Buffalo

benjs · May 2022

JB16057 said:

Cropduster-80 said:

JB16057 said:

Cropduster-80 said:

JB16057 said:

Gern Blansten said:

JB16057 said:

OnWis97 said:

We've become so desensitized to this kind of violence that my gut reaction was "its own thread?"

And to be honest, I hope Buffalo does get lost in the shuffle with the countless other incidents...as opposed to being well-remembered as "the first Great Replacement Theory Massacre."

How about angry black people?
https://www.fitsnews.com/2022/04/13/black-nationalist-identified-as-suspected-perpetrator-of-new-york-city-subway-attack/

How about angry Chinese people?
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/16/alleged-gunman-in-california-church-shooting-identified-by-police

There are angry people of all colors all over the place. It has more to do with mental illness than skin color.

an apologist for white gunmen....good work!

I know... it is pointless to try and have an honest conversation here.

So are you saying that this guy being white is his main issue and that mental illness has nothing to do with this?

Mental illness is also an excuse white people use to explain the actions of other white people. And I’m referring to people like Fox hosts here. Then it gets amplified to other white people. Fundamentally they know what’s it’s about, blaming an illness makes them feel less responsible

on 9/11 who blamed mental illness? No one

https://www.fitsnews.com/2022/04/13/black-nationalist-identified-as-suspected-perpetrator-of-new-york-city-subway-attack/

So how about this black guy wanting to kill white people? Surely this guy has no mental illness, right?

First of all mental illness and a legal definition of insanity are not even close to the same thing.

most people probably have some sort of mental illness as that’s a catch all term. In any given year it’s 1 in 4 Americans, over a lifetime it’s probably everyone has had a bout with mental illness. Planning, execution, etc all show the person knows what they are doing. You can’t blame a mental illness on their actions in the same way you could on a schizophrenic who literally can’t process reality. They also can’t execute a plan months in advance.

You can’t blame mental illness for these actions as if it was an excuse everyone would do something like this in their lifetime, and we don’t

I'm not saying that this is only a mental illness issue but it does play a big part of it. This guy obviously had mental issues but the system allowed him to move forward with his plan. Gun laws don't matter if they aren't being enforced.

There were 33 people shot in Chicago this weekend with 5 fatalities. How many of these shooters were white?

I hate the games you play on here, Tucker Jr. You always seem to be “just asking questions” but it’s transparent in its intent to derail, to anyone with a modicum of intelligence. Situations like Buffalo don’t exist in a vacuum - they are a clear pattern to anyone with a functional pair of eyes and ears, who chooses not to wear earplugs and blindfolds.

Halifax2TheMax · May 2022

Is this guy mentally ill too?

The New York Corrections Department said Tuesday that it would move to fire a longtime officer who joked online about the recent mass shooting in Buffalo, denouncing a “vile posting” that “does not represent the morals and values” of its staff.

The state’s Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) said Gregory Foster II, a correction officer, has been suspended without pay and that an internal investigation would “identify and discipline any staff who may have engaged” with Foster’s Facebook post.

The supermarket massacre in Buffalo on Saturday left 10 people dead, and authorities have described the attack as an act of racial hatred meant to kill Black people.

Foster had shared an image of the Tops grocery store accompanied by references to a request for “clean up” in aisles, the corrections department confirmed to The Washington Post.

“Too soon?” Foster allegedly wrote in the post, which drew fury online before it was apparently deleted.

Foster’s comments “are despicable, stand in violation of multiple Department rules and will not be tolerated,” DOCCS wrote in a statement. The department also said it “has engaged” a civil rights task force “for potential criminal prosecution.” It did not provide further details.

