What's your take on the tragedy in San Francisco?

Word is he was dealing with prostate cancer.

electrictiger70 said:I am not entirely convinced that war alone isn't enough. I believe that being placed in a location and a time where all human dignity and moral rules cease to exist—where you witness horrors like mass killings for extended periods—fundamentally alters one's perception of life. It is something very few psychotherapies can actually resolve. This isn't just an individual question of a "mental disorder"; it’s about having been there and witnessing absolute chaos, seeing someone brutally tortured simply because of an ethnic label attached to their name. You were present when a person was massacred just to steal a gold bracelet.

And then, from that mental state, you are expected to reintegrate into the moral order of a peaceful society? Good luck with that.

In my view, certain consequences remain for life, whether one is formally diagnosed with PTSD or not.
It is entirely possible for one's entire value system to be completely dismantled. Your sense of identity might shatter, likely reaching a point where you can no longer distinguish yourself from your surroundings... add to that the poor social support for veterans here in the US, the lack of understanding from the general public, and the situation has the potential to end exactly how it ends every five days in our national news; yes, frustrated by long-term societal neglect, a man picks up a gun and delivers judgment upon himself and "his own."

Since we aren't talking about a domestic dispute here, and he killed children as well—I don't believe he did this out of pure malice, but rather out of a distorted sense of possessiveness. In a moment of ultimate fury toward the world, he probably can no longer distinguish his own existence from theirs; if he is leaving "this hellish world," then "his people won't stay either"—that is likely the logic at play. Beyond the fact that he is reacting impulsively in the moment, the moral categories that would normally signal that his planned actions are wrong were likely shattered during the war long ago; the question is whether he even possesses them in the way a "normal" person does.

What I fail to understand is why this country does nothing regarding this issue.
It is one thing when such a tragedy occurs once or twice—that is an individual problem. But when similar headlines appear every five days, it becomes a systemic social crisis. Why on earth don't they sit down and establish a social support system for these individuals, along with a social work framework designed to provide regular monitoring...

electrictiger70, how old are you?

We all lived through the war. In my opinion, the fallout isn't just something reserved for someone born in '95 in some suburb far from the front lines, especially if their immediate family wasn't involved and they went to school with kids in the same boat. How many people like that actually exist? I highly doubt there’s a single school in downtown Chicago where you won't find children of veterans—either those who died or those who never came home. Everyone growing up today in places like Houston, St. Louis, or Indianapolis is dealing with the heavy aftermath of that conflict. It's a reality they don't even have to remember to feel.

If you spent your whole life in a place like Chicago just watching war unfold on the news, you still carry the weight of it. You witnessed the total collapse of every moral value imaginable. I guess it leaves a mark.

The war left deep scars, and I don't just mean for the veterans. Society seems to be looking the other way. We simply don't have the budget, I guess. Maybe we just don't care.

I honestly don't think this was just a crime of passion; it feels much more calculated than that. According to the news reports, he actually bought and prepared the rifle a day in advance. He waited until early morning to strike while they were still asleep, which suggests this wasn't some heat-of-the-moment argument. Planning something like that requires a certain level of premeditation. Then again, since his mental state was clearly not sound at the time, we could be looking at a psychotic break. It’s such a tragedy because there's no way for us to get any clarity from them now.

In some of these heartbreaking cases where a parent decides to take both themselves and their spouse, they sometimes kill the children as well, thinking they're doing them a "mercy" so they won't have to grow up as orphans.

Kyle Lee7 said:I honestly don't think this was just a crime of passion; it feels much more calculated than that. According to the news reports, he actually bought and prepared the rifle a day in advance. He waited until early morning to strike while they were still asleep, which suggests this wasn't some heat-of-the-moment argument. Planning something like that requires a certain level of premeditation. Then again, since his mental state was clearly not sound at the time, we could be looking at a psychotic break. It’s such a tragedy because there's no way for us to get any clarity from them now.

In some of these heartbreaking cases where a parent decides to take both themselves and their spouse, they sometimes kill the children as well, thinking they're doing them a "mercy" so they won't have to grow up as orphans.

Ugh, now I'm remembering those news stories from back home 😢

Like, that one woman who killed her five kids before killing herself 👎

My brain just totally froze up from how horrific that story was, I completely forgot about it.

