Was Cho Seung-hui decision rational or irrational?

Was Cho Seung-hui's decision rational or irrational?

  • Total voters
    33
darksidZz

Why the hospital he was at in 2005 let him leave is beyond me,
Click to expand...

Because in this country with out a court ordered commitment you can check your self out at any time you chose and there is nothing anyone can do to stop you with out being charged with kidnapping and unlawful confinement, and then you are in more trouble than the individual that refuses treatment.
 
Sputnik said:
I must admit , that I am a bit disappointed with the mental institution he went to in 2005 ...........they let him go ..........I still wonder if they diagnosed him correctly ..........
Click to expand...

I have personally tried to get a person institutionalize. You wouldn't belive how difficult it is. You have to remember we're taking away someone's freedom...

That's no excuse for allowing Cho to go off. The evaluation needs to be for much long er period of time. More than just three days. I know how Cho's type is. They can act normal when they wish. They have a measure of control...to some extent they understand consquences. It's not complete insanity it's a controled-imbalance. Under evaluation they must be put under some sort of duress. Only then do they show their true selves.
 
Saquist


That's no excuse for allowing Cho to go off. The evaluation needs to be for much long er period of time. More than just three days.
Click to expand...

And how do you do this with the laws as they are?
 
Answers.com definition of rational

Clearly he did not meet all the definitions of rational, and only marginally so for the first definition. Cho possessed the ability to reason, however his reasoning was not sane and was influenced by emotion only. Therefore his decision was irrational.
 
Last edited:
Buffalo Roam said:
Sputnik

Why be disappointed in the institution, by law they couldn't hold him, and he was free to leave at any time he chose, the people to be disappointed in is the government that made these laws, in the sixties and has no responsibility to protect you, and then take away your ability to defend your self, why do these things happen in schools?
Click to expand...

Saquist said:
I have personally tried to get a person institutionalize. You wouldn't belive how difficult it is. You have to remember we're taking away someone's freedom...
Click to expand...


The reason I am disappointed is that the laws in Denmark ( my country ) , is so different from US legislation .........

The police HAVE to protect people .... and respond quickly here , normally within minutes ...............

Guns are allowed , but you first have to have a license from the police .......
since Denmark is a small country - all crimes are on one computer system .... and ALL your contacts with the national health system is also on another computer system ( medicare is free here so EVERYBODY uses NHS of Denmark )........which means, that even if you only had 1/2 hour contact with a psychiatric emergency department after a personal crisis .....then the police can see it , and demand insight in your journal AND an assesment from a shrink before you get the license for a gun !!!!!!!!!!!!!

For admitting a person against his will , it can be done if :
he is a danger to himself or others or can´t take care of himself ..........
Or : if he is insane , WITHOUT being a danger .....
Or : if he is in a state of mind that is equal to being insane : intoxicated or very upset , boiling inside with emotions .......
Or : suspected insane even though he manages to control himself , if that is the case he can be held back untill a final diagnosis has been made .........

If you need medication for being mentally disturbed , then you will get it here , with or without your accept ........

According to law, not only what the patient says , but also his previous actions AND statements from other people (teachers and even neighbours) is to be included in the psychiatric assesment of the patient by the doctors ................

Yes , you need heavy funding into NHS and police to maintain this ....... we are lucky here in Denmark .............

He would NEVER have got a license for a gun in my country ..........

I do admit this is easier to do in a very small and rich country .........
 
Last edited:
29154656.jpg

at this moment more then 50% believes this boy is rational... oohkay?
 
He was ONLY rational in planning his action , get the means to do it and execute it .............
Even most schizophrenics are able to decide, that they are hungry , buy food , prepare it and eat it ..............
 
Last edited:
Buffalo Roam said:
Sputnik I would check your case law, I do believe you will find that there is no right to police protection.
Click to expand...


I must admit , that I have not checked it , but we had a case in 2007 where police respond was longer than normal ( a guy fired a gun several times , in a suburb , nobody hurt ) .........it even went into the government , that specified that the police had to react immediately to puplic need ...........

