9 Dead in SC Church Shooting - Hate Crime Confirmed.

[Blakk Metal]

Uh, no.

Are you not thinking of crime generally? Poverty is a massive cause of crime.

He's taking "poverty can lead to radicalization, which can lead to becoming a terrorist" and claiming it's saying "poverty causes terrorism".

And you're taking "mental illness can lead to irrational crimes" and claiming it's saying "mental illness causes irrational crimes".

[Camicon]

He's taking "poverty can lead to radicalization, which can lead to becoming a terrorist" and claiming it's saying "poverty causes terrorism".

And you're taking "mental illness can lead to irrational crimes" and claiming it's saying "mental illness causes irrational crimes".

Being mentally ill may, in rare cases, make a person more likely to commit terrible acts of violence, but it does not determine who those attacks are directed towards. Blaming a mass shooting on mental illness makes about as much sense as blaming World War II on Hitler flunking out of art school.

[Ifreann]

This kid obviously has some serious mental instabilities I mean going in a shooting a church in order to start a race war arent the signs of a healthy human being and I'm sure the drugs he got caught with in February didn't help his situation ether. If or rather when he is convicted I hope he never has the opportunity to be involved in general society he's a threat and I doubt he'd be able to be reabilitatied although I'm unsure if I'm for the death penalty in this case.

In any case the gun control argument here is a little pointless since no gun control laws short of a total ban would be able to have stopped him from obtaining the firearm the way he did and even then I'm sure a person such as himself would have found other means to carry out this awful attack.

So, if I follow you, he's obviously mentally unstable, but he's also so competent that no possible action by anyone at any stage could possibly have kept him from carrying out this attack. How's that work?

---

In the process I was obliquely highlighting the media's affinity to almost excuse white shooters and demonise non-white shooters.

That's not just an accusation you can just nonchalantly make. Again it's a deeply polemical statement, asserting that the reason people are labeling him as mentally unstable is because there is a mass media conspiracy to 'almost-excuse' white shooters is deeply partisan.

It's not a conspiracy, it's just racism.

It's a totally unjustified, unfalsifiable, unproven claim that will only ignite massive racial tension when it's spammed hundreds of thousands of times all over twitter, again it's exactly the kind of shit Roof would want.

No it fucking isn't. It's the opposite, if anything.

[The Grim Reaper]

And you're taking "mental illness can lead to irrational crimes" and claiming it's saying "mental illness causes irrational crimes".

Being mentally ill may, in rare cases, make a person more likely to commit terrible acts of violence, but it does not determine who those attacks are directed towards. Blaming a mass shooting on mental illness makes about as much sense as blaming World War II on Hitler flunking out of art school.

Blakk's talking about Imperializt's assertion that the mainstream media tends to discuss white shooters in the frame of 'mental illness causes irrational crimes', and arguing that the MSM instead argues 'mental illness can lead to irrational crimes'.

I don't think either are arguing that it /does/, rather they're arguing on the veracity that the MSM argues it does.

[Dyakovo]

He's taking "poverty can lead to radicalization, which can lead to becoming a terrorist" and claiming it's saying "poverty causes terrorism".

And you're taking "mental illness can lead to irrational crimes" and claiming it's saying "mental illness causes irrational crimes".

No, I'm not.

[Insaeldor]

To be fair you have to be fucked in the head to be a terrorist also. Then again we'd also have to make the distinction be what actually differs a terrorist from an insurgent and all those lovely little semantics. And again I'm not say this wasn't a terroristic act but I feel based on the evidence this has a a lot to do his issues steaming from mental illness that manifested itself in the way that it did. But is this really the dialogue we want rather than trying to form some sort of solution to the problem?

