News Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, 6 YTBN Shot, Killed In Tuscon AZ

  • Thread starter Thread starter nismaratwork
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords was among at least 18 people shot during a constituent meeting at a Tucson grocery store. Initial reports indicated she was shot in the head at point-blank range, leading to concerns about her survival. Eyewitness accounts described the chaotic scene, with multiple casualties, including a federal judge and a child, and a suspect, identified as Jared Lee Loughner, was taken into custody. Discussions centered around the nature of the attack, with speculation about whether it was politically motivated or a personal vendetta. Medical professionals on the scene provided aid, but the prognosis for many victims was grim. The incident sparked debates about gun control and the motivations behind such violent acts, with some arguing that mental illness played a significant role. The tragedy raised concerns about the safety of public figures and the potential impact on political discourse.
  • #401
nismaratwork said:
I'd say it depends on the neibours, but Proton, if I were living next to these people, would I even think to make that call? The only people we KNOW were there when he became threatening or otherwise made people uncomfortable enough for a boot from COMMUNITY COLLEGE... in Tuscon... ARIZONA. I still can't get over that one... you truly must be mad as a cut snake to stand out that badly in that setting.

Anyway, you're making a moot point. Neighbors can ALREADY do that, and always could. The controlling mechanism would be reprecussionns of a legal and social nature, which is probably why Arizona can't decide if its a police state, or 'the last free state'. Actually, that seems to be a common problem in this country, but again, NOTHING to do with...

THE SHOOTING.

Does Evo need to get us back on topic AGAIN?


moot? i think the reporting of IPs was mentioned. but yes, he was reported. he was a familiar face to law enforcement. thing is, we used to keep people with mental problems institutionalized many years ago. then for reasons I'm not as familiar with since it is even a bit before my time, we let them out and they became the odd folks that live on the street talking to themselves and begging for alms. some of it ostensibly for protection of their rights, but there had to be a bit of "not with my tax money" going on.

does this have to do with the shooting? it has to do with the reactions of people to it. which i find fascinating.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #402
mugaliens said:
Let's stick with facts that are relevant!
No idea what you are ranting about, the article is extremely relevant. As for ex-military, funny you should mention that, when the news first came out, the first thing that people assumed was that the shooter was ex-military, it was discussed at the beginning of the thread.

On another note, decades ago I was assessed by a psychologist who used some sort of Q&A test to find me a "danger to society."
Then you joined the military? Not sure what your point is.
 
  • #403
I agree that it was obvious based on his obsessions and writings that he was insane. I wouldn't go as far as to recommend anyone who thinks we should move to a gold standard, or who believes in conspiracy theories, involving things like even mind control, should be considered a threat and institutionalized. Especially since there is some president for being suspicious in this regard. Bottom line the government has been caught doing some pretty horrific things in the not so distant past. Should having the suspicion something sinister is going on, be reason enough to call someone a psychopath and a danger to society?

One day there may be a vile conspiracy facing us, and it would help if people were level headed enough to be without strong superficial procedure. That being said, when a person is obsessed with this stuff, and confrontational about it, and their thinking is so illogical and garbled, you can tell something is wrong.

But really I think conspiracy theories are not to blame, Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck are not to blame. Now consider this, even if everything the shooter believed were true, why shoot a bunch of innocent people including a little girl, and why Gifford? I think this guy had personal issues, and he expressed his problems in a specific direction. If he hadn't been into the ideas he had, and didn't care about politics, he probably would have shot up the college campus instead. This guy was just plain psycho and hateful.
 
  • #404
The guy had 5 separate run-ins with campus security, and was told that he had to have a psych evaluation before he would be allowed to attend CC again. Still, nobody called the hot-line to trigger such an evaluation based on his erratic, disruptive behavior.
 
  • #405
Proton Soup said:
moot? i think the reporting of IPs was mentioned. but yes, he was reported. he was a familiar face to law enforcement. thing is, we used to keep people with mental problems institutionalized many years ago. then for reasons I'm not as familiar with since it is even a bit before my time, we let them out and they became the odd folks that live on the street talking to themselves and begging for alms. some of it ostensibly for protection of their rights, but there had to be a bit of "not with my tax money" going on.

does this have to do with the shooting? it has to do with the reactions of people to it. which i find fascinating.

I'm familiar with those reasons, but not a scholar of them. To a great degree the history of caring for the mentally ill in the country was changed by the perception of "mad houses" and sudden trans-orbital lobotomies. Psychology has attracted some very brilliant, and some very troubled minds to the field, and the result tends to be that the public sees it as voodoo.

The other big issue, and I don't want to open a major debate here... we have a prison industry, and the focus went to that. You can't lose with a, "Touch on crime, tough on criminals" slogan... you can get it in bad place if you lead with, "Lets put Dahmer in a secure institution for life!" Psychology is often seen as a threat to the good 'ol judeo-chrisitan principles so many in this country hold dear. What put a capstone over that was probably the Governor's dilemma: do I pardon or release a prisoner?

