Mass Murder is a Societal Problem
Mass Murder is a Societal Problem
In the past 24 hours, we have seen a mass murder occur twice in a 24-hour period: one in El Paso, Texas, and the other in Dayton, Ohio. These two bloody murders took place on the heels of the Garlic Festival shooting just last week, and my heart is tearing apart for the victims of these unhinged fucksticks whose first reaction to whatever angst, anger, or impotence they’re feeling is to murder innocent people.
As soon as the news broke, and without much effort to research, the usual suspects – Giffords, Shannon Watts, the Brady Gun Grabber squad, and other squealing opportunists – jumped into action, demanding the abrogation of the rights of innocent Americans in response to the massacres.
Leave voicemails for your Senators NOW. Text CHECKS to 644-33. pic.twitter.com/X9Fsg7FF69
— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) August 4, 2019
How typical. While Texas residents stood together to provide comfort and donate blood, the gun grabbers danced in it to promote their political agenda.
Meanwhile, the empty suit known as Beto O’Dumbass has decided that once again all ills in the world, including the El Paso massacre, all other mass murders, climate change, genital warts, and the brown skidmark in his panties yesterday are all the fault of Trump, and if we just elect HIM President, all these ills will magically vanish.
Those of us with an analytic brain (and who aren’t tinfoil sporting conspiritards derping about government false flags and such) have to wonder what is going on here. It’s not the guns, and it’s not the laws. Criminals don’t obey laws, so if they want to commit acts of mass murder, they will find a way. For an example, see the attack in Japan recently in which 18 children were stabbed before the attacker committed suicide.
So what is it?
A friend of mine recently said that he doesn’t want to know. He doesn’t want to know about the scumbag’s difficult life or his abusive childhood. He doesn’t want to know his name. He doesn’t know whether the shitstain wrote a manifesto or who his targets were or why.
Although I agree that these non-entities should absolutely be deprived of the attention and publicity they so desperately seek, I disagree that we shouldn’t seek knowledge about them or an understanding of their actions.
We absolutely need to examine the why. We need to look for patterns. We need to assess why these stains on society do what they do. Because only then, can we really gain insight into ways – if there are any – to prevent them from striking again and undertake mitigation strategies that could help prevent these tragedies in the future.
These people may strike us as “lone wolf” attackers, with no terrorist group – domestic or otherwise – directing their actions. But they are far from alone, and where they draw their inspiration, with whom they associate, and their behavioral and Internet activity histories can maybe give a clue about their actions and possibly help us prevent them.
British journalist Jason Burke wrote in the Guardian two years ago that “The idea that terrorists operate alone allows us to break the link between an act of violence and its ideological hinterland.” And I don’t disagree with Burke that these lone actors find their ideological brethren in their social circles, aided and abetted by the Internet.
Modern terrorists may not always belong to a group that can be clearly named such as al-Qaida, the “Islamic State” or the National Socialist Underground (NSU), an extreme-right German terrorist cell that was responsible for a string of murders. Nevertheless, their radicalization takes place in the social climate in which they live. The internet and social media allow terrorists unprecedented ways to network globally and the ability to propagate their ideologies — right up to livestreaming their attacks on Facebook, as was the case with the Christchurch attack.
This does not mean we need to abrogate the right of free people to associate with one another – no matter what kind of violent thugs they happen to hang with – but understanding these networks is what will help us understand motives and perhaps stop these murderers before it occurs to them to act.
But what drives these terrorists to seek out similar violent, unhinged murderers? Online networks serve to support and inspire these lunatics, but what compels them to believe that whatever their issues are, murdering innocent people is the solution?
Is there a pattern? Drugs? Media exposure? The upbringing that makes these slime believe their petty problems are somehow so special, that murdering innocent victims in cold blood will somehow assuage their feelings of inadequacy?
The piece of garbage that opened fire in Dayton early this morning worked at Chipotle and was a psych major at a local community college, according to Heavy.com which is always quick to update its stories with additional information. The bitch non-human responsible for yesterday’s massacre in El Paso was captured and will probably never experience freedom again.
The investigation into their motives is ongoing, but it’s clear that at least the El Paso shitstain purchased his rifle legally, which means he underwent a background check, and no additional law would have helped deter that purchase.
So as we search for answers, I will say this. It is wholly unsurprising that in a society in which government bureaucrats refuse to address known, consistent patterns of behavior that lead to mass murders, like they did in the case of the Parkland scumbag, that mass massacres occur.
It shouldn’t be shocking that in a society where people are physically attacked for opposing views, violence is the answer for so many.
It is completely predictable that a society in which parents convince their kids from a young age that they are special, entitled, and deserving of the best of everything in life without having to actually work for it, produces violent scum that blames its lack of success in achieving its goals on others and proceeds to vent its rage in the form of mass murder.
And it is absolutely foreseeable that in a society where you are branded a racist and a fascist and compared to the likes of Hitler for any view you hold that may run counter to the unhinged narrative that seeks to change the very basic words we use to dehumanize the political opposition, that some will experience the mental break required to commit a mass murder.
I believe there is something cultural at play here.
Violence has become the substitute for discourse. It has become the reaction du jour in response to challenges. And mass murder has become the answer for petty impotents to vent their frustration at the world.
The only thing politicians on the left and their compliant media lapdogs want to do about these mass murders is banning guns and infringing on the rights of the people who didn’t commit these crimes. They don’t want to discuss the political motivations of socialist slime like James Hodgkinson – the foul piece of detritus that shot up a Congressional baseball game a couple of years ago – because they would have to take a long look in the mirror. They certainly don’t want to discuss the family dynamics of many individuals who commit murders, because that would require them to admit that perhaps a stable, two-parent home is preferable to a single-parent who may be too focused on putting food on the table to pay much attention to their child. They certainly don’t want to focus on the whining, helicopter-parented snowflakes who think that their chafed little labia are justification for violence.
These shouldn’t be right or left issues. Every possibility should be on the table as we examine the causes of this societal breakdown
But instead, the conversation has ground to a halt, because the left is unwilling to examine anything but the banning of guns as a solution to the societal problem of mass murder.