7 ms·

On the manifestos killers leave behind

74 points by jonathansizz 11y ago

Laaw 11y ago
I realize this is the actual title of the piece, but it's going to get much fewer views/reads because of it. For the sake of HN readers, it might be worth editorializing this title to add some kind of context.
- dang 11y ago
  This is a common misunderstanding, but in fact the HN guidelines ask you not to use the original title when it is linkbait. We changed the linkbait title to the subtitle. Once you get past that, this is a substantive piece.
  - p4bl0 11y ago
    Thanks. I flagged the link because of the previous title without even reading the story behind it. I'll unflag it now.
  - waterlesscloud 11y ago
    Perhaps adding a note to that effect on the submissions page would help.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
draw_down 11y ago
http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/02/the_rage_of_the_average_joe.html http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/02/the_rage_of_the_avera...
swagv 11y ago
It's little more than a rehash of facts with little exploration beyond that. I expected more from such a read.
justinator 11y ago
...what about the Unabomber?
- cuberator 11y ago
  He doesnt have much in common with the people mentioned in this article, except Breivik maybe, though i might be completely wrong since i havent read up on the Unabomber.
  - roflc0ptic 11y ago
    Yeah, as I understand it the Unabomber was politically motivated terrorism. He also had the distinction of being a pretty smart guy, which is unusual for the demographic that gets into mass murder.
    - justinator 11y ago
      Ted Bundy [0] Andrew Cunanan [1] Jeffrey Dahmer - I wouldn't say it's "unusual" [2] [0] http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Psyc%20405/serial%20killers/Bundy,%20Ted%20-%202005.pdf http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Psyc%20405/serial%20killers/B... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Cunanan#Early_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Cunanan#Early_life [2] http://www.examiner.com/article/22-serial-killers-with-high-iqs http://www.examiner.com/article/22-serial-killers-with-high-...
      - andreasvc 11y ago
        You listed two serial killers with a high IQ; however, the merits of IQ can be debated, but more importantly Kaczynsky stands out because he holds a PhD and was a Berkeley professor.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > He also had the distinction of being a pretty smart guy, which is unusual for the demographic that gets into mass murder. I actually thought it was fairly common for mass killers (other than those whose mass killing is confined to a single mass casualty attack / killing spree), if for no other reason than not being smart makes it more likely that you get caught before your killing reaches the level of "mass".
devindotcom 11y ago
It's a very strange time, when anyone can reach anyone else (or any knowledge) instantly, but many use this as an opportunity to isolate themselves even further. It seems to happen a lot when the exceptionalism common to young white men runs straight into the reality that they are in fact unexceptional and what power they have is not just unearned but waning. The cognitive dissonance that results is, as we see over and over, lethal to themselves and others.
- dropit_sphere 11y ago
  > what power they have is not just unearned but waning That's the interesting thing, though, isn't it? Leaving aside questions of "earned," is their power waning? Does it console Veronika Weiss or Katherine Cooper that we might have a woman as POTUS? I know no one is crusading for it but I will: when will we see equality in mass shootings? To put it in less obviously straw-man terms: why should women have to live in fear when men don't? My point is: the exceptionalism is apparently justified, because when it couldn't be, they went out and justified it. Got any breathless expose's about your troubled writings?
  - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
    why should women have to live in fear when men don't? They don't?
    - dropit_sphere 11y ago
      It was definitely a straw man. I'm a dude and I don't live in fear of a shooter, and I don't get the impression many women do either. My point is: We're quick to claim victory as society grows more tolerant and race/sex matter less, but I think we claim it too soon. That young white men feel entitled to shoot people when their lives don't work out (and apparently others don't) is as real an imbalance as wage gaps, etc.
      - minority-one 11y ago
        > That young white men feel entitled to shoot people when their lives don't work out (and apparently others don't) If I said that Jews feel entitled to slander people and call them racist when their arguments about the existence of gas chambers don't work out, I would be ding ding ding'ed by dang. While both assertions are crassly correct, we must ask ourselves (dropit_sphere, pay attention now): - Please tone down your claims. Are you sure it is a characteristic inherent of young white men that they feel like shooting people when their lives don't work out? Or perhaps do you think it could be the characteristic not of such a large group with so many counter-examples to your thesis, but of a much narrower group, such as, for instance, non-home-schooled pubescent students under prescription drugs and probably victims of bullying, who aren't emotionally connected enough with their parents in order to talk through their feelings? When you generalize it to "young white men" you indict a whole category of people when really you should be chastising only the exceptional, criminal outliers. - Please substantiate your claims more. How did you come to the conclusion that young white men feel entitled to shoot people when their lives don't work out, while others apparently do not? Is there a study corroborating this? Can we make this claim from the sample size we have? Have there been other cases where people mistakenly blamed a whole group for the actions of the outliers? (Hint: Jews). If so, what can we learn from it? dang: please moderate this thread more closely in order to curtail the behavior exemplified by dropit_sphere's post. Thank you.
mathgenius 11y ago