The Post was unable to reach Foster on Tuesday or view his Facebook page. He was hired in 1997, the department said, and worked at Attica Correctional Facility, a prison less than an hour’s drive from Buffalo.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/05/17/correction-officer-buffalo-shooting/

nicknyr15 · May 2022

The dude decapitated a cat and wrote about it in extreme detail. Can’t he be mentally ill and racist? It’s amazing how many red flags there were.

mickeyrat · May 2022

nicknyr15 said:

The dude decapitated a cat and wrote about it in extreme detail. Can’t he be mentally ill and racist? It’s amazing how many red flags there were.

is being a sociopath or psychopath being mentally ill?

nicknyr15 · May 2022

mickeyrat said:

nicknyr15 said:

The dude decapitated a cat and wrote about it in extreme detail. Can’t he be mentally ill and racist? It’s amazing how many red flags there were.

is being a sociopath or psychopath being mentally ill?

I’m no expert but a quick google search claims that it is a mental illness. Not that any of that matters to me. Anyone who takes another’s life is a waste of life and garbage. I don’t look at them any different if society deems them mentally ill.

Halifax2TheMax · May 2022

Wow.

Lerxst1992 · May 2022

brianlux said:

OnWis97 said:

We've become so desensitized to this kind of violence that my gut reaction was "its own thread?"

And to be honest, I hope Buffalo does get lost in the shuffle with the countless other incidents...as opposed to being well-remembered as "the first Great Replacement Theory Massacre."

I started this as separate thread for a number of reasons.
1. It stuck me as taking these mass shooting to another (awful) level.
2. There are very concerning political ramifications in that some of the ultra right wing politicians in this country are more or less supporting it and tying it in with the ridiculous and false "great replacement theory".
3. I support the notion of acknowledging the victims and not the shooter, including referring to any nefarious creep by a number (like "45" etc).

Anyway, I'm sorry you have issues with the thread. Maybe just ignore it?

Buffalo is unfortunately a major news story, which deserves its own thread. Good call here.

tbergs · May 2022

I guess I'm not getting why there is such a desire to label this a mental illness unless you are trying to distract away from the fact that this was a hate crime. Ok, yeah, I guess I do get it then. Lessen the focus on white nationalist hate and focus on mental illness because then we can move on because we know nothing can be done about that. I think anyone who considers harming others is mentally unstable, but that generic mental illness tag that gets tossed around seems to just be a lazy way of pushing blame. Easy to be a Monday morning QB on these situations, but how many deranged comments are made online everyday? Go to those far right sites and read the posts and comments. There's so many red flags all across the country that we could start a new government agency called the Department of Red Flags.

I work at a College and serve on our behavioral intervention team. We get a handful of red flag students every semester that we manage and monitor. Most never rise to the level of imminent threat, but the amount that hover in the gray is scary. They haven't committed a crime and there is nothing law enforcement can do with them so we try to intervene in various ways to keep in contact. I would wager that most schools (college and high school) have a similar load of individuals they are monitoring, but once they are no longer students they are on their own because the forced support stops there. If these individuals get a job, they probably end up on their employer's radar as well, unless they personally take action and change, but every time that relationship is ended (school, employment, etc.) they fall back through the cracks because we don't have a system in place to take over.

This just seems like something as a society we've decided to accept. Gun rights advocates don't want to limit their access to firearms and some just want to jump on the mental illness soapbox right away, but then also aren't supportive of funding the social structures needed to help these so called mentally ill mass murderers. The circle of nothing, but much like thoughts and prayers, it feels nice to say unless someone you know or love is one of the victims.

nicknyr15 · May 2022

tbergs said:

I guess I'm not getting why there is such a desire to label this a mental illness unless you are trying to distract away from the fact that this was a hate crime. Ok, yeah, I guess I do get it then. Lessen the focus on white nationalist hate and focus on mental illness because then we can move on because we know nothing can be done about that. I think anyone who considers harming others is mentally unstable, but that generic mental illness tag that gets tossed around seems to just be a lazy way of pushing blame. Easy to be a Monday morning QB on these situations, but how many deranged comments are made online everyday? Go to those far right sites and read the posts and comments. There's so many red flags all across the country that we could start a new government agency called the Department of Red Flags.

