eflatminor
Classical Liberal
- May 24, 2011
- 10,643
- 1,669
- 245
- Thread starter
- #41
Seriously though, it seems to me at this stage that he did what he did because he was mentally ill and an asshole. I'm not sure that trying to assign a motive to it beyond that is really all that productive.
The time and energy the government puts into playing criminal whack-a-mole with gun-control laws should really be put into serious research on the brain and mental health.
I say he was mentally ill no matter what the motivation. I admit to wanting the know that motivation, particularly if it came via an enemy of the United States.
Re research on mental health, I wonder if it should be less research and more of a willingness to put troubled folks, once fully and properly adjudicated, into mental institutions, which need not be the awful places as they sometimes were in the past. This seems to me well within a state's right to legislate. The alternative seems to be to let the jails handle them or they walk into walls homeless. Of course, I doubt that would have stopped the asshole in Vegas. Others, perhaps. Tons of petty crime, absolutely. A tricky civil rights issue to be sure.
The Sheriff says it possibly was "radicalization".
Do we know more than the Sheriff?
That's rather vague of the Sheriff. Any act like this is radical.
Do you know more than the Sheriff?
I am quoting the Sheriff, I agree with the Sheriff.
On the contrary, it seems that many here think they know more than the Sheriff.
This is the meaning of radicalisation and the Sheriff could not have been more clear!
-"Radicalization (or radicalisation) is a process by which an individual, or group comes to adopt increasingly extreme political, social, or religious ideals and aspirations that reject or undermine the status quo or undermine contemporary ideas and expressions of the nation."-
Like I said, vague. What group, what ideals, what aspirations?