It's a vicious circle.Why do people commit mass shootings?

[Frame Dragger]

Sounds like sour grapes from lazy students.

From the comments posted, it sounds like she set a very high standard, gave tough tests, but put in a lot of effort into helping students - such as scheduling extra classes, helping students outside of class, and having guest lecturers. That, in my book, shows most of the signs of a good teacher.

There may have been plenty of good behavioral reasons to have red-flagged/fired her long ago, but I don't easily buy the argument that she was a bad teacher, based on a bunch of students whining about her.

...Then again her history of murder, assault, and now multiple murder makes me think we should give the benefit of the doubt to the not-murdering-students. I know, a radical idea, but perhaps one who's time has come.

Edit: For clarity's sake, let me expand; people who commit spree killings are not usually going to be functional teachers or people. The closer you get to the crime, the more you can see (in retrospect usually) how detatched the individual was becoming. People may seem fine one day and kill THEMSELVES the next, but spree killers usually resemble the pressure vessles they are. Someone who is constantly distracted, depressed, and enraged is not going to be a good teacher unless they have unique abilities this woman lacked.

 

[Evo]

...Then again her history of murder, assault, and now multiple murder makes me think we should give the benefit of the doubt to the not-murdering-students. I know, a radical idea, but perhaps one who's time has come.

Edit: For clarity's sake, let me expand; people who commit spree killings are not usually going to be functional teachers or people. The closer you get to the crime, the more you can see (in retrospect usually) how detatched the individual was becoming. People may seem fine one day and kill THEMSELVES the next, but spree killers usually resemble the pressure vessles they are. Someone who is constantly distracted, depressed, and enraged is not going to be a good teacher unless they have unique abilities this woman lacked.

There is no doubt at this point that this woman had a long history of issues. Her husband knew of all of them, I'd like to know how much he is involved with encouraging her psychosis. He was implicated in the pipe bombing, and I suspect he's the "person of interest" in her getting this gun.

He claimed "yeah she got a gun, but I don't know where she got it or why". Your wife, whose history you know, suddenly gets a gun and you don't ask her anything? I know I would ask basic questions like "where did you buy that?" "what did you buy it for?".

I think they need to be investigating the husband too.

 

[Gokul43201]

...she sounds like an innatentive and uninterested teacher. ...

Uninterested teacher:

"Professor is helpful but the class is super hard! She has classes for extra help since there are so many students in the class."

"This class was great. Bishop makes the class interesting by talking about her research and her friends research. That speaker she had for class was hard to understand but smart. She expects a lot and you need to come to every class and study."

"I am in her lab and her class. She is smart, talks about more stuff than just the book. She let's me sit in her office and study."

"Bishop uses the online stuff, the internet, powerpoint, from the book and some stuff not from the book. If you show up to class and listen to what she tells you what is important and what is not as important you will get an A. Her animations from that anatomy program always crash the laptop(last year). This year her she bought her own laptop."

"Dr. Bishop says she has to teach us about so much so we are ready for nursing classes. It is so much material! But she is nice, helpful and makes it interesting. I like her study day she has before the test."

"Dr. Bishop is a great teacher! She talks about the stuff in the book but then she talks about extra stuff like diseases. This makes the class fun. She's super smart and thinks everyone else is too so sometimes she goes too fast."

"Awesome teacher. She tends to make a lot of tangents but you learn a lot and she's always willing to help you out."

"Mrs Bishop was totally awesome! She made this class fun and entertaining with her great sense of humor. She is always willing to help, and is great at working with students."

"Dr. Bishop is extremely knowledgeable about her field. She is grateful to help, you just have to ask. Her lectures are disorganized, but if you read your book, you'll get an A. I learned alot."​

[quotes from the ratemyprofessor page linked in an earlier post]

She schedules extra help classes, review days before tests, allows students a lot of access to her office time, invites guest lecturers, discusses research in the field, covers material not in the book, and seems to be willing to help anyone that asks for it. Yeah, that sounds like "uninterested" to me.

 

[turbo]

There is no doubt at this point that this woman had a long history of issues. Her husband knew of all of them, I'd like to know how much he is involved with encouraging her psychosis. He was implicated in the pipe bombing, and I suspect he's the "person of interest" in her getting this gun.

He apparently accompanied her to the pistol range very recently. My wife and I practice at the range at least once or twice a year, just to retain proficiency, but if she had a history of aggression, assaults, and odd behavior, I would expect to get some kind of attention from the authorities if she took one of our pistols to work and shot a bunch of co-workers.

 

[Gokul43201]

...Then again her history of murder, assault, and now multiple murder makes me think we should give the benefit of the doubt to the not-murdering-students. I know, a radical idea, but perhaps one who's time has come.

She was a violent person who assaulted and murdered people, therefore she must have been a lousy teacher. Besides, none of her petition-signing students were murderers. QED.

Would you also like to put those students that called her a good teacher on a potential murderer watch-list?

 

[Evo]

Why are we dragging this offtopic about teaching abilities?

 

[Gokul43201]

Why are we dragging this offtopic about teaching abilities?

I guess some folks are suggesting that she should have been red-flagged or fired based on reaction to her teaching. So far, I have seen nothing substantive to support the claim that she was a terrible teacher, much less, an uninterested one. Besides, I think there were plenty of much better reasons to red-flag her than her teaching reviews.

 

[Evo]

I guess some folks are suggesting that she should have been red-flagged or fired based on reaction to her teaching. So far, I have seen nothing substantive to support the claim that she was a terrible teacher, much less, an uninterested one.

No, her teaching doesn't seem to be part of her problems.

 

[elect_eng]

Why are we dragging this offtopic about teaching abilities?

