| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/20/2012 01:20:47 AM · #851 |
Originally posted by Cory:
quote:
A sociopath is one who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior. A psychopath is a person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse.
recent research done by a geneticist and pschologist in americas top serial killer prison and holding psychopaths recently tested large corporate CEO's and found a number of them had not only the tell tale signs exhibited and included missing empathy and the warrior gene! psychopaths in fact mirror the illusion of empathy... a shy retiring loner who looks unhappy even if you are happy is not mirroring empathy... and we dont even know what his state of mind was or whether he was very ill or just having an accute breakdown which you or anyone can have at any moment with the right stressor and circumstance forced upon you! |
VS.
Originally posted by Article Posted:
Psychopaths often live at the fringes of society. They often tend to be extremely disorganized and are unable to maintain normal relationships with family, friends or co-workers. Unlike psychopaths, sociopaths can be almost obsessively organized and are normal in their social relationships, often forming symbiotic or parasitic relations. A sociopath would likely live an outwardly normal life and appear to blend in well with society; they may even be charming.
edit Career
Psychopaths often find it hard to maintain a steady job and home.
Sociopaths often have successful careers and try and try to make others like and trust them. This is because they understand human social emotions quite well but are unable to experience them. This allows them to be master manipulators of human emotions.
|
..
So either he got this wrong, or the article got this wrong, or it's a very indefinite term.
Seems to me, again, that while a great idea in principle - actually implementing any significantly effective measures would be tricky at the very least, especially given the cultural diversity of the US. [/quote]
i think that article got them back to front if you check out the many others i listed and other ones ive seen, read in scientific journals and seen in programs based on this exact thing you will see they seem to have been mixed up a little in that article above |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 01:37:42 AM · #852 |
Originally posted by Cory:
I really HATE to use the N-word, but you do realize that some of the worst things in history occurred because average Joes, who were neighbors that people went to high school with, who just worked their 9-5.
Hell, I work in government a lot of the time - and almost all the folks I know are WONDERFUL people. But that doesn't mean that they can't make huge mistakes collectively. |
I don't understand the N-word reference. (I'm a bit out of touch with reality, it appears.) |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 01:39:14 AM · #853 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by Cory:
I really HATE to use the N-word, but you do realize that some of the worst things in history occurred because average Joes, who were neighbors that people went to high school with, who just worked their 9-5.
Hell, I work in government a lot of the time - and almost all the folks I know are WONDERFUL people. But that doesn't mean that they can't make huge mistakes collectively. |
I don't understand the N-word reference. (I'm a bit out of touch with reality, it appears.) |
Godwin. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 01:40:37 AM · #854 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Not supporting that particular conspiracy theory. Just a general note on the Govt. being people; People act differently according to the situation, level of accountability, peer pressure, etc. Many experiments have demonstrated you can make an average, healthy person do unthinkable things under the "right" circumstances. |
So it is conceivable that someone, ANYONE, let alone an entire town, can conspire to kill 20 children to make a point about gun control laws? Under any imaginable circumstances? I am beyond out of touch. I am delusional in thinking that people are inherently good. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 01:45:45 AM · #855 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by Cory:
I really HATE to use the N-word, but you do realize that some of the worst things in history occurred because average Joes, who were neighbors that people went to high school with, who just worked their 9-5.
Hell, I work in government a lot of the time - and almost all the folks I know are WONDERFUL people. But that doesn't mean that they can't make huge mistakes collectively. |
I don't understand the N-word reference. (I'm a bit out of touch with reality, it appears.) |
refers to the political group that was hijacked by a certain little known normal person by the name of adolf hitler? ;O) (well i was guessing on that one lolal) ;o)
and +1 Melithia: although most people in govt dont even know who they work for anymore, theyre under the illusion its real govt and not a corporation that is listed in securities exchange masquerading as govt... where the goal collectively is to run like a business and corporation not for the people by the people, which is based on $ not services to humanity.. its not the employees fault of course, theyre just as much confused as the masses about who and what govt is and who's really in charge.
Message edited by author 2012-12-20 01:47:18. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 01:52:17 AM · #856 |
| P.S. I am one of those clueless, pathetic and apparently dangerous government workers. Just to clarify and all.... Armor up folks, I'm comin' for ya! (My cats both have claws.) |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 01:53:03 AM · #857 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Not supporting that particular conspiracy theory. Just a general note on the Govt. being people; People act differently according to the situation, level of accountability, peer pressure, etc. Many experiments have demonstrated you can make an average, healthy person do unthinkable things under the "right" circumstances. |
So it is conceivable that someone, ANYONE, let alone an entire town, can conspire to kill 20 children to make a point about gun control laws? Under any imaginable circumstances? I am beyond out of touch. I am delusional in thinking that people are inherently good. |
i dont think its inconceivable, but anythings possible, but im not so sure about this particular shooting as the reason, and any number of possible stressors could have triggered it, social outcry over the way he was treated growing up, or even was treated by his mum before hand at how she treated him say versus other kids... who knows, probably never know because theyre all dead and unless its documented somewhere by the young man who did it we'll never know... only speculation, but it still the important question how could society do more to nurture the good nature in people and yes even psychopaths, i have seen some interesting stuff on nature versus nurture and what makes the difference in one being a serial killer or killer v healthier upbringing... |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 01:54:57 AM · #858 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
P.S. I am one of those clueless, pathetic and apparently dangerous government workers. Just to clarify and all.... Armor up folks, I'm comin' for ya! (My cats both have claws.) |
lolal it doesnt have to be a govt worker it can be anyone in society, doctor, postman ;o) so dont forget to be nice to everyone :O) |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 02:12:46 AM · #859 |
| I don't know about others, but I'm losing focus in this thread. Nothing new seems to be said and it has gone way beyond honoring or remorse for those who died and seems to be nothing but banter. Perhaps this conversation should move to rant or be locked altogether. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 02:14:05 AM · #860 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Not supporting that particular conspiracy theory. Just a general note on the Govt. being people; People act differently according to the situation, level of accountability, peer pressure, etc. Many experiments have demonstrated you can make an average, healthy person do unthinkable things under the "right" circumstances. |
So it is conceivable that someone, ANYONE, let alone an entire town, can conspire to kill 20 children to make a point about gun control laws? Under any imaginable circumstances? I am beyond out of touch. I am delusional in thinking that people are inherently good. |
Nope, but they might enact laws that leave the lawful unarmed, and leave the lawless well armed.
Or any one of a dozen other equally bad alternatives. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 02:18:41 AM · #861 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
I don't know about others, but I'm losing focus in this thread. Nothing new seems to be said and it has gone way beyond honoring or remorse for those who died and seems to be nothing but banter. Perhaps this conversation should move to rant or be locked altogether. |
Agree. And I apologize for my comments as well. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 02:35:23 AM · #862 |
To be clear. I don't think all teachers should have a gun at school.
But. I did just run across this - and I do recall several people asking for just such anecdotes.
In 2007, a gunman entered New Life Church in Colorado Springs and shot and killed two girls. Jeanne Assam, a former police officer stationed as a volunteer security guard at the church, drew her firearm, shot and wounded the gunman before he could kill anyone else. The gunman then killed himself.
In 1997, high school student Luke Woodham stabbed his mother to death and then drove to Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi, and shot and killed two people. He then got back in his car to drive to Pearl Junior High to continue his killings, but Joel Myrick, the assistant principal, ran to his truck and grabbed his pistol, aimed it at Woodham and made him surrender. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 02:40:43 AM · #863 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
I don't know about others, but I'm losing focus in this thread. Nothing new seems to be said and it has gone way beyond honoring or remorse for those who died and seems to be nothing but banter. Perhaps this conversation should move to rant or be locked altogether. |
true! well im gonna leave it now anyway! my thoughts are with the families and friends and survivors. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 02:47:17 AM · #864 |
Sometimes to solve a problem one has to be mature enough to look elsewhere, if elsewhere we notice that the problem exists but to a much much smaller extent, then we have to be mature enough to admit that we've been tackling the problem the wrong way and we should at least try the method being used elsewhere. It is just a question of maturity and common sense, letting go of what we cherish is never easy, even when we know the bad it does.
Edit because I stuck a French word in there, I need to get out more.
Message edited by author 2012-12-20 03:24:03. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 03:33:22 AM · #865 |
The real solution is to have everyone armed. If someone tried to rob a bank and 20 people pulled out their personal handgun, he would instantly give up. If he knew that everyone in the bank was armed, he wouldn’t try to rob the bank to begin with. It is an enormous deterrent to crime, not a facilitator. If a common thug thought that everyone on the street had a gun on them, would he try to mug someone knowing there was a good chance he would be shot for his effort? Much less likely.
These shootings do not take place because guns are available, they take place because of an enormous range of factors. Mental instability, mind-altering drugs, the feeling of utter helplessness when looking at society as a wholeâ€Â¦ Who really knows what triggered this kid, whether it was a side-effect of whatever mental condition he may or may not have had combined with whatever chemicals he may or may not have been prescribed, or whether this was a black-flag psy-op. Does it really matter?
The point is how this event is being used to try to take away your rights. If you support the effort, even just by saying “Well, maybe more restrictions would help” then you are part of a massive problem with this country. You are willfully giving your rights away, in exchange for “safety.” If you think not having semi-automatic rifles suddenly makes the world a safer place, then you are simply a fool. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 07:30:58 AM · #866 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
So it is conceivable that someone, ANYONE, let alone an entire town, can conspire to kill 20 children to make a point about gun control laws? Under any imaginable circumstances? I am beyond out of touch. I am delusional in thinking that people are inherently good. |
people often confuse a conspiracy with people taking advantage when an opportunity occurs. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 07:32:29 AM · #867 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Sometimes to solve a problem one has to be mature enough to look elsewhere, if elsewhere we notice that the problem exists but to a much much smaller extent, then we have to be mature enough to admit that we've been tackling the problem the wrong way and we should at least try the method being used elsewhere. It is just a question of maturity and common sense, letting go of what we cherish is never easy, even when we know the bad it does.
Edit because I stuck a French word in there, I need to get out more. |
insightful as always. I couldn't agree more. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 07:35:50 AM · #868 |
Originally posted by cutout:
The real solution is to have everyone armed. If someone tried to rob a bank and 20 people pulled out their personal handgun, he would instantly give up. If he knew that everyone in the bank was armed, he wouldn’t try to rob the bank to begin with. It is an enormous deterrent to crime, not a facilitator. If a common thug thought that everyone on the street had a gun on them, would he try to mug someone knowing there was a good chance he would be shot for his effort? Much less likely.
These shootings do not take place because guns are available, they take place because of an enormous range of factors. Mental instability, mind-altering drugs, the feeling of utter helplessness when looking at society as a wholeâ€Â¦ Who really knows what triggered this kid, whether it was a side-effect of whatever mental condition he may or may not have had combined with whatever chemicals he may or may not have been prescribed, or whether this was a black-flag psy-op. Does it really matter?
The point is how this event is being used to try to take away your rights. If you support the effort, even just by saying “Well, maybe more restrictions would help” then you are part of a massive problem with this country. You are willfully giving your rights away, in exchange for “safety.” If you think not having semi-automatic rifles suddenly makes the world a safer place, then you are simply a fool. |
that only works if EVERYONE has a gun EVERYWHERE. that isn't the case now, will never be, and thus isn't a solution to the problem. arming everyone would be much harder and be met with much more opposition than restricting gun use. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 07:51:59 AM · #869 |
Originally posted by cutout:
The real solution is to have everyone armed. If someone tried to rob a bank and 20 people pulled out their personal handgun, he would instantly give up. If he knew that everyone in the bank was armed, he wouldn’t try to rob the bank to begin with. It is an enormous deterrent to crime, not a facilitator. If a common thug thought that everyone on the street had a gun on them, would he try to mug someone knowing there was a good chance he would be shot for his effort? Much less likely.
These shootings do not take place because guns are available, they take place because of an enormous range of factors. Mental instability, mind-altering drugs, the feeling of utter helplessness when looking at society as a wholeâ€Â¦ Who really knows what triggered this kid, whether it was a side-effect of whatever mental condition he may or may not have had combined with whatever chemicals he may or may not have been prescribed, or whether this was a black-flag psy-op. Does it really matter?
The point is how this event is being used to try to take away your rights. If you support the effort, even just by saying “Well, maybe more restrictions would help” then you are part of a massive problem with this country. You are willfully giving your rights away, in exchange for “safety.” If you think not having semi-automatic rifles suddenly makes the world a safer place, then you are simply a fool. |
This would be CHAOS. It's what used to happen in the Middle Ages and life wasn't better than now.
Message edited by author 2012-12-20 07:52:18. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 08:16:50 AM · #870 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Edit because I stuck a French word in there, I need to get out more. |
Wouldn't that lead to more French? ;) |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 08:24:57 AM · #871 |
Originally posted by cutout:
The real solution is to have everyone armed. If someone tried to rob a bank and 20 people pulled out their personal handgun, he would instantly give up. If he knew that everyone in the bank was armed, he wouldn’t try to rob the bank to begin with. It is an enormous deterrent to crime, not a facilitator. If a common thug thought that everyone on the street had a gun on them, would he try to mug someone knowing there was a good chance he would be shot for his effort? Much less likely.
These shootings do not take place because guns are available, they take place because of an enormous range of factors. Mental instability, mind-altering drugs, the feeling of utter helplessness when looking at society as a wholeâ€Â¦ Who really knows what triggered this kid, whether it was a side-effect of whatever mental condition he may or may not have had combined with whatever chemicals he may or may not have been prescribed, or whether this was a black-flag psy-op. Does it really matter?
The point is how this event is being used to try to take away your rights. If you support the effort, even just by saying “Well, maybe more restrictions would help” then you are part of a massive problem with this country. You are willfully giving your rights away, in exchange for “safety.” If you think not having semi-automatic rifles suddenly makes the world a safer place, then you are simply a fool. |
I think you must be joking. the evidence of shootings in military installations and incidents where shooters deliberately attack law enforcement personnel and are expecting to get killed make a nonsense of your argument.
Do you think that the US has many more people who suffer a particular mental instability compared to other countries; a mental instability that causes them to take guns and shoot large numbers of other people? What do you think would happen if these people were in an environment where guns were NOT freely available?
Your paranoia about having your rights taken away is very difficult to understand. Did you ever think that it would be a right to not have to worry about whether you were likely to get shot or shoot somebody in the course of your day? Did you ever think that maybe the industries that depend on gun ownership WANT you to believe that it's your right to own guns. That sounds much more like the conspiracy that's going on.
|
|
|
|
12/20/2012 08:36:30 AM · #872 |
Everyone armed is not a serious position. Its an NRA bargaining position, a starting point.
Gun control people say no guns, NRA says everybody armed, and as such frame the debate to keep everything status quo, they hope, for the most part. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 09:03:15 AM · #873 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by jagar:
Edit because I stuck a French word in there, I need to get out more. |
Wouldn't that lead to more French? ;) |
Out of the country I meant :) |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 09:24:53 AM · #874 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by Melethia:
So it is conceivable that someone, ANYONE, let alone an entire town, can conspire to kill 20 children to make a point about gun control laws? Under any imaginable circumstances? I am beyond out of touch. I am delusional in thinking that people are inherently good. |
people often confuse a conspiracy with people taking advantage when an opportunity occurs. |
Sorry for the confusion Melethia. I was not implying any of us could be the shooter in this situation. It's very unlikely that we'd be driven to such direct, in your face action. But more indirect, or slow moving harm, yes, most any one of us. We all know the frog in boiling water.
The simplest example of what I was referring to is the Milgram Experiment.
Normal, sane people were goaded into shocking their fellow human (well it was faked, but they didn't know that).
"In Milgram's first set of experiments, 65 percent (26 of 40)[1] of experiment participants administered the experiment's final massive 450-volt shock, though many were very uncomfortable doing so; at some point, every participant paused and questioned the experiment."
We are VERY bound by social protocol, authority figures, etc. There are many more examples (mock prison experiments, mock psych ward experiments, etc) that also illustrate this principle.
My point being, back to the fundamental attribution error I mentioned several posts back. We overestimate the amount of influence a persons inherent traits have and underestimate situational factors.
Aside from rare, rare cases of born sociopathy (or psychopathy as the debate may go) illness is made, not born. Which means it can be avoided with the correct intervention.
Message edited by author 2012-12-20 09:28:01. |
|
|
|
12/20/2012 09:30:38 AM · #875 |
|