If you pardon/release someone you believe is innocent, even an innocent person might commit a different crime. You're taking a risk on a person with potentially, your entire political career. If you leave them where they are, you break no laws, and unless supporters of that cause are SO numerous in your state that it threatens your re-election... why do it? A moral compass?... yeah, probably some use it for that.
--------------

NOTE: At this point I stopped, took a break, and came back. I can actually sum up the argument I was making at length in a sentence:

More and more, we live in a society (then and now), which is retributive and punitive in its penal system, in practice; this is incompatible with emerging evidence that some of the WORST and recidivist criminals have psychological and neurological defects.

I'll leave it at that. Everything else I talked about, and was going to talk about can be extrapolated from that one fact.
 
  • #406
turbo-1 said:
The guy had 5 separate run-ins with campus security, and was told that he had to have a psych evaluation before he would be allowed to attend CC again. Still, nobody called the hot-line to trigger such an evaluation based on his erratic, disruptive behavior.

There's a hot-line?

There are a lot of people that are like this. It's hindsight though. They aren't officially homicidal until they actually commit a homicide. One of these people actually commits an act and everyone points to all the "obvious" signs and wonder why nothing was done to prevent it. Catch 22 (I love that book).
 
  • #407
drankin said:
There's a hot-line?
See post #388
 
  • #408
nismaratwork said:
More and more, we live in a society (then and now), which is retributive and punitive in its penal system, in practice; this is incompatible with emerging evidence that some of the WORST and recidivist criminals have psychological and neurological defects.

That's true, but can they all really be fixed? The shooter in this instance is clearly crazy, but I don't like the idea of him getting treated for 5 or 10 years in a mental hospital and being sent free. Many of these people who are crazy are capable of pretending to be sane. I don't know what the best procedure is for these type of psycho killers who have neurological disorders? My opinion is that for clear cut, and I mean really clear cut cases like this one, the shooter should be fast tracked to execution crazy or not.
 
  • #409
turbo-1 said:
The guy had 5 separate run-ins with campus security, and was told that he had to have a psych evaluation before he would be allowed to attend CC again. Still, nobody called the hot-line to trigger such an evaluation based on his erratic, disruptive behavior.
I think that's the point, he wasn't violent, he was weird.

"He made a lot of the people really uncomfortable, especially the girls in the class," said Steven Cates, who attended an advanced poetry writing class with Loughner at Pima Community College last spring. Though he struck up a passing friendship with Loughner, he said a group of other students went to the teacher to complain about Loughner at one point.

Another poetry student, Don Coorough, said Loughner read a poem about bland tasks such as showering, going to the gym and riding the bus in wild "poetry slam" style - "grabbing his crotch and jumping around the room."

And his parents were involved and were aware of his bizarre behavior.

According to Pima, Loughner was a student from the summer of 2005 though the fall of 2010. From February to September 2010, Loughner had five "contacts" with campus police for classroom and library disruptions. On Sept. 29, campus police found that he had filmed a video on YouTube that claimed the college was illegal according to the U.S. Constitution.

The college administration immediately suspended Loughner and delivered a letter of suspension to Loughner's parents' home. According to the Pima, police officers spoke with both Loughner and his parents.

The letter barred Loughner from returning to campus expect to set up an appointment and discuss the school's code of conduct and his suspension.

On Oct.4, Loughner and his parents met with college administrators and withdrew from school. On Oct. 7, Pima sent a letter to Loughner telling him that if he intended to return to school, he would have to get a letter from a mental health official indicating "his presence at the College does not present a danger to himself or others."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/10/national/main7231560.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

His parents should have insisted he seek a mental evaluation, but he was an adult and being weird and paranoid about the government wouldn't have been enough to get a court order to force a psychiatric evaluation. If it was, half of the people that post in P&WA would be subject to forced evaluations. :-p

Would he have really failed a psychiatric exam? I was listening to a reporter describing him in his court hearing and the reporter said that Loughner appeared completely sane, calm, even polite, and appeared to completely understand everything the judge was saying to him.
 
Last edited:
  • #410
jreelawg said:
I agree that it was obvious based on his obsessions and writings that he was insane. I wouldn't go as far as to recommend anyone who thinks we should move to a gold standard, or who believes in conspiracy theories, involving things like even mind control, should be considered a threat and institutionalized. Especially since there is some president for being suspicious in this regard. Bottom line the government has been caught doing some pretty horrific things in the not so distant past. Should having the suspicion something sinister is going on, be reason enough to call someone a psychopath and a danger to society?

One day there may be a vile conspiracy facing us, and it would help if people were level headed enough to be without strong superficial procedure. That being said, when a person is obsessed with this stuff, and confrontational about it, and their thinking is so illogical and garbled, you can tell something is wrong.

But really I think conspiracy theories are not to blame, Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck are not to blame. Now consider this, even if everything the shooter believed were true, why shoot a bunch of innocent people including a little girl, and why Gifford? I think this guy had personal issues, and he expressed his problems in a specific direction. If he hadn't been into the ideas he had, and didn't care about politics, he probably would have shot up the college campus instead. This guy was just plain psycho and hateful.