I was picked on in school a fair amount. Some of it quite violent, and pervasive. At some point I got really fed up with one particular kid, and got myself a big stick. Luckily for him that stick broke cleanly in two upon first impact, otherwise i'm not sure what would have happened. After that things subsided somewhat. That kid threatened me more, but never did come after me again. Growing older I realise two things. First, those "jocks" that get all the girls, have (generalizing here) other very serious problems, are often emotionally stunted, angry at their dads, or whatever. So we all get weathered differently by life, and actually it's kind of heartbreaking to see. Second, I just think too much! It drives people crazy when i do that, and instead of that, I just need to turn my attention outwards, and feel what is going on outside of my own head. Then things become relational, and people can also sense that I am here too. Wish I could tell all of this to my 14-year-old self.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- dworin 11y ago
  >>> Wish I could tell all of this to my 14-year-old self. I often think this about any number of things, and then I realize there were probably a lot of people in my life who were telling them to me, and I just didn't want to listen to them. Being 14 is really hard.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- Retric 11y ago
  I am sure this is way far too late for most people on HN, but there is some useful advice that tends to work. Usually, the most popular people can pick on a wide range of people and don't focus on any one person. It is the people in the lower middle that have fewer targets below them that get really mean. As strange as this sounds moving slightly up the hierarchy, but not to high is the best way to avoid lots of negative attention from any one person. Granted, this assumes there is nothing specifically unusual about someone. PS: Sorry, if this comes off as victim baiting, but thinking of high school as a pack of chimps works surprisingly well.
cuberator 11y ago
Very well written and interesting. While some people put the blame on firearms (lets not turn this into a debate on gun control) i believe that its the media attention that is the biggest culprit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4
- venomsnake 11y ago
  I was expecting a Natural Born Killers scene here.
- manachar 11y ago
  "Let's not turn this into a debate on BLANK, instead let's talk about my pet theory BLANK". Seems like that's the only constant after any sort of horrific tragedy. It becomes grist in the mill for people to push their pre-existing agendas. For some it has been a push for greater gun control. For others it has been a push for greater funding and understanding of mental health. For others, you blame media attention. Personally, I view these events as "side-effects" of our society. And we're basically loathe to examine it too deeply as it can call into question some deeply held parts of American culture.
  - avar 11y ago
    As the linked article covers this is not exclusive to America, that's probably one correlation we can genuinely throw out.
    - manachar 11y ago
      To be fair, it does happen more often in America, which may provide some information to see the underlying conditions that lead to the kind of desperate isolation seen in these manifestos.
  - sliverstorm 11y ago
    "Reduce media attention to criminals" seems like an odd pre-existing personal agenda. What ulterior motive could that possibly correspond to?
pervycreeper 11y ago
Interesting topic, but the article does nothing more than recycle points taken from the most quotidian of newspaper editorials.
FussyZeus 11y ago
Who cares honestly? It's the same rehashed garbage. First world problems galore. Not getting enough sex, not having enough money, not making enough friends but not being willing to do anything about those things but sit in their basement of choice and whine. Clarifying: The first world problem I'm talking about are the things the shooters cite as reasons for their actions, not the shootings themselves.
- roflc0ptic 11y ago
  Sure, it's a first world problem. I guess you can either emphasize "first world", or "problem." As a resident or denizen of the first world, I'm interested in first world problems.
  - FussyZeus 11y ago
    Wasn't referring to the mass shootings being a first world problem, referring to the varying "crises" presented as justifications FOR mass murder, which are almost without exception pathetic.
- DanBC 11y ago
  Mass shootings are overwhelmingly a US problem, not rest of the first world problem. (There are a few exceptions). > but not being willing to do anything about those things but sit in their basement of choice and whine. Or go out and kill a bunch of people.
  - hga 11y ago
    Not even close; here's an accounting I did covering just Western Europe just for this century as of a little over 2 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4970408 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4970408 and the same with some discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5070201 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5070201 Add e.g. Canada and "[it's] overwhelmingly a US problem" is even less true.
    - 11y ago
comrh 11y ago
At what point does the constant retread of mass murders' ideals become fetishization? Does anyone really think we'll prevent more of these attacks by deep analysis of their writings or are we just obsessed with the possibility of understanding horrible tragedies? I'm tired of reading these monsters' names and quotes. They all thought they were the smartest people on the planet and everyone should read their words. I'm going to stick with remembering the amazing people taken from us instead. I think about people like Liviu Librescu and Alex Teves a lot as a reminder of the requirement for good people to stand up to evil. http://nonotoriety.com/ http://nonotoriety.com/
venomsnake 11y ago
There should be a Mad Max reference in the article with Immortal Joe shouting "mediocre", because even in their blaze of glory moment for these troubled individuals, there is no glory and barely any blaze. And I think that the reason they leave this manifestos is because they feel they cannot do anything right and put it as insurance.
- prawn 11y ago
  "Immortan Joe"
rrggrr 11y ago
People alone with their thoughts. Early, frequent and long-term intervention can ease the suffering of mentally troubled individuals. Instead we build prisons, invest in security and hire more police.
- aaron-lebo 11y ago
  Are you advocating more spending on mental healthcare and less spending on prisons? If so I agree, but that isn't explicit in your comment. These people committing these acts don't usually end up in prison, anyway.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
