I'm trying to point out that saying 'OftenBen is in favor of a surveillance state and precrime divisions' is fallacious. My opinion of a surveillance state doesn't change the fact that we have one, and it's routinely abused. I'm trying to say that even with the abuses that are inherent to such a system, maybe we can get some use out of it. If we're already paying the price, why not get some value returned? Why not save a few lives? Why not find the Elliot Rogers and Omar Mateens and get them help before their insanity becomes violent?

I'm not saying that any of it is alright. I'm saying that we might as well get some of what we're paying for, if we have no choice about paying. Did you see someone to vote for last election who was opposed to the surveillance state? Did you see a 'keep government out of my emails' party on the ballot? Because I sure as hell didn't.

why should we allow our governments to monitor us, to catalogue who we are, what we believe, what we say and do, to potentially hold against us down the road?

This happens now anyway. When I say it i'm Alex Jones on his worst day, when KB says it he's our wise elder statesman. The fact of the matter is that if someone with the appropriate clearances wants the facts of your digital life, they can get them with piddling effort. I'm not in favor of it. I'm not in favor of any part of it. But I'm trying to work with what we have, not with what I want idealistically.

What makes you think it's just a mental health issue? I've been told time and time again that this is about politics, international relations, economics, cultural identities, social cohesion, and so much more. Wouldn't you agree that addressing all of these issues once again deserve scrutiny and consideration?

Because there seems to be a belief held in plural on this site that no sane person is capable of holding beliefs that would drive them to violence against another person. The consensus seems to be that if a person is willing to inflict violence upon others, they have to be crazy. They can't possibly have a principle or ideology or whatever that's guiding their actions. If 'crazy' is the word we need to use, then 'crazy' is the framework I'll adapt to, if it amounts to the same outcomes.