If everyone who believed in conspiracies, even truly OUT THERE ones, were mentally ill the world would be even madder than it is.

Again, it is not WHAT he obsesses over, but THAT he obsesses, and further the form his writings take; that of someone trying to actively control themselves... almost have an externalized internal dialogue... and then add a kind of difficulty in processing all of it... that's what you look for in the writing. Obviously if he were doing a, "how to write like someone in the throes of a delusion" project, he'd be set, and no worries.

As it stands, written neurological and psychological tests; are the print analogues of a test you're probably familiar with (if not as a test, then in school): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thematic_Apperception_Test

I'm not talking about the TAT exactly, but newer and grounded in newer principles of the thing that is psychology (I love it, but I'm not pretending it's a science). It's important to realize that when we talk to someone, when we let them talk, or write, the structures they employ or are foiled by tell us a great deal about whether or not a problem is present. It's not so fantastic when it comes to narrower applications except that mentioned previously.

So, yes... What the shooter believed doesn't matter... why the shooter fixated on these issues... probably the environment, but it wasn't going to be "fixate on government or just get sane!". Above all, his writing again seems to be about mind control, and that is often the realm of people who strongly believe that their thoughts are being influenced by an external force. That doesn't mean you're insane, maybe just misinformed, or GOK... it is however a good place to start.
 
  • #411
As somebody has suggested elsewhere, Loughner's grudge against Giffords may have started with that in her "Thank-You card", she mis-spelt his name as "Loughney".

Within a deranged mind obsessed with mind-control-through-grammar, this might be construed as a deeply sinister message.

Thus, I am gradually changing my position to that Loughner might, indeed, have a specific[(I] grudge against Giffords personally
 
  • #412
nismaratwork said:
So, yes... What the shooter believed doesn't matter... why the shooter fixated on these issues... probably the environment, but it wasn't going to be "fixate on government or just get sane!". Above all, his writing again seems to be about mind control, and that is often the realm of people who strongly believe that their thoughts are being influenced by an external force. That doesn't mean you're insane, maybe just misinformed, or GOK... it is however a good place to start.

I agree. If a person however were writing things which required their own internal self discussions to decipher, and therefor made no logical sense to the reader, yet were talking about mundane things without a confrontational tone, you might mistake them for a poet. It is the fact they appear to be disturbed which raises the flag, you can tell they are ready to snap.
 
  • #413
jreelawg said:
That's true, but can they all really be fixed? The shooter in this instance is clearly crazy, but I don't like the idea of him getting treated for 5 or 10 years in a mental hospital and being sent free. Many of these people who are crazy are capable of pretending to be sane. I don't know what the best procedure is for these type of psycho killers who have neurological disorders? My opinion is that for clear cut, and I mean really clear cut cases like this one, the shooter should be fast tracked to execution crazy or not.

It depends on what needs fixing, and how much a human can be reliable. People tend to focus on the obvious nightmare scenario we're taught from fun stories and campfire tales: The lunatic escapes the nuthouse...

Well, there's no reason that the "nuthouse", can't be a supermax on the outside. There's sifting that needs to be done between those inmates with treatable mental illness, those who are going to require long-term care (read: potential life in 'hospital'), and those who are sociopaths and for whom there's nothing that can be done at this time, or really even the forseeable future.

Your argument for execution is logical too, but there's a big flaw: If "crazy gets you killed", then we just made mental illness the next shooting offense. That strikes me as a giant step backwards, and an invitation to more of what we have: prisons full of a mix of people serving time and rehabilitating, drug addicts, career criminals and casualties of poor parenting (i.e. non-sociopathic career criminals), sociopaths, other mentally ill individuals.

Our understanding of neurology, medicine, and psychology has undergone a revolution over the past century and more, but our mental health system has taken a huge step back. What kind of sense does that make.

Personally btw, I find the concept of executing people who are 'crazy', retarded, or otherwise people society recognizes as LESS than competent... except in court. Finally, part of the move away from mental health institutions was that people can be kept there under a doctor's order until they DIE OF OLD AGE. Since "crazy" is a much more fluid concept for most than, "murder", "theft", "battery" etc... we might enact such measures with the best intentions only to have future iterations used as a means to sequester unwanted elements from society, much like prisons, but with a broader and supposedly compassionate mandate.

So instead we did the same thing, but put them in prison and removed the compassionate mandate... and the started to systematically make funding for necessary research scarce.
 
  • #414
arildno said:
As somebody has suggested elsewhere, Loughner's grudge against Giffords may have started with that in her "Thank-You card", she mis-spelt his name as "Loughney".

Within a deranged mind obsessed with mind-control-through-grammar, this might be construed as a deeply sinister message.

Thus, I am gradually changing my position to that Loughner might, indeed, have a specific[(I] grudge against Giffords personally


Me too except that he shot a bunch of other people he probably didn't even know. Like one person said, he routinely laughs at things which are sad.
 
  • #415
jreelawg said:
I agree. If a person however were writing things which required their own internal self discussions to decipher, and therefor made no logical sense to the reader, yet were talking about mundane things without a confrontational tone, you might mistake them for a poet. It is the fact they appear to be disturbed which raises the flag, you can tell they are ready to snap.