I work at a College and serve on our behavioral intervention team. We get a handful of red flag students every semester that we manage and monitor. Most never rise to the level of imminent threat, but the amount that hover in the gray is scary. They haven't committed a crime and there is nothing law enforcement can do with them so we try to intervene in various ways to keep in contact. I would wager that most schools (college and high school) have a similar load of individuals they are monitoring, but once they are no longer students they are on their own because the forced support stops there. If these individuals get a job, they probably end up on their employer's radar as well, unless they personally take action and change, but every time that relationship is ended (school, employment, etc.) they fall back through the cracks because we don't have a system in place to take over.

This just seems like something as a society we've decided to accept. Gun rights advocates don't want to limit their access to firearms and some just want to jump on the mental illness soapbox right away, but then also aren't supportive of funding the social structures needed to help these so called mentally ill mass murderers. The circle of nothing, but much like thoughts and prayers, it feels nice to say unless someone you know or love is one of the victims.

I agree. The automatic mentally ill
label is nothing but a distraction. It happens here in NYC all time surrounding our crime. That last sentence is spot on.

oftenreading · May 2022

One of the problems with this discussion so far is that people are using the term "mentally ill" like it's a unitary phenomenon, when in fact it's a broad descriptive term. There are many different types of mental illness but only a very small proportion affect legal culpability (with probably a somewhat larger proportion affecting moral culpability but that varies depending on personal beliefs). When we talk about a person not being legally responsible for criminal activity due to mental illness we're really only talking about psychosis, and not just that the person has symptoms of psychosis such as delusions and hallucinations but that they directly impair that person's ability to understand the nature of the acts that they are committing and that they are wrong (the exact legal test varies from state to state in the US). So far everything I've read about the killer in this instance does not suggest psychosis. Personality disorders like antisocial personality disorder and even the condition we call psychopathy have aggressive behaviour as part of their core criteria but that doesn't mean that the person is too mentally ill to understand or control their behaviour.

MayDay10 · May 2022

They should throw people who (have clearly) done something like this into a wood-chipper.

JojoRice · May 2022

I think the shooter certainly had mental issues in addition to being racist. It's a combination of both in this unfortunate event. What also sucks is that he'll probably live on death row for another 20-30 years and be a waste of tax payer money. He doesn't deserve to breath air.

cincybearcat · May 2022

oftenreading said:

One of the problems with this discussion so far is that people are using the term "mentally ill" like it's a unitary phenomenon, when in fact it's a broad descriptive term. There are many different types of mental illness but only a very small proportion affect legal culpability (with probably a somewhat larger proportion affecting moral culpability but that varies depending on personal beliefs). When we talk about a person not being legally responsible for criminal activity due to mental illness we're really only talking about psychosis, and not just that the person has symptoms of psychosis such as delusions and hallucinations but that they directly impair that person's ability to understand the nature of the acts that they are committing and that they are wrong (the exact legal test varies from state to state in the US). So far everything I've read about the killer in this instance does not suggest psychosis. Personality disorders like antisocial personality disorder and even the condition we call psychopathy have aggressive behaviour as part of their core criteria but that doesn't mean that the person is too mentally ill to understand or control their behaviour.

Thanks for your contribution on this. I find it interesting and usually learn something new or at least am remind of something I forgot

Mental Illness appears to just be the deflection issue to ignore the other issues that are the root cause of the majority of these situations. It use to be thoughts & prayers....and not talking about the issue because people are grieving. Now it's calling everything a mental health issue so it is seen as something outside the norm....not something to really worry about or something you can really do anything about.