My guess is that we are so repulsed by the evil displayed by this person, that anyone with any appreciation of academia instinctively wants to distance themselves from her. If she is a horrible teacher with no ability to do research and publish good scientific work, then we can feel that we have nothing to do with this monster. She becomes the beast from outside that broke in, rather than a representative of the tribe .

 

[cronxeh]

I think I've attempted to address the other side of this issue, but my posts were summarily deleted. You guys are all quick to jump to a conclusion that she either had psychiatric problems, or was just pure evil, while I argued that given the statistics of humanity, perhaps what she did was not abnormal, just immoral.

 

[Frame Dragger]

Uninterested teacher:

"Professor is helpful but the class is super hard! She has classes for extra help since there are so many students in the class."

"This class was great. Bishop makes the class interesting by talking about her research and her friends research. That speaker she had for class was hard to understand but smart. She expects a lot and you need to come to every class and study."

"I am in her lab and her class. She is smart, talks about more stuff than just the book. She let's me sit in her office and study."

"Bishop uses the online stuff, the internet, powerpoint, from the book and some stuff not from the book. If you show up to class and listen to what she tells you what is important and what is not as important you will get an A. Her animations from that anatomy program always crash the laptop(last year). This year her she bought her own laptop."

"Dr. Bishop says she has to teach us about so much so we are ready for nursing classes. It is so much material! But she is nice, helpful and makes it interesting. I like her study day she has before the test."

"Dr. Bishop is a great teacher! She talks about the stuff in the book but then she talks about extra stuff like diseases. This makes the class fun. She's super smart and thinks everyone else is too so sometimes she goes too fast."

"Awesome teacher. She tends to make a lot of tangents but you learn a lot and she's always willing to help you out."

"Mrs Bishop was totally awesome! She made this class fun and entertaining with her great sense of humor. She is always willing to help, and is great at working with students."

"Dr. Bishop is extremely knowledgeable about her field. She is grateful to help, you just have to ask. Her lectures are disorganized, but if you read your book, you'll get an A. I learned alot."​

[quotes from the ratemyprofessor page linked in an earlier post]

She schedules extra help classes, review days before tests, allows students a lot of access to her office time, invites guest lecturers, discusses research in the field, covers material not in the book, and seems to be willing to help anyone that asks for it. Yeah, that sounds like "uninterested" to me.

Very good, you quoted a website, and NOT the petition regarding her classroom behaviour that was given to FACULTY. Here, I can use quotes too!

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. - Students said they signed a petition and complained to no avail about the classroom conduct of a University of Alabama-Huntsville professor accused of killing three colleagues and wounding three others in a shooting rampage at a faculty meeting.

The students upset with biology professor Amy Bishop told The Associated Press they went to university administrators at least three times a year ago, complaining that she was ineffective in the classroom and had odd, unsettling ways.

The students said Bishop never made eye contact during conversations, taught by reading out of a textbook and made frequent references to Harvard University, her alma mater.

I googled that in less time than it took you to write one of your annoyed messages. Give it a shot, it works like a charm, and it keeps you from confusing 'websites' with 'petitions'.

Now, interesting sidenote about Harvard... a friend and colleague of mine is a professor of neurobiology at Harvard, and she apparently had a reputation outside of her department; not a positive one. 'Detatched' came up a lot, and keeping in mind that the friend in question is one of the better psychologists (research: abnormal, spec in schizophrenia and PET/fMRI studies) I know.

Granted, that's anecdotal, and I was trying to pointing out that you seem to have an enormous bias coming out of the gate in favour of believing someone with a history of homocide and other anti-social behaviour from her (late) TEENS. So, feel free to do a little research on this woman and then rip me up one side and down the other AFTER we're talking about the same things. I for instance, never mentioned some silly website.

cronxeh While she surely won't be found mentally ill by LEGAL standards, a person acting in a simply 'immoral' manner would tend to NOT go on a spree. Dr. Bishop had no reasonable manner of escape, which means she likely considered this her LAST act, or was unable to think in those terms. Either way, I think we can conclude that something beyond immorality was at play. Then again, she clearly is not what MOST people think of when the word 'insane' floats thorigh their head.

Again, I can't emphasize how unusual female spree killers are; ESPECIALLY ones who use obviously violent means.

elect_eng Her history of shooting her brother TWICE with a shotgun 'accidentally', assault, and finally multiple murder would seem to indicate that as with the individual at Fort Hood (and most other spree killers), SOMEONE, somewhere... had indications that the person was disturbed or dangerous. That person may well have been unable to make the leap to 'murderer', and reasonably not, but the information was probably there and searching for and examining it is useful in understanding the pathology.

 

[Frame Dragger]

My guess is that we are so repulsed by the evil displayed by this person, that anyone with any appreciation of academia instinctively wants to distance themselves from her. If she is a horrible teacher with no ability to do research and publish good scientific work, then we can feel that we have nothing to do with this monster. She becomes the beast from outside that broke in, rather than a representative of the tribe .

A foolish notion. Spree killers are rare, they just happen to get coverage of a type now that was impossible in the past. 'Running Amok' is a good term to research if you want some early (and primitive) thinking on spree killing.

The issue with spree killers is that unlike sociopaths they're 'signals' are ones shared by MANY people to some degree. A loner disliked by her students? If that made you a killer, there would be a LOT more murder. Aquitted of a previous 'accidental' killing? Well, aquitted says it all right? Violent outbursts around times of stress instead of evidence of healthy (or 'standard' unhealthy menas such as drugs) coping is a HUGE warning sign.

Finally, she didn't make tenure, and this was clearly the straw that made her decide her life was no longer worth living (or at least, not worth preserving in a normal fashion), and that others she felt anger towards HAD to die. People... like to give others some space... some benefit of the doubt... and we HAVE to if we're to live a normal life. People miss tenure, and accidentally kill people. Sometimes good people explode, get some help and get better (without murder).

