"A loner"

Post questions or suggestions here.
Elizabeth Isabelle
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am

Post by Elizabeth Isabelle »

sschaula wrote:But the fact is that those roommates did nothing wrong.
So if you had some roommates who would follow you around online and warn everyone they could that Scott has guns and a short temper, there would be nothing wrong with that?
sschaula wrote:He had no sense of others, but only of himself. No compassion or empathy...he was just an endless pit of selfishness. He had no capacity for pain.
Where are you getting that? Perhaps the same place you got this:
sschaula wrote:That's not a joke. I'm being serious about the hat thing. In my experience only assholes wear them.
I agree that the guy's attitude made him seem like an asshole, but the hat? That's as far-fetched as all those projections on Cho.
sschaula wrote:Seek the truth above all else.
Like the truth about hats and how it's okay to stalk your roommate?
sschaula wrote:The truth so far is that no one did anything to him, and that they actually tried to reach out to him.
We don't know the whole truth yet. Granted you did say "the truth so far" - but there is no such thing as "truth so far" - there is only one truth. All we have now are stories, and we will never have the whole perspective of the shooter.
sschaula wrote:Playing devil's advocate in an argument like this only demonizes your position.
So my position is like that of a demon because I can see psychological possibilities rather than just swallow exactly how the media is portraying him?

Never mind answering those. I was just trying to show some possible psychological motivations for his behavior, and you're attached to the good guy/bad guy mindset.
.
Last edited by Elizabeth Isabelle on Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
keenobserver
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:01 pm

Post by keenobserver »

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
sschaula wrote:This wasn't the result of snobby kids ignoring him, or girls thinking he was a stalker just because he was different. Cho was actually screwed up, probably from childhood events. Read his plays and stop projecting your worldview onto his.
Okay, so he was screwed up from childhood stuff. That does not excuse how he was treated by others. Of course how he was treated by others would screw him up even worse, which would make others treat him even more strangely - and anyone treated strangely starts acting more strangely. Yeah, he must have known the pictures under the desk was inappropriate, but sooner or later a person says fuck it, no one is going to accept me anyway, I might as well (fill in blank here). Horrors have to stop somewhere, and for him, this is where they stopped.
Interview with roommates.

Watch this as objective observers. Keep in mind how much someone is going to be willing to say (not much as far as confessing to being a contributor) and consider the warped mentality of "normal" people. Even the reporter, even after getting a full explanation, seemed to think e weirdest thing was that he kept the light on "all night." On clarification, we hear that he left the light on while the roommate was up late studying, and the roommate would turn off the light before he went to bed. What's so weird about that? It sounds considerate to me. And as for this "stalking" - apparently he met a girl online, and after he got to know her a little (and she seems to have lived close - maybe on the same campus) went to meet her in person. The girl freaked out and called the cops. Who knows if he did anything weird or if the girl was easily freaked out. Anyway, after that, one of the roommates would find out whatever girl he was talking to online and "warn her" about him. Uh, yeah - any girl would freak out if someone warned her about a guy she just met - and what kind of a chance would he have of meeting anyone if his roommates were "warning" everyone he tried to meet? And they said they didn't think he would actually harm any of them, but they just wanted to warn the girls because he might freak them out (huh?) and one said he "thought about" following him around to see if he was talking to any other girls so he could warn them too - yet Cho is the one they are accusing of "stalking." Think about it. And this was just the stuff they confessed to doing - thinking they were proving how weird he was by doing such horrible things as not complaining about the light while his roommate was studying. The roommates and the reporter thought like that, and have a look around to see how many other people are thinking like that. Realizing what people are like, it's no wonder he wanted to kill them all. I'm just surprised he didn't get those roommates.
.
Indeed, good points here.
One thing that occured to me - these teachers and other staff being interviewed, you've got to take what they say with a grain of salt. They're very much worried about getting saddled with some of the blame for these deaths, you can tell from their responses, they all emphasize having reported him and the like to clear themselves, but they never go so far as to suggest there was any way to predict his violence. They want credit for recognizing his problems and acting appropriately, but they dont want any credit for his actions. They are measuring their words carefully. In short, they are much too concerned for their own asses to be believed at all. Its a circus, meant primarily to convince the living and their parents to continue to trust them and not transfer to another school. Its like everything else in this godforsaken country, little more than a movie with greedy incompetent actors, all fluff and no substance, a state in which it has become impossible to be sincere and take any risk at all, where we all agree to pretend to each other and hope for the best.
Meanwhile from within and without we are beaten and punished for our sins, while the worst is yet to come.
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

Elizabeth,
So if you had some roommates who would follow you around online and warn everyone they could that Scott has guns and a short temper, there would be nothing wrong with that?
Well if I had guns and a short temper - no! I would be dangerous.
Where are you getting that? Perhaps the same place you got this:
I'm getting it from knowing his mindset.
I agree that the guy's attitude made him seem like an asshole, but the hat? That's as far-fetched as all those projections on Cho.
So what if I think people that wear those kinds of hats tend to be assholes? I don't think it's too far fetched. If you've known the people that I have wearing those types of hats maybe you'd think the same thing.
Like the truth about hats and how it's okay to stalk your roommate?
They didn't stalk their roommate...but if they had, it would've been okay and justified. They had good reason to watch what he was doing, and in light of what happened, they should've been watching more closely.

About the hats...lets forget I said anything about it. It's not a discussion worth having.
We don't know the whole truth yet. Granted you did say "the truth so far" - but there is no such thing as "truth so far" - there is only one truth. All we have now are stories, and we will never have the whole perspective of the shooter.
So what's your point? Work with what you've got. Don't "what if" it unnecessarily.
So my position is like that of a demon because I can see psychological possibilities rather than just swallow exactly how the media is portraying him?

Never mind answering those. I was just trying to show some possible psychological motivations for his behavior, and you're attached to the good guy/bad guy mindset.
Attached? Haha...you're quite annoying.

Yes, your position is wrong because you are making decent people out to be the cause of why Cho did this. If they turn out to be indecent people, then things will obviously change. But there IS NO EVIDENCE that they were indecent to Cho. So there's NO REASON to speculate that they were...especially after reading his plays and hearing about his behavior in class, and also his dealings with the cops and getting mental treatment in '05.

To make it clear: with the evidence there is, this is NOT about what his classmates did to him. It was about him having problems, period.
- Scott
Elizabeth Isabelle
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am

Post by Elizabeth Isabelle »

sschaula wrote:Elizabeth,
So if you had some roommates who would follow you around online and warn everyone they could that Scott has guns and a short temper, there would be nothing wrong with that?
Well if I had guns and a short temper - no! I would be dangerous.
Well, unless you were lying about your weaponry in the other thread, by your own assessment, you are dangerous. You have been informed about your short temper on multiple occasions, so this should not be a surprise to you. In light of what Cho did, should we just notify everyone you have contact with, or should we have you locked in a mental institution right now? A self admission of being a danger to others is sufficient to get you locked away for at least a couple of days.
.
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

Elizabeth,
Well, unless you were lying about your weaponry in the other thread, by your own assessment, you are dangerous.
I don't think I have a short temper. Anyone that knows me considers me to be very patient and serene...except for the people here, of course, who have the wrong impression of me.

Of course I'm dangerous, but not to innocent people.
You have been informed about your short temper on multiple occasions, so this should not be a surprise to you.
No, the posters at this board generally don't suprise me. I knew this was coming when you mentioned weapons and a short temper, because I know how you view me, in light of my dealings with Kow and Nick.

Do you really think I would do what Cho did? Answer truthfully, and lets see how retarded you can be.
In light of what Cho did, should we just notify everyone you have contact with, or should we have you locked in a mental institution right now?
Well, you can if you want. I don't know what they'd put me in jail for since I've done nothing illegal by owning a weapon. There'd be no reason to put me in a mental institution since I've never said I was going to kill myself, and I haven't been stalking anyone...
A self admission of being a danger to others is sufficient to get you locked away for at least a couple of days.
Well yeah, but I never admitted I was a danger to others.

Start thinking, Elizabeth.
- Scott
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

I want to make a point clear...

If you told my family, friends, and everyone that knew me that I was a dangerous person. If I was committed to a mental institution for a while because of what you told them. If I didn't talk to anyone...

Is that justification for shooting like 60 of my classmates, killing 32 and wounding the rest?

Can that even sensibly be considered a cause for the shooting?

I don't think so!
- Scott
Elizabeth Isabelle
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am

Post by Elizabeth Isabelle »

sschaula wrote:Do you really think I would do what Cho did? Answer truthfully, and lets see how retarded you can be.
No, I don't think you are currently a danger to yourself or others despite that you have a gun and a short temper - and I knew my post would flare up your temper a little - which it obviously did by you calling me retarded, amongst other things. My purpose was to make a point that you would not think it was so okay if someone did that to you. You got mad at even the suggestion, so I see that I made my point.

And that one incident was not the whole cause of him shooting all those people - but it seems to me that it was one link in the chain of causality.
.
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

E,
No, I don't think you are currently a danger to yourself or others despite that you have a gun and a short temper
Good. Your argument was getting very close to being retarded.
and I knew my post would flare up your temper a little - which it obviously did by you calling me retarded, amongst other things.
You think me calling you retarded showed that my temper was flared? I thought someone's temper was what would cause them to kill 32 students...there's a wide gap there...I don't think the definition of temper should account for that entire spectrum.
My purpose was to make a point that you would not think it was so okay if someone did that to you. You got mad at even the suggestion, so I see that I made my point.
Actually, I did say it would be okay if I had a short temper. You didn't make your point.
And that one incident was not the whole cause of him shooting all those people - but it seems to me that it was one link in the chain of causality.
It may have been. I just disagree with focusing on that link, instead of the largest one, which was his obvious mental illness. Saying his classmates were at fault is far far far far far from the truth if this is all they did to him.
- Scott
User avatar
Katy
Posts: 599
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 8:08 am
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Post by Katy »

Oh, well then, lets just start rounding up everyone with a mental illness because they're all going to go killing everyone at their school too.

Trying to attribute this to ONE CAUSE or even ONE MAIN CAUSE is idiotic.
-Katy
Elizabeth Isabelle
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am

Post by Elizabeth Isabelle »

This may help people understand some of the background that contributes to this sort of thing including both internal and external usual factors:

spree killing
and
suicide + spree killing
.
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

No, it's not idiotic. He was mentally ill, but not in the same way as others are mentally ill.
- Scott
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

By the way, you may want to turn to the news now and look at the videos he sent into NBC.
- Scott
keenobserver
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:01 pm

Post by keenobserver »

I think I heard him say his intention was to "inspire" other victims of injustice living in a fake, careless society. And I suppose he may just manage it.
There are thousands of mostly men in the US who are silent invisible victims of the careless majority, heartless may be more accurate. I see them everyday lying on the streets, treated like lepers, not the slighest chance anyone will ever care about them, just a social services full of loveless misfits feeling no responsibility toward their fellow man, if truth be told.
America is all about ME, and getting and taking and rising above other citizens, maximum pleasure at any cost and screw the future, it will take care of itself.
Cho realized what he was up against. That those that have get more and those that dont deserve less. That being odd or different was a death sentence.
Look who he killed, many were beautiful people.
Sure he was disturbed, but the question is, would have he managed better in another society, in Canada for instance.
Would have he had found an ounce of love there? Probably.
America cares not for its loosers. Barely respects them. This greed and selfishness isnt free, nothing's free, it comes at a cost. And this week we paid out once again.
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Post by Unidian »

But the fact is that those roommates did nothing wrong. Cho was actually fucked up, and that was the whole reason why this occurred. He had no sense of others, but only of himself. No compassion or empathy...he was just an endless pit of selfishness. He had no capacity for pain.
But how does this happen? Some people are born this way, but for reasons others have already mentioned, Cho was obviously not one of them. He wasn't a born sociopath, he was severly disturbed. That doesn't just "happen" by itself. It has causes, and keenobserver and Elizabeth have pointed some of them out quite accurately. If we don't listen to these people and start getting honest about what is contributing to these attacks, they are going to keep happening continuously.

It's ugly, but this can't be wished away. No amount of falsely claiming "we have no idea why he did it" on the part of the media or others is going to make this sort of thing stop. He's quite clear about why he did it, for anyone who has ears to listen. This isn't about "excusing" him for his actions, just in case anyone is entertaining that idiotic thought. It's about recognizing that actions have causes, which is something we'd better start learning how to do.

And here's a good place to start:
Sure he was disturbed, but the question is, would have he managed better in another society, in Canada for instance.
Would have he had found an ounce of love there? Probably.
America cares not for its loosers. Barely respects them. This greed and selfishness isnt free, nothing's free, it comes at a cost. And this week we paid out once again.
I've heard Cho referred to as "a loser" by major media figures at least twice since the tragedy. These people don't know it, but they are confessing to a role in the attacks. Events have causes. Read it again, Americans. Events have causes.
I live in a tub.
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

It seems that the more I discuss my point of view, the more people will argue with it.
- Scott
Elizabeth Isabelle
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am

Post by Elizabeth Isabelle »

Okay, they finally released it online. (I don't have television - I guess they release it on TV a little faster than it gets online).

The reporters are misinterpreting him (so what's new). The reporters are saying that he was being very anti-rich kids. That's not what I heard. I heard him explaining that he was being emotionally tortured by these kids. He was saying that their gold chains etc. wasn't enough for them, they had to get their pleasure by being mean to him.

Interpret what he says yourself - don't just take the reporter's interpretation (or mine either - you interpret it for yourself).

This is just more of the same that we all go through - we say something important, and people hear not what we say, but what they want to hear. He is being as misunderstood in death as he probably was in life.
.
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

Do you really interpret when he says "you" as being directed at the kids at the school? It seems to me that he's referring directly to his molester.
- Scott
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

He is being as misunderstood in death as he probably was in life.
Actually, keenobserver attempting to justify the killings is exactly what Cho would've wanted. In his videos he talks about being a martyr just like the Columbine kids.
- Scott
User avatar
Jamesh
Posts: 1526
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:44 pm

Post by Jamesh »

He was saying that their gold chains etc. wasn't enough for them, they had to get their pleasure by being mean to him.
I thought it was more general than that, more about the general hedonism in society these days, leaving him confused and unable to determine wrong or right. The messages from parents and others like the campus religious crowd, were probably in direct conflict to the blatant hedonistic images and stories one sees in the media these days. It kind of leaves some sensitive kids no "right" way to turn, as they are more naturally attracted to the hedonism and this makes them feel guilty. If they are also made into outsiders both by their own sensistivity and the tormenting or rejection of others then bottled up anger can bubble over. You see this everywhere in young folks music, be it rap or metal.

I'd like to see the full 1800 words in the package he send to the media.
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

If you go to the link Elizabeth posted, and watch the videos you can hear his point in his own words. It doesn't seem to be about the general hedonism in society, but more about a specific person who molested him.
- Scott
User avatar
Katy
Posts: 599
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 8:08 am
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Post by Katy »

sschaula wrote:If you go to the link Elizabeth posted, and watch the videos you can hear his point in his own words. It doesn't seem to be about the general hedonism in society, but more about a specific person who molested him.
Well, it's definitly plural, not a specific person.
-Katy
sschaula
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am
Location: USA

Post by sschaula »

That's not what I got out of it. How did everyone on campus make him bleed, or crucify him? Do they all wear gold chains and drive mercedez? The blood is on EVERYONE'S hands?

Either way, I'm confused.
- Scott
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Post by Unidian »

Actually, keenobserver attempting to justify the killings is exactly what Cho would've wanted. In his videos he talks about being a martyr just like the Columbine kids.
That's a typical Republican response (and I mean "Republican" in the larger sense). "You're excusing it, you're justifying it, you're rationalizing it," etc. I don't think that is what keenobserver is doing and I know it's not what I'm doing. Frankly, I'm not comfortable with the tone of keenobserver's statements either, because I think his mental state is questionable in its own right. I don't think he's justifying it, although I do think he shares the attacker's mindset to an alarming extent. At one time in my life, after undergoing abuse and ostracization, I shared some of that mindset as well. Understanding is not justifying.

Some people think that all we need to focus on is the fact that Cho was crazy and evil, and it is acceptable to act as if those trying to understand his motives are sympathizing with him. Not so. I think everybody here realizes he was both crazy and evil. He massacred 32 people. We're all well aware of the monstrous and inexcusable nature of these crimes. Nobody wants to have this guy over for dinner. Had he survived, I would have supported the death penalty in his case.

But saying he was crazy and evil and ending the discussion there is not enough. That sort of approach gives us no insight into the mindset of these attackers and no possibility of preventing future attacks. Anyone can see that he was nuts. That's a no-brainer. Far more challenging is to understand the role of society and the environment in these things. That role is still far from clear, but the first step is to listen to what the killer himself has to say about his motives.

People don't just decide to become crazy and evil, nor do they become that way randomly. I suspect it's going to end up being schizophrenic tendencies, molestation, social ostracism, or all of the above. A deadly combination in which mental illness combined with ongoing peer rejection and possibly other forms of abuse to push a fragile mind past the breaking point.
Last edited by Unidian on Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I live in a tub.
User avatar
Katy
Posts: 599
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 8:08 am
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Post by Katy »

Sadistic snobs
Not enough you brats
You snobs

References to Columbine - they were against everyone, not specific people...

People don't just decide to become crazy and evil, nor do they become that way randomly. I suspect it's going to end up being schizophrenic tendencies, molestation, social ostracism, or all of the above. A deadly combination in which mental illness combined with ongoing peer rejection and possibly other forms of abuse to push a fragile mind past the breaking point.
All of the councelors and psychologists who spoke with him or saw him in the hospital say that he was not schizophrenic. In fact, almost no serial killers or mass murderers turn out to be schizophrenic. It gets said so much because it makes the killers "the other"
-Katy
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Post by Unidian »

That's not what I got out of it. How did everyone on campus make him bleed, or crucify him? Do they all wear gold chains and drive mercedez? The blood is on EVERYONE'S hands?

Either way, I'm confused.
Having been in dark places mentally at times in my own life, it makes perfect sense to me. In my view, he's talking to those who ignored, dismissed, invalidated, and ostracized him. He's talking to those who never made any effort to include him in anything beyond an occasional token conversation initiated out of what must have been pity. He's talking to those who lived what he saw as a "hedonistic" life all around him while he felt isolated and non-existent, cut off, powerless, and hopeless. He's talking to those who enjoyed all sorts of things that seemed permanently out of his reach. Add some apparent schizophrenic tendencies (my diagnosis, not based on media reports) and what appears to be a messianic/martyr complex to the mix, and you have a recipe for trouble. It's also possible that something like molestation or a similar emotional trauma might have set the stage for his distorted thinking many years ago.

Necessary disclaimer: None of this "justifies" what he did or excuses it in any way. He should have recognized his problems and sought help on a consistent basis. He failed to do that, so regardless of any contributing factors, the blood is on no one's hands but his own.

Only in America do you have to add that disclaimer.
I live in a tub.
Locked