• 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?

1. Family values need to come back in a big way. Two parents in the home and a stable home life. 2. Better support for mental health. 3. Social media and national media is telling everyone they should be miserable so they are because they’re gullible, plus the media turns these coward a**h***s into celebrities (f*** you Rolling Stone and your cover issue of Zhokar Tsarnaev). Get rid of it. 4. People are miserable and don’t appreciate what they have - we need something big to happen to change perspectives on a massive scale - like Holocaust big. 5. They’re never going away - democrats fundraise and saber rattle over tragedy, and politicians as a whole are afraid of an armed populace.
 
#1 adress the mental health issues in America.

LOL. This is bullshit. some anecdata: Black women generally have the least access to mental health, but I've never heard of a black woman doing a mass shooting. White men have the the most access, but most mass shootings are done by white men. So this doesn't hold up.

Also, "mental health issues" is such a huge term it encompasses like half the population. "mass shootings" are incredibly rare compared to "people with mental health issues"

Also, aside from simply saying, "anyone who would do a mass shooting has mental health issues", there's not a great correlation between mass shooters and mental health issues. You're better off with "white" or "male".

#2 police in every school…everyday

I would add:
#3 Restore families in America. Kids whose two parents are involved in their lives don't grow up to become mass shooters.

Do you have any evidence to support that statement? Is there actually data that shows single parent homes produce more violent/dangerous people? I don't think there is.

Given that the divorce rate in the US is like 50%, you're tarring an awful lot of people with that very broad brush.
 
1. Family values need to come back in a big way. Two parents in the home and a stable home life. 2. Better support for mental health. 3. Social media and national media is telling everyone they should be miserable so they are because they’re gullible, plus the media turns these coward a**h***s into celebrities (f*** you Rolling Stone and your cover issue of Zhokar Tsarnaev). Get rid of it. 4. People are miserable and don’t appreciate what they have - we need something big to happen to change perspectives on a massive scale - like Holocaust big. 5. They’re never going away - democrats fundraise and saber rattle over tragedy, and politicians as a whole are afraid of an armed populace.
LOL. This is bullshit. some anecdata: Black women generally have the least access to mental health, but I've never heard of a black woman doing a mass shooting. White men have the the most access, but most mass shootings are done by white men. So this doesn't hold up.

Also, "mental health issues" is such a huge term it encompasses like half the population. "mass shootings" are incredibly rare compared to "people with mental health issues"

Also, aside from simply saying, "anyone who would do a mass shooting has mental health issues", there's not a great correlation between mass shooters and mental health issues. You're better off with "white" or "male".





Do you have any evidence to support that statement? Is there actually data that shows single parent homes produce more violent/dangerous people? I don't think there is.

Given that the divorce rate in the US is like 50%, you're tarring an awful lot of people with that very broad brush.
There actually is evidence that single mother households create more criminals
 
There actually is evidence that single mother households create more criminals
Yeah... this. I thought it was obvious to literally everyone but I guess not.

To be clear though: no one is saying that single parent household automatically equals criminal. But the trend is certainly there.
 
I'm 99% of the time on your team. Forgive me today as I pick a couple nits...
[...]access to mental health, but[...]
This one is just a personal pet peeve. Mental is an adjective modifying the noun health. We would never talk about access to health, but to healthcare, or other related services. In the same way that we would all benefit from turning conversations to gun-owners' rights, rather than gun rights, I wish we'd all do better in conversations about mental health.

most mass shootings are done by white men.
This hinges on how we define mass shooting. If we're talking about media-friendly spree killings (e.g. school shootings as we understand them) then this is probably true. If we're holding to the traditional statutory definition, then that skews heavily towards young men of color in urban areas.

So this doesn't hold up.

Also, "mental health issues" is such a huge term it encompasses like half the population. "mass shootings" are incredibly rare compared to "people with mental health issues"

Also, aside from simply saying, "anyone who would do a mass shooting has mental health issues", there's not a great correlation between mass shooters and mental health issues.
See? 99% same team.

Do you have any evidence to support that statement? Is there actually data that shows single parent homes produce more violent/dangerous people? I don't think there is.
I think there's some risk of correlation fallacy here. Again, if we're looking at the FBI definition, then we find a significant number of children of single mothers taking part in gang-related activity that precedes their involvement with those statutory mass shootings. There's probably very little scholarly research, and even less that can point towards cause WRT spree killers, but there is quite a bit related to crime, generally..

With spree killers, that final report I cling to so bitterly would certainly disagree that we can track it to single mothers. We probably can point to poor parenting, broadly, but like the mental health conversation, it's surely too complex to simply handwave at as causative.
 
LOL. This is bullshit. some anecdata: Black women generally have the least access to mental health, but I've never heard of a black woman doing a mass shooting. White men have the the most access, but most mass shootings are done by white men. So this doesn't hold up.