This is a reflection on one woman who clearly thought in all-or-nothing terms, and was willing to die if it meant she could vent her spleen. That isn't academia... that's humanity in a far end of the bell curve.

EDIT: To be fair, if the students I quoted earlier are to be believed she showed classic signs of a crisis... but then we all know how distant the 'comradarie' of academia can be, don't we? Lack of eye contact, lack of interest in the material, obsession with her 'glory days'... well that could be a lot of people right? Add in the history of violence. Now we have a warning sign, whether academicians here like that or not. Presumably USPS workers were not thrilled at 'going postal', so maybe the teachers and researchers here can relax for a minute and rememer that this is about the people who were hurt, not your 'tribe'

The truth is she is part of our tribe; this is a HUMAN 'thing' not a teacher/postal-worker/IT guy, etc... etc.. problem. This is a uniquely human problem, and she IS frightening. Dumpy middle-aged women teaching in Alabama, according to 'the script' are not SUPPOSED to blow away 6 people, killing 3, and critically wounding 2! If life can be THAT uncertain and unsafe... and there you have the terrified reaction, even though we're all far more likely to die on our way to pick up some groceries in the care. Everyone is terrified that their kids will be kidnapped by a stranger, when really it's a friend or relative likely to abuse or kidnap. The story repeats.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Sounds like sour grapes from lazy students. And I'd be more interested in the arguments presented in the petition, rather than the number of signatures in it.

From the comments posted, it sounds like she set a very high standard, gave tough tests, but put in a lot of effort into helping students - such as scheduling extra classes, helping students outside of class, and having guest lecturers. That, in my book, shows most of the signs of a good teacher.

There may have been plenty of good behavioral reasons to have red-flagged/fired her long ago, but I don't yet buy the argument that she was a bad teacher, especially since it's based entirely on a bunch of students whining about her. As nearly any Homework Helper or Mentor here can attest, the more you refuse to hand out solutions to lazy students, the more likely you are to be the target of whining, complaints and hate mail.

Actually, I assumed the petition to be pointing out something "behavioral" about her that was bothering the students and which would account for why so many apparently banded together when this doesn't seem to happen in the case of teachers who are merely rigorous.

The students upset with biology professor Amy Bishop told The Associated Press they went to University of Alabama in Huntsville administrators at least three times a year ago, complaining that she was ineffective in the classroom and had odd, unsettling ways.

The students said Bishop never made eye contact during conversations, taught by reading out of a textbook and made frequent references to Harvard University, her beloved alma mater.

"We could tell something was off, that she was not like other teachers," said nursing student Caitlin Phillips.

What was significant to me were the words "odd", "unsettling", "off" and the phrase "not like other teachers".

It has to be borne in mind that most students are getting themselves into major debt and it can be infuriating to be confronted with a teacher who makes learning unnecessarily more difficult by virtue of an approach so eccentric it requires effort to decipher. I assumed, correctly or not, that is mainly what the petition was addressing.

A previously interviewed student said:

Andrea Bennett, a sophomore majoring in nursing, described Bishop as being "very weird" and "a really big nerd."

"She's well-known on campus, but I wouldn't say she's a good teacher. I've heard a lot of complaints," Bennett said. "She's a genius, but she really just can't explain things."

 

[zoobyshoe]

There is no doubt at this point that this woman had a long history of issues. Her husband knew of all of them, I'd like to know how much he is involved with encouraging her psychosis. He was implicated in the pipe bombing, and I suspect he's the "person of interest" in her getting this gun.

He claimed "yeah she got a gun, but I don't know where she got it or why". Your wife, whose history you know, suddenly gets a gun and you don't ask her anything? I know I would ask basic questions like "where did you buy that?" "what did you buy it for?".

I think they need to be investigating the husband too.

Just to clarify, the "person of interest" was of interest to the case in general, not to the issue of where she got the gun. I think it's clear now that the "person of interest" cited in the original story must have been her husband, simply because he would be most likely to know what was going on in her mind. There was no indication the police suspected he'd procured the weapon.

I don't see him as an active accomplice, just an enabler offering rationalizations for her behavior.

The question remains, though: just where did she get the gun?

 

[Gokul43201]

Very good, you quoted a website, and NOT the petition regarding her classroom behaviour that was given to FACULTY. Here, I can use quotes too!

Because there isn't a link that provides a transcript of the petition. Which is why I specifically stated that I'd be more interested to see the contents of the petition rather than count the signatures on it.

I googled that in less time than it took you to write one of your annoyed messages. Give it a shot, it works like a charm, and it keeps you from confusing 'websites' with 'petitions'.

Oh, great guru of Googling, pray tell us where the word "uninterested" (or anything resembling it) appears in that little nugget of yours?

Besides, the "website" I quoted from tells a lot more about what the students thought of the Prof than the half sentence description of the petition from your googling.

Now, interesting sidenote about Harvard... a friend and colleague of mine is a professor of neurobiology at Harvard, and she apparently had a reputation outside of her department; not a positive one. 'Detatched' came up a lot, and keeping in mind that the friend in question is one of the better psychologists (research: abnormal, spec in schizophrenia and PET/fMRI studies) I know.

Brilliant logical work! A friend and a colleague who works at Harvard is detached, therefore ...

Here's another interesting sidenote about Harvard - I work there. Now could you please divine for me how many people I am planning to assault and murder?

Granted, that's anecdotal, and I was trying to pointing out that you seem to have an enormous bias coming out of the gate in favour of believing someone with a history of homocide and other anti-social behaviour from her (late) TEENS.

Show me where I said anything that indicated I was believing her. The people I am believing are the students that did well in her class, rather than those that didn't. Talk about bias!

