Understanding a person's motive for an action isn't the same thing as agreeing that the action was justified.
Christ on a cracker here we go again.
Reread all the posts again.
There is no understanding of this person's motive for the act. And when some posters have said they understand it, it has been in the context of 'If the government had done its job...this wouldn't have happened because she wouldn't have been driven to it.'
Okay?
And once anyone makes that connection, every action, no matter how inexplicable or heinous, becomes subject to that reasoning.
ie.....I disagree with the McVeigh, but if the government hadn't murdered two people on Ruby Ridge, he never would have had to blow up a federal office building.
or....I disagree with the 9/11 terrorists, but if the US had left Saudi Arabia and stop supporting Israel, they never would have had to crash planes into two office buildings.
or....I disagree with Hitler, but if the US and Europe hadn't set such punishing conditions after World War I, he never would have had to exterminate 6 million jews, gypsies, homosexuals etc. etc.
Some actions, no matter the motivation that the deranged individuals ascribe to them, are utterly and totally inexplicable. That is where we need to start.
With the simple premise that there was no excuse or rational reason behind the act. Like the murder of the man and his daughter.