Jump to content

Talk:Lone wolf attack

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 78.69.180.157 (talk) at 16:50, 28 June 2019 (→‎Mental Health dispute: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nbelt408 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Samo56.

Lone Wolf Terrorism (Thoughts)

I felt that this is a good place to start for looking at Lone Wolf Terrorism. However, I think this article could use an update. Maybe including recent events connected to Lone Wolf Terrorism and updating the cited sources. Looking for something more recent. Holley08 (talk)Holley08

Hope the new material is responsive to your post above, Holley08Chip.berlet (talk) 16:43, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lone wolf or Lone Wolf

  • A "Lone wolf" is an animal.
  • A "Lone Wolf" is a typology used by criminologists and other social scientists and law enforcement personnel.

... As such shouldn't the full term be capitalized throughout our entry here? Just asking for some comments and discussion.Chip.berlet (talk) 16:41, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. They're differentiated by context, not capitalization. WP Ludicer (talk) 04:10, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mental Health dispute

A lot of stochastic terrorists are incentivised by the legal system to get false diagnosis as a legal defense, and a lot of political extremists will dismiss criticism of their ideology by deflecting it using mental illness arguments. There is also a lot of media sources that exploit the hysteria and stigma of mental illness with regards to acts of violence.

Most science on the other hand dispute this, and there's a lot of studies to indicate that mentally ill people are often less violent, and more likely to harm themselves. I believe it would be good to somehow cover these nuances, as to not validate what I would consider political opportunism.