There has been a national outpouring of empathy and sympathy for the survivors and the families of the victims of the movie massacre in Aurora, Colorado. Words cannot adequately express my heartfelt condolences and profound sadness. As of now, we know of no criminal past or history of mental illness of the alleged shooter, James Holmes. The missing piece is his motivation. Do you think he ever had a sense of empathy? What are your thoughts?

This can all be traced to one source. Since Barack Obama's is a Marxist, it is clearly his fault.

Me: "This can all be traced to one source. Since Barack Obama's is a Marxist, it is clearly his fault."

Me makes an excellent point. It has been said that the perpetrator was unemployed. Unemployment takes a tremedous toll on one's psychologial well-being.

Since President Obama has failed to address the economic problems in America over the last 3-1/2 years (even when the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress), you could connect-the-dots and point a finger at President Obama for the incident in Colorado. I wouldn't do that, but Me's point is somewhat logical.

As to whether or not President Obama is a marxist is the subject for another thread and would probably be most appropriately be discussed on those threads, rather than on this thread.

More than likely this guy was unemployed because he was mentally ill and anyone who interviewed him saw the crazy in his eyes. Perhaps his mental illness is completely out of control because he cannot afford his medicine or competent medical care.

Abigail: "I think we need to wait until we hear more to determine if this man was unemployed or visibly mentally ill. Obviously something was wrong but did anyone ever notice, or just look the other way."

Once a child reaches a certain age, 18 or 21, parents no longer have custody of their children and no longer have access to their medical records. Given that, the people who are most likely to care and to notice can't really do anything. Being mentally ill is not a crime in the United States-hence, police cannot just make an arbitrary arrest because someone is not acting normally. The courts have tied our hands. Sad, but fact.

Well Me, as we know, all liberals are mentally ill, so why would the liberal courts lock them up?

This is not the topic for sarcasm though.

Me: "It is a sad fact that the police cannot arrest someone for being mentally ill and that the liberal courts simply allow people who are different to roam freely throughout society."

Apparently, you don't have much experience with mental illness. As a parent, not being able to help your own child with mental illness is a heart-wretching experience. Today, there are very good medications to treat mental illness, however, the medications are only effective if the patient actually takes the medication.

More information on mental illness is available from the National Association on Mental Illness (NAMI). NAMI conducts classes on how parents can cope with children who are mentally ill, including adult children.

Yes, it is a sad fact that we now have highly effective treatments for mental illness, but often patients cannot avail themselves to treatment because of the illness.

You will likely not understand my comments unless your family is touched by mental illness. Unfortunately, most families are touched by mental illness, so it might be a good idea to learn something about these illnesses.

Mental illness usually strikes people in their late teens or early 20's. This young man was in his early 20's. Based upon what little I know of the incident in Colorado, I'd say that we're dealing with someone with a mental illness and I don't hold him or anyone else responsible, at least at this point in time.

Of course, Richard. Although you are a flaming hypocrite, you are correct about mentall illness. So why is it you are so against the mentally ill getting assistance? Many cannot afford the treatments of which you speak, yet you condemn them for not having the financial resources necessary. Kind of inconsistent, don't you think? And just a side note, if you have a child who is suffering from an emotional/mental disorder, it typically runs in families. Maybe you should have yourself checked out.

My apologies Ms. Freedman for this sidebar. As you stated, one must take advantage of teachable moments. I yield the floor back to the topic at hand.

Joanna, may I suggest that Sully has once again disregarded Patch's "Terms of Service" and that Patch remove Sully's comments above. Sully's comments on politics are really unappropriate for this thread and Sully's rude remarks are inappropriate for any discussion of mental illness. Ms. Freedman, the author of this piece, deserves some respect.

Richard: "Being mentally ill is not a crime in the United States-hence, police cannot just make an arbitrary arrest because someone is not acting normally. The courts have tied our hands. Sad, but fact."

I can only take you at your word. I know that you are trying to re-explain and backtrack from your statement but sadly it stands just as you wrote it.

Joanna, perhaps it's time to ban Sully from Patch permanently. His comments on mental illness are simply over the top. If Sully would post under his full name, I'm sure that Sully would be contacted by NAMI to discuss his attitude toward mental illness. Any person who would deride someone because a relative has a mental illness really shouldn't be allowed on Patch.

If Sully is allowed to continue to post on Patch, may I suggest that he be required to post under his full name. Perhaps posting under his full name would cause Sully to have some manners.

Richard, I have all the respect in the world for those with mental illnesses. You brought politics into the discussion. I merely responded. I'm very sorry if you did not like it. What I said about mental illness running in families is true. If you are so concerned, you have never indicated that. I have suggested from the beginning you seek help for your obsessions. I was not joking.

Stanley, I wasn't on here when Bush was in office. I've only been posting for about a year and a half, so I'm not sure where you get that I've been bashing Bush. As for trolling every site? Again, I don't know to what you are referring. As for picking fights? Do you mean disagreeing with other's comments? Guilty as charged then.

Richard: "Me, that remark, like Sully's remarks, should get you kicked off of Patch too."

Are you actually suggesting that I should be censored? The only thing that I have done is to quote the words you typed with your own hands. We aren't talking about a simple mis-spoken word here, this is something you actually thought about and typed on your keyboard.

"Being mentally ill is not a crime in the United States-hence, police cannot just make an arbitrary arrest because someone is not acting normally. The courts have tied our hands. Sad, but fact."

Perhaps it is you who owes an apology to those families.

Empathy, like intelligence, creativity, etc. is a tough thing to truly understand ans/or measure. Behavior and inner experience sometime go hand in hand and sometimes don't. People with no empathy, such as sociopaths, are often quite able to act in ways that others would probably experience as empathic. Empathic people are quite capable under a variety of circumstances (certainly mental illness being one of them) to act in cruel or destructive ways.

As Ms. Freedman suggests, there are lessons to be taught with increasing empathy in mind, but like in all teaching/learning situations there are often limitations in what can be accomplished or factors that can undo whatever has been taught.

Quite frankly, I believe that Sully's first response was golden - and empathic to boot.

Thank you, Doctor. I'm not always an ass (but I do play one on TV... Or on the Patch).

I feel that children are taught about empathy but is not really practiced. If it were practiced, then the children(with special differences) would not be routinely left out of activities. When a child has a birthday party, the parents would invite all girls from the class, all boys from the class or the entire class. That is what I was taught when I was a child. However, today, parents allow picking and chosing which kids to invite, thus, deliberately teaching their children the opposite of empathy. For example, if there are 8 girls in the class, and only 6 are invited, how do the other 2 feel when they hear about the party...Yes...they will hear either through the other kids or parents talking. Kids make mistakes but the parents often miss a learning opportunity. How about the group of kids getting together to go to the movies and walking past a home, where a special needs child lives, on their way to pick up another friend. Did any of these kids think about inviting this person...the same person that goes to school with them on the same bus and attends the same classes? Did anyone think about inviting the person to sit with them during lunch? Call on the phone? All that is really needed, is encouragement, from the family to put his/herself into the other person's shoes to and ask about how he/she would feel if someone did that to them and them knew about it?