Listen to this article—
Just a quick note:
I was unaware of the shooting of Charlie Kirk when I published my article titled: America’s New Civil War. While I didn’t know that much about Charlie other than the handful of videos I came across over the years including his events at colleges inviting people to prove him wrong, I knew we would have agreed on more than we would have disagreed. I can only surmise that Kirks assassination is what happens as a last resort when those on the Left consistently fails to prove him wrong. People were noticing. Minds were being changed, the Left was losing their grip on America’s youth and that scared the shit out of them so they did what the Left normally does. If they can’t beat you through civil debate, if they can’t cancel you though lies, if they can’t destroy you through media propaganda… they kill you. They accomplish this by finding then exploiting the anger of a susceptible, lost young mind by convincing them that all that anger is due to someone else. Affirmation then amplification is key. Eventually, convincing the individual that the only way to resolve this emotional pain is by taking out that which now according to him and others is the sole cause of it. A good thing for democracy. A good thing for the world. And there you have it, a radical, sacrificial lamb is born.
What I found a little remarkable when (through reporting) Tyler Robinson allegedly said to his father “I’d rather kill myself” when he demanded Tyler turn himself into police. That statement tells me two things. First— he knew within a split second after pulling the trigger that he did a horrific thing. In essence, it was suicide by murder. Second— he also knew he immediately forfeited his freedom for the rest of his life and most likely, his life as well seeing that Utah has the death penalty and is all but guaranteed in his case. Whether or not he now questions if his actions were “worth it” plays absolutely no role but I’m certain he’ll be grappling with that in his mind for as long as he lives.
All speculation on my part including absolutely no sympathy for this assassin aside, I can’t help but imagine his three and a half hour drive home, alone with only his thoughts. Unless he’s either a psychopath (manipulative, lacks empathy, and can maintain a façade of normalcy,) or sociopath (impulsive, struggles to form stable relationships, and often displays emotional outbursts,) it must have been pure agony for him. Three and a half hours to contemplate the consequences he, in all certainty will soon face. Confronting the looks on his parents faces who by now are sure he was the assassin. Confronting the police because he had to have known he would be apprehended which is why he contemplated suicide as the only way to avoid it all like many others in his situation do. In all honesty, I’m surprised they caught him alive. Remorse? Regret? Robinson? No. This is the reason most commit suicide afterwards. Their thoughts eat them from the inside out when they realize what they’ve done solved absolutely nothing as the demons arrive to collect his soul.
But a very important question remains which will be the focus of this article. I’ll ask the same question I asked in a segment of a very long article on solving crime in general and once again in my article on School Shootings all part of my ongoing series called Solutions.
Why are there so many people here in the U.S., completely willing to throw their lives away through their criminally violent behavior— which is a conscious choice on their part? Most will be eventually caught, convicted and will cost them years in prison and in some cases, the rest of their lives.
These days, the “go to” answer by the Left and liberal mainstream media is pretty much the same. Mental health. They all appear to suffer from one mental health issue or another. But you have to ask— what exactly is mental health? It seems like today, if I hated Brussels Sprouts or anchovies on my pizza, both could be considered mental health issues. Especially to those who enjoy both. So, let’s answer a few questions:
What Is Mental Health?
According to Mental Health.org. Mental health includes our emotional, psychological, and social well-being. It affects how we think, feel, and act. It also helps determine how we handle stress, relate to others, and make choices. Mental health is important at every stage of life, from childhood and adolescence through adulthood.
Over the course of your life, if you experience mental health problems, your thinking, mood, and behavior could be affected. Many factors contribute to mental health problems, including:
- Biological factors, such as genes or brain chemistry
- Life experiences, such as trauma or abuse
- Family history of mental health problems
Difference Between Psychology and Psychiatry:
- Psychology: Focuses on understanding human behavior, emotions, and cognition through therapy, counseling, and research. Psychologists typically hold a PhD or PsyD and provide non-medical interventions like talk therapy.
- Psychiatry: A medical field where psychiatrists, who are MDs or DOs, diagnose and treat mental disorders, often using medication, therapy, or both.
