No dates? Shoot a bunch of people. Santa Barbara Drive By.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

And you're both using the tragedy to push your agendas. And it needs to stop. Please. Let's keep this on topic rather than turning it once again into a 'who can outwank who in regards to rules-lawyering the debate'.

[Grenartia]

That would be in the OP.

Ok. Got it. (Skim) Read it. Fine. The problem is, that narrative ignores that the spree started when he stabbed three males to death inside his own home.
THEN he went to the sorority house.

My bet would be he was working down a checklist, and if he'd got into the sorority house and shot them all, he'd have next decided to go murder his family, or some other types of people he had a grievance with.

When he was denied entry to the sorority house, he broke from the plan and just started indiscriminately killing people.

To claim that his attempt to enter the sorority house demonstrates the motive for his attack is farfetched, given everything we know about the guy.
His motive was complex, and it involved hatred of basically everybody.

Yeh, i'm not reading the OP sources. I said as much last night. I'm researching all over the place on this thing.

Except, you know, he probably only killed the roommates first to keep them from interfering with the rest of his killing spree (as they probably would've been the first to view the video, and thus would've provided an early warning to the authorities).

We're focusing on his misogyny because this case involves the killing of women. If he killed someone else, we would be focusing on that.

Two of the seven deaths were women. Five were men.
I've pointed that out to show why this line of logic simply doesn't work.

In fact, the first three victims were males who he stabbed to death inside his own house.

As I've pointed out, since most of those deaths were in the drive by (and even then, the kills were split 50/50), they could only have been targets of opportunity, and the 3 remaining kills were probably to prevent his killing spree from being shut down prematurely, and thus more motivated by practicality than hatred.

Hey folks, a friendly reminder to cut the personal attacks. I can't make rulings on it, but others can, and will, if they don't stop. Ignore lists are something that are not to be waved about as a flag - it defeats the purpose. And also isn't being utilized correctly if you're quoting one another and responding to them. It's gloating, and it isn't pretty. So please.

Argument, not player. You know the score.

Just a question, but how are the people on another person's ignore list supposed to know that expecting a response from said person is a waste of time if they're not made aware that they're being ignored?

[Ostroeuropa]

And you're both using the tragedy to push your agendas. And it needs to stop. Please. Let's keep this on topic rather than turning it once again into a 'who can outwank who in regards to rules-lawyering the debate'.

I'm not pushing an agenda. I'm resisting a push of an agenda.
There is a difference.
If I were going to push an agenda i'd argue that feminism somehow caused him to go out and murder people, which is ridiculous and slanderous.
What i'm arguing against is people saying that the MRA and such caused him to go out and murder people. If you can't see the difference, then I don't know what to say.
I can shut up I suppose.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

And you're both using the tragedy to push your agendas. And it needs to stop. Please. Let's keep this on topic rather than turning it once again into a 'who can outwank who in regards to rules-lawyering the debate'.

I'm not sure how describing an attack carried out by someone who stated his wish to target women as a group as misogynistic is furthering an agenda.

I mean, yes, he targeted his roommates, as well, but as individuals he knew personally and against whom he had an obvious grudge. Women were targeted as a group. He stated as much in his manifesto.

[Ostroeuropa]

And you're both using the tragedy to push your agendas. And it needs to stop. Please. Let's keep this on topic rather than turning it once again into a 'who can outwank who in regards to rules-lawyering the debate'.

I'm not sure how describing an attack carried out by someone who stated his wish to target women as a group as misogynistic is furthering an agenda.

I mean, yes, he targeted his roommates, as well, but as individuals he knew personally and against whom he had an obvious grudge. Women were targeted as a group. He stated as much in his manifesto.

Which attack.
The attack or the sorority? You're absolutely right.
The attack in general? There is no evidence of that.
We often see checklist like behaviour from psychopaths who go on sprees. The fact he started with his roommates against whom he had a grudge, then went to the sorority, suggests that if he'd killed everyone in the sorority house, he may well have moved onto his next victims.
(Which, by the end of the list, includes basically everyone.)
When the plan derailed, he decided to just indiscriminately start shooting.

His misogyny is a problem. It's a motivation for part of the attack. It isn't the sole motivation, and I wish people would stop acting like it is.

[Dakini]

And you're both using the tragedy to push your agendas. And it needs to stop. Please. Let's keep this on topic rather than turning it once again into a 'who can outwank who in regards to rules-lawyering the debate'.

