Dressed in black, school, gun, you get it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fixiwee

In a civilized societey, isn't sport supposed to help maintain a balanced agression level?
Because I'm sceptic how your argument would maintain in environment with lower social standards where kids get bullied and beaten up (aka Chavs).

---

It's normal that kids get bullied and beaten up, there is such a thing as being overly protective. I am not a parent mind you, maybe I would think differently if it was my own kid but I doubt it. These things don't change, the office is just as cruel a place. What if there is no way out? You are supposed to solve it verbally, but there is a reason you are being picked on, you can't. Solving it semi-violently, a fight after school, will get you into trouble you are supposed to be above that. What to do? You are already confused because of your hormones kicking in. Things like sexual desire and violence shouldn't be surpressed, kids messing around or beating eachother up is perfectly innocent.

I see. We're back to blaming the usual suspects: guns, girls and gaming. Much easier then child psychology, isn't it.

Müller writes somewhere that in the course of his career he always encountered such resistance; people are prepared to hear him out when they need him to solve a case, but they don't want to listen when he tells them how the case could arise in the first place. His unique approach to profiling, which departs not from psychology but from observational techniques and has allowed him to achieve remarkable results, is always welcome after the fact, almost never prior to it.

I must say I am particularly disappointed in Banquo's Ghost's view that boys aged 16-19 should be raised in a military atmosphere and that their educational opportunities should be made dependent on it. It reeks of fascism. There are many reasons why his approach is wrong, but suffice it to say that it does not prevent the behaviour we are discussing. Jeffrey Dahmer or Timothy McVeigh are prime examples of kids whose military service - if anything - gave them more inspiration and/or practical expertise to carry out their horrendous acts.

Edit
Dang it, Fragony, quit being so sensible. Your views on A Clockwork Orange already impressed me to the point where I remember them after two years or so. And yes, the office sometimes is just as cruel and unforgiving a place as the playground. That's exactly what Müller might say, too.
We have to stop meeting in this way.

(what were my views of the Clockwork Orange, you just tickled my vanity)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

I must say I am particularly disappointed in Banquo's Ghost's view that boys aged 16-19 should be raised in a military atmosphere and that their educational opportunities should be made dependent on it. It reeks of fascism. There are many reasons why his approach is wrong, but suffice it to say that it does not prevent the behaviour we are discussing. Jeffrey Dahmer or Timothy McVeigh are prime examples of kids whose military service - if anything - gave them more inspiration and/or practical expertise to carry out their horrendous acts.

---

Forty years ago (at age 18), I personally fought Banquo's Ghost's proposal tooth-and-nail, not for the fascistic aspects (those don't typically frighten americans as much as they do europeans, who apparently fear a slippery-slope slide back to the 30's; I mean that kindly), but for the involuntary servitude aspects.

Tying such national service to educational opportunities unobtainable otherwise lessens my opposition. And my own military experience, and observations, and time as a Dad, tells me that BG is actually spot-on correct. The family unit can (and must) do much to impart the qualities of good citizenship. But, the practical application of those qualities, the proof of their need, comes about best in the company of other young men, strictly (militarily, if you will) supervised by older men who have "been there, done that". The goal (among others) being: learning to no longer fear one's own or others' anger, fear, indecision, sadness, disappointment, rejection, violence - but instead, to recognize that stuff, focus it, and USE it to accomplish a mission satisfying to the individual man, and his society.

Sport can go a long way in accomplishing this, as well, but often misses the mark in its search for superstar players. The levening effect of military drudgery, punctuated by periods of intense danger, works better, in my opinion.

Dahmer and McVeigh were inadequately-trained soldiers. They 'got' the techniques, but not the background. I blame their sergeants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

My own view is that we need to implement military national service across Western countries. This should be focussed on discipline, service and hard physical experience.

---

Germany has compulsory military service for men. Germany has the most school shootings in Europe.
(Although school shootings still occur so infrequently that the statistical relevance is debatable)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian

We're back to blaming the usual suspects: guns, girls and gaming. Much easier than child psychology, isn't it.

