Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Donward

Terror Attacks and Active Shooter Events Thread

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Even more annoying are people who are upset because they are calling this the worst mass shooting in the US in modern history.  Their complaint is that they are forgetting about Wounded Knee.  First off, I'm not sure that Wounded Knee count's as "modern history."  Second, it was a US military operation.  A nasty and regrettable one for sure, but it was a military action/battle.  By this standard, the largest mass shooting in US history would be Gettysburg.  

 

22050316_832681690246193_988546287050582

What's racism?

When 500 settlers are massacred at Fort Mims by Red Stick Creek Indians in 1813 not being regarded as the largest mass shooting in US history...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sturgeon said:

Leaked photos of some of the guns. The latter AR is configured with a SlideFire, VFG, EOTech, and 100 round SureFire mag. The top gun appears to be a Daniel Defense rifle.

 

cZDjn6q.jpg

 

EAp0wpN.jpg

 

Neither is set up for the bump-SAW exploit, although the ingredients are all there.

 

I think we can begin to discount the statements of the shooter's brother who claimed that he wasn't a gun guy. At some point, he not only began assembling this firearm collection but has accrued the know-how to operate them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Donward said:

 

I think we can begin to discount the statements of the shooter's brother who claimed that he wasn't a gun guy. At some point, he not only began assembling this firearm collection but has accrued the know-how to operate them. 

 

Didn't the brother say something like "he lives 3,000 miles away and I haven't seen him for ten years"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

Didn't the brother say something like "he lives 3,000 miles away and I haven't seen him for ten years"?

I believe so.

Doesnt mean that he wasn't interviewed anyway, quoted, etc. with his words being added to the narrative.

Not blaming the brother by the way. It's just kind of useless sometimes to stick a mic in these people's faces.

I mean, if the shooter had a healthy family relationship with anyone, he probably wouldn't have hauled 500 pounds of ammo and shooting irons into a casino.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

Do you blame them?

 

 

Not for taking them down. Not sure it was ever smart to put them up.

 

Also, apparently scumbag was a multimillionaire: https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews.go.com/amp/US/vegas-shooter-200-reports-suspicious-activities-large-financial/story%3Fid=50258986

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are various classes of psychopath, very few of them are directly murderous or sadistic in the classic sense and very few are actually detected in youth, the vast majority gravitate toward the business world these days, an environment literally made for their needs (by the psychopaths who have gone before).

 

57 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

Not sure it was ever smart to put them up.

 

Truth.....Apart from anything else, promoting such idiotic devices doesn't really fit in with the 'mature firearms enthusiast' image they try to project elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Double post.....Might as well use it now I made it!

 

So.....IMHO the psychopaths in the world of business have inflicted vastly more harm to their fellows than those who have taken up weapons and acted directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

There are various classes of psychopath, very few of them are directly murderous or sadistic in the classic sense and very few are actually detected in youth, the vast majority gravitate toward the business world these days, an environment literally made for their needs (by the psychopaths who have gone before).

 

We'll rephrase mine to "murderous psychopaths" then, I suppose.

Point is, this is strange.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sturgeon said:

 

Well, what makes Scumbag unusual is that normally psychpaths/sadists are unable to fly under the radar for six decades. They usually get caught in their developmental years when they are pulling the wings off birds, or, at worst, knifing or shooting their classmates. Then they are circulated through various ineffectual programs and/or prison until they die or (in rare cases) readjust. They do not normally lie dormant until they go on a shooting spree in their '60s. That is why people wonder if this was politically motivated.

 

Plus there's the fact that, in 2017, 85% of all actions taken by individuals, aside from eating, sleeping, and relieving the bowels, are politically motivated.

Sadists and psychopaths are the polar opposite.  And they both can function well in society. CEOs and journalists are popular choices for psychopaths. 
Psychopaths are very good at hiding under the radar, even managing to convince psychologists into not diagnosing them. 

 

He might be motivated by the fact that he is 60. He might want fame or to be remembered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Xoon said:

Sadists and psychopaths are the polar opposite.  And they both can function well in society. CEOs and journalists are popular choices for psychopaths. 
Psychopaths are very good at hiding under the radar, even managing to convince psychologists into not diagnosing them. 

 

He might be motivated by the fact that he is 60. He might want fame or to be remembered. 

 

Ooookay, well, I am not a psychologist and I apparently brought down the potato sacks here hahah.

I didn't say psychopaths couldn't function in society, just that if they have murderous tendencies they usually get ID'd early in life.

Basing this on some reading I've done regarding psychopaths, but that doesn't make me an expert so feel free to correct me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Xoon said:

Sadists and psychopaths are the polar opposite.

 

Not sure I'd agree there.....Both put their own gratification at the top of the priority stack and almost always at the expense of others.  The degree of gratification they draw from the various different aspects of an interaction may vary, but their primary motivation remains essentially identical.

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

Ooookay, well, I am not a psychologist and I apparently brought down the potato sacks here hahah.

I didn't say psychopaths couldn't function in society, just that if they have murderous tendencies they usually get ID'd early in life.

Basing this on some reading I've done regarding psychopaths, but that doesn't make me an expert so feel free to correct me.

A psychopath is a person that lacks or is low in empathy. A sadist has exaggerated empathy, meaning they feel other peoples emotions more strongly than normal people, and gets sexual pleasure from others pain, and in some cases their own pain. 

 

In this case a sadist would probably do the killing out of pure pleasure. A psychopath would have to have motivation, like fame, money or ideological. In their eyes, murdering a few people does not seem like a big price to accomplice their goals. 

 

Both can go under the radar simply because people are not diagnosed unless they deviate from the norm. Meaning, if a sadist keeps their desires in check, they could appear as just another person.

 

For squarehead:

 

They are the polar opposite because they can't technically be both, as explained above.  Psychopaths put their gratification first, and will do anything to get it, thinking if you are dumb enough to be fooled, you deserve it. A sadist just loves pain.

 

They both fall under the "Evil triad" though, pretty much evil aspects of humans. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

Hm, well I never said sadists were the same thing as psychopaths.

You said psychopath/sadist, making it seem like they are similar, so I just explained to make sure everyone here was on the same track. Media tends to portray mental disorders and personality disorders pretty poorly. 
Examples like Sociopathy, mania, psychopathy, psychosis and schizophrenia.  The new film "Kingsmen 2" is a great example here. 

They really love to romanticize a hybrid psychopath/sadist, which per definition is almost impossible to be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Xoon said:

You said psychopath/sadist, making it seem like they are similar, so I just explained to make sure everyone here was on the same track. Media tends to portray mental disorders and personality disorders pretty poorly. 
Examples like Sociopathy, mania, psychopathy, psychosis and schizophrenia.  The new film "Kingsmen 2" is a great example here. 

They really love to romanticize a hybrid psychopath/sadist, which per definition is almost impossible to be. 

 

I just meant "and".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO the difference lies in their perception of their victims.....A psychopath just doesn't give a shit, the 'humanity' and 'suffering' of the victim is essentially meaningless in the grand scheme of things, especially in comparison to their own gratification.   A sadist on the other hand is fully cognisant of what they do and to whom they do it and derive their gratification directly from that.  The two are not mutually incompatible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

IMHO the difference lies in their perception of their victims.....A psychopath just doesn't give a shit, the 'humanity' and 'suffering' of the victim is essentially meaningless in the grand scheme of things, especially in comparison to their own gratification.   A sadist on the other hand is fully cognisant of what they do and to whom they do it and derive their gratification directly from that.  The two are not mutually incompatible.

 

Xoon's definition of psychopath is on the money.

Sadists I am not going to comment on because I've not really studied it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree in principle, but what is the difference in practical terms between someone who will happily torture another person to death without consideration for their suffering (because doing exactly whatever the fuck they like gratifies them) and someone who will torture someone to death without consideration for their suffering (because making others suffer gratifies them)?  Empathy is very strongly moderated by societal expectations as the BBC article I linked to clearly demonstrates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I don't disagree in principle, but what is the difference in practical terms between someone who will happily torture another person to death without consideration for their suffering (because doing exactly whatever the fuck they like gratifies them) and someone who will torture someone to death without consideration for their suffering (because making others suffer gratifies them)?  Empathy is very strongly moderated by societal expectations as the BBC article I linked to clearly demonstrates.

 

Because what makes them tick is different. They have different feedback loops, different inputs, etc. Negotiating with either would be different, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I don't disagree in principle, but what is the difference in practical terms between someone who will happily torture another person to death without consideration for their suffering (because doing exactly whatever the fuck they like gratifies them) and someone who will torture someone to death without consideration for their suffering (because making others suffer gratifies them).  Empathy is a BS concept to a great extent, it is very strongly moderated by societal expectations as the BBC article I linked to clearly demonstrates.

When I speak of empathy, I mean a persons ability to emulate others emotions.  Not how caring you are or something like that. You can be strong in empathy and still don't give a crap about someone dying, this comes down to perceptions as you mentioned.  However, a person low in empathy is less likely to be affected by the death, while a person high in empathy is more likely to be affected. 

 

And then we come down to the definition, a psychopath is extremely low in empathy. This means they have a really hard time understanding others feelings. Which is why they end up not giving a shit. A sadist is extremely high in empathy, ironic right? To the point where they feel it stronger than the actual person, they also confuse pain with sexual pleasure. This means they can be caring and loving of people. However, if they are narcissistic, or low in consciousnesses they are likely to hurt others for their own pleasure.  

 

A psychopath would not torture someone to death unless it was to prove a point, or for deterrence. It is simply illogical and a waste of time. A sadist would, regardless of how logical it is. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×