ADVERTISEMENT

EXCELLENT article on explaining why the US has so many MASS shootings.

HawktimusPrime

HB Legend
Mar 23, 2015
16,535
4,653
113
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/am...lem-of-mass-shootings/ar-BBm9m4V?ocid=DELLDHP

The United States, according to Lankford’s analysis, is home to just 5 percent of the world’s people but 31 percent of its public mass shooters. Even more stunning, between 1966 and 2012, 62 percent of all school and workplace shooters were American. At 90 mass shooters in less than 50 years, the U.S. has five times as many as the next highest country on the list (the Phillippines).

One explanation is Americans’ high rate of firearm ownership. All five of the countries with the largest number of guns per capita (of which the U.S. is No. 1) ranked among the top 15 countries for public mass shootings, including two countries with reputations for safety, Switzerland and Finland. Many other studies have found a correlation between local gun ownership rates and deaths from shootings.

But that’s not enough to explain why mass shootings happen so much more often here than anywhere else. There are also cultural factors at work, Lankford argues. The things that Americans believe make us exceptional — our emphasis on individualism, our sense of destiny, our wealth-and-fame-based standards for success — also contribute.

The connection begins with something called “strain theory,” developed by sociologist Richard Merton in the 1930s. According to the theory, Lankford says, “deviance occurs because individuals who strive to meet culturally defined goals lack the means to do so.”

This is especially salient in the U.S., where the “American Dream” promises a better life than one’s parents for anyone who is willing to work for it. According to a 2010 survey, 81 percent of American high school students believe they will have a “great paying job” by age 25. A similar survey conducted in 2014 found that 26 percent of high schoolers expected that they would soon be famous. Nearly one third of college freshman expect to eventually get an M.D. or PhD (though only about 5 percent do).

“There’s a sense in which these aspirations are subject to that axiom that the bigger they are the harder they fall,” Lankford said. “If you’re reaching for the stars and you come up short, that’s perhaps more frustrating and devastating.”
 
Workplaces and schools — or, in Flanagan’s case, former colleagues — are the symbolic sources of their strain; by attacking them, shooters seek to exact revenge on the people and institutions they believe have kept them down. In the U.S., the strain of unmet expectations and unrealized goals is more pressing than perhaps anywhere else, so it makes a gruesome kind of sense that this country is home to nearly two thirds of the world’s school and workplace shooters.


This paragraph I really like for it's honesty. I've been saying this for awhile now, as have many others.
 
So, it sounds like this violence all still comes back to Participation Trophies.

Thanks a lot Libs.


The connection begins with something called “strain theory,” developed by sociologist Richard Merton in the 1930s. According to the theory, Lankford says, “deviance occurs because individuals who strive to meet culturally defined goals lack the means to do so.”

“If you’re reaching for the stars and you come up short, that’s perhaps more frustrating and devastating.”
 


This was a good scene from Watchmen. A great quote here from Comedian, which is truthful, ironic, and sad all at the same time.
 
Why don't we see mass shootings like this in China or Japan? Certainly those people put more pressure on themselves to succeed than we do.
 
Why don't we see mass shootings like this in China or Japan? Certainly those people put more pressure on themselves to succeed than we do.
Because, their punishments there are much more harsh. Also, because they are trained from birth to be good little drones. Also, because they are usually much more intelligent than most.
 
Why do you say that?
The crux of the OP is that people fail to meet their expectations for themselves and that this is the driving force behind their murders. But what about other cultures that put just as much pressure on themselves, if not more than us? Why don't they have such high rates of mass murder?
 
Because, their punishments there are much more harsh. Also, because they are trained from birth to be good little drones. Also, because they are usually much more intelligent than most.
These mass murderers are either put to death or locked up for life. How much more punishment can you get? Many of these mass murderers take their own lives. I don't think punishment factors into their mindset much at all.
 
The crux of the OP is that people fail to meet their expectations for themselves and that this is the driving force behind their murders. But what about other cultures that put just as much pressure on themselves, if not more than us? Why don't they have such high rates of mass murder?

Maybe they are taught to overcome adversity and be accountable at a young age instead of being given a false sense of entitlement?
 
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/american-exceptionalism-and-the-‘exceptionally-american’-problem-of-mass-shootings/ar-BBm9m4V?ocid=DELLDHP
. . .

The connection begins with something called “strain theory,” developed by sociologist Richard Merton in the 1930s. According to the theory, Lankford says, “deviance occurs because individuals who strive to meet culturally defined goals lack the means to do so.”

This is especially salient in the U.S., where the “American Dream” promises a better life than one’s parents for anyone who is willing to work for it. According to a 2010 survey, 81 percent of American high school students believe they will have a “great paying job” by age 25. A similar survey conducted in 2014 found that 26 percent of high schoolers expected that they would soon be famous. Nearly one third of college freshman expect to eventually get an M.D. or PhD (though only about 5 percent do).