And how on Earth are you pointing out some non-existent bias in me by providing us an anecdote about someone that works at Harvard?

So, feel free to do a little research on this woman and then rip me up one side and down the other AFTER we're talking about the same things. I for instance, never mentioned some silly website.

Who cares that you didn't - it's irrelevant. You posited that she was an "uninterested" teacher when there's not a shred of evidence for it, and moreover, there's tons of evidence against it.

That's the only point of contention here (in this offshoot argument): whether or not she was "uninterested" as you claim. You're muddying the waters with anecdotes about colleagues that have absolutely nothing to do with this. And your wizardry at googling hasn't produced anything to support your assertion of an uninterested teacher either.

 

[zoobyshoe]

In that incident, she allegedly said, "I am Dr Amy Bishop." I'm just curious, is she well-known in the biology world?

And I mean for her work, not for shooting and assaulting people .

She had just gotten some attention for having invented a better sort of incubator. She was on the cover of a minor biology periodical for that.

I believe, though, the IHOP incident preceded that. Even if it didn't, announcing your own identity as if you're someone important who should be made way for, is pretty grandiose.

 

[Gokul43201]

I believe, though, the IHOP incident preceded that. Even if it didn't, announcing your own identity as if you're someone important who should be made way for, is pretty grandiose.

It's not just grandiose, it's more or less delusional.

 

[elect_eng]

elect_eng Her history of shooting her brother TWICE with a shotgun 'accidentally', assault, and finally multiple murder would seem to indicate that as with the individual at Fort Hood (and most other spree killers), SOMEONE, somewhere... had indications that the person was disturbed or dangerous. That person may well have been unable to make the leap to 'murderer', and reasonably not, but the information was probably there and searching for and examining it is useful in understanding the pathology.

I agree with that, but I'm confused why you directed this comment to me personally. Is this a response to something I said?

 

[elect_eng]

A foolish notion...

I think you took my speculative notion out of context. I was just thinking about (and answering a specific question from evo) why there might be so much chatter about trying to show how bad of a researcher, teacher, scientist, etc. she is. It is just speculation, foolish or otherwise.

 

[Frame Dragger]

Because there isn't a link that provides a transcript of the petition. Which is why I specifically stated that I'd be more interested to see the contents of the petition rather than count the signatures on it.

Oh, great guru of Googling, pray tell us where the word "uninterested" (or anything resembling it) appears in that little nugget of yours?

Besides, the "website" I quoted from tells a lot more about what the students thought of the Prof than the half sentence description of the petition from your googling.

Brilliant logical work! A friend and a colleague who works at Harvard is detached, therefore ...

Here's another interesting sidenote about Harvard - I work there. Now could you please divine for me how many people I am planning to assault and murder?

Show me where I said anything that indicated I was believing her. The people I am believing are the students that did well in her class, rather than those that didn't. Talk about bias!

And how on Earth are you pointing out some non-existent bias in me by providing us an anecdote about someone that works at Harvard?

Who cares that you didn't - it's irrelevant. You posited that she was an "uninterested" teacher when there's not a shred of evidence for it, and moreover, there's tons of evidence against it.

That's the only point of contention here (in this offshoot argument): whether or not she was "uninterested" as you claim. You're muddying the waters with anecdotes about colleagues that have absolutely nothing to do with this. And your wizardry at googling hasn't produced anything to support your assertion of an uninterested teacher either.

You're so onvolved in the rhetoric at this point that you're missing some very obiosu points which Zoobyshoe nicely reiterated. You're either being willfully snippy about citing an ongoing news story as though it were a grant proposal. You're clearly upset, and I have no desire or willingness to be your punching bag, however interesting it is to be unhit amidst your 'flurry'.

I like how you ran with the google theme until the end; it's good that you have no sense of when I'm being sarcastic. I'm glad you couldn't find citations for the petition, but then again... NEWS STORY. Hearsay that's being backed by major networks is a decent standard... not publication in The Lancet.

Your little, 'not grandiose, delusional' bit is another fine example. Grandisity IS delusional. Do we really need to split every hair in this discussion because you want to back up on the notion that her students were just lazy whiners?

I think her history (from age 19+) of violence, both "accidental" and planned is very significant.

elect_eng I see your point, sorry, Gokul43201 has such a way with people that it's rubbing off on me.

As for why I directed that comment at you, I assumed that you felt such a discussion was driving the thread off topic. I'm sorry, you were not clear as to just how that was being done. It may be I misunderstood.

 

[Frame Dragger]

Oh, and Gokul, if you're a teacher who fails to explain the concepts you teach, to the point that students complain directly to faculty on three occasions within one year, COMBINED with her 'reading from the textbook' and lack of eye contact style would seem to indicate a disinterested affect.

EDIT: To clarify, you seem to misunderstand. This person at Harvard, my friend, is not detatched. Re-read what I actually SAID. I wasn't accusing the people of Harvard of planning murder, I was talking about a bit of hearsay from a friend DIRECTLY about her many years ago. That's all. I checked what I wrote, and I honestly don't know how you concluded that I was saying my FRIEND was detatched. Get a grip.

 

[Gokul43201]

Oh, and Gokul, if you're a teacher who fails to explain the concepts you teach, to the point that students complain directly to faculty on three occasions within one year, COMBINED with her 'reading from the textbook' and lack of eye contact style would seem to indicate a disinterested affect.

EDIT: To clarify, you seem to misunderstand. This person at Harvard, my friend, is not detatched. Re-read what I actually SAID. I wasn't accusing the people of Harvard of planning murder, I was talking about a bit of hearsay from a friend DIRECTLY about her many years ago. That's all. I checked what I wrote, and I honestly don't know how you concluded that I was saying my FRIEND was detatched. Get a grip.

I refuse to have to give you a lecture on grammar, in addition to one on logic, so I shall gladly cede this argument to you.