Jerry Martinez5 said:electrictiger70, how old are you?

We all lived through the war. In my opinion, the fallout isn't just something reserved for someone born in '95 in some suburb far from the front lines, especially if their immediate family wasn't involved and they went to school with kids in the same boat. How many people like that actually exist? I highly doubt there’s a single school in downtown Chicago where you won't find children of veterans—either those who died or those who never came home. Everyone growing up today in places like Houston, St. Louis, or Indianapolis is dealing with the heavy aftermath of that conflict. It's a reality they don't even have to remember to feel.

If you spent your whole life in a place like Chicago just watching war unfold on the news, you still carry the weight of it. You witnessed the total collapse of every moral value imaginable. I guess it leaves a mark.

The war left deep scars, and I don't just mean for the veterans. Society seems to be looking the other way. We simply don't have the budget, I guess. Maybe we just don't care.

Fairy, I am old enough to remember the war, but that is a world away from what it actually feels like when you are standing right in the middle of it. I am a writer by nature, though I rarely find the right moment to sit down and truly compose. My life has always been defined by a certain level of quiet observation. I tend to watch, to listen, and to process everything before I ever commit to an opinion. I don’t believe in rushing to judgment. It feels reckless. Instead, I prefer to gather the facts, weigh them against my own experiences, and then speak only when I am certain of what I have to say. My approach to most things—whether it be literature, politics, or daily life—is measured. I value substance over flash. In a world that seems increasingly obsessed with the immediate and the superficial, I find myself retreating toward the deliberate. There is a dignity in being slow. There is a necessity in being thorough. I am here to engage in meaningful discourse. I have little patience for triviality or performative outrage. If we are going to discuss a topic, let us do so with gravity and respect for the nuance involved. I expect the same from those I interact with. I am looking for depth. I am looking for truth. That is all.It is absolutely false to suggest that we are facing the same consequences. There is no comparison between someone like me—living miles away from any actual front line, watching everything unfold through the lens of a television screen—and someone who experienced it firsthand. I am talking about people who were forced to participate in killing others simply because they stood on the opposite side of a line, or those who watched live as elderly people trapped in their homes were slaughtered just because of their ethnic identity. That was the brutal reality of the war back home in America.
Every single person I’ve ever met who lived through that war is still dealing with the fallout today. It isn't something you just move past. It leaves you with scars that never truly fade. 🤷

I am not suggesting that every single person is going to reach for a weapon and turn on their own family—that is far from my point. However, it is an observable reality that certain social groups exhibit a higher tendency toward psychological distress. That is simply a natural consequence of their environment. To me, it would actually be more alarming if someone spent years watching violence erupt all around them and felt absolutely nothing. If you could witness such chaos and remain unaffected, you wouldn't be human anymore. You would be a robot. Or a sociopath.

The war left behind deep scars, and those wounds aren't limited to the veterans alone. Society simply doesn't care about this.We simply don't have the capital. It’s just not there.

What does it actually mean when people say "society doesn't deal with that"? In my view, society absolutely should be dealing with it. When I refer to society here, I am talking about the administrative leadership—essentially the same government that spends every single day patting itself on the back and acting like our veterans are the reason they exist. It’s all performative. Yet, despite all that posturing, they are completely incapable of ensuring even a decent standard of living for these individuals, let alone providing necessary psychological support.

I am not trying to shift the blame away from any one person or diminish individual accountability here. However, we have to look at the bigger picture. When you see this kind of phenomenon repeating itself every few days, it isn't just a string of bad luck or isolated incidents. It is a clear indicator that there is a systemic issue embedded within our society. Problems of this magnitude cannot be solved by individuals acting alone; they require a structural response, and that responsibility lies solely with the federal government.

I am uncertain what you intended to convey with that single word. If you were attempting to initiate a discussion or provide a prompt, please be more explicit. I prefer to engage with substantive topics rather than fragmented utterances. I await your clarification. As requested:
I don't buy the idea that this murder was a crime of passion. To me, it looks premeditated. According to the news reports, he acquired and prepared the rifle a full day in advance. He waited until early morning, rose before they were even awake, and killed them while they were sleeping. That isn't a heat-of-the-moment outburst during an argument. Planning requires deliberation. It’s just my take on it.