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/its_not ... ite_males/

So mental illness can't be a way for a person to take action on these ideas like Racism and Toxic Masculinity? After all you can go to any city or town in any state and find offensively racist people I'll just use my great grandpa who still thinks the phrases nigger, negro, and colored are appropriate terms for African Americans. The man is racist in large part due to his upbringing and I suspect it wouldn't be different for Roof ether (I could be wrong however) but the man would want to start a race war over it. To say this guy didn't have any sort of mental instability at some level is a little silly since its doubt that a mentally stable person with hard opinions would act out so violently based on them. He's no better than say Tamerlan Tsarnaev and it's assumed that the elder Tsarnaev brother was mentally unstable to some degree. now I'm not to keen on the fairly soft language the article uses but it at least shows that it's possible that while these people are influenced by ideology they would most likely not go through with there acts without being in some way mentally unhinged. This isn't in anyway a route to absolve him of wrong doing he obviously needs to pay for his actions and I'll leave the judgement up to the court system.

As said however I don't believe this person would have done what he was been accused of if it wasn't for some deep seeded mental problems wether they had been the result of bad genetics and birth, a shirty childhood that made him grow up angry and agressive, or a combination of the two. Plus as I pointed out earlier you have drugs involved as well might have contributed to his actions as well.

[Atlanticatia]

Muslim shooter - terrorist.
White shooter - mental instability.

I completely agree.

Good article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/1 ... 16460.html

Yet mainstream media has already begun wondering what really might have motivated him to kill -- as we often do with white murderers. Fox News analysts ignored the racist flags on Roof’s clothing and suggested the attack was religiously motivated, while The Daily Beast made sure to let America know Roof was “quiet” and “softspoken.” Other outlets cited his use of a medication that assists with addiction recovery.

And, of course, some have already questioned whether Roof was mentally ill.

When white people go on shooting sprees, their actions are frequently attributed to mental illness and, thus, they’re not considered fully accountable for the harm they’ve inflicted. This narrative -- which is not afforded to people of color -- feeds into the assumption that incidents like what happened at Emanuel AME Church are isolated tragedies executed by lone gunmen. Essentially, it excuses the system that allows racialized terrorism to keep happening.

If a Muslim did this, people would not be calling him mentally ill - they'd scream "terrorist". If a black person did this, it's likely we'd hear calls of "thug!". However, when a white person does something, we are in disbelief and go "uhhh..mental illness!" This person needs to be held accountable for his actions, which were based on racism. It is terrorism - violence based on an ideological goal. We should not make excuses for him.

[Insaeldor]

This kid obviously has some serious mental instabilities I mean going in a shooting a church in order to start a race war arent the signs of a healthy human being and I'm sure the drugs he got caught with in February didn't help his situation ether. If or rather when he is convicted I hope he never has the opportunity to be involved in general society he's a threat and I doubt he'd be able to be reabilitatied although I'm unsure if I'm for the death penalty in this case.

In any case the gun control argument here is a little pointless since no gun control laws short of a total ban would be able to have stopped him from obtaining the firearm the way he did and even then I'm sure a person such as himself would have found other means to carry out this awful attack.

So, if I follow you, he's obviously mentally unstable, but he's also so competent that no possible action by anyone at any stage could possibly have kept him from carrying out this attack. How's that work?

---

That's not just an accusation you can just nonchalantly make. Again it's a deeply polemical statement, asserting that the reason people are labeling him as mentally unstable is because there is a mass media conspiracy to 'almost-excuse' white shooters is deeply partisan.

It's not a conspiracy, it's just racism.

It's a totally unjustified, unfalsifiable, unproven claim that will only ignite massive racial tension when it's spammed hundreds of thousands of times all over twitter, again it's exactly the kind of shit Roof would want.

No it fucking isn't. It's the opposite, if anything.

Mental instability and incompetence don't always go hand and hand. Plus it's not like this was an extensively detailed plan ether. From the information I've been able to read he got a gun from his dad and shot the place up, his motivations might be complex but his actions aren't.