Yep, information is nothing without context when it comes to psychology. Now if you could figure out how to tell when that snap is coming (usually the flags are sporadic, then come fast and hard) and prevent it, I promise to invest in your Jreelawg Co... because you will be MINTING money.

Arildno: In fact, given his obsession with how words and grammar control thoughts, he may have latched onto that! I mean, people who are obsessed with "the orgone" somehow conflate that conspiracy with cell towers. In fact... a LOT of conspiracies feature cellphone toward, high tension power lines, radio towers... I wonder why...

1.) They're big, tall and in the crazy person's face. Grass is green, and big antennae are a common sight.
2.) They transmit and receive signals, a concept that many who are in the process of losing their minds become fixated upon; there is some thinking that the internal experience of hearing voices or failing to process information properly, mixed with failed insight, leads to a need to externalize the source of changes in mood and thought...

... which leads to predictably unpredictable behaviour. What does someone in that mindset do if they become desperate, and believe whole-heartedly in their delusion? Well, I just attacked them, so they may attack me back. Of course, sane people don't react predictably to attacks, except for the one constant: fight or flight means there will be a reaction.

Loughner could have shot himself on the way to Giffords, or in is case, more likely could have shot the cab driver. At that point, I doubt he was seeing people... and if I'm wrong, and he did, he should die for killing that little girl.
 
  • #416
jreelawg said:
Me too except that he shot a bunch of other people he probably didn't even know. Like one person said, he routinely laughs at things which are sad.

Yeah, that was me, and it's the first sign I've seen in the media that might indicate something on the sociopathic end of the spectrum, instead of Schizophrenia. Still, my bet is with someone still in the relatively early stages of Schizophrenia, but falling fast.
 
  • #417
Dr. Phillip Resnick very ethically did not make a diagnosis of Loughner on CNN, however when speaking in the hypotheical about people LIKE Loughner... Schizophrenia. I'm so going to win this petty and meanignles bet with myself, and only I care at all! Wheee!

Back to the serious note. He also had this to say when asked who Loughner reminded him of:

Dr Phillip Resnick said:
it reminds me of Cho, the uh, Virginia tech shooter as someone who engaged in a lot of minor, inappropriate activity. Scaring fellow students, scaring professors, and uh then other people NOT, um, even though he went to a mental health clinic once, ah, people not putting the pieces together.

He goes on to explain that violence as a result of mental illness is often found in the context of persecutorial delusions. Here's a profile of the man: http://www.cwru.edu/med/psychiatry/profile-resnick.htm
 
  • #418
WhoWee said:
I'm not clear on the timeline - this apparently happened before he ever purchased a gun?

I caught the end of an interview earlier (again only heard part) that inferred the sheriff's office (apparently they monitor gun purchases locally?) might have dropped the ball. I'll try to find something to clarify - again, I only heard part of the piece - label this IMO for now.

No the FBI and ATF monitors gun purchases. As far as loghner's contacts with law enforcement. They were with the Campus Police of Pima Community College. There were five contacts in all.

He had one contact with the Sheriff's department. He was cited for possessing drug paraphernalia

Loughner was finally expelled from the school in September. He couldn't go back until a private mental health evaluation was done. It had to show that he was not a danger to other people.

The College administration never pursued it or reported it. If anyone dropped the ball here it was the Community College.. Oddly though as soon as Campus police showed up Loughner calmed down and acted reasonably normal.

The guy was also clever enough to keep telling teachers that they were violating his constitutional rights.
 
  • #419
jreelawg said:
Me too except that he shot a bunch of other people he probably didn't even know.

IF I should speculate in that, he probably didn't regard them as People.

He has had a history of inability to connect with other people.

This has of course as an internal correlate that he was an intensely lonely person, but most likely as well, a feeling that the actual people around him were Cardboard Figures, rather than Real People (.ie, a sort of projection of his own failure to connect).

Remember that he said stuff like that only 5 percent of people being conscience dreamers, the others having been sapped of their humanity by the mind-controlling government.

Thus, he didn't really shoot people at all, but merely removed nuisances or tragic end products of nefarious governmental activity..
 
  • #421
The Question that Loughner had asked of Giffords in 2007 that triggered the entire chain of events was: What good is government when words have no meaning?

He wasn't satisfied with her answer and mentioned it frequently to his few friends. He never mentioned it in a classroom.
 
  • #422
edward said:
No the FBI and ATF monitors gun purchases. As far as loghner's contacts with law enforcement. They were with the Campus Police of Pima Community College. There were five contacts in all.

He had one contact with the Sheriff's department. He was cited for possessing drug paraphernalia

Loughner was finally expelled from the school in September. He couldn't go back until a private mental health evaluation was done. It had to show that he was not a danger to other people.

The College administration never pursued it or reported it. If anyone dropped the ball here it was the Community College.. Oddly though as soon as Campus police showed up Loughner calmed down and acted reasonably normal.