I'm not sure how describing an attack carried out by someone who stated his wish to target women as a group as misogynistic is furthering an agenda.

I mean, yes, he targeted his roommates, as well, but as individuals he knew personally and against whom he had an obvious grudge. Women were targeted as a group. He stated as much in his manifesto.

He also stated that he wanted to lure as many people into his apartment as possible to kill before going to the sorority house to kill all of the "blonde bimbos" therein.


It's really lucky for the people of this guy's neighbourhood that he was a total failure.

[Cannot think of a name]

Except, you know, he probably only killed the roommates first to keep them from interfering with the rest of his killing spree (as they probably would've been the first to view the video, and thus would've provided an early warning to the authorities).

Not that I want to assist the massive levels of intellectual dishonesty or anything, but just to keep things grounded...all the issues in bold, the ship had already sailed. His parents had seen the video and alerted authorities who had visited him and gave him a pass.

[Ostroeuropa]

As I've pointed out, since most of those deaths were in the drive by (and even then, the kills were split 50/50), they could only have been targets of opportunity, and the 3 remaining kills were probably to prevent his killing spree from being shut down prematurely, and thus more motivated by practicality than hatred.

The police were already aware of his death threats made to various sections of the population, and had already discussed it with him before.
They decided there was no threat.
Practicality wasn't a problem.

[Ostroeuropa]

Except, you know, he probably only killed the roommates first to keep them from interfering with the rest of his killing spree (as they probably would've been the first to view the video, and thus would've provided an early warning to the authorities).

Not that I want to assist the massive levels of intellectual dishonesty or anything, but just to keep things grounded...all the issues in bold, the ship had already sailed. His parents had seen the video and alerted authorities who had visited him and gave him a pass.

I don't see how it's intellectually dishonest to deny that misogyny was the motivation for his killing spree when there is no evidence of that, and a multitude of evidence in opposition to that idea.

If you want to say it motivated him to attack the sorority, then i'll agree. But that isn't what you are saying.

[Cannot think of a name]

I'm not sure how describing an attack carried out by someone who stated his wish to target women as a group as misogynistic is furthering an agenda.

I mean, yes, he targeted his roommates, as well, but as individuals he knew personally and against whom he had an obvious grudge. Women were targeted as a group. He stated as much in his manifesto.

He also stated that he wanted to lure as many people into his apartment as possible to kill before going to the sorority house to kill all of the "blonde bimbos" therein.


It's really lucky for the people of this guy's neighbourhood that he was a total failure.

Not that I want to make light of the situation (I guess any more than I already have with slights against BMWs etc...) but a guy who's upset that he can't get people to be with him having any part of his plan resting on his ability to lure people really isn't playing on his strengths...

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I'm not sure how describing an attack carried out by someone who stated his wish to target women as a group as misogynistic is furthering an agenda.

I mean, yes, he targeted his roommates, as well, but as individuals he knew personally and against whom he had an obvious grudge. Women were targeted as a group. He stated as much in his manifesto.

Which attack.
The attack or the sorority? You're absolutely right.
The attack in general? There is no evidence of that.
We often see checklist like behaviour from psychopaths who go on sprees. The fact he started with his roommates against whom he had a grudge, then went to the sorority, suggests that if he'd killed everyone in the sorority house, he may well have moved onto his next victims.
(Which, by the end of the list, includes basically everyone.)
When the plan derailed, he decided to just indiscriminately start shooting.

His misogyny is a problem. It's a motivation for part of the attack. It isn't the sole motivation, and I wish people would stop acting like it is.

I didn't say that it was the sole motivation.

It was obviously the main one, from what the manifesto stated. So much so that the rest of his motivations and targets were a mere side dish to the main course of taking down this group of "bimbos".

[Ostroeuropa]

Which attack.
The attack or the sorority? You're absolutely right.
The attack in general? There is no evidence of that.
We often see checklist like behaviour from psychopaths who go on sprees. The fact he started with his roommates against whom he had a grudge, then went to the sorority, suggests that if he'd killed everyone in the sorority house, he may well have moved onto his next victims.
(Which, by the end of the list, includes basically everyone.)
When the plan derailed, he decided to just indiscriminately start shooting.

His misogyny is a problem. It's a motivation for part of the attack. It isn't the sole motivation, and I wish people would stop acting like it is.

I didn't say that it was the sole motivation.