[Camicon]

Being mentally ill may, in rare cases, make a person more likely to commit terrible acts of violence, but it does not determine who those attacks are directed towards. Blaming a mass shooting on mental illness makes about as much sense as blaming World War II on Hitler flunking out of art school.

Blakk's talking about Imperializt's assertion that the mainstream media tends to discuss white shooters in the frame of 'mental illness causes irrational crimes', and arguing that the MSM instead argues 'mental illness can lead to irrational crimes'.

I don't think either are arguing that it /does/, rather they're arguing on the veracity that the MSM argues it does.

Well, he'd be wrong on that count as well.

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/its_not ... ite_males/

So mental illness can't be a way for a person to take action on these ideas like Racism and Toxic Masculinity? After all you can go to any city or town in any state and find offensively racist people I'll just use my great grandpa who still thinks the phrases nigger, negro, and colored are appropriate terms for African Americans. The man is racist in large part due to his upbringing and I suspect it wouldn't be different for Roof ether (I could be wrong however) but the man would want to start a race war over it. To say this guy didn't have any sort of mental instability at some level is a little silly since its doubt that a mentally stable person with hard opinions would act out so violently based on them. He's no better than say Tamerlan Tsarnaev and it's assumed that the elder Tsarnaev brother was mentally unstable to some degree. now I'm not to keen on the fairly soft language the article uses but it at least shows that it's possible that while these people are influenced by ideology they would most likely not go through with there acts without being in some way mentally unhinged. This isn't in anyway a route to absolve him of wrong doing he obviously needs to pay for his actions and I'll leave the judgement up to the court system.

As said however I don't believe this person would have done what he was been accused of if it wasn't for some deep seeded mental problems wether they had been the result of bad genetics and birth, a shirty childhood that made him grow up angry and agressive, or a combination of the two. Plus as I pointed out earlier you have drugs involved as well might have contributed to his actions as well.

Did you even read the article?

[Imperializt Russia]

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/its_not ... ite_males/

So mental illness can't be a way for a person to take action on these ideas like Racism and Toxic Masculinity? After all you can go to any city or town in any state and find offensively racist people I'll just use my great grandpa who still thinks the phrases nigger, negro, and colored are appropriate terms for African Americans. The man is racist in large part due to his upbringing and I suspect it wouldn't be different for Roof ether (I could be wrong however) but the man would want to start a race war over it. To say this guy didn't have any sort of mental instability at some level is a little silly since its doubt that a mentally stable person with hard opinions would act out so violently based on them. He's no better than say Tamerlan Tsarnaev and it's assumed that the elder Tsarnaev brother was mentally unstable to some degree. now I'm not to keen on the fairly soft language the article uses but it at least shows that it's possible that while these people are influenced by ideology they would most likely not go through with there acts without being in some way mentally unhinged. This isn't in anyway a route to absolve him of wrong doing he obviously needs to pay for his actions and I'll leave the judgement up to the court system.

As said however I don't believe this person would have done what he was been accused of if it wasn't for some deep seeded mental problems wether they had been the result of bad genetics and birth, a shirty childhood that made him grow up angry and agressive, or a combination of the two. Plus as I pointed out earlier you have drugs involved as well might have contributed to his actions as well.

Like I said earlier, when we can't think of a reason why "normal" people don't undertake these actions, we can't think of a good reason why you or I wouldn't in the same position.
To make ourselves feel better about this, we assume "oh, they're insane".

I still subscribed to that logic by the time of the Isla Vista shooting. I now realise I was very wrong.

[Sabara]

This kid obviously has some serious mental instabilities I mean going in a shooting a church in order to start a race war arent the signs of a healthy human being and I'm sure the drugs he got caught with in February didn't help his situation ether. If or rather when he is convicted I hope he never has the opportunity to be involved in general society he's a threat and I doubt he'd be able to be reabilitatied although I'm unsure if I'm for the death penalty in this case.