List of Psychological Issues with Overlap Noted:
- Anxiety Disorders* (e.g., generalized anxiety, panic disorder)
- Depression* (e.g., major depressive disorder, dysthymia)
- Bipolar Disorder*
- Schizophrenia*
- Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)*
- Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)*
- Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)*
- Eating Disorders* (e.g., anorexia, bulimia)
- Personality Disorders* (e.g., borderline, narcissistic)
- Substance Use Disorders*
- Phobias
- Adjustment Disorders
- Sleep Disorders*
*Issues in bold marked with an asterisk can overlap, as both psychologists and psychiatrists may diagnose and treat them, though psychiatrists can prescribe medication while psychologists focus on therapy.
At first, this information surprised me. I honestly didn’t expect to see so many overlapping issues or conditions. Then I thought about it focusing on my comment above “psychiatrists can prescribe medication while psychologists focus on therapy.” Gotta love big pharma, right? They have their hands in everything. OK— so? What are some mental health issues that typically don’t overlap between psychology and psychiatry are those primarily addressed through non-medical, therapeutic approaches by psychologists, without routine psychiatric medication management. Here’s a concise list:
- Specific Phobias (e.g., fear of heights, spiders)
- Adjustment Disorders (e.g., coping with life changes like divorce)
- Relationship Issues (e.g., marital or interpersonal conflicts)
- Stress-Related Concerns (e.g., workplace stress, burnout)
- Developmental Disorders (e.g., certain learning disabilities, mild autism spectrum issues)
These are generally managed through therapy or behavioral interventions by psychologists, with less frequent need for psychiatric medication.
Question:— If the above is all true, is it at best ambiguous the way the media appears to portray (most) criminals (especially violent criminals) as having “mental health issues”?
The answer is yes, the term “mental health issue” in news reports is often ambiguous. It’s a catch-all phrase that can refer to a wide range of conditions, from non-overlapping issues like stress or phobias (handled by psychologists) to overlapping ones like depression or schizophrenia (potentially involving psychiatrists). Interesting how the media rarely if ever provide specifics.
Pundits often toss around “mental health issue” like it explains or excuses criminal behavior, which is rarely the case. Most mental health conditions, whether overlapping (like depression or schizophrenia) or non-overlapping (like phobias or stress), don’t directly cause criminal acts. The term’s overuse simplifies complex motives— anger, ideology, or opportunity—and can unfairly paint mental health as a scapegoat, ignoring personal responsibility or societal factors. Truth be told— only a small fraction of violent crimes are directly linked to untreated severe mental illness, like psychosis which is why you rarely see a successful insanity plea.
Altering a Mindset— The Seed
Referring to the key question above, people don’t just decide one morning to become a criminal let alone a murderer. So what do I mean when I say— “The Seed?”
We all have it. For most of us, it lies dormant in our minds but does make itself known on occasion and let me tell you, it’s a really bad seed triggered into movement by anger, rage, depression, basically all irrational, destructive emotional thoughts that enter our minds. Common sense, rationality and recognizing these thoughts for what they are because deep down, they know the difference between right and wrong allows their seed to go back to sleep. This knowledge could be spiritually based, morally based or learned through loved ones in our families or people we trust and admire. Doesn’t matter our age or influences, we all know the difference. This is how the average person keeps their personal seed in check leading to a positive, productive life.
There are others who perhaps during a particular period in their lives allow that seed in their minds to germinate. As negative, harmful emotions grow, so does the seed. Unless the decision to root it out entirely is made, it takes over to the point they’ve discarded their former self. These are the impressionable ones, susceptible minds who perhaps out of initial curiosity, naivete or a cheap thrill taking a quick peek inside Pandora’s Box or cracking open the door into life’s dark side. By doing so, they turn the valve on that begins the germination process. The question is, what provokes the individual to turn the valve? One answer could be influences he allows to surround him. (I know, women are involved as well but its too damn hard to keep saying “him/her” so, when I say him, consider it a given).
Influences
In the age of smartphones and computers, the possibilities are endless but let’s go with a few we already know and place them on a scale from 1 to 100 in regard to their effectiveness.