nickysielicki 11y ago
I link to this far too often, but it's relevant to so many discussions had on this site. The Great On-Line Equalizer Date: 21 Mar 1996 https://subgenius.com/bigfist/answers/articles2/X0095_The_Great_On-Line_Eq.html Relevant quote: """ All the people who are invisible in the normal world (the world run by the rich and powerful), all those people you can dismiss on the street as powerless and harmless -- ALL THOSE PEOPLE are now in your face. You can feel their hot breath on the Internet. """ It seems the more we become intertwined with the Internet, the more we start feeling their hot breath in real life. Or at least, the more we notice it.
- untog 11y ago
  I'm not sure how much that applies here. Killers with manifestos have always existed, it has little to do with the internet. They were always in people's faces because, well, they killed people and left manifestos. Where the internet does come into its own is allowing these disturbed people to find other like-minded (like-disturbed?) people, and feed off each other's misery, perhaps making them more likely to kill.
- 0x49 11y ago
  This quote has a lot of truth to it. I think the issue we now face is that it gives EVERYBODY power. Even people that shouldn't ever have it in the first place. Many of these hashtag protests are purely based on emotion and in some instances, don't even have enough information to make a claim either way (or are based on rumor/false information). This is why our court systems were invented in the first place: to prevent mobs of people from attacking innocent individuals and calling it 'justice'.
sparkzilla 11y ago
I went to school with the author. If you like his writing style, I highly recommend his (long but fascinating) account of trying to ghost write Julian Assange's autobiography. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n05/andrew-ohagan/ghosting http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n05/andrew-ohagan/ghosting
- everial 11y ago
  Thanks for mentioning - really enjoyed the linked piece (previously on HN at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9395156 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9395156 though it didn't generate discussion).
tunesmith 11y ago
I think this is a good read when combined with the Gladwell article from the New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence?currentPage=all http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-v...). I'm not against gun control efforts or better mental health efforts (whatever that might mean) but I think that both articles suggest that a lot of progress can be made in figuring out how to arrest this kind of societal disconnect. In the days after Columbine, there was a huge reaction from people who wanted to paint with a really broad brush, along the lines of random kids being potential suspects just because they liked wearing trench coats. John Katz had a project called "Voices From The Hellmouth" over at Slashdot, that invited people that had similar difficulties to write in and share their thoughts and experiences of being bullied or ostracized. I'm convinced that efforts like that can save lives. http://news.slashdot.org/story/99/04/25/1438249/voices-from-the-hellmouth http://news.slashdot.org/story/99/04/25/1438249/voices-from-...
- hga 11y ago
  Hacker News discussion on the Gladwell article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10380513 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10380513
- mfoy_ 11y ago
  That Gladwell article is a good read, it offers a perspective I hadn't come across before. Not that it really "solves" the problem at all, just casts a different light on it.
- arthur_pryor 11y ago
  I haven't thought about "Voices From The Hellmouth" in a really long time. I remember reading Slashdot a ton in high school and college (maybe 97 or 98 through 02?). Then, not so much. FWIW, HN, esp when I first found it a few years ago, reminded me a lot of what I loved about the discussion on Slashdot back in the day. Anyway, the actual point of this comment: much of what's described in "Voices From The Hellmouth" would now fit comfortably under the currently fashionable term "microagression." I'd bet that many posters on HN and elsewhere who think that microaggressions aren't a thing worth real concern, are also the sorts of people who were/are picked on in the way that "Hellmouth" catalogs so vividly. And for the record, I'm not saying that the prevailing view on HN is that microaggressions aren't real, or that most people who deny them were bullied geeks. Just that there are probably a lot of bullied or formerly bullied geeks who deny the significance of such social ostracism, even though they experienced it themselves. Ironic, but not unexpected: people without power often end up at odds with one another when they should be looking for common ground and empathizing with one another. Still, sad. I always find it really painful to watch minorities be racist, to watch geeks pick on other geeks for lacking social graces, to watch women be unfeminist, etc. Well, sometimes it's darkly hilarious. But still painful.
VT_Drew 11y ago
From your first paragraph: >‘I have noticed,’ it says, ‘that so many people like him are all alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are. A man who was known by no one is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you’re in the limelight.’ So, PLEAE can you stop fucking mentioning these assholes names? For the the love of God you are perpetuating the problem.
- FussyZeus 11y ago
  No kidding. Leave them as forgotten as they thought they were in life.
- comrh 11y ago
  I have no idea why this is controversial. The previous day's Gladwell article even comes to the same conclusion as most that notoriety and coverage are major factor in these types of attacks.
  - fit2rule 11y ago
    I think the reason its controversial is that, with such a law enacted, oppressive governments can keep the revolutionaries in their boxes. Sometimes, you need to know the name of the revolutionaries. For example, with this "memory hole" policy, would we have ever known who these folks were, and what they were fighting for? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_revolutionaries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_revolutionar... Or is violent revolution simply not ever going to be acceptable any more because the fact of the application of violent force aspect has been usurped by the mentally insane? Are all violent revolutionaries insane, then? (Hint: no, of course not... unless you're the state they're attempting to violently overthrow, in which case you've got your "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, State-Sponsored Edition" at hand, ready for just such a circumstance ..) (Note: I am not saying we should worship these insane gun-toting school shooters as revolutionaries - but I am saying that we are on a very slippery slope if we're going to whiteout violent revolutionaries from history, future and past. Revolutions don't happen if you don't have a figurehead to get them started.)
