Mass Shooters' Understanding of Law, Politics, and Crime by Tifenn
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Extremist Manifestos: Mass Shooters’ Understanding of Law, Politics, and Crime by Tifenn Drouaud B.A. in Criminal Justice & Political Science, May 2018, The George Washington University A Thesis submitted to The Faculty of The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of the George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master in Arts August 31, 2020 Thesis directed by Fran Buntman Assistant Professor of Sociology © Copyright 2020 by Tifenn Drouaud All rights reserved ii Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank Professor Fran Buntman for igniting my passion in this field and for her continued support, guidance, and encouragement throughout the many stages of this project. Her ability to challenge me has yielded my best ideas. The author also wishes to thank Professor Xolela Mangcu of George Washington University for providing his unique perspective and feedback. Additional thanks are given to the author’s parents, family, and friends for their relentless unwavering love, patience, and praise. Their support has never waned and without them, none of my accomplishments are possible. iii Abstract Extremist Manifestos: Mass Shooters’ Understanding of Law, Politics, and Crime A subset of mass shooters writes manifestos which outline the rationale for their intended violence. Most scholarly assessments focused on the psychological perspective of the shooters (Hamlett 2017; Knoll 2012; Bondü & Schneithauer 2015). Instead, this thesis considers the shooters’ socio-legal imagination as offered in their manifestos, focusing on their understanding and construal of crime, law, and politics. Most of these shooters portray their violence as a form of justice in an unjust world. They consider themselves as at once individual actors and as part of a collective resistance of fellow mass shooters challenging illegitimate socio-legal orders. In this regard, they are best understood as an “imagined community” (Anderson 1983). Using critical grounded theory, this study analyzes the manifestos to understand the shooter-authors’ implicit and explicit ways of seeing and defining legality and legitimacy. In particular we consider: (1) their relational identity (e.g. to other mass shooters and like-minded people), (2) their view of their victims (e.g. enemies, collateral damage, symbols, criminals), (3) their construction of their acts (e.g. narrow illegality intended to challenge an aspect of law, legitimate but illegal, resistance against state or non-state entities, etc.), and (4) how they believe their violence intervenes in the socio-legal order. Answering these research questions highlights the socio-legal justifications mass shooters utilize in their resistance to dominant institutions and rules. The manifestos articulate the shooters’ extremist ideas which, together with their violence, are intended to challenge the socio-legal order in favor of a reactionary nostalgia. iv Table of Contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... iii Abstract ............................................................................................................................. iv Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................. 7 Chapter 3: Methods ........................................................................................................... 16 Chapter 4: Findings ........................................................................................................... 23 Chapter 5: Analysis ........................................................................................................... 39 Chapter 6: Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 57 References ......................................................................................................................... 61 Appendix ........................................................................................................................... 71 v Chapter 1: Introduction Mass public shootings (MPS) have captivated the public attention for good reason. They are extreme violent acts that result in multiple casualties and reap “damage and devastation far beyond that which is measured in lives lost” (Peterson and Densley 2019:4; Fox and DeLateur 2014; Harding, Fox, and Mehta 2002). Mass shootings represent “1% of all firearm homicides” in the United States (Peterson and Densley 2019:4; Fox and DeLateur 2014). While statistically rare as the smallest percentage of gun homicides, MPS appear at once both routine and random—a chronic occurrence perpetrated haphazardly without warning. This type of gun violence garners the largest amount of American public and media attention regarding firearms, due to its high numbers of casualties, often unclear explanations for these acts, and the seeming randomness associated with its public nature. This study attempts to fill a gap in the discussion of MPS by focusing on the shooters’ expressed rationales and justifications which motivate them to act in this manner. MPS in the United States are increasing in incidence and mortality (Peterson and Densley 2019). Of the recent American MPS, 20% occurred since 2014, 33% since 2013, and over half since 2000 (Peterson and Densley 2019:13). While MPS occur in other countries, they remain an overwhelmingly American phenomenon. Moreover, they not only occur more frequently but are increasingly lethal. Of the 20 deadliest shootings since 1965, 75% took place in the last twenty years, with 40% in the last five years (Peterson and Densley 2019:13). A 2016 FBI study also found that these incidents rose from 6.4 incidents annually between 2000 and 2007 to an average of 16.4 incidents per year from 2007 to 2013 (Blair and Schweit 2014:8). An analysis of mass shooter data compiled by Mother Jones, an independent media outlet, found that the average number of days between each incident of mass shooting (defined by the Congressional Research Service as four or more fatalities pre-2012, and lowered to three or more after 2012), has shrunk. From 1982 to 2011, a mass shooting occurred on average every 172 days. From 2011 to 2014, the interval shrunk to 64 days (Cohen, Azrael, and Miller 2014). Despite the large amount of attention on these acts, public discussion of MPS is limited in scope, whether by law enforcement, media, or scholars. The law enforcement and legal communities primarily discuss MPS through the lens of applicable charging statutes and sentencing guidelines for those arrested. “Some statutes establish stand-alone crimes, while others authorize penalty enhancements for...crimes... motivated by bias” (German and Maleon 2019:10). Of the sample included in this thesis, only Dylann Roof and Patrick Crusius face criminal charges–including but not limited to both state and federal murder, attempted murder, and hate crime penalty enhancements (Kennedy 2017; Aguilera 2020; Corchado 2020; U.S. v. Dylan Storm Roof, July 20, 2015). For the majority of the perpetrators who perish during the commission of their crime, death preempts legal prosecution. But their ideas live on through public and social media. Mass media outlets often capitalize on the fear and chaos created by these violent acts, offering simplistic explanations for these phenomena. They merely designate perpetrators as mentally ill, “bad apples” (individuals who violate rules that the majority of the group follow), or “lone wolves” (individuals who act alone, separate from a larger group or organization) (Beydoun 2017; Kimball 2019; Walter 2012). Media coverage is typically shallow, touching briefly on the individual shooter’s past and, almost inevitably, highlighting any history of mental illness—even going so far as to speculate if no such 2 history is apparent. Most of this coverage remains psychologically focused, answering “why did this perpetrator commit this act?” Oftentimes, these incidents and accompanying manifestos fuel existing policy debates on gun access and control. These important discussions tend to omit also vital investigations into the expanded number of MPS and, especially, what messages the shooters want to convey. Existing studies that have looked at MPS have done so from a psychological and individualistic perspective, consistent with the predominant narrative surrounding these offenders (Hamlett 2017; Knoll 2012; Bondü & Schneithauer, 2015). Beyond widespread and appropriate legal and moral condemnation of these shooters, there is inadequate analysis of how they understand their own actions in socio- legal and/or political terms. Even when perpetrators explicitly state their motivations in written manifestos, these documents are rarely relied upon or seriously analyzed to contribute to understanding this violence from a sociological or criminological perspective. The manifestos are usually tangentially mentioned as evidence of the mental instability of the perpetrator. Scholars generally employ the manifestos as supporting evidence for theories of contagion and copycat among mass public shooters (Langman 2017; Helfgott 2015; Meindl and Ivy 2017). The increase in MPS and the persistent emergence of manifestos, often referencing previous shootings and perpetrator rationalizations, draws attention to the need