No I'm not - I am using the facts being reported to frame this as mental illness - if the facts and circumstances as reported are incorrect, that is a different matter.
And to be clear, saying that the kid is mentally ill in no way defends or excuses his actions. I am not talking about the level of mental illness that is required for an insanity defense - that is being incapable of knowing right from wrong. That is not what I mean and I have never said anything about giving the kid the benefit of the doubt or excusing his actions or anything like that.
Do you have examples of similar cases where the white perpetrator was "excused" due to mental illness while the black perpetrator's actions were said to be caused by a culture of violence?
Literally all the time.
Here’s one study:
https://news.osu.edu/white-mass-shooters-receive-sympathetic-media-treatment/
———-
“Much of the media coverage of white shooters framed them as sympathetic characters who were suffering from extreme life circumstances. But black shooters were usually made to seem dangerous and a menace to society.”
For example, when shooters were framed in the media as mentally ill, 78 percent of white attackers were described as being victims of society – as being under a lot of stress, for example – versus only 17 percent of black shooters.
….
The researchers controlled for a variety of factors that could influence coverage, including the number of victims; whether any victims were women, children, family or romantic partners; whether the perpetrator committed suicide; whether the shooting took place in public; and whether the shooting was framed as gang violence.
After taking these factors into account, findings showed that whites were 95 percent more likely than blacks to be described in coverage as mentally ill. Latinos were 92 percent more likely than blacks to be described as mentally ill in media reports.
…
The researchers identified several themes in articles that framed mass shooters as mentally ill. The most common theme – found in about 46 percent of the articles – was that the shooter was a “victim of society.” This included articles that said the shooter was “going through a lot,” was “stressed out” or “suffered abuse as a child.”
About 28 percent of articles that framed shooters as mentally ill offered testimony to the attacker’s good character, while another 21 percent said the shooting was unexpected or out of character. Another 14 percent said the shooter came from a good environment.
But these descriptions were almost always about white shooters, Duxbury said.
“Black shooters who were described as mentally ill never receive testament to their good character and the media never describe the shootings as out of character,” he said.
“And only white shooters were ever talked about as coming from a good environment.”
The researchers contrasted the coverage of two mass shooters – Josh Boren, a white man, and David Ray Conley, a black man.
“The comparison between Conley and Boren is striking. Both shooters were adult men who murdered their families. Both had a history of domestic violence and drug abuse and both had received treatment for mental illness. However, whereas the media described Josh Boren as a quiet, gentle man – a teddy bear – coverage of Conley described him as perpetually violent, controlling and dangerous,” the researchers said.
…
“When the media frame a mass shooting as stemming from gang violence, they talk about the perpetrators as being perpetually violent and a menace to society,” he said.
“But when a shooting is attributed to mental illness, the media treat it as an isolated incident, or the result of the pressures on the perpetrator.”
—————
Again, the fact that the media coverage even discusses his mental health makes my point. There’s plenty other research and coverage of this as well.
I’d hope after over 20+ years on these boards of discussion social and racial issues with you all, at some point you’d stop and think, “Hmm…Ph probably knows what he’s talking about here. Maybe I should take note, look it up for myself, read up on the issue, and not dive into a counter argument based simply on what I believe to be true.”