Müller writes somewhere that in the course of his career he always encountered such resistance

---

I shall blissfully ignore Müller and move on to guns, girls and gaming. ~;p

Girls are important. I do not think the motivation of this shooter can ever be understood without bearing in mind that eight of the nine students and all three of the teachers he shot dead were female.

Guns are important too. Gun culture kills. I do not mean the availability or unavailability of guns itself. I mean gun culture at large. I myself would never go on a shooter spree like this. I could see myself do a lot of things, like crushing the skull of the next person to skip the line in front of me. But I would not put on a commando costume and enter a public building for a shooting spray. Simply, because I wouldn't - literally - want be caught dead looking like an imbecile like that. To me, he looks as ridiculous as a guy with lots of tattoos and a sleevless shirt exposing his beefed up biceps. Or as ridiculous as a man in a colonel uniform, a moustache, shining boots and reflexing sunglasses.

All three of these types look powerful, manly, 'in control' to some, in varying (sub)cultures. Ridiculous to others. In gun culture, the first type looks very impressive, cool, assertive. If the culture dissapears, so too do these shootings.

Well, I don't have children yet, but I wouldn't be too enthusiastic about seeing my children (re-?)educated by an organisation that is in the end controlled by the morons that are called politicians.

EDIT: intended as response to Kukri and Banquo.

I don't think it would change anything, just another system in which some can't cope. Any attempt at uniformity is an exercise in futility imho. Just let things be even if it's unpleasant we aren't equals. Where do these things happen; in society's with high expectations of how someone should behave.

(@Kukri)

Andres and Fragony: I take your points. A highly-trained, well-motivated Cadre of NCO's would be an absolute necessity for such a plan. So, yes: Poorly-handled or -staffed, it would do more harm than good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Where do these things happen; in society's with high expectations of how someone should behave.

---

Sigh. Now you're doing it again. Why are you less perceptive on certain other subjects, when you have such a great capacity for observation as shown above? It's not the whole story, but it is part of it. Criminal forms of revenge (be it in the shape of violence, blackmail, extortion or fraud) often reflect the expectations of the environment where they take place. Bankers don't go on shooting sprees like postal workers. Bankers defraud or blackmail their bosses.

As to shootings and mass murderers. We all know (or should, if we are able to read papers) that these incidents occur in many countries with different traditions. Militaristic or not, 'gun culture' or no 'gun culture', rigid Japanese-style education or loose Dutch-style education, it doesn't matter.

As I tried to explain in some detail there may be a common denominator in these cases. But it does not correspond with most peoples' pet peeves, so it is often 'blissfully' ignored. That doesn't surprise me and shall blissfully leave this thread. Hey, it's only teh Internets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Why are you less perceptive on certain other subjects

---

I take compliments in whatever form :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

As I tried to explain in some detail there may be a common denominator in these cases. But it does not correspond with most peoples' pet peeves, so it is often 'blissfully' ignored. That doesn't surprise me and shall blissfully leave this thread. Hey, it's only teh Internets.

---

Please, don't leave. In fact, this psychology thing fascinates me.

I wonder, how many of those school shootings are comitted by clear psychopaths and how many by the depressed/suicidal/hot headed teenager type? Or is Müllers' book more something general on child psychology and not specifically oriented to mass murdering teenagers?

Also, are such things evitable according to him (and I'm not talking about the usual "ban guns/allow more guns/ban violent computer games (:wall:)/turn schools into impenetrable forts"-nonsense solutions)?

Are their specific signs, something a parent/teacher can see?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

As I tried to explain in some detail there may be a common denominator in these cases. But it does not correspond with most peoples' pet peeves, so it is often 'blissfully' ignored. That doesn't surprise me and I shall blissfully leave this thread. Hey, it's only teh Internets.

---

Oh, come on. May I remind you that you name non-Müller explanations 'pet peeves' and 'the usual suspects' for those who can't understand child psychology?

