Mass shootings

[Bengalzona]

Another mass shooting. And what has changed since the last one? Or the one before that? Or the one before that? etc...

Nothing has changed.

Apparently, we are either so desensitized that we are comfortable with these things occurring or we feel pathetically helpless to do anything about them.

Or, third option, maybe we are just so caught up in politicizing the issue that we can no longer get past our premature fears of the potential butthurt and embarrassment of an opposing political ideology having any sort of constructive input on finding a solution to the problem.

Whatever the case, we don't do anything about them. As a society, we really don't even try. We are paralyzed with indecision and impotent. Some people even claim that "there is nothing that can be done". I present to you that that is the only outright wrong opinion about the whole phenomenon. That reeks of the "it's too hard, so we don't even want to try" ideology. And that ideology is the definition of pathetic, IMO. People with that ideology were inseminated by a maggot and birthed of a sheep.

What can be done?

First, we probably should realize by now that it is a complex problem. Hence, there will not be any "one size fits all" simple solution. I liken the situation to the old parable of the blind men and the elephant: a person or small group sees an aspect or part of the problem, but they are blinded from seeing the whole thing. Therefore, they draw conclusions based upon their myopic view. Maybe we need to open our minds to all of the different aspects of the issue in order to "remove the blinders" and see the whole "elephant", consider different views and proposals. Cooperate, rather than being partisan dumbasses all of the time.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(02-15-2018, 10:35 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Another mass shooting. And what has changed since the last one? Or the one before that? Or the one before that? etc...

Nothing has changed.

Apparently, we are either so desensitized that we are comfortable with these things occurring or we feel pathetically helpless to do anything about them.

Or, third option, maybe we are just so caught up in politicizing the issue that we can no longer get past our premature fears of the potential butthurt and embarrassment of an opposing political ideology having any sort of constructive input on finding a solution to the problem.

Whatever the case, we don't do anything about them. As a society, we really don't even try. We are paralyzed with indecision and impotent. Some people even claim that "there is nothing that can be done". I present to you that that is the only outright wrong opinion about the whole phenomenon. That reeks of the "it's too hard, so we don't even want to try" ideology. And that ideology is the definition of pathetic, IMO. People with that ideology were inseminated by a maggot and birthed of a sheep.

What can be done?

First, we probably should realize by now that it is a complex problem. Hence, there will not be any "one size fits all" simple solution. I liken the situation to the old parable of the blind men and the elephant: a person or small group sees an aspect or part of the problem, but they are blinded from seeing the whole thing. Therefore, they draw conclusions based upon their myopic view. Maybe we need to open our minds to all of the different aspects of the issue in order to "remove the blinders" and see the whole "elephant", consider different views and proposals. Cooperate, rather than being partisan dumbasses all of the time.

Amen.


You're right, it's a very complex issue, but I feel metal detectors are a fine place to start.

[GMDino]

(02-15-2018, 10:35 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Another mass shooting. And what has changed since the last one? Or the one before that? Or the one before that? etc...

Nothing has changed.

I disagree.  We are now free to say "Merry Christmas" again!  And rules to try and stop people with mental problems from getting weapons was eliminated. 

(02-15-2018, 10:35 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Apparently, we are either so desensitized that we are comfortable with these things occurring or we feel pathetically helpless to do anything about them.

Or, third option, maybe we are just so caught up in politicizing the issue that we can no longer get past our premature fears of the potential butthurt and embarrassment of an opposing political ideology having any sort of constructive input on finding a solution to the problem.

A little from both columns I think.  Our political discourse is now limited to arguing on social media and 24 hour talking heads. Real people aren't getting together to actually do something.

(02-15-2018, 10:35 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Whatever the case, we don't do anything about them. As a society, we really don't even try. We are paralyzed with indecision and impotent. Some people even claim that "there is nothing that can be done". I present to you that that is the only outright wrong opinion about the whole phenomenon. That reeks of the "it's too hard, so we don't even want to try" ideology. And that ideology is the definition of pathetic, IMO. People with that ideology were inseminated by a maggot and birthed of a sheep.