In any case the gun control argument here is a little pointless since no gun control laws short of a total ban would be able to have stopped him from obtaining the firearm the way he did and even then I'm sure a person such as himself would have found other means to carry out this awful attack.

So, if I follow you, he's obviously mentally unstable, but he's also so competent that no possible action by anyone at any stage could possibly have kept him from carrying out this attack. How's that work?

---

Being Mentally ill =/= inability to be cunning.

[Novus America]

To be fair you have to be fucked in the head to be a terrorist also. Then again we'd also have to make the distinction be what actually differs a terrorist from an insurgent and all those lovely little semantics. And again I'm not say this wasn't a terroristic act but I feel based on the evidence this has a a lot to do his issues steaming from mental illness that manifested itself in the way that it did. But is this really the dialogue we want rather than trying to form some sort of solution to the problem?

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/its_not ... ite_males/

That article lacks citations, statistics, and is full of strawman and would have you believe that people like Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler were sane, rational people. Because apparently violent and insane people never do violent insane things? I mean how does this make sense? Are serial killers also sane? I guess violent people cannot be insane because calling them such is an attack on all mental ill? That is what this article says.

Devotion to a cause is one thing, but doing something like this does not help a cause, it hurts it. It is self defeating and beyond any logic.

And no nobody is saying this means all mentally ill do these things. And this applies to people regardless of race, I am pretty sure Idi Amin was also insane.

But there are crimes that are logical even though immoral for example if you steal something beneficial and think you can get away with it. But mass shootings are different. There is no logical motive. And no I am going to shoot up a black church to cause a race war is not in the least bit logical.

I am sorry, but you are never going to convince me this behavior is sane. Shooting up a church is not sane, regardless of your ideology. Look I have beliefs I am devoted to. But I do not shoot up a church over them.

And the article into ignores these shooters are often flagged as mentally ill by mental health professionals before.

Finally what is you alternative for people like this? How would you deal with them? Just lock them up and execute after they comitt the crime? That needs to be done, but is a reactionary strategy that does not prevent the incidents from occurring.

[Camicon]

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/its_not ... ite_males/

That article lacks citations, statistics, and is full of strawman and would have you believe that people like Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler were sane, rational people. Because apparently violent and insane people never do violent insane things? I mean how does this make sense? Are serial killers also sane? I guess violent people cannot be insane because calling them such is an attack on all mental ill? That is what this article says.

Devotion to a cause is one thing, but doing something like this does not help a cause, it hurts it. It is self defeating and beyond any logic.

And no nobody is saying this means all mentally ill do these things. And this applies to people regardless of race, I am pretty sure Idi Amin was also insane.

But there are crimes that are logical even though immoral for example if you steal something beneficial and think you can get away with it. But mass shootings are different. There is no logical motive. And no I am going to shoot up a black church to cause a race war is not in the least bit logical.

I am sorry, but you are never going to convince me this behavior is sane. Shooting up a church is not sane, regardless of your ideology. Look I have beliefs I am devoted to. But I do not shoot up a church over them.

And the article into ignores these shooters are often flagged as mentally ill by mental health professionals before.

Finally what is you alternative for people like this? How would you deal with them? Just lock them up and execute after they comitt the crime? That needs to be done, but is a reactionary strategy that does not prevent the incidents from occurring.

Hitler didn't personally kill millions of innocent people. What the article is saying, what you missed, is that terrible acts of violence (indeed, the most terrible acts of violence) are often committed by people that are both sane and rational. Doing things that you don't personally understand, that society as a whole cannot follow the logic of, does not make a person "insane" or "mentally unstable".

[Imperializt Russia]

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/its_not ... ite_males/

That article lacks citations, statistics, and is full of strawman and would have you believe that people like Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler were sane, rational people.

Sanity and rationality can occur independently.

Hitler was probably sane. Drug-addled and blinded by laughably wrong ideology, but probably sane. Definitely not rational.

