The Orlando Sentinel reports: 4 dead in murder-suicide in Heathrow.
A man shot and killed his wife and two children, then turned the gun on himself inside their upscale Heathrow home, Seminole County sheriff's officials said today.
Deputies identified the victims of the murder-suicide as John Dillon Wood, 41; Cynthia Wood, 40; Aubrey Wood, 12; and Dillon Wood, 10. Their bodies were found today inside their Trentwood Court home in the Lakeside subdivision.
"[Wood] apparently shot his entire family," Seminole County Sheriff Don Eslinger said. "It's a huge tragedy. There's no other way to describe it."
Eslinger said the family was having financial issues.
Neighbor Ed Evans said John Wood had worked at Lowe's home improvement store, but more recently had been working for Dick's Sporting Goods in Melbourne.
Cynthia Wood also recently lost her job, said Evans, who described them as a "nice couple."
The media is not allowed into the gated community, but aerial images from televised newscasts showed several deputy patrol cars parked outside the home.
Please note that they lived in a "gated" community.
The "gated" community is supposed to protect "the children" from harm (read: blatant racism and anti-Semitism up the wazoo!)
Pity the children weren't "gated" from their parents' financial stupidity!
Who "gates" the "gaters"?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
antisemitism? Really?
I have an aunt who is jewish but they live in NYC and I haven't spent a great deal of time with them in my life. Around here there really aren't many jewish people. I never got the whole antisemitism thing.
I find it a little hard to believe that someone would try to keep a jewish family out of a "gated community", other than the occasional oddball antisemite. I mean, it seems they are pretty much like other white people...
The standard way to keep out black families is to have a mandatory "golf course" and "golf fees".
Ask around. It's really standard "code" because "everyone knows black people don't play golf".
Here's an article: link.
These are coded symbols. They are not explicit but they correlate highly with the desired composition of residents. The point isn't that they will legally exclude you but that an outsider would be uncomfortable enough that they would self-select themselves out of the club.
Same logic for "family-oriented communities (read: no gay people allowed), etc. etc. etc.
And anti-semitism is alive and rife. Just visit certain kinds of clubs in Connecticut or even co-ops on Fifth Ave. It's latent and unstated but it's undoubtedly there.
Yeah I get it with other situations. I grew up in the South and certainly am familiar with racism. It's just the antisemitism thing I have a hard time wrapping my head around.
I understand why a person or group might not like another group even if I don't agree. A white person might have a number of reason for not liking "black people" or hispanic people or whatever. (they are thieves, lazy, gonna take all the jobs, etc) A person doesn't like homosexuality and doesn't want to be around it or have it around their kids b/c it might be a bad influence.
Once you accept those ideas (irrespective of whether they are accurate or not) as being true, disliking the offending party is a pretty rational act. If you really believe that black people are predisposed to more criminal behavior then it makes sense to not want to live around such a potential threat.
But what is different (compared to "white" people) about jewish people? They aren't a threat in terms of "taking all the jobs" (a standard reason for racism) given they are such a small portion of the population. They pretty much act and look just like other white people (aside from the orthodox jews). Even the supposed stereotypes (as far as I know) given as reasons for disliking them don't make sense: "they are successful, hard working, frugal and tend to be wealthy as a result". How can a person go from that premise to making a decision it would be best to NOT have them around?
If you believe that they killed sweet baby Jeebus then all other arguments are moot.
You can't argue with unreason.
Black people don't cause crime - poverty does. It correlates more with income and class than color of skin.
And you can't "turn" someone homosexual - either they are or they ain't.
So it's all total unreason and you can't argue with that.
While I agree with your original observations to some degree, I think your fourth comment is at best incomplete. Did Hitler (or for that matter, does Ahmadinejad) care about Christian legend?
These phenomena exist, but are far more complicated than you make them out to be. There is plenty of crime that is not caused by poverty. I suspect your correlation is one of numbers, not extent (see B. Madoff). And sexuality is far more complicated than binary.
The motive factors here are not (just) reason versus unreason.
Nobody cares about second-order phenomenon - at least I don't because you can't make money off of it.
I leave that to the academics who can fight over it because they have so little to fight for.
The fact is that to a first-order approximation, crime and poverty are blood-brothers, and to a first-order approximation, sexuality is binary.
Plus, you've invoked Hitler so I'm shutting down this absurd thread.
Being wrong is not the same as being irrational. If a person believes black people are more likely to commit crime b/c of genetics and developed that belief due to a simple evaluation of statistics, it it not an irrational thing (potentially) its just a misunderstanding of how to interpret stats. I'm just saying that acting on that belief/understanding isn't irrational even if some education in regard to the underlying premise may be in order.
You are making the classic mistake of confusing "rational acts" with your own morality, something I have seen you correct in others.
I merely observed that the justifications for antisemitism seems to be more irrational (unless I am misunderstanding the underlying biases) than some other typical examples of "isms" in the U.S.
that was me. logged in wrong.
Dude, the topic is antisemitism! Hitler is fair game!
Right, and that's why I'll make one final comment that Hitler did care a lot about the whole Christian legend thing particularly the whole Wagner and Parsifal thing.
Never mind that Wagner's Parsifal is more akin to Schopenhauer than to any Christian legends. People believe what they want to believe!
But back to the topic.
Here are the sequence of events:
[1] Man gets mortgage.
[2] Man can't afford mortgage.
[3] Man blows his childrens' brains out.
Can we focus on the basics please?
Post a Comment