University of Connecticut bid to study mass killer genes sparks controversy

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
It pains me to say this but. . . I think Univ of Conn. is trying to upgrade their genetics program by receiving 'charitable' funding/donations through this tragic event under the disguise of this study.

It's foolish to say that they're looking for just one gene. Let's say at Minimum, it'll be a 'blend' of several genes and even then there could be different combinations in order for activation to occur.

Another point is once Univ. of Conn sequences Lanza's DNA, what other background will they make the comparison with? I understand that there are huge gene banks (databases) around but far as I can tell there's no "Psycho'R'Us GeneBank". . .

Perhaps I should pull back on the reins & first ask: What specifically are they looking for as being 'evil'. Will they be simply comparing Lanza's DNA w/ other known genetic markers for 'mental illness'?

Like I stated earlier, 'evil' is extremely broad for this particular study.




posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by magma
 


A couple of thoughts:

- "One of the worst school shootings"? Are there "better" school shootings? Yes, I know...the OP isn't the stories author


- It is a slippery slope fallacy to think that identifying a gene will result in automatic incarceration. If that happens, we as "The People" have failed miserably to protect the few scraps of liberty left for us.

- There is absolutely no reason to create controversy over uncovering factual information. That is what science is. So what if some people are uncomfortable with the implications. That smacks of how religion has increased ignorance over the millenia.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   
If they want to study a killer's DNA, why not just hit up Bush Jr for a sample?
Seriously.

Suddenly now someone wants to do this, as if senseless killing is new or is some sort of pandemic. Just strikes me as odd, but I'd be interested in hearing what sort of results could be had from one person.

I don't think anything conclusive could come from looking at one individual's DNA, but perhaps used in conjunction with future 'cases', to detect a pattern or what not?
edit on 28-12-2012 by Sek82 because: ETA more than two lines.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I think in the future it will be more like those who have the gene are segregated from those who don't.

Slippery indeed.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by magma
 



I don't think any of that would happen. It is a HUGE leap to go from scientific research to eugenics.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


A few hundred years ago so called witches were burnt at the stake. A little more than a hundred years ago electricity was just invented.

In 50 years time you will be able to select a baby based on gene analysis.

The norm will be to discard the unwanted undesirables from the gene pool.

Society will demand it.

Is that so far fetched?



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 03:07 AM
link   
__________________

So Lanza inherited his DNA from his
'violent parents' ? ? ? Lanza's Grand-parents were
mass murderers too ? ? ? (obviously NOT !)
Heads-up people, don't be fooled !
And after they take the guns,
Next . . .everyone's DNA will be assessed, then
the alien bloodlines will start
the selective culling/depopulation.

This is a precursor to total mass-control .
________________



edit on 28/12/12 by ToneDeaf because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by ToneDeaf
 


He may have inherited his situation from his grandparents. Or their parents.

That is where I would start.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by magma
 


Ha! Got them scared with this one, eh?

I'm all for it. There just might be some DNA link. These angry young Jewish kids like Lanza, the two Columbine shooters, and the Arizona Gabrielle Giffords shooter must have some hidden link. Maybe there really is some crazy shooter gene.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 04:50 AM
link   
I can think of a better person to study if this University wants to know what makes a mass killer tick... how about, the President?

This guy killed 27 people. How many did Bush kill? How many has Obama killed? I guess they don't matter because they're brown.

Is there an evil gene? What a joke! How about you find one of these corrupt scumbags in Washington and ask them if there's an evil gene?! All these cowards that call themselves politicians that sit there and call for a war neither themselves nor their kids will ever have to fight! Ask a banker if there's an evil gene while they evict the very same people that baled them out! Is there an evil gene? No, there's corrupt bastards that lie and cheat and always get away with it.
edit on 28-12-2012 by Vidpci because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by XXX777
reply to post by magma
 


Ha! Got them scared with this one, eh?

