Tennessee shooting: Mixed motives...

... or shoddy reporting.  You decide.

Found these two stories on the shooting at the Universalist Unitarian Church in Knoxville to be interesting.

Here's the first:

The man accused of a mass church shooting this morning was described by his Powell neighbors as a helpful and kind man, but one who had issues with Christianity.

Jim D. Adkisson, 58, has been charged with first-degree murder in the shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church, which killed one and injured eight others.

He is being held on $1 million bond.

"He had his own sense of belief about religion, that's the impression I got of him," said neighbor Karen Massey. "We were talking one day when my daughter graduated from Bible college, and I told him I was a Christian, then he almost turned angry.

"He seemed to get angry at that."

According to Massey, Adkisson talked frequently about his parents who "made him go to church all his life ... he was forced to do that."

If you're angry with Christians, it'd seem you'd choose something other than a Universalist Unitarian church to go hunting for them.  Just saying.

But then there's this:

The shotgun-wielding suspect in Sunday’s mass shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church was motivated by a hatred of “the liberal movement,” and he planned to shoot until police shot him, Knoxville Police Chief Sterling P. Owen IV said this morning.

Jim D. Adkisson, 58, of Powell wrote a four-page letter in which he stated his “hatred of the liberal movement,” Owen said. “Liberals in general, as well as gays.”

Adkisson said he also was frustrated about not being able to obtain a job, Owen said.

The letter, recovered from Adkisson’s black 2004 Ford Escape, which was parked in the church’s parking lot at 2931 Kingston Pike, indicates he had been planning the shooting for about a week.

“He fully expected to be killed by the responding police,” the police chief said.

Owen said Adkisson specifically targeted the church for its beliefs, rather than a particular member of the congregation.

This will get more attention in the press since it fits the meme.

The truth will get out but probably not from our MSM outlets

Comments

[Patrick Meighan]

Doesn't it seem reasonable, when searching for the gunman's motives, to give greater weight to the motive that he, himself, avowed than to the motive imagined by a neighbor?

Adkisson, himself, says he shot up the UU church because of his hatred for "the liberal movement." If the newspapers are reporting that motive rather than the one guessed at by the lady next door, I'd say it's because the former is more relevant than the latter, not because the media has some favored meme.

I'd encourage you to drop your sense of persecution for the moment. The *real* persecuted folks today are the ones who had their blood shed for the simple reason that they dared believe in the inherent worth and dignity of every human being, including immigrants, homosexuals, and even the gunman himself. It's with those victims that our thoughts should lie.

Patrick Meighan
Culver City, CA (and active member of the Unitarian Universalist Community Church of Santa Monica)

[Mommynator]

Mr. Meighan:

I don't subscribe to the notion that this man should have shot up ANY church, but quite frankly, I find UUs very confusing - you eschew any kind of doctrine, any framework for spirituality and seem to accept any notion that comes down the river.

That in itself is not shot worthy, but please - if you read more extensively on this forum, you'd realize that we recognize the humanity of homosexuals while deploring the fact that they insist on reducing themselves from full human beings to people who believe their worth and identity lies in doing strange things to other peoples' bodies which violate their functions, trying to get a neurological thrill that has nothing to do with the purpose of sex that has been recognized throughout all of human history.

And you'd also realize that we have no problem with immigrants who are here LAWFULLY. We do have problems with people who think they are immune to breaking our laws. They are human, but they are also lawbreakers.

Try not to set up so many straw men - what with all the fires you have in California, I'd hate to see you go up in smoke.

[tim aka The Godless Heathen]

I love how immediately after some hideous crime we are all subjected to the obligatory “motives”. As if there is some logical answer to what was behind the person’s intent.

How ‘bout the lunatic was hells bells, whacked out, loony, crazy (insert any adjective you prefer).

There’s no motive beyond the demons, if you please, in that persons head. While I realize we as a society have the overwhelming need to figure everything out, to compartmentalize, to have everything and anything all wrapped up with a bow, to find “closure” with all that happens in life.

Well guess what, it’s not that simple folks. Life is full of sh*t that happens to good people, for no good reason. Some of it can’t be washed away. Some of it can’t be figured out. Life is not always all nice, clean and neat.

Quit trying to make it so and just deal with it.

“He hated gays”, “He hated liberals”. WTF-ever. How about “He was deranged f*#k”

Sorry, just being Brutally Honest.

[Mommynator]

Granted, tim TGH.

But one needs to respond to the other nonsense, too, and try to deconstruct the sloppy thinking and silliness that accompanies these things.

[janice]

Well it is good to hear what his motives were for this crime, so that we can figure out how to prevent this stuff from happening. People should be able to feel safe in their gathering place be it a church or a school or a community center, etc... We've got to find a way to stop these crimes and understanding the motives seems to be a good start.

[tim aka The Godless Heathen]

Absolutely Mommynator, my rant wasn’t aimed towards you.

Ironically though along comes more to prove my point. I’ll try to be less brutal.

Nothing will “prevent this stuff from happening.” Nothing. Period end of story.

“People should be able to feel safe in their gathering place be it a church or a school or a community center, etc...” Yes they should, but to what point do they? No matter what, everyone should be prepared to act when some nut job goes on some rampage. Or just sit there and be slaughtered. Your choice.

“We've got to find a way to stop these crimes” Never gonn’a happen. Best wishes trying.

This is my point, everyone wants life to be some utopia were nothing bad happens. Good luck living in that alternative universe.

There have always been and will ALWAYS be twisted, sick, deranged people. As soon as you think you can prevent that, fine. Until then…

[Mommynator]

Alas, TypePad seems to be having fits today.

You and I are in complete agreement, tim. You are absolutely right.

The assumption of safety, and of the ability to make everything safe, is one of the silliest pieces of thinking we have in this age. Every other time in history, people were cognizant of man's fallen nature and danger.

I've been contemplating a piece of writing along these lines myself. If the synapses fire well over the next few days.

[DLM27]

Tim TGH--

"No matter what, everyone should be prepared to act when some nut job goes on some rampage. Or just sit there and be slaughtered. Your choice."

That's an excellent point. This is why I have a concealed-carry permit and take my weapon everywhere I go--even to church.

Janice says "[w]e've got to find a way to stop these crimes," but I don't think you can stop them. People are going to do what they're going to do, and the rest of us have to be prepared to take care of ourselves. Ultimately, you can't depend on the police--or anyone else--to protect you. We alone are responsible for our security.

Unfortunately, given the views of people in the Unitarian Universalist "church," it's very unlikely that anyone in any of their congregations would be carrying a firearm.

[tim aka The Godless Heathen]

“I've been contemplating a piece of writing along these lines myself.”

Just go for it Mommynator. Rick wouldn’t have asked you to guest blog if he didn’t like what you had to say.

One point if I may, this way of thinking, “the assumption of safety, and of the ability to make everything safe,” is a liberal mindset that permeates our society to our detriment.

BTW, I’ll miss your piece if it runs after Wed. I’m going west for a couple of days. I’ll try to catch up on next Mon.

Lastly, just jump in, it doesn’t have to be some Pulitzer winner. The longest journey, blah, blah…. Just to get your feet wet, just do the linky thing and add a few lines of your own. Just my two cents…