[Mavorpen]

So mental illness can't be a way for a person to take action on these ideas like Racism and Toxic Masculinity? After all you can go to any city or town in any state and find offensively racist people I'll just use my great grandpa who still thinks the phrases nigger, negro, and colored are appropriate terms for African Americans. The man is racist in large part due to his upbringing and I suspect it wouldn't be different for Roof ether (I could be wrong however) but the man would want to start a race war over it. To say this guy didn't have any sort of mental instability at some level is a little silly since its doubt that a mentally stable person with hard opinions would act out so violently based on them. He's no better than say Tamerlan Tsarnaev and it's assumed that the elder Tsarnaev brother was mentally unstable to some degree. now I'm not to keen on the fairly soft language the article uses but it at least shows that it's possible that while these people are influenced by ideology they would most likely not go through with there acts without being in some way mentally unhinged. This isn't in anyway a route to absolve him of wrong doing he obviously needs to pay for his actions and I'll leave the judgement up to the court system.

As said however I don't believe this person would have done what he was been accused of if it wasn't for some deep seeded mental problems wether they had been the result of bad genetics and birth, a shirty childhood that made him grow up angry and agressive, or a combination of the two. Plus as I pointed out earlier you have drugs involved as well might have contributed to his actions as well.

Like I said earlier, when we can't think of a reason why "normal" people don't undertake these actions, we can't think of a good reason why you or I wouldn't in the same position.
To make ourselves feel better about this, we assume "oh, they're insane".

I still subscribed to that logic by the time of the Isla Vista shooting. I now realise I was very wrong.

This is basic psychology FFS.

Stanford Prison Experiment? Milgram's Obedience Study? Any of that ring a bell, people? You don't have to suffer from some inherent mental illness to do horrible things. ANYONE is capable of any of these things given the right set of circumstances.

[Novus America]

Muslim shooter - terrorist.
White shooter - mental instability.

I completely agree.

Good article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/1 ... 16460.html

Yet mainstream media has already begun wondering what really might have motivated him to kill -- as we often do with white murderers. Fox News analysts ignored the racist flags on Roof’s clothing and suggested the attack was religiously motivated, while The Daily Beast made sure to let America know Roof was “quiet” and “softspoken.” Other outlets cited his use of a medication that assists with addiction recovery.

And, of course, some have already questioned whether Roof was mentally ill.

When white people go on shooting sprees, their actions are frequently attributed to mental illness and, thus, they’re not considered fully accountable for the harm they’ve inflicted. This narrative -- which is not afforded to people of color -- feeds into the assumption that incidents like what happened at Emanuel AME Church are isolated tragedies executed by lone gunmen. Essentially, it excuses the system that allows racialized terrorism to keep happening.

If a Muslim did this, people would not be calling him mentally ill - they'd scream "terrorist". If a black person did this, it's likely we'd hear calls of "thug!". However, when a white person does something, we are in disbelief and go "uhhh..mental illness!" This person needs to be held accountable for his actions, which were based on racism. It is terrorism - violence based on an ideological goal. We should not make excuses for him.

Nidal Hassan was called insane. (DO NOT call him Major, he is NOT a Major, he has been stripped of all rank).

Look insanity is not an excuse. Hitler was insane, but I am not making excuses for him. He like this shooter was a very evil and very insane man.

And again what alternative to you propose? That we call thes mass shooters normal functioning people who should not be commited when the show a danger to themselves and others? That we should only use punitive measures after we allow the events to occur?

[Novus America]

That article lacks citations, statistics, and is full of strawman and would have you believe that people like Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler were sane, rational people.

Sanity and rationality can occur independently.

Hitler was probably sane. Drug-addled and blinded by laughably wrong ideology, but probably sane. Definitely not rational.

And Charles Manson?

But you are never going to convince me Hitler was sane. Yes he was high as a kite, and probably had syphilis eating his brain (mental illness) but that does not explain what he did. Other people with those conditions do not orchestrate mass murder.