The guy was also clever enough to keep telling teachers that they were violating his constitutional rights.

Yet not clever enough to understand what those rights were, or how they applied.

Honestly, I don't know how to apply the term, "clever" to someone so divorced from reality...

@Arildno: Agreed... this person clearly was not only unable to connect, but even understand the pain or sorrow of others. I disagree on the 'why'... I suspect that in his planning he was motivated by persecutorial delusions (his belief that he was being monitored and controlled), and saw them not as people, or figures; they were his enemies... I suspect that by that point he was convinced that pretty much everyone was. His silence in the face of what is some of the best and most finely tuned interrogative techniques the FBI has says a LOT, especially when contrasted with his clear, brief responses to the judge at his hearing.
 
  • #423
edward said:
The Question that Loughner had asked of Giffords in 2007 that triggered the entire chain of events was: What good is government when words have no meaning?

He wasn't satisfied with her answer and mentioned it frequently to his few friends. He never mentioned it in a classroom.

Remember that for him, a person who believed in a kind of arcane brainwashing through language, that was an earth-shaking question. By all accounts she answered that bizarre question to the best of her ability, and no doubt he was outraged that the world remained unshaken. So, now we're shaken, and somewhere in that shaved pinhead is the knowledge that NOW, people have to wait on him, and now we're shaken by his "revelations".

Of course, we're shaken by the atrocities, not his views, but the psychology of such a person isn't amenable to that kind of thinking. If it doesn't link to him, his life, his internal world... it just doesn't register emotionally. Remember he 'knows the system of mind control', making him the keeper of 'special knowledge'.

Honestly, he's not exactly atypical, which I've maintained since page 1.
 
  • #424
Evo said:
Actually, they did pursue it with his parents. See my post https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3077829&postcount=409

My empathy for his parents is now severely tempered with a measure of disappointment and suspicion... yet arildno said it... dragons. I can't help but feel badly for whoever these faceless parents of a human-monster.
 
  • #425
Evo said:
Actually, they did pursue it with his parents. See my post https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3077829&postcount=409

That is correct Pima Police did take a letter to his parents. His parents have lived in the same house for thirty years yet are seldom seen by their neighbors. The father called a neighbor last night and said that he needed help. He asked the next door neighbor if he would go out to the mail box and get the mail.

That was the first time the neighbor had ever spoken to him or he to Lochner senior. The best that the neighbor could describe the Lochner's was that they were like Mountain people and kept to themselves.

The houses in that subdivision are on lots that are a bit under one quarter acre.
 
  • #426
edward said:
That is correct Pima Police did take a letter to his parents. His parents have lived in the same house for thirty years yet are seldom seen by their neighbors. The father called a neighbor last night and said that he needed help. He and asked the next door neighbor if he would go out to the mail box and get the mail.

That was the first time the neighbor had ever spoken to him or he to the neighbor. The best that the neighbor could describe the Lochner's was that they were like Mountain people and kept to themselves.

The houses in that subdivision are on lots that are a bit under one quarter acre.

First order relatives of schizophrenic children often exhibit a higher incidence of Schizophrenia, Schizophreniform Disorder, and a few other behavioral oddities as-yet to be explained. This still means that most first order relatives have no issues, but to find a family of mentally ill people raising a mentally ill child doesn't shock me.

I'd suspect abuse, but the age, situation, and pathology don't fit.
 
  • #427
edward said:
The Question that Loughner had asked of Giffords in 2007 that triggered the entire chain of events was: What good is government when words have no meaning?

He wasn't satisfied with her answer and mentioned it frequently to his few friends. He never mentioned it in a classroom.

i believe she responded to him in spanish, which i imagine he took as an insult, especially if he didn't understand the response.

chain of events seems to be that he wasn't so nuts in high school, had some big breakup with a girlfriend, started falling apart, getting desocialized from old friends, and progressively more insane. i suspect there is something here to do with her being a woman. it would be interesting to see a pic of the old girlfriend, to see if there is resemblance.
 
  • #428
Proton Soup said:
i believe she responded to him in spanish, which i imagine he took as an insult, especially if he didn't understand the response.
I've heard two versions of this, one was that she didn't answer directly, which makes sense, I mean how do you respond to utter nonsense? And then one version that she answered in Spanish which makes absolutely no sense. Why would you answer an English constituent in a foreign language?

I haven't seen anything about his girlfriend, can you post the link. (not doubting you, just curiosity)
 
  • #429
Evo said:
I've heard two versions of this, one was that she didn't answer directly, which makes sense, I mean how do you respond to utter nonsense? And then one version that she answered in Spanish which makes absolutely no sense. Why would you answer an English constituent in a foreign language?