It was obviously the main one, from what the manifesto stated. So much so that the rest of his motivations and targets were a mere side dish to the main course of taking down this group of "bimbos".

What do you think the manifesto is.
His video where he threatens to attack the sorority, or the manifesto.
Because if it's the latter, I don't see how you came to that conclusion.

It's 140 pages of rambling about just about how every section of society deserves to die.

It's like if the Unabomber was caught after his first bomb, and people decided he was clearly motivated by a hatred of chicago university.
It's a little more complex than that.

[Dakini]

Except, you know, he probably only killed the roommates first to keep them from interfering with the rest of his killing spree (as they probably would've been the first to view the video, and thus would've provided an early warning to the authorities).

Not that I want to assist the massive levels of intellectual dishonesty or anything, but just to keep things grounded...all the issues in bold, the ship had already sailed. His parents had seen the video and alerted authorities who had visited him and gave him a pass.

iirc, his parents saw another video that was concerning and called the authorities about that. They didn't see the one where he actually stated his plan.

The roommates were killed as part of stage one where he was going to lure people into his apartment with "trickery" and kill them. Then his plan was to go off to the sorority house and kill all the women he could find there. Then step three was going to be the drive by shooting. Apparently he either abandoned stage one after killing the roommates (maybe that took too long? maybe everyone pegged him for a homicidal maniac and wouldn't go with him to his apartment? maybe nobody was out at that time and he got impatient? who knows?), then he failed at stage two because nobody would open the door for him and he instead shot three sorority sisters who were outside and then he moved right to the drive by shooting.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I didn't say that it was the sole motivation.

It was obviously the main one, from what the manifesto stated. So much so that the rest of his motivations and targets were a mere side dish to the main course of taking down this group of "bimbos".

What do you think the manifesto is.
His video where he threatens to attack the sorority, or the manifesto.
Because if it's the latter, I don't see how you came to that conclusion.

It's 140 pages of rambling about just about how every section of society deserves to die.

Combined with the video, it's obvious that this attack was about women.

Your anti-feminist paranoia notwithstanding, it's rather blatantly obvious.

My apologies for engaging with you and wasting both our time. I've done so before, and the lesson learned obviously didn't take.

[Arkinesia]

Boy, it sure would be nice if Americans would stop stigmatizing mental illness and encourage people around them showing signs of it to get help.

I mean, it's a statistic that bears repeating about a gazillion times—nearly one in three Americans has limited or no access to mental health care of any kind, and seeking said care makes you a “pussy” or “faggot” or whatever the hell kids say these days to insult their peers. It's embarrassing, it should be a national shame that we're doing this to ourselves (and, obligatory Memorial Day nod, our veterans, who are some of the hardest-hit by mental disorders).

Until Americans are willing to accept that not only are mass murderers suffering from mental disorders causing severe irrationality (people who commit these acts are not weighing pros and cons, let's not kid ourselves), and that failure to recognize signs and encourage seeking help will just result in more mass murders, we are never going to make progress on this problem.

Fuck gun control, knife control, car control, whatever control. We need some serious awareness dedicated to these issues because there is clearly not enough awareness to even begin to start pushing back against them.

[Dakini]

He also stated that he wanted to lure as many people into his apartment as possible to kill before going to the sorority house to kill all of the "blonde bimbos" therein.


It's really lucky for the people of this guy's neighbourhood that he was a total failure.

Not that I want to make light of the situation (I guess any more than I already have with slights against BMWs etc...) but a guy who's upset that he can't get people to be with him having any part of his plan resting on his ability to lure people really isn't playing on his strengths...

Yeah. I'm not sure why some people claim that this guy was bright, he very clearly wasn't.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Boy, it sure would be nice if Americans would stop stigmatizing mental illness and encourage people around them showing signs of it to get help.

I mean, it's a statistic that bears repeating about a gazillion times—nearly one in three Americans has limited or no access to mental health care of any kind, and seeking said care makes you a “pussy” or “faggot” or whatever the hell kids say these days to insult their peers. It's embarrassing, it should be a national shame that we're doing this to ourselves (and, obligatory Memorial Day nod, our veterans, who are some of the hardest-hit by mental disorders).

Until Americans are willing to accept that not only are mass murderers suffering from mental disorders causing severe irrationality (people who commit these acts are not weighing pros and cons, let's not kid ourselves), and that failure to recognize signs and encourage seeking help will just result in more mass murders, we are never going to make progress on this problem.

