So I'm quiet, shy and introverted..

LazyHermitCrab

Well-known member
Yeah it's annoying how some say watch out for the quiet people. I just think it's closeminded i and don't really let it bother me as much. I think I scare people sometimes but like you said I wouldn't hurt anyone either and can't even kill a bug.
 

OceanMist

Well-known member
I personally didn't feel offended so don't worry. You have a valid point and yes, there's a common history there. What puzzle me the most is, with this kind of track or history going on, is why everybody else is not taking notice? Rejection can really, and definitely mark someone's life and not in a good way, so why do society or certain people keep doing hurtful stuff to others?
Yep, as I said before, society is partially to blame. I've seen perfectly nice people who have done nothing wrong get rejected by people who think the person getting rejected isn't cool enough. I've gotten rejected because of shyness before too.

I do get that the "it's society's fault" isn't the most popular reason, but unfortunately, it's part-way truth.


Then, when this kinds of things happened they don't seem to understand why. This is a typical case of a guy that possibly didn't find his place in the world and had something to say.

Yep, that is true. The problem is that he chose to stand up for himself with a weapon. But, yeah, he did want to be heard as you said. It's a shame that he didn't find a more reasonable means of getting heard.

I'm not justifying this atrocious act AT ALL, but I can definitely see his frame of mind. . That being said, the main point here is that not only introverts do this kind of stuff. This kind of acts and their perpetrators have a story to tell, wether they ARE OR NOT introverts. It is wrong to accuse every introvert now of something to beware of. ,

Oh, I'm not accusing introverts in general. These shootings aren't happening every minute with these kinds of situations, and 99.99999% of introverts aren't even doing these shootings. It's just that .0000000001% or whatever that lose their stuff.

It's not just the introversion that is the reason for these shootings, these people also happen to have psychological problems with themselves. The main thing to blame is the shooter if they are shooting weapons and killing innocent people. These killings that I mentioned earlier can't possibly be justified.

I was saying is I have a good idea of how many of them felt when they were in pain.
 
Last edited:

awkwardamanda

Well-known member
I would disagree with some of the points raised here and in the media.

People tend to assume straight away when something like this happens that the person "must have a mental illness". It's nonsense.

Perfectly normal people can just be driven over the edge, or they can have hugely different views to most of us. Doesn't mean they are ill..

Like that Norweigan dude who shot all those kids. Straight away it was "he';s mentally ill"...not really. He just had radical political views that the vast majority of people would disagree with.

Of course we can still find what they do wrong and in cases like this, abhorrent, and they should be rightfully locked up, but if's dangerous turf when as a society we start labelling anyone who doesn't fit into our idea of "normal" as mentally ill.

So you're saying there's a chance this guy's not psychologically damaged in any way? Sorry, I don't buy that.
 

AsTimeBurns

Well-known member
So you're saying there's a chance this guy's not psychologically damaged in any way? Sorry, I don't buy that.

I'm saying you don't HAVE to be mentally ill to do something like that, it's not a prerequisite that people tend to assume. And it's dangerous to assume that.

With cases like this, not as much, as they are dangerous criminals themselves who should be rightly sent to prison, but if you start throwing "mental illness" around at everyone who seems not "normal" to you, it's a slippery slope.

Hell, even my own mother has questioned whether I have mental illnesses, just because I'm shy and quiet...just because to her, being sociable and finding talking to people and making friends easily is "normal", and therefore I am not normal and must have something wrong with me.

Surely you see what I am saying here? This actual specific case isn't particularly relevant, it's just an example.
 

Hellhound

Super Moderator
I'm saying you don't HAVE to be mentally ill to do something like that, it's not a prerequisite that people tend to assume. And it's dangerous to assume that.

Not exactly. Mental illness affects everyone differently. Maybe you and I won't go and kill people, but some other dude who might have it in a worse degree could do it.
 

I'm Not There

Well-known member
I'm reminded of January 2009, when this guy here in Belgium went on a killing spree in a daycare centre. He was described by his former classmates as being a loner, quiet and weird. Just like me at the time, he didn't have any friends, had my age and had the same shoulder-length hairstyle. He resembled me in so many ways, yet I wouldn't ever hurt a fly.
 