I haven't seen anything about his girlfriend, can you post the link. (not doubting you, just curiosity)

i don't remember where i originally read it, but here are a couple of articles i just googled that mention it. no real details, tho.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/01/tuscon_shooters_obsession_with.html?f=most-commented-24h-5

High school friends of Loughner's described him as apolitical, except for some criticism of the Bush administration. They say he was an average kid who spent much of his free time playing saxophone in the school band. But around the tenth grade, after a breakup with his girlfriend, Loughner started experimenting with drugs and fell in with the wrong crowd. His friends cite drug abuse as the reason Loughner dropped out his senior year. Although the case was dismissed, Loughner was also charged with possession of drugs and drug paraphernalia in 2007.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/Arizona+shooting+suspect+became+outcast+high+school/4088147/story.html

In tenth grade everything started to fall apart. High school friend Alex Montanaro told the Wall Street Journal Mr. Loughner took a turn after a break-up with a girlfriend. He started hanging out with drug users, grew distant from his friends and “really became an outcast,” said Mr. Montanaro. Classmate Catie Parker described him as a “pot head” and by grade eleven his marks had dropped. He didn’t bother returning for grade twelve.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #430
nismaratwork said:
@Arildno: Agreed... this person clearly was not only unable to connect, but even understand the pain or sorrow of others. I disagree on the 'why'... I suspect that in his planning he was motivated by persecutorial delusions (his belief that he was being monitored and controlled), and saw them not as people, or figures; they were his enemies... I suspect that by that point he was convinced that pretty much everyone was. His silence in the face of what is some of the best and most finely tuned interrogative techniques the FBI has says a LOT, especially when contrasted with his clear, brief responses to the judge at his hearing.

In a way, he may have felt such mind-control and oppressedness very keenly:

Alone in his room, half-verbalized thoughts whizzed through his head that FELT to be absolutely right and true.
But the moment he tried to formulate these insights verbally, to others, or even just on a piece of paper, only silly trivialities or nonsense was to be found.
Somebody evidently had robbed him of the communicative device of language, so that truly important ideas remained locked in his brain

Never could he dare to contemplate that what whizzed through his mind WAS just..nonsense, and that the joy he felt in those moments were totally..unfounded.

For whatever other sources of joy did he have in his life than the insane ramblings within his mind?

Easier to blame the government for exercising mind control, in particular what, through grammar, seems to make sense and what doesn't...

Locked unhappily within himself, he would still have a sense of freedom there, and a meagre resource of happiness.
 
  • #431
Proton Soup said:
i believe she responded to him in spanish, which i imagine he took as an insult, especially if he didn't understand the response.

chain of events seems to be that he wasn't so nuts in high school, had some big breakup with a girlfriend, started falling apart, getting desocialized from old friends, and progressively more insane. i suspect there is something here to do with her being a woman. it would be interesting to see a pic of the old girlfriend, to see if there is resemblance.

Given the age, it's the sad, but normal progress of an undiagnosed and untreated schizophrenic. His father has been described as, "being sometimes hostile", although neighbors don't seem to know why. He is described as giving, "the silent treatment", again, for no apparent reason.

If this isn't schizophrenia, I'll be genuinely shocked.


@Arildno: You've described the internal world of a spree killer very well. In this case, as I keep saying I think there's more, but the portrait you pain is still very accurate with the addition that he would be UNABLE to realize, not just admit, that his thoughts were increasingly paranoid and disorganized.

What does a man feel as he loses his mind? Doubtless one of the first things at the outset is fear, and a need to pull those pieces back together. Sadly, the perceptual and processing issues would make that a jumble of his own internal world, and cut him off from the ability to test reality properly. Humans want control, and believe we have more control than we do... and that's when we're sane! It seems to be a common theme that OTHERS are INTRUDING... that the disorganization isn't a problem with the the ill person, but everyone else; truly the epitome of 'I am the only sane man', which you see echoed in his statements about intelligence and literacy.

If you become convinced that X entity is imposing thoughts, reading your thoughts or (another common phrase we hear) 'Projecting thoughts'... then when you believe someone is essentially waging what you and I would call magic psychic warfare, they react badly. Most break down, and end on the streets, with family, on drugs, or they get help. It's that group which remains untreated which presents the primary risk to themselves and others.


@All: Giffords is now, apparently, able to breathe on her own (still intubated of course) and the sedation has been reduced.
 
  • #432
nismaratwork said:
What does a man feel as he loses his mind? Doubtless one of the first things at the outset is fear, and a need to pull those pieces back together. Sadly, the perceptual and processing issues would make that a jumble of his own internal world, and cut him off from the ability to test reality properly. Humans want control, and believe we have more control than we do... and that's when we're sane! It seems to be a common theme that OTHERS are INTRUDING... that the disorganization isn't a problem with the the ill person, but everyone else; truly the epitome of 'I am the only sane man', which you see echoed in his statements about intelligence and literacy.

nismaratwork, your revelations are interestingly insightful. I would argue that regardless of how I might feel about a particular situation, I would never resort to violence, unless absolutely necessary for the preservation of life or limb. It's simply what I was brought up to believe.
 
  • #433
mugaliens said:
I would argue that regardless of how I might feel about a particular situation, I would never resort to violence, unless absolutely necessary for the preservation of life or limb.

So your argument is that even if went insane, you'd still remain rational about the situation?
 
  • #434
Office_Shredder said:
So your argument is that even if went insane, you'd still remain rational about the situation?

