-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
So what is the answer?
- Thread starter BigAl23
- Start date
Mass shootings (the ones publicized) of the recent years are textbook copycat killings involving murderers that wanted to make a statement, gain infamy, and go out in their own blaze of glory. What needs to be done about these mass shootings? Nothing. I hate to sound like that guy, but it's not our problem. There is no statistic in existence (and trust me, the alphabet agencies try) that shows with any significance level that gun ownership among law abiding citizens increases gun violence. What the hacks at Everytown, Giffords, etc. do (and their pals in the media) is look at broad, macro-statistics and extrapolate to isolated problems. Not how that works. In a recent lawsuit filed against the state of New Jersey, the judge specifically asked "Is there a correlation between legal gun ownership and violence?" And the bro from the AGs office said "no." It's not our problem in the same way drunk driving isn't our problem.
Here's what we know to be fact:
-The killers in discussion pick soft targets. So much for "gun free zones."
-The past five events involved the killers reaching out for help, conveying a suicide wish, stating a desire for infamy, etc. A manifesto or two. In some cases, the police completely dropped the ball.
-They use the same weapons and tactics because they have admiration for the scum that preceded them and know it's a way to become a household name. "The shooter was using a Springfield M1A chambered in .308 Winchester" doesn't have the same ring to it.
-They purchased or likely purchased their gun legally per state rules.
-A history of mental illness, being bullied, etc.
Politicians, agency heads, and anti-gun nonprofits are interested in disarmament and gun control because it's politically valuable. They are not interested in anti-violence strategies, expanding mental health, or holding people accountable. They aren't interested in securing schools because it would be a political defeat, even if it did mean lives saved. You're dealing with people and a party that didn't express a morsel of sympathy or sorrow for what happened during the Afghanistan withdrawal. I can't see how any human can't be at least somewhat empathetic to the video of people falling from landing gears because that was a better option than living under the Taliban.
Where you're personally willing to compromise is up to you. But check the data first. Once you start digging and doing real journalistic/analysis type work, you'll find the violence is a fairly complex topic filled with numerous sociological factors (race, culture, income, etc.) that no one wants to address because they will inevitably be called an "ist" of sorts.
Again, I reiterate that most politicians are not human. They are machines designed to raise money, spend money, talk on tv show, and repeat. All the solutions from the anti-gun groups ultimately involve disarmament because it will never be enough for them. And their marketing strategy is to convince the public that by restricting arms to good people, and placing the burden of all this stuff on legal gun owners through meaningless restrictions, there will magically be no more gun violence. Effectively, they scapegoat the entire 2A community because they don't want to tackle the real, hard problems that will hurt feelings, cost money, and cost elections.
Here's what we know to be fact:
-The killers in discussion pick soft targets. So much for "gun free zones."
-The past five events involved the killers reaching out for help, conveying a suicide wish, stating a desire for infamy, etc. A manifesto or two. In some cases, the police completely dropped the ball.
-They use the same weapons and tactics because they have admiration for the scum that preceded them and know it's a way to become a household name. "The shooter was using a Springfield M1A chambered in .308 Winchester" doesn't have the same ring to it.
-They purchased or likely purchased their gun legally per state rules.
-A history of mental illness, being bullied, etc.
Politicians, agency heads, and anti-gun nonprofits are interested in disarmament and gun control because it's politically valuable. They are not interested in anti-violence strategies, expanding mental health, or holding people accountable. They aren't interested in securing schools because it would be a political defeat, even if it did mean lives saved. You're dealing with people and a party that didn't express a morsel of sympathy or sorrow for what happened during the Afghanistan withdrawal. I can't see how any human can't be at least somewhat empathetic to the video of people falling from landing gears because that was a better option than living under the Taliban.
Where you're personally willing to compromise is up to you. But check the data first. Once you start digging and doing real journalistic/analysis type work, you'll find the violence is a fairly complex topic filled with numerous sociological factors (race, culture, income, etc.) that no one wants to address because they will inevitably be called an "ist" of sorts.
Again, I reiterate that most politicians are not human. They are machines designed to raise money, spend money, talk on tv show, and repeat. All the solutions from the anti-gun groups ultimately involve disarmament because it will never be enough for them. And their marketing strategy is to convince the public that by restricting arms to good people, and placing the burden of all this stuff on legal gun owners through meaningless restrictions, there will magically be no more gun violence. Effectively, they scapegoat the entire 2A community because they don't want to tackle the real, hard problems that will hurt feelings, cost money, and cost elections.