Fuck gun control, knife control, car control, whatever control. We need some serious awareness dedicated to these issues because there is clearly not enough awareness to even begin to start pushing back against them.

He was getting therapy, his parents called the police when they thought that he posed a threat. He fooled them into thinking that he didn't. There's a stigma regarding mental illness and treatment, but it doesn't seem to apply in this case.

[Spagatine states of Potato]

I find it very disturbing that this actually happened. I mean, It's shocking to know that this is actually becoming a trend. It's no longer that people hear about murder (1 or 2 people dying) but people in scores getting killed (7-20+). What can we do?

[Ostroeuropa]

What do you think the manifesto is.
His video where he threatens to attack the sorority, or the manifesto.
Because if it's the latter, I don't see how you came to that conclusion.

It's 140 pages of rambling about just about how every section of society deserves to die.

Combined with the video, it's obvious that this attack was about women.

Your anti-feminist paranoia notwithstanding, it's rather blatantly obvious.

My apologies for engaging with you and wasting both our time. I've done so before, and the lesson learned obviously didn't take.

The attack on the sorority? Yes.
But we can't know the attack in general was about women. I don't see why people are having a hard time with that.

[Grenartia]

I'm going to address these in the order they grabbed my attention.

1. Except he's not a PUA. He joined an anti-PUA site. Also, strawman, because I never said he was a PUA.

2. They don't have to endorse his actions in order for him to agree with their rhetoric.

3. He was a total Red Piller. His very words indicate that.

4. Except I don't. Also, like you, for all your ranting about "feminist propaganda", don't have yours on?



Boom.



1. Except, you know, the vast majority of his motivation was misogyny.

2. Might wanna take off your ideological blinders. Check yourself before you wreck yourself.



1. Removeth thine ideological blinders.

2. No, its more shock that as much as you seem to have delved into this story, that you actually haven't seen a news article or TV report stating that fact.

3. See above.

1. Red pill is not MRA.

Also this pretty much addresses the rest of your post.

2. So yeh. That bit about "The vast majority of his motivation"?
Doesn't hold up under any scrutiny.
3. What things is my ideology blinding me to. Go ahead. You can point out which parts i'm ignoring to further a narrative if you like, and i'll stop.
I hadn't delved into the actual night of the attack. I looked up his motivations and the victim list first. THEN when pointed to a record of the actual sequence of events, I read it.
THEN I noted that it absolutely didn't fit with what you people are claiming.

You decided that his hatred of women provoked him into a murder spree.
4. That isn't the case.
His hatred of women provoked him into including them on a list of victims.
5. You are acting like women are being singled out, when the evidence doesn't back that at all.
6. The motivation for his spree wasn't misogyny. It's typical of this subset of feminism to act like this.

"We're a victim of this problem. Therefore, we shall act like we are the only victim and it's all about us."

7. You've decided that because I disagree with you i'm wearing ideological blinders. I'm not. I'm actually looking at all the evidence and coming to a conclusion.
8. How do you come to your conclusion that this spree was provoked by a hatred of women, given that he hated basically everyone, and 9. began his spree by murdering three males inside his home, THEN went to the sorority house.

If you want to say his attempt to enter the sorority house was motivated by his hatred of women, yes. That's true.
But that isn't what you people are saying.

1. Except it is. They both share the same rhetoric about how men are all being oppressed by women, and how men deserve their privileges and women are all heartless manipulators who deserve lesser treatment.

2. Except, it does. You've not provided anything that proves that his misogyny didn't provide most of the motivation, as you're claiming.

3. Mostly everything you're handwaving away as "feminist propaganda".

4. Except, it is.

5. Lets go with your logic that the gender with the most victims is the focus of his anger. And lets extend that to his intended victims (i.e., the ones that had he killed them, he would be guilty of first degree murder). Certainly, this sorority house had more than 5 women, did it not? Almost a guarantee that it had more than 3, the minimum required to shift the gender ratio of his planned victims. So, if he were totally successful, this gender ratio of victims shifts from mostly men to mostly women. And the only reason it didn't was because he wasn't able to get inside the sorority house. The fact is, most of his intended victims were women. We've already established that his motive for killing the women was misogyny. Therefore, this act was mostly motivated by misogyny.

6. You're putting on your ideological blinders, again.

7. I'm only referencing ideological blinders because you first condemned me for using them, because I disagreed with you, and because you're basically using pot and kettle tactics (calling me out for blaming MRAs, while you yourself are blaming feminists). People who live in glass houses shouldn't be throwing stones.