Predacon

Well-known member
It's a tough one. It seems almost cliche when something like this happens to say the person responsible was a loner and kept to himself. I just its important to remember that people like that don't represent the vast majority of introverts or people with SA.
 

cowboyup

Well-known member
Well said, OceanMist. I was not offended at all.

It is true that the media/society helps to push the old adage of "better watch out for the quiet ones" ... I've always been a quiet person and have actually been told "better watch out for that one, she's the quiet one of the bunch" ... I used to get offended, but not anymore.

Just because we are introverted, quiet, shy, etc., that surely does NOT mean we are more 'apt' to turn to violence. Nor should it be a label we bare.

I admit, sometimes I wonder how I made it through a day without stabbing someone with a fork, but who hasn't?

With the people who commit these crimes it lies far beyond the 'quiet, introvert' ... it goes much, much deeper.

And what IS up with Colorado? That state can't catch a break, it seems. I was calling my college in Littleton, CO. WHILE that shooting of Columbine was going on. The person at the college told me he couldn't talk and to turn on the news and I'd understand. Come to find out later, his co-worker was the mother of one of the shooters - the Klebolt (sp) kid.
All of a sudden my silly call didn't matter one bit.
 

dragonoth

Well-known member
Honestly, I think any kind of person is capable of committing crimes no matter if they're quiet, outspoken, popular, withdrawn etc, so it doesn't matter how they are described. The important thing is that they are made to never do it again.
 
AsTimeBurns said:
People tend to assume straight away when something like this happens that the person "must have a mental illness". It's nonsense.
Perfectly normal people can just be driven over the edge, or they can have hugely different views to most of us. Doesn't mean they are ill..

awkwardamanda said:
So you're saying there's a chance this guy's not psychologically damaged in any way? Sorry, I don't buy that

I'm saying you don't HAVE to be mentally ill to do something like that, it's not a prerequisite that people tend to assume.
With cases like this, not as much, as they are dangerous criminals themselves who should be rightly sent to prison, but if you start throwing "mental illness" around at everyone who seems not "normal" to you, it's a slippery slope

This is my take on it...

Mentally damaged/dysfunctional = everyone (contains all of below)
. . Not mentally ill = most people ("Normal")
. .
. . People with quick tempers
. . People with violent tempers

. .

. . . . . . HERE is where i think Brevik/Holmes are. ie JUST SHORT of true "mental illness".
. . <---- their ideology/goals/choices/values/influences causing them to temporarily MIMIC the behaviour of the "mentally deranged", or worse

. .
. . Mentally ill = some people (eg people with SA? most on socialphobiaworld?)
. .
. .

. . Mentally deranged = very few people
. . Violent mentally-deranged = very very few people



They might not have any particular "disorder" (mental illness), so they are above the level of mentally ill. But they also have some WORSE aspects than the mentally ill, such as major personality disorder (eg narcissism, delusional). Perhaps if they had the "steadying" influence of a constant mental illness, they would not "FLIP THEIR LID" as they would learn to HANDLE things better???


Framing in another way, if the chart is NOT based on "severity of mental illness", but instead as "danger of being extremely violent", then we get...


Not mentally damaged/dysfunctional (almost nobody)
. .
Mentally damaged/dysfunctional = everyone (contains all of below)
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. . Not mentally ill = most people ("Normal")
. .
. . Mentally ill = some people (eg people with SA? most on socialphobiaworld?)
. .
. .

. . People with quick tempers
. . Mentally deranged = very few people
. . People with violent tempers
. . Violent mentally-deranged = very very few people

. . <---- Holmes }
. . <---- Brevik . } Killers & mass-murderers
. . Hitler/etc . . . }



There's probably similar charts on the web about this somewhere
 
Last edited:

A86

Well-known member
Emotion can be a strong motivator to behave in a completely irrational way.

Even the most level headed individual can be influenced dramatically by a surge of emotion, or through a constant supply of emotion.

Negative emotions influence they way we think, we can come up with justifications to allign and make sense of the way we feel, but ultimately emotions are there to initiate some sort of response action.

Makes me wonder if society actually invested some time into better understanding and educating of emotional responses if we would still get...
the passion crimes of people killing family or friends.
the angry people following someone home and stabbing them because they cut them off on the highway.
people cutting neighbors heads of because they are to loud.
the people who lash out against the world by shooting up public places... and so forth.

