Mass Murderers

2663 days ago, 781 views
PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Mass Murder Definition. Mass homicide is the place there are four or more casualties in one setting.Or close together.The fellow that executes his wife at her occupation, goes to his in-laws and shoots them, then goes home and murders the children.. Sorts of Mass Murderers. Family AnnihilatorsTwo Types:Motivated by loveMotivated by force and hateIndividuals with mental defectsDisgruntled specialists (going postal).

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1

Mass Murderers 10 Myths and Comments by Northwestern University Professor Jack Levin

Slide 2

Mass Murder Definition Mass murder is the place there are at least four casualties in one setting. On the other hand near one another. The person that executes his better half at her employment, goes to his in-laws and shoots them, then goes home and slaughters the children.

Slide 3

Types of Mass Murderers Family Annihilators Two Types: Motivated by affection Motivated by power and detest Individuals with mental imperfections Disgruntled specialists (going postal)

Slide 4

Family Annihilators (From Prof. Kevin Browne) Family part (regularly father) who has self-destructive musings, however once the choice is made, carefully arrange the end of their own family. Stafford family 1999, Kent, England

Slide 5

Family Annihilator "These individuals accept on the off chance that they confer suicide they will lose their families and not have the capacity to look after them, so they irrationally persuade themselves that the most ideal route forward is to execute them all and meet them on the opposite side."

Slide 6

The Other Kind of Family Annihilator Motivated by loathe and the requirement for control. Frequently act when somebody tries to take control from them. The man who slaughters his children when his better half records for separation.

Slide 7

Mental Defects – Mass Murder See Psychotics. Hereditary qualities? Stretch/emotional instability? Drugs?

Slide 8

Going "Postal" Disgruntled laborers. Frequently individuals who characterize themselves exclusively by their employments or achievements. No different methods for characterizing themselves or their prosperity.

Slide 9

Myth #1: "He didn't fit the profile." "The statistic, identity, school history, and social qualities of the assailants changed generously," Attackers were of all races and family circumstances, with scholastic accomplishment going from neglecting to phenomenal.

Slide 10

Myth #2: "He just snapped." Rarely were occurrences of school viciousness sudden, imprudent acts. Aggressors don't "simply snap," however advance from shaping a thought, to arranging an assault, to get-together weapons.

Slide 11

Myth #3: "Nobody knew." In many cases, the individuals who knew were different children: companions, classmates, kin and others. Be that as it may, this data seldom advanced toward a grown-up. Most aggressors occupied with some conduct preceding the occurrence that brought on concern or demonstrated a requirement for offer assistance.

Slide 12

Myth #4: "He hadn't undermined anybody." A tyke who discusses conveying a firearm to class, or looking for vengeance on educators or cohorts, represents a risk, regardless of whether a danger is made.

Slide 13

Myth #5: "He was an introvert." In many cases, understudies were considered in the standard of the understudy populace and were dynamic in games, school clubs or different exercises. Just a single quarter of the understudies hung out with a gathering of understudies thought to be a piece of a "periphery assemble."

Slide 14

Myth #6: "He was insane." Only 33% of the assailants had ever been seen by a psychological wellness proficient, one-fifth had been determined to have a mental issue. Substance manhandle issues were likewise not pervasive.

Slide 15

Myth #6: "He was insane." "Be that as it may, most assailants demonstrated some history of self-destructive endeavors or contemplations, or a background marked by feeling outrageous gloom or distress." Most aggressors experienced issues adapting to critical misfortunes or individual disappointments.

Slide 16

Myth #7: "On the off chance that we just had a SWAT group or metal indicators." Despite provoke law authorization reactions, most shooting episodes were over certainly before a SWAT group could have arrived.  Metal identifiers have not hindered understudies who were focused on murdering themselves as well as other people.

Slide 17

Myth #8: "He'd never touched a firearm." Most assailants had entry to weapons, and had utilized them before the assault. A large portion of the aggressors obtained their weapons from home.

Slide 18

Myth #9: "We did all that we could to help him." "Many assailants felt harassed, aggrieved or harmed by others before the attack," and said they had attempted without accomplishment to motivate somebody to intercede. Managers and educators were focused in the greater part the occurrences.

Slide 19

Myth #10: "School brutality is wild." truth be told, school shootings are to a great degree uncommon. Notwithstanding including the more normal brutality that is pack related or question related, just 12 to 20 murders a year happen in the 100,000 schools in the U.S. past decade.

Slide 20

Myth #10: "School brutality is uncontrolled." when all is said in done, school strikes and other savagery have dropped by about half in the previous decade.

Slide 21

Additional Thoughts from Jack Levin – conspicuous criminologist In practically every case the intention is reprisal . Generally the executioner is on a self-destructive frenzy—he embarks to take his own life yet first he delivers his retribution on every one of the general population he accepts to be in charge of his agonies.

Slide 22

Professor Levin's musings: Usually the executioner has experienced some calamitous misfortune; it could be a sweetheart, lost a place in the college—expecting he's an understudy or personnel. In any case, in his eyes, it's disastrous.

Slide 23

Professor Levin's Thoughts: Usually the last bit of trouble that will be tolerated gets under way the arranging stages. Now and again the cataclysmic misfortunes happen months before the shooting. It's a precipitant that triggers the arranging stage. Practically every one of these shootings is premeditative and particular.

Slide 24

Professor Levin's Thoughts on Virginia Tech: in the meantime this resembles a family destruction where a spouse father needs to get even with his better half since he censures her for all his wretchedness, however does as such by killing everything related with her, all that she cherished.

Slide 25

Could Virginia Tech be a copycat? A few months back there was a mass shooting including 20 understudies, one of whom kicked the bucket, at a junior college in Montreal. [In the Virginia case], the underlying news reports said that the executioner looked as if he's Asian or of Asian plummet. So was the executioner in Montreal. I've concentrated the copycat impact. It's substantially more prone to happen when the executioners share individual attributes.

Slide 26

So what occurs next? As per Levin? The executives may choose to foundation some transient measures with a specific end goal to make everybody feel safe. They may introduce metal indicators; may put cops in the corridors. It's reasonable; it gives the sentiment wellbeing. However, it won't do much to lessen brutality.

Slide 27

So what occurs next? (as per Levin) My most noteworthy concern at this moment is this could move copycats around the nation. At any rate, we may see false cautions being pulled, particularly amid end of the year tests week and debilitating calls to workforce.