Honestly, I just don't know 🤷

electrictiger70 said:I am not entirely convinced that war alone isn't enough. I believe that being placed in a location and a time where all human dignity and moral rules cease to exist—where you witness horrors like mass killings for extended periods—fundamentally alters one's perception of life. It is something very few psychotherapies can actually resolve. This isn't just an individual question of a "mental disorder"; it’s about having been there and witnessing absolute chaos, seeing someone brutally tortured simply because of an ethnic label attached to their name. You were present when a person was massacred just to steal a gold bracelet.

And then, from that mental state, you are expected to reintegrate into the moral order of a peaceful society? Good luck with that.

In my view, certain consequences remain for life, whether one is formally diagnosed with PTSD or not.
It is entirely possible for one's entire value system to be completely dismantled. Your sense of identity might shatter, likely reaching a point where you can no longer distinguish yourself from your surroundings... add to that the poor social support for veterans here in the US, the lack of understanding from the general public, and the situation has the potential to end exactly how it ends every five days in our national news; yes, frustrated by long-term societal neglect, a man picks up a gun and delivers judgment upon himself and "his own."

Since we aren't talking about a domestic dispute here, and he killed children as well—I don't believe he did this out of pure malice, but rather out of a distorted sense of possessiveness. In a moment of ultimate fury toward the world, he probably can no longer distinguish his own existence from theirs; if he is leaving "this hellish world," then "his people won't stay either"—that is likely the logic at play. Beyond the fact that he is reacting impulsively in the moment, the moral categories that would normally signal that his planned actions are wrong were likely shattered during the war long ago; the question is whether he even possesses them in the way a "normal" person does.

What I fail to understand is why this country does nothing regarding this issue.
It is one thing when such a tragedy occurs once or twice—that is an individual problem. But when similar headlines appear every five days, it becomes a systemic social crisis. Why on earth don't they sit down and establish a social support system for these individuals, along with a social work framework designed to provide regular monitoring...

Everything you’re saying holds water—war leaves scars that never quite fade, and no amount of therapy or downtime can fully undo that damage. However, the war itself, along with its attendant traumas, isn't enough by itself to trigger this specific kind of breakdown.
It might be a complicating factor, certainly—the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back—but it isn't the whole story.

Surely we wouldn't claim that everyone who served in combat ends up acting this way?
How else would you explain those who commit similar atrocities without ever having stepped foot on a battlefield?

Quincey:

Since this wasn't some domestic dispute over an affair, and he took his children with him, I don't buy that this was pure malice. It feels more like a manifestation of extreme possessiveness. In a moment of ultimate, blinding rage against the world, he likely lost the ability to distinguish himself from them; if he's exiting "this godforsaken world," then "his people aren't staying behind either." It's likely a warped logic akin to that.

It’s clear the man wasn't much of an individualist; as the article suggests, he came from a rigid, traditionalist background. As the head of the household, he made the executive decision that everyone should pass on together.
Now, what specifically pushed him over the edge or fueled that final decision? No one can say for certain, because we are all analyzing this through our own lenses rather than his.
To my mind, he was unwell, and this sickness didn't just materialize overnight; there may have been other underlying causes.

Financial ruin is always a possibility. Finding yourself buried under unpayable debts can dismantle a person's psyche in a heartbeat. Even the strongest will can buckle under that pressure. It isn't just about the looming poverty; it's about the total loss of dignity.

In France, a few years back, a couple decided to take their children with them because of debt. (If I recall correctly, they survived.)

In a moment like that, a person might decide it's better for everyone to go to "the other side" than to face a life spent scavenging through the wreckage. 😢

EDIT: response from Liti:

I was miles away from the front lines, but my immediate family was right there. In uniform. Carrying rifles. I lost school friends. My college buddies came home disabled.