Rockrivr1
NES Member
The key here is that it will not work and when it doesn't they will move on to something else instead of admitting they were wrong and reverse what they did. There's a reason crimes with guns has skyrocketed in Australia and UK since there bans. You'd think we'd learn something from that. Nope.
MaverickNH
NES Member
Guns were far more accessible in the past, but far fewer mass killings/school shootings occurred than today. So, why do more people resort to mass killings/school shootings today? Because it’s what we all read, hear and see everywhere, every day - virtually. The Left knew they were never going to ban guns as the news cycle dampened out anti-gun sentiment too quickly, so they redefined mass killings/school shootings to 4+ injured in a shooting (even if by broken glass or twisting an ankle) and any firearms offense on or near a school (even if a drug-deal gone bad Saturday night in a school parking lot between non-students). Now the gun violence new cycle is 24x7 - that it slows down on the weekends and holidays only shows the media’s manipulation.
Why just commit suicide in the basement when you can go out in a blaze of glory, taking others with you? Still, most still just commit suicide in the basement, but many more probably consider shooting up work, school, etc., even if only a very small number follow through with such plans. Suicides are up in absolute numbers and so are mass killings/school shootings.
The perils of a free society is that the press (media) is free to to do what is known to amplify mass killings/school shootings. The “Don’t Say Their Name” campaign, where the media voluntarily minimized information on killers and focused on victims, died when NYT decided in 2015 that anything goes to beat Trump. The Leftist genies are out of their bottles and will never go back. The only silencing and canceling to be done now is by the Left of Conservatives now, as the Left controls the media, regulators and finance.
We can’t afford enough mental health services to reach the very few who become mass killers/school shooters, as we’d have to treat tens of millions. And mental health professionals say they can’t spot potential killers with any confidence anyway.
Pre-crime surveillance of social media is a totalitarian solution that would “catch” millions in a partisan purge. There would be more dead from such a cure than from the illness.
Uniformed armed security and armed teachers/staff in schools would shrink the school shootings and drive killers to malls, parks and the workplace - or back to committing suicide in the basement. Almost anyone can kill many in minutes almost anywhere unless the site is a lockdown secure area with metal detectors, searches, monitored fences/walls/doors, etc.
Right now, the best option is to shoot back. We CAN put more uniformed armed security and armed teachers/staff in schools but we CANNOT disarm America, politically or practically.
Why just commit suicide in the basement when you can go out in a blaze of glory, taking others with you? Still, most still just commit suicide in the basement, but many more probably consider shooting up work, school, etc., even if only a very small number follow through with such plans. Suicides are up in absolute numbers and so are mass killings/school shootings.
The perils of a free society is that the press (media) is free to to do what is known to amplify mass killings/school shootings. The “Don’t Say Their Name” campaign, where the media voluntarily minimized information on killers and focused on victims, died when NYT decided in 2015 that anything goes to beat Trump. The Leftist genies are out of their bottles and will never go back. The only silencing and canceling to be done now is by the Left of Conservatives now, as the Left controls the media, regulators and finance.
We can’t afford enough mental health services to reach the very few who become mass killers/school shooters, as we’d have to treat tens of millions. And mental health professionals say they can’t spot potential killers with any confidence anyway.
Pre-crime surveillance of social media is a totalitarian solution that would “catch” millions in a partisan purge. There would be more dead from such a cure than from the illness.
Uniformed armed security and armed teachers/staff in schools would shrink the school shootings and drive killers to malls, parks and the workplace - or back to committing suicide in the basement. Almost anyone can kill many in minutes almost anywhere unless the site is a lockdown secure area with metal detectors, searches, monitored fences/walls/doors, etc.
Right now, the best option is to shoot back. We CAN put more uniformed armed security and armed teachers/staff in schools but we CANNOT disarm America, politically or practically.
SpaceCritter
NES Member
Ultimately, that really isn't even the point.
Didn't one of the Ma**h*** politicians say something like, "Self-help is discouraged" ??
Remember what the end-game is: a Chinese-style totalitarian bureaucracy FOR EVERYONE. ESPECIALLY the US. You cannot have that with strong, healthy, self-sufficient individuals; only masses of
Even the whole "eat ze bugs" thing: making someone eat a bug is a BULLYING move, just like a wedgie or a swirlie. There's even a delightful children's Christmas tune that mentions it:
The next level up is typically sexual assault: forcing the bullied to do something reprehensible, sodomy with (nightstick or whatever, or out-and-out rape.
The intention is to show who's in charge.
I wouldn't give a shit if I had a kid in school because I'm not a retard. My kid would have an exponentially greater chance of:
-dying on the way to or from school in a car accident or car vs ped
-dying because they were in a car and didnt wear a seatbelt
-dying because of a gang/bdc/crime/thug incident. (Exponentially more school age children die from simply being in some dump city where gang violence happens)
-dying of a drug overdose or some other bullshit involving drugs or alcohol (how many of you know a school shooting victim personally or one who was even IN a school that was
shot up? on the other hand it doesnt take much to find someone who had a kid who died of a Heroin/fent overdose these days).
-if female, getting raped
and on and on and on. (theres much better examples likely but I'm not going to write them all out. Look at CDC death stats by age for starters).
Terrorism and school shootings are a statistically insignifigant source of death despite all the media bullshit and hype designed to get eveyrone all white suburban Karen-braying and mad. It's just that the 24 hr news cycle has conditioned you and the karens to think that its some kind of a big deal. It really isn't.
School shootings are in a competition with under-18 covid deaths as being nearly irrelevant/insignificant in reality.
Quick googling shows that there are approximately 115,576 schools in america. This week, all or nearly all of them will not have a school shooting. The better part of like 50+ something MILLION children, will sit in these buildings for 6+ hours a day and not get shot or so much as hear a loud noise while in class. Despite all the media bullshit and karens crying, schools are on average probably on a per hour basis literally one of the safest places an average kid could ever be sitting for 6 hrs a day that isn't home.
Lets pretend for a moment that there was a school shooting once a month. (There isn't, though) The average wounded/death toll of these things isn't huge. They typically can't even kill more than a dozen people or so. Even if we had 12 people a month die that's basically 144 deaths a year, which is still probably way higher than most years.
During that same time period more "school aged children" WILL BE SHOT ON THE STREET in the city they live in or near, and may or may not die. But MSM doesnt care about that, cuz most of them are brown.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
(our MSM outlets are by far the biggest, most racist institutions in america. Americans IMHO aren't objectively racist to a degree that matters, but the news stations they watch certainly are. ) One nypost article I just looked at, said in one recent pre covid year 216 kids were shot in Chicago. Most of them probably werent shot inside a school. I get it though, you want it to stop because you tihnk it will make the braying gun control karens go away. And I would like it to stop too for the same reason, but I'm under no delusion that it hasn't been blown out of proportion.
Solutions? How about trying to fix the roots of the problem instead of just treating the symptom? The roots of these problems are a lot about what @richc discusses in his post. You want people to stop killing each other for stupid reasons you're going to have to get society and families to stop being defective. But nobody wants to talk about those things because its uncomfortable and "complicated" but if everyone just keeps humming while ignoring the two elephants in the room the elephants are going to keep raping the shit out of our society and
will go unchecked.
I dont entirely disagree on hardening schools. But not because of rubber lipping lanzas. But because of the possibility of a greater memetic threat. A handful of kids getting shot
sucks, but we would all collectively be in a world of hurt if some towels and a couple minivans came along and decided to pull a mumbai on a school. You could basically kiss all your
rights goodbye after that, after the karens start a braying national chorus of "save the orphans" grade singing and handwaving.
ETA: even the above though, is rapidly becoming a fading threat though. Not because we suppressed the towels from doing it, but because there are other more pervasive problems that are net greater damage than that stuff. Towels dont need to terrorize america, we're terrorizing ourselves. (look at covid response, as one example... that was more self induced terror than any jihadist could ever imagine. When covid was birthed, some Taliban commander instantly became jealous of Fauci in his ability to terrorize millions of people).
Last edited:
SpaceCritter
NES Member
![[wave]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/011.gif "Wave [wave]")
Does Sandy Hook Elementary count?I think a root of it is all in this nexus, Rich. I'll say its about 2 parent families, but you also have this thing now where people have no family anymore, whether its from drugs, or family dysfunction or whatever. It used to be that even if a kid was a poor ugly kid or whatever he or she might not have had friends but would have had family that looked out for them
unconditionally or nearly so. This stopped so many people from going off the rails, or at least they got support if they truly wanted to stay on the rails. These support systems and networks were better. Nowadays a lot of that stuff is shot to shit. The balancing forces that kept more vulnerable people out of trouble, whether its mentally or criminally, etc, or other things like substance abuse, etc, a lot of the "checks and balances" imposed by family, or even things like community etc are all gone. On top of that our mental healthcare system is
f***ed. So now we have Joe Ruberlip, his only family he knows (his mother) dies, and he basically exists marinating on his assigned medication with nobody monitoring him or anything other than maybe a caseworker a few times a year. and thats a BIG maybe. So you get all kinds of carnage from that....