All the students that did badly in her class and implied that she was a disinterested teacher are spot on; the others that studied hard, did well, and said that she was extremely helpful were probably just a bunch of little liars.

You can have the last word, if you want it. I have nothing more I wish to add.

 

[ideasrule]

Edit: For clarity's sake, let me expand; people who commit spree killings are not usually going to be functional teachers or people.

I can't count how many times (non-fictional) crime shows or crime stories start with "the quiet, peaceful town of XXX was shocked that one of their most trusted citizens murdered 8 people..." or "the murderer was described as 'nice' and 'mild-mannered' by his neighbors" or "his neighbors were in a state of utter disbelief". Mass murderers are NOT who they seem to be; many are kind, warm-hearted, compassionate, dedicated, and talented for all except the 2 hours in which they decide to commit murder.

The people who try to look for "signs" in Amy Bishop NOW are a bit like crackpots who say Nostradamus predicted X or Y after X and Y have already happened. It's very telling that all the media sensationalism hasn't turned up any relatives, psychologists, co-workers, or anybody else who said Bishop was mentally unstable before the killing spree occurred.

 

[drankin]

Does anyone believe this was preventable somehow? If so, how?

 

[MotoH]

Does anyone believe this was preventable somehow? If so, how?

A time machine would probably have been the best bet for stopping this.

 

[dacruick]

metal detectors everywhere. and perpetual satellite surveillance

 

[leroyjenkens]

The people who try to look for "signs" in Amy Bishop NOW are a bit like crackpots who say Nostradamus predicted X or Y after X and Y have already happened. It's very telling that all the media sensationalism hasn't turned up any relatives, psychologists, co-workers, or anybody else who said Bishop was mentally unstable before the killing spree occurred.

That's what I've been thinking. Same thing happened with the V-tech shooter.
Anybody at any time can go on a killing spree.

 

[Evo]

metal detectors everywhere. and perpetual satellite surveillance

My high school required that we walk through metal detectors, there were armed police staffed at every entrance to stop and search anyone that tripped the detectors. Of course this was after several stabbings, a kid being thrown out of a third floor window, and serious death threats on the Vice -principle. We had a police helicopter circle the school during lunch hours.

Where I work you cannot get in or out of the building without getting stopped inside a "mantrap" first. You use your badge to access a little space, similar to a circular door. It stops with you trapped inside while you gain admitance to the building, you are scanned, weighed, and detected for questioanble objects. If you don't pass, you are stuck until security comes for you. Thousands of people enter and leave these buildings daily, so I don't see why they can't be installed on campuses.

 

[Frame Dragger]

I refuse to have to give you a lecture on grammar, in addition to one on logic, so I shall gladly cede this argument to you.

All the students that did badly in her class and implied that she was a disinterested teacher are spot on; the others that studied hard, did well, and said that she was extremely helpful were probably just a bunch of little liars.

You can have the last word, if you want it. I have nothing more I wish to add.

Yes, my grammar online is terrible, and that invalidates my points; logic from a master. My spelling is horrendous too, so please ignore the following: I don't know why you (who are former staff) have chosen to act in such a juvenile fashion, but if leaving with a sarastic nip on the heels makes you feel better, by all means. Why argue substance when ad hominem attacks are so much more conveient.

I can't count how many times (non-fictional) crime shows or crime stories start with "the quiet, peaceful town of XXX was shocked that one of their most trusted citizens murdered 8 people..." or "the murderer was described as 'nice' and 'mild-mannered' by his neighbors" or "his neighbors were in a state of utter disbelief". Mass murderers are NOT who they seem to be; many are kind, warm-hearted, compassionate, dedicated, and talented for all except the 2 hours in which they decide to commit murder.

The people who try to look for "signs" in Amy Bishop NOW are a bit like crackpots who say Nostradamus predicted X or Y after X and Y have already happened. It's very telling that all the media sensationalism hasn't turned up any relatives, psychologists, co-workers, or anybody else who said Bishop was mentally unstable before the killing spree occurred.

Yes, and more often you can count the warning signs. Often they are only useful in hindsight, although murder, attempted bombing, assault, etc... does some like an extreme case, as does that of Maj. Hassan. Usually the issue is not that people do not percieve warning signs, but rather that they are misinterpreted, and only rarely end in bloodshed anyway.

If someone is withdrawn, ornery, etc... co-workers may unfairly suspect them, sure. If someone is or becomes pre-occupied, obsessed with past glories (real or percieved), depressed, a constant underachiever it just ups the risk.

I should be clear... I don't think most of these events can be prevented, but these same signs often are those of distress in people who will never harm another. Those people should still be helped however, and just as you sometimes study extremes in physics (black holes for instance) so that one element (gravity in the case of the BH), or several are at the forefront.

Oh... and don't forget that just as often people 'Remember that funny smell' (too many too count, recent near the sausage factory is a good example), or ignored an escaped victim assuming a lover's spat (Dahmer). Keep in mind the standards people have for their neighbors, and what ill people speak of others in public. A few rare 'congenial' killers actually form the romantic notion of the 'everyman' psychopath. In reality if you could examine these people's lives as a whole (impossible before they commit a crime of course) you can see the hollow points (failure or perceived failure in careers, love etc...) and odd bits (the husband knew about the pipe-bomb, gun or both? OY!) that distinguish them.

Remember for all those pop-psych physicists, it's only 'The MASK of Sanity'.

Finally, just because people remember the hits and forget the misses (she's a genius... bit odd... fine teacher... killed her brother) doesn't mean that people were not giving adequate warning of their actions.

Sadly, that usually only becomes apparent in a free society after the incidents. Still, it beats living in a police state.


