Taking guns away from the sane won't keep them out of the hands of the insane. You weaken the strong and strengthen the weak.
EXCELLENT article on explaining why the US has so many MASS shootings.
- Thread starter HawktimusPrime
- Start date
But this is like throwing spaghetti on a wall then. How do you isolate any of these forces? At this point, it's less science than simple ideas of what's going on.
Do you understand what a correlation is statistically? The article states that guns per capita and death rates from shootings are correlated. There is no"Yeah, but"...Its a statistical fact
What surprises me about most if not all of these shootings is that they are, as you say, committed by dumb shits.
Or is that the coverup?
Not trying to sound like OiT here, but why don't we see mass shootings for any causes in America?
I sometimes kid about this - as when I ask where are the suicide bombers for women's rights, or the environment, or against wealth inequality, or against government corruption. Not that I actually approve of such things, but if people are going to start spraying bullets, wouldn't you think they'd have a reason?
Agree with them or not, folks like the IRA or Haganah or Black September or any number of others committed violent acts to punish invaders or to fight for independence or to fight (for or against) racism. Even if you oppose their aims, you understand that they do have aims.
It somehow seems worse that our shooters never seem to have plausible, believable, real aims.
Or do they? Our press and our governments are quick to raise the lone-crazy-person meme. Either that or the the-Muslim-did-it meme. One or the other, or both. Are we too quick to accept those explanations?
It seems that the opposite ends of the 'quality of life' spectrum, sadly can lead to the same results.
So the countries that have more guns, have more shootings. Let me guess, the countries that have more people, have more fights amongst the people too? What about the murder rates of the countries, violent crime, etc in those countries that have STRICT to an almost flat out ban on guns?
Or you beat them down to the lowest rungs of society with the winner take all -- and win at cost mantra -- of naked capitalism, combined with the lack of equal opportunity in education -- caused by the property tax funding model -- add in cuts in social programs, including mental health care funds, in favor of tax cuts for the rich in the name of the false prophet of supply side voodoo economics, swirl in the potent mixer of virtually unlimited access to weapons -- and of course people are gonna snap and take a few out with them on the way out the door.
See, we can play a fun game of blame the other guys for all our collective problems. Or we can work jointly to help fix the problem.
Because if they fail at something, they are probably more likely to take their own life than other people's. it's a cultural thing.
Or you beat them down to the lowest rungs of society with the winner take all -- and win at cost mantra -- of naked capitalism, combined with the lack of equal opportunity in education -- caused by the property tax funding model -- add in cuts in social programs, including mental health care funds, in favor of tax cuts for the rich in the name of the false prophet of supply side voodoo economics, swirl in the potent mixer of virtually unlimited access to weapons -- and of course people are gonna snap and take a few out with them on the way out the door.
See, we can play a fun game of blame the other guys for all our collective problems. Or we can work jointly to help fix the problem.
Social programs can be just as damaging as they are helping. People that use these programs often speak on that.
Exactly, because no one is willing to accept that they failed. Because in this society, failure is next to dying.
That's a lot of variables.
Why does the left just point at an inanimate object?
Because taking away guns leads to an even worse Police State than we already live in. Don't even try to play that 'I don't believe in the police state line', because you most definitely do. In the end, you take away all the guns, and you give into COMPLETE and utter control to the state. Our government has shown that it has no problem brutalizing it's own people.
Yep. And that gives us a way to test the hypothesis. I don't have the data or I'd do it. But it's simple enough. How popular were those movies in other countries (viewership and approval rate)? When were they popular? What happened to their shootings rate?
There may be other factors you'll need to correct for, but that's a start. Either there's an effect or their isn't.
Who has proposed getting rid of everyone's guns?
I propose making it more difficult to get one, not ban them.
I don't think all the gun ownership has done anything to stop the NSA, etc. from breaking the 4th Amendment and having it supported by politically appointed courts. I don't think it deters anything to do with government.
The recent mass shootings resumes before they shot their victims may not have stopped with the 'more difficult' avenue you speak of. Hence, why many seek to find another way, that goes after the real cause of these mass shootings, mental illness.
First, nobody is calling for all guns to be taken away.
Second, I think you are kidding yourself if you think the puny firepower of the average American gun owner worries governments very much.
If we don't want a police state (or a worse police state if that's how you see things) then it won't be our guns that will protect us, it will be getting and keeping enough good people in government who will object to those tendencies.
The difference between the police coming for an unarmed person and a well-armed person is how polite they are when they come. If you are unarmed, 2 guys in suits come for you at dinner time and politely invite you to go with them. If you are armed, a SWAT team batters down your doors, shoots your dogs, screams at you and your wife and your kids to do 5 contradictory things simultaneously at the top of their lungs, and cuffs or shoots anyone who resists that lawful order.