Mesatchornug
NES Member
I'll be the exception that proves the rule...
Same - a friend's mother was their school councilor. Also, a college classmate was at Columbine.
Meanwhile, I have had several more friends/acquaintances who simply killed themselves. And I have known plenty of others who got themselves near enough on various chemicals.
Mesatchornug
NES Member
The system is way worse than that.
Everyone still talks about psychiatry through the lens of better living through chemistry providing a silver bullet solution, with mental health issues as simple "imbalances." The reality is that we really don't understand how brains work; what we know is that the chemistry is incredibly complicated. And we try to solve this complicated system by sending arbitrary* psychoactive compounds into our brain until things seem to suck less.
Many people are prescribed something and told this will fix it. A lot of prescribers are utter garbage at their jobs, so they don't monitor side effects; often they won't even mention the possibility.
Example: those horrorshow nightmares that fill your every sleeping hour (assuming you can sleep at all)? Yeah, they're not normal. They're also not uncommon when we pump you with this chemical that helps other people take the edge off. And by the way, if we decide to change track you might suffer various, "lovely" withdrawal symptoms.
Which is worse? How long do you test each new chemical before moving to the next? How long until you stop trying altogether?
And that all glazes over whether your protocol uses complementary talk therapy or tries to rely on drugs alone...and just how bad many therapists are generally.
* where arbitrary means, "others had some success with this; if it doesn't work, we'll cycle through all the others on the shelf"
richc
NES Member
I've had several family members decide they no long wanted to be on this planet. Both my father's brothers blew their brains out.
On my mother's side of the family addictions rule. Drugs and booze. No one has died yet but it's just a matter of time.
Certainly 1/2 of my friends today had major substance abuse problems in their lives. They stopped cold. No help. No rehab. They realized they were hurting people they cared for. I have huge respect for these guys.
I am sorry to hear about your friends at Sandy Hook and Columbine. That just sucks.
Rich
APFSDS
NES Member
Attachments
StevieP
NES Member
Your first mistake is thinking that it's government's job to fix every societal woe. It is not, never has been, and never will be.
Life would be significantly improved if the middle class could afford to have one parent stay at home and raise children.
Keep them off the internet as much as possible. Forums are poisoning their minds and giving them the false sense that their thoughts and behaviors are validated.
More time spent around other families and community. Less time in front of the TV,
Fart book, etc.
Problems always start in the home. But the way our current system works we pawn off our kids onto teachers making $15 an hour. They don’t care about your kids, and I don’t blame them. We come home too exhausted from work to actually listen and engage with our kids. We stick them in front of the TV just so we can have 20 minutes of personal time.
Keep them off the internet as much as possible. Forums are poisoning their minds and giving them the false sense that their thoughts and behaviors are validated.
More time spent around other families and community. Less time in front of the TV,
Fart book, etc.
Problems always start in the home. But the way our current system works we pawn off our kids onto teachers making $15 an hour. They don’t care about your kids, and I don’t blame them. We come home too exhausted from work to actually listen and engage with our kids. We stick them in front of the TV just so we can have 20 minutes of personal time.
Mesatchornug
NES Member
Your logical fallacy is begging the question
You presented a circular argument in which the conclusion was included in the premise.
yourlogicalfallacyis.com
Begging the question - Wikipedia
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/GettyImages-501830159-5c6dbc4cc9e77c0001f24f1a.jpg)
Logical Fallacies: Begging the Question
Begging the Question is the most basic and classic example of a Fallacy of Presumption. Discover an explanation of the phenomenon plus see examples.
What if your understanding is flawed?
What if you've asked the wrong question?
What if there's nothing to be done?
- or -
what if we learn from successes with teen suicide, copycat killings, and violence in public generally?
Stop glorifying killers.
Increase access to counseling services, while decreasing social pressure to decline them.
Trust people who already choose to carry to do the same at their workplace - even schools.
Lol they make a f*** of a lot more than $15 an hr but they're still largely not the reason kids get f***ed up today, it's literally not their job to make someones kid not be an
a**h***.
Lol if most kids were getting even that it wouldn't be such a problem. It's quite a bit worse than that with the sheer # of broken families. seemingly half the people I know don't even have their kids 50% of the time, or even if they do, lets face facts, its still increasing the probability of a shit show going on because the two parents cannot audit one another directly or back each other up anymore. And its worse if the kids are young.
chris_1001
NES Member
Spank your kids when they deserve it.
Turn off their video games and social media
Send them outside to go play with other kids after school and on weekends and do some fun stuff
Worked for me…
Turn off their video games and social media
Send them outside to go play with other kids after school and on weekends and do some fun stuff
Worked for me…
In God We Trust
NES Member
You have to look at the actual statistics and not the media hype. Yeah it’s a problem, but less so than so many other things that kill kids. Swimming pools are statistically way more dangerous.
The only answer is to have armed security or armed teachers in every school. That won’t happen though because the goal is to ban guns, not protect our kids.
The only answer is to have armed security or armed teachers in every school. That won’t happen though because the goal is to ban guns, not protect our kids.
End thread /
MaverickNH
NES Member
There is something we can all do about mass shootings
bearingarms.com
Rare or not, the reality is that is the media are not going to let mass killings/school shooters drop from the headlines - it’s part of the gun, bibles, masks, abortion, immigration, gender identity, racism, climate change, etc. wedge they drive between Americans. Risk is severity of hazard x likelihood of occurrence, which is way at the bottom as drgrant notes, but ignoring them won’t make them (the killers, the media and the Leftists) go away. If there is an urge to "do something" more gun control is more people control, so better options need to be adopted, even if for an insignificant risk.
The solution below (media dialing back) ain’t never gonna happen. Next solution - shoot them sooner more often.
“We could meaningfully decrease gun violence if both sides were simply willing to give up their cheap rhetoric. How do I know this? Because according to the American Psychological Association, the individuals who become mass shooters are often directly seeking the media infamy we continue to grant them.
Western New Mexico University Psychologist Jennifer B. Johnston has found in her research that mass shooters tend to be in the midst of rampant depression, social isolation, and pathological narcissism; they are in part driven to such heinous crime by their desire for national attention.
And it is undeniable that the wall-to-wall coverage in the wake of these mass shootings—coverage that is amplified and jacked up by partisan political attacks that instrumentalize the shooters’ names and identities—makes the crime all the more tantalizing for these mass murderers.
“We find that a cross-cutting trait among many profiles of mass shooters is desire for fame in correspondence to the emergence of widespread 24-hour news coverage on cable news programs, and the rise of the internet,” Johnston has said. “If the mass media and social media enthusiasts make a pact to no longer share, reproduce or retweet the names, faces, detailed histories or long-winded statements of killers, we could see a dramatic reduction in mass shootings in one to two years.”
bigbravehog
NES Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
- Messages
- 6,470
- Likes
- 16,897
bigbravehog
NES Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
- Messages
- 6,470
- Likes
- 16,897
They would move on to gun free zones, so to answer your question: yes
556USER
NES Member
Abso...f..ing...lutely, Obama set back race relations about 40 years. We had been making slow but steady progress before ocrapa. We have never been the same since.
fencer
NES Member
Kid bites his pop tart into a gun shape...
"Drop your weapon! You have 5 seconds to comply."
fencer
NES Member
So, if I ruled the world, the first thing I would do is launch a voluntary armed staff program.
Any teacher that was willing, offer a month long training program that includes trauma treatment, CPR and first aid, a rigorous background check and psyche screening. As well as firearms training and tactics. And I would offer a monetary incentive like 10k a year and pay then to take the course in the summer. Do it right in the school while it is empty.
School shooters would think twice about attacking a school when some 60 year old kindergarten teacher makes the news for emptying her Glock 19 into the next ass hole that shoots through the doors. Even if some schools had no one trained, shooters wouldn't know that.
Any teacher that was willing, offer a month long training program that includes trauma treatment, CPR and first aid, a rigorous background check and psyche screening. As well as firearms training and tactics. And I would offer a monetary incentive like 10k a year and pay then to take the course in the summer. Do it right in the school while it is empty.
School shooters would think twice about attacking a school when some 60 year old kindergarten teacher makes the news for emptying her Glock 19 into the next ass hole that shoots through the doors. Even if some schools had no one trained, shooters wouldn't know that.
Similar threads