Müller sounds very interesting. I have not read him and am probably not going to be able do so before this thread has run its course. So I post about what I know, and what I think is relevant: amateur psychology and sociological phenomena. Others post about other things.
School and other shootings do not have a single explanatory scheme. There are many relevant angles to this story. We can't ignore Müller, Müller can't ignore other angles. You got the tongue (= ~;p) for brushing aside not just that what disagrees with Müller, but for brushing aside everything that isn't Müller. After which I resumed my, erm...feministic/haircut/gun culture explanation scheme. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

Your profiler's view seems to me to be sound. Many young men these days do seem to suffer from loneliness and a sense of abstraction from society. This is not helped by a significant confusion as to what actually makes a man in the 21st century. What can a youngster do these days to earn society's respect? Teenage males have always undergone this confusion as to their role in society, but it is exacerbated by the kind of "feminisation" that Fragony touched on. I would also argue that the easy consumer society we have developed is feminised - man is a provider, and that is undermined by just whipping out a credit card with no thought as to consequence.

---

Not like I feel I'm a woman trapped in a man's body but I do often feel like I cannot come up to the standards of most men. Somehow i seem natural very lazy and no matter how often I managed to break out of this, I always fall back into this lazyness. It's like I need someone to constantly kick me in the behind to make me keep going in many situations. I'm not very lazy at work where I can see the monetary benefits and feel obliged to do what I'm paid for, even if just because of empathy for my very nice boss. But once it gets to things like learning for university I slide back into this neverending lazyness. :shrug:

It doesn't help that we had company bosses at highschool telling us about their super-high hiring standards which I feel I will never be able to meet. My lack of ability for physical labour makes lower jobs seem inaccessible as well so where exactly am I supposed to see myself in the future? I really don't know and it causes a fear in me that almost startles me which makes things even worse of course. Not like I want to be violent but since you mentioned it I wanted to get that out I guess.

I don't know where my lazyness comes from, it was always there I think but more importantly I don't know how to get rid of it. Sometimes I think maybe I should have tried to get into the army, that might have helped. Or I might have become lazy again afterwards. :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAG

You are completely wrong and the logic is flawed. Just because the tightened laws did not stop this shooting, it does not mean it has not stopped or reduced any shootings. I think you can use your common sense - and the great example of the US, compared to say, er.... Germany - to realise that having less guns and less avaliability to guns means less gun related deaths and shootings. To reduce gun laws after this tragedy would be the ultimate height of stupidity.

---

:inquisitive:

Look at some other countries besides the US. There really isn't any correlation. Points three and six especially.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis

Germany has compulsory military service for men. Germany has the most school shootings in Europe.
(Although school shootings still occur so infrequently that the statistical relevance is debatable)

---

Now, I'm not sure if I'm for or against conscription, and I can't say I pay much attention to school shootings (just the resulting debates on gun control), but aren't most of those who shoot up schools under the usual ages of mandatory conscription?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Not like I feel I'm a woman trapped in a man's body but I do often feel like I cannot come up to the standards of most men. Somehow i seem natural very lazy...

---

I wish this would help, but I guess it won't: It is normal to feel that way in late teens/early twenties. Sure, lotsa guys bluster through that time, but they're bluffing: you're old enough to see and recognize the (seems like: enormous) challenges and responsibilities of man-hood, and young enough to remember carefree childhood, that you now wish you'd enjoyed more - since the future looks like a whole buncha hard work that maybe you're not confident you can do.

Cheer up. Listen to Uncle Kukri, who has been through it himself, and brought several other young men through it too: There's really only 2 things you have to get good at:

1) Protecting
2) Providing

Everything else, your instincts, your abilities (that you don't even know you have, yet) are there so that you can do those two things. Protect and Provide. It is the boiled-down basic job description of Husband, Father, Brother, Leader, Man. You may never be Husband, or Father or Leader, but you already are: Man. And you have no idea what Fate will throw at you in the future for a life-job.