I'm sorry, Office_Shredder, but your post makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

If you would, please, restate whatever it is you're trying to state.

Thanks.
 
  • #435
mugaliens said:
nismaratwork, your revelations are interestingly insightful. I would argue that regardless of how I might feel about a particular situation, I would never resort to violence, unless absolutely necessary for the preservation of life or limb. It's simply what I was brought up to believe.

I believe you're a deeply rational person, and one who is deeply centered in your sense of what is right, and what is wrong. I think you also have a brain that's wired in the right ways, and you've dedicated yourself to improving your lot in life, and serving your country... and more importantly your people. I doubt you'd ever harm someone except in the most extreme circumstances, and unlike most you know what it means to be in violence, to be pressed; your reactions have been mined by experience.

I find the same is often true of the most stable Paramedics, ER Attendings, and other professions that require both compassion, and leaving that work at work. Firemen, Police officers, fall into a different kind of psychological category, with the latter being obviously too numerous and diverse to easily analyze.

Office: Huh? He never stipulated insanity, just strong feelings.
 
  • #439
WhoWee said:
They need to lose their tax status.

The media has to fall out of love with them, too. No one - left, right, or center - wants to know what WBC thinks about anything.
 
  • #440
lisab said:
The media has to fall out of love with them, too. No one - left, right, or center - wants to know what WBC thinks about anything.

It's their name. If they were the WMC (Westboro Motorcycle Club) - we wouldn't know anything about them.
 
  • #441
lisab said:
The media has to fall out of love with them, too. No one - left, right, or center - wants to know what WBC thinks about anything.
Please!

There are biker groups that would gladly take care of the WBC if law-enforcement would look the other way. Hells Angels would provide funeral escorts. The Iron Horsemen even scare the Angels and would willingly provide coverage. WBC is a family-group of loons that want to exploit pain and suffering in order to get coverage for their own twisted brand of "christianity".
 
  • #442
WBC is a family of lawyers that pretend to be a church so they don't pay tax and can get special status. They do outrageous dirtabg things to see if anyone tries to stop them, and then they sue anyone that tries. They even sued the father of that dead soldier whose funeral they destroyed!
 
Last edited:
  • #443
Evo said:
WBC is a family of lawyers that pretend to be a church so they don't pay tax ansd can get special status. They do outrageoes dirtabg things to see if anyone tried to stop them, and then they sue anyone that tries. They even sued the father of that dead soldier whose funeral they destroyed!
Is there any way that we can get "church" and "religious freedom" re-defined so that actual churches are covered and nasty fringe crap is not? If not, why? I shouldn't be able to gather a handful of idiots in my house and call it a "church" and get tax-advantaged treatment for it. I'd rather rescind all tax-exemptions for religious groups and tax them like any other other business, then grant them exemptions based on their charitable works.
 
  • #444
Evo said:
WBC is a family of lawyers that pretend to be a church so they don't pay tax ansd can get special status. They do outrageoes dirtabg things to see if anyone tried to stop them, and then they sue anyone that tries. They even sued the father of that dead soldier whose funeral they destroyed!

Actually, the father sued the church and won, but the case was appealed to the US Supreme Court and the decision hasn't been published yet.

On the other hand:
In 2003, before the fall of Saddam Hussein during the Iraq War, Phelps wrote a letter to Saddam praising his regime for being, in his opinion, "the only Muslim state that allows the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ to be freely and openly preached on the streets." Furthermore, he stated that he would like to send a delegation to Baghdad to "preach the Gospel" for one week. Saddam granted permission, and a group of WBC congregants traveled to Iraq to protest against the U.S. The WBC members stood on the streets of Baghdad holding signs condemning both Bill and Hillary Clinton, as well as anal sex.

I wonder if they met Badhdad Bob.
 
  • #445
I guess I didn't understand what nismaratwork was referring to in the post mugaliens quoted
 
  • #446
BobG said:
Actually, the father sued the church and won, but the case was appealed to the US Supreme Court and the decision hasn't been published yet.
The dad's award was reversed and he was ordered to pay the WBC, but I do see where it's been appealed.

Good stuff on the WBC.

http://blog.stanfordreview.org/2010/01/28/countdown-to-westboro-baptist-church-at-stanford-the-law-and-wbc/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #447
Sheriff Dupnik shows his integrity, and has issued a statement where he dismisses the idea that loughner's motivation can be called political.

The following description is largely a reversal of what he previously thought:

"Though Giffords may have been the intended target, Dupnik said there's no evidence that the shootings were part of a political agenda. Instead, he said, Loughner is deeply troubled, and "When you try to rationalize irrational acts, you wind up with zero."

"While you can't prove what the motive was in this case, I think we know that people who have troubled personalities are being subjected to the anger and emotion that is being created in this country, and I think we need to at least look into our hearts and souls and think about it," Dupnik said.
"

Disturbed persons DO draw into their private worlds stuff from the outside world, but in manners that really cannot be predicted by those making it.
Thus, one cannot really blame politicians using a militant rhetoric for anything such disturbed persons might do.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/10/106546/sheriff-loughner-targeted-giffords.html
 
  • #448
nismaratwork said:
Given the age, it's the sad, but normal progress of an undiagnosed and untreated schizophrenic. His father has been described as, "being sometimes hostile", although neighbors don't seem to know why. He is described as giving, "the silent treatment", again, for no apparent reason.