OnWis97 · May 2022

oftenreading said:

One of the problems with this discussion so far is that people are using the term "mentally ill" like it's a unitary phenomenon, when in fact it's a broad descriptive term. There are many different types of mental illness but only a very small proportion affect legal culpability (with probably a somewhat larger proportion affecting moral culpability but that varies depending on personal beliefs). When we talk about a person not being legally responsible for criminal activity due to mental illness we're really only talking about psychosis, and not just that the person has symptoms of psychosis such as delusions and hallucinations but that they directly impair that person's ability to understand the nature of the acts that they are committing and that they are wrong (the exact legal test varies from state to state in the US). So far everything I've read about the killer in this instance does not suggest psychosis. Personality disorders like antisocial personality disorder and even the condition we call psychopathy have aggressive behaviour as part of their core criteria but that doesn't mean that the person is too mentally ill to understand or control their behaviour.

True. I have a mental illness. OCD. I'm not violent...I don't own a gun (let alone multiple guns to necessitate an entire rack) but it really would not make any sense to say I could not have one because of my mental illness.

brianlux · May 2022

oftenreading said:

One of the problems with this discussion so far is that people are using the term "mentally ill" like it's a unitary phenomenon, when in fact it's a broad descriptive term. There are many different types of mental illness but only a very small proportion affect legal culpability (with probably a somewhat larger proportion affecting moral culpability but that varies depending on personal beliefs). When we talk about a person not being legally responsible for criminal activity due to mental illness we're really only talking about psychosis, and not just that the person has symptoms of psychosis such as delusions and hallucinations but that they directly impair that person's ability to understand the nature of the acts that they are committing and that they are wrong (the exact legal test varies from state to state in the US). So far everything I've read about the killer in this instance does not suggest psychosis. Personality disorders like antisocial personality disorder and even the condition we call psychopathy have aggressive behaviour as part of their core criteria but that doesn't mean that the person is too mentally ill to understand or control their behaviour.

Again, spot on.

The bottom line is this guy had enough sense about him to know what he was doing, was very methodical about it, and was successful in his objectives up to the point of being detained. The motive for his actions was racism. And the only people looking to use mental illness as an excuse for his actions are either racists themselves, or are gun advocates who don't see a problem with allowing people to own and carry weapons intended to kill as many people as possible (and some are both of those things).

The focus here needs to be on the issues of racism, what some of us see as unreasonably lax weapons laws, and the disturbing acceptance and even approval of the consequences of these things by a segment of the radical far right-wing.

My twenty-something self would be shocked to see where we are today. Fifty years ago, I thought we were on the road to recovering from the broad social sickness that is racism. Now I wonder if we will ever get there.

tempo_n_groove · May 2022

brianlux said:

oftenreading said:

One of the problems with this discussion so far is that people are using the term "mentally ill" like it's a unitary phenomenon, when in fact it's a broad descriptive term. There are many different types of mental illness but only a very small proportion affect legal culpability (with probably a somewhat larger proportion affecting moral culpability but that varies depending on personal beliefs). When we talk about a person not being legally responsible for criminal activity due to mental illness we're really only talking about psychosis, and not just that the person has symptoms of psychosis such as delusions and hallucinations but that they directly impair that person's ability to understand the nature of the acts that they are committing and that they are wrong (the exact legal test varies from state to state in the US). So far everything I've read about the killer in this instance does not suggest psychosis. Personality disorders like antisocial personality disorder and even the condition we call psychopathy have aggressive behaviour as part of their core criteria but that doesn't mean that the person is too mentally ill to understand or control their behaviour.

Again, spot on.

The bottom line is this guy had enough sense about him to know what he was doing, was very methodical about it, and was successful in his objectives up to the point of being detained. The motive for his actions was racism. And the only people looking to use mental illness as an excuse for his actions are either racists themselves, or are gun advocates who don't see a problem with allowing people to own and carry weapons intended to kill as many people as possible (and some are both of those things).

The focus here needs to be on the issues of racism, what some of us see as unreasonably lax weapons laws, and the disturbing acceptance and even approval of the consequences of these things by a segment of the radical far right-wing.

