Author Topic: Why do people feel the need to avoid learning about mass killers?  (Read 941 times)

Seriously, I don't get that. There's a big circlejerk going around the Internet (primarily Reddit) about how everyone should avoid learning about killers like Chris Harper-Mercer or Vester Lee Flanagan because it will "give them the attention they want." I have always found this incredibly stupid and because of the recent shooting in Oregon this circlejerk has been flared up again. You are going to find out about him one way or another.  I recently made a post on Reddit that mentioned the shooter's name and someone actually told me to remove his name from the post. Come the forget on. It's also pretty funny in that Reddit also had the big circlejerk about net neutrality and censorship a few months ago. Is straight up telling people to not post names (that will probably be forgotten in a few months' time anyway) not censorship?
Also, Chris Harper-Mercer is dead. He's not receiving any attention in afterlife. FFS.

Because when a killer sees that another killer gets a ton of attention for going on a murder rampage, all the killers want to beat the record of murders and want the attention as well

i would put one and two together that the reason you're trying to research them is that you want to be like them or attempt to do what they did or find out what they did wrong and things like that

Because when a killer sees that another killer gets a ton of attention for going on a murder rampage, all the killers want to beat the record of murders and want the attention as well
literally no evidence suggests this

literally no evidence suggests this
because you can't really collect evidence on it
you can't find people who will one day shoot up a school
you can't understand the mentality of those who did it previously

it could be true or not.


because then people in real life who may not be mentally stable will feel compelled to commit Flash Mobs so they'll be famous (or infamous) and remembered as well

...although trying to censor out names is a tad drastic

literally no evidence suggests this
Just because there's no evidence for something doesn't imply it's false (especially when it logically makes sense)
Plus, there have been plenty of psychologists (Like, PHDs in psychology) that have said that it's true, just because there's no research you're not gonna believe it?

I never heard about this what the forget are you talking about OP

Sounds like they're just saying that to troll you or something

I never heard about this what the forget are you talking about OP

Sounds like they're just saying that to troll you or something
it's said ad nauseum any time there's a mass killing.


i think it's silly to assume every mass killer thinks the same way, and they're all in it to get that attention before they die. that just seems foolish to me. the mind is not that simple, especially when it comes to the complex reasons why someone decides to blow away a school. so yeah, maybe reporting on a school shooting for a while isn't the real crime being perpetrated here, rather it's the person who committed murder.

That's handicapped, leaking heavily classified data is ok for leddit but "attention giving" is bad?

Eat my richard.

because you can't really collect evidence on it
Just because there's no evidence for something doesn't imply it's false (especially when it logically makes sense)
Except it doesn't make any logical sense. People do not shoot up schools to 'beat a high score'. If they were going to shoot up a school, they would have done it regardless of whether someone else has done it before.

Why would they bother trying to 'beat a record' anyway? They're going in to kill as many people as possible. Nobody ever drops their gun and surrenders because "hey, that's 31, so I beat The Joker' record".

Except it doesn't make any logical sense. People do not shoot up schools to 'beat a high score'. If they were going to shoot up a school, they would have done it regardless of whether someone else has done it before.

Why would they bother trying to 'beat a record' anyway? They're going in to kill as many people as possible. Nobody ever drops their gun and surrenders because "hey, that's 31, so I beat The Joker' record".
Oh sorry, I misread it as many of them do it for attention, which many doctors in psychology have said before. Yeah, I doubt the whole high score thing is true.

Why would they bother trying to 'beat a record' anyway? They're going in to kill as many people as possible. Nobody ever drops their gun and surrenders because "hey, that's 31, so I beat The Joker' record".
"remember me as 'AAA'"