I also don't agree with their actions. but I think I understand where it comes from. People should be responsible for their own actions, however you never really hear from the people/s responsible for solicitating the emotional responses in these unstable people. Surely they should have some accountability?
 
I reading the responses on here lastnight, some of the stuff said I agreed with and disagreed with. The one thing I agreed with was someone said about lacking empathy. This guy probably was lacking empathy, and in that case that makes him a psychopath. I also think he did not know how to self parent (take care of himself emotionally and mentally). Its possible him living by himself really fueled the fire. Also he was probably the type that put enormous amount of pressure on himself..and he wasn't living up to peoples real or imagined standards.
I definately do not blame anyone, his parents, the batman movies or society for this happening. It's way to easy to point a finger and its a copout. This soley rests on his shoulders. But then as I say this, I have this thought in my head..if hes a psychopath, he was probably born that way..it was already in his makeup, and if it was in his genetic makeup, is it his fault?? Almost like a defect?..
 

awkwardamanda

Well-known member
This is my take on it...

Mentally damaged/dysfunctional = everyone (contains all of below)
. . Not mentally ill = most people ("Normal")
. .
. . People with quick tempers
. . People with violent tempers

. .

. . . . . . HERE is where i think Brevik/Holmes are. ie JUST SHORT of true "mental illness".
. . <---- their ideology/goals/choices/values/influences causing them to temporarily MIMIC the behaviour of the "mentally deranged", or worse

. .
. . Mentally ill = some people (eg people with SA? most on socialphobiaworld?)
. .
. .

. . Mentally deranged = very few people
. . Violent mentally-deranged = very very few people



They might not have any particular "disorder" (mental illness), so they are above the level of mentally ill. But they also have some WORSE aspects than the mentally ill, such as major personality disorder (eg narcissism, delusional). Perhaps if they had the "steadying" influence of a constant mental illness, they would not "FLIP THEIR LID" as they would learn to HANDLE things better???


Framing in another way, if the chart is NOT based on "severity of mental illness", but instead as "danger of being extremely violent", then we get...


Not mentally damaged/dysfunctional (almost nobody)
. .
Mentally damaged/dysfunctional = everyone (contains all of below)
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. . Not mentally ill = most people ("Normal")
. .
. . Mentally ill = some people (eg people with SA? most on socialphobiaworld?)
. .
. .

. . People with quick tempers
. . Mentally deranged = very few people
. . People with violent tempers
. . Violent mentally-deranged = very very few people

. . <---- Holmes }
. . <---- Brevik . } Killers & mass-murderers
. . Hitler/etc . . . }



There's probably similar charts on the web about this somewhere
That's more or less what I was getting at. Let me just point out that personality disorders are considered a form of mental illness. These mass murderers are often the quiet, introverted types. Maybe it usually is to the point of having a personality disorder, and not just a healthy level of introversion. I have a hard time fathoming the possibility that a "normal" person could suddenly go on a shooting rampage and then have a psychiatric evaluation done, only to find nothing wrong.

I reading the responses on here lastnight, some of the stuff said I agreed with and disagreed with. The one thing I agreed with was someone said about lacking empathy. This guy probably was lacking empathy, and in that case that makes him a psychopath.
A lack of empathy is typical of a psychopath or someone with antisocial personality disorder.

PhillyFlyersGrl said:
if hes a psychopath, he was probably born that way..it was already in his makeup, and if it was in his genetic makeup, is it his fault?? Almost like a defect?..
It may be partly genetic but I doubt it's that simple. There are probably environmental factors involved.
 

Lea

Banned
The film Falling Down with Michael Douglas is a good illustration of a 'normal' person driven to despair and 'cracked'.

If society thinks it's the quiet ones who create the crime, because they understood it to mean that their loneliness and frustration with relationships made them do it, it follows that society should make life easier for quiet loner type of people. 2 sides to the coin.

Well I don´t have life easy either, but that doesn´t mean I have to turn into hating everyone and desire their death, or even start hurting or killing them. Shyness or social problems shouldn´t be used as an excuse, in my opinion. Everyone should be responsible for their deeds and choices. I may get angry sometimes, but know that hurting someone is wrong, so I take the anger out by punching some bag for example. I don´t really know what the exact cause is for people to do these things, but don´t think they should be excused..