My twenty-something self would be shocked to see where we are today. Fifty years ago, I thought we were on the road to recovering from the broad social sickness that is racism. Now I wonder if we will ever get there.

This is opposite of whats going on w the NYC subway shooter where local officials are claiming that "Social Services" were to blame. He had videos he made w racist rants and even said that the system failed him and he had zero desire to work for the system but had enough forethought to carry out a mass shooting.

The mental illness angle is being brought up for him yet a few miles up north that shouldn't be considered?

It is interesting on how it gets used.

brianlux · May 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

brianlux said:

oftenreading said:

One of the problems with this discussion so far is that people are using the term "mentally ill" like it's a unitary phenomenon, when in fact it's a broad descriptive term. There are many different types of mental illness but only a very small proportion affect legal culpability (with probably a somewhat larger proportion affecting moral culpability but that varies depending on personal beliefs). When we talk about a person not being legally responsible for criminal activity due to mental illness we're really only talking about psychosis, and not just that the person has symptoms of psychosis such as delusions and hallucinations but that they directly impair that person's ability to understand the nature of the acts that they are committing and that they are wrong (the exact legal test varies from state to state in the US). So far everything I've read about the killer in this instance does not suggest psychosis. Personality disorders like antisocial personality disorder and even the condition we call psychopathy have aggressive behaviour as part of their core criteria but that doesn't mean that the person is too mentally ill to understand or control their behaviour.

Again, spot on.

The bottom line is this guy had enough sense about him to know what he was doing, was very methodical about it, and was successful in his objectives up to the point of being detained. The motive for his actions was racism. And the only people looking to use mental illness as an excuse for his actions are either racists themselves, or are gun advocates who don't see a problem with allowing people to own and carry weapons intended to kill as many people as possible (and some are both of those things).

The focus here needs to be on the issues of racism, what some of us see as unreasonably lax weapons laws, and the disturbing acceptance and even approval of the consequences of these things by a segment of the radical far right-wing.

My twenty-something self would be shocked to see where we are today. Fifty years ago, I thought we were on the road to recovering from the broad social sickness that is racism. Now I wonder if we will ever get there.

This is opposite of whats going on w the NYC subway shooter where local officials are claiming that "Social Services" were to blame. He had videos he made w racist rants and even said that the system failed him and he had zero desire to work for the system but had enough forethought to carry out a mass shooting.

The mental illness angle is being brought up for him yet a few miles up north that shouldn't be considered?

It is interesting on how it gets used.

I don't remember- was the NYC subway shooting methodically planned out and executed the way the Buffalo incident was?

cincybearcat · May 2022

brianlux said:

tempo_n_groove said:

brianlux said:

oftenreading said:

One of the problems with this discussion so far is that people are using the term "mentally ill" like it's a unitary phenomenon, when in fact it's a broad descriptive term. There are many different types of mental illness but only a very small proportion affect legal culpability (with probably a somewhat larger proportion affecting moral culpability but that varies depending on personal beliefs). When we talk about a person not being legally responsible for criminal activity due to mental illness we're really only talking about psychosis, and not just that the person has symptoms of psychosis such as delusions and hallucinations but that they directly impair that person's ability to understand the nature of the acts that they are committing and that they are wrong (the exact legal test varies from state to state in the US). So far everything I've read about the killer in this instance does not suggest psychosis. Personality disorders like antisocial personality disorder and even the condition we call psychopathy have aggressive behaviour as part of their core criteria but that doesn't mean that the person is too mentally ill to understand or control their behaviour.

Again, spot on.

The bottom line is this guy had enough sense about him to know what he was doing, was very methodical about it, and was successful in his objectives up to the point of being detained. The motive for his actions was racism. And the only people looking to use mental illness as an excuse for his actions are either racists themselves, or are gun advocates who don't see a problem with allowing people to own and carry weapons intended to kill as many people as possible (and some are both of those things).

