It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Why do paranoid dummies feel a need to broadcast themselves? Wouldn't that just clue in the Ruinous Powers that someone is onto them?
I ask this because twice in the past week I've gotten spam mail from some idiot named "Fremen Fighter" who's agenda is unclear but thinks the government is putting guns in the hands of killers to spur events like the Connecticut shooting and thus thinks the solution is to...
...WAIT FOR IT...
...Arm teachers with guns.
Comments
Because usually these types are legitimately mentally ill and, y'know, not capable of acting rationally?
Why the fuck didn't their family or something recommend them to a psychiatrist? How do people this...Troubled...Get a job long enough to afford a computer and pay the internet bills?
Why are these people left unmonitored? That's how shit like the Connecticut shooting happens in the first place!
Also how did these looney get my email address to begin with, anyway?
(On that note, part of the reason that happened was because the mum was...Not a good mother. She apparently taught her son firearms usage to teach him responsibility. Oh, the irony.)
Because psychiatric care is expensive, far more than internet access, and also disability checks.
Sigh. Figures.
Shouldn't someone monitor these people to make sure they're not spending the disability checks on digging their own grave?
Its pretty easy for people not to get psychiatric care and to not be monitored. Whatever mechanism we use to monitor these people is either going to be difficult to enforce (and costly at any rate) and its doubtful any useful data will be gained from surveillance.
From a law enforcement perspective, lone shooters (or active shooters as they are known, since in a shooting spree information is often sparse) are very difficult to track and counter. Honestly, there are many people that have to be monitored and very limited resources to monitor them.
I doubt gun laws can help if the situation involves someone other than the owner having possible mental issues, unless we want to go that extra step.
But its pretty easy for someone with mental illness to do well enough that they can afford internet bills and spout their theories. It is much less likely for most people to actively seek mental healthcare and most asylums are temporary (and designed for crisis moments, not indefinite storage) and have an iffy chance of leading the person to take better care of themselves.
Chances are they'll end up the street given enough time, and become part of the homeless population of whatever area they are in.
Also conspiracy theories are rarely rational or internally consistent. If you are likely to believe in one conspiracy theory, you are more likely to believe in other conspiracy theories. When faced with facts that point against the theory, or when theories contradict each other, they generally add another layer onto the conspiracy. And someone can be a conspiracy theorist without being mentally ill.
Are you sure he wasn't with House Harkonnen? Those are some vindictive motherfuckers.
@saladofstones: I see.
Still wondering where this guy got my email, though.
@RocketDude:
Too crazy and not EEEEEVIL enough to be Harkonnen, sadly.
Well, hey, if the guy posts a picture of himself and he has some nasty-ass boils on him, run.
I'm kind of puzzled how you went from "conspiracy theorist" to "medically mentally ill" to "clearly this guy is a shooting perpetrator waiting to happen".
Like, there are many different kinds of mental illness, and even then, being a conspiracy theorist doesn't make you mentally ill, it makes you misguided in most circumstances. I could tell you about the things I used to believe but I'll spare you that trip down memory lane. Often, people get into this kind of thing via a messageboard or e-mail, usually from someone with an agenda of some kind.
I never said this guy was a shooting perp waiting to happen, just that he's ranting at length about the Connecticut shooting and has some crazy ideas about it.
Also, I think he's at least a LITTLE crazy because he sent another email about a week ago saying that Windows 8 was literally Satan incarnate, and something either against- or for-Paganism. I couldn't tell which.
And again, I'll ask, HOW DID THIS FUCKER GET MY EMAIL ADDRESS.
It is *shockingly* easy to get random peoples' e-mail addresses if you're not looking for anyone's in particular. Honestly you could probably google it and come up with several different techniques.
Google is a spectacular and terrifying tool.
Other than the usual actual investigative channels, simple library attacks are enough to get loads of addresses. If you're using a college email account, their account-naming process is trivially deterministic if you have access to their public records, and gmail encourages similarly simple naming conventions.
Hell, you can just have a program randomly pair up common first + last names @gmail.com and land several thousand.
A bigger question is why you aren't blocking him.
Because I'm a dutz and forgot I could do that. :V
Oh look, the asshole's back!
Someone please tell me how to permablock someone on Gmail because there isn't a BLOCK button in big bold letters.
EDIT: Figured it out. I think.
You know what, concerning this particular wacko - I've been thinking, he might be kinda right. I mean, concerning his solution. The 'States look to me like they're on the whole so oversaturated with guns, it might be easier just to stuff more guns into those places which aren't yet stereotypically American (if you know what I mean). You know, it'd be kinda like ending the "War on Drugs" and getting more laid-back is the proposed solution to the drug problem.
I can't imagine that ending well in crowded urban areas, though. Too much crossfire.
So many GUNS GUNS GUNS types live in the countryside, though, that I don't think they'd understand.
And at any rate I am not going to indulge the NRA and their lobbyist tendencies. All I'm sure they want above all is a world where they can push more guns on more people so the NRA can get more money.
And at any rate, wouldn't trying to ensure that people never turn into psychopaths/gang members/etc be better than turning everything into a small-scale case of Mutually Assured Destruction?
The difference is that if everybody had a joint, it wouldn't lead to anywhere near the amounts of death that would happen if everyone was holding an object made for killing on their household.
For some reason I'm just suddenly imagining how A-pot-calypse would look.
Probably, but these people don't seem like they actually understand that.
Do police usually need/want to kill criminals? I imagine their job is mainly to arrest people and leave it up to a judge and jury.
SPOILERS FOR THE WIRE THE BEST SHOW OF ALL TIME EXCEPT FOR MAYBE THE PRISONER
Shit, I got this nutjob too. He must not have liked my Harkonnen comment.
This bastard is timely and productive. Got another one today:
I wish I knew how to say "Too long; didn't read; you bore me; kill yourself" in crackpot-ese.
I think this might just be The Best Sentence. I'll have to do some cross-referencing but this might just be the one. Fingers crossed!
He's like Timecube Guy with more of a Freudian gun complex.
Dude, either block him or admit you like this shit for the schadenfreude value.
I DID put him on my Gmail block list. All it seems to do though is automatically assign posts from him to the spam bin.
Then leave it in the spam folder where it belongs and let the auto-delete do its work.