(1) Broadcast & Cable News Media
Often sensationalize stories by linking mental illness to violent acts, emphasizing rare cases while ignoring that only 3-5% of violence stems from untreated severe mental illness, fueling stigma. Scale— 85
(2) Pundits
Amplify narratives blaming crimes on “mental health issues” without nuance, using it as a scapegoat for violence in commentary, which oversimplifies and perpetuates myths. Scale— 75
(3) Social Media
Platforms spread user-generated content and viral posts that reinforce stereotypes of mentally ill people as violent, with algorithms boosting distressing or misleading info, impacting attitudes rapidly. Scale— 80
(4) Social Media Influencers
Can perpetuate harmful stereotypes through content that glamorizes or misrepresents mental health in violent contexts, though some challenge them; overall, they influence followers’ perceptions variably. Scale— 70
(5) Learning Institutions
Teachers and learning institutions deserve a spot on this 1-100 scale. Scale— 60. They influence youth perceptions through curriculum and ideology, with some (e.g., 10-15% of K-12 teachers in liberal districts per 2024 NEA surveys) pushing content that can blur mental health-violence links (e.g., DEI debates fueling stigma). Unlike algorithms (see below) and media, their impact is less direct— more about shaping early biases— though 20-30% of Gen Z cite school as a mental stress source. It’s a moderate role, varied by region.
(6) Social Media Algorithms
They actively curate content, amplifying harmful stereotypes by pushing 37% more radical or distressing material to vulnerable users (per 2024 YouTube audits), far exceeding human pundits’ (75) or media’s (85) passive bias. With 80% of Gen Z’s screen time in echo chambers, they turbocharge the mental health-violence myth by targeting impressionable minds, making their role more insidious and direct. Scale— 90
The bottom line is, the villain in all this is the algorithm. (Let’s take a closer look).
The Social Media Algorithm
Full disclosure: I am not a programmer. I’m not a coder. Everything you’re about to read concerning algorithms is from the brief research I’ve done using common sense afterwards. Here’s how I believe it all works. Again, in regard to social media algorithms used to direct users to content.
The very second you log on to just about anywhere on the internet, there’s an algorithm that places a target on your back and begins tracking your every move and with every click you make, it’s learning. It doesn’t matter if it’s Walmart, Amazon or for that matter— anywhere. The more it learns, the more it suggests a particular direction. With social media, it’s really not a suggestion, it just takes you there and waits for you to opt out by choosing a different direction. The algorithm makes adjustments and continues all the while remembering. In other words— certain algorithms act like an invisible blanket advertisement, subtly guiding all users on a platform by suggesting content directions—users then choose to follow or diverge, shaping their experience. Filter algorithms narrow this audience by targeting vulnerabilities (e.g., 37% more radical content to biased users per 2024 YouTube audits), but the core mechanic remains advertising-like, pushing engagement over well-being. It’s still an ad— just personalized.
The Lost
A little over two years ago, I wrote an article titled: Gen Z — The Lost Generation. If you haven’t read it, I invite you to. Here’s a small excerpt.
Watch any news story covering protests and they’re primarily made up of kids. You know, the most easily manipulated people on the planet. They soak up propaganda like a sponge. Especially if they feel distant from the norms of society. The more distant they feel, the more apt they are to join in these hostile groups because it gives them a sense of belonging. Many having no idea or failing to realize they’re being used as pawns to bolster talking points from so-called leaders in order to enrich themselves. And it’s not just in the U.S.— it’s around the world. Try to have an intelligent conversation asking pertinent questions with these lost young people? Impossible. They would stick to their talking points then walk away calling you names and continuing their nonsensical chants, most having no clue the meaning behind them. [end excerpt].
Or take someone with so-called mental health issues. Emotionally lost, struggling with who they are as a human being— their identity— their sexuality— how they see themselves now and in the future. Almost more importantly, how they believe others see them. Could be family, friends or by complete strangers. To these people, it’s all equal. In their minds. They’re being judged. And not by just themselves, by the world. And they hate it.
The average person will recognize this for what it is— some call it an emotional funk— others might say it’s a brief bout of depression. Brief or temporary are the key words here. We’ve all experienced these at one time or another and inevitably, they soon pass and life goes back to normal. Others hold on to it and allow that seed mentioned earlier to grow. For this to take place, that seed requires nourishment. This is where their reliance on social media platforms becomes all-consuming. They intentionally seek out others with similar experiences and the all seeing algorithm picks up on this. Every click, every search, every comment he makes is being tracked and filtered .eventually granting their wish.
It was bad enough when young people in the past placed a greater value than they probably should have on the opinions of people they personally knew. Now they seek out stories they can personally relate to. From there, they begin to value the advice from complete strangers who happened to make them feel better by saying they could feel their pain. Weak-minded, confused, self-deprecating young people online seeking some answer as to why they feel the way they feel and more importantly (to them)— who’s to blame for it all and what they should do to remedy it— as a way to justify their feelings. These are what social media predators seek. These are their prey of choice whether it’s for ideology conversion and/or recruitment, sexual indoctrination, being eventually trafficked or perhaps something as simple as convincing them to vote a certain way. Or commit a murder. All brought to you by algorithms.
Social media algorithms— particularly recommendation systems— can and do group users based on susceptible behaviors (e.g., high engagement with emotional, polarizing, or grievance-based content) to exploit them for profit, often amplifying vulnerabilities like anxiety, isolation, or ideological leanings. This isn’t always deliberate “hunting” by platform operators but emerges from designs prioritizing engagement metrics (likes, shares, watch time) over user well-being. Platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and TikTok track patterns such as dwell time on controversial posts or searches for “victim” narratives, clustering users into echo chambers that feed increasingly extreme content. This manipulation is driven by “those running these algorithms” (tech companies) to maximize ad revenue, but it can be exploited further by bad actors like troll farms or traffickers who game the system with provocative posts.
There are algorithms that actively detect and analyze user behaviors associated with radicalization or extremism (e.g., searches for violent content, engagement with polarizing posts, or patterns of isolation). These are primarily content moderation and risk-assessment algorithms, designed to identify harmful activity and intervene—such as flagging accounts, limiting reach, or notifying authorities. However, they’re often paired with recommendation algorithms that amplify such behaviors by pushing increasingly extreme content to keep users engaged, creating a “radicalization conveyor belt.”
Algorithms aren’t just passive tech; they’re like digital puppeteers, nudging vulnerable youth like Tyler Robinson toward a breaking point by curating echo chambers that amplify their grievances. These systems exploit emotional triggers— resentment, isolation, rage— turning discourse into deadly action, with the Charlie Kirk case as a chilling example. The kicker? It’s not always some shadowy influencer “hunting” them; it’s the profit-driven design of platforms clustering kids into radicalizing bubbles.
The Snap!
Call it the snap, that final trigger, the straw that broke the camel’s back or when one reaches the end of their rope. There’s one thing they all have in common when it comes to murders from a political, ideological, sociological standpoint. It’s when the soon to be murderer feels his own life is of equal trade which is why you see so many of these people whether it’s school shooters or the like commit suicide afterwards. They resign themselves that their own death or spending the rest of their natural lives in prison is the price they’ll eventually pay and they’ve accepted this fate, this willing sacrifice they bestow upon themselves.
Let’s face it folks. There are a lot of sick puppies here in the U.S.. Then again, seeing as there are approximately 335 million people living here with at least 10 million unvetted, unassimilated people into our way of life who brought with them their own cultures and ideologies, it shouldn’t surprise anyone. In fact, it now appears we should expect more of this. Remember that first question I posed at the beginning of this article? Why do people throw away their lives? The only answer I can come up with is that they make the choice to. All the reasoning behind it after their choice was made make no difference. Who do we blame? The internet? Algorithms? Upbringing? Lack of positive family role models? Lack of morality?
While all the aforementioned could very well be contributing factors, it’s impossible to legislate them out of existence. And when you take it all into consideration, especially our population— I’m almost surprised things like this don’t happen more often and this is what concerns me.
In all of my articles (when warranted,) I’ve said that I’m a live and let live kinda guy. Just as long as how you live your life doesn’t interfere or negatively impact with how I live mine. (And vice-versa.) This last decade or so has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that many on the Left don’t agree with these principles. If everyone doesn’t agree with them, let the chaos begin. Let the riots begin. Let the burning, the destruction of cities begin and they now appear to be adding glorifying assassination to the mix. The videos below prove my point.