And the next day all your HROT buddies will say if you had just done what the cop told you, you would have been fine - it's your own fault.
There must be some way to combine those 2 objectives.
Can we get the gun owners to round up the illegals?
Or maybe "hire" the illegals to go around and confiscate the guns - and then after the gun owners shoot the illegals, we arrest them and take their guns.
You're welcome.
Some have mentioned a potential difference in races, Chinese, Japanese, or nationalities, etc...I submit that it may be more of a cultural phenomenon, rather than a racial or nationality issue.
In America there is much wider cross section of disparate cultures than in most other countries.
Mental Illness plus easy access to guns is a lethal combo
None of the gun lovers can give me any concrete action that would keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill
When talking about gun violence, you should probably consider guns. Seems pretty straight forward to me.
Yes it is. One of the theories makes sense and the other is based on your idiotic personal beliefs.
Not everyone with a gun is a mass shooter.
Not everyone with mental illness is a mass shooter.
Not even every mentally ill person with a gun is a mass shooter.
But look at it the other way....
Is every mass shooter mentally ill? Some might argue that's true by definition. But some would say not. How many of our mass shooters have been diverted to the mental health system instead of being tried as criminals? Since a lot of them are dead before either of those can happen, it's probably too small a sample to draw conclusions from, but have any mass shooters been diverted to the mental health system?
Does every mass shooter have a gun?
Whether you think it's appropriate or the best approach, or not, the gun part does seem to be the common denominator - and may be the only handle we have on the problem.
If it is the only handle we have on the problem, what's the argument against using that lever?
Excellent point. If a gun is the only thing all these shootings have in common, we would be doing ourselves a huge disservice to not include it in the study of why these shootings happen.
Sure I can. Make it more difficult to get a gun. Waiting periods, stronger background checks, etc. Again, not banning guns, just making a higher threshold to get one. 100% effective? No. But nothing is.
Well, outlawing guns seems like a possible approach. Nobody is actually suggesting that. But it is the obvious answer.
The question is whether we have a good alternative that would come even close to achieving the same success.
If there is no other approach to significant success, then does the level of harm we see justify taking that step (outlawing guns)?
THAT is the hard question?
For the NRA and other gun defenders, is there ANY level of gun-related harm that justifies outlawing guns?
No point reading any further than your first sentence. The false "winner take all" and "lowest rung" narrative is complete victimhood bs. Are you a 1%er? Are you a part of the "lowest rung"? I bet not along with the vast majority of Americans. The reality of opportunity in the US is nothing like you described.
I've had plenty of debates with folks on here without any "personal attacks" as the guy calling me a douche ironically enough would say.
That article is BS.
This video reveals the indisputable connection between psychiatric drugs and violence, especially young “lone-wolf” shooters in gun massacres.
As psychiatrist Peter Breggin observes in the video:
One of the things in the past that we’ve known about depression is that it very, very rarely leads to violence. It’s only been since the advent of these new SSRI drugs that we’ve had murderers even mass murders taking these antidepressant drugs.
Instead of intimidating the NRA into negotiating away Americans’ Second Amendment rights through its seat at the table in Washington, the government should be demanding answers and explanations from PhRMA and the pharmaceutical companies.
Instead of extorting NRA chairman Dave Keene and NRA president Wayne LaPierre into participating with the gun snatchers’ efforts to nullify the Second Amendment in the name of reducing gun violence, why isn’t the White House and Congress putting former Business Roundtable President and current head of PhRMA, John Castellani, along with the presidents of the pharmaceutical companies on the hot seat?
Why isn’t Castellani sitting in on White House and congressional meetings about the connection between his products and mass shootings instead of Keene and LaPierre of the NRA?
Why isn’t there a White House Task Force on the connection between psychiatric drugs and violence, suicide and murder, both gun related and otherwise?
Why aren’t there congressional hearings on the connection between violence and psychiatric drugs?
Why aren’t there bills being introduced in Congress and state legislatures to tighten down on the indiscriminate, unmonitored use of these killer drugs?
Why is the government still suppressing information about the shooters’ psychiatric drug use at Sandy Hook and Virginia Tech?
Why is the government turning America into a police state in the name of protecting us against nonexistent “reefer madness” while it turns a blind eye to the real, deadly med madness created by psychiatric drugs and the uncontrollable violent rages they produce in some people?
Could it be there is a quiet conspiracy afoot among pharmaceutical companies, the government and the gun grabbers to make Mr. and Mrs. Gun Owner of America the patsies for the violence and to blame lone-wolf violence on guns rather than psychiatric drugs?