Also, "mental health issues" is such a huge term it encompasses like half the population. "mass shootings" are incredibly rare compared to "people with mental health issues"

Also, aside from simply saying, "anyone who would do a mass shooting has mental health issues", there's not a great correlation between mass shooters and mental health issues. You're better off with "white" or "male".
Just because you have never heard of it happening, doesnt mean it doesnt happen

IMG_0144.jpeg
 
Yeah... this. I thought it was obvious to literally everyone but I guess not.

To be clear though: no one is saying that single parent household automatically equals criminal. But the trend is certainly there.

The point is that we need data before we can make policy. And it's not kosher to precrime anyone based on "trends" that involve other people.
 
Why do people assume there is an "answer" for this shit? The world is a brutal place and shit happens and all you can do is put yourself in the most advantageous position you can where you can prepare for it if the time comes. We are actually living in the most peaceful time in our human history...that should tell you something.
 
Last edited:
The point is that we need data before we can make policy. And it's not kosher to precrime anyone based on "trends" that involve other people.
No one is "precriming" anyone. Restoring two parent families is a general net positive for society that would result in lower crime overall - I'm not calling anyone specific a criminal just because of their family situation.
 
No one is "precriming" anyone. Restoring two parent families is a general net positive for society that would result in lower crime overall - I'm not calling anyone specific a criminal just because of their family situation.
I don't disagree, but in a "what can be done [by the government]????" discussion, things have to be quantifiable.
 
I don't disagree, but in a "what can be done [by the government]????" discussion, things have to be quantifiable.
Why? Besides, I don't work for a think tank, I don't have specific data. I can think of specific policy proposals though.
 
Why? Besides, I don't work for a think tank, I don't have specific data. I can think of specific policy proposals though.

I don't like public policy based on feels, hunches, or perceptions.

Honestly, I don't like it much better based on data, but if it's going to happen (and it is), I want someone to be able to point to whether or not we can measure the effectiveness of the policy. We can only do that if we can make valid comparisons, and data's how we do that most easily.

I'm not asking you for the data. I'm mostly pointing out that it needs to exist somewhere before we can make responsible policy choices.
 
Can't ban the internet, but it has changed the whole playing field. The ease of bullying is way worse than when I was a kid. And whipping up an extremist is so easy now, too.

No clue how to fix that, but it's easier than ever to send someone who is borderline over the edge on any topic.
 
I'm 99% of the time on your team. Forgive me today as I pick a couple nits...

This one is just a personal pet peeve. Mental is an adjective modifying the noun health. We would never talk about access to health, but to healthcare, or other related services. In the same way that we would all benefit from turning conversations to gun-owners' rights, rather than gun rights, I wish we'd all do better in conversations about mental health.

Yea, but... man... language is hard. Being 100% precise all the time sometimes takes away from communication.

I'm pretty sure nobody was confused by my use of those words.

...

Actually... I take that back. I can totally imagine someone misreading that to mean something insane like, "black women are mentally unstable" or some bullshit. I'll be more careful in the future.



This hinges on how we define mass shooting. If we're talking about media-friendly spree killings (e.g. school shootings as we understand them) then this is probably true. If we're holding to the traditional statutory definition, then that skews heavily towards young men of color in urban areas.

Good point. I was thinking of the kind of mass shootings that make white suburban people want to ban guns, not kind that happens to "other people". (people other than their tribe)

I think there's some risk of correlation fallacy here. Again, if we're looking at the FBI definition, then we find a significant number of children of single mothers taking part in gang-related activity that precedes their involvement with those statutory mass shootings. There's probably very little scholarly research, and even less that can point towards cause WRT spree killers, but there is quite a bit related to crime, generally..

How over-represented are single-parent-household criminals? I honestly don't know the answer. I'm inclined to disregard that as a signifcant contributing factor simply because there's SO MANY single parent households in the US. Like saying "grey cars are overrepresented in collisions" is stupid because (it seems like) 90% of cars are some color that could be described as "grey" Even if EVERY SINGLE CRIMINAL came from a single parent household, the number of people from single parent households who are NOT criminals would make the metric basically meaningless. And we know for sure that there's a lot of shitbags whose parents stayed together.

And... just to extend that train of thought: How many people get stuck in abusive two-parent households because the non-abusive parent can't leave for financial reasons? e.g.: health care, rent, basic income, etc. One might argue (I would argue) that single payer healthcare would go a long way to breaking up f***ed up households, which would likely lead to healthier (less violent) children. A single parent healthy household is surely better than an abusive two parent one.

And furthermore, if two parent households are good idea, it's insane to force a woman who is not in a committed relationship to bear and raise a child by herself.

With spree killers, that final report I cling to so bitterly would certainly disagree that we can track it to single mothers. We probably can point to poor parenting, broadly, but like the mental health conversation, it's surely too complex to simply handwave at as causative.

Exactly!
 
There's been a change in society that's driving this. I think some of the posts above are contributing factors. The failure of our mental health care systems. Loss of family values (i.e. dinner at the table with the family). Psychopharmaceuticals that have unknown and dangerous side effects.

But I also blame the loss of the two parent household. It's damn hard raising kids with both parents. With only one parent who likely needs to work and raise the kids, it's damn near impossible.

I'll also put some emphasis on the widening gap between the haves and have nots. The have nots, by necessity, often live in the poorest of neighborhoods where rents are cheapest. These neighborhoods are often infested with gangs, drug use is rampant, and the pressure on kids to take a bad path is enormous. Oh, and these neighborhoods often have the absolute worst of schools. The education is awful. How the hell does any kid escape that environment unscathed?

Society has changed, and not for the better. In some areas there is zero value on a human life. It's the law of the jungle.

I feel the same way. Society has fundamentally changed in the last 50 years; probably for a variety of complex reasons. I don’t claim to know the answer but it’s obvious to me. When I grew up the guns were in the closet corner and ammo was on the top shelf. No locks were needed. It was understood what they were capable of and we respected our parents and had a good sense of right and wrong.

Sadly, we are at a point where it is necessary to tighten security and harden our schools to eliminate the obvious holes. Simple things can make a big difference. Having glass doors with wire in the would have either stopped or slowed down thenNashville school shooter. I don’t think that we should turn them into jails but some of the obvious holes can be eliminated for short money.
 
I understand something needs to be done with these mass shootings but how do they go about doing it without violating our rights and Constitution? Seems no one knows the answers and we know the lawmakers are just trying to keep their votes intact. Ever since Trump decided to run for president back in 2014-15, the country became more divided and right now it is definitely at its worse. The Dums and Repubs need to put party aside and start fixing everything in this country.
Start building more prisons, longer sentences, repeat offenders get life, no parole. No more treating hardcore criminals like human beings. If they want to act like wild animals, then treat them that way.
Re-open all the mental institutions that the liberals closed back in the 80s and 90s. The mentally ill can be as dangerous as any other criminal. Some need to be locked up for the safety of the general public.
 
LOL. This is bullshit. some anecdata: Black women generally have the least access to mental health, but I've never heard of a black woman doing a mass shooting. White men have the the most access, but most mass shootings are done by white men. So this doesn't hold up.

Also, "mental health issues" is such a huge term it encompasses like half the population. "mass shootings" are incredibly rare compared to "people with mental health issues"

Also, aside from simply saying, "anyone who would do a mass shooting has mental health issues", there's not a great correlation between mass shooters and mental health issues. You're better off with "white" or "male".





Do you have any evidence to support that statement? Is there actually data that shows single parent homes produce more violent/dangerous people? I don't think there is.

Given that the divorce rate in the US is like 50%, you're tarring an awful lot of people with that very broad brush.
I agree with most of this. However, I think the "single parent home thing" has been validated by some statistical evidence with one key modifier that doesn't get mentioned: income levels and, of course, culture as it relates to proximity of violence. My hypothesis is that the closer you are to violence, the more likely you are to become victim to it and victim=victim of violence and/or someone that becomes violent in response to your surroundings.

I grew up in the projects in Chelsea, MA until I was 16. My dad got hooked on drugs when I was young, did a bunch of violent stuff to myself and my mom, and was in prison by the time I was six. We ended up in the projects while my mother went to school and worked two jobs. When she got a "good job," the housing authority takes a bigger chunk of your paycheck, so you can never really save as a mom w/ two kids.

If you know anything about Chelsea, it was one of the most violent cities in America for years (including during my childhood and teenage years). Mostly because there was a tremendous surge of gang violence mixed with a very tiny footprint (just over 1.5 square miles).

By the time I was 10 years old, I had been held at knifepoint twice (once for two dollars, once because an older guy thought it was funny). I saw my first clinically dead body before I was 12 (and who knows how many other ODs that ended up dying). By the time I was 15, I had been a few feet away from walking into gang related gun violence, had a firearm pulled on me because some gang member thought I was another gang rival from afar, and had been at a birthday party where someone shots had come through a window. Many of the kids from Chelsea I attended high school with ended up in prison, including murder and attempted murder. More than I can count for firearms and drug charges, all before the age of 21. These are just the people I knew of directly, on a first-name basis.

Numerous opportunities as a kid and teenager to end up in a bad spot, most of the time just through wrong place and wrong time. I wasn't hanging out with the "bad kids," but every kid was inevitably a "bad kid" just by proximity. I walked the edge many times, but never crossed over, and luckily no one ever pushed me over.

Why did I turn out different that 99% of my peers of the same age? For one, I had a good extended family including uncles that were cops/firefighters. But more than anything, I was taught right from wrong, it was constantly enforced, and my mom set a good example of overcoming adversity by working hard and non-stop while the other people living in the projects were scamming the system, working under the table, lying about income, and producing more children for more benefits. We were driving a beat down Buick with elastic bands holding the seat up while our neighbors were buying new cars, some on a yearly basis, even though they had "no income."

In other words, even though I grew up raised in the projects w