[Camicon]

*snip*
Nidal Hassan was called insane. (DO NOT call him Major, he is NOT a Major, he has been stripped of all rank).

Look insanity is not an excuse. Hitler was insane, but I am not making excuses for him. He like this shooter was a very evil and very insane man.

And again what alternative to you propose? That we call thes mass shooters normal functioning people who should not be commited when the show a danger to themselves and others? That we should only use punitive measures after we allow the events to occur?

Someone who is actually insane, as in they are suffering from insanity, is not in control of their actions. According to the justice systems of (I believe) every developed nation, a person can't be held legally responsible for things they do, if they do those things while suffering from insanity.

Hitler was not insane. He was very much in his right mind; he simply subscribed, wholeheartedly, to a horrific ideology. The society around him allowed this ideology to flourish, and gave him the tools and powers he needed in order to act as he and the Nazi party saw fit in the furtherance of that ideology. Just because you don't understand him does not mean he was insane.

[Mavorpen]

Sanity and rationality can occur independently.

Hitler was probably sane. Drug-addled and blinded by laughably wrong ideology, but probably sane. Definitely not rational.

And Charles Manson?

But you are never going to convince me Hitler was sane. Yes he was high as a kite, and probably had syphilis eating his brain (mental illness) but that does not explain what he did. Other people with those conditions do not orchestrate mass murder.

And the people who followed him? And the German citizens who agreed with him and allowed him to do as he pleased? What about them?

[Blakk Metal]

*snip*
Nidal Hassan was called insane. (DO NOT call him Major, he is NOT a Major, he has been stripped of all rank).

Look insanity is not an excuse. Hitler was insane, but I am not making excuses for him. He like this shooter was a very evil and very insane man.

And again what alternative to you propose? That we call thes mass shooters normal functioning people who should not be commited when the show a danger to themselves and others? That we should only use punitive measures after we allow the events to occur?

Someone who is actually insane, as in they are suffering from insanity, is not in control of their actions. According to the justice systems of (I believe) every developed nation, a person can't be held legally responsible for things they do, if they do those things while suffering from insanity.

Hitler was not insane. He was very much in his right mind; he simply subscribed, wholeheartedly, to a horrific ideology. The society around him allowed this ideology to flourish, and gave him the tools and powers he needed in order to act as he and the Nazi party saw fit in the furtherance of that ideology. Just because you don't understand him does not mean he was insane.

No, he was very well insane. He believed there was international conspiracy of Jews working to screw him and his country over for shits and giggles.

[Novus America]

That article lacks citations, statistics, and is full of strawman and would have you believe that people like Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler were sane, rational people. Because apparently violent and insane people never do violent insane things? I mean how does this make sense? Are serial killers also sane? I guess violent people cannot be insane because calling them such is an attack on all mental ill? That is what this article says.

Devotion to a cause is one thing, but doing something like this does not help a cause, it hurts it. It is self defeating and beyond any logic.

And no nobody is saying this means all mentally ill do these things. And this applies to people regardless of race, I am pretty sure Idi Amin was also insane.

But there are crimes that are logical even though immoral for example if you steal something beneficial and think you can get away with it. But mass shootings are different. There is no logical motive. And no I am going to shoot up a black church to cause a race war is not in the least bit logical.

I am sorry, but you are never going to convince me this behavior is sane. Shooting up a church is not sane, regardless of your ideology. Look I have beliefs I am devoted to. But I do not shoot up a church over them.

And the article into ignores these shooters are often flagged as mentally ill by mental health professionals before.

Finally what is you alternative for people like this? How would you deal with them? Just lock them up and execute after they comitt the crime? That needs to be done, but is a reactionary strategy that does not prevent the incidents from occurring.

