FANDOM

Lord Gøn

Bureaucrat Founder
A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
    • Hey, I know this comes a bit late, I've been quite busy recently, but thanks a lot for that! I've been wondering about that case ever since I have found a small snippet at the AFP-archive that mentioned it, though I was unable to unearth any additional information and put it into my backlog of cases that require further research. Thanks to you I can now add it to the regular list.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Case Recently added to the list of rampage killers, the list says they killed 19 and injured 16, but from the article sourced, I cannot tell what the casualties were. Could you help?

      Loading editor
  • I know this is a pretty random case to point out, but I want to know what the source said because I was wondering how the death toll would vary with only one source.

      Loading editor
    • The story of the case is the following:

      At Karachi, one April, a coolie was sitting in a shop, when another man came in with a knife in his belt; without rhyme or reason the seated coolie grabbed the knife, stabbed its owner and the shopkeeper, and then run amok through the town, killing thirteen people, all of whom were complete strangers to him.

      The question here is, do the thirteen people killed include the owner and shopkeeper, or not? Were these two fatally stabbed, or only injured? The given information is not clear enough in this regard, and from experience I know that either could be true.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I found this case on your nastrond page, and since the article is not avaliable, what did it say? Im curious because i want to know how the article failed to say how many people were killed OR injured.

      Loading editor
    • This reply has been removed
    • I don't remember what the exact context was, but the incident was only briefly mentioned in the article. All it said was that during the New Year's Eve celebration someone drove his car into a crowd in Berlin. I tried to find more information about this case in German news archives, but came up empty handed. Maybe the number of victims was very small.

        Loading editor
    • Id guess that probably no one was killed.

        Loading editor
    • Correction, it was not the New Year's Eve celebration, but the celebration of German reunification, which in all probability was also the topic of the article.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • On the infobox for that case, it says that 2 others were wounded, but the page itself doesnt mention anything about injuries. Was this a mistake or did you actually find out 2 people were injured?

      Loading editor
    • Good question. I've wondered myself some time ago, but couldn't come to a conclusion, so I left it as it is.

      There are several possibilities here.

      1. The article from The Milwaukee Sentinel, which isn't accessible anymore, included information that is missing in all the others.

      2. The article in The Canberra Times cites AFP as a source. Maybe I've gotten the information from there when their archive was still up.

      3. Maybe I've concluded from the given information that she must have battered more than the babies killed, so assumed that 2+ were injured.

      4. Or it was a mistake on my part, perhaps because I forgot the number when I copy-pasted the infobox from another page. Unfortunately the archive of wikia seems to be buggy. I created the Soweto article "17:57, November 3, 2013‎", but when I look at Special:AncientPages it is missing and only shows:

      • Olimpiades Velasco‏‎ (17:08, November 3, 2013)
      • Leyte amok case‏‎ (18:37, November 4, 2013)

      So I don't know what articles I've created after Olimpiades Velasco‏‎, and if one of them may have had two injured. The article about Tian Zhaokai, created 17:01, November 3, 2013, has however, so maybe I copied the infobox from that article, and forgot to remove the injured number.

      The entry at the LoRK: Africa still has a question mark where the number of injured should be, so I really don't know what has happened.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I noticed this case on your nastrond page, im interested that the case happened in ancient times, but you didnt give any sources?

      Loading editor
  • So, you might have already known/seen this, and it may not be something you'd lke brought up but in the off chance that this question is still haunting you, I think this page may bring some answers to light. 

    https://sandyhooklighthouse.wordpress.com/2017/02/19/knavesmig-on-wikipedia/

    It's almost undeniable that you had an exchange with Adam Lanza. 

    I am sincerely hoping that this may help put your mind at ease, at least a bit, as if I were you I would not stop wondering about such a thing. 

    Interesting wiki, I'm happy to have found it. 

      Loading editor
    • Thank you for your concerns and the link, even though I've seen this already. When I found out about that blog I even considered notifying the author about the message Lanza (I have no doubt it was him) left at my talk-page, but then I don't want to draw too much attention towards myself, so I let it be, hoping on the one hand that it would remain buried in the digital Mariana trench, but also wondering if somebody would eventually find it - after all, I could've simply deleted it whenever I wished. Well, it seems you can't hide anything on the internet for ever.