If this isn't schizophrenia, I'll be genuinely shocked.@Arildno: You've described the internal world of a spree killer very well. In this case, as I keep saying I think there's more, but the portrait you pain is still very accurate with the addition that he would be UNABLE to realize, not just admit, that his thoughts were increasingly paranoid and disorganized.

What does a man feel as he loses his mind? Doubtless one of the first things at the outset is fear, and a need to pull those pieces back together. Sadly, the perceptual and processing issues would make that a jumble of his own internal world, and cut him off from the ability to test reality properly. Humans want control, and believe we have more control than we do... and that's when we're sane! It seems to be a common theme that OTHERS are INTRUDING... that the disorganization isn't a problem with the the ill person, but everyone else; truly the epitome of 'I am the only sane man', which you see echoed in his statements about intelligence and literacy.

If you become convinced that X entity is imposing thoughts, reading your thoughts or (another common phrase we hear) 'Projecting thoughts'... then when you believe someone is essentially waging what you and I would call magic psychic warfare, they react badly. Most break down, and end on the streets, with family, on drugs, or they get help. It's that group which remains untreated which presents the primary risk to themselves and others.@All: Giffords is now, apparently, able to breathe on her own (still intubated of course) and the sedation has been reduced.
This is philosophy with little to no foundation at all in science. It is what you believe are the FAPs and their triggers in a person who "looses its mind". It's all useless speculation. You re also not qualified to diagnose anyone. Let it to specialists.
 
Last edited:
  • #449
DanP said:
This is philosophy with little to no foundation at all in science. It is what you believe are the FAPs and their triggers in a person who "looses its mind". It's all useless speculation. You re also not qualified to diagnose anyone. Let it to specialists.

Qualified or not, I'm not making a diagnosis, which would be unethical in the extreme. I've been clear that this is a bet I've made with myself, but if you'd like it to be a bet with you, I'd be thrilled. In the meantime:

http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx

mugaliens said:
Lol, see the time? I don't sleep.

I do, however, respect your point of view. In the meantime, I'm watching Get Smart, and ROTFLMFAO. Anne's such a deadpanner! Cute, too.

Cute? Hot. One of the few things I've owned on bootleg, VHS, then DVD. Get Smart is, without a doubt, one of the best ways to pass time with a television if laughter is your goal. I can only hope kids appreciate that Inspector Gadget is a generation outreach from Get Smart to their age-group.

mugaliens said:
I'd say it takes one to know one. :)

If I dare go off on a tangent, I also enjoy writing, photography, music, and flying! On a more serious note, though, I'd also say I've had some mighty good friends who have helped me along the way.

No, I would never harm another human being unless it were absolutely necessary, and I sincerely hope it would never be necessary. Something some people don't understand, however, is that sadly, reluctantly, it is sometimes necessary to harm another human being. I don't like it, but it's a sad fact of life, something the vast majority of us who have served in the military, or on a police force, understand. However, I think most people who have not served in this way understand this, as well, as it's a fundamental tenet of our human existence. I feel Saving Private Ryan dealt with these issues quite well, and as gruesom a movie as it was, I would recommend it to any adult. My son visted with me recently, yet he's only ten, so he's far too young for it's content. Much, much later!

I think the driving question is whether any of us would be willing to harm another human being, if doing so were the "right" thing to do? I spent 20 years in the U.S. military, so I know what my answer is, yet I thank God I've never killed anyone.

I very sincerely hope I never have to. I will not, however, forfeit either my own life or the lives of friends and family. That is why I carry a firearm. My life, my son's life, and the lives of my parents, aunts, and uncles, are worth protecting. Some may fault me for caring enough to protect their lives. That's ok. I swore and fought to protect their Constitutional rights to believe that, the same as I swore and fought to protect the rights in which I believe.

Not having really good friends may be a contributing factor in this man not being forced to get help. It may not, but I hear you; a friend will save your life, but a good friend will save it when you don't realize there's a problem, or can't get a handle on it, whatever that is.

Beyond that, I don't believe that this is a tangent. You're the person who, at first blush, might scare people if they don't listen to EVERYTHING you're saying in the context of how you live. As one excellent signature here quotes, you and the Dalai Lama are on the same page where self-defense is concerned... I'd call that solid moral ground. I think that your basic attitude about your son watching 'SPR' also reflects a lack of hypocrisy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #450
The self-proclaimed "expertise" in this thread seems to have some reevaluation to do:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/12/national/main7238536.shtml?tag=stack"

Loughner was arrested in October 2008 on a vandalism charge near Tucson after admitting he scrawled the letters "C" and "X" on a road sign in a reference to what he said was Christianity. His address listed on the police report was an apartment near his home.

Christian-Communist-Nazi...? Really??
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
56
Views
8K
Back
Top