Now is the time for pactice; Work on the P & P of Husar, as though he were another (little bit younger) person than you. Some day, maybe soon, you'll have to protect and provide for another, or maybe many others. And you'll know what to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Now, I'm not sure if I'm for or against conscription, and I can't say I pay much attention to school shootings (just the resulting debates on gun control), but aren't most of those who shoot up schools under the usual ages of mandatory conscription?

---

We have conscription here too. I can't say I wanted to go to a school and shoot a bunch of people after my army year. Now, the army headquarters on the other hand........

A year in a frozen hellhole in the middle of nowhere, 20.000km from women, with absolutely nothing to do except counting the days to your next leave and day-dream about banging your girlfriend... Someone has got to pay for that.

*the thread hijacker will now wander off*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Hey, it's only teh Internets.

---

Upon reflection, I think I was most ungracious to you. :embarassed:

I did read your posts about Müller with interest. My apologies for my lack of grace and my lack of acknowledgement. What I meant, was that my interest lies not so much with profiling the character traits of these killers, however interesting or necessary for prevention, but with the nature and origin of these traits themselves.

On the upside, I have read up on Müller a bit and am now an expert on him. Here is Müller - if only every German would listen to him, there'd be no more shootings. :2thumbsup:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Okay, okay, sorry 'bout the video. I am simply clinically incapable of engaging in a serious debate for more than five minutes or three sentences.

I do, of course, have a serious question. I would say that Müller excells in profiling after the fact. I think he could give a great psychological report on this shooter simnply from his acts and the nature of them.
But can he give an accurate description before the shooting has occurred? Statistics and criminal profiling go a long way towards identifying possible suspects. But will it ever be so refined as to narrow it down to a workable set of 'alarm bells'?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Well I got a nice shiny AK47 for you, 275 euro, complete with case, with 50 plus you get a reflex sight along with perks. Guns are not hard to get, I could get you a bazooka or an RPG, not sure about nukes though.

---

275 euros for a AK47? :shocked2:
No wonder we have these shootings when weapons are dirt cheap!

Still, it's incredibly sad what's going on. I just hope there won't be any shootings in the school I am currently in and in the university I will attend later on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edyzmedieval

275 euros for a AK47? :shocked2:
No wonder we have these shootings when weapons are dirt cheap!

Still, it's incredibly sad what's going on. I just hope there won't be any shootings in the school I am currently in and in the university I will attend later on.

---

If you worry about such things, I recommend that you buy lottery tickets.

And stop driving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

If you worry about such things, I recommend that you buy lottery tickets.

And stop driving.

---

You forgot mentioning to stop being near cars in general.

One aspect of these things that seems to be important is the media attention given to these killers after the fact.

It provides an opportunity for the violent people who are feeling oppressed to gain fame. I believe if there were only slight coverage of the killer, such disturbed people would have less motivation for their acts. They can sieze a platform to have all their grievances aired, talked about and discussed. If they are bullied or slighted, they can make everyone regret that, make them think they shouldn't have bothered them.

So I think one problem is the intense media coverage given to these killers. It provides a chance for the mentally unstable to grab the spotlight.

As for guns; I don't wish to retred old ground and debate gun control. I'd rather reflect on the nature of gun culture and the like. It seems, for all these kids that use guns, there are not many raised by parents who taught them how to use guns. So instead of guidance from their parents they substitute whatever pop culture teaches them about guns.

The gun culture of America is likely different from what most people see it as. I view it as the culture of people who own guns in the US. It is not the same representation we get from the media of a bunch of redneck yokels drinking beer. It is one of responsibility, of people from all walks of life.

But if kids aren't taught how to use guns, using them responsibly as a tool, then they must find some other source of information. Enter the media - Hollywood glamorizing guns in myriad number of ways, the news showing these killers getting famous just because they used a gun, which becomes a source of power over others instead of a tool to be used responsibly.

As an analogy, think of what we western folks, who grew up with cars, think of them compared to some third world child who's only seen them used in hollywood high speed chases, or by bank robbers or heads of state.

And Adrian, please continue to share the fascinating insights of Mr. Muller.