Could it be that power-hungry politicians and gun snatchers are out to exploit rare tragedies such as Sandy Hook and use the blood of innocent children to scare America into giving up its constitutional rights to own and bear arms and use them as a deterrent against tyranny?
Could it be that big pharma is today's big tobacco?
Could it be there is an intentional effort underway in the centers of power in Washington, DC to hide the truth from the American people about the strong connection between psychiatric drugs and violence and to protect the pharmaceutical companies from civil and criminal charges for their responsibility in these heinous crimes?
Could that be the explanation for why there continue to be lawsuits against gun manufacturers – not for defects in their products but rather for the misuse of their products by drug-addled individuals – and why there are few lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies for the obvious flaws in their products, which are producing violence and mayhem?
Could it be the Gun Control movement is simply a blind; just an effort by the triple alliance of left-fascists, big-government politicians and big-pharma prescription-drug dealers to dose and oppress the American people in the name of public safety, officer safety and social order?
The gun snatchers such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg all shamefully exploit the bloody murder of children as a pretext to nullify the Second Amendment and short arm the American public with their so-called assault-weapons ban and ammunition/clip restrictions. The fact is, the kinds of guns used by mass shooters are far less relevant than the kinds of drugs they were prescribed.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/01/lawrence-a-hunter/its-the-drugs-not-the-guns/
This video reveals the indisputable connection between psychiatric drugs and violence, especially young “lone-wolf” shooters in gun massacres.
As psychiatrist Peter Breggin observes in the video:
One of the things in the past that we’ve known about depression is that it very, very rarely leads to violence. It’s only been since the advent of these new SSRI drugs that we’ve had murderers even mass murders taking these antidepressant drugs.
Instead of intimidating the NRA into negotiating away Americans’ Second Amendment rights through its seat at the table in Washington, the government should be demanding answers and explanations from PhRMA and the pharmaceutical companies.
Instead of extorting NRA chairman Dave Keene and NRA president Wayne LaPierre into participating with the gun snatchers’ efforts to nullify the Second Amendment in the name of reducing gun violence, why isn’t the White House and Congress putting former Business Roundtable President and current head of PhRMA, John Castellani, along with the presidents of the pharmaceutical companies on the hot seat?
Why isn’t Castellani sitting in on White House and congressional meetings about the connection between his products and mass shootings instead of Keene and LaPierre of the NRA?
Why isn’t there a White House Task Force on the connection between psychiatric drugs and violence, suicide and murder, both gun related and otherwise?
Why aren’t there congressional hearings on the connection between violence and psychiatric drugs?
Why aren’t there bills being introduced in Congress and state legislatures to tighten down on the indiscriminate, unmonitored use of these killer drugs?
Why is the government still suppressing information about the shooters’ psychiatric drug use at Sandy Hook and Virginia Tech?
Why is the government turning America into a police state in the name of protecting us against nonexistent “reefer madness” while it turns a blind eye to the real, deadly med madness created by psychiatric drugs and the uncontrollable violent rages they produce in some people?
Could it be there is a quiet conspiracy afoot among pharmaceutical companies, the government and the gun grabbers to make Mr. and Mrs. Gun Owner of America the patsies for the violence and to blame lone-wolf violence on guns rather than psychiatric drugs?
Could it be that power-hungry politicians and gun snatchers are out to exploit rare tragedies such as Sandy Hook and use the blood of innocent children to scare America into giving up its constitutional rights to own and bear arms and use them as a deterrent against tyranny?
Could it be that big pharma is today's big tobacco?
Could it be there is an intentional effort underway in the centers of power in Washington, DC to hide the truth from the American people about the strong connection between psychiatric drugs and violence and to protect the pharmaceutical companies from civil and criminal charges for their responsibility in these heinous crimes?
Could that be the explanation for why there continue to be lawsuits against gun manufacturers – not for defects in their products but rather for the misuse of their products by drug-addled individuals – and why there are few lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies for the obvious flaws in their products, which are producing violence and mayhem?
Could it be the Gun Control movement is simply a blind; just an effort by the triple alliance of left-fascists, big-government politicians and big-pharma prescription-drug dealers to dose and oppress the American people in the name of public safety, officer safety and social order?
The gun snatchers such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg all shamefully exploit the bloody murder of children as a pretext to nullify the Second Amendment and short arm the American public with their so-called assault-weapons ban and ammunition/clip restrictions. The fact is, the kinds of guns used by mass shooters are far less relevant than the kinds of drugs they were prescribed.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/01/lawrence-a-hunter/its-the-drugs-not-the-guns/
And not every mass murderer uses a gun but it seems to be the only means that gets discussed by anyone.