I'm all for it. There just might be some DNA link. These angry young Jewish kids like Lanza, the two Columbine shooters, and the Arizona Gabrielle Giffords shooter must have some hidden link. Maybe there really is some crazy shooter gene.




Don't forget Holmes. It would be easy to get a sample from him at this time.

Not sure about crazy shooter gene, but there might be a gene that enables people to flip out.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 07:00 AM
link   
__________________
Brain scans of the world bankers
would be transparent, but how about
DNA testing on the elite as jimmy sa vile's buddies
in government and the monarchy.
___________________



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I do not like this at all. First of all, if they could do this, why now? Why not study Charles Manson or some famous serial killers over the years? If they could figure this out and isolate genes, you would think they'd study many serial or mass killers over the years. Why not the Columbine boys?

Second of all, and this is what I have a HUGE problem with, this could lead to MAJOR problems for people down the line. Just imagine, pregnant women getting tested for this gene and recommending people abort their pregnancies because they've found the gene? Okay, maybe that's dramatic, but it could happen! What if they "isolate" the gene and start testing us? Locking us up because they've found the gene? Again, dramatic, but hey, who knows? Here's the thing. Any of us can have any sort of gene, but it doesn't mean we ARE our genes. Genes can be present, but unless they're switched on, it's like not having them at all. At this point, we don't know why some mundane genes get "turned on", so what if someone has the "murder" gene, how do we know it will be "turned on"?

Don't get me wrong. Research is a good, good thing. However, I'm suspect of what this could lead to. Are they really looking for the "killer" gene? Or are they looking for the "mental illness" gene? If the latter, that could just get very wrong very quickly if in the wrong hands with the wrong agenda. I'm studying to be a psychologist and although there are many great theories on mental illness when it comes to genetics, we can't predict crap. We are still arguing how things like GID (gender identity disorder) start, so how do we think we can figure this one out? To me, it's suspect.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by mountaingirl1111
 


You look at many of the moral implications. I don't see moral implications as "big problems", but rather road bumps. People are going to do what they are going to do. The more you try to control them, the more stress it will cause you.

What I expect will be found in this study is that there is no "gene" that causes behavior. Of course, there are genes that causes specific diseases, and there are genes that increase risk.

But to allow fear of a slippery slope fallacy to prevent the pursuit of science is just ridiculous, nearing 16th century superstition. The science itself is not immoral, only the fear of what it will result in down the road somewhere, if people lose their minds.

I, for one, encourage any scientific study that pulls funding away from military science projects.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I understand what you're saying. Trust me, I'm all for scientific advancements through research. In my field, the road to PhD is paved with research, otherwise, I'd go for PsyD. It's not the research that I fear, it's the sudden interest in trying to figure out motives via DNA. Since when can we figure that out? Suddenly we believe we can figure this stuff out when we haven't even been able to get close to figuring out "mundane" illnesses? And trust me, it all comes down to gene isolation. We can't begin to figure out motive via DNA without genetics. While yes, research is good, this sort of undertaking is unusual because we've had a plethora of cases to study since we've been able to study genetics. Basic College Bio 101 teaches us that even if genes exist, it doesn't mean they're switched on. So, even if they find something, wouldn't it be moot because they don't know WHY that gene was switched on. So, it's pointless to assume they can figure out motive. PLUS they're biased in looking for something that causes something else, perhaps an odd gene might not have caused that, but a certain trigger did? See, it's too complex to use just one example and claim they can figure it out. ANY study is only rendered valid when it can be replicated by other researchers and results duplicated. That is why they publish to journals. So, even if they researchers at the university could find something and figure it out, it still wouldn't "count" until others studies could find the same results, etc. Also, if they could find something, they would need to then look at the DNA of other killers and try to find the common gene/link. STILL, they would need to figure out why or how the gene was turned on and it would have to be a pretty common thing between all of these killers before they could make an actual conclusion.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by magma
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I think in the future it will be more like those who have the gene are segregated from those who don't.

