Sick freak kills first-graders

  • News
  • Thread starter Jack21222
  • Start date
In summary: I believe she was found dead in his home...They just released his name, apparently he killed his father in New Jersey, went to Newtown killed his mother who worked at the elementary school (which so far is the only connection they have found between him and the school). Then he went to the school...Which news are you listening to?I don't know how anyone could do this. It's just so senseless. I don't know how anyone could do this. It's just so senseless.
  • #106


Rika said:
No, this is the best time for debate. Because saying 'he is a freak, I can't believe it' is superficial and meaningless. People are dead and this is the fact.

That being said as European I will never understand Americans. For some reason more than 90% of you want to sleep with machine gun under your pillow or else you won't feel "free".

I don't sleep with machine gun but I don't feel that my freedom is restricted in any way.

It's true that if you can't buy gun in supermarket then events like that are less likely to occur.

But it's also true that in Canda the law is similar and yet events like that are rare. So how come? Maybe sth in your society is broken. I would love to hear any explanation for that.

My thoughts exactly. I will never understand this, this seems to be an obvious problem to everyone else except to a lot of Americans, who seem to be selectively blind to it. I actually feel more free knowing that people don't go around armed, it's the freedom of not being afraid to get shot. And I don't think anywhere in the world gun laws are as lax as in the US. They are certainly more restrictive in Canada.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #107


russ_watters said:
No, it isn't. This is the time when people are least rational and decisions should be based on rational thoughts.
Is there a right time to do something about guns issue in the US? I started one thread recently where many people either said statistically there is no problem at all or there is no solution.

It's shame how the US politicians choose to ignore the gun issue including the both president candidates.
Greg Bernhardt said:
A new thread called "technology to protect a school" thread has been made
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=659069

Just to keep the idiots happy with their guns, will this technology be placed in schools, universities, religious places, and theaters?
 
  • #108
This video came to mind when hearing of this incident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKwnE_jR8l8​

Maude apparently took poison, because her 80th birthday was the proper time to die.
The movie as a whole is filled with symbols of death, Harold's inability to deal with reality, and the resulting morbid manifestations.
Harold escapes death in the end, by destroying his hearse. Maude had earlier taught him how to live, dance, and play the banjo.
The lyrics of http://lyrics.wikia.com/Cat_Stevens:Trouble are about as close as I can come to describing my feelings.

I do not know what to do about the dead kindergartners.

Sharing the stories of the heroes seems appropriate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TX8V_ZWwgb4​

The survivors will appreciate it. I do.

Greg Bernhardt said:
My fiance works at an elementary school. I almost hope she doesn't read about this.

Give her a big hug for me.
 
  • #109
Astronuc said:
New information has Lanza forcing his way into the school and not voluntarily let in as earlier reported. He apparently left some evidence regarding his motives.

http://news.yahoo.com/conn-police-very-good-evidence-gunman-155817889.html
Where does it say he forced his way into the school? Oh, never mind, I see it. But it's not clear what they mean.

What I heard was that he first went to the principal's office, got into an argument with her, which was placed over the PA system to alert the teachers, then the principal was killed and he then went to his mother's old kindergarden class.

Lanza forced his way into the school, Vance revealed Saturday, though he wouldn’t say how or whether Lanza used weapons to do it.

It’s also not clear whether Lanza entered before or after 9:30 a.m., the time each day when the school would lock its doors as part of a security system introduced this year. Authorities say the first emergency call about the shooting came in at “approximately” 9:30 a.m. Friday.
So we still don't know how or when he entered.

http://wtvr.com/2012/12/15/police-gunman-adam-lanza-barged-into-elementary-school/

If he knew they locked the doors at 9:30am, it would make sense for him to enter before then.
 
Last edited:
  • #112


enosis_ said:
... It's strictly my opinion that violent video games might have a de-sensitizing effect ...

nsaspook said:
... I'm not saying it's the reason this happened but excessive violent game use coupled with mental instability been a common thread in other school type killings .

Why is this even being discussed?

And it appears that the issue is not with video games, but with the mentally unstable. It's just a convenient scape-goat that allows for us to try to feebly explain how this could have happened. I think that it's fairly obvious that this is not something that normal people do, which implies that this person is not normal. Having a better understanding of mental illnesses, or possibly trauma that could bring a human being to rationalize despicable acts, is a far better use of time and effort than blaming video games ever will be.

It's like parents who blame violent video games for their children's crimes; they just can't cope with their own incompetence, and would rather have the blame be put off onto something other than themselves or their children.
 
