Recent shootings serve to highlight how we live in times that are violent and lonely. Young shooters are breaking the precarious rhythms of our daily lives with tragedy. We know little about them. However, one thing they all have in common is loneliness.

In times past, subversives would seek strength in organization and numbers. They would conspire with others to carry out their nefarious deeds. Intelligence services could trace links and patterns to uncover vast conspiracies.

The loner finds his strength in loneliness. He does not need or seek others. There is no organization or headquarters. He slips quietly under the radar until he unleashes his silent and irrational wrath. As with suicide bombers, the loner is willing to die in his first and final act. Society has little defense against his unpredictable movements. Law enforcement cannot take preventative measures in the face of a past of non-engagement.

There is not even a set of established beliefs for loners. What is erroneously labeled "white supremacist ideology” is usually a self-made mish-mash of contradictory (and often liberal) ideas with little rhyme or reason to them. Analysts like to refer to a process as "online self-radicalization.” Shooters’ "ideology” is more likely the scrambled ramblings of broken individuals who rebel against life and society.

What makes this scenario more frightening is that loner demographic is growing. Young people who normally become increasingly social as they mature are retreating into themselves. Society is mass-producing loners.

[...]

If we are to prevent violence, we must address the cause of the problem to be effective. It is not something a government program will resolve.

The tragedy of the lone shooters is their isolation. They lack the family links of intense affection. Few people will make an effort to connect with the loners.

Everyone knows they need help — especially after the fact. Everyone generally reports on the bizarreness of the shooters’ behavior. Some are not surprised by the news of their evil acts. In the busyness of their daily lives, most people have no time to reach out or take action, even when evidence points to serious problems. The loner is out of sight and out of mind.

Thus, people propose red flag laws that would allow police to intervene in cases where such individuals appear dangerous. However, these measures are of limited effectiveness. Of what use are red flag laws when there is no one to wave the flag? Of what use are background checks into the lives of loners with no background? How effective can we be in curbing the present cases when the nation is mass-producing loners on a grand scale? [emphasis added]

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:15 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 553 words, total size 4 kb.