University of Connecticut bid to study mass killer genes sparks controversy

Hi! Welcome to the US Bureau of Genetics!

Please, have a seat. Well, we've gone over your tests. You show a genetic disposition towards tobacco. So sorry, no insurance is allowed for any lung-related illness.
But good news! You show no inclination towards drinking! So damage that liver all you want! Also we found that you probably won't live past 65. A genetic leaning towards dying early. Sorry.

As for gun registration?
You show recessive traits for the psycho gene so we can't take any chances.

Plus you have the gambling gene as well. So you have been disapproved for a home loan.

So drink up! We'll pay for a liver, until we won't because you're going to die homeless and penniless!

Have a nice day.

reply to post by magma


This will be how pre-crime punishment starts. They will start mandatory gene testing on everyone and if your found to have this "evil gene" you will be put in a labor camp, (private prison) making items for .50 an hour for the rest of your life.

The newborn babies that test positive will probably have a fate thats far worse though, theyll probably just be euthanized.

reply to post by magma


So when the creatards want to keep their guns suddenly genetic research is viable scientific evidence.

Strange how the science they always claim is invented by demons was the first thing they reach for.

Peter, a young but brilliant neuro-scientist, made a major discovery over Lanza's brain scan.

While comparing his amongst many other humans' brain scans whom had not resorted to violence, he discovered that the row of synapsis 172 to 179 was missing from Lanza's brain left hemisphere.

He then went further, to research other mass murderers and even single murders committed by criminals' brain scans. It showed similiar missing synapsis on the row in the left hemisphere brain.

The then wrote and submitted his findings to the science institutes, whom peer reviewed his articles, and found conclusive evidence base upon their own findings of criminals' brain scans within their districts and nations. Peter was hailed.

But what was more important was that it made mental heallh specialist jobs easier by identifying early violent behaviour in mental patients, and offer help and remedy, so that the mentally ill can return back to society safely and contribute to their communities.

Soon, violent crimes became greatly reduced, and there were less humans on death rows around the world.

All because of the dedication of one mental health specialist to save mankind from fear and destruction.

Despite what 1950s pulp movies would have us believe... I trust scientists WAY more than politicians, lobbyists, the NRA, cops, my dad, you, Jon Stewart OR Bill O'Reilly, the President. In fact, I can't think of a sub-strata of American society I trust more than the scientific community. It's hilarious to me that folks immediately jump to the "pre-crime" conclusion from a report about genetic research. If they can do research and discover a *reason* people go bitchcakes and kill dozens of innocents, then that's wonderful news. If they isolate that gene, you know what will happen? People will be shipped to a moon-prison to live the rest of their... no no... they'll research a way to TREAT the problem. You have to identify the problem in order to treat it. It's become obvious to everyone that there is a mental illness that "causes" these seemingly mild-mannered people to suddenly decide to shoot up a school. It's also obvious that the paranoid neanderthals aren't going to let us regulate assault weapons soooo, the next best thing is isolating the mental malfunction that is leading to this and figure out a way to treat it.

To read this thread you would think people didn't know there was a such thing as treatment for mental illness.

Originally posted by JWash
Good luck on that!

Thats quite an ambitious endeavour. . .

There are numerous variables that will hinder the process until a shred of 'concrete' factual data can be considered for peer reviewing and could become scientifically checked. . .

Some variables:
- A sample pool size for comparison
- Collection of other DNA samples (of 'good' & 'evil' people)
- A method to test the geneticists 'hypothesis'/data (intrigued on this one)
- etc. . .

Not to mention identifying their control group! This is riddled with possibilities of drawing the wrong conclusion. But once again, we'll witness man wanting to know so badly, that a group actually convinces the rest of us that they know. And we believe it because we don't hold the same academic degree. Knowledge truly is power.

Originally posted by yourmaker
Okay, let's assume there is an evil gene and they find it, does that lay the groundwork for a mass cull of anyone holding that gene?

Or what would they hope to find from this? I can only imagine it being used against anyone actually in possession of such a thing..

No what the Pentagon would do if they found an evil gene, and they probably already have found several after studies in the Middle East with war, is that they would then create a vaccine. I know for example they found a fundamentalist brain activity that can be turned off; saw a video on youtube about it, shared below:



The vaccine would trigger or mute certain genes that would turn off certain areas of the brain that are firing, and reducing the population with those genes switched on into even more ineffective people in society, in my opinion. It's half-decent to do that to what we eat, but to do it to our birthrights and inheritance of a body is too far.

