Curmudgeon wrote:

Derick Freese wrote: In reply to friedgreencorrado: Mom sounds like someone that's too lazy to do any of her own research, and is unwilling to do any work to find any sort of help. She wants someone else to do everything for her, for her kid. She is one of the problems with mental healthcare in the united states because she is expecting someone else to solve it for her.

It has nothing to do with lazy. Or trying to shove it off on someone else. I won't bore you with the various incidents that happened in my case, but here's the thing, as I learned first hand: there is only so much that a family member can do, particularly when the person with the problem is of legal age. Our hands are tied by laws and other things and so called 'research' gets people like me absolutely nowhere, it's not like just Googling valve lash specs or etc. Thanks to medical privacy laws, I could not even talk with my ex's counselor about her problems except in the most general of terms unless I had her explicit consent. So that avenue is closed. We can demand that the person attend counseling etc but at the end of the day it's up to them, not us, to get help. Maybe they refuse or, as in my ex's case they go for a while and then say screw it, I'm tired of this and I'm not gonna do it any more. I don't have any experience with this with a underage person, I would suppose there are restrictions on just how far a parent can go but I don't know. So we family members live in fear, waiting and wondering when The Big One is going to happen, watching someone we love come apart. If we are lucky, the problem eventually manifests itself in a way which can make it imperative that others get involved and force the individual with the problem to get help. Or sometimes it shows up as it did in this case with horrific results.

+1

Derick - you just don't know. Until you've lived in the same house as someone who you think may snap, you're just talking out of your ass. What that mom wrote is incredibly brave. A lot of people live it, but nobody talks about it.

Admitting a problem is greater than you can handle on your own is not the same as trying to pass all the responsibility on to someone else.

Beer Baron wrote: Admitting a problem is greater than you can handle on your own is not the same as trying to pass all the responsibility on to someone else.

Especially when you're not a professional in the field that actually works on that problem. If the boy's problem was cancer, would the mom be blamed for not doing the surgery?

while trying to avoid the gun-control angle,

it seems that the common thread of these perpetrators is the defenselessness of the targets. not only is the environment non-threatening for the purpose of those present, the very people present are among the least possible threatening targets to the perpetrators.

whatever behavioral or mental issues lead down this path, these people seem to be drawn to places of least resistance and challenge to carry out their intent.

This is different than instances like Columbine where they have examples of revisiting sources of previously inflicted anxiety, as well as no indication of impulsive sudden actions vs deliberate premeditation over months.

i'm of the opinion that these people, for whatever reason, are seeking to exert a sense of control that they are convinced they don't have on the world they're in.

They pick 'soft targets' to protect themselves and the sensation of empowerment they'll get from carrying out these acts.

but if i'm right, the real question becomes, what are the signs of the subject suffering from such feelings?

In reply to madmallard:

I think that is a question only a psychologist is capable of even attempting to answer.

After giving this a lot of thought and listening to adamant people shouting about guns, I've come up with what I think are real ideas to solve this problem. The following actions would be far more effective and nowhere near as controversial as trying to either arm or disarm more of the general populace.

1: Stop sensationalizing the event and shooter. This was done for attention. Stop putting his name and face on the front page and leading news stories. If you see the shooters name in print, ignore it. Don't give people who do these things the fame they hope for. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

2: Better mental health services, and better sharing of mental health information between agencies. There seems to be a link between mental/emotional imbalance and events like these. Let's talk openly about mental and emotional health. These are not bad or evil people. They are sick people who need treatment. Their families and friends need to be aware of and understand their conditions to be able to control the environment so to minimize the risk these people pose to themselves and others. Again, an ounce of prevention...

3: Trained, dedicated, armed security at schools. The shooting spree in Connecticut was brought to a halt when law enforcement personnel arrived on the scene to confront the shooter. Having a team of 2-3 LEO's per school who are equipped and kept up with current training would be useful first responders. They could also be trained in basic first aid and other emergency scenarios to be able to respond to events such as serious injuries, fires, etc.