In Denmark you can have people jailed if the peoples sense of justice is hurt .......... by law .... recently , a young man did a hit and run with his car on a 2 year old child - the child is now out of hospital , but the guy is still in jail even before his trial , due to moral reasons ...........sometimes we are very tough here .....but you always have the choice to sue, if you think that you are not treated fair ....... and you can sue if you feel , that psychiatrists are keeping you against your will without reason .........
 
What is truly sad in cases such as these is the killer is technically acting out rationally against a perceived irrational world beyond change and is correct in that analysis in that context.

The truth is society is built on lies, for those rare or sensitive souls who don't understand the everyday hypocrisy, bigotry, cruelty, selfishness, cognitive dissonance, racism, prejudice etc is fracturing and confusing.

He couldn't take out everyone, so he took out as many as he could and himself. Evidently, the world is not "right" for them or anyone to live in.

Ironicly, Cho is sadly correct. Cho is predictably labeled a monster and mentally ill when the institutionalized and approved masses are mental cases themselves. Just didn't crack because the pig sty happens to not rub them the wrong way.
 
Buffalo Roam said:
Saquist




And how do you do this with the laws as they are?
Click to expand...

Persistence. US law governing contentious people is more about frequency of occurences. Therefore it need documentation of behavior that shows a progression from bad to worse.

But most importantly it takes a constant figure, a person, in constant contact with the distrubed person to report any and everything...

In Cho's case no one took that intrest.

Sputnik said:
The reason I am disappointed is that the laws in Denmark ( my country ) , is so different from US legislation .........

The police HAVE to protect people .... and respond quickly here , normally within minutes ...............

Guns are allowed , but you first have to have a license from the police .......
since Denmark is a small country - all crimes are on one computer system .... and ALL your contacts with the national health system is also on another computer system ( medicare is free here so EVERYBODY uses NHS of Denmark )........which means, that even if you only had 1/2 hour contact with a psychiatric emergency department after a personal crisis .....then the police can see it , and demand insight in your journal AND an assesment from a shrink before you get the license for a gun !!!!!!!!!!!!!

For admitting a person against his will , it can be done if :
he is a danger to himself or others or can´t take care of himself ..........
Or : if he is insane , WITHOUT being a danger .....
Or : if he is in a state of mind that is equal to being insane : intoxicated or very upset , boiling inside with emotions .......
Or : suspected insane even though he manages to control himself , if that is the case he can be held back untill a final diagnosis has been made .........

If you need medication for being mentally disturbed , then you will get it here , with or without your accept ........

According to law, not only what the patient says , but also his previous actions AND statements from other people (teachers and even neighbours) is to be included in the psychiatric assesment of the patient by the doctors ................

Yes , you need heavy funding into NHS and police to maintain this ....... we are lucky here in Denmark .............

He would NEVER have got a license for a gun in my country ..........

I do admit this is easier to do in a very small and rich country .........
Click to expand...

Yes my thought's exactly. However countries like the US are capable of doing something but America is steeped in the "911 Syndrome" Do nothing untill it's too late. The US isn't proactive untill it's assets or repuation is indanger. You can imagine how long such a country could last...

I did not vote rational...nothing he did was rational...it was only consistent.
 
peta9 said:
What is truly sad in cases such as these is the killer is technically acting out rationally against a perceived irrational world beyond change and is correct in that analysis in that context.

The truth is society is built on lies, for those rare or sensitive souls who don't understand the everyday hypocrisy, bigotry, cruelty, selfishness, cognitive dissonance, racism, prejudice etc is fracturing and confusing.

He couldn't take out everyone, so he took out as many as he could and himself. Evidently, the world is not "right" for them or anyone to live in.

Ironicly, Cho is sadly correct. Cho is predictably labeled a monster and mentally ill when the institutionalized and approved masses are mental cases themselves. Just didn't crack because the pig sty happens to not rub them the wrong way.
Click to expand...

VERY well said, I concur.
 
peta9 said:
What is truly sad in cases such as these is the killer is technically acting out rationally against a perceived irrational world beyond change and is correct in that analysis in that context.
Click to expand...

Arguably a decent hypothesis.

peta9 said:
The truth is society is built on lies, for those rare or sensitive souls who don't understand the everyday hypocrisy, bigotry, cruelty, selfishness, cognitive dissonance, racism, prejudice etc is fracturing and confusing.
Click to expand...

True. Rational people are able to see this...I identify it for people who commit them all the time.

peta9 said:
He couldn't take out everyone, so he took out as many as he could and himself. Evidently, the world is not "right" for them or anyone to live in.
Click to expand...

This is where rationality falls down. What process of ordered thought, based on logical and non-emotive reasoning could a rational person plausibly come up with to inflict collateral damage, because he felt 'left out' of a corrupt society?

peta9 said:
Ironicly, Cho is sadly correct. Cho is predictably labeled a monster and mentally ill when the institutionalized and approved masses are mental cases themselves. Just didn't crack because the pig sty happens to not rub them the wrong way.
Click to expand...

Given that the majority of humanity may be desensitized, self-absorbed, gold digging and discrimatory, how do you leap from this conclusion to "well, i think i'll shoot some people for it"? Clearly irrational, and correctly labelled mentally unstable.
 
Just a few majoe points here. Obviously, there are people here that don't understand that he was TRULY irrational. Even a highly irrational person can make plans, complex ones at that.

He was paranoid, delusional, angry and had several other "problems" as well.

I'm all for helping people but there are some here who are actually being a bit irrational themselves about that. In truth, he did NOT want to be "reached." His fellow students and theachers did NOT make him into an outcast - he himself chose to withdraw. And therein lies a big difference between someone who can be helped and one who cannot.

So, before you go weeping and crying about the people around him who "made" him that way, understand that that was not the case at all. It was by his own choice that he withdrew and became a loner!!!
 
Read-Only said:
Just a few majoe points here. Obviously, there are people here that don't understand that he was TRULY irrational. Even a highly irrational person can make plans, complex ones at that.

He was paranoid, delusional, angry and had several other "problems" as well.

I'm all for helping people but there are some here who are actually being a bit irrational themselves about that. In truth, he did NOT want to be "reached." His fellow students and theachers did NOT make him into an outcast - he himself chose to withdraw. And therein lies a big difference between someone who can be helped and one who cannot.

So, before you go weeping and crying about the people around him who "made" him that way, understand that that was not the case at all. It was by his own choice that he withdrew and became a loner!!!
Click to expand...

Read-Only , I agree with you, that all in all he was irrational ...............

I wonder if he - as an out patient did follow his treatment :

http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/vatech/seunghui2005ord.html

Even a schizophrenic can become "normal" and social on the right medication ........
 
Last edited:
Read-Only said:
Just a few majoe points here. Obviously, there are people here that don't understand that he was TRULY irrational. Even a highly irrational person can make plans, complex ones at that.

He was paranoid, delusional, angry and had several other "problems" as well.

I'm all for helping people but there are some here who are actually being a bit irrational themselves about that. In truth, he did NOT want to be "reached." His fellow students and theachers did NOT make him into an outcast - he himself chose to withdraw. And therein lies a big difference between someone who can be helped and one who cannot.

So, before you go weeping and crying about the people around him who "made" him that way, understand that that was not the case at all. It was by his own choice that he withdrew and became a loner!!!
Click to expand...

He was "rational" in his own asessment and his own mind based on his own belief system. He believed he was being rational railing against a "bad" world which he perceived as corrupt and the people in it. Not what society would consider rational.

No one knows what caused him to withdraw, some people will from a traumatic experience and to avoid people. The sad fact is some people can't handle a tainted world and especially for those who are innately too trusting, shut themselves down and never trust again.
 
Enterprise-D said:
Given that the majority of humanity may be desensitized, self-absorbed, gold digging and discriminatory, how do you leap from this conclusion to "well, i think i'll shoot some people for it"? Clearly irrational, and correctly labelled mentally unstable.
Click to expand...

In his manifesto, he mentions Columbine. My guess is that he saw it as a blueprint to the course of action for "people who feel socially oppressed"

It's as if there is a "columbine routine" or a "postal routine" or a "suicide bomber routine"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top