      If it relieves you, I can assure you that I don't lose any sleep over this little episode of my life, but of course sometimes I wonder what would've been, if I had replied to him. Was he desperate to find someone who'd listen to him, someone whom he could talk to? Could I have dissuaded him from his plans? In the end these thoughts are, of course, futile. Lanza was a troubled person, and from what I know, and as I see it, he was in a situation he couldn't cope with. He felt cornered, sought a way out of his predicament and found his solution in mass murder and suicide. There's little I could've done to help him besides lending him an ear, but I also could've made his deed much worse.

      In any way, what's done is done and can't be changed. But I should've downloaded his excel-sheet.

        Loading editor
    • I think it's perhaps particularly troubling to individuals such as ourselves who shared his interests, as it makes us wonder about ourselves in relation to him. 

      I don't think we should, our interests don't define who we are. 

      From what I've read of him (and from him on forums) over the course of my research, it seems like he had a lot of people he associated with online and plenty of people who reached out to him, but he never recirprocated. I highly doubt, even had you the opportunity to become acquainted with him, that you'd have had any influence on him whatsoever. He lived inside his own mind, and that was a living hell for him that there was no escape from here. 

      But yes, the excel sheet woul'dve been interesting lol. 

      Anyway, I plan on sticking around here as I like this wiki and if I find the time I'd love to contribute. 

      Thanks for the chat. 

        Loading editor
    • Guilty by association? Nah, I don't think so. Of course, others may, or probably do fall into this logic trap and come to the conclusion that we must be some very dubious, or empathically bankrupt people who have lost all sense of human decency, merely because we have an interest in extreme acts of violence. But that happens to all groups who spend their time with something that is considered socially unacceptable.

      In the case of Adam Lanza, e.g., his interest in pedophilia, and his attempt to justify it, certainly seem odd and suspicious. After all, one may ask, why would anyone dwell on that matter, if he weren't a pedophile himself, or at least was the victim of one? Of course, his interest in it doesn't necessarily prove anything, and just because pedophilia is a taboo, doesn't mean that its scientific study, or a social discussion about it, must be as well, or isn't worthwhile. You cannot advance your understanding of something, if you refuse to concern yourself with it. So, if you want to understand pedophilia, you have to occupy yourself with it. And who will be willing to do that? Probably not those, who have no interest in it anyway. The same is true for mass murder. Interestingly, even professionals seem to have a need to justify their research of the matter. I've seen it quite a few times that people like Grant Duwe, or Peter Langman were asked during an interview how they came to study mass murderers. As if this were an exceptionally weird topic for a criminologist, or psychologist.

      In the end I don't think that our field of interest is actually that extaordinary and out of the norm. Considering the amount of media coverage mass murders receive, I'd assume that a significant part of the population to some degree shares our interest in them, or violence and mayhem in general. What need would there be for a term like "disaster tourism", if people weren't curious about death and destruction? The difference is that we take it a step further and aren't content with gasping in awe at the sight of a catastrophe, mindlessly mumbling: "Why?" No, we also want to find an answer to it. At least that is what I try to achieve. (And somebody has to do that, no?)

      Certainly there are others – and probably I am in the minority with my approach towards the topic – others, who care little about the scientific aspects, but simply feel lost, or expelled from society and try to find a likeminded soul, people who are nurturing their repressed anger, seeking a justification for their feelings, those who love to wallow in other peoples' misery, and finally those who are searching for inspiration, because they are planning their own demise and are aiming for the maximum impact. This may be disconcerting, but there is little we can do about it. Religions attract intolerant zealots, fast cars attract street racers, pedophiles are attracted by children, moths are drawn to the light, and potential mass shooters may flock around websites about mass murders. It's unavoidable.

      Nonetheless, in my opinion you can learn quite a lot by studying the extreme forms of human behaviour. I think, researching mass murder has improved my understanding of people, mankind, and myself quite a bit, so I really wouldn't want to miss the time I spent with it.

      I don't think we should, our interests don't define who we are.

      I would say, who we are defines our interests, but also that our interests do define who we are. There is certainly a bit of reciprocity between the two. No, I am not going to turn into a mass murderer, just because I research them, but it would be nonsensical to say that this research has not, in part, shaped my personality. You probably know that famous quote by Nietzsche:

      "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you."