They can go past the vaccine and create a virus that switches genes on and off.

So this Connecticut study has a chance of being redundant. The shooter could have had a "fundamentalist" gene. Or he could have a different gene that reduces guilt for one's actions; in the 1980s I heard about studies about a sociopath gene. It doesn't matter about the cards he's dealt in life; what matters is how the cards are played. He failed. Where is the gun gene? Nature vs nurture arguments will come around next.

reply to post by magma


Why don't they study the effects of psychotic drugs?

This is a waste of money.

Originally posted by yourmaker

Originally posted by Infi8nity

Originally posted by MaMaa
I'm all for it! If they can identify something that all mass killer/psychopaths/violent criminals/ect.. have in common, yet others do not then by all means.. go for it. I have always thought it would be better to find out why a person would do such a thing rather than try to deal with it after the fact. I hear all sorts of things about banning/controlling various weapons and such, but how about figure out what or why it is that people do these things to begin with. finding and treating the cause seems far more logical to me.

YEAH? What if you carry that gene?

I'd imagine she would be perfectly happy with being subjugated the way she would do onto others!

You have a wild imagination because nothing could be further from the truth. All I'm talking about is studying and seeing if there are any links between known mass killers/psychopaths/violent criminals. Now of course it could have nothing to do with genetics at all, it could just be the way a person is raised, but plenty of people are raised with worse conditions than some who turn into these mass killers/ murderers/ect.. So maybe there is a genetic component to it? It wouldn't even mean that having that gene automatically makes someone a mass murderer either, but I would think any insight into why these people are doing what they are doing would be a step in the right direction.

If I happened to have that gene I would be greatly surprised, I would never hurt anyone intentionally. But having a gene doesn't make one a killer, it's simply a marker for possible behavior. I would think other things would need to be taken into consideration as well. Psychological profiles for example, past behavior, home life, ect.. basic nurture along with the nature (physical reasons such as genetic mutations, ect..)

I'm not saying find a gene and then round up everyone who may have it and lock them up or anything.

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by magma

 

Why don't they study the effects of psychotic drugs?

This is a waste of money.

I am not actually sure. Maybe if they find out there is a mass murderer gene, big pharma will then manufacture a pill the prevent any actual action.

Originally posted by magma

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by magma

 

Why don't they study the effects of psychotic drugs?

This is a waste of money.

I am not actually sure. Maybe if they find out there is a mass murderer gene, big pharma will then manufacture a pill the prevent any actual action.

That's what they do alright, or try to, but typically make matters worse.
I've read a study that determined ultimately it was a combination of nature and nurture at least for another type child killer, a serial killer or pedophile. They found "many" remorseless killers and child rapist/murders have a part of the brain that registers empathy, sympathy and external feelings for others, inoperative. These are not the genius psychopaths or even smart sociopaths like Lanza, but a simpler low IQ type killer. You'll hear it said 'he had the IQ of an 8 year old.' In the same study they determined simply having the low IQ and those empathic parts of the brain inoperative DID NOT NECESSARILY A KILLER MAKE. Though the killers had this "brain type" in common, other people, with similar weak areas of the brain, raised in loving supportive families, did not turn into killers. Usually the killers were low functioning adults (we might call simpletons) who were ABUSED in childhood.

So I feel the same might hold true. If there is a mass murderer gene, it is NOT the only factor that results in a mass murderer. I think a lot of other things have to go wrong along the way. And blaming genetics you might miss another cause, like child abuse, trauma or even something in the food or water affecting that particular "killer" gene uniquely...etc.

I can see a huge problem coming with their sample size, there simply aren't that many spree-killers to begin with. add in a things like fake events, and you'll introduce a lot of noise into your already sparse dataset. For example,I couldn't imagine Lee Harvey Oswald carrying anything other than a patsy gene


anyway, the way i see it, they'll come up with genetic markers for brand preference next, ridiculous on so many levels and what a disservice to science this is.

Originally posted by yourmaker
Okay, let's assume there is an evil gene and they find it, does that lay the groundwork for a mass cull of anyone holding that gene?

Or what would they hope to find from this? I can only imagine it being used against anyone actually in possession of such a thing..

Well, they would have to use a larger group then the mass shooters. They would have to include serial killers, serial rapists, white collar criminals etc(because most of the mass shooters in the last decade or more have been primarily Asian American/Jewish American, which could lead to false positives due to the ethnic similarities of the mass shooters).

But this is old news, scientists are already looking for the genetic markers of Psychopaths(after having found out that Psychopaths brains are wired differently then most).