Inconclusive Musings About Two Mass Killings in the USA

I do not think I know anything like enough about the two mass murders in the USA to have much to say about them yet. So here are some inconclusive musings.

 

But I note here that, as in all my writings on such subjects , stupid people are banned from reading what follows. If you don't know whether you are stupid or not, I also advise you not to read it. If you find yourself thinking that I am trying to excuse mass murder, then that means you are definitely stupid, for I am clearly not doing that. You should go and lie down until the mood has passed. Alas, the stupidity will persist. 

 

As usual, I wait for facts before reaching conclusions, which slows me down among all the others rushing to judgement. Sometimes, as I know from the case of the Quebec City mosque killer, Bissonnette, here��� https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/04/reposted-in-the-light-f-new-information-another-mass-shooter-turns-out-to-have-been-taking-mind-alte.html

���crucial facts do not come to light for long months, even years,  after these events - if they ever do. In my experience, police all over the world are sublimely uninterested (in Britain actively uninterested|) in the drug use of the perpetrators of such crimes, and often only stumble across them by accident.

 

But there are some features of the El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, killings on which I will comment.  As usual, the reporting concentrates upon the horror of the crimes, as it must. But it is then swiftly followed by editorialising about guns and gun control of the usual sort, which neglects to wonder whether, as mass gun ownership is not new in the USA, but dates back to the foundation of the country, whereas these sort of rampage killings only really began about 50 years ago, and have been growing more common in the past five years,  the free availability of guns alone can be blamed for these incidents.  

 

But in this case there is also quite a lot about the supposed ���right-wing extremism��� of one of the two accused, the alleged El Paso killer Patrick Crusius.  (Not the other killer though, see below) I have discussed the significance of such affiliations here in long posts on the Jo Cox murder here https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/04/my-reply-to-the-secret-barrister-.html

 

I would also draw readers��� attention to what I wrote about the Charlottesville killer, Fields, two years ago (the caveat still very much applies ) https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/on-the-miserable-events-in-charlottesville-virginia.html

My questions, as to what might have caused Fields to become mentally ill enough to be rejected by the US Army in the first place, were not innocent. I stick by my belief that, if you find a mentally-ill young person in the modern world, you will almost certainly find a current or former marijuana user.  But this grows harder to establish definitively, as police in many jurisdictions long ago gave up even cautions or diversion programmes for those found in possession of marijuana, and are not interested in probing it now. In fact they are positively uninterested, because the connection makes their abandonment of law-enforcement look foolish. So while five or ten years ago their drug abuse might have been recorded, it is not now.

 

More than a year after his crime, in November 2018, the range of drugs (potentially amphetamines, ���anti-anxiety��� medication and SSRIs) , which Fields may have been legally taking, possibly all at once, was briefly revealed at his trial: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/james-alex-fields-trial-deadly-charlottesville-white-nationalist-rally-set-n939991 The key pasage reads : ���Fields later told a judge he is being treated for bipolar disorder, anxiety, depression and ADHD.���

 

'Treated', of course, means 'given drugs'.

I recently checked for the latest information on the mass murderer Dylann Roof, whose crime has been attributed to a political motive (though as usual it is hard to see how such a filthy act could possibly have aided any cause to which it is attached)  and found this https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-dylann-roof-20170202-story.html . His admitted problems include a 'Mixed Substance Abuse Disorder, a Schizoid Personality Disorder, depression by history, and a possible Autistic Spectrum Disorder.������

 

Well, that is pretty much evidence of substance abuse. Which substance or 'mixed substances' would you guess might be involved here?  Likewise the word ���Schizoid��� tends to be associated with drug-related mental illness. ���Depression��� is treated with powerful SSRIs, and Autistic Spectrum Disorder can be treated with Risperidone, an antipsychotic.  In modern America, none of these things would be considered abnormal enough to merit special note, especially once Roof's crazed action had been attributed to white supremacist opinions which he holds, insofar as such a person can be said to hold opinions. To me, and to anyone familiar with the subject of side-effects of legal medications, and indeed the problems associated with marijuana, they are flashing red lights. But they emerged quietly 18 months after he was arrested for the murder of nine people, and long after most people had lost interest in the case.

 

 

I have also addressed the subject of the supposed political affiliations of other violent, irrational, apparently politicised persons  in this article on the Leytonstone  knife attacker, Muhaydin Mire here . (���You ain���t no Muslim , Bruv!���) https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2016/08/the-man-who-thought-tony-blair-was-his-guardian-angel-yes-really.html

My point is that it is possible for people who are unhinged (usually by legal or illegal psychotropic drugs and sometimes by both in succession) to espouse ostensibly political views, but this does not necessarily mean that they can correctly be classified as political actors. I know too little about Crusius to say anything other than, can we wait for a bit more information?

 

But in reports that I have seen, the strong  interest in Crusius��� supposed right-wing extremism is not matched by concern about alleged left-wing opinions held (according to the ���Heavy��� website) by the suspect in the Dayton, Ohio killing, Connor Betts . See for example https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/connor-betts/

 

Attempts to analyse his Twitter feed found that ���he described himself as ���he/him / anime fan / metalhead / leftist / i���m going to hell and i���m not coming back.��� He wrote on Twitter that he would happily vote for Democrat Elizabeth Warren, praised Satan, was upset about the 2016 presidential election results, and added, ���I want socialism, and i���ll not wait for the idiots to finally come round to understanding.��� The Greene County Board of Elections lists his party as ���Dem.��� ���. When Donald Trump was elected President he is said to have tweeted that ���This is bad���.

 

I don���t propose to make anything of this in itself. Rather the opposite  

These vague semi-literate mutterings obviously cannot be used to attempt any link between the dead Connor Betts and the American left. And, by the way, I am not suggesting any equivalence between seething racial bigotry and peaceful mainstream Democratic Party leftism, in case anyone was hoping to pin that on me. They are obviously utterly distinct.  To make such a connection between Betts and the Democrats would obviously be absurd.  In which case, perhaps some similar caution should be observed in the case of Crusius, whose alleged actions  may well be as unconnected to his supposed politics as those of Betts,  though I doubt my plea for this will get much of a hearing. What I am saying here ( see especially the Muhaydin Mire case, referenced above) is that crazy people quite often adopt political causes to make themselves feel important and part of a movement. But they do this because they are crazy, not because they are really political in nature. The affiliation is part of their craziness, and can't be equated with the genuine, rational political affiliations of sane people.    

I still wonder what, if anything, these two alleged culprits will turn out to have objectively in common, when we know all that there is to be known about them ��� if we ever do. But until we do, I must be inconclusive, and speculative. So please don���t tell me I have reached any conclusions here. As Sherlock Holmes always said, it is a capital error to theorise without data. Not, alas, that it stops everyone else.