What can be done?

First, we probably should realize by now that it is a complex problem. Hence, there will not be any "one size fits all" simple solution. I liken the situation to the old parable of the blind men and the elephant: a person or small group sees an aspect or part of the problem, but they are blinded from seeing the whole thing. Therefore, they draw conclusions based upon their myopic view. Maybe we need to open our minds to all of the different aspects of the issue in order to "remove the blinders" and see the whole "elephant", consider different views and proposals. Cooperate, rather than being partisan dumbasses all of the time.

Change will have to be small at first and then painful in the end.

But it will not come anytime soon given our political parties and the division they sow in the American people.

But let me add that the constant and current dumbing down of our educational system only makes things worse.

[Griever]

trump made it easier for mentally ill people to purchase guns, so thats technically a change

[Au165]

(02-15-2018, 10:45 AM)Wyche Wrote: Amen.


You're right, it's a very complex issue, but I feel metal detectors are a fine place to start.

I covered this in another thread, just not feasible from my experience in the industry. 

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(02-15-2018, 10:52 AM)Au165 Wrote: I covered this in another thread, just not feasible from my experience in the industry. 

I missed that, do you care to elaborate here or link your comments?  I'm genuinely interested in any take.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(02-15-2018, 10:49 AM)GMDino Wrote: A little from both columns I think.  Our political discourse is now limited to arguing on social media and 24 hour talking heads. Real people aren't getting together to actually do something.


Change will have to be small at first and then painful in the end.

But it will not come anytime soon given our political parties and the division they sow in the American people.

But let me add that the constant and current dumbing down of our educational system only makes things worse.

A lot of truth here.....

[Au165]

(02-15-2018, 10:55 AM)Wyche Wrote: I missed that, do you care to elaborate here or link your comments?  I'm genuinely interested in any take.

School's are criminally under funded when it comes to security. The issue would be that the cost of metal detectors is high and the amount required to cover all schools is a pretty astronomical number. One metal detector per school won't cut it some of the larger high schools you will be talking 10+ to even think about having any normalcy to school and getting kids inside in a reasonable time. The hidden cost here is for every metal detector you add, you need to add a body to run it which means you are now having to hire that many security guards as well. When you add the cost of the guard to the cost of the metal detector you are now talking about something that just isn't feasible to fund. 

[GMDino]

Something I talk about in reference to public outrage/hysteria is "the year of the shark".

I don't even remember what year it was anymore, but the nightly news was filled every night with stories of people being attacked by sharks.  It seemed the vents were a daily occurence!

Turns out that summer there were FEWER shark attacks than the year before...we just talked about it more.

So I tend to take the current talking point (whatever it is) with a grain of salt.

Without solid numbers and research how can we be sure that gun violence is worse than even last year and that it's not just we talk about it A LOT more now?

So I found this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootings_in_the_United_States#1950s

That's a list of school shootings since 1950.  I'm sure it is not perfect but just get an idea.

The list gets longer and longer and longer with each decade.

We should have seen this coming.

[GMDino]

(02-15-2018, 11:00 AM)Au165 Wrote: School's are criminally under funded when it comes to security. The issue would be that the cost of metal detectors is high and the amount required to cover all schools is a pretty astronomical number. One metal detector per school won't cut it some of the larger high schools you will be talking 10+ to even think about having any normalcy to school and getting kids inside in a reasonable time. The hidden cost here is for every metal detector you add, you need to add a body to run it which means you are now having to hire that many security guards as well. When you add the cost of the guard to the cost of the metal detector you are now talking about something that just isn't feasible to fund. 

I'm put in mind of a comic I saw after Sandy Hook where a congressman is yelling at a teacher for not being better at her job, her union, her pay, etc.  And it ended with him giving her a gun to protect his child.

[Benton]

It’s basic, but as someone who lives 20 miles from heath and 1 from Benton, I still can’t fathom in the 20 years since — and all the shootings between— wjy scgools don’t have metal detectors. Yeah, they foolproof. But it’s a first step. We put them at courthouses and theme parks and capitols but we tell our teachers and students to practice running. That’s the solution suggested. Run.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(02-15-2018, 11:00 AM)Au165 Wrote: School's are criminally under funded when it comes to security. The issue would be that the cost of metal detectors is high and the amount required to cover all schools is a pretty astronomical number. One metal detector per school won't cut it some of the larger high schools you will be talking 10+ to even think about having any normalcy to school and getting kids inside in a reasonable time. The hidden cost here is for every metal detector you add, you need to add a body to run it which means you are now having to hire that many security guards as well. When you add the cost of the guard to the cost of the metal detector you are now talking about something that just isn't feasible to fund. 

Thank you.  You are right, they are definitely criminally underfunded.  I hadn't considered the need of having guards at every detector, and the time factor.  Well stated.  Unfortunately, I will have to agree with you.  It just doesn't seem that feasible when you look at the numbers.  Thanks for the input and education on the matter.

[Belsnickel]

I was thinking about this quite a bit, yesterday. One of the reasons is that I listen to a podcast with my wife called Buffering: The Vampire Slayer which goes episode by episode through Buffy: The Vampire Slayer. My wife and I both enjoy the show and the podcast. This week, the episode that was being dropped was for "Earshot." This episode aired in 1999 and was delayed because of Columbine. The episode dealt with school violence and the timing of it was just a bit eerie. In addition to that, after the Kentucky shooting the ladies at Pantsuit Politics brought up the fact that after Columbine, there was a big conversation that something would be done, and nothing was. 19 years later and nothing has been done. In fact, it has only been made easier for these things to occur with the lapse of the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994. I'm not going to sit here and argue about the efficacy of that law or its merits. It is a fact that the sunset of that law has made it easier for the general public to own firearms that can more effectively kill higher numbers of people in a shorter period of time.

Now that I have gotten that little rant out of the way, I'd like to say that we need to separate the issues of mass shootings and overall gun violence. In fact, we need to separate school shootings from other mass shootings, as well. These are three things that are related to each other, but they are different issues that will need to be addressed in different ways. It is likely that policy solutions for overall firearm violence will help the other two, but there is no one solution that will solve all three problems.

I'm not sold on increased security in our schools. I haven't been sold on it for a long time, and this recent article posted on The Conversation cemented that a bit more for me. But then what do we do? The article gives some ideas that I think are sound, but the main crux of it all is that our education system needs to work on addressing the underlying issues that may cause people to act in this violent way. They should be approaching it without firearms in mind, just in a way that looks at the students. More and more teens are facing issues of anxiety and depression, and we need to be looking at why and what we can do. Student centered solutions are going to help reduce school shootings, not firearm centered solutions.

As to overall firearm violence, I've offered some of my policy ideas before. I'd love to see us make an effort on this, but right now we are not going to see anything at the federal level, even though that it where it needs to take place. Lax gun laws in one state impact neighboring states. Illinois has tight gun laws but high gun violence. Why? Lax laws in neighboring states. When Missouri repealed their permit-to-purchase laws there was an influx of firearms from Missouri being used in crimes in Illinois (Webster, D., Crifasi, C. K., & Vernick, J. S., 2014, sorry I can't link this one, it's from the Journal of Urban Health if anyone can get access). I have been pushing for changes in Virginia because our laws impact Maryland, DC, and others in our area, but we need to be lobbying for policy solutions at the federal level. Not superficial things that make good talking points, we need evidence based solutions that will actually be a benefit. But that isn't what lawmakers are calling for.

[CKwi88]

Until we are all collectively ready to have an open discussion about guns, mental health, and our culture of violence, specifically pertaining to men and masculinity, among other factors in these killings, we're going to be stuck in this holding pattern for a long time.

If the massacre of 20 6-7 year old children and more adults did nothing to bring everyone to the table years ago, I doubt the senseless killing of 17 more will do much to spur conversation.

[*Nately120*]

(02-15-2018, 10:45 AM)Wyche Wrote: Amen.


You're right, it's a very complex issue, but I feel metal detectors are a fine place to start.

Another tax cut for the ultra rich?  You got it!

(02-15-2018, 10:49 AM)Griever Wrote: trump made it easier for mentally ill people to purchase guns, so thats technically a change

For this reason I would expect the right-wing to stop blaming mental illness for mass shootings and blame "pure evil" or something even less analytic.  Yes, we let people with mental illness buy guns, but we need to remember that people possessed by demons are the ones who do the shootings, ergo, no person who is clearly possessed by a demon or demons shall be permitted to buy guns.  Problem solved.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

My dad related the other day how, at the hardware store when he was a kid, was a barrel of Enfield rifles at the end of one of the aisles. All you had to do was pick one out of the barrel, put it in your cart and pay for it at the register. This begs the question, with such easy access to firearms back then, with zero restriction on purchase, did they not have the mass shooting problem back then? You'd think with the millions of returning WW2 vets with PTSD there'd be a huge pool of candidates for mass shootings, and yet, virtually none.

[Belsnickel]

(02-15-2018, 12:27 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: My dad related the other day how, at the hardware store when he was a kid, was a barrel of Enfield rifles at the end of one of the aisles. All you had to do was pick one out of the barrel, put it in your cart and pay for it at the register. This begs the question, with such easy access to firearms back then, with zero restriction on purchase, did they not have the mass shooting problem back then? You'd think with the millions of returning WW2 vets with PTSD there'd be a huge pool of candidates for mass shootings, and yet, virtually none.

Yeah, you and I have had multiple conversations about this and how socioeconomic systems play as much, if not more, of a role in firearm violence prevalence in the country than availability of firearms. This is why I say evidence based policy is needed, and will add here that it needs to be holistic. Any policy that only focuses on the tool being used is a superficial attempt at resolving the solution. I believe there are things that can be done focusing on the firearms that can help in the interim, but a long-term solution has to focus on society itself.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(02-15-2018, 11:49 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Another tax cut for the ultra rich?  You got it!

I'm not sure I follow you here.....

[Belsnickel]

(02-15-2018, 12:35 PM)WychesWarrior Wrote: I'm not sure I follow you here.....

Most of Nately's responses are nothing more than facetious commentary that is half-assed mockery. I like him, don't get me wrong, this isn't me calling him out for anything. You just have to understand that his opinion of the conversations that occur on here having any sort of substantial merit is one of extreme skepticism, and so engaging in them in any serious way isn't his typical direction.

[*Nately120*]

(02-15-2018, 12:36 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Most of Nately's responses are nothing more than facetious commentary that is half-assed mockery. I like him, don't get me wrong, this isn't me calling him out for anything. You just have to understand that his opinion of the conversations that occur on here having any sort of substantial merit is one of extreme skepticism, and so engaging in them in any serious way isn't his typical direction.

I'll admit I've been pretty lazy as of late.  I used to enjoy a reasonable political debate, but things have just become so insane that I can't quite wrap my head around it, other than to shroud myself in a cloak of cynical mockery.  In my defense, I'm just pretending our current political course of action makes sense, so if it comes off as total nonsense, that's the fault of the powers that be...or something.

We can debate the latest shootings, but the point is even  the political party that blames mental illness for shootings made it easier for mentally ill people to buy guns.  This stuff is beyond insane, but I don't mean to derail any real discussion people want to have.  I'm not blaming you guys for wanting to discuss it (I like discussing stuff, for the most part too), I'm just pointing out how utterly hopeless this particular situation is.

I stand by my actual serious assertion that we should treat citizens who die in this manner with a respect and honor similar to what we bestow upon those who die in combat. This is dying to preserve our freedoms.