I personally don't think political motivations or influence had anything to do with the horrific shooting in Tuscan on Saturday, as the main suspect in question seemed to lack any coherent political beliefs. Which leads me to personally believe that he would just have easily taken shots at Senator John McCain or Governor Jan Brewer if they had been the one's holding the constituent meeting and not Representative Gifford.
That being said when I first heard about the whole incident in Tuscan Arizona and the types of individuals who lost their lives or who were injured, I thought at first it might have been a drug cartel hit given the initial profile of the shooter. As well as speculation as accomplices/and or multiple gunman.In addition, to the fact that the type of people targeted were high profile individuals who been involved with issues regarding drug-related violence both within the US and across the Southern border.
Nobody is saying that the perp had connected or organized 'political' thoughts.
The override is that an atmosphere was created in which such an individual would be somewhat more likely to turn to irrational violence(this is Arizona, remember) because the concept of irrational violence has been constantly adverted to by the screwball right-wing.
Conversely, I could blame the Left wing blogs that "targeted" Rep. Giffords for insufficient fidelity to their policy goals. I could assert that a certain prominent politician gave him permission when he told his supporters "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."Originally Posted by 91bravojoe
I would be wrong to do so. As is anyone who asserts that somehow this tragedy is the fault of people they disagree with politically.
As more information emerges, the perpetrator looks increasingly likely to be suffering from schizophrenia. If that is the case, then he interprets any speech, writing, or interaction in any form in his reality, not ours.
News reports say he isn't cooperating. If he is, indeed, schizophrenic, it's more likely that he's blocked any recollection of his actions, so we'll probably never know what happened in his reality to lead him to this violence. If that ever does come out, it won't be political, it will be something along the lines of "Buddha used the CIA mind control ray to tell me to kill Rep. Giffords because her unintelligent use of grammar was keeping me from nirvana." Because that is, unfortunately, how the schizophrenic mind works.
Last edited by J Wolfsberger; 01-10-2011 at 01:29 PM.
John Wolfsberger, Jr.
An unruffled person with some useful skills.
You would not be wrong. You would be right. Radical thoughts on the left and the right can act as triggering events when dealing with disturbed individuals.
So can Jodie Foster.
PH Cannady
Correlate Systems
Sure can. That is why the stalking element is so prevalent in these types of cases. They begin to obsess on certain people.
Slap, the point I was making is that anything can be a triggering event. As Presley points out, it could be Jodie Foster. As I pointed out, it could be Buddha speaking to him. Or he could have decided that he was called to prove that no one was safe at Safeway. It isn't possible to predict.
Claiming he was motivated by political speech, left or right, is applying normal standards of reasoning and behavior to his very private reality. That's not possible, either.
John Wolfsberger, Jr.
An unruffled person with some useful skills.
Agreed. Which leads to: Are there, or should there be, any law enforcement protocols for how those behaviors trigger an in depth investigation or evaluation of threat potential?
Last edited by J Wolfsberger; 01-10-2011 at 03:01 PM.
John Wolfsberger, Jr.
An unruffled person with some useful skills.
Jay, gotta leave for a while. Will respond later.
Not rational people...
You state:The unstable will react to prompts from either side -- even hard over left leaners recognize that (LINK) and apologize for it -- and as you also said:...Both at the macro level, and at the individual candidate level, the right wing pursued explicit behavior which would agitate the unstable.True and one never knows precisely what triggered an alleged radical who had allegedly had many leftist tendencies but was, mostly, just a sad mentally aberrant kid (LINK).The more you focus on "disturbed", the more you have to examine what is likely to trigger a disturbed person.Are those rifle sights or are they simply targets? A lot of folks including the media use terms like target for many things (LINK). Fortunately, as that article shows, some people can apply some common sense....The sequellae includes the SarahPac ad with rifle sites...
Regardless, as you also said:As any Lawyer will tell you, intent is hard to prove. As any shooter will tell you you, those aren't very good representations of the cross hairs in a telescopic sight. As Kurtz said, tossing blame around is easy -- and generally incorrect...Tort definition of intent: you INTEND the likely consequences of your acts.
And as I said earlier, the bottom line is that this is not a political discussion board -- so while a brief unbiased comment on political ramifications is acceptable, even desirable, we should save the leaning in either direction politics for elsewhere. That means NOT 'intending' to provoke politically biased responses.
Thanks.
Some semi-related comments from a Tucson resident
The media is making too big a deal of this. It was a tragedy, and I strongly hope that Congresswoman Giffords makes a full recovery and runs for Governor so that we can have some responsible leadership in this state. However, comparing Tucson to Dallas (Kennedy assassination) is ridiculous, and comments about the shooter's alleged politics as well as calls for gun control are, in my judgment, both misguided and unseemly. People will get over this trauma and the incident pales in comparison to what occurs in Iraq and Afghanistan on a weekly basis.
Where was the threat assessment? Why wasn't one of the Congresswoman's staffers armed? (As of five months ago, anyone can carry a concealed weapon in Arizona without a permit.) The Congresswoman was the target of multiple threats, just completed a nasty campaign, and had her local office vandalized because of her health care vote. The House of Representatives Sergeant-at-Arms Office should also be asking themselves some questions. They can't be expected to assess security threats in 435 separate districts but they should be providing personal security assessment briefings to incoming members.
It was a stroke of luck that the shooter used a 9mmP caliber pistol rather than a 40 S&W or a 45 ACP caliber pistol. I buy powder and primers from the store where he reporteldy purchased his handgun and he could have easily selected from the display shelf a Glock 23 (40 S&W) rather than the Glock 19 which he used to commit his crimes. The number of dead would have likely been greater if he had used a more powerful caliber. This should be another argument (as if anymore are needed) for the U.S. military to change its handgun caliber from 9mmP to 45ACP.
There are such protocols but as the Arizona Sheriff said yesterday the traditional route from long ago would have been to refer them to mental health and possible long term incarceration. But money for such programs no longer exist(started with Regan and has been building for some time) and that is a huge part of the problem and with the mood in DC to cut budgets the situation will likely get worse.
Substantial air of disreality certainly manifest here. There is NO COMPARISON between what the left(whatever that means in America) and the right have said. Review the explicitness in this list:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmem...10.php?ref=fpa
If you broaden out a little, you plow into actual conduct, involving hundreds of incidents and 8 actual murders:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence
Show me the 'left' involvement in that multi-decade history.
On the other hand, here's an opportunity to spiff up your wardrobe:
http://www.zazzle.com/tea_party_rall...26866986316482
Currently in stock.
You can proof text all day, but you still haven't addressed the widely-reported description of the shooter as a leftist and deeply disturbed -- beyond the reach of any particular political rhetoric.
Just off the top of my head...Show me the 'left' involvement in that multi-decade history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army
"The status quo is not sustainable. All of DoD needs to be placed in a large bag and thoroughly shaken. Bureaucracy and micromanagement kill."
-- Ken White
"With a plan this complex, nothing can go wrong." -- Schmedlap
"We are unlikely to usefully replicate the insights those unencumbered by a military staff college education might actually have." -- William F. Owen
At the risk of being redundant, for the second time:
"And as I said earlier, the bottom line is that this is not a political discussion board -- so while a brief unbiased comment on political ramifications is acceptable, even desirable, we should save the leaning in either direction politics for elsewhere. That means NOT 'intending' to provoke politically biased responses.
Thanks."
I asked nicely. Opinions on either side of this argument certainly exist among people who frequent this Board, however, most know that purely political discussions do not belong here. Please move any further comments to a political board and let's drop it here. I'd hate to lock this thread due to ideologically based comments that belong elsewhere.
Sorry, Ken. 91bravojoe -- ignore my post.
"The status quo is not sustainable. All of DoD needs to be placed in a large bag and thoroughly shaken. Bureaucracy and micromanagement kill."
-- Ken White
"With a plan this complex, nothing can go wrong." -- Schmedlap
"We are unlikely to usefully replicate the insights those unencumbered by a military staff college education might actually have." -- William F. Owen
I do obviously not watch U.S. news all day, but I recall having read that the "leftist" description originates from Fox news and was criticised for being partisan propaganda. I watch CNN International when I'm bored (it doesn't help against that condition, though) and so far they didn't associate him with either wing - nor did German media so far afaik.
The guy had according to reports both marxist and fascist titles in his favourite books list.
It's likely best to completely ignore the topic for a month, skip all those preliminary (and often wrong) info in the meantime. Then in a month when people have calmed down we can read up somewhat robust info on the topic and form an opinion in a calm situation.
Judy Clarke appointed as defense counsel,
and according to USA Today, Loughner's lawyer is 'One-Woman Dream Team', with an interesting prior client list:
RegardsHIGH-PROFILE CLIENT LIST
Criminal defense attorney Judy Clarke has been involved in several high-profile cases. Among them:
-- Zacarias Moussaoui. The 9/11 conspirator represented himself during his 2006 trial. Clarke served as an adviser to him. He is serving a life sentence.
-- Eric Rudolph. Known as "Olympic Park Bomber," he pleaded guilty in 2005 to a series of bombings, including the 1996 Olympics bombing in Atlanta that killed one person and injured 111 others. He is serving life in prison.
-- Theodore Kaczynski. Known as the "Unabomber," he pleaded guilty in 1998 to a mail-bombing campaign that spanned almost 20 years and killed three people and injured 23 others. He is serving a life sentence.
-- Susan Smith. She was convicted in 1995 of drowning her two toddler sons in a lake in Union, S.C., in 1994. She is serving a life sentence with the possibility of parole in November 2024.
Mike
I think politics is just what this guy fixated on, it could have easily have been a specific corporation that he had a job at, or some family members, or any of thousands of other things to become attached to in a twisted up way.
This really had to do with badly handling mental illness and firearms in that locality. The US needs to revisit how we deal with those issues in a way that is not offensive to the second amendment. I think it's possible to do it, and I think it's an issue that could be solved with guidance rather than any sort of national legislation.
Virginia had a lot of problems with this, and it took some real tragedy for them to improve. The not so smart thing was for everyone else not to invest in learning from their mistakes. This is one result of that. While politicians in the US need to be more civil than they have rather stupidly chosen not to be, it's not all about that to be sure. We can survive bad language, but people don't survive when mentally ill people get violent with weapons of any sort.
Arizona law does prohibit selling firearms to the mentally ill. But they need to be identified in the system for the law to work. Jared Loughner's behavior gave plenty of warning to students and faculty at the community college. There were, reportedly, incidents with law enforcement intervention at his home. That was what prompted my question to Slap about protocols for identifying and dealing with the mentally ill. The relevance to SWC is that the sociopathy and/or fanaticism that lead to terrorism often give plenty of warning signals as well. Maybe the topics for discussion should be:
What are the protocols?
How did they break down in this instance?
How should they be changed?
How should they be extended to identify the truly dangerous without curtailing the freedom of ordinary citizens?
John Wolfsberger, Jr.
An unruffled person with some useful skills.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks