Saturday, February 10, 2018

What Happened In Vegas Shouldn't Have (part whatever)

Las Vegas Gunman's Brain Exam Only Deepens Mystery:

Stephen Paddock, the 64-year-old gunman who killed 58 concertgoers in Las Vegas last October in the worst mass shooting in modern American history, had not had a stroke, brain tumor or a number of other neurological disorders that might have helped explain his actions, a recent autopsy and examination of the remains of his brain showed.
Why would it have? There's never been a neurological or biological link associated with mass shootings, or even violence generally, that's ever been documented. I'm stunned they spent the money to do this.
The brain examination was conducted by Dr. Hannes Vogel, the director of neuropathology at Stanford University. Dr. Vogel said he was able to perform an adequate evaluation, despite damage caused by Mr. Paddock’s fatal, self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head.
“With a good deal of screening, I didn’t see anything,” he said, that could explain why Mr. Paddock became a calculating mass killer.
There was no evidence of frontotemporal lobar degeneration, which affects “executive functions,” including decision-making and social interactions, and can cause personality changes and unrestrained behavior. That disease would likely have been inconsistent with someone able to engage in meticulous planning.
Again, duh. No one psychotic or delusional could have carried out something as meticulously plotted as what this dumb ass did.
A primary care physician in Las Vegas — who said he had been Mr. Paddock’s doctor since 2009 and had last seen him as a patient roughly a year before the shooting — told officials that he suspected Mr. Paddock had bipolar disorder. That psychological disorder, however, cannot be identified in a typical post-mortem examination of brain structures. And while some studies have shown that people with bipolar disorder are more likely to have a history of violent behavior than the general public, the majority of them do not, and the relationship between mental health and violence involves many other factors.
Right, namely that there is no relationship between mental health and violence.
The doctor, who was not named in the report, also described Mr. Paddock as having behaved oddly, showing little emotion and expressing fear of medications. Mr. Paddock had refused prescriptions for antidepressants, but the physician had prescribed anti-anxiety medicine for him.
LOL. That's like 99% of men in the United States. Guys are socialized to show little emotion and express fear of taking meds or going to the doctor generally. So what?
Even so, Dr. Vogel, the Stanford neuropathologist, said the results of his examination should reassure the public that Mr. Paddock’s doctors had not missed diagnosing a tumor or other major brain disorder that could have been treated.
Yeah, because we're all still out here worrying about whether the old cuck had a brain tumor or that he "snapped." Said no one, ever.

You know what they should have measured? The size of his penis. I'd bet dollars to donuts dude had what the literature calls a "micro-penis," and that "pencil dick" is highly correlated with both gun ownership and violent outcomes.

I'm kidding (maybe) but that's how stupid it is for this general physician to suggest depression or bi-polar had anything to do with it. In fact the whole article is stupid because it furthers the idea that this guy was a lone wolf, and not the product of our culture and society.

I've already explained the motivation in earlier posts. Why the media supposedly keeps "looking for the reasons or motivation behind why he did it" is beyond me. He did it because he could. Because guns everywhere. Because our culture is soaked in violence and blood.  Because toxic masculinity. And because we're a dumb society.

Any other questions?