8. See above, where I established that since most of his intended vicitms were to be women, it was inherently an act of misogyny. To use your Godwin from earlier, its pointing out that while the Jews were not the only people killed in the Holocaust, they were intended to be its primary victims, thus making the Holocaust inherently an act of anti-Semitism.

9. Again, they were probably killed for the practical reasons of allowing him to continue his killing spree.

[Ostroeuropa]

1. Red pill is not MRA.

Also this pretty much addresses the rest of your post.



2. So yeh. That bit about "The vast majority of his motivation"?
Doesn't hold up under any scrutiny.
3. What things is my ideology blinding me to. Go ahead. You can point out which parts i'm ignoring to further a narrative if you like, and i'll stop.
I hadn't delved into the actual night of the attack. I looked up his motivations and the victim list first. THEN when pointed to a record of the actual sequence of events, I read it.
THEN I noted that it absolutely didn't fit with what you people are claiming.

You decided that his hatred of women provoked him into a murder spree.
4. That isn't the case.
His hatred of women provoked him into including them on a list of victims.
5. You are acting like women are being singled out, when the evidence doesn't back that at all.
6. The motivation for his spree wasn't misogyny. It's typical of this subset of feminism to act like this.

"We're a victim of this problem. Therefore, we shall act like we are the only victim and it's all about us."

7. You've decided that because I disagree with you i'm wearing ideological blinders. I'm not. I'm actually looking at all the evidence and coming to a conclusion.
8. How do you come to your conclusion that this spree was provoked by a hatred of women, given that he hated basically everyone, and 9. began his spree by murdering three males inside his home, THEN went to the sorority house.

If you want to say his attempt to enter the sorority house was motivated by his hatred of women, yes. That's true.
But that isn't what you people are saying.

1. Except it is. They both share the same rhetoric about how men are all being oppressed by women, and how men deserve their privileges and women are all heartless manipulators who deserve lesser treatment.

2. Except, it does. You've not provided anything that proves that his misogyny didn't provide most of the motivation, as you're claiming.

3. Mostly everything you're handwaving away as "feminist propaganda".

4. Except, it is.

5. Lets go with your logic that the gender with the most victims is the focus of his anger. And lets extend that to his intended victims (i.e., the ones that had he killed them, he would be guilty of first degree murder). Certainly, this sorority house had more than 5 women, did it not? Almost a guarantee that it had more than 3, the minimum required to shift the gender ratio of his planned victims. So, if he were totally successful, this gender ratio of victims shifts from mostly men to mostly women. And the only reason it didn't was because he wasn't able to get inside the sorority house. The fact is, most of his intended victims were women. We've already established that his motive for killing the women was misogyny. Therefore, this act was mostly motivated by misogyny.

6. You're putting on your ideological blinders, again.

7. I'm only referencing ideological blinders because you first condemned me for using them, because I disagreed with you, and because you're basically using pot and kettle tactics (calling me out for blaming MRAs, while you yourself are blaming feminists). People who live in glass houses shouldn't be throwing stones.

8. See above, where I established that since most of his intended vicitms were to be women, it was inherently an act of misogyny. To use your Godwin from earlier, its pointing out that while the Jews were not the only people killed in the Holocaust, they were intended to be its primary victims, thus making the Holocaust inherently an act of anti-Semitism.

9. Again, they were probably killed for the practical reasons of allowing him to continue his killing spree.

1. Can you find a single explicitly MRA site or forum that will accept the Red Pill as MRA's.
2. Burden of proof. You are making the positive claim here.
3. Such as?
4. Oh ok. So now we're just asserting things and acting like it's an argument. That's cool.
5. The intended victims of the sorority attack? Absolutely. That was motivated by a hatred of women. The motivation of the killing spree? Entirely unknown, and based on the evidence we have such as his manifesto, i'm going with "He hates absolutely everybody."
6. What is this statement showing blindness too? Go ahead. Which facts is this statement ignoring. You aren't using that term properly.
7. No. Not the same thing at all. You are blaming MRA's for causing this guy to go out and murder people. I'm saying that's a shitty thing to do, and i'm blaming feminists for starting the blame game. If you don't understand why these are two different actions, then I have nothing else to say to convince you.
8. His attack on the sorority? Yes. Motivated by hatred of women. Just like the gassing of the gypsies was motivated by hatred of gypsies. You are using one SUBSET of victims by one PART of the spree/genocide to argue the entire excercise was motivated by it.
9. Already debunked above.

