Why is it always young men?
Why do young men with suicidal urges feel the necessity of taking a bunch of total strangers with them? Columbine, Aurora, Oregon and now today in Connecticutt these young men open fire on total strangers — in today’s shooting, innocent children.
I can’t think of ANY mass shooting instigated by young women. Are women saner, more stable, what?
And why do these young men think they have the right to inflict their personal pain on so many others? To be honest, back in my 20s (40 years ago), I felt suicidal, but I NEVER considered inflicting my personal pain upon total strangers.
What is it about men that they feel like they can do this? What is it?
Rachel Elaine Hines
5 months agoIt’s not always young men. Google “Laurie Dann” or “Brenda Spencer.”
This is not to say that men are not statistically more likely to commit violent crimes—just reminding you that women have done so in the past too.
Suzanne Conaway
5 months agoRachel, I’d never heard of either of these two women. I wonder why not? Even the Star’s list of mass shootings doesn’t include these two women. I also remember the girl from Blue Springs (I think) who murdered a young neighbor “Just to see what it felt like.” So, yes, women get murderous, too.
But I still wonder why any of these people feel the need to take out total strangers as part of their suicide.
Phil Cardarella
5 months agoBoys and toys. With exceptions, girls play with dolls and boys with guns and swords. Try not to let a boy have a “weapon” toy and he will pick up a stick to use.
Hey, in the Ice Age, when the tribe needed someone dispensible to guard the women and children against wolves and tigers, boys with sharp sticks (and no sense) came in really handy. Same mindset is a bit inconvenient in the Age of I-Pods.
Of course, the MOTHER of this mentally-disturbed kid was the one who bought a casche of semi-automatic weapons and a ton of ammunition to protect herself in a town where jaywalking is considered a crime-wave. Was.
So, the gals don’t get a total pass on this one.
Isa Hodge
5 months agoHome Grown American Terrorists
In light of the tragic events in the Connecticut Elementary school it has made me contemplate as a Muslim American a couple of things. First how this event has caused me great heart ache for the victims and their families that have and will continue to suffer and how important my own children are to me and I couldn’t imagine what they are going through. My prayers go out to them and may Allah give them comfort. Second is we now have and have had for some time home grown American apple pie fed white as the peaks of the Caucus mountains TERRORISTS! When ever someone of non Islamic background does an act of this magnitude doesn’t the media paint them as mentally unstable or insane. Could it be that this is true that there is a mental instability that can allow someone to systematically murder in cold blood men, women, and children? But I would like to know why this is not labeled as an act of terror done by a terrorist. Could it be because that word is reserved for only people claiming to be Muslim? Why don’t people see that these acts are one in the same that for any one regardless of their motives committing these acts are either a terrorist or insane pick one or both for everyone. Take the solider in Afghanistan who killed the women and children all because he witnessed and army buddy losing his life over an explosive devise. Before he even landed state side and started his trial didn’t the media label him with PTSD. But when a Muslim runs into a cafe or a market with an explosive devise strapped to themselves and as soon as the media knows it was done by some one claiming to be Muslim he is labeled a terrorist! Are they both not acts of terror is there not death and lives affected. Ok I know what you are thinking your thinking Muslims do it for religious reasons and all the others are because of a mental instability. Ok 2 things one any one who can run into a crowd with weapons of any kind and take the life of others and then take there own life all have something wrong mentally. Second what about the man in Norway? Brevik who before his 97 victims at a youth camp for young politicians released a 1500 page manifesto calling on ” All Christian conservatives to begin the 4th Christian Crusade by stopping the Muslimization of our nations by any means necessary even calling on the use of WMD!” He even used explosives but as of yet not one media outlet called him a terrorist. People wake up and see the lies before your eyes. There is no difference between the two and God willing the march to Washington D.C. will put a stop to interest groups and media outlets from slandering such a racist word on us Muslims. But we can only do it with you fellow non Muslim Americans help. Join us stand up against an injustice help us get our civil rights back from the government. Before it is to late and after they are done with us they will move on to another minority in America to make an enemy out of.
Phil Cardarella
5 months agoActually, both Tim McVeigh and Brevik ARE terrorists — and have been labeled as such.
“Terrorism” essentially is a political act — however irrational the aim, it is a public policy directed act. Alas, mere psychos — here or abroad — do not usually qualify as “terrorist” because they are non-political in their attacks.
Alas, there is a religious double-standard — but only since the advent of religion. No doubt the Philistines considered David a terrorist when he was out and about murdering Philistines to collect their foreskins for Saul. Can’t say I blame them.
The guy who shoots an abortion provider is a terrorist to me, but a hero to the rightwing “Christian” nuts.
Fact is, most educated folks — Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu — are not into violence, faith-based or not. And most of their kids — truth be told — would rather have an I-Pad than a Bible or Koran. Which is GOOD news.
Isa Hodge
5 months agoAccording to the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)defines terrorism and states “the unlawful use of force and violence … to intimidate or coerce a government … in furtherance of political or social objectives.” New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy © 2005 defines it as: “Acts of violence committed by groups that view themselves as victimized by some notable historical wrong. They stage unexpected attacks on civilian targets, including embassies and airliners, with the aim of sowing fear and confusion.” So yes “terrorism” is defined as a political act but it is also defined as ” someone viewing themselves as victimized ect” Most of the attacks over seas are between religious sects of Islam not aimed at a government but they all get lumped in with Terrorism as long as it is done by someone claiming to be a Muslim. I am glad to see that you agree that McVeigh and Brevrik are terrorists but here is the of what I wrote the media never called them that they only said they had a mental deficiency. Only a few years ago did they call McVeigh a terrorist. But in the beginning he wasn’t. I only wish to bring to light the hypocrisy of our media and government to help wake Americans up to the lengths they will go to force their agenda and use our tax dollars at our expense to make themselves richer. This is why AMPAC (American Muslim Political Action Comity) is organizing a Million Muslim March to Washington D.C. on 9.11.13 to demand civil rights protection for the 7 million and growing Muslims in America to protect us from libel and slanderous remarks about Islam and its followers. To demand that President Obama fulfill his promise of a transparent government and give back control of our country to its citizens.