      Also, what else would define who I am, if not the things I love, the things I hate, the things I do? The people I interact with, the films I watch, the books I read, the music I listen to, none of them is me, but each of them is a part of me and forms my personality, and so did the countless stories of mass murder that I read over the years, there is no denying it. Did they turn me into another Adam Lanza, or Cho Seung-hui? No. But they left their mark, each of them only a tiny little bit, but still. Did they change me for the worse? I don't think so (of course, this is only my completely subjective judgement). As I said, I wouldn't want to miss my dealing with the matter, as it helped me understand, but everybody is different. I am able to cope in this bog of death, hate, and misery just fine, whereas others may become depressed, or worse. If you realise that it affects you negatively, stay away from it, or at least don't expose yourself to it more than necessary. We all have stuff that we can't deal with.

      Regarding Lanza, maybe I wouldn't have been able to sway him, but the thing is, I would've loved to talk to him. In that few paragraphs that he left at my talk-page he came across as so polite and modest that I immediately thought that he deserves an answer, but then I did not reply, coming across as a complete dick. It was obvious to me that he wanted to initiate some contact, I thought he was a person I could have a nice little chat with, and i did exactly what? Nothing. And now he's dead and that chance is gone. Bummer.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • is this probably a real case? as it sounds like urban legend, and how many people did he kill? since the article is confusing.

      Loading editor
    • Well, the story that he went into a police domitory and killed more than fifty people with a knife without anyone noticing sounds hard to believe and it may be a hoax, however, a search of Google books shows a number of results, the earliest being from 1989, so there probably is some truth in it. I am sure the Chinese government would've tried everything to cover up a case where an unknown person undermines the authorities by killing dozens of police officers over an extended period of time. The fact that he supposedly got away with it must've been a huge embarassment for the police as well. So, I think the serial killer story is probably true, the mass murder, I don't know. But then, Ou Yangpu managed to kill 17 people in a single room without waking them, so who knows. Stranger things have probably happened in China without the rest of the world even noticing.

        Loading editor
    • Speaking of ou yangpu, could you make a page on him? Since Google translate is a bitch.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Could you explain what the nastrond pageis about? You dont explain it on the page.

      Loading editor
    • It's a dump for cases I am not yet sure about, if they should be included, or not, stuff that needs more research, etc.

        Loading editor
    • Also, that one chinese guy on the list who killed dozens of people, could yoh explain more to me? As google translate is crappy and I want to get a better explanation of the death toll

        Loading editor
    • Oh, it's been a while since I have researched that case, but as far as I can remember during the night of March 28, 1986 he supposedly entered a police dormitory where officers lived with their families and began stabbing people in their sleep. After killing 52 of them, and painting the signs 呼兰大侠 (Hulan Knight) on a wall, he escaped.

      Later he apparently began shooting police officers. I don't recall much about that part, but I think he approached them from behind during the night and killed them by shooting them in the back of the head. Anyway, he was supposed to have killed more than 100 police officers that way, but was never arrested.

      I don't know how much of this story is true. As far as I can recall the part concerning his raid on the police dormitory first appeared on a website that also made some very extraordinary claims about Tian Mingjian (I don't remember the specifics), so I have serious doubts about its veracity. The second part, on the other hand, can be corroborated by various sources and seems to be mostly correct.

        Loading editor
    • It sounds like an urban legend, and I doubt its true

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • this list includes mass murderers and spree killers, but which definition of spree killer are we supposed to use? i tend to use the definition that the crimes have to take place over the span of at most a month, but is that the one you use?

      Loading editor
    • Over the years I have used different criteria to decide if I include a spree killer case, or not, but for now it seems I have settled on the following:

      1. The perpetrator(s) must have committed at least one mass murder, defined as the murder of four or more person within 24 hours, during their spree.

      2. The first and last murder shouldn't be more than one month apart.

      3. The primary reason for the murders wasn't the facilitation of another felony, such as robbery.

      However, I don't think these rules should be handled too rigidly. In the end it's always a case by case decision, because the term "spree killer" isn't very well defined (one reason why I have ditched it and began to apply the terms amok and rampage killer). Imagine a very hypothetical murderer who is on the run for over a year and committs one mass murder every ten days. Where would you draw the line? Anyway, I don't think the spree killer problem is much of an issue, as the number of relevant cases is rather low, so there is little point in wasting much tought on a question that raises its head once every two or three years.

        Loading editor
    • Ok

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.