EDIT: To be clear as it seems to be a major issue here... I am not saying that most of these signs are apparent or useful until AFTER the crime has occured. While I disagree that 'anyone can becomes a [spree] killer at anytime', certainly anyone can kill, and any potential killer might be disuaded by any number of variables. That said, ideally such behaviour should be presaged by warnings that could be interpreted by clinicians at some point. This would be ideal, because EFFECTIVE mental health screening (for the 2 million people in our prison system for instance) stands to help a lot of people. It won't stop murder or spree killing (I said in my first post on this thread how shockingly atypical this woman is), but it might shed light on the spectrum of executive-deficiet issues (serial killers, sociopaths) and help such issues be treated in infancy or childhood.

 

[ideasrule]

Yes, and more often you can count the warning signs. Often they are only useful in hindsight, although murder, attempted bombing, assault, etc... does some like an extreme case, as does that of Maj. Hassan. Usually the issue is not that people do not percieve warning signs, but rather that they are misinterpreted, and only rarely end in bloodshed anyway.

A "warning sign" that's only useful in hindsight is NOT a warning sign. You can't do an experiment, explain it with a hypothesis, and say that the experiment supports the hypothesis; you have to actually predict something. If a hypothesis (or a "warning sign") cannot be used for predictions, it's garbage.

That said, there are legitimate warning signs for spree killings. Poverty, childhood abuse, a history of crime, drug abuse, and even race are all statistically correlated with a person's risk of going on a spree killing. These indicators are sensitive but very non-selective, so they can't possibly be used to predict whether a specific person will commit murder to any degree of certainty.

I should be clear... I don't think most of these events can be prevented, but these same signs often are those of distress in people who will never harm another. Those people should still be helped however, and just as you sometimes study extremes in physics (black holes for instance) so that one element (gravity in the case of the BH), or several are at the forefront.

Completely agreed.

In reality if you could examine these people's lives as a whole (impossible before they commit a crime of course) you can see the hollow points (failure or perceived failure in careers, love etc...) and odd bits (the husband knew about the pipe-bomb, gun or both? OY!) that distinguish them.

Remember for all those pop-psych physicists, it's only 'The MASK of Sanity'.

I was of course only talking about the MASK, not the actual person. The MASK is what Bishop's students saw.

Finally, just because people remember the hits and forget the misses (she's a genius... bit odd... fine teacher... killed her brother) doesn't mean that people were not giving adequate warning of their actions.

Again, warnings are not even worth considering unless they can be used to make predictions.

 

[Frame Dragger]

A "warning sign" that's only useful in hindsight is NOT a warning sign. You can't do an experiment, explain it with a hypothesis, and say that the experiment supports the hypothesis; you have to actually predict something. If a hypothesis (or a "warning sign") cannot be used for predictions, it's garbage.

That said, there are legitimate warning signs for spree killings. Poverty, childhood abuse, a history of crime, drug abuse, and even race are all statistically correlated with a person's risk of going on a spree killing. These indicators are sensitive but very non-selective, so they can't possibly be used to predict whether a specific person will commit murder to any degree of certainty.



Completely agreed.



I was of course only talking about the MASK, not the actual person. The MASK is what Bishop's students saw.



Again, warnings are not even worth considering unless they can be used to make predictions.

Oh... as for the childhood factors, I don't count them. Poverty and abuse etc... tend to be in the past of a LOT of people, sane and otherwise. We're nowhere near understanding how genes and the environment interact to produce those rarest events (or freaks in the case of someone like Dahmer, and oddly enough, Bishop).

Of course, your point and any point against predictive modeling is made by the simple fact that no model would have a woman as a likely spree killer. Add a gun, and the odds go down even further.

Then again, the fact that predictions cannot be made NOW, doesn't mean that warning signs don't exist. The reality is that they tend to be proximal to the event, and people tend to write them off. Of course, given the rarity of these events, the rarity of them being prevented by a wary bystander is even lower. People DO predict and stop these events, but 1.) that doesn't make for great news and 2.) you can't PROVE that they would have 'done it' except in the most extreme cases of a failed attempt. Often a single case of attempted murder is the result.

Finally, in some situations these are VERY predictive factors. Fly El Al and you'll be made safe in part by the use of extensive profiling of your behaviour which has proven useful in protecting an extremely high value target. Of course, as with the man-trap scenario above, you can't screen the whole world, and what's the point? You're still FAR more likely to die at the hands of friend or family, and die in a traffic accident near your home. Such is life. That doesn't invalidate the point, anymore than predicting black ice prevents all accidents on the road.

Now, if the behaviours are not catalogued they cannot be studied, and progress towards what you consider a meaningful warning cannot be made, then no science or art can progress. Obviously we're not 'there' yet, but that's not going to happen without study in the interim.

Edit: I should add... Ms. Bishop's students seemed to have cause to complain on three occasions to faculty about her in-class demeanor and teaching style. The IHOP incident. Her Brother. The Pipe Bomb... That strikes me as a mask that is wearing thin.

 

[Proton Soup]

regarding the student petition, the whole time i was in Uni before, i never once heard of a group of students petitioning a department chair regarding an instructor. we all had teachers we complained about, some odder than others. but a petition to remove an instructor from a classroom seems extremely unusual to me. and considering the replies others have made to me here that not granting tenure is roughly equivalent to firing, it appears that the faculty may have been granting the students' request, using the least confrontational (and perhaps litigation-inducing) method at their disposal.

 

[Frame Dragger]

regarding the student petition, the whole time i was in Uni before, i never once heard of a group of students petitioning a department chair regarding an instructor. we all had teachers we complained about, some odder than others. but a petition to remove an instructor from a classroom seems extremely unusual to me. and considering the replies others have made to me here that not granting tenure is roughly equivalent to firing, it appears that the faculty may have been granting the students' request, using the least confrontational (and perhaps litigation-inducing) method at their disposal.

