Finland is Winland

[random n00b]

lern2read

Oh, I can read just fine. I read the part where you said you couldn't know the specific reason, and I also read the part where you laid down a rather simplistic and tendentious possible explanation of the circumstances that made him go bat****. That is called contradicting oneself.

 

lern2write

 

 

I think that Xard is trying to say that all these killings were done by people who were social outcasts and often picked on by others at school. They expressively feel that they do not belong to the society that they live in and start to have depressive and hyper-aggressive tendencies.

You mean social outcasts are a product of changing social rules and customs? Do you really believe that?

 

 

At least in Finland, "in the good old days", the underlying social binding with society was stronger among people, and everyone felt that they took part in something (Solidarity perhaps?). Those days are long gone and many people here see this society has turned into a egoistic, selfish, and greedy one. This is also known as the "ME"-generation, hence capitalism and it's strongly individual message.

 

However, i do not know the reasons mentioned above are true or not, it is just the saying on the street, or so to say. But studies have shown that a growing number of young people feel disconnected to the rest of society, which is the underlying problem to begin with.

I agree with the general idea that some people are becoming more and more disconnected from their environment. What I don't like is the automatic connection between this and capitalism, which is as weak as disingenuous.

 

On the other hand, I believe that, more than a lifestyle and outlook that places the self above everything else, it's the increased chance for publicity that makes these things increase in frequency. I mean, the guy was obviously, desperately seeking attention.

 

And, of course, one of these incidents per year is still not enough to suggest that society is spiralling to its DOOM.

 

EDIT: Apparently, the Police questioned him about his YouTube channel the previous day, or so says Wiki.

Edited September 23, 2008 by random n00b

[mkreku]

I wonder if it's a coincidence that Finland has Europe's most lax gun laws?

[Morgoth]

The only way to avoid such accidents in the future is to ban all violent videogames in Finland. Really!

[SirPetrakus]

the finnish equivalent to the american S.W.A.T., "karhuryhm

[Gorgon]

Apparently the police questioned him the day before, quite the case to get wrong.

[SirPetrakus]

Apparently the police questioned him the day before, quite the case to get wrong.

 

Are you questioning the efficiency of the Bear Squad, kind sir? You do NOT want to anger the Bear Squad!

 

 

I am sorry, I can't get over how awesome that is. Bear Squad! Wow!

[Meshugger]

lern2read

Oh, I can read just fine. I read the part where you said you couldn't know the specific reason, and I also read the part where you laid down a rather simplistic and tendentious possible explanation of the circumstances that made him go bat****. That is called contradicting oneself.

 

lern2write

 

 

I think that Xard is trying to say that all these killings were done by people who were social outcasts and often picked on by others at school. They expressively feel that they do not belong to the society that they live in and start to have depressive and hyper-aggressive tendencies.

You mean social outcasts are a product of changing social rules and customs? Do you really believe that?

 

 

At least in Finland, "in the good old days", the underlying social binding with society was stronger among people, and everyone felt that they took part in something (Solidarity perhaps?). Those days are long gone and many people here see this society has turned into a egoistic, selfish, and greedy one. This is also known as the "ME"-generation, hence capitalism and it's strongly individual message.

 

However, i do not know the reasons mentioned above are true or not, it is just the saying on the street, or so to say. But studies have shown that a growing number of young people feel disconnected to the rest of society, which is the underlying problem to begin with.

I agree with the general idea that some people are becoming more and more disconnected from their environment. What I don't like is the automatic connection between this and capitalism, which is as weak as disingenuous.

 

On the other hand, I believe that, more than a lifestyle and outlook that places the self above everything else, it's the increased chance for publicity that makes these things increase in frequency. I mean, the guy was obviously, desperately seeking attention.

 

And, of course, one of these incidents per year is still not enough to suggest that society is spiralling to its DOOM.

 

EDIT: Apparently, the Police questioned him about his YouTube channel the previous day, or so says Wiki.

 

All, in all, I do not know. I am just speculating that it might be a product of when the underlying social tapestry, which has been shared by generations, erodes or dramatically changes. However, since there are several different countries with several different cultures, one can have some trouble on defining what a social outcast really is. In the end, it is all relative.

[Guest The Architect]

Whenever a social outcast goes on such a shooting spree like this you always hear people saying that the students need to be taught to respect each other and everything. This already has happened. It won't work, because the reality is, it's not uncommon for teenagers to be self-centred emotional retards who will prey on the weak out of fear of being preyed on themselves.

 

As pathetic and primitive it is, it's not unexpected. What the students should be taught is about inner validation, self-respect, how not to get taught in the trap of defining oneself based on how society deems you to be. Controlling ones ego, like that of a monk.

 

If this guy was a social outcast, a victim of emotional abuse, if he had the right mental health education he would've seen his attackers as idiots not worthy of his attention and would've had no desire to harm them since there may be a chance they'll grow up one day and feel bad about what they did. If not, then hey, not his problem.

 

Or this guy could've been an undiagnosed psychotic or mental disorder suffering person. Anyway, I don't think it's the social isolation that's the problem. It's the social negative attitude towards it. The media will be quick to point the finger at it being the source of the problem, if this guy even was in this position in the first place, but it was his low self-esteem that was actually the problem.

[~Di]

A tragedy. My condolences to all the Fins on this board. You must be devastated.

[Aram]

This type of thing makes me really unhappy.

[Volourn]

This has nothing to do with age. Most of the most evil people in the world were adults. And, btw, most people can be selfish and egotistical; but that doens't lead most people to murder either. Don't blame society for one punk's actions.