The focus here needs to be on the issues of racism, what some of us see as unreasonably lax weapons laws, and the disturbing acceptance and even approval of the consequences of these things by a segment of the radical far right-wing.

My twenty-something self would be shocked to see where we are today. Fifty years ago, I thought we were on the road to recovering from the broad social sickness that is racism. Now I wonder if we will ever get there.

This is opposite of whats going on w the NYC subway shooter where local officials are claiming that "Social Services" were to blame. He had videos he made w racist rants and even said that the system failed him and he had zero desire to work for the system but had enough forethought to carry out a mass shooting.

The mental illness angle is being brought up for him yet a few miles up north that shouldn't be considered?

It is interesting on how it gets used.

I don't remember- was the NYC subway shooting methodically planned out and executed the way the Buffalo incident was?

https://apnews.com/article/police-hunt-brooklyn-subway-gunman-8b4e1efee5d08c06050c7b09172829d3

tempo_n_groove · May 2022

brianlux said:

tempo_n_groove said:

brianlux said:

oftenreading said:

One of the problems with this discussion so far is that people are using the term "mentally ill" like it's a unitary phenomenon, when in fact it's a broad descriptive term. There are many different types of mental illness but only a very small proportion affect legal culpability (with probably a somewhat larger proportion affecting moral culpability but that varies depending on personal beliefs). When we talk about a person not being legally responsible for criminal activity due to mental illness we're really only talking about psychosis, and not just that the person has symptoms of psychosis such as delusions and hallucinations but that they directly impair that person's ability to understand the nature of the acts that they are committing and that they are wrong (the exact legal test varies from state to state in the US). So far everything I've read about the killer in this instance does not suggest psychosis. Personality disorders like antisocial personality disorder and even the condition we call psychopathy have aggressive behaviour as part of their core criteria but that doesn't mean that the person is too mentally ill to understand or control their behaviour.

Again, spot on.

The bottom line is this guy had enough sense about him to know what he was doing, was very methodical about it, and was successful in his objectives up to the point of being detained. The motive for his actions was racism. And the only people looking to use mental illness as an excuse for his actions are either racists themselves, or are gun advocates who don't see a problem with allowing people to own and carry weapons intended to kill as many people as possible (and some are both of those things).

The focus here needs to be on the issues of racism, what some of us see as unreasonably lax weapons laws, and the disturbing acceptance and even approval of the consequences of these things by a segment of the radical far right-wing.

My twenty-something self would be shocked to see where we are today. Fifty years ago, I thought we were on the road to recovering from the broad social sickness that is racism. Now I wonder if we will ever get there.

This is opposite of whats going on w the NYC subway shooter where local officials are claiming that "Social Services" were to blame. He had videos he made w racist rants and even said that the system failed him and he had zero desire to work for the system but had enough forethought to carry out a mass shooting.

The mental illness angle is being brought up for him yet a few miles up north that shouldn't be considered?

It is interesting on how it gets used.

I don't remember- was the NYC subway shooting methodically planned out and executed the way the Buffalo incident was?

Gas mask, check.
Smoke bomb, check.
Carried multiple gun clips, check.
Ranted about killing people in online youtube videos, check.

Plus he did it on a full subway car. I'd say it was methodically planned but I'm no expert.

PJ_Soul · May 2022

nicknyr15 said:

mickeyrat said:

nicknyr15 said:

The dude decapitated a cat and wrote about it in extreme detail. Can’t he be mentally ill and racist? It’s amazing how many red flags there were.

is being a sociopath or psychopath being mentally ill?

I’m no expert but a quick google search claims that it is a mental illness. Not that any of that matters to me. Anyone who takes another’s life is a waste of life and garbage. I don’t look at them any different if society deems them mentally ill.

They aren't mental illnesses. They are mental disorders. There is a difference.

Buffalo

Comments

Categories