She seems to have understood their message and reciprocated in a more direct fashion. Thus is academia undone by cowardice? *shrug*

What strikes me is that the notion of students in her class, complaining as a group to faculty on 3 occasions (where no secrets are kept of this type) is EXTREME. That said, this is so unusual. The stastics vary, but on point the trend is overwhelmingly clear: women tend not to shoot people as a means of murder, tend not to commit mass killings, and when they do indirect means such as poison are often used.

A woman blasting away with a gun... is at least as unusual as a woman comitting suicide by handgun (unsual). I'm glad this woman is alive and I hope that the state of Alabama (which is not known for mercy or subtelty) er for every bit of information useful to the psychological and medical profession before they commit their own act of murder on all of our behalfs. *sigh*. What a world.

 

[drankin]

She seems to have understood their message and reciprocated in a more direct fashion. Thus is academia undone by cowardice? *shrug*

What strikes me is that the notion of students in her class, complaining as a group to faculty on 3 occasions (where no secrets are kept of this type) is EXTREME. That said, this is so unusual. The stastics vary, but on point the trend is overwhelmingly clear: women tend not to shoot people as a means of murder, tend not to commit mass killings, and when they do indirect means such as poison are often used.

A woman blasting away with a gun... is at least as unusual as a woman comitting suicide by handgun (unsual). I'm glad this woman is alive and I hope that the state of Alabama (which is not known for mercy or subtelty) er for every bit of information useful to the psychological and medical profession before they commit their own act of murder on all of our behalfs. *sigh*. What a world.

The death penalty, or murder as you call it, has it's place. I just wish it didn't take a decade to carry it out.

 

[Frame Dragger]

The death penalty, or murder as you call it, has it's place. I just wish it didn't take a decade to carry it out.

I agree actually, but in practice as you point out it's absurd. If we have laws and principles which exclude a rapid end to a death penalty case, and we do... we're stuck. What about that 94 year old man who died on death row recently... from NATURAL CAUSES?! Hint: he wasn't in his 80's when he was convicted...

If the system is broken, biased, racist, delayed and expensive, we should probably put aside its dubious benefits in favour of an effective regime, morality aside. If you could make the death penalty work in our (usa) legal framework, start a thread and I'd love to listen.

In this case however, Amy Bishop will be more valuble as on object of study (never know when a currently invasive technique will become passive and legal without consent), than she would be as a corpse. It's the untreatable sexual predators and sociopaths (Anti-Social Personality Disorder) which we have to admit is untreatable under current methods.

 

[billiards]

Seeing as we're all putting out wild speculation. Perhaps the accidental shooting of her brother messed her up in such a way that made it possible for her to commit these recent murders. This would shift the emphasis that the shooting of her brother was more a trigger of her mental instability rather than a warning sign.

 

[Frame Dragger]

Seeing as we're all putting out wild speculation. Perhaps the accidental shooting of her brother messed her up in such a way that made it possible for her to commit these recent murders. This would shift the emphasis that the shooting of her brother was more a trigger of her mental instability rather than a warning sign.

There are people who would argue that point! I think that's why the question of whether or not that death was truly accidental is so key in understanding if this is a demented individual, or someone traumatized and made unable to cope with stress.

Given the IHOP incident, the DOUBLE shot from the shotgun (re: her brother), the pipe-bomb... she sounds more like someone who probably killed her brother intentionally.

All wild speculation, true, and you could be right... although the kind of trauma from killing a sibling rarely leads to this kind of grandiose behaviour, a family, and finally a spree killing. That's... how many times have I said 'atypical' in this thread?!

At least she's alive so that the families of victims and society as a whole can get some answers and maybe use her to help others.

 

[lisab]

The defense attorney appointed to represent an Alabama professor accused of shooting her colleagues said Friday he regrets describing her as "wacko."

Well, I don't know about this. In high-profile cases, lawyers rarely say things unintentionally.

The article goes on to quote more of what her lawyer said:

Discussing his client's mind, he said that doctors of biology "have got, in my estimation, high IQs -- and the high IQ in my opinion is sometimes not good for people."

Ah, insanity caused by high intelligence...riiiiight .

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/19/alabama.shooting.lawyer/index.html?hpt=T1"

 

[Frame Dragger]

Well, I don't know about this. In high-profile cases, lawyers rarely say things unintentionally.

The article goes on to quote more of what her lawyer said:



Ah, insanity caused by high intelligence...riiiiight .

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/19/alabama.shooting.lawyer/index.html?hpt=T1"

"Now, I'm just a country lawyer, but this here lady is clearly WHACK-A-DOODLE! Yes, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I ask you to find her innocent, by reason of *makes unintelligable animal noises* and of course we expect she has an excess of phlegmatic humours. Keep in your minds, oh gentle ladies and kind fellows of the jury, that this here woman did learnin' stuff! She was too smart for her own good; we all remember when Einstein had to be forgiven his spree of gang-related killings in the late 1910's..."

Seriously. This is the country that brought us 'The Twinkie Defense'.

EDIT: Oh lord... http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/19/alabama.shooting.lawyer/index.html?hpt=Sbin

"Y'all, you know bettah than to listen to these here words 'ah comin, ah say ah comin' out this here mouth! Hell I been drinkin' rye all night, and you expect me tuh be crisp in the Ay-Em?" Ok... not a direct quote, but I think having this lawyer is the first step in Bishop's punishment. It must be fabulous to be have a doctorate and be in the hands of someone who tries to established a Diminshed Capacity defense with the 'country lawyer' jive.

 

[PhaseShifter]

He's a court-appointed attorney, not being paid by her.

There's a bit of controversy about that as well.

 

[Frame Dragger]

He's a court-appointed attorney, not being paid by her.

