The Rage of the Incels

I really wonder how much follow-up there was after he left school. As a former teacher, I know I've taught pupils who have shown worrying behaviour while still at school. The trouble is that until something happens, there isn't a system to do anything. People can't be detained or monitored just because there are suspicions. Nevertheless, if he had actually been diagnosed, which it sounds as though he was, there should have been a monitoring system in place. I guess it depends how much information the police actually had or should have had. Something's gone horribly wrong and somebody with real knowledge needs to investigate and not just tick boxes.

I have some minor connections to the area and had heard via them, though his former teacher gave an interview to the press the other day. I forget which newspaper.

SueDonim

He went to a special school for children with EBD and autism so I imagine he will have had a diagnosis of some sort.

Thanks for that info. I hadn't seen much about his background, but that's because I haven't really been looking.

He went to a special school for children with EBD and autism so I imagine he will have had a diagnosis of some sort.

I haven't been following this story too closely and I might have missed something, but is there any evidence anywhere that this killer had ever been diagnosed with or being treated for a mental illness or autism?

Surely there's a problem relying on social media posts? Where do you draw the line between some of the angry anti-woke posts, which appear to be becoming mainstream, and the posts of a psychopath? I can see cries of discrimination, if there's action against everybody who opposes feminism. What action should there be against our very own PM, who was caught out agreeing to give the contact details of somebody, so he could be given a scare?

As ever, there seems to be so much speculation and readiness to blame in this case. With hindsight, it seems the danger signs were obvious, but I just wonder what the facts are.

There are specialised agencies that can do this kind of checking. It is their bread and butter.

DD has just started a new job, for which she needs security checking. Where national security is concerned there are several levels of checks, from the basic demand for birth certificates and enquiries about the nationality of your parents to the full GCHQ type clearance which seems to want to know the nationality and religion of your great-great-grandparents.

The real problem seems to be, not the checking of the application, when it is made, but the feedback system after it is granted. For example anyone with a gun licence who is being treated for mental illness, should have that fact flagged up with the licencing authority. Gun clubs should have a requirement to report a licence holder if they have concerns about their mental state, or an abnormal obsession with firearms. Social media checks should be mandatory.

Thank goodness events like those in Plymouth are rare, but guns are also used to commit suicide, and in domestic murder/suicides.

Small State is definitely not a good thing if it means the police haven’t got enough person power to properly check out these potentially dangerous individuals. The police employ civilians to do a lot of their office work, surely a civilian employee could do these checks to ensure safety. It is indeed the job of government to keep us safe, and by not doing these checks properly, we are not being kept safe.

Dinahmo, I'm sure you mean well but I believe it's the government's job to keep us safe so this should be properly funded.

Like so many parts of our life where we depend on the government to allocate the money needed, we can see that all they have done is strip the money out because of their own prejudice for "small state". Small state which seems to mean the rich get rich enough to take care of themselves and everyone else can go hang.

In this case, apart from the incel connection, there were so many other indicators screaming NO,NO, NO, a history of mental illness, an obsession with guns, using anabolic steroids and other mood changing drugs, or can the police not 'afford' to monitor for things like this.

What on earth do they actually check? his credit rating and whether he has paid council tax?

The comments about there not being enough money to pay for the social media checks gave me pause for thought. Perhaps they could make use of retired people, who might like to boost their pensions, or those close to retirement who don't like their jobs but can't afford to leave employment before reaching retirement age. Most people, as demonstrated on here, are computer literate.

MerylStreep

^there appears to be no money accompanying this^
In an interview Nazir Afzel said as much.

Perhaps they haven'y yet worked out how their cronies and donors could make a profit from it. If they could, I'm sure the money would flow freely...

there appears to be no money accompanying this
In an interview Nazir Afzel said as much.

Jess Phillips MP, on Twitter: This is an example of what she receives, on a very regular basis'

You would be put behind bars in a high security women's prison where you would be subjected to female rape and torture for the rest of your miserable existence!

Can you imagine if male MPs got that kind of abuse?

Joan Smith yesterday on the subject.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/15/extreme-misogyny-ideaology-plymouth-killer-terrorist

One example from her article:

"In the UK, however, misogyny is not even widely recognised as the driving force behind violence against women. Time and again, we hear about men who supposedly “just snapped” and killed their female partners in what the police describe as “domestic” and “isolated” incidents. Not so isolated, given that 1,425 women were killed by men in the UK between 2009 and 2018, but we are expected to believe that such homicides could not be predicted or stopped. In fact, it is rare for a woman to be murdered by a current or former partner without a previous history of domestic abuse".

