Printable View
Brilliantly put, Miss Cellane. I was thinking along those lines "Oh, here we go again with the smart, quiet, scary loner." I was more social in school, so wouldn't have raised concerns. Interestingly, when we took Myers-Briggs at work, the few women in my group all tested introvert. My "brand" was INTJ, which one resource identified as 1% of the female population.
Cellane - the concen you express for introverts, is the concern I have for the mentally ill. As I mentioned part way thru this discussion, most mentally ill people are not violent. It's the personality disordered ones that are most dangerous (and usually only the cluster B part of the axis 2 diagnoses ... Clusters A and C are usually nonviolent).
In fact, the classically mentally ill (bipolar, schizophrenia, depression) are victims more often than anything else.
I think: people with Aspergers are going to be blamed hard :(. And what are there going to be seperate gun laws for Asperger's folks compared to non-Aspergers people now? By broad descriptions you could fit me in there, things like overwhelmed by excessive external stimulation. I dont like it. However on any actual psyche test for such, I am not at all. Am of course introvert though.
INTP, like I am, is not a very common a female type either (introverts are less common than extroverts, N's are not that common, and it seems to me most females or at least most introvert females are Fs). Why it's uncommon enough and makes one feel different enough one could start inaccurately diagnosing oneself with Aspergers and stuff!Quote:
My "brand" was INTJ, which one resource identified as 1% of the female population.
When I think of the sacrifices of life, limb and family that our founding fathers made, I am certain that they would disagree with freein05 as well. I'll bet, without goggling history, that at least one of their children died in or as a result of that conflict.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
I don't know of the majority, but I know that Eric Harris was reasonably well assimilated into social activities: he had a job, had been known to date, etc. He was a psychopath, that whole storyline about him being rejected by jocks was faux.Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Cellane
Oddly, perhaps unfortunately, I had just watched We Need to Talk About Kevin on Monday night of this week. That is a theatrical film about one of these psychopaths, his family, The Event, and the aftermath. To pretend that it sheds light on the Newtown killer is bogus, but still, fiction can be brilliant at illuminating an element of the human condition, and this film was already in my head this week when Friday's even occurred. The mother in this film knew something was wrong with Kevin and was powerless to stop it, he was far too cunning.
I think that there are people who walk amongst us who are--evil. That is a simplistic word to use, but it's apt.
The founders fathers wrote a constitution that has lasted for a very long time and for the most part works very good today. I am one of those who feel the founding fathers wrote a living constitution because they knew that the United States would be a different place in 200 years. The type of firearms used during their time were muskets that fired 1 shot and took about 30 seconds to 1 minute to reload if you were good and you could not conceal them. I also believe the 2nd amendment was not written for the individual but for state militias.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iris lily
Firearms we have today can fire 100s of rounds a minute. There are pistols with 30 round magazines that can fire the 30 rounds in seconds. The population of the US when the constitution written was about 2.5 million. Today the population is over 300 million. Many things have changed since 1776
Yeah, it is ironic how the constitution seems to be viewed as some sort of divinely inspired word to not be challenged. This is not what some of the the framers had in mind...Quote:
Originally Posted by freein05
"There have been many proposals for substantial change to the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson himself was wary of the power of the dead over the living in the form of an unchanging Constitution. To ensure that each generation have a say in the framework of the government, he proposed that the Constitution, and each one following it, expire after 19 or 20 years."
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_newc.html
But it's not so inviolate when it comes to the Fourth Amendment. Can you imagine what the Founders would have thought of porno scanners or Carnivore?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
There have been 27 amendments to the Constitution since the 1780s. Amendments have to pass a high bar to be ratified, but they can pass it if enough people want it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
Given the current political climate, I would hate to see something like this enacted. If a new Constitution was not agreed upon, would the default be for the old one to perpetuate? Or would we face a "judicial cliff"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
Actually the current political climate itself might be enough evidence to suppose a revised constitution. Some thing in our congress and our election process and maybe out tax process just doesn't seem to be working and might indicate the need for some revolutionary changes. Like the article says, amendments are intended as small evolutionary changes, but not truly defining like the constitution. I sometimes think what might have happened if the electoral vote would have gone one way and the popular voted the other in the recent election.Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveinMN