Ideas on how to curb mass shootings.

[MusterX]

Yes we do...but how many have access to them?

How many can afford them?

Making them easily accessible would be a crucial step...

again, i don't believe this is the silver bullett to stop all Mass murder but a great deal of good would come out of this.

There is also sort of a catch 22 situation. If you make it were people can't confide in their doctor for fear of being labeled, for fear of being locked up, for fear of being put on a list of some sort, for fear of being able to purchase a gun, etc....how much is that going to help. Nobody will go near them with a 10 foot pole.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

You should talk to the U.S. government about its obsession with the big ole bad guys knocking their door down because they spend ALOT of money on armor and guns to kill ALOT of people. Sometimes I wonder if gun activists, not you specifically, want all people disarmed or only civilians because our government mass kills and spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year to do it.

I am NOT for disarming all civilians of all firearms. Firearms that are non-repeating, bolt or pump action etc are necessary for personal protection, light duty security work, hunting, protection of herds/live stock from animals and other such uses.

And I am against the current rate of military spending due to unnecessary, aggressive military campaigns and "peace keeping" in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya etc. The funds wasted on these things could have been put to such good use here in our own back yards through education, health and infrastructure.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Aren't the bulk of the shooters either on, or coming off of, anti depressants? Maybe start there.

This always seemed a really strained argument to me.

If you're going to shoot up a school, theater, whatever, you're probably fucked up, right? Ipso facto these days you may well have gotten some treatment.

Why blame the drugs as opposed to the fact that the person was fucked up to start?

 

[MusterX]

I am NOT for disarming all civilians of all firearms. Firearms that are non-repeating, bolt or pump action etc are necessary for personal protection, light duty security work, hunting, protection of herds/live stock from animals and other such uses.

And I am against the current rate of military spending due to unnecessary, aggressive military campaigns and "peace keeping" in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya etc. The funds wasted on these things could have been put to such good use here in our own back yards through education, health and infrastructure.

Fair enough. I just wondered what you thought about the governments of the world and the killing they perpetrate. I'm not saying war is never necessary because obviously sometimes it is, WWII I guess is a good example but we focus on these spree killers and the numbers are really small compared to what our own government does in its spare time.

Maybe the human race hasn't come to terms yet with its own predatory nature. How do you teach a Tiger not to tiger.

 

[MusterX]

This always seemed a really strained argument to me.

If you're going to shoot up a school, theater, whatever, you're probably fucked up, right? Ipso facto these days you may well have gotten some treatment.

Why blame the drugs as opposed to the fact that the person was fucked up to start?

Because the argument for some is that they didn't do the crime until they started taking the pharmaceuticals. I think its fair to say there are alot of crazies not being medicated, how many of those go on killing sprees? Why are almost all of the spree killers taking mind altering pharmaceuticals?

 

[Zap]

Parents need to be more involved with their kids. They have to know their kids interests, fears, goals etc. Too many parents these days let tv and videogames raise their kids and wonder why they are so damn awkward/strange.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

This always seemed a really strained argument to me.

If you're going to shoot up a school, theater, whatever, you're probably fucked up, right? Ipso facto these days you may well have gotten some treatment.

Why blame the drugs as opposed to the fact that the person was fucked up to start?

Well, there are multiple types of "treatment". Many people end up going to their primary care physician who will send them to a psychiatrist.

A psychiatrist is someone who is a medical doctor and their job it so determine if your mental health problem is the result of a medical disorder, such as chemical imbalances in the brain. They then prescribe drugs, often with dozens of nasty side effects, to correct what they say is the medical issue. By definition, the job of a psychiatrist is to prescribe drugs.

But I think we have to question how many people treated THIS WAY actually should have been treated by a therapist instead. A therapist is someone whose job is to help a person understand why they have a mental health disorder such as depression, anger, rage, etc and once determining with that person what caused them to feel this way, to help them treat it with counseling.

I honestly have no numbers to support what I'm saying, but I feel like due to the greed of drug companies and doctors, most people who need option B (therapy) get thrown in option A, which actually makes it worse because they "think" they are getting treated but get made much worse by having the cause of their issues ignored (so they spiral out of control) and have drugs tossed at them which alter their brain chemistry, effectively creating a NEW problem.

But like I said, I have no studies to support this. Only personal experience with close family and friends going through this cycle.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Because the argument for some is that they didn't do the crime until they started taking the pharmaceuticals. I think its fair to say there are alot of crazies not being medicated, how many of those go on killing sprees?

Lots of unmedicated crazies kill.
Spree killers are, at least from my casual observation, typically middle class with disposable income. That lets them kill more people than Crazy Eyes Steve stabbing someone over a bottle of ripple.

Why are almost all of the spree killers taking mind altering pharmaceuticals?

Because they're fucked up. You're making a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument.
There may well be some sort of contribution but that would require other sorts of evidence than being put forward.

 

[JadeOwl]

Find a way to stop the media from doing what the killers want - glorifying them endlessly.

I'm not sure how it could be done other than media heads having an agreement not to cover all the details of the killers lives and stupid troubles.

We've been trying to do this for over 23 centuries and we still can't make it stick.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Well, there are multiple types of "treatment". Many people end up going to their primary care physician who will send them to a psychiatrist.

A psychiatrist is someone who is a medical doctor and their job it so determine if your mental health problem is the result of a medical disorder, such as chemical imbalances in the brain. They then prescribe drugs, often with dozens of nasty side effects, to correct what they say is the medical issue. By definition, the job of a psychiatrist is to prescribe drugs.

But I think we have to question how many people treated THIS WAY actually should have been treated by a therapist instead. A therapist is someone whose job is to help a person understand why they have a mental health disorder such as depression, anger, rage, etc and once determining with that person what caused them to feel this way, to help them treat it with counseling.

I honestly have no numbers to support what I'm saying, but I feel like due to the greed of drug companies and doctors, most people who need option B (therapy) get thrown in option A, which actually makes it worse because they "think" they are getting treated but get made much worse by having the cause of their issues ignored (so they spiral out of control) and have drugs tossed at them which alter their brain chemistry, effectively creating a NEW problem.

But like I said, I have no studies to support this. Only personal experience with close family and friends going through this cycle.

I've no doubt that over prescribing and poor diagnosis goes on. The issue is support for a causal relationship between these medications and spree killers.

We're starting with people who already have some sort of serious issues. That seems like a more parsimonious place to start looking for causality.

 

[MusterX]

Lots of unmedicated crazies kill.
Spree killers are, at least from my casual observation, typically middle class with disposable income. That lets them kill more people than Crazy Eyes Steve stabbing someone over a bottle of ripple.


Because they're fucked up. You're making a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument.
There may well be some sort of contribution but that would require other sorts of evidence than being put forward.

Cause and effect is a bitch. I'm not saying the pharmaceuticals do or do not cause their psychosis to worsen but the argument has been put forth. The United States eats more pills than anyone on earth and also has more of these sorts of problems than anyone else. You don't think that chemicals that are designed to effect a persons mind can sometimes make them actually get worse?

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

I've no doubt that over prescribing and poor diagnosis goes on. The issue is support for a causal relationship between these medications and spree killers.

We're starting with people who already have some sort of serious issues. That seems like a more parsimonious place to start looking for causality.

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with what you were saying. Just that I hear the media and folks here even keep saying "there needs to be more treatment" but they really don't understand how the mental health treatment system works so I was just explaining.

A good psychiatrist will run their brain scans, blood tests etc and if they determine "whelp, your brain is just fine. But you are indeed nuttier than a squirrel turd. Go see this therapist" and then the therapist determines Jim Bob is angry at the world because his little brother pissed on his teddy bear.

But because drug companies have offered incentives for prescribing their drugs, I would suspect the system has now become "well, Jim Bob, this new drug came out and its really good so here's a prescription." without much more effort. I see it all the time, and not just with mental health. Doctors throwing medication at things at a fatty with high blood pressure, high cholesterol, etc and then secondarily saying "oh yeah and maybe exercise one in a while" when it should be the other way around.

Infinitely treating the symptoms is profitable, but treating the cause isn't.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Cause and effect is a bitch. I'm not saying the pharmaceuticals do or do not cause their psychosis to worsen but the argument has been put forth. The United States eats more pills than anyone on earth and also has more of these sorts of problems than anyone else. You don't think that chemicals that are designed to effect a persons mind can sometimes make them actually get worse?

Of course I think it is possible, that's different from likely.
What we do know is that these are fucked up people and there is easy access to guns.

 

[Lord of Lies]

"Do you understand that was written hundreds of years ago, and the technology of TV and the internet today are beyond what the writers of that could have even fathomed in their wildest dreams?"

You should have just written that instead. Do you feel the same way about the 1st Amendment, since it was also written at the same time?

Please, tell us more of your knowledge of the Bill of Rights.

You state that people shouldn't have "high powered" weapons like AR-15s and then say you're okay with handguns. The majority of firearm deaths and crimes are by handguns. The "assault rifles" as you like to call them (which they're not) are used in a tiny percentage of all crimes involving firearms. Based on that, I'm guessing you find so called "assault rifles" scary. Why else would you want to ban something that isn't used in many crimes?

And of course you closed with the "to prevent the big bad mean ole government from taking all your rights". It's always funny when anti-gunners pull out that line, since no government in the history of the world has ever turned on their citizens. Correct? The American Indians all killed themselves and chose to live on reservations, the Jews in Germany decided to cook themselves in ovens, etc. Strange how that happened.

Do you?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Do you understand that was written hundreds of years ago, and the technology of weapons and body armor today are beyond what the writers of that could have even fathomed in their wildest dreams? Can you point me to even ONE politician who has said that the right to own all types of firearm should be revoked? Pretty sure last time I checked that most Americans supported the stricter regulation of high powered weapons. How many Americans who own a gun are "part of a well regulated militia"? No one wants to "take your guns" but it things like AR15's have no point being on the streets of America. Hand guns, revolvers, shot guns, hunting rifles I have no issue with.

If you think the average person needs to own a high powered assault rifle to prevent the big bad mean ole government from taking all your rights, or some other foreign power knocking on your door to take your rights, then you live in a world of paranoia and may suffer from a mental health issue like these people committing these shootings do.

 

[Zeke's Chaingun]

That don't involve sweeping gun control, but distinct targeted gun control. Now I'm as conservative, NRA, ex military, and Gun loving as they come. But these mass shootings have to stop. After watching the video of the Santa Barbara shooter. I noticed that this guy was completely selfish, and suffered badly from pride. It seems like every other month now, were hearing about some mentally ill, self absorbed person killing innocents.

My idea/opinion on how to possibly curb this for the generations to come is

1.Children need to be taught morals,and decency as a state mandated law in elementary, middle, and high school, just like they're taught art and science. I think the average person would be surprised to know how many children have never heard don't steal, don't kill, respect your elders, treat people like you would want to be treated,don't bully people.

I think you're off base here. I think most kids have heard that it is wrong to kill, steal, etc. Being told something and accepting it into who you are are two completely different things.

You're solution is to ask Government to do this for you. If the parents aren't creating this environment at home then how can you expect Government to do it for you? And what precendent does this set? When people start shoving things off on Government to do things for you then their own responsibilities are lessened. This is never good.

2. Starting as early as 4th grade, all children need to be given a mental health screening, to include talking to their parents about the typical behaviors of their children. We need to know as a society which kids are killing small animals, wetting the bed past say Fourth grade, have an infatuation with fire, and those who are being tormented by bullies on a daily basis.

I'm willing to hear more about this - although I do not know how effective it will be. What do you do when you find something out anyway? If you discover a kid has "issues" it is still not certain that they are going to turn out to be a danger to others. If the kid has - as of yet - done nothing wrong, then how can you justify forcing action upon them? Are you going to mandate therapy? Are you going to force parental behavior?

It's not that I do not see the issue with the children or possible risk to society, but one thing you cannot do is start letting fear place restraint on a free society.

3. After these children are identified, steps need to be taken to treat them without psychotropic drugs.....at first. My brother was prescribed Ritalin in 6th grade, and imo it not only didn't help, but made him worse.

Again, see above. Are you suggesting that these "identified children" suddenly lose some of their rights for things they haven't done? Just because some test indicated potential red flags? This is a major issue that you're proposing. It is the slow crushing of our liberty.

4. After these children are identified, rigorous mental health treatment should be started, and their names interred into a national "NO BUY" list like our national "NO FLY" list. The "NO BUY" list would be a form of targeted gun control for individuals who've been identified from childhood as having severe mental; and emotional problems.

Your steps 2-4 are essentially one and the same.

I know this isn't perfect, but the status quo of guy "snaps", kills a bunch of innocents, and nothing changes, must stop. I came to these feelings primarily after The Newtown mass killing. thoughts.

This brings up the next point. These people who snap aren't suddently going to vanish even if you do the above. It is STILL going to happen and people would STILL slip through the cracks. So in the end all you end up with are continued murders and less freedom for everyone.

Understand that you CANNOT stop bad things from happening. History is full of truly bad things happening BECAUSE of people trying to stop bad things from happening. It will not work. There will ALWAYS be bad things happening.

I fully support taking actions to protect ourselves but we should NEVER be bullied into giving up our liberties in some vain attempt to prevent bad things from happening. Find helpful methods, certainly, but not those that cause the rest of us to sacrifice more and more of our freedom.

Human beings are animals. I find myself understanding that we are animals more and more every day. I learn about murderers, abusers, thieves, corruption, and so on every day. I cannot turn on the news or read an article without something new completely upsetting me. I also understand that we can not legislate these issues away. It is a scary fact that these issues are a part of our species. They will ALWAYS be here one way or another.

The best I think we can do is live in a very free society that has laws that put away and/or punish those who violate our freedoms. Those violations will always happen, but at least we are a free people. I'd rather live as a free man in a society with other people violating rights than living in a government controlled society with other people violating rights.

 

[UpaLoompa]

The "assault rifles" as you like to call them (which they're not) are used in a tiny percentage of all crimes involving firearms. Based on that, I'm guessing you find so called "assault rifles" scary. Why else would you want to ban something that isn't used in many crimes?

This, ultimately, is the only real argument. An assault weapon ban will have little to no appreciable effect on crime and murders. As a result the only people it really penalizes are those that would be law abiding anyway.

 

[Zeke's Chaingun]

Dad's need to be involved with their sons. Teach them morals and how to be a real man. Again, there is no government program or law that can fix the moral crisis in this country.

That's an obvious "need", but how do you get this when these fathers have awful morals? You certainly cannot force it upon them. Unfortunately we are animals, and a good number of people will always act as if they are one generation away from killing each other in the wilds over which cave we get to occupy.

 

[Hadron]

Bring back prayer in school.
Encourage youth to get involved in church youth groups.
Put something other than gangsters and sex on television
Give them something other than Call of Battlefield: Modern Honor 4 to play for videogames.
Stop letting the youth listen to gangster rap and hedonistic pop music.


There, I just improved society 10000000 fold.

 

[ripskater]

That's an obvious "need", but how do you get this when these fathers have awful morals? You certainly cannot force it upon them. Unfortunately we are animals, and a good number of people will always act as if they are one generation away from killing each other in the wilds over which cave we get to occupy.

I agree. Some father's are bad fathers because they were raised the same way. You are correct in that you cannot force morals on anyone. So how could it improve? It starts with you and I. We need to be good fathers,we need to model it ourselves, raise our kids and teach them morals, and teach our sons how to be good and functioning young men in this society. It's the only way to turn this around. There ain't no law that can do what Mom and Dad should be doing themselves.

 

[Zeke's Chaingun]

every thing a child knows non intrinsically is taught to them by listening to interacting with, and observing people. you can most certainly teach and mold a child into what is considered "right" or acceptable behavior" by most cultures. I think this needs to be law there is an extreme moral decline in this country based on 1. kicking Judeo-Christian values out of the mainstream.

What a load of crap. You mean those awesome values such as teaching homosexuality is a sin? That races of people shouldn't mix? That Consitutionally Protected Rights only mean something when it agrees with you? That children should have their genetalia mutilated at birth? That tells us how to have sex and in what way? That AIDS is bad but condoms are worse?

You do not get to claim good acts and ignore the bad. That is dishonest, and certainly not the type of value I want for my kids. The values that need to be espoused are humanistic values and basic human rights - values that religion so often tramples on.

2. celebrating violent, and lewd behavior, think how violent our entertainment is, and how lewd our former Disney kids club actresses are for example. People who don't think the young girls that idolized Hannah Montana won't think it's okay to be a ho bag because Miley's one now. People underestimate how much influence these genres and media personalities can have on our children.

If you do a good job as a parent, this shouldn't worry you. I am the father of two daughters and I am not concerned about some raunchy teen idols because I am very involved in their lives and their moral upbringing. I claim the right as a parent to do what is in my power to release into the world a self respecting hard working woman. I do not claim the right to ban things like raunchy television stars because I do not like it.