempt at the gun control issue" but to focus on what in my view is at the heart of the matter reason(s) I have no dog in this fight. I don't own a gun and have no desire at buying one; albeit at times I wonder if I should.
and yet people keep returning to the gun issue because it is easy and simple but unfortunately never addresses the fundamental cause. Politicians love it because it gets them off the hook, and they can generate the populist spin which side tracks people

Your parting remarks regarding Capone killing many people is instructive as to reasons, he was a criminal, and method as he used many gun knife ,bat, concrete etc and support my position. I need to leave for my work out shortly

Personal Best Regards

[JourneyOfLife]

This is one of those complex situations where there are many interconnected issues and problems.

Some people seem to be able to render it down to a one dimensional POV that is the predominant issue in their mind.

I am more conflicted about it.

The one thing that always stuck in my mind was: Who is making money from all of the weapons in the US?

They make money selling weapons, accessories, and ammo to all sides. They make money selling the guns and ammo to the people that kill people or victimize them through crime. They make money selling guns and ammo to people that think they need to protect themselves, etc.

Pretty soon there are more guns than people.

Think about how that business model sustains itself.

We've been had!

[PennBF]

I think it is unfortunate that in a number of cases Sociopaths or Borderline Personalities are excused as being something less than what they are. Based on some experts it is not uncommon to have this as an assumptions. In addition to the "Sociopath Next Door" another good book on the subject is "Without Conscience". The Sociopath Next Door was written by a Harvard Psychiatrist who pretty much spent her life studying the subect. Both agree that not all sociopaths kill. They do agree that about 1 in 25 are Sociopaths. I am a loss to understand how someone kills innocent people (e.g. 9/11, Boston, etc) and have a conscience. To allow them to "skate" and be identified as some form of normal resistence is to misunderstand the sickness of these people. :rant-rave:

[Taltarzac725]

I think it is unfortunate that in a number of cases Sociopaths or Borderline Personalities are excused as being something less than what they are. Based on some experts it is not uncommon to have this as an assumptions. In addition to the "Sociopath Next Door" another good book on the subject is "Without Conscience". The Sociopath Next Door was written by a Harvard Psychiatrist who pretty much spent her life studying the subect. Both agree that not all sociopaths kill. They do agree that about 1 in 25 are Sociopaths. I am a loss to understand how someone kills innocent people (e.g. 9/11, Boston, etc) and have a conscience. To allow them to "skate" and be identified as some form of normal resistence is to misunderstand the sickness of these people. :rant-rave:

I see mass murderers like those involved in the 9/11 and the Boston bombing as motivated mainly by anger, religious fervor, and often TOO MUCH empathy for a group of people these mass murderers identify with in some form. It also often involves dehumanizing whomever these terrorists are targeting. These seem like a far different set of motivators than those of a sociopath. Profile of the Sociopath (http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html)

The dehumanization of the terrorists' targets is the big problem. This is usually part of institutionalized dehumanization of a group of people. I had a close Iraqi friend Mahmood while I was getting a MA in Librarianship and Information Management at the University of Denver. He was from Mosul and had a brother whom I believe was some kind of higher up in the army of Saddam Hussein. My friend was often making very crude jokes about Kurds which bothered me quite a bit. This was in 1983-1984 as the Iran-Iraq war waged http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War and saw horrible atrocities on both sides. I wrote my friend letters for a short time but his anger took over his thinking as he seemed to be buying into an institutional hatred of the West fueled by the war. He was a good man when I knew him but I never found out what happened to him after 1986 or so. The University of Mosul Library also fared quite badly during the wars in Iraq with staff hiding books in their homes.