My father used to beat me a lot before, especially in the head. I thought he couldn´t control himself and that this would never change. Until he got me injured quite badly, and my mother got injured as well when I wasn´t at home (head injury). Now I noticed that he almost stopped hitting me, although the shouting and attacking and threatening is still there - but he is afraid to hit. So I think this can be controlled if one wants.. If someone has a reason sound enough to carry out this planned action, they can´t be menally ill or not knowing what they are doing. Unless being evil is a mental ilness.
 

OceanMist

Well-known member
As for Colorado being a shooter's hotbed, I just remembered about how Colorado is a popular gun state. In Littleton, is there not a big weapons factory there? I remember watching that in Bowling for Columbine.

I do believe that is partially to blame for these killings. I've always been a big anti-gun person. I mean really, tell me the reason any person should be able to go out and buy an automatic weapon? Where is the skill in shooting a deer with an assault rifle? Doesn't that defeat the concept of hunting? It's supposed to be a skill sport, no?

I do realize this sounds weird, but less people would have died if these shooters didn't have these automatic weapons. Vtech shooter had automatic weapon(s), apparently so did both those Colorado shootings?

I don't think people should be able to buy guns anyway. Even pistols and such. Only cops, military and special authority should have guns. I do realize that a bunch of people disagree with those statements but that's what I think. I live near a big city and it's the same story every night, so and so got "capped" on the street by a gun. Drive-by. It's too easy for these people to get these guns.

It sucks because I do get the self defense theory. If one guy has a gun pointed at you and you don't have one, who will win? Yeah, I get that. And yeah, the problem is that even if guns were outlawed there would still be illegal gun purchases just like all those drug purchases that happen all the time. But I'm saying there would be harder access to these weapons which would make the psycho James Holmes's of the world less tempted to purchase a weapon from a shady gun dealer in the what would be illegal gun market. Walking up to a register and attaining a gun license is too easy.

It seems like all you gotta do is just stay clean and not have a criminal record until you decide you want to shoot up the place. (Sarcastic)

It seems cops are more concerned about petty marijuana and gambling than they are about gun purchases. What a screwed up country I live in (USA). No wonder it's so violent. It's okay to go to KMart and buy a gun so you can possibly kill someone, but you can't use your credit card to place a $20 bet on a basketball game.

As for the mentally ill debate, those arguments always come out on here like what is shyness, SA, SAD? The same thing always happens, everyone seems to have a different opinion.

What is mentally ill? Imo it's someone who isn't right in the head, and anyone shooting up crowded movie theaters and killing innocent people definitely qualifies as mentally ill. Dare I say psychotic. If that isn't mentally ill, then what is?
 
Last edited:

awkwardamanda

Well-known member
What is mentally ill? Imo it's someone who isn't right in the head, and anyone shooting up crowded movie theaters and killing innocent people definitely qualifies as mentally ill. Dare I say psychotic. If that isn't mentally ill, then what is?

Well that's one way of putting it.
 

Lowlight

Well-known member
I do realize this sounds weird, but less people would have died if these shooters didn't have these automatic weapons. Vtech shooter had automatic weapon(s), apparently so did both those Colorado shootings?

Hello. I just wanted to point out that he didn’t have an automatic weapon. What he had was a semi-automatic rifle. This type of rifle shoots one round per trigger squeeze. Every time you pull the trigger only one round fires. An automatic rifle (machine gun) will fire continuously with one trigger pull. That means a person could pull the trigger and fire all rounds inside the magazine in one continuous stream. The movie theater shooter had a semi-automatic rifle, and the Vtech shooter had two semi-automatic pistols. It is very hard to get a machine gun in the US. You have to have a Class 3 license which involves you having to fill out a lot of paperwork, background checks, and you have to pony up some money also.
 
I know how you feel, I kept pretty much to myself at school and people labeled me as a "creeper" and I've been stuck with that label. One bad appel spoils the whole bunch i guess.
 

Silatuyok

Well-known member
I don't think people should be able to buy guns anyway. Even pistols and such. Only cops, military and special authority should have guns.

You have likely already heard this argument, but don't forget that the whole point of the second amendment is to allow the people to protect themselves from their own government and authority, if need be. Only allowing authority figures to have those weapons would completely nullify and contradict the purpose of that constitutional right.
 
Top