I won't go into details - you can find those. I'm going to speculation on motivation of the shooter.
My first thoughts were that this was some sort of Jihadist fantastist - considering they were withholding his name while putting out names of victims. Then - not. Honestly, I'd almost wish he was - it'd make explaining it all easier to frame it in the terms of Islamic fanaticism.
My second thoughts are that this is some asshole with dreams of notorious fame. As some say - pop culture's a cesspool. You've got subcultures that glorify intentional, studied ignorance, violence and misogyny.
Yet... there will be those who will blame the right. They'll be making pronouncements about the right-wing conservatives being the focus of ignorance, violence and intolerance - and that it's their attitudes which are causing the problem. (Look at how fast folks were to connect Giffords' shooting with Palin's website - despite there being no evidence that the nutcase who did it was even politically aligned in any direction at the time, and well over a year later there still isn't.)
But all you've got to do is look at the violence that the Tea Party's not fallen into, and you'll see a slight problem with that. Yet the wonderous Occupy movement's been plagued by violence...
You'd almost think there was a problem there.
On the right, they're looking to establish a framework that proves a structure for society, something stable and predictable they can live their lives in. They understand that personal freedom requires personal responsibility, and that uncoupling the two isn't going to yield a good result in the long run.
Yet it seems like all too many want to tear any sort of framework apart because they dislike any expectations that they show some sort of self-control. They don't like the imposition of (to them) distasteful cultural norms on their wants and desires. They want to party - they don't want to show up for work. They want things given to them, without limit - yet are unwilling to work to provide for others. They want freedom, but don't want responsibility. They want the structure to shelter them, but they're not going to do a damn thing to help build it.
Perhaps there's only so much of that any one civilization can take...
We'll likely find out soon enough what his 'motivation' was. There'll be something found on Youtube, or Facebook - or something will be leaked from the press. Maybe he had a bad childhood, maybe he's reacting to a breakup with his girl. Maybe he flunked summer school, and was angry. Maybe he played too many video games.
For whatever reason - he's a murderer. Deliberately committing premediated murder. This wasn't a random, impulsive act.
And though I'm curious about his motiviation - it won't excuse his action.
J.
Comments (2)
And, of course, the great Progressive cry went up across the land within minutes of the massacre hitting the news, "If only we could ban guns then this great loss of innocent life would never have happened!"
Bulls#!T!
According to the early reports this man was a brilliant but highly unstable loner, the classic recipe for a lone whacko killer.
We don't currently know what kind of insane grudge was driving this man but we do know that whatever it was drove him to plan an elaborate killing spree for opening night of one of the most highly anticipated movies of the summer with a guaranteed full capacity crowd of teenagers and young adults. We also know he picked the one situation where someone putting on full military style black body armor in the back parking lot of the theater would go if not noticed then unremarked upon.
We now know he spent months gathering supplies from various internet suppliers of ammunition and basic chemicals with which to prepare the explosives he used to booby trap his apartment.
Any outright ban on any of the weapons he chose to use, an AR-15 with high capacity magazine, a Mossberg shotgun, and a Glock 40 caliber pistol, probably would not have prevented someone with his demonstrated level of ingenuity from obtaining those weapons or other weapons of equal lethality.
What most people who are calling for increasingly Draconian high levels of gun control fail to take into account is the fact that his choice of readily available semiautomatic firearms actually limited the number of people that might have died in the attack if he had been forced to use other weapons he had at his disposal.
Suppose instead of entering the back door of the theater with a rifle, a pistol, and a shotgun he had gone in with four or five explosively detonated half gallon Molotov Cocktails.
How many would have died then?
otpu
Posted by otpu | July 22, 2012 5:42 PM
Posted on July 22, 2012 17:42
You have to remember that, for many people on the Left, gun control isn't about reducing crime. Some of them oppose private ownership of weapons because the ability of people to defend themselves from crime reduces the need for police, and therefore reduces their dependence on government. Others (and I am certain there is considerable overlap) understand that the actual intent of the 2nd Amendment was to ensure the populace is a final check on the power of government, and they don't WANT a final check on themselves, or those in the government they support. Sometimes I wish I were merely paranoid....
Posted by John C. | July 23, 2012 7:10 AM
Posted on July 23, 2012 07:10