So, out in rural Rensselaer County, there was a man who shot his daughter, his granddaughter's boyfriend, and himself. The gunman died; the others are in serious and critical condition respectively at a nearby hospital.
So of course this is initially reported, roughly, as motive-was-unknown-put-gunman-may-have-
The updated report says that, according to his son in another state, the gunman was angry with his daughter over some issue, and that there is no evidence to substantiate the idea that he "battled mental illness".
RIGHT THEN. Because crazy people don't have a motive for anything they do, especially if it's violent - they just do it because they are crazy. Sane people are angry over issues. Crazy people are just crazy.
Never mind that the stereotype of violent = mentally ill and mentally ill = violent is not exactly useful in the first place, or that TU seems to have started out using "mentally ill" as a way of saying "took actions that otherwise seem inexplicable." Which, y'know, NOT.
(My own speculation as to the guy's possible motive? Given that he shot his daughter and a person who was living there in part to provide personal care and assistance to him, I'm guessing he had been told something he didn't want to hear about his physical health and capabilities and decided first to shoot the messenger and then to end his own life because he didn't want to deal with whatever it was. Is this how people should react to news of declining health? No. Is it a chain of logic that can be followed, especially given that apparently the gunman legally owned a large number of guns? Yes.)