Slippery indeed.



maybe this will lead to a DNA test in order to own weapons.
Just walk away.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   
In the immortal words of Chris Rock;



Whatever happened to crazy?


Looking for a genetic link in mass murderers considering the absolutely minuscule sample size would be for all intents and purposes, impossible. We also have that age old argument of "Nature versus Nurture." For example, let's take two individuals who have a propensity for violence that can be identified genetically. One was raised in a dysfunctional (I'll leave the definition of "dysfunctional" up to the reader) family environment and is now in prison for attacking someone outside a bar. The other was raised in a functional, supportive environment and is a successful Doctor. Yet they share the same genetic "marker" for violence (this "marker" is pure conjecture BTW).

The identification of a gene sequence common to violent individuals will NOT give us the ability to suddenly wave a magic DNA wand over everyone and throw thousands, perhaps millions of people behind bars because of what they MIGHT do.

I believe the research is perfectly valid if somewhat unrealistic. Further reading:

Nature versus Nurture

Epigenetics



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by PW229
In the immortal words of Chris Rock;



Whatever happened to crazy?


Looking for a genetic link in mass murderers considering the absolutely minuscule sample size would be for all intents and purposes, impossible. We also have that age old argument of "Nature versus Nurture." For example, let's take two individuals who have a propensity for violence that can be identified genetically. One was raised in a dysfunctional (I'll leave the definition of "dysfunctional" up to the reader) family environment and is now in prison for attacking someone outside a bar. The other was raised in a functional, supportive environment and is a successful Doctor. Yet they share the same genetic "marker" for violence (this "marker" is pure conjecture BTW).



So environment is the kicker, the catalyst.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by magma
 


I don't think any of that would happen.  It is a HUGE leap to go from scientific research to eugenics.


Quite the opposite - Darwin , his family and his colleagues - "evolution and eugenics" go hand in hand. Rejecting creation leads to no qualms regarding tampering with that creation.

Over the past couple years, "science" has been flooding the MSM with 'studies' hypothetically linking everything from how we vote and our religious beliefs to our choice in mates to DNA. Now on how on Earth will the occult propose to create the peace, love and security of it's envisioned utopia? By eliminating what purportedly causes behaviours deemed "unsuitable" - genetic manipulation. Eugenics.

The President of Iran spilled their beans publicly at the UN in September. This is found in their occult writings.


"He (the Imam Mahdi) will come to return all children of Adam irrespective of their skin colors to their innate origin after a long history of separation and division linking them to eternal happiness." www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...
 

In other words - genetic change. They already have their "solution" in the bag - now they are just creating the problems and influencing the public reactions to steer you towards acceptance of their solution. 

There is only one Truth available to humanity - Our Creator. But as long as you reject it, the occult truth is what you get. 



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
I applaud the University for this attempt to de-mystify criminal violence. EVERY bit of research WILL help.

Lanza was not a political leader. He was only a seemingly ordinary kid, with extra-ordinary talents many will claim as 'gifted'. There is often a fine line between a genius and a nutjob. Lanza walked a fine line, and research is needed to know why and how he tripped on that line and ended as a mass murderer of innocent children.

Eugenics had been proven failed science. Our DNA only creates our body shell. It is the gift of LIFE that separates one another in the way we live and choose with free will - to focus on becoming a genius in our core interests and contribute to society as taught by ENVIRONMENTAL moral and ethical guidelines that worked for civilised life of centuries, passed down from surving humankind to us and for future generations, OR

became a mass murderer and destroy all.


It is my hope that the MORE CRITICAL research - NEUROSCIENCE - will undertake similar research. It is the brain and how it is electrically hardwired that cause our effective functions in daily life, that will UNLOCK the mysteries of our behaviour.

What had snapped or been missing in Lanza's brain that caused him to become a mass murderer? May we find out and soon, so that mental health specialists can identify and help these individuals earlier, rather than to ignore them and let them continue on, which will only have adverse effects on innocent humanity as Lanza had provened.






top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join