necessity 11y ago
According to this ridiculous article I was "a natural step" from being a school shooter in my teenager years, and so are million others. The juvenile grouping of "jocks and nerds" is not enough for the author, who makes no effort in trying to understand the killera, instead he dwells into generalizations and sheer prejudice. If the title didn't hint you into what sort of article it would be.
cmiles74 11y ago
This is the first time I've read excerpts from these "manifestos" and it's hard to know how to react. It all reads like a kind of mental illness and it's chilling to see the similarities (although this article may only make them look similar). Intellectually I feel like there should be room for sympathy of some kind, but to be honest, I feel nothing of the kind; just angry. The authors strike me as small, pathetic, misguided and (for me, worst of all) demanding and entitled. In terms of constructive moves to try and deal with this issue, it's hard to think of anything substantive. For sure, less guns means these individuals would have taken fewer lives. Perhaps a better attitude toward mental illness and easier to access treatment options might help. On the other hand, it doesn't sound like these people though they were mentally ill. On the contrary, they felt the opposite. I found the bits about how special they think they are to be particularly striking. I certainly feel that my daughter is special, but I understand that what makes her most special is that she is my daughter. The idea that everyone should be, in some way, globally special seems somewhat misguided.
- tunesmith 11y ago
  The tough part is knowing that for every one of those that shoots up a bunch of people, there's an untold number of people that might feel similar feelings of alienation and agitation, but don't end up taking those final planning and action steps. In other words, before the killers took those final steps towards becoming a monster, there's not a really good way to differentiate them from someone else who never becomes a monster. This is where I think the whole discussion goes off the rails - the emphasis is in figuring out how to identify these "potential monsters", or in preventing these "potential monsters" from having the means to accomplish their ends. But if it's impossible to define a test/indicator such that, if it's true then they'll probably shoot up a school down the line, and if it's false then they probably won't, then where does that leave us? I think it leaves us in a place of not treating these people as potential monsters, but instead as normal kids struggling with feelings of alienation and lack of purpose, and giving them love and support. Not looking for signs of "potential school shooters" and seeking to prevent it, but looking for signs of loneliness and alienation, and seeking to give support. I just think that for a lot of us, we've probably had times in our past where we had a lot in common with the people that had not yet shot up a bunch of people. So when we think of what might have made our lives better at those times, maybe it would have helped some of them too. There the emphasis is more on just helping alienated kids feel less alone, knowing that for a very small percentage of them, it very well could prevent some real tragedies later on.
vorg 11y ago
> According to the FBI, there have been close to two hundred such incidents in the last 15 years, resulting in the murder of 486 people and the wounding of 557 as of September last year According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualt... , in the 8-year Iraq War (2003–2011), there were 3,527 U.S. combat deaths and 32,222 wounded. Could save far more American lives, not to mention others, by keeping sociopaths out of the Presidency rather than profiling and surveilling loners.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
AndrewKemendo 11y ago
I am convinced that the people who do these shootings do so because they have an ego that cannot cope with their societal impotence. That is, they think they should be more liked, more powerful, be able to get girls, be in charge of things, free from criticism, unable to be bullied (which is reasonable) etc... but aren't for any given reason. So their recourse is to prove to everyone how powerful they are by shooting them up. The worst part is, it is pretty powerful and it destroys communities, which is what they want. They want to be able to say they destroyed a community because that's how they are proving their power. I don't see any solution to this. Preventing them from getting access to the tools that could empower that could help but is really hard to do, especially in the US, because banning guns or whatever likely wouldn't work 100% of the time. If they are smart and dedicated enough they will find a way to get/make bombs and guns. So I see no real solution here.
- rottencupcakes 11y ago
  The falacy here is the classic "perfect is the enemy of good." Banning assault rifles and handguns could go a long way to reducing availability. And if that decreases the number of these events by as much as people think it could, it's probably worthwhile. Just because somebody who's super dedicated to the cause and works day in and day out to get the equipment to carry out a shooting could probably make it happen doesn't mean limiting access won't greatly reduce the number.
  - AndrewKemendo 11y ago
    This is a good point, but I think underestimates the pathos around American gun ownership. That is to say, I don't think that banning those things would result in a reduction in availability.
- flycaliguy 11y ago
  With Facebook and other social media suspected of distorting people's perspective of their peer's social achievements... I wonder if a link can be drawn to recent mass shootings.
_0ffh 11y ago
Is pervasive PUA language in articles now so commonplace that nobody even comments on it? Is it a thing now to identify people with serious mental health problems with "betas", as if that was in any way a valid or helpful analysis?

74 points by jonathansizz 11y ago

Laaw 11y ago

I realize this is the actual title of the piece, but it's going to get much fewer views/reads because of it. For the sake of HN readers, it might be worth editorializing this title to add some kind of context.

dang 11y ago
This is a common misunderstanding, but in fact the HN guidelines ask you not to use the original title when it is linkbait. We changed the linkbait title to the subtitle. Once you get past that, this is a substantive piece.
- p4bl0 11y ago
  Thanks. I flagged the link because of the previous title without even reading the story behind it. I'll unflag it now.
- waterlesscloud 11y ago
  Perhaps adding a note to that effect on the submissions page would help.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

draw_down 11y ago

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/02/the_rage_of_the_average_joe.html http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/02/the_rage_of_the_avera...

swagv 11y ago

It's little more than a rehash of facts with little exploration beyond that. I expected more from such a read.

justinator 11y ago

...what about the Unabomber?

cuberator 11y ago
He doesnt have much in common with the people mentioned in this article, except Breivik maybe, though i might be completely wrong since i havent read up on the Unabomber.
- roflc0ptic 11y ago
  Yeah, as I understand it the Unabomber was politically motivated terrorism. He also had the distinction of being a pretty smart guy, which is unusual for the demographic that gets into mass murder.
  - justinator 11y ago
    Ted Bundy [0] Andrew Cunanan [1] Jeffrey Dahmer - I wouldn't say it's "unusual" [2] [0] http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Psyc%20405/serial%20killers/Bundy,%20Ted%20-%202005.pdf http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Psyc%20405/serial%20killers/B... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Cunanan#Early_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Cunanan#Early_life [2] http://www.examiner.com/article/22-serial-killers-with-high-iqs http://www.examiner.com/article/22-serial-killers-with-high-...
    - andreasvc 11y ago
      You listed two serial killers with a high IQ; however, the merits of IQ can be debated, but more importantly Kaczynsky stands out because he holds a PhD and was a Berkeley professor.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > He also had the distinction of being a pretty smart guy, which is unusual for the demographic that gets into mass murder. I actually thought it was fairly common for mass killers (other than those whose mass killing is confined to a single mass casualty attack / killing spree), if for no other reason than not being smart makes it more likely that you get caught before your killing reaches the level of "mass".

devindotcom 11y ago

It's a very strange time, when anyone can reach anyone else (or any knowledge) instantly, but many use this as an opportunity to isolate themselves even further. It seems to happen a lot when the exceptionalism common to young white men runs straight into the reality that they are in fact unexceptional and what power they have is not just unearned but waning. The cognitive dissonance that results is, as we see over and over, lethal to themselves and others.

dropit_sphere 11y ago
> what power they have is not just unearned but waning That's the interesting thing, though, isn't it? Leaving aside questions of "earned," is their power waning? Does it console Veronika Weiss or Katherine Cooper that we might have a woman as POTUS? I know no one is crusading for it but I will: when will we see equality in mass shootings? To put it in less obviously straw-man terms: why should women have to live in fear when men don't? My point is: the exceptionalism is apparently justified, because when it couldn't be, they went out and justified it. Got any breathless expose's about your troubled writings?
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  why should women have to live in fear when men don't? They don't?
  - dropit_sphere 11y ago
    It was definitely a straw man. I'm a dude and I don't live in fear of a shooter, and I don't get the impression many women do either. My point is: We're quick to claim victory as society grows more tolerant and race/sex matter less, but I think we claim it too soon. That young white men feel entitled to shoot people when their lives don't work out (and apparently others don't) is as real an imbalance as wage gaps, etc.
    - minority-one 11y ago
      > That young white men feel entitled to shoot people when their lives don't work out (and apparently others don't) If I said that Jews feel entitled to slander people and call them racist when their arguments about the existence of gas chambers don't work out, I would be ding ding ding'ed by dang. While both assertions are crassly correct, we must ask ourselves (dropit_sphere, pay attention now): - Please tone down your claims. Are you sure it is a characteristic inherent of young white men that they feel like shooting people when their lives don't work out? Or perhaps do you think it could be the characteristic not of such a large group with so many counter-examples to your thesis, but of a much narrower group, such as, for instance, non-home-schooled pubescent students under prescription drugs and probably victims of bullying, who aren't emotionally connected enough with their parents in order to talk through their feelings? When you generalize it to "young white men" you indict a whole category of people when really you should be chastising only the exceptional, criminal outliers. - Please substantiate your claims more. How did you come to the conclusion that young white men feel entitled to shoot people when their lives don't work out, while others apparently do not? Is there a study corroborating this? Can we make this claim from the sample size we have? Have there been other cases where people mistakenly blamed a whole group for the actions of the outliers? (Hint: Jews). If so, what can we learn from it? dang: please moderate this thread more closely in order to curtail the behavior exemplified by dropit_sphere's post. Thank you.