I call this a narcissistic sense of entitlement.
 
I have a simpler explanation. I call it the "Rambo Effect." Movies like Rambo and Death Wish and many more since them have given Americans, in particular, permission to engage in vigilantism.

It isn't just movies. Or cop dramas on TV. Or 24. Or violent video games. It's also our laws. Think of "stand your ground" laws.

And then there's the national adoption of pro-active self-defense that we have seen played out from the Iraq war to the Zimmerman case.

Somewhere we've either lost the "reasonable man" standard or have redefined "reasonable." For example, we no longer ask ourselves (or the jury) whether a reasonable person would be so afraid in that situation that he would kill an unarmed person. Instead we ask whether the defendant was that afraid. If we imagine that he was that afraid, then he gets off - even if it wasn't reasonable to be that afraid or even if his own behavior increased the perceived risk.
 
These mass murderers are either put to death or locked up for life. How much more punishment can you get? Many of these mass murderers take their own lives. I don't think punishment factors into their mindset much at all.
Perhaps we should publicize killings and punishments then? Show them what they only understand by words?
 
These mass murderers are either put to death or locked up for life. How much more punishment can you get? Many of these mass murderers take their own lives. I don't think punishment factors into their mindset much at all.
What about the other two factors? The main one being, that they are just as a whole, much more intelligent than Americans.
 
Because the dumb shits that commit the mass murders are made famous by our media. I want to be special, so I'll kill a bunch of people to show everyone else how exceptional I really am. I don't care why people know my name as long as they know it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yiana
You enslave folks with the cloak of victimhood, with no way to cope, and they lash out when their false reality shatters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unIowa
I have a simpler explanation. I call it the "Rambo Effect." Movies like Rambo and Death Wish and many more since them have given Americans, in particular, permission to engage in vigilantism.

It isn't just movies. Or cop dramas on TV. Or 24. Or violent video games. It's also our laws. Think of "stand your ground" laws.

And then there's the national adoption of pro-active self-defense that we have seen played out from the Iraq war to the Zimmerman case.

Somewhere we've either lost the "reasonable man" standard or have redefined "reasonable." For example, we no longer ask ourselves (or the jury) whether a reasonable person would be so afraid in that situation that he would kill an unarmed person. Instead we ask whether the defendant was that afraid. If we imagine that he was that afraid, then he gets off - even if it wasn't reasonable to be that afraid or even if his own behavior increased the perceived risk.
Don't other cultures have access to these same exact movies?
 
Another factor I've noticed is that we embrace the villains in this country. Star Wars isn't loved because of Luke Skywalker, it's because of Darth Vader. Dark Knight is not beloved because of Batman, it's because of the Joker.
We are conditioned in this country also by the medias insistence on sensationalizing disparity amongst the people. Lots of social engineering going on in this country. Loss of spirituality, loss of the true connection between people, etc.
The system wants robots, and the problem is the minds of those robots, lose hold of their programming and malfunction, due to the unnatural progress of their thinking minds.
 
Intelligence tests show that Asians are no smarter than Americans.
Is that true? Are the reports that Asians are better at math and some other things still correct? Are the studies you mention merely saying they work harder at math (or whatever) but aren't any different in native intelligence (whatever that might mean)?

I don't think that anyone disputes the existence of cultural differences toward learning and education that can show up in testing - presumably including IQ testing.
 
Don't other cultures have access to these same exact movies?
Japan doesn't feature movies, and media that pit Japanese people against each other because they are different from each other. Asian countries are mostly Asians. Our country is a melting pot of different cultures, all taught that the other cultures are out to get them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unIowa
I don't recall the article talking about victimhood at all.
It doesn't need to be said, for that to be the point. The point is that the entitlement leads them to think that they have been victimized when that entitlement doesn't come to them.
 
Is that true? Are the reports that Asians are better at math and some other things still correct? Are the studies you mention merely saying they work harder at math (or whatever) but aren't any different in native intelligence (whatever that might mean)?

I don't think that anyone disputes the existence of cultural differences toward learning and education that can show up in testing - presumably including IQ testing.
Asians work harder, but there is little to no evidence they are any smarter. In other words, put an Asian baby in an American home and an American baby in an Asian home and you'll like see things flip.
 
Is that true? Are the reports that Asians are better at math and some other things still correct? Are the studies you mention merely saying they work harder at math (or whatever) but aren't any different in native intelligence (whatever that might mean)?

I don't think that anyone disputes the existence of cultural differences toward learning and education that can show up in testing - presumably including IQ testing.

Here's a plausible explanation:

In his forthcoming book Outliers (available tomorrow), Malcolm Gladwell offers another provocative investigation into curious social phenomena. An extract is published in yesterday’s Guardian, which asks and answers the question, What explains Asian superiority in academic subjects?

