<p>
I bet the people in the movie theater don’t agree with that.</p>
<p>At least most college campuses now have a system in place to deal with it. Movie theaters will too soon.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The question of sanity versus insanity is a different one than whether a person suffers from a mental illness. I believe that in order to be considered insane by the legal system, you have to have had difficulty distinguishing right from wrong which is sometimes, but certainly not always, the case when someone is mentally ill. To assume that all people who commit mass violence, or vicious crimes, are mentally ill may be too big of an assumption because it rules out the possibility that there is evil in the world, or that otherwise sane people make choices based on other reasons. Were the men who flew planes into buildings on 9/11 mentally ill or were they operating under assumptions that led them to their actions? Was everyone who worked for Hitler insane? What about those who colluded with him, who turned in neighbors, etc.? Is every terrorist insane? Every dictator? </p>
<p>Just because only a few people engage in certain behaviors doesn’t mean that they are all mentally ill. Sometimes people who are not mentally ill choose to do terrible things.</p>
<p>
Yes - that’s why I used the term ‘mass-murder’ rather than ‘homicide’ although in a lot of the cases you mentioned people aren’t in their right minds temporarily - alcohol, domestic disputes.</p>
<p>Just reading an article about a serial rapist in Utah. He did what no rational sane person would do, but he is not mentally ill. </p>
<p>I’m curious as to why he told police bout the booby traps. Was that the sign of a mentally ill person or a braggart.</p>
<p>The reason I said it was a good thing he did not choose to shoot students on campus is he could have killed 112 students very easily. Surprised at some of your reactions.</p>
<p>mimk6:</p>
<p>I’m sure a lot of it comes down to semantics and legal definitions. My point is that it’s a minute number of people who commit an act similar to this one. Most people would never consider doing it and some of those that would consider it would have a mental check that would stop them from doing it - an inhibition. Given that, I say this person and anyone like him has some mental illness of some kind. Maybe I should re-phrase it as a mental deviation. </p>
<p>I went ahead and looked up the definition in the dictionary though to see what it had to say about the term -
</p>
<p>
Again - it comes down to definitions. Since most people would never want to do it in the first place and would be able to stop themselves from doing it in the second place then someone who doesn’t follow that paradigm is certainly an aberration.</p>
<p>Since you advocated earlier in this thread that the key to this tragedy is not gun control but rather examining the shooter’s psyche I think you should go well beyond the dictionary in determining whether or not this person is mentally ill.</p>
<p>^^ The term ‘mentally ill’ seems to be an evolving one in its applicability. Regardless of what label one wants to apply and so as not to get hung up on semantics, this individual certainly is in a minuscule minority of people who do something like this. Given that, he’s not ‘normal’ in his thoughts by any definition.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Data strongly back this up for depression but also for other mental illnesses (e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar). Most people with mental illness never hurt anyone and those who do are FAR more likely to hurt themselves. This is not say that those with mental illness are never violent (nor are those without), but that it would be not reasonable–or just–to treat everyone with bipolar/depression/schizophrenia/etc as a murderer waiting to happen, IMO. For one thing, you’d be doing that for about 30% of the population if you included depression! </p>
<p>Screening for homicidality is possible and usually done–and sometimes effective–but it is difficult and relatively inaccurate. Many of these connections that seem so obvious only because they are seen in hindsight. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work towards a better model for this, but just that it is very difficult to do so while balancing sensitivity (false negatives) and specificity (false positives).</p>
<p>Of course, better mental health services would have the potential to improve people’s lives greatly, regardless of homicidality, suicidality or lack thereof.</p>
<p>(Statistics, though, are cold, cold comfort if you or a friend or loved one is affected by the small percentage of people who are violent. 
This and other mass murders are incredibly gut-wrenching tragedies, and I think it’s only natural to want to ensure they do not re-occur.).</p>
<p>Bookmarks page 7</p>
<p>“IMO, doctors who treat patients for a number of different psychiatric disorders should be required to put those patients names on the federal firearms list to prevent them from purchasing weapons. I see no rational reason to allow someone with schizophrenia or borderline personality disorder to own a gun at any time.”</p>
<p>How did you come up with those two? On second thought nevermind .FWIW, people who have been involuntarily hospitalized (5150’d in California,) can’t get guns for awhile.</p>
<p>I agree that not every one who does terrible things is mentally ill.
[Daily</a> Kos: An adult conversation about guns](<a href=“http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/20/1112130/-An-adult-conversation-about-guns]Daily”>An adult conversation about guns)</p>
<p>" That is a shame, no an outrage, if the system in your state permits someone without adequate mental health training to make that decision. I am so sorry ."</p>
<p>In California, police can put them ( a hold) on, but can’t take them off. In my county the folks with authority to put them on are masters level. Few physicians or psychologists have 515 authority.y. I used to, and i do not miss it.</p>
<p>" Perhaps addressing that verbiage might be a starting point"</p>
<p>Perhaps if you are willing to tie dollars to it. Mental illness costs money. Loosly defined mental illness costs a lot of money. Are we okay with that? Maybe if it saves more than it costs.</p>
<p>
I didn’t read your link but if your response is in connection to events like this one, what’s your definition of mentally ill (or were you referring to other terrible things)?</p>
<p>Im not a professional, so this is just my opinion.
Mental illness is as broad as physical illness.
Mental illnesses can be treated although like physical illnesses, the treatment may be lifelong care.
Personality defects don’t go away. They may get better at hiding it, but underneath they don’t change.</p>
<p>In some cases mental illness IS physical illness. The brain can become damaged or impacted by illness just as any other organ of the body can.</p>
<p>The definition that I generally use is Bipolar, Depression, Schizophrenia where there may be delusions and hallucinations involved. These are somewhat treatable things where the person may not understand what they are doing or see things in a context where they have to do something.</p>
<p>Sociopathy is a mental disorder but I don’t think that it is treatable and I do think that the person knows what they are doing.</p>
<p>The last time I went to a movie theater I saw the previous BATMAN movie, the one with Heath Ledger. I was left with the impression that it was mostly a depiction of hyper-speed, hyper-sound volume, hyper-gratuitous, hyper-wanton criminal violence. </p>
<p>I also noticed the audience hyper-loved it.</p>
<p>I haven’t seen this movie or any of the Batman movies. </p>
<p>Are they violent? Was he mimicking something The Joker did in one of the movies? </p>
<p>Is there any issue as to whether the comic books/movies ‘inspired’ this? </p>
<p>I really detest violent movies and never see them. I wonder what the effect is on the unstable mind?</p>
<p>Obviously a bright guy.He was studying neuroscience for years , maybe in an attempt to figure himself out? It will be interesting to see what his computer reveals. Reports are (haven’t seen it confirmed yet by major networks) that the dad has a PhD in statistics from Berkeley, masters from UCLA and undergrad from Stanford . I cannot imagine having your young adult child do something so horrific. Suicide would have been so painful but homicide, can’t even imagine. Neither of my kids were loners. Not sure how you deal with that , if most of the time you even need to deal with that. As others have said, most loners are not just going to go out and start killing people and this guy was 24 years old. The whole thing is very troubling.</p>