CR

Holy Crap. First time I ever agree with CR.
As in, I also think fame is an important factor. Pretty sure these people would just commit suicide quietly or carry the burden of their meaningless life without causing trouble if it weren't for the instant celebrity status they achieve by killing a dozen people.

But then, on the other hand, I think it's kind of the media's role to speak about it.

I think it can be reported without the intense scrutiny of the lives of the killers that currently happens. What should be reported are the thoughts of people like Mr. Muller. We shouldn't go over the lives of the killers to try and find out and report to the nation what injustice might have set them off. It is like giving the killers a megaphone to air their grievances. But this megaphone they must kill to use.

CR

Rubbish.

I mean, generally you might have a point, but apparentley not so in this case.
I only found this german article but it's basically about the things the hostage said, the man who's car the killer kidnapped.

He jumped into the backseat, held the gun at the hostage's head and told him to drive, played around with ammunition in his other hand and they also talked a bit.
At some point the killer asked "do you think we can find another school?", the hostage ignored this and changed topic.
Later the hostage asked him "Why are you doing this ****?" and the answer was: "For fun, because it's fun!"..... :wall:

Of course one may not believe the hostage everything but I don't see why he would be lying about such things.

I can see where Baquo is coming from with his idea. When I reflect on my teens, I can see there were many problems. I lived in my room, got isolated from my friends, never got any fresh air, probably didn't move above walking pace for months at a time, generally had poor health and everyone kept telling me how pale and gaunt I looked. In some ways these problems were because I wasn't great with people, although to be honest I wasn't that bad at first, mainly it was because my Mum didn't like me leaving the house (she had problems with stress). And in these conditions, I think its fair enough to say my mental health followed to an extent, although I never got anything diagnosed, because my parents think mental problems don't exist.

Now when I look back, the best thing that could have happened for me would have been for me hauled out an put on compulsory military service. I would have got exercise, I would have become healthier, eaten better, felt a ton better. Perhaps even more importantly, it would have forced me to deal more with people, I would have made friends, I would have felt like I was doing something useful. Generally I would have felt a lot better. Now, I'm not suggesting I would ever have went on a shooting spree, the idea seems as ridiculous as it does sick, but I get the feeling some of these school shooters are just more extreme examples of what I was like. Through a form of military service, people would:

1. Feel they are included in society
2. Feel they have a useful role in society
3. Feel that they serve society and society serves them

If people knew these 3 things, who would ever go on a shooting spree? The only thing that could cause it would be a chemical imbalance in the brain, at least it would eliminate the environment-induced problems.

Generally things are better for me now, and when I look back I think "if only these things could have happened sooner!".

PS: As you may imagine, I wasn't so keen on the military brothel idea. Replace it with God-fearing Puritanism and there you go. :beam:

Yes, many run amok because of social problems but did I already mention this guy here was nuts?

I don't know whether nuts is genetic like gay or whether it is ideologic like terrorist but the guy he kidnapped did not get the impression that mister Kretschmer was particularly unhappy about certain people, he just thought shooting people is dfun and would have shot up another random school as well, doesn't sound like his anger was inspired by anyone particular.

Furthermore he was supposedly undergoing psychiatric treatment before for being nuts, which the parents denied though, and he shot up his old school a while after leaving it and quite frankly I don't think old things can tip the balance after you left them behind already unless you're nuts.

Which makes me conclude that he was just nuts, as unfortunate as that may be for him and his victims.
For reference, Hitler was also nuts and I wouldn't say he was a social outcast considering he got the votes of more than half the german nation to lead them, not like they're comparable in any other way but sometimes people are just nuts and the circumstances just support this, not cause it, IMO.

Good points, Husar: sometimes 'nuts' is just 'nuts', and there is little anyone can do to make them not-nuts. Spotting that fact before the nuts guy/girl ACTS nuts, is the hard part.

We all act a little nutty sometimes. We can't lock each other up everytime that happens. So we've gotta either find a way to ID the truly, irredeemably nuts guys and lock them away ahead of time,

or deal with their craziness as it pops up (which I guess is where we are now).