And regarding those who didn't personally witness a killing but still lived through that atmosphere: out of an American population of roughly 330 million, at least 250 million felt it. You should know that PTSD doesn't just affect the veteran; it hits the spouse and the kids too. (Not every veteran gets it, obviously)

Whether you were in New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles, you saw how it suddenly became normal to kill someone, to seize a person's home because of their nationality, or to fire them just because they turned 38 or had the "wrong" last name... War consequences aren't an excuse. Otherwise, every single German after WWII would be a criminal, or every Russian, Ukrainian, or Pole (referring to the nations that took massive hits during WWII)

slypuma17 said:Everything you’re saying holds water—war leaves scars that never quite fade, and no amount of therapy or downtime can fully undo that damage. However, the war itself, along with its attendant traumas, isn't enough by itself to trigger this specific kind of breakdown.
It might be a complicating factor, certainly—the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back—but it isn't the whole story.

Surely we wouldn't claim that everyone who served in combat ends up acting this way?
How else would you explain those who commit similar atrocities without ever having stepped foot on a battlefield?

Quincey:

Since this wasn't some domestic dispute over an affair, and he took his children with him, I don't buy that this was pure malice. It feels more like a manifestation of extreme possessiveness. In a moment of ultimate, blinding rage against the world, he likely lost the ability to distinguish himself from them; if he's exiting "this godforsaken world," then "his people aren't staying behind either." It's likely a warped logic akin to that.

It’s clear the man wasn't much of an individualist; as the article suggests, he came from a rigid, traditionalist background. As the head of the household, he made the executive decision that everyone should pass on together.
Now, what specifically pushed him over the edge or fueled that final decision? No one can say for certain, because we are all analyzing this through our own lenses rather than his.
To my mind, he was unwell, and this sickness didn't just materialize overnight; there may have been other underlying causes.

Financial ruin is always a possibility. Finding yourself buried under unpayable debts can dismantle a person's psyche in a heartbeat. Even the strongest will can buckle under that pressure. It isn't just about the looming poverty; it's about the total loss of dignity.

In France, a few years back, a couple decided to take their children with them because of debt. (If I recall correctly, they survived.)

In a moment like that, a person might decide it's better for everyone to go to "the other side" than to face a life spent scavenging through the wreckage. 😢

Of course, but when a phenomenon occurs at regular intervals within a specific demographic, the logical conclusion is that this group
is more susceptible to such issues. It stems from certain shared factors among its members; in this particular instance, that factor would be combat experience.

Surely you aren't suggesting that everyone who served in the military commits these kinds of acts?
How then do you account for those who do similar things despite having never seen a battlefield?

My explanation lies in the fact that there are different types of social psychopathology. Those are distinct situations driven by entirely different causes that have nothing to do with this specific case.

It is true that someone killing their family doesn't necessarily have to be linked to their military service. But if it happens repeatedly, there is clearly an underlying pattern. I view it as being connected to broader societal issues.

It is obvious the man wasn't an individualist and, as the article notes, came from a rigid patriarchal household. As the head of the family, he decided that everyone should pass away together.
Now, what specifically drove him to this or what culminated in his decision is something no one can know for sure, because we are all analyzing this with our own minds rather than his.
I still believe he was mentally ill, and that his condition didn't manifest overnight; it could be something else entirely.

Perhaps debt is the issue. Finding oneself buried under unpayable debt can destroy a person overnight. Even the strongest will breaks under that pressure. It’s not just about the looming poverty; it’s about dignity.

In France, a few years ago, a mother and father decided to take their children's lives along with their own due to debt. (If I recall correctly, they survived.)

In a moment like that, a person might think it is better for everyone to pass on rather than face a life of scavenging through trash. 😢

Yes, that is also a possibility.

Jerry Martinez5 said:EDIT: response from Liti:

I was miles away from the front lines, but my immediate family was right there. In uniform. Carrying rifles. I lost school friends. My college buddies came home disabled.

And regarding those who didn't personally witness a killing but still lived through that atmosphere: out of an American population of roughly 330 million, at least 250 million felt it. You should know that PTSD doesn't just affect the veteran; it hits the spouse and the kids too. (Not every veteran gets it, obviously)

Whether you were in New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles, you saw how it suddenly became normal to kill someone, to seize a person's home because of their nationality, or to fire them just because they turned 38 or had the "wrong" last name... War consequences aren't an excuse. Otherwise, every single German after WWII would be a criminal, or every Russian, Ukrainian, or Pole (referring to the nations that took massive hits during WWII)

And you think there aren't consequences? 🤷

Quincy:

For those who didn't personally witness someone being killed, but lived within that atmosphere: out of an American population of 330 million, at least 250 million felt the impact. You should realize that PTSD doesn't just affect the veteran; his wife and his children experience it too. (Not every veteran suffers from PTSD, of course.) And you, living in a place like New York City or Chicago or Los Angeles, witnessed how it suddenly became normal to kill a person, to seize someone's home simply because they belonged to the "wrong" nation, or to fire them just because they turned 38 or had a certain last name... the aftermath of war isn't an excuse. If it were, then every single German after WWII would be considered a criminal, or every Russian, or every Ukrainian, or every Pole... (I am referring to nations that were absolutely devastated by World War II).

