Aurora
The horrible event in Aurora should allow all people of good will cause to reflect upon some of the dynamics of violence and social decay in the United States. A news report stated that this was the 27th such incident since Columbine. Some on television are speculating if this week’s assassin was “influenced” by that tragic high school event, as if the very nature of the mass murder is not connection enough.
Frequently, a tragic event results in communities pulling together, for the common good. When a photo of a seemingly detached, unconcerned President Bush contrasted with the very real images of sincere people, bringing forth their best efforts to assist others, we have a striking contrast between the very worst and very best in humanity.
In this instance, and others like it, that distinction is not always quite as clear. Certainly, the murderer can be identified as the bad guy. Even if the most sympathetic among us believes he probably suffers from a severe and persistent mental illness, his actions are without question those of a person who knows “right from wrong.” No matter what other factor may or may not be involved here, this young man intended to make a statement to society by murdering as many innocent human beings as he possibly could. And, make no mistake, he invested a lot of thought and preparation into killing as many people as he could.
A number of good people have said that it is likely the murderer suffers from a mental illness. Hopefully, we all agree that a “sane” person does not fantasize about murdering strangers in a movie theater, much less follow through on such a sick dream. But the fact that a person did exactly that does not mean that he or she (usually he) is mentally ill in any legal sense. More, it is important to keep in mind that, as a population, the mentally ill are far, far more likely to be a victim of a violent crime, and to commit one. The news media sells the mistaken idea that the opposite is true, simply because that sells. And the media is a selling business.
Of the major SPMIs, only paranoid schizophrenia has a high correlation with violence. I saw that my good DU friend “cali” had made an OP that suggested the murderer might well be found to be a paranoid schizophrenic. I think that she may be right on the money: if he does have a SPMI, it is most likely this. Still, the vast majority of people suffering from this illness do not engage in mass murder, and the majority of mass murderers do not suffer from paranoid schizophrenia.
A university professor in criminology noted that the murderer may well prove to be a psychopath (or sociopath, if you favor that term). While very little is actually known about the “suspect,” I think the professor may be right on the money, too. And while all psychopaths are not mass murderers, a substantial number of mass murderers are psychopaths.
While again not all the details are known, there is enough evidence to indicate that this fellow intended to be in a gun-fight; that and the loaded gun in his car suggest he at very least considered the possibility of a confrontation with police, and perhaps escaping from the scene of the crime. The manner in which he left his apartment could be -- considering the reported hour of loud music -- his hope that police would come crashing through his door. Is this the planning of a paranoid schizophrenic? Or a psychopath? Or both?
The title of one OP on DU’s General Discussion claimed that, even if this person had sought mental health treatment, he could not have gotten it. This, of course, is not true. There are many, many holes in the social safety net. The public mental health services are under-funded, and employees’ case loads are far too high as a rule. Insurance companies and the medication industry are, in my opinion, criminal. But people who really seek treatment can generally find it, imperfect as it may well be.
Still, in part because of the stigma associated with mental illness, many people in real need are treatment-resistant. Many more are not compliant with recommended treatment. The sad cycle of SPMI often is enhanced by dual-diagnoses; the rates of MICA (mentally ill, substance abuse) are high among those under the age of 50. The actions of a reportedly young man with a very high level of intelligence who commits this type of heinous crime suggest a person who did not view himself as owning the problem -- it was society’s fault, and he was intent upon getting his revenge.
A media report on the initial response of the killer’s mother indicates that she was not surprised that her son committed an act of extreme violence. His only reported legal history was a minor traffic ticket. Thus, even if his parents believed he needed some type of treatment, he was a legal adult, and could not be forced into treatment. It may be that, in the past, there were periods where he was deemed a threat to himself and/or others, and actually had brief periods of treatment; if so, he apparently did not stick with it. It is not illegal to be mentally ill, and as horrible as this incident was, I do not think that locking people up because they may, at some future time, commit an act of violence, is the best alternative.
Gun laws are always debated after such crimes take place. Too often, the irrational on both sides of the issue hijack serious attempts to find common ground for balancing public safety and Amendment 2 rights. Again, while it may be tempting to lock people up for holding irrational opinions, it isn’t a long-term solution.
So what is the answer? I certainly do not know. Based upon my reading ofErich Fromm’s 1955 classic, “The Sane Society,” I would venture that a society that has this rate of mass murders is sick, indeed. And social theories seem insignificant when so many human beings are suffering. Each event like this increases people’s levels of anxiety, at least for a time. Perhaps the only sane response is that found in the actions of those good people who go out of their way to help those in need -- be it their families, neighbors, or even complete strangers. For there is a power in compassion in action.
= new reply since forum marked as read
... when we so obviously fail to comprehend how awash we are in "normal" disorders and suboptimal behavior, and how such a context contaminates each of us. Indeed, I often think that getting the "proper" label is merely an excuse for filing yet another horror away in the memory bucket, only to be retrieved in a perverse kind of nostalgia as circumstances warrant.
As I sit back (as an outsider?) and observe human behavior, I find it noteworthy that the media spiel and assoiciated rhetoric is remarkably different as we see a nice, white boy ("honor student"
instead of a person of color. It'd be interesting to see comparative word clouds.
I remember, back in 1989, on the eve of Ted Bundy's execution, the comment of one older "woman on the street": "It's a shame to have to put such a nice-looking young man to death." Somehow, that said it all.
Thanks Waterman 
At a movie theatre against unknown and unsuspecting people, we call him "crazy". Had he been part of a military swat team that planned and carried this out against bin Laden/Al Queda, we'd call him a brilliant stretegist & give him a medal.