 

My sympathy goes out to the victims, and their families.

[Walsingham]

A spiritually positive note from Architect, but I don't know... In this case I doubt the people he shot were the morons. This foool had been planning the attack for six years, so the BBC have said. I call him the moron.

 

Having siad that, people are inextricably social, so I totally disagree with Volo. People don't hit 18 years old having been unaffected by people around them. Unless they're feral children, like in that film.

[Volourn]

"Having siad that, people are inextricably social, so I totally disagree with Volo. People don't hit 18 years old having been unaffected by people around them. Unless they're feral children, like in that film."

 

Nothing you wrote is indisagreement with my statement. Society does effect people; but society is still not to blame for a punk's actions.

 

Because, if what you say is true and society is to blame for his actions then we all in society would go out, and commit the same acts which just isn't the case. People are different, and react to things different, and choose to do different things even if confronted with the same choices and this is true even if all things were as 'equal' as they can be - ie social background/race/education/IQ/money/etc.

 

Society didn't make Wayne Gretzky a hockey star. Wayne Gretzky did.

 

Society didn't make this guy become a mass murderer. He did.

Edited September 24, 2008 by Volourn

[Gorgon]

I don't think there is anything tangible you can do to prevent people from becoming isolated and dangerous to their surroundings. You can't tell what crackpot is the one that will flip and do something like this. That would assume a level of control and attention to detail that just isn't feasible. You can't get inside everyone's heads.

 

As usual the answer to these nature or nurture questions is somewhere in the middle.

 

Suspicious behavior should result in a revocation of gun licenses if it's someone unbalanced, but then we are back to getting inside people's heads again. Better to just make it harder to get guns in the first place. Maybe some required psychological tests, but then again it's hardly an exact science.

Edited September 24, 2008 by Gorgon

[Meshugger]

And now the stupidity comes with the politicians

 

Finnish prime-minister Matti Vanhanen:

 

"We have to tighten the law significantly," the prime minister said.

 

"In terms of handguns that can easily be carried about, we have to think about whether they should be available for private people. In my opinion, they belong on shooting ranges."

 

- Nevermind that the finnish police failed to determine that he was a threat to society and sent to psychiatric evaluation days before the execution.

- Nevermind that the guy was way over the legal age of buying/carrying a gun: 22

- Nevermind that the guy planned this for 6 years, so it wasn't "a heat of the moment", or so to say.

 

There's a scandinavian saying "Eth

[Gorgon]

Well I don't think it's a good idea to allow the general populace easy access to guns. Legislation shouldn't be based on single incidents though, there needs to be a debate about this first.

Edited September 24, 2008 by Gorgon

[Volourn]

Actually, having the general populace have 'easy access' to guns is a good idea. The general populace are good, stand up people who just want to live their lives. The people you want to have hard access to guns are criminals, and scumbags. If it wasn't for poor policing, maybe the general populace wouldn't need to have 'easy access' to guns. Not to mention hunters, collectors, and the like who should also have 'easy access' to guns.

 

The only government that bans guns are those who fear being overthrown and only poor governments who are doing horrible jobs (ie. dictators) would truly fear such an uprising.

[Gorgon]

The only government that bans guns are those who fear being overthrown and only poor governments who are doing horrible jobs (ie. dictators) would truly fear such an uprising.

 

Well that is rather obviously incorrect. There isn't a single government in central Europe that has any fear of being overthrown.

[random n00b]

Well that is rather obviously incorrect. There isn't a single government in central Europe that has any fear of being overthrown.

Not quite. General policies towards private gun ownership in Europe are mostly inherited notions. When those notions were first made into laws (1600-1700s?), the threat of armed revolts was very, very credible.

[Gorgon]

And now they are countries with gun restrictions which are in no danger whatsoever of some sort of armed uprising. This makes the whole observation a complete anachronism. Much like the notion that easily available guns protect US citizens from a military coup d'etat

Edited September 24, 2008 by Gorgon

[Meshugger]

I do not see a problem with owning guns and keeping them home. I do not however, want to live in a society where everyone walks around with a fully loaded, automatic assault-rifle on their respective backs. Just use good judgement and keep them at home, folks.

[Kissamies]

They are fast with their knee-jerk reactions of banning handguns, those politicians. Should focus on the real problems. What causes this behaviour in the first place? I don't mind making those licences harder to get, but the real problem is people. They'll find ways to kill people if they want. Have they forgotten the Myyrmanni bombing already?

[Gorgon]

Research into what makes people homicidal maniacs doesn't have much in they way of practical implementation.

[random n00b]

And now they are countries with gun restrictions which are in no danger whatsoever of some sort of armed uprising. This makes the whole observation a complete anachronism. Much like the notion that easily available guns protect US citizens from a military coup d'etat

The point is that stringent gun laws in Europe are not related to the governments' lack of fear of being overthrown in either way - it cannot be wielded as proof of anything. They are more a tradition than anything else, and one that nobody has any reason to challenge.

 

 

They are fast with their knee-jerk reactions of banning handguns, those politicians. Should focus on the real problems. What causes this behaviour in the first place? I don't mind making those licences harder to get, but the real problem is people. They'll find ways to kill people if they want. Have they forgotten the Myyrmanni bombing already?

Indeed. There have always been psycho ****ers, but coming up with initiatives to outlaw ammonium nitrate probably isn't as profitable politically...

[Gorgon]

Dealers are supposed to report any missing major components in bomb making material, as a result of the new wave of terrorist activity. Can't very well have farmers stop fertilizing their fields though.