  • #113


I'm with AntiFreeze on this one. I grew up dirt poor in a seriously broken home with a history of irresponsibility, abuse, and neglect. I played violent video games(*) and am also an avid shooter. I've never gone on a shooting spree, and can confidently say I never will. Looking for inanimate objects to blame is a disease in and of itself, for people who for one reason or another do not want to acknowledge that at the end of the day, what a person does is their own decision, and to some extent, their parents.

(*)By the standards of the day. I'm 36 so violence back then was double dragon, mortal kombat, doom, etc. They made the same unsupported connections back then, and to movies and music before then.
 
  • #114


I'm sorry for the teachers and children who died, and those who will suffer from witnessing such inhuman incident..

My condolences to their families.
 
  • #115


Be aware that as we seek to understand and find a solution to this problem, we will encounter many side issues that will detract from and co-opt the story from the victims of this crime. You may think the victims have been killed but they are present. They are the parents and siblings of these kids. They will be going thru tremendous pain, suffering and grief leading to PTSD, lost jobs, broken marriages, troubled teens, and drug/alcoholic abuse. The stress they will feel is just too great to handle and just to unbearable...

Please think about what they will be going through, read up on grief counseling and prepare yourself should you find it has affected one of your relatives, friends or co-workers. If so don't treat them like they have leprosy. Dont run away from them because you can't handle it. You must be strong. You must listen without an opinion. You must be there for them.

All of this news coverage will also do damage as it delays the grieving process where people who were indirectly affected praise God for their good fortune or say at least the little ones are in heaven. None of this talk helps these parents. Sometimes religious sentiment backfires. Sometimes I even feel that it may make it easier for a shooter to justify his/her actions on the grounds that we really don't die or that we're going to heaven.
 
  • #116


justsomeguy said:
I'm with AntiFreeze on this one. I grew up dirt poor in a seriously broken home with a history of irresponsibility, abuse, and neglect. I played violent video games(*) and am also an avid shooter. I've never gone on a shooting spree, and can confidently say I never will. Looking for inanimate objects to blame is a disease in and of itself, for people who for one reason or another do not want to acknowledge that at the end of the day, what a person does is their own decision, and to some extent, their parents.

(*)By the standards of the day. I'm 36 so violence back then was double dragon, mortal kombat, doom, etc. They made the same unsupported connections back then, and to movies and music before then.

Its true that Brievik of Norway said he used video games to desensitize himself beforehand. However, he had already decided that he was going to kill many and used the video game to strengthen his resolve because its one thing to kill a character in a game and another to do it in real life. The video game serves the same purpose as a gun for those who want to kill.

In the Palestinian conflict video game developers have created custom games for both sides to perpetuate the hatred each feel. The games are directed at teens involved in the conflict and make it harder to create a lasting peace. So while we can't blame the games for creating killers, we can ask why can't game developers agree to create games with better civic and moral values.
 
  • #117


AnTiFreeze3 said:
Why is this even being discussed?

And it appears that the issue is not with video games, but with the mentally unstable. It's just a convenient scape-goat that allows for us to try to feebly explain how this could have happened. I think that it's fairly obvious that this is not something that normal people do, which implies that this person is not normal. Having a better understanding of mental illnesses, or possibly trauma that could bring a human being to rationalize despicable acts, is a far better use of time and effort than blaming video games ever will be.

It's like parents who blame violent video games for their children's crimes; they just can't cope with their own incompetence, and would rather have the blame be put off onto something other than themselves or their children.

I'm not blaming video games for his actions but I'm not blind to the conditioning of a sick human mind to repetitive killing. There are testable effects on the human mind from violence of all sorts not just games. Games are not the trigger to this or any other crime but exposure even simulated violence or love has an effect on mood as we all know from watching movies. Just blaming mental illnesses for despicable acts is a whitewash when it's possible the society at large is conditioning a very tiny fraction of the population to have no limits when they snap for hatred of their mom or any other strange reason. Are we creating a sub-culture of unlimited violence in our society?
 
  • #118


jedishrfu said:
Its true that Brievik of Norway said he used video games to desensitize himself beforehand. However, he had already decided that he was going to kill many and used the video game to strengthen his resolve because its one thing to kill a character in a game and another to do it in real life.

I am skeptical that 'training' had any real impact, as he'd already made up his mind. Maybe during the shooting he convinced himself that it was just another game, but that's delusion, not desensitization.

jedishrfu said:
The video game serves the same purpose as a gun for those who want to kill.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Shooting a gun at paper targets will desensitize you to the light and noise, but target practice isn't going to mentally or emotionally prepare you to take a life. Video games would certainly be much better at that.


jedishrfu said:
we can ask why can't game developers agree to create games with better civic and moral values.

I don't really follow this either. The jihad training games are not made by typical game studios. If you're suggesting that all violence is immoral, I would say that self defense (for individuals or countries) is not, and that no matter how moral the game, if it has violence, that aspect of it can be adjusted (e.g. modded) into a new game without the morality.

Of course, for the actual game studios to have any reason for this, it would help to prove that what they're doing is harmful to otherwise healthy people, and I don't believe that it is.
 
  • #119
Names and Potraits of the Victims at Sandy Hook

Evo said:
Where does it say he forced his way into the school? Oh, never mind, I see it. But it's not clear what they mean.

What I heard was that he first went to the principal's office, got into an argument with her, which was placed over the PA system to alert the teachers, then the principal was killed and he then went to his mother's old kindergarden class.
The story has often changed during the last 24 to 30 hrs. I get some news from NPR or local NPR affiliate. Newtown is about an hour drive from my home, and I have often passed through it on trips. Various news services are reporting on it.

The names of the victims will be released soon. Apparently the 20 child victims were 6 and 7 years old - first graders and maybe kindergardeners(?). I just saw an interview with one of the fathers whose daughter Emilie (6) was one of the victims.

From the LA Times:

Children:
Charlotte Bacon, 6
Daniel Barden, 7
Olivia Engel, 6
Josephine Gay, 7
Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 6
Dylan Hockley, 6
Madeleine F. Hsu, 6
Catherine V. Hubbard, 6
Chase Kowalski, 7
Jesse Lewis, 6
James Mattioli, 6
Grace McDonnell, 7
Emilie Parker, 6
Jack Pinto, 6
Noah Pozner, 6
Caroline Previdi, 6
Jessica Rekos, 6
Avielle Richman, 6
Benjamin Wheeler, 6
Allison N. Wyatt, 6

Adults:

Rachel Davino, 29
Dawn Hochsprung, 47 (Principal)
Anne Marie Murphy, 52
Lauren Russeau, 30
Mary Sherlach, 56
Victoria Soto, 27 (was killed while shielding her students).

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/...ook-shooting-victims-20121215,0,1042668.story

'Always smiling': Portraits of Conn. victims
http://news.yahoo.com/always-smiling-portraits-conn-victims-232628223.html
 
Last edited:
  • #121


justsomeguy said:
I am skeptical that 'training' had any real impact, as he'd already made up his mind. Maybe during the shooting he convinced himself that it was just another game, but that's delusion, not desensitization.



I'm not sure what you mean here. Shooting a gun at paper targets will desensitize you to the light and noise, but target practice isn't going to mentally or emotionally prepare you to take a life. Video games would certainly be much better at that.




I don't really follow this either. The jihad training games are not made by typical game studios. If you're suggesting that all violence is immoral, I would say that self defense (for individuals or countries) is not, and that no matter how moral the game, if it has violence, that aspect of it can be adjusted (e.g. modded) into a new game without the morality.

Of course, for the actual game studios to have any reason for this, it would help to prove that what they're doing is harmful to otherwise healthy people, and I don't believe that it is.

The video games are getting more and more violent and much more realistic than a few years ago. I take it from your point of view we should wait until they do have a harmful effect on normally healthy people.

From my point of view if they don't have an effect on normal people now they eventually will.
 
  • #122


edward said:
I take it from your point of view we should wait until they do have a harmful effect on normally healthy people.

Yes, and perhaps not even then, if by 'wait' you mean 'wait to involve the government.' There are a million things the government should be doing before it takes it upon itself to play the role of parent, psychiatrist, or conscience.
 
  • #123


There is no evidence that the killer was into video games.

What I just caught on the tail end on a tv report was that the killer went to target practice with his mother and her guns.

Each victim shot between 3-11 times.
 
  • #124


Evo said:
There is no evidence that the killer was into video games.

What I just caught on the tail end on a tv report was that the killer went to target practice with his mother and her guns.

And even if he was, video games are so ubiquitous, it would be like saying "the killer was into watching television."
 
  • #125


justsomeguy said:
Yes, and perhaps not even then, if by 'wait' you mean 'wait to involve the government.' There are a million things the government should be doing before it takes it upon itself to play the role of parent, psychiatrist, or conscience.

It would be refreshing if government would get out of the "parent, psychiatrist, or conscience" business.
 
  • #126


nsaspook said:
It would be refreshing if government would get out of the "parent, psychiatrist, or conscience" business.
I feel that there should be government regulation of these things because individuals screw up too much.

We don't have government regulations and intervention right now, and look where it's gotten us. The individual rights of people prevent most intervention, what law enforcement and mental health professionals can do is limited. Parents, even less held to "government" interference, which you have yet to explain.

Since you make the claim
government would get out of the "parent, psychiatrist, or conscience" business
Please post the laws to which you are referring.
 
Last edited:
  • #127


nsaspook said:
It would be refreshing if government would get out of the "parent, psychiatrist, or conscience" business.

Agree 100%

Evo said:
I feel that there should be government regulation of these things because individuals screw up too much.

So what? If an individual does not have the right to screw up their own life however they see fit, you're on the fast road to a terribly authoritarian society.

Evo said:
Since you make the claim Please post the laws to which you are referring.

NYC banning "large" soft drinks is the most recent that comes to mind for me.
 
  • #128


Jack21222 said:
And even if he was, video games are so ubiquitous, it would be like saying "the killer was into watching television."

I think that's part of problem, violence has so saturated the culture we assume it's normal and safe for everyone because we're not affected. There is something happening to our culture that's being expressed by the use of guns in the most violent means possible. We can be numb to the possible causes but if this trend continues gun rights won't be the only rights being trashed to stop it.
 
Last edited:
  • #129


justsomeguy said:
So what? If an individual does not have the right to screw up their own life however they see fit, you're on the fast road to a terribly authoritarian society.
Ok, that means that we currently do not have that, contrary to what was claimed.

So, you think that what happened is ok, because he had the right to do as he saw fit?

NYC banning "large" soft drinks is the most recent that comes to mind for me.
:rofl: No, LOL, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
 
  • #130


I mean this is totally practical for self defense. A "semi automatic":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fW_HMBLvzuU
I'm sure the forefathers foresaw this technology becoming a reality when they drafted the constitution. Get real, the forefathers are not demigods.

A "semi auto" that shoots 400 shots a minute:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WDAIN-Onc0&feature=player_embedded
I feel sooooooo much safer knowing the fact that there's probably 1000s of people walking around out there with one of those that aren't law enforcement or the military.
 
  • #131


If people want to do something that in no affects others in a detrimental way they should be allowed to do it.

When it affects other people, this is where regulation, legislation, consent, and other important attributes come in.

This is really what governments should be focusing on and there are a lot of great people in government that give a stuff about this that allow them to do a fantastic job in making sure everything works and works well (unfortunately not all though).

This is a natural self-organizing system and for many purposes it has worked well.

The amount of red tape, triple checking, and cross the t's and dotting the i's increases as the potential risk of destructive behaviour increases in the specific activity.

The unfortunate thing though is that sometimes when people do things they think that they don't affect other people, when they actually do have an effect on those close around them.

One thing that I would emphasize is that if people are sick of governments running their lives then they should be making every effort to prove that they are responsible citizens of this world and run their own lives by making their own decisions and sticking by them and the consequences they bring.

Unfortunately I don't see this happening for the majority and in this case you will get a nanny state, simply because people are unwilling to show the government that they can act like grownups and actually give a stuff about their communities and their world.

People could stop supporting this system and create a new one if they wanted to and they could potentially live in a society with a completely different governmental structure without even the need for money to function.

But this would require an absolutely incredible amount of discipline and genuine intent to do the what's best for everyone for every single person involved without exception.

It is the situation now that if most people won the lottery, they would do what they wanted instead of what other people wanted.

So we are slaves to money simply because of the fact that most people would stop helping people and only help themselves.

If people decide to give a stuff about their neighbour and show that they have the personal responsibility and the discipline required to not be governed like a kid by his parent, then and then will people be ready to change the system but until then I don't see the point.

Also I should point out that although some people are like this, many are not and it sincerely upsets me to see this kind of behaviour both in my own and through others experience (chatting, videos, documentaries, etc) all the time.
 
  • #132


Evo said:
:rofl: No, LOL, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

Hold up.. is that for you to decide in this context? Someone said we should "step in." I disagreed and said it was none of the governments business and that they were doing enough already. You asked for an example, and there it is.

At issue is simply do I have the right to potentially harm myself (physically, emotionally, psychologically) or not? The government can keep not only out of my bedroom, but out of my kitchen and television as well, and those restrictions extend to restaurants and movie theaters, as long as the attendees are responsible adults.
 
  • #133


justsomeguy said:
Hold up.. is that for you to decide in this context? Someone said we should "step in." I disagreed and said it was none of the governments business and that they were doing enough already. You asked for an example, and there it is.
We're not talking about a city decision on soft drinks. :bugeye:

You are out on a tangent that has nothing to do with what is being discussed. Yeah, I have to pay parking meters at some street locations. OMG, my rights to park on the street are being controlled by government! My rights to free parking on public streets have been taken away! It's a conspiracy! What's next? :rolleyes:

You do know that the soft drink order was the result of public upset about obesity? That people can vote or have input on local decisions at city hall, meetings and votes?
 
Last edited:
  • #134


Evo said:
We're not talking about a city decision on soft drinks. :bugeye:

You are out on a tangent that has nothing to do with what is being discussed. Yeah, I have to pay parking meters at some street locations. OMG, my rights to park on the street are being controlled by government! My rights to free parking on public streets have been taken away! It's a conspiracy! What's next?

I said nothing of the sort. It's been alluded to that the government should step in and 'do something' about these violent video games, because they have the potential to 'cause problems.' I disagree. The soft drink law is a perfect example of that : the government stepping into save me from myself.

There's no relation to parking meters. :uhh:
 
  • #135
It just keeps getting weirder.

Turns out that the shooter's mother was not a teacher and not affilated with the school.
The Newtown area superintendant said Lanza was not a teacher at the school and was not in their database at all on the Today show Saturday morning. It would appear she has no major connection to the school at all.
http://news.yahoo.com/nancy-lanza-r...50BHB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQR0ZXN0A040VV9jb3Jl;_ylv=3

The aunt of Connecticut shooter Adam Lanza said the shooter's mother pulled him out of Newtown's public school system because she was unhappy with the school district's plans for her son.
That they indentified mental problems?

she wound up home-schooling him because she battled with the school district," said Marsha.

http://news.yahoo.com/adam-lanzas-mom-pulled-him-school-relative-194453060--abc-news-topstories.html;_ylt=AhZtXLstyjHefEFiAUO_VxrNt.d_;_ylu=X3oDMTFkZWgzYnZwBG1pdANCbG9nIEJvZHkEcG9zAzIEc2VjA01lZGlhQmxvZ0JvZHlBc3NlbWJseQ--;_ylg=X3oDMTNoOTlzbXQ1BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDZTJmM2Y0M2EtZDRiMy0zMjQ5LTgyMzUtOWE1ZTgzNjhkNjhjBHBzdGNhdANibG9nc3x0aGVsb29rb3V0BHB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQR0ZXN0A040VV9jb3Jl;_ylv=3

IMO. Home schooling to avoid school mental assessment. Buying guns and taking her son to shooting ranges. Kid goes crazy and becomes mass gun murderer.
 
Last edited:
  • #136


justsomeguy said:
The point was made that there are some incident levels we're willing to accept when it comes to different things, like car accidents and gun violence, and perhaps to violence in media as well. I think though that if you take the numbers in context, rather than looking at them in a vacuum, they tell a different story.

I think these types of tragic events follow the power law pattern like income distribution not a regular statistical distribution. The total counts of crime remains fairly stable or drops but as time moves on in the cycles of violence we begin see a few people who commit crimes that are much worse than the norm and there are usually similar characteristics about these people. They will never be a large number but when an event does happen it will usually be of a unthinkable nature. When we study the reasons and possible solutions for it we need look at these characteristics and what reinforces the possibilities for extreme violence in this small population.
 
  • #138


nsaspook said:
I think that's part of problem, violence has so saturated the culture we assume it's normal and safe for everyone because we're not affected. There is something happening to our culture that's being expressed by the use of guns in the most violent means possible. We can be numb to the possible causes but if this trend continues gun rights won't be the only rights being trashed to stop it.
Really? Because violent books have been around for AGES. Stop putting the blame on material things for pete's sake. It isn't that simple.
 
  • #139


WannabeNewton said:
Really? Because violent books have been around for AGES. Stop putting the blame on material things for pete's sake. It isn't that simple.

Stop being simple yourself. You're right it's not the "material things", it's about looking into the cause and effect of simulated violence on the mental states of already sick people. The blame belongs only on the person who committed the crime but it's foolish not to examine what factors shaped his actions before and after the decision was made to commit the crime.
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top