Thursday, May 29, 2014

Predictable Media Blames Guns But Ignores Mental Health System Failures

Once again after a shooting the media and hypocritical leftists will rail about guns. The predictable image of a grieved parent blaming guns comes in seconds. While we should empathize with the loss of these families the media needs to stop feigning innocence with its own role in these events.

The killer was once again well known to mental health care providers. These killers often come from affluent  to upper middle income families and have access to quality mental health care. Institutionalization has become a bad word, but the average family is not equipped to deal with ticking time bombs.

The media coverage of every aspect of the pathetic lives of these killers is part of the problem. No doubt the public has a right to know who went haywire. Yet the desire for celebrity is part of the motivating factor behind theses massacres. If you want your rants published just shoot a few people and the media will go to absurd lengths to report it.

The mental health care profession needs to be held under scrutiny. What is the name of the professional who
treated this person. This is not to say that all of the blame belongs on the clinician. However, is this a case of
clinicians not having the tools and resources to address a serious case or misdiagnosis. Mental health care also depends on the co-operation of the patient.

We need to stop reporting these idiotic manifestos. These manifestos have little information useful to the public. If a hypothetical criminal was obsessed with trans fat and bringing back Good and Fruity let it be discussed at lengths by criminologists not the mass media.

At a certain point the question of affluence and long term mental illness is appropriate. We hear familiar rants about untreated mental illness and crime from the media. Yet the perpetrator was neither indigent, nor untreated and no questions have been asked.


8 comments:

Duckys here said...

I have no idea what media outlets you consume other than Fox Snooze and Mark Levin but if you bothered to express anything but the kneejerk fringe right talking points it might be possible to engage you in dialogue (I'm a true optimist).

1. This business about notoriety. The shooter is dead. The shooter in nearly all these cases ends up dead.
In fact you might say that these shootings are failed suicides.
So just what does covering the event contribute to the impulse of a suicidal mentally ill individual?
Really, do you have some clinical data or are you just parroting the idiot Levin and feigning knowledge?

2. The mental health aspects of the case are being reported.
Why was it left up to two untrained, unengaged cops to make the decision about the firearms possession after parents and trained mental health professionals felt it necessary to contact police?
Would the NRA and their political stooges allow any tightening of the legislation governing firearms possession in these cases?


There's a lot worth talking about but you should establish that a desire for celebrity was the motivator here.
Do that or get back to filling in the forms, officer.



beakerkin said...

Just who bothers to write a manifesto? The Killer was well aware
and motivated by the media attention.

These psychos tend to be upper Middle class and frequently well acquainted with mental health professionals. Commies instinctively blame guns whenever a lifetime mental patient goes haywire.

Mental illness is not new or novel. The rapid rise in these
staged shootings is very likely linked to celebrity culture. The person was a loser and now everyone knows his name for five
minutes.

The forms have a lasting legal impact. Can anyone remember the porno films your students shot in Van Nuys.

Duckys here said...

Mental illness is not new or novel. The rapid rise in these staged shootings is very likely linked to celebrity culture. The person was a loser and now everyone knows his name for five minutes.

------
Beak that is pure conjecture and incoherent to boot.

May I point out that I blame neither mental illness nor firearms exclusively.

I blame the mentally ill with firearms. A more complicated proposition.

beakerkin said...

There has always been mentally disturbed people among the general
population. It is part of the human
condition.

The mass shootings date back about 50 years. The first generally accepted case is the Whitman shooting. Whitman had a medical condition that was not diagnosed.
His case should not be confused with more recent cases.

The generally accepted term used to describe this term is called active shooter. It is covered a concise version in the training of
Federal Employees.

These incidents appear to increase
as we have moved into a 24/7 media
coverage. We know the killers names and life stories.

There are those among us who crave
attention. These people lack the talent and the opportunity to do it positively. Thanks to the media
news cycle all a marginal type has
to do is perform an act of deranged violence.

Perhaps we don't need to know the
name and every detail of these killers. Of course as we have the
First Amendment this is never going to happen.

It is easier for the far left media elite to rail against guns
than look in the mirror.

Anonymous said...

If only we could identify and isolate the losers, morons, cumwads, mass murderers, mental defectives, potential mental defectives, untalented, pricks and arseholes before they let loose. That would solve it. That's exactly why we need guns, to protect ourselves from potential harm from all those Other idiots with guns. Because it's always the Other who's gonna fire first ain't it Bleak. And on it goes. Marion Mitchell (Robert) Morrison to the rescue. Dirty Harry to the rescue. George Friggin' Bush to the rescue. The US to the rescue. "What, ya don't wanna be rescued? Well goddamn. What, you wanna go it alone? Well, we just can't let ya do that. And if ya got a problem with that, well, shit, we'll just have to blow you to goddamn kingdom come. Y'understand? DO YOU UNDERSTAND?"

That's it isn't it Bleak, always someone else, always the Other who's the problem. It's always about the individual Other without the RIGHT attitude, the RIGHT discipline, the RIGHT way of thinking, the RIGHT education, the RIGHT manners, the RIGHT stories.

You got all the RIGHT stories, ain't ya Bleak?



beakerkin said...

Commies love prisons, they just think of it as coerced communes.
Placing commies in prisons is cruel and unusual punishment to honest hard working criminals.

The mental health industry has a poor track record. Any other service with this type of failure rate would be under the microscope.

Still stuck on the Duke. It seems communists lack machismo.

Duckys here said...

What is the failure rate of the mental health system?

Can you supply some evidence that you're not blowing smoke?
You wouldn't feign knowledge of something you really don't understand, would you?

beakerkin said...

That is something the mental health profession has never established.Part of the reason is defining that term is not easy.

We moved away from institutional care due to a series of articles in the media. Conditions were bad, but closing the facilities led to other problems.

In multiple cases our active shooters were in fact long term
patients. What benefit if any was provided by this long term treatment. Blaming the police who had fleeting contact with the killer is absurd.

There are limits to what can be done by counseling and medications. Even families with
large amounts of resources are not
able to deal with this issue.

Why are a large proportion of these active shooters affluent
long term patients?

The problem is not guns. The problem is the mental health care
professionals have over promised.

You feign the ability to discern facts and logic. Why does case after case of these active shooters seem to fit a predictable
profile. Are guns the variable or is it something else.