While the likes of controversial professor and psychologist Richard Lynn advance the thesis for variation in IQ along racial and ethnic divisions, Gladwell says the superior performance and achievement in maths has nothing to do with innate ability. Rather, performance and achievement in mathematics can be explained by the structure of our languages, which gives the East a cultural advantage over the West in certain academic subjects.

The words for Asian numbers are shorter than in English, allowing children to remember more content — they can “hold more numbers in their heads and do calculations faster”; the Asian number system is also more “transparent,” clarifying the structure of numbers and the purpose of a problem. In short, where the English linguistic system is “clumsy” with “arbitrary and complicated” rules, there is an intuitive pattern and conceptually compelling structure to the Asian system.
 
It doesn't need to be said, for that to be the point. The point is that the entitlement leads them to think that they have been victimized when that entitlement doesn't come to them.
But at this point, we're venturing into too many variables. We're now wrapped up in gun ownership rates, intelligence, drive to succeed, and perceptions of victimhood. With so many things going on, how can you simply point to victimhood while, say, ignoring the gun factor? Too many variable doesn't make for good science.
 
Maybe they are taught to overcome adversity and be accountable at a young age instead of being given a false sense of entitlement?

A false sense of entitlement combined with two political parties that non-stop sell "you are the victim of the system/Obama/white males/etc.

As we learned yesterday many believe these shooters are real victims.
 
"All five of the countries with the largest number of guns per capita (of which the U.S. is No. 1) ranked among the top 15 countries for public mass shootings, including two countries with reputations for safety, Switzerland and Finland. Many other studies have found a correlation between local gun ownership rates and deaths from shootings."

Anyone else notice that part?
 
But at this point, we're venturing into too many variables. We're now wrapped up in gun ownership rates, intelligence, drive to succeed, and perceptions of victimhood. With so many things going on, how can you simply point to victimhood while, say, ignoring the gun factor? Too many variable doesn't make for good science.
The gun factor wouldn't mean anything without these other variables. The driver of a force is the first thing you need to stop if you wish to quell any sort of issue.
 
The gun factor wouldn't mean anything without these other variables. The driver of a force is the first thing you need to stop if you wish to quell any sort of issue.
But we don't know what that driving force is. That's the point.
 
"All five of the countries with the largest number of guns per capita (of which the U.S. is No. 1) ranked among the top 15 countries for public mass shootings, including two countries with reputations for safety, Switzerland and Finland. Many other studies have found a correlation between local gun ownership rates and deaths from shootings."

Anyone else notice that part?
Did you notice that the force driving those stats aren't the guns themselves? No one is forcing you to own a gun JR. But you sure as hell aren't going to force the rest of us not to in the flip side of that coin.
 
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/american-exceptionalism-and-the-‘exceptionally-american’-problem-of-mass-shootings/ar-BBm9m4V?ocid=DELLDHP

The United States, according to Lankford’s analysis, is home to just 5 percent of the world’s people but 31 percent of its public mass shooters. Even more stunning, between 1966 and 2012, 62 percent of all school and workplace shooters were American. At 90 mass shooters in less than 50 years, the U.S. has five times as many as the next highest country on the list (the Phillippines).

One explanation is Americans’ high rate of firearm ownership. All five of the countries with the largest number of guns per capita (of which the U.S. is No. 1) ranked among the top 15 countries for public mass shootings, including two countries with reputations for safety, Switzerland and Finland. Many other studies have found a correlation between local gun ownership rates and deaths from shootings.

But that’s not enough to explain why mass shootings happen so much more often here than anywhere else. There are also cultural factors at work, Lankford argues. The things that Americans believe make us exceptional — our emphasis on individualism, our sense of destiny, our wealth-and-fame-based standards for success — also contribute.

The connection begins with something called “strain theory,” developed by sociologist Richard Merton in the 1930s. According to the theory, Lankford says, “deviance occurs because individuals who strive to meet culturally defined goals lack the means to do so.”

This is especially salient in the U.S., where the “American Dream” promises a better life than one’s parents for anyone who is willing to work for it. According to a 2010 survey, 81 percent of American high school students believe they will have a “great paying job” by age 25. A similar survey conducted in 2014 found that 26 percent of high schoolers expected that they would soon be famous. Nearly one third of college freshman expect to eventually get an M.D. or PhD (though only about 5 percent do).

“There’s a sense in which these aspirations are subject to that axiom that the bigger they are the harder they fall,” Lankford said. “If you’re reaching for the stars and you come up short, that’s perhaps more frustrating and devastating.”
OK. So, does their stats include Boko Haram, ISIL, or the entire continent of Africa? Mass murders are performed for religious or military/totalitarian regimes in Africa and the middle east on almost a daily basis.

What about the drug trade related mass murders exacted on a regular basis in Mexico, Columbia and throughout central and South America? They make Columbine or Sandy Hook look like the muppets show.

There is some truth to the 'deviance' and 'American Dream' theories mentioned above. With affluence comes decadence and the need to fit in. Also the need and means to lash out when perceived needs are not getting met.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT