On reaching a consensus re mass shootings in the U.S.

Yes. Something should be done.

 

The mental health thing AGAIN?

Would the gun lobbyists stop fucking repeating the same crap over and over

This has already been covered and as pointed out it isn’t ‘simple’ and to do it correctly it would cost money that many on the right would refuse to a lot.

Some in the right wing gun lobby have complained that gun issue threads always seem to end up been ‘circular’ with the same argument been repeated.

I will say again - honest and rational debate is supposed to be linear – someone presents an argument, the presentation or statement is criticised, then the next step is the person addressing the criticisms or if unable to do so adapting or dropping that argument or taking back the statement.

 

OK to repeat -

It’s not simple to decide who is a ‘nut’ who constitutes a ‘serious threat’.

A number of people on this forum and in the gun lobby have said openly that they have guns specifically or in part so they can kill police officers if they feel the need. Are they are ‘serious threat’ should they be not allowed to own guns?

Many in the gun lobby seem to hold views that I (and others) would say were delusional and borderline paranoid with beliefs that are mentally unhealthy, does that make them ‘nuts’ and likely to do ‘nutty things’.

Also as many here have pointed out the problem with easy access to guns in the US is not just limited to what are termed ‘mass shootings’ done by ‘nutters’ but involves the day to day incidences of crime and domestic disputes that make up an even larger number of deaths not to mention the high level of gun related suicides.

And many of these can also be connected to mental health issue brought on by socio-economic factors that can turn up the fear and stress levels to the point of aggression or depression, when people do things that they otherwise would not do.

*

The best way to tackle mental health in its broader sense is though policy and infrastructure changes – welfare, social services, drug regulation, universal healthcare, education and training etc. This is already done in many countries in the UK most mental health issues are dealt with by the NHS and Social Services and in extreme case people can be Sectioned hospitalise for you own good if you are seen as a threat to yourself or others (but that is often after they have tried to ‘do’ something).

And that’s were ease of access to guns comes in – in the UK there is not ease of access in the US there is. This means that the potential for guns to getting into the hands of people is much more likely and supposedly one in five Americans have experience mental health problems at some time in their life.

So ease of access to guns is a major factor in the numbers of people that may act out of a mental health problem (do nutty things) with a gun.

 

Mac

Have you anything of substance to say?

 

I think number 5 and 6 together are the answer. Each one of their own is not a 100% guarantee. The checks that do exist for guns are not as effective because it's a not a crime until you do it otherwise it's "thought crime" right out of 1984. The NRA will fight this idea more than anything. That an American can be labeled as somehow dangerous when they have done nothing wrong in a free speech society. You can have have a gun if you are not a felon but most of these shooters first felony is the mass murder.

But if we combine the two and extend them we can reach the best compromise. Americans and guns have a culture unlike anywhere else in the world. Even the few other countries where a citezin can own a gun are vastly different and would never think of them as a "right" or constantly threaten violent rebellion if the goverment discussed changing those laws. More of a "privladge" that is earned and not something to distrust the goverment over. You can also not own many of the guns an American can because they are so dangerous and viewed as not for sport or hunting. Yet the people accept that. I am sure some of them wish they could have what Americans have though.

We should try to respect gun people as much as possible if they can help us return American society to what it was. Guns have been around since America has. Yet the fears of a public shooting is very recent. The NRA itself was also once very different and while for gun rights was not as corupt. I've talked with a few NRA members who wish it was more about trap shooting and sport not the revolution. Not all NRA people are that angry.

 

Part of the issue with guns is that they are cheap to make and a "Saturday Night Special" was what they used to call a cheap gun sold on the streets that never came from any known manufacturer. England could eliminate guns for the most part, because they have limited borders and few places for a manufacturer to hide such activities. Being capitalists, the only solution the US considers acceptable is for them to virtually eliminate knockoffs and control the distribution of goods virtually worldwide, and IBM is now making a move in this direction as the technology continues to expand, using encrypted tags on everything the size of a grain of salt. The same technology could also easily be adapted to ensure that only the person who buys a gun can operate it, and they're waiting for the technology to become cheaper.

Like alcohol, which is involved in 80% of all violent crimes, they want to sell their products and ensure the buyer gets any blame for its misuse. Until half the country starts running around shooting each other, its just more reality TV as far as they are concerned. But they also sell bullet proof suits that look like any other suit.

3D printers have the Pentagon climbing the walls, but the idea the mindless masses have any real say in this fight for their markets is a joke in bad taste. Either you support the empire or you are lucky to be cannon fodder or target practice. Snowden's only mistake was in over-estimating the average intelligence of the American public. The people who shop at Walmart for their American values on sale at low-low prices, along with guns and liquor on isle 9.

 

What about "hardening" of schools?

• Metal detectors
• Armed security guards
• state of art security security cameras, with direct feed to the police
  
• bullet proof doors
  
• A big fence
  
• Few or no trees
• No parking lots, or ones with restricted access and passes
  
• Entrapment areas
• No windows, or bullet proof glass
  
• Door stops
• panic buttons for every teacher to wear

I didn't mention moats and alligators. That could be considered as a last resort. This list should be enough for starts.The NRA's design for "hardening" schools

 

Here’s an idea:

Let’s put GUN FREE ZONE signs on all school campuses

It’s brilliant I tell you!

 

Well, what about my list Post #90. We could add cannons for sleeping gas, and give the panic buttons to employees instead of teachers.

 

I don't want to live in a country where we have to adjust everything in response to the possibility of a mass shooting, where we have to be patted down and walk through a metal detector just to see a movie or where concerts can only take place inside because outdoor concerts leave us too vulnerable to snipers from higher vantage points. I would rather address shootings at the source rather than accept that they're just a way of life now and we must adjust the way we live instead.

But I suppose the problem is reaching a consensus on what the source of mass shootings actually is.

 

According to ABC this morning covering the March today, statistically 27% of America thinks it's about gun control and 68% think it's about mental health.

So there's that.

 

I tried to google this. There are some links for reportedly more people thinking it's about mental health than gun control, but I can't find the statistics. One of the results was from 2015. Like this poll More See Mass Shootings as a Mental Health Issue

But I think the debate is sort of shifting, especially with the national attention brought by the march. I don't think gun owners should be worried though. Apparently, it's not up for discussion right now, as they've already put the issue to rest with recent legislation and the move by the DoJ to ban bumpstocks.

 

There was no option for those who think it is both?

 

We're almost to the point where we could use armed drones to go after active shooters.

Of course, once we reach that point, it's going to be a scary world. There will be nothing stopping crazy people from using drones to commit murder.

 

Here's your link.

Most see inaction by Trump, Congress on mass shootings