<Speaking of statistics: Have you polled the profilers of the nation for their political leanings? Upon what do you base the observation that "leftist profilers were wrong"?

Does everything have to be political?



A fair question.

Lindy had the same objection, and I responded to it. Your comment caused me to look into it a bit harder.

No, I have not taken an official poll of profilers to detect their political leanings. I did more research on the three profilers listed in the above response, and from what I can gather there seems to be a reasonably broad spectrum there.

Dr. Michael Welner is an academic, and given the current academic climate I would bet solidly against his being a Republican, but he may very well be a moderate liberal. Christopher Whitcomb once worked for the late Silvia Conte, who was a Republican, although just barely, so I suppose one could probably safely say he may be from that end of the chart. As I said in the post to Lindy, Brian Levin of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism is pretty obvious. If he's not hard left, one could at least say he's probably not a Reagan voter.

Perhaps it would have been more accurate to say that the prejudice from which these errors arose was the result of leftist propaganda, regardless of whether the profilers were themselves leftist. Or, as I pointed out, does the idea that a serial shooter must of necessity be a white, right-wing, ex-military gun nut sound like it would come from the right?

And I'm sorry, but almost everything does wind up political. I probably like it less than you do, but it's self-defense. When one political movement sees my ideal role as the property of the state, I don't have a lot of choice.