There's a bit of controversy about that as well.

Frankly her only hope is to accumulate as many of these controversies as she can to avoid the death penalty. This is Alabama after all, and I doubt the court will accept a non compus mentis please or a a defense of diminished capacity. By it's nature this is a premeditated act by a bright woman. That's all a jury is going to care about, and they won't buy 'insanity' unless she is CLEARLY demented... and she's not.

As for the attorney, he's a hack.

 

[Vanadium 50]

There's a bit of controversy about that as well.

I think the last thing she is worried about is perjury. Not with a trip to the Yellow Mama potentially in her future.

Indeed with that possibility, I'm surprised she's cheaping out on a lawyer. If I were on trial for multiple counts of capital murder, I'd be trying to get F. Lee Bailey, not Jimmy Bob's Lawyers for Less.

 

[cronxeh]

I think a better defense would be to come up with a microbiology excuse. Suppose she got infected by Borrelia burgdorferi, or a vitamin B-12 deficiency, or perhaps some funky syphilis. You can even throw in some prion disease argument. You may never know unless you dissect her delicious brain Whos got dibs ?

 

[Frame Dragger]

I think the last thing she is worried about is perjury. Not with a trip to the Yellow Mama potentially in her future.

Indeed with that possibility, I'm surprised she's cheaping out on a lawyer. If I were on trial for multiple counts of capital murder, I'd be trying to get F. Lee Bailey, not Jimmy Bob's Lawyers for Less.

All of which shows that you're a person who cares if they live or die. I don't think that's the case with Bishop. I doubt that this is a woman who expected to survive the initial event. People like her usually take quite a bit of time for the reality of their changed situation to set in. That assumes of course, that the IHOP incident was rage and grandiosity, and not a sign of a major personality disorder.

I think she's just a nasty, bitter woman who wanted to take people with her before the police took her out. Her lack of planning shoudl now land her in the ultimate nightmare for someone like her; a total lack of personal control, for the rest of her (probably short) life.

EDIT: cronxeh: I call dibs. It's my field after all!

 

[rewebster]

My high school required that we walk through metal detectors, there were armed police staffed at every entrance to stop and search anyone that tripped the detectors. Of course this was after several stabbings, a kid being thrown out of a third floor window, and serious death threats on the Vice -principle. We had a police helicopter circle the school during lunch hours.

Where I work you cannot get in or out of the building without getting stopped inside a "mantrap" first. You use your badge to access a little space, similar to a circular door. It stops with you trapped inside while you gain admitance to the building, you are scanned, weighed, and detected for questioanble objects. If you don't pass, you are stuck until security comes for you. Thousands of people enter and leave these buildings daily, so I don't see why they can't be installed on campuses.

too many buildings usually--between the dorms and class buildings + all the entrances to each---cost too much versus the safety of escape for fire codes

 

[Frame Dragger]

too many buildings usually--between the dorms and class buildings + all the entrances to each---cost too much versus the safety of escape for fire codes

Besides, if you think back to Starkweather, not one metal detector would have helped. These crimes are rare enough that changing our culture to prevent them ever occurring (which might not work either) is pointless.

 

[zoobyshoe]

That assumes of course, that the IHOP incident was rage and grandiosity, and not a sign of a major personality disorder.

Behaviors like that are exactly what get people taken to psychiatrists, and they are the basis for the consequent diagnosis. In other words, rage and grandiosity aren't considered to occur in sane people. It got her arrested and charged: it's dysfunctional behavior.

It would be discounted as a sign of mental illness only if it were discovered it was triggered by drugs, say she was on pcp, or, innocently, an unforeseen adverse reaction to a medication. That sort of thing.

 

[Proton Soup]

Behaviors like that are exactly what get people taken to psychiatrists, and they are the basis for the consequent diagnosis. In other words, rage and grandiosity aren't considered to occur in sane people. It got her arrested and charged: it's dysfunctional behavior.

It would be discounted as a sign of mental illness only if it were discovered it was triggered by drugs, say she was on pcp, or, innocently, an unforeseen adverse reaction to a medication. That sort of thing.

not exactly a charge of grandiosity, but maybe related

Sammie Lee Davis said his wife had mentioned Bishop before and said that she was described as "not being able to deal with reality" and "not as good as she thought she was".

 

[zoobyshoe]

not exactly a charge of grandiosity, but maybe related

Sammie Lee Davis said his wife had mentioned Bishop before and said that she was described as "not being able to deal with reality" and "not as good as she thought she was".

There was also the novel she was writing about the girl who accidentally shot her brother and was going to redeem herself by becoming a great scientist. This was uncovered during the investigation following the Harvard pipe bombs.

 

[Frame Dragger]

There was also the novel she was writing about the girl who accidentally shot her brother and was going to redeem herself by becoming a great scientist. This was uncovered during the investigation following the Harvard pipe bombs.

As I said early in this thread, Amy Bishop gave people warning signs (and I guessed at others). This isn't always the case, and one could argue if she never committed this crime that she was eccentric, or suffered from PTSD as a result of the incident with her brother. It's only in hindsight that some of these things become signals of dangerous behaviour.

As for getting help, as I understand she was charged, and has to attend anger management classes. The reality is that in this country you are not going to be compelled to seek psychological treatment except in EXTREMES. The streets are packed with schizophrenics and other lost souls who are 'harmless' by the legal definition, both to themselves and others. This is a woman who could keep a mask on at least SOME of the time.

Is she insane? Well, she fits plenty of diagnostic criteria, but none that would be workable as plea in court. The legal definition vs. every other definition of insanity is separated by a vast gulf of ignorance. Yes, we understand that in a better world Bishop would have been singled out early in life and helped or sequestered. Alas, we live in this, "the best of all possible worlds".