Greg Gutfeld Says it Best
As long as the internet along with it’s dark corners of certain social media platforms remain including algorithms which point weak-minded individuals to them, I honestly don’t really know if there actually is a solution. Free speech and all— correct? But one would imagine that if technology exists that directs certain individuals to these what are considered to be harmful platforms, the same algorithms can be used to either shut these individuals down completely through terms of service or alert authorities as to possible criminal behavior.
Solutions?
Below is an excerpt from a segment of an article titled Solutions: The Rise in Crime, all part of my ongoing series called Solutions. Here it is.
Is it just me or are you seeing more and more each day on the news when a violent crime occurs that the words “mental issues” are included in many of the articles. Especially assault crimes. Yes, I’ll be the first to agree that the United States has a major problem with individuals walking the streets with some form of mental illness.
Years ago, a city could simply commit the individual to an institution for the mentally ill, but that ended years ago with SCOTUS declaring it unconstitutional.
Constitutional or not, mental illness is a large and growing factor resulting in the rise of crime. Especially in inner cities. While I feel a degree of empathy towards the mentally ill, that doesn’t solve the problem. We also know that the mentally ill make up a large part of the homeless population. But that’s a separate topic.
So, what do we do with the mentally ill committing random assaults on law abiding citizens? If we’re no longer able to commit them to an institution, do we simply wait for them to commit a crime and throw them in jail? At least that will get them off the streets….. right? And who would be willing to become the victim of such a crime? Not me.
If someone can’t make a legal decision pertaining to themselves personally due to a mental illness, is there someone who can? Or is jailing them the only legal option? What’s the answer…… when you can’t force someone who has a mental illness to take their meds, what do you do?
Take a portion of the hundreds of millions of dollars a state receives from the Feds or from their own budgets each year and instead of flushing that money down the toilet like many states do, build a few institutions for the mentally ill, including and equally important, the criminal mentally ill. Once they’re built, the state should first give all mentally ill who are homeless the opportunity to commit themselves into the institution and receive help and treatment in lieu of being homeless. If they’re not breaking any laws, it’s their choice. At the very least, it gives them the opportunity to get off the streets. I know what you’re thinking. How can someone diagnosed with a mental illness make a legal choice? Seeing as I’m not a legal expert, I can’t answer that question. However, if there isn’t a legal remedy, then I guess they’re just going to have to remain homeless until they commit a crime.
The mentally ill criminal is a different story. If convicted, they’ll serve their sentence in the institution instead of a prison. Once their sentence has been served, they must go through an evaluation process and if still deemed a threat to the public and/or to themselves, they become a ward of the state. I’ll be the first to admit that the issue of mental health, especially homelessness due to mental heath is a subject you can’t solve within a few paragraphs. I also realize there are a lot of legalities that need to be figured out, but I’m certain most can be accomplished. Look at it this way, at the very least, it will get the criminal with mental illness off the streets and somewhere they can receive the help they need. [End excerpt]
The most difficult part of this solution will be in gaining the trust from the public that the administrators will not allow any form of corruption within this institution. At the moment, distrust of government run anything is at an all-time low. How trust is regained will be a monumental task. But to do nothing just solidifies the fact that for these people…
All Roads Lead to the Same Outcome
Yes, the people in the videos above are pathetic. Mental health issues? It’s a good bet that anyone with a modicum of common sense would respond with yes! Absolutely. The trouble is— these people don’t care what sanity thinks. That’s how far they’ve jumped down their delusional rabbit-hole. That “seed” has now grown to the extent that rational thought has been obliterated from their human make-up and whether they know it or not, they’re down to two choices. (1) Seek professional help. Serious professional help or (2) Keep going the way they’re going ending up in an early grave, drug addicted and homeless or in prison. Sadly, to most— they won’t really care what becomes of them because they honestly see no future for themselves. Destruction to themselves and others is now their only goal. It’s their way of punishing the universe and all in it for being born.
I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention a group of people who create and foment this mental illness in others for cheap thrills, perceived power over others through their manipulation or through monetization of the content they produce. They’ll declare free speech rights and say nothing was their fault. It’s not up to them how someone interprets the content they create. Most who follow them aren’t rioters… looters or murderers. My response? With Charlie Kirk?
It only took one.