While I acknowledge the importance of people's online presence and what they post as a measure of their suitability to hold a gun licence, can we consider the following: (1) just who is going to trawl through SM for every shotgun licence application? The stretched, undermanned police force? Do tax payers want police officers out on the street or sitting in front of screens? (2) who decided what is or isn't a sign of mental instability? I frequently rant about the Tory administration, about Farage ( not to the extent of wanting to kill them though), would someone consider me a risk?

It is too easy to blame the police, to say 'something should be done' but we must be wary of knee jerk legislation which could harm us all.

There was a piece on the news. Advice is going out about the information the police need to gather to issue a licence. It now includes checking social media.

As always, where this government is concerned, there appears to be no money accompanying this. I would be happy to be told that is untrue.

Nothing to do with Cressida Dick, I agree.

If this is policing under the PC obsessed Cressida Dick then heaven help us all.

Unnecessary comment. I don't think Cressida Dick has any connection at all with the Plymouth police force. She's the Metropolitan Police. London...

Yes, everything you say is correct Sarnia, and I question why he was allowed to have a gun addresses both your points. I certainly wonder why the gun was returned to him after the red flag was waved re his behaviour, but I also wonder why he even got a gun in the first place as well. I just wonder why he was thought to need a gun at all, ever. But the gun being returned to him was a gross error of judgment.

maddyone

Just one simple question ^why was he allowed to have a gun.^

Do you mean a gun in the first place or having it returned? I don't know how long the gunman had held a licence but my concern is it being returned to him. There were reports of him assaulting other people so the police, quite rightly, revoked his licence and took away his firearms. Unfortunately, all it took for everything to be returned to him was a tick in the box when he attended an anger management course, so he will be fine now, won't he? There need to be far more stringent checks before returning guns to people waving red flags. A check on social media would have quickly shown the police how unstable and embittered this person was but of course, it infringes his privacy. If this is policing under the PC obsessed Cressida Dick then heaven help us all.

Just one simple question why was he allowed to have a gun.

growstuff

I agree with Shelbel. Some people don't even see autism as a mental health disorder, but a different wiring of the brain. I've had some limited experience working with autistic children and the problem seems to be that difficulties forming relationships and misunderstandings can exacerbate personality disorders. People with autism are perfectly able to understand right from wrong.

I definitely agree with this. I've taught a LOT of AS students in the mainstream classroom and while they all present differently, I wouldn't have classes any one of them as having MH issues.

One of my favourite students ever was an undiagnosed AS student in China (they don't recognise conditions such as this there, OR they regard it as a defect so avoid diagnosis). Highly intellectual young man. Very high functioning immediately after a meltdown. Low functioning just before one. But he kept up with the class overall, which was fine. He challenged my thinking on topics ALL the time.

Whitewavemark2

That answers my question. The GP is sought for information.

Yes, Whitewave, I heard a conversation about shotgun and firearm certificates this morning and you would need to allow contact with the GP when you apply. Whether there is anyone to do that is debatable.

The ex-Chief Constable talked about a couple of things which, while not talking about this incident, really begged some questions.

Firstly, why do we have two different forms of certification, one of which require less information than the other? I can see why this might have been appropriate historically. However, we don't have country "bobbies" who know their community anymore and know who is a farmer, etc.

Secondly, if an applicants internet footprint is to be checked, they will need more people; that requires more money. This Government has stripped so much money out that, in my opinion, this will not happen. The Government may requote some already allotted money - as they do - but I doubt they even understand the costs in the information age.

From the BBC website:

Independent referees have to provide confidential character statements in which they are expected to answer in detail about the applicant's mental state, home life and attitude towards guns. Officers check the Police National Computer for a criminal record - anyone who has served a prison sentence of more than three years is banned for life from holding a firearms licence. The police will also speak to the applicant's GP for evidence of alcoholism, drug abuse or signs of personality disorder. Social services can also be asked for reasons to turn down an applicant. Finally, senior officers must be sure that prospective shotgun holders have a secure location for the weapon, typically a dedicated gun cabinet. Each certificate is valid for five years.

Like others, I’m puzzled as to what valid reason there could possibly be for this person needing a gun licence.

But now I’m doing all the speculating I criticised earlier, so I’ll butt out.

That answers my question. The GP is sought for information.