I am not making excuses. Rather, I am attempting to understand the mechanisms that can drive a person to such actions—both the individual psychological drivers and the environment they inhabit, which includes the broader social dimension. I haven't understood at all that this is about justification; it shouldn't be about that. It is about understanding the forces that lead to these outcomes.

Perhaps you misunderstood me; I am not saying that having served in a war is the decisive factor that causes a person to kill someone—God forbid! I am merely stating that it is a factor that places them in a demographic group that is documented to have a higher tendency toward certain types of psychological issues. And those types of psychological issues include the erosion of a value system and problems with aggression... which is certainly not an insignificant point.

electrictiger70 said:And you think there aren't consequences? 🤷

Quincy:

For those who didn't personally witness someone being killed, but lived within that atmosphere: out of an American population of 330 million, at least 250 million felt the impact. You should realize that PTSD doesn't just affect the veteran; his wife and his children experience it too. (Not every veteran suffers from PTSD, of course.) And you, living in a place like New York City or Chicago or Los Angeles, witnessed how it suddenly became normal to kill a person, to seize someone's home simply because they belonged to the "wrong" nation, or to fire them just because they turned 38 or had a certain last name... the aftermath of war isn't an excuse. If it were, then every single German after WWII would be considered a criminal, or every Russian, or every Ukrainian, or every Pole... (I am referring to nations that were absolutely devastated by World War II).

I am not making excuses. Rather, I am attempting to understand the mechanisms that can drive a person to such actions—both the individual psychological drivers and the environment they inhabit, which includes the broader social dimension. I haven't understood at all that this is about justification; it shouldn't be about that. It is about understanding the forces that lead to these outcomes.

Perhaps you misunderstood me; I am not saying that having served in a war is the decisive factor that causes a person to kill someone—God forbid! I am merely stating that it is a factor that places them in a demographic group that is documented to have a higher tendency toward certain types of psychological issues. And those types of psychological issues include the erosion of a value system and problems with aggression... which is certainly not an insignificant point.

I agree,🙂

My only point is that we can't use the aftermath of war as a discriminatory factor, because most of society felt those consequences directly. It's like saying the cause of a murder was eating apples in childhood. Everyone ate apples!

We just have to accept that the fallout from war and major societal shifts results in much higher levels of violence and crime. 😢

What we were shocked by twenty years ago has basically arrived on our doorstep now. 😢

PTSP.

Jerry Martinez5 said:I agree,🙂

My only point is that we can't use the aftermath of war as a discriminatory factor, because most of society felt those consequences directly. It's like saying the cause of a murder was eating apples in childhood. Everyone ate apples!

We just have to accept that the fallout from war and major societal shifts results in much higher levels of violence and crime. 😢

What we were shocked by twenty years ago has basically arrived on our doorstep now. 😢

That isn't what I meant by the consequences of war... we clearly misunderstood each other. 😉

Quincy:

We simply have to accept that the fallout from war and the post-war transition inevitably brings a much higher volume of violence and crime. 😢 What we found shocking twenty years ago has finally arrived at our doorstep. 😢

Exactly. 👍 And we have to face the reality that we are the generation that refuses to accept it. 😬

Something about it really gnawed at him.
It’s safe to say this isn't some minor issue.
A person could sit through a horror flick two or three times
and if they aren't mentally bulletproof... well, goodbye.
That's why I don't think we should be debating someone else's moral compass;
instead, we should focus on cultivating our own values...
It's a strange feeling, thinking you actually have the right to take a life.

electrictiger70 said:And you think there aren't consequences? 🤷

Quincy:

For those who didn't personally witness someone being killed, but lived within that atmosphere: out of an American population of 330 million, at least 250 million felt the impact. You should realize that PTSD doesn't just affect the veteran; his wife and his children experience it too. (Not every veteran suffers from PTSD, of course.) And you, living in a place like New York City or Chicago or Los Angeles, witnessed how it suddenly became normal to kill a person, to seize someone's home simply because they belonged to the "wrong" nation, or to fire them just because they turned 38 or had a certain last name... the aftermath of war isn't an excuse. If it were, then every single German after WWII would be considered a criminal, or every Russian, or every Ukrainian, or every Pole... (I am referring to nations that were absolutely devastated by World War II).