[Ostroeuropa]

To branch out this argument slightly, does anyone think that issueing death threats in this manner should result in compulsory institutionalization for a while to undergo analysis?

[Grenartia]

Except, you know, he probably only killed the roommates first to keep them from interfering with the rest of his killing spree (as they probably would've been the first to view the video, and thus would've provided an early warning to the authorities).

Not that I want to assist the massive levels of intellectual dishonesty or anything, but just to keep things grounded...all the issues in bold, the ship had already sailed. His parents had seen the video and alerted authorities who had visited him and gave him a pass.

Correct, but he wouldn't have known that his family had seen it.

As I've pointed out, since most of those deaths were in the drive by (and even then, the kills were split 50/50), they could only have been targets of opportunity, and the 3 remaining kills were probably to prevent his killing spree from being shut down prematurely, and thus more motivated by practicality than hatred.

The police were already aware of his death threats made to various sections of the population, and had already discussed it with him before.
They decided there was no threat.
Practicality wasn't a problem.

Source that he'd made death threats before they visited him? The story I heard was that the death threats didn't happen until his last video, and that the videos which caused him to be visited were concerning, but didn't actually contain any threats.

Also, I find it hard to believe on general principle that they wouldn't have left him alone if he had actually posted death threats in his videos.

He also stated that he wanted to lure as many people into his apartment as possible to kill before going to the sorority house to kill all of the "blonde bimbos" therein.


It's really lucky for the people of this guy's neighbourhood that he was a total failure.

Not that I want to make light of the situation (I guess any more than I already have with slights against BMWs etc...) but a guy who's upset that he can't get people to be with him having any part of his plan resting on his ability to lure people really isn't playing on his strengths...

Indeed.

They didn't see the one where he actually stated his plan.

From what I saw, they did see it shortly after he posted it, and frantically tried to call the cops to stop him before it was too late.

Boy, it sure would be nice if Americans would stop stigmatizing mental illness and encourage people around them showing signs of it to get help.

I mean, it's a statistic that bears repeating about a gazillion times—nearly one in three Americans has limited or no access to mental health care of any kind, and seeking said care makes you a “pussy” or “faggot” or whatever the hell kids say these days to insult their peers. It's embarrassing, it should be a national shame that we're doing this to ourselves (and, obligatory Memorial Day nod, our veterans, who are some of the hardest-hit by mental disorders).

Until Americans are willing to accept that not only are mass murderers suffering from mental disorders causing severe irrationality (people who commit these acts are not weighing pros and cons, let's not kid ourselves), and that failure to recognize signs and encourage seeking help will just result in more mass murders, we are never going to make progress on this problem.

Fuck gun control, knife control, car control, whatever control. We need some serious awareness dedicated to these issues because there is clearly not enough awareness to even begin to start pushing back against them.

He was getting therapy, his parents called the police when they thought that he posed a threat. He fooled them into thinking that he didn't. There's a stigma regarding mental illness and treatment, but it doesn't seem to apply in this case.

As I said before, its not merely a problem of people not getting access to mental health services. This guy is obviously proof of that. This is also a problem of the few people who do get access to those services not getting access to competent professionals.

[Ostroeuropa]

Gren:

Update: An attorney representing Rodger's family said that law enforcement contacted after they expressed concern over this YouTube videos found him to be "polite and kind" after they talked with Rodger and took no further action, according to ABC News. The attorney also said that Rodger was enrolled at Santa Barbara City College, and was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome and being treated by "multiple therapists." A social worker had also contacted police about Rodger just last week. The family of Rodger wished to send their "deepest condolences" to the families of the victims at this time.

http://laist.com/2014/05/24/what_we_kno ... ger_th.php


From ABC:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/killed-mass-mu ... d=23853918

Schifman said in recent weeks that Rodger’s parents were concerned for their son's well being and reported his disturbing YouTube videos to police, which lead to an investigation. According to Schifman, police interviewed Rodger and found him to be “polite and kind.” He did not specify which law enforcement division conducted the interview.

A social worker also contacted police about Rodger last week, said Schifman.

[Condunum]

To branch out this argument slightly, does anyone think that issueing death threats in this manner should result in compulsory institutionalization for a while to undergo analysis?

At risk of committing double-think, yes.