mathgenius 11y ago

I was picked on in school a fair amount. Some of it quite violent, and pervasive. At some point I got really fed up with one particular kid, and got myself a big stick. Luckily for him that stick broke cleanly in two upon first impact, otherwise i'm not sure what would have happened. After that things subsided somewhat. That kid threatened me more, but never did come after me again. Growing older I realise two things. First, those "jocks" that get all the girls, have (generalizing here) other very serious problems, are often emotionally stunted, angry at their dads, or whatever. So we all get weathered differently by life, and actually it's kind of heartbreaking to see. Second, I just think too much! It drives people crazy when i do that, and instead of that, I just need to turn my attention outwards, and feel what is going on outside of my own head. Then things become relational, and people can also sense that I am here too. Wish I could tell all of this to my 14-year-old self.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
dworin 11y ago
>>> Wish I could tell all of this to my 14-year-old self. I often think this about any number of things, and then I realize there were probably a lot of people in my life who were telling them to me, and I just didn't want to listen to them. Being 14 is really hard.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
Retric 11y ago
I am sure this is way far too late for most people on HN, but there is some useful advice that tends to work. Usually, the most popular people can pick on a wide range of people and don't focus on any one person. It is the people in the lower middle that have fewer targets below them that get really mean. As strange as this sounds moving slightly up the hierarchy, but not to high is the best way to avoid lots of negative attention from any one person. Granted, this assumes there is nothing specifically unusual about someone. PS: Sorry, if this comes off as victim baiting, but thinking of high school as a pack of chimps works surprisingly well.

cuberator 11y ago

Very well written and interesting. While some people put the blame on firearms (lets not turn this into a debate on gun control) i believe that its the media attention that is the biggest culprit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4

venomsnake 11y ago
I was expecting a Natural Born Killers scene here.
manachar 11y ago
"Let's not turn this into a debate on BLANK, instead let's talk about my pet theory BLANK". Seems like that's the only constant after any sort of horrific tragedy. It becomes grist in the mill for people to push their pre-existing agendas. For some it has been a push for greater gun control. For others it has been a push for greater funding and understanding of mental health. For others, you blame media attention. Personally, I view these events as "side-effects" of our society. And we're basically loathe to examine it too deeply as it can call into question some deeply held parts of American culture.
- avar 11y ago
  As the linked article covers this is not exclusive to America, that's probably one correlation we can genuinely throw out.
  - manachar 11y ago
    To be fair, it does happen more often in America, which may provide some information to see the underlying conditions that lead to the kind of desperate isolation seen in these manifestos.
- sliverstorm 11y ago
  "Reduce media attention to criminals" seems like an odd pre-existing personal agenda. What ulterior motive could that possibly correspond to?

pervycreeper 11y ago

Interesting topic, but the article does nothing more than recycle points taken from the most quotidian of newspaper editorials.

FussyZeus 11y ago

Who cares honestly? It's the same rehashed garbage. First world problems galore. Not getting enough sex, not having enough money, not making enough friends but not being willing to do anything about those things but sit in their basement of choice and whine. Clarifying: The first world problem I'm talking about are the things the shooters cite as reasons for their actions, not the shootings themselves.

roflc0ptic 11y ago
Sure, it's a first world problem. I guess you can either emphasize "first world", or "problem." As a resident or denizen of the first world, I'm interested in first world problems.
- FussyZeus 11y ago
  Wasn't referring to the mass shootings being a first world problem, referring to the varying "crises" presented as justifications FOR mass murder, which are almost without exception pathetic.
DanBC 11y ago
Mass shootings are overwhelmingly a US problem, not rest of the first world problem. (There are a few exceptions). > but not being willing to do anything about those things but sit in their basement of choice and whine. Or go out and kill a bunch of people.
- hga 11y ago
  Not even close; here's an accounting I did covering just Western Europe just for this century as of a little over 2 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4970408 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4970408 and the same with some discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5070201 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5070201 Add e.g. Canada and "[it's] overwhelmingly a US problem" is even less true.
  - 11y ago

comrh 11y ago

At what point does the constant retread of mass murders' ideals become fetishization? Does anyone really think we'll prevent more of these attacks by deep analysis of their writings or are we just obsessed with the possibility of understanding horrible tragedies? I'm tired of reading these monsters' names and quotes. They all thought they were the smartest people on the planet and everyone should read their words. I'm going to stick with remembering the amazing people taken from us instead. I think about people like Liviu Librescu and Alex Teves a lot as a reminder of the requirement for good people to stand up to evil. http://nonotoriety.com/ http://nonotoriety.com/

venomsnake 11y ago

There should be a Mad Max reference in the article with Immortal Joe shouting "mediocre", because even in their blaze of glory moment for these troubled individuals, there is no glory and barely any blaze. And I think that the reason they leave this manifestos is because they feel they cannot do anything right and put it as insurance.

prawn 11y ago
"Immortan Joe"

rrggrr 11y ago

People alone with their thoughts. Early, frequent and long-term intervention can ease the suffering of mentally troubled individuals. Instead we build prisons, invest in security and hire more police.

aaron-lebo 11y ago
Are you advocating more spending on mental healthcare and less spending on prisons? If so I agree, but that isn't explicit in your comment. These people committing these acts don't usually end up in prison, anyway.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

nickysielicki 11y ago

I link to this far too often, but it's relevant to so many discussions had on this site. The Great On-Line Equalizer Date: 21 Mar 1996 https://subgenius.com/bigfist/answers/articles2/X0095_The_Great_On-Line_Eq.html Relevant quote: """ All the people who are invisible in the normal world (the world run by the rich and powerful), all those people you can dismiss on the street as powerless and harmless -- ALL THOSE PEOPLE are now in your face. You can feel their hot breath on the Internet. """ It seems the more we become intertwined with the Internet, the more we start feeling their hot breath in real life. Or at least, the more we notice it.

untog 11y ago
I'm not sure how much that applies here. Killers with manifestos have always existed, it has little to do with the internet. They were always in people's faces because, well, they killed people and left manifestos. Where the internet does come into its own is allowing these disturbed people to find other like-minded (like-disturbed?) people, and feed off each other's misery, perhaps making them more likely to kill.
0x49 11y ago
This quote has a lot of truth to it. I think the issue we now face is that it gives EVERYBODY power. Even people that shouldn't ever have it in the first place. Many of these hashtag protests are purely based on emotion and in some instances, don't even have enough information to make a claim either way (or are based on rumor/false information). This is why our court systems were invented in the first place: to prevent mobs of people from attacking innocent individuals and calling it 'justice'.

sparkzilla 11y ago

I went to school with the author. If you like his writing style, I highly recommend his (long but fascinating) account of trying to ghost write Julian Assange's autobiography. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n05/andrew-ohagan/ghosting http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n05/andrew-ohagan/ghosting

everial 11y ago
Thanks for mentioning - really enjoyed the linked piece (previously on HN at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9395156 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9395156 though it didn't generate discussion).

tunesmith 11y ago

I think this is a good read when combined with the Gladwell article from the New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence?currentPage=all http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-v...). I'm not against gun control efforts or better mental health efforts (whatever that might mean) but I think that both articles suggest that a lot of progress can be made in figuring out how to arrest this kind of societal disconnect. In the days after Columbine, there was a huge reaction from people who wanted to paint with a really broad brush, along the lines of random kids being potential suspects just because they liked wearing trench coats. John Katz had a project called "Voices From The Hellmouth" over at Slashdot, that invited people that had similar difficulties to write in and share their thoughts and experiences of being bullied or ostracized. I'm convinced that efforts like that can save lives. http://news.slashdot.org/story/99/04/25/1438249/voices-from-the-hellmouth http://news.slashdot.org/story/99/04/25/1438249/voices-from-...

hga 11y ago
Hacker News discussion on the Gladwell article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10380513 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10380513
mfoy_ 11y ago
That Gladwell article is a good read, it offers a perspective I hadn't come across before. Not that it really "solves" the problem at all, just casts a different light on it.
arthur_pryor 11y ago
I haven't thought about "Voices From The Hellmouth" in a really long time. I remember reading Slashdot a ton in high school and college (maybe 97 or 98 through 02?). Then, not so much. FWIW, HN, esp when I first found it a few years ago, reminded me a lot of what I loved about the discussion on Slashdot back in the day. Anyway, the actual point of this comment: much of what's described in "Voices From The Hellmouth" would now fit comfortably under the currently fashionable term "microagression." I'd bet that many posters on HN and elsewhere who think that microaggressions aren't a thing worth real concern, are also the sorts of people who were/are picked on in the way that "Hellmouth" catalogs so vividly. And for the record, I'm not saying that the prevailing view on HN is that microaggressions aren't real, or that most people who deny them were bullied geeks. Just that there are probably a lot of bullied or formerly bullied geeks who deny the significance of such social ostracism, even though they experienced it themselves. Ironic, but not unexpected: people without power often end up at odds with one another when they should be looking for common ground and empathizing with one another. Still, sad. I always find it really painful to watch minorities be racist, to watch geeks pick on other geeks for lacking social graces, to watch women be unfeminist, etc. Well, sometimes it's darkly hilarious. But still painful.

VT_Drew 11y ago

From your first paragraph: >‘I have noticed,’ it says, ‘that so many people like him are all alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are. A man who was known by no one is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you’re in the limelight.’ So, PLEAE can you stop fucking mentioning these assholes names? For the the love of God you are perpetuating the problem.