Hitler didn't personally kill millions of innocent people. What the article is saying, what you missed, is that terrible acts of violence (indeed, the most terrible acts of violence) are often committed by people that are both sane and rational. Doing things that you don't personally understand, that society as a whole cannot follow the logic of, does not make a person "insane" or "mentally unstable".

Yes, terrible things are done by sane rational people. An SS soldier doing what he is told by those he is conditioned to obey against those he is conditioned to hate. Do you know why the Nazis turned to gas chambers? To make it less metally stressful on the SS soldiers, the normal ones who despite their conditioning were discovered to suffer adverse effects from being made to commit such acts. Normal people even when ordered and conditioned to these things recoil from it.

But this shooter does not fit this profile at all. He was not ordered, he did this on his own initiative and volition.

[Camicon]

Hitler didn't personally kill millions of innocent people. What the article is saying, what you missed, is that terrible acts of violence (indeed, the most terrible acts of violence) are often committed by people that are both sane and rational. Doing things that you don't personally understand, that society as a whole cannot follow the logic of, does not make a person "insane" or "mentally unstable".

Yes, terrible things are done by sane rational people. An SS soldier doing what he is told by those he is conditioned to obey against those he is conditioned to hate. Do you know why the Nazis turned to gas chambers? To make it less metally stressful on the SS soldiers, the normal ones who despite their conditioning were discovered to suffer adverse effects from being made to commit such acts. Normal people even when ordered and conditioned to these things recoil from it.

But this shooter does not fit this profile at all. He was not ordered, he did this on his own initiative and volition.

Are you going to sit there and tell me that every Nazi soldier was forced to act as they did. That being ordered to do terrible things somehow makes them less culpable? Boyo, you know absolutely nothing about what you're talking about.

[Mavorpen]

Hitler didn't personally kill millions of innocent people. What the article is saying, what you missed, is that terrible acts of violence (indeed, the most terrible acts of violence) are often committed by people that are both sane and rational. Doing things that you don't personally understand, that society as a whole cannot follow the logic of, does not make a person "insane" or "mentally unstable".

Yes, terrible things are done by sane rational people. An SS soldier doing what he is told by those he is conditioned to obey against those he is conditioned to hate. Do you know why the Nazis turned to gas chambers? To make it less metally stressful on the SS soldiers, the normal ones who despite their conditioning were discovered to suffer adverse effects from being made to commit such acts. Normal people even when ordered and conditioned to these things recoil from it.

But this shooter does not fit this profile at all. He was not ordered, he did this on his own initiative and volition.

Where did you get this from?

[Camicon]

Someone who is actually insane, as in they are suffering from insanity, is not in control of their actions. According to the justice systems of (I believe) every developed nation, a person can't be held legally responsible for things they do, if they do those things while suffering from insanity.

Hitler was not insane. He was very much in his right mind; he simply subscribed, wholeheartedly, to a horrific ideology. The society around him allowed this ideology to flourish, and gave him the tools and powers he needed in order to act as he and the Nazi party saw fit in the furtherance of that ideology. Just because you don't understand him does not mean he was insane.

No, he was very well insane. He believed there was international conspiracy of Jews working to screw him and his country over for shits and giggles.

And YEC's believe that the Earth was created 10,000 years ago. Does that mean they are insane?

Believing factually incorrect information to be true does not make a person insane. It makes them wrong.

[Novus America]

And Charles Manson?

But you are never going to convince me Hitler was sane. Yes he was high as a kite, and probably had syphilis eating his brain (mental illness) but that does not explain what he did. Other people with those conditions do not orchestrate mass murder.

And the people who followed him? And the German citizens who agreed with him and allowed him to do as he pleased? What about them?

See above. The Nazis covered up the Holocaust knowing that even brainwashed normal people would not accept it. They turned to gas chambers as they found many troops were unwilling to carry out massacres or suffered mental breakdowns after.

But this guy is totally different. He was not ordered to shoot up a church and directed by a chain of command using phycological techniques. He did this on his own volition. Again is Charles Manson sane?