I am not making excuses. Rather, I am attempting to understand the mechanisms that can drive a person to such actions—both the individual psychological drivers and the environment they inhabit, which includes the broader social dimension. I haven't understood at all that this is about justification; it shouldn't be about that. It is about understanding the forces that lead to these outcomes.

Perhaps you misunderstood me; I am not saying that having served in a war is the decisive factor that causes a person to kill someone—God forbid! I am merely stating that it is a factor that places them in a demographic group that is documented to have a higher tendency toward certain types of psychological issues. And those types of psychological issues include the erosion of a value system and problems with aggression... which is certainly not an insignificant point.

Fair enough. 😁

They have a predisposition, sure, but there is no blueprint for how that actually plays out. It would be more than just unfair—it would be incredibly shortsighted—to view these people as nothing more than ticking time bombs.

The most sobering realization, unfortunately, is that there is no way to predict when or how someone might finally snap, whether they are a veteran or not.

I was watching the movie Judah with Kate Winslet on TV the other day, and honestly—it completely floored me right near the end. It was one of those moments where you just sit there stunned... maybe even someone with a dark streak was watching the same thing at the exact same time. 😢 I can’t quite wrap my head around the logic of why it hit me so hard, but even if it was just a coincidence, as soon as I started reading about this accident on the news sites, I felt this sudden chill. That movie just flashed right back into my mind... it was genuinely unsettling.

I honestly couldn't even wrap my head around it when I heard—I was just completely floored. I’ve known that little girl since her days in preschool; she was such a sweetheart. Her dad absolutely adored her, treated her like she was the center of his entire universe. I can't even believe this is happening, and I'm actually getting chills just typing this out. Her parents were such wonderful people, too; her mom always had the brightest, warmest smile. At this point, I don't think anyone will ever truly know what happened. It's too late for answers now. It just goes to show that you never really know what someone is hiding deep down inside. Honestly, maybe it's better if we don't dwell on the "why" too much—out of respect for those who are gone and for the family they left behind. Just please, keep those poor people in your thoughts.

Here’s what they’re reporting:
It looks like there is some seriously heavy subtext behind this whole situation.

Jerry Martinez5 said:Only he knows the truth. Only he knew what kind of darkness was piling up inside him. I find it hard to buy the whole "hearing voices" thing—the idea that he was experiencing a severe psychotic break—because if that were actually the case, we probably would have seen signs much earlier. And I guess you can't just blame it on combat trauma either; plenty of veterans have been through hell without snapping like this.

If he were still alive, maybe experts could finally pin down a cause, though even then, I suspect they’d just end up arguing with different theories. As it stands, we’re all just left guessing.

I honestly can't wrap my head around what drives a person to take their own child's life. It's just incomprehensible. 😢

A total mental breakdown. There isn't any other way to explain it.

Angela Wright said:Here’s what they’re reporting:
It looks like there is some seriously heavy subtext behind this whole situation.

is that... while the pathologist didn't actually find any cancer, they did flag a suspicion regarding HIV...
now it looks like the guy is just a total jerk, though I honestly suspect he might be gay, which would explain a lot of that deep-seated frustration he’s been carrying around for years... especially once you look into where he actually came from.

This part is the most chilling:

“If he didn't think his illness was putting his family at risk, then he simply couldn't bear the thought of being apart from them. He loved them so much that he just didn't want to leave them behind,” one close friend noted.

Because everyone seems to agree on one thing: Ljubomir absolutely adored his kids, maybe even to a possessive degree. He was a devoted father who was endlessly proud of them. His friend suggests that this horrific act really shows the scale of his despair—just a total, complete breakdown.