FussyZeus 11y ago
No kidding. Leave them as forgotten as they thought they were in life.
comrh 11y ago
I have no idea why this is controversial. The previous day's Gladwell article even comes to the same conclusion as most that notoriety and coverage are major factor in these types of attacks.
- fit2rule 11y ago
  I think the reason its controversial is that, with such a law enacted, oppressive governments can keep the revolutionaries in their boxes. Sometimes, you need to know the name of the revolutionaries. For example, with this "memory hole" policy, would we have ever known who these folks were, and what they were fighting for? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_revolutionaries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_revolutionar... Or is violent revolution simply not ever going to be acceptable any more because the fact of the application of violent force aspect has been usurped by the mentally insane? Are all violent revolutionaries insane, then? (Hint: no, of course not... unless you're the state they're attempting to violently overthrow, in which case you've got your "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, State-Sponsored Edition" at hand, ready for just such a circumstance ..) (Note: I am not saying we should worship these insane gun-toting school shooters as revolutionaries - but I am saying that we are on a very slippery slope if we're going to whiteout violent revolutionaries from history, future and past. Revolutions don't happen if you don't have a figurehead to get them started.)

necessity 11y ago

According to this ridiculous article I was "a natural step" from being a school shooter in my teenager years, and so are million others. The juvenile grouping of "jocks and nerds" is not enough for the author, who makes no effort in trying to understand the killera, instead he dwells into generalizations and sheer prejudice. If the title didn't hint you into what sort of article it would be.

cmiles74 11y ago

This is the first time I've read excerpts from these "manifestos" and it's hard to know how to react. It all reads like a kind of mental illness and it's chilling to see the similarities (although this article may only make them look similar). Intellectually I feel like there should be room for sympathy of some kind, but to be honest, I feel nothing of the kind; just angry. The authors strike me as small, pathetic, misguided and (for me, worst of all) demanding and entitled. In terms of constructive moves to try and deal with this issue, it's hard to think of anything substantive. For sure, less guns means these individuals would have taken fewer lives. Perhaps a better attitude toward mental illness and easier to access treatment options might help. On the other hand, it doesn't sound like these people though they were mentally ill. On the contrary, they felt the opposite. I found the bits about how special they think they are to be particularly striking. I certainly feel that my daughter is special, but I understand that what makes her most special is that she is my daughter. The idea that everyone should be, in some way, globally special seems somewhat misguided.

tunesmith 11y ago
The tough part is knowing that for every one of those that shoots up a bunch of people, there's an untold number of people that might feel similar feelings of alienation and agitation, but don't end up taking those final planning and action steps. In other words, before the killers took those final steps towards becoming a monster, there's not a really good way to differentiate them from someone else who never becomes a monster. This is where I think the whole discussion goes off the rails - the emphasis is in figuring out how to identify these "potential monsters", or in preventing these "potential monsters" from having the means to accomplish their ends. But if it's impossible to define a test/indicator such that, if it's true then they'll probably shoot up a school down the line, and if it's false then they probably won't, then where does that leave us? I think it leaves us in a place of not treating these people as potential monsters, but instead as normal kids struggling with feelings of alienation and lack of purpose, and giving them love and support. Not looking for signs of "potential school shooters" and seeking to prevent it, but looking for signs of loneliness and alienation, and seeking to give support. I just think that for a lot of us, we've probably had times in our past where we had a lot in common with the people that had not yet shot up a bunch of people. So when we think of what might have made our lives better at those times, maybe it would have helped some of them too. There the emphasis is more on just helping alienated kids feel less alone, knowing that for a very small percentage of them, it very well could prevent some real tragedies later on.

vorg 11y ago

> According to the FBI, there have been close to two hundred such incidents in the last 15 years, resulting in the murder of 486 people and the wounding of 557 as of September last year According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualt... , in the 8-year Iraq War (2003–2011), there were 3,527 U.S. combat deaths and 32,222 wounded. Could save far more American lives, not to mention others, by keeping sociopaths out of the Presidency rather than profiling and surveilling loners.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

AndrewKemendo 11y ago

I am convinced that the people who do these shootings do so because they have an ego that cannot cope with their societal impotence. That is, they think they should be more liked, more powerful, be able to get girls, be in charge of things, free from criticism, unable to be bullied (which is reasonable) etc... but aren't for any given reason. So their recourse is to prove to everyone how powerful they are by shooting them up. The worst part is, it is pretty powerful and it destroys communities, which is what they want. They want to be able to say they destroyed a community because that's how they are proving their power. I don't see any solution to this. Preventing them from getting access to the tools that could empower that could help but is really hard to do, especially in the US, because banning guns or whatever likely wouldn't work 100% of the time. If they are smart and dedicated enough they will find a way to get/make bombs and guns. So I see no real solution here.

rottencupcakes 11y ago
The falacy here is the classic "perfect is the enemy of good." Banning assault rifles and handguns could go a long way to reducing availability. And if that decreases the number of these events by as much as people think it could, it's probably worthwhile. Just because somebody who's super dedicated to the cause and works day in and day out to get the equipment to carry out a shooting could probably make it happen doesn't mean limiting access won't greatly reduce the number.
- AndrewKemendo 11y ago
  This is a good point, but I think underestimates the pathos around American gun ownership. That is to say, I don't think that banning those things would result in a reduction in availability.
flycaliguy 11y ago
With Facebook and other social media suspected of distorting people's perspective of their peer's social achievements... I wonder if a link can be drawn to recent mass shootings.

_0ffh 11y ago

Is pervasive PUA language in articles now so commonplace that nobody even comments on it? Is it a thing now to identify people with serious mental health problems with "betas", as if that was in any way a valid or helpful analysis?