Mass killer, spree killer, rampage killer, serial killer… What is the difference?
‘A Nation of Killers?‘ argues that nationality is not a factor in serial killing and implies that neither is the sex of the perpetrator. It uses the term ‘spree killer’ to identify the phenomenon of mass killers but implies that the borders between the categories serial killer and mass killer are blurred.
‘Breaking the Silence of the Lambs: Female Serial Killers and Collective Amnesia‘ identifies that men do not have a monopoly on being serial killers and that our collective amnesia with respect to female serial killers is quite recent (a consequence of the effectiveness of public relations efforts by modern feminism).
There most definitely were and are female mass killers. After all, women are just as human as men (or are they?). The ‘Columbine High School Massacre Discussion Forum‘ identifies a compendium of female mass killers.
Shall I kill you ‘deader’ yet?
Mass killer, spree killer, rampage killer, serial killer…, who can tell the difference? Wikipedia does?
• Mass murder is “the act of murdering a number of people, typically simultaneously or over a relatively short period of time and in close geographic proximity.”
• Spree killer, someone who kills two or more victims in a short time in multiple locations.
• Rampage killer, “A rampage involves the (attempted) killing of multiple persons at least partly in public space by a single physically present perpetrator using (potentially) deadly weapons in a single event without any cooling-off period.” Don’t ask why a weapon that was used to kill a good number of people is deemed ‘potentially’ deadly.
• Serial killer, “typically a person who murders three or more people, usually in service of abnormal psychological gratification, with the murders taking place over more than a month and including a significant period of time between them.” Correct me if I am wrong, but is there anything that is normal about murdering anyone, let alone three or more people?
Did anyone ever look at all of the various attributes of somewhat arbitrary and capricious murder categories and apportioned them appropriately and rationally to individual categories of murders? Yes, that appears to have been done. It appears to have been decided that none of the attributes matter much, other than almost equally, except for one, whether it was done by a woman. Although it was once, not all that long ago, common practice to acknowledge that woman are as human and as deadly as are men, that is no longer the case.
In their infinite wisdom, the feminist social engineers decided that the common sense expressed by Rudyard Kipling in ‘The Female of the Species‘ is wrong and launched a campaign to promote the denial of female culpability.
Of course, that is exceedingly difficult, when human lives are being willfully and even unjustifiably terminated, due to the prevalence of the inconvenient evidence — the bodies that litter the scenes. Therefore, when the evidence is undeniable, we now legalize it when women take lives and call it ‘abortion’, ‘infanticide’ or simply condone it in whatever desirable fashion.
That has a fine effect, as it makes the prevailing collective amnesia with respect to female culpability a reality. For example, let’s not mention female suicide bombers or that women commit the vast majority of fatal child abuse and neglect. Close to a million fatalities a year, in the US alone, but never mind.
How does a male mass killer fit in?
The Florida shooter, Nikolas Cruz, is without a doubt a mass killer who ended the lives of 17 people, mostly children. Are those 17 lives more important than the remaining million that were violently terminated during the past 12 months? Never mind. We need to concern ourselves about what made Nikolas Cruz do what he did.
Few details are available as of now, but some emerged, such as that he was a full orphan who had been adopted, that his adoptive mother had died last November, that he had an obsession with owning weapons. Perhaps we will eventually find out more but never be able to figure out what made him into a mass killer.
We know already that his killing spree broke the law and that, in absolute terms, the killing of close to a million other human beings during the past twelve months mostly did not (while the rest don’t matter that much, because they took place individually, although some did not), because most of them were legal, even government-funded.
We don’t know yet when Nicolas Cruz’ parents had died, whether he made the journey from one foster home to the next (on average 16 for orphaned or apprehended boys by the time they are eighteen). All we can determine as of now is that he appears to fit the outcomes that are vastly more likely to be seen in children suffering from their parents’ divorce and father absence than they are with children from intact families. Take a look at the damages that causes on average:
The Effects of Divorce on Children
Patrick F. Fagan and Aaron Churchill
January 11, 2012
Let us hope that we will find our way out of the mess we managed to create for ourselves.
Nikolas Cruz suffers from FAS?
Today I saw a photo of Nikolas Cruz, the Florida shooter, and instantly thought of looking whether someone else had drawn the conclusion the photo made me draw, that Nikolas Cruz is suffering from FAS (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome). Judging by the way Nikolas Cruz looks on the photo in the article identified below, yes, FAS is a possibility.
The headline for the article states, “Florida shooter, 19, may have had fetal alcohol syndrome”. FAS is not something that one “may have had”. FAS sufferers are born with the brain condition. I cannot be cured. It will never go away. It lasts for life.
From the indicated article:
»…Children with FASD [Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder ] can fall on many ends of the spectrum and vary in symptoms. Experts generally break the spectrum up into three stages. [ FASD — a continuum of permanent birth defects caused by maternal consumption of alcohol during pregnancy]
ARBD (alcohol-related birth defects) is the mildest stage, occurring in babies of women who drank lightly or moderately during pregnancy.
The physical defects of ARBD include heart, skeletal, kidney, ear, and eye malformations in the absence of apparent neurobehavioral or brain disorders.
ARND [alcohol-related neurodevelopmental disorder] occurs in infants whose mothers drank lightly to moderately during pregnancy.
Specifically, children with ARND do not have the FAS facial abnormalities, but may have developmental disabilities including structural and/or functional central nervous system dysfunction (brain damage) with behavioral and learning problems.
FAS is recognized as the most severe form of the condition and occurs in women who drink heavily during pregnancy.
Kids with FAS have a distinct pattern of facial abnormalities, growth deficiency and evidence of central nervous system dysfunction…«
More about FAS in a comprehensive Canadian article from 16 years ago:
The fetal alcohol crisis
Report Newsmagazine (The Report Newsmagazine ceased publishing)
September 25, 2000 Issue, Full Text
»In addition to the tragedy caused, the cost of women binge-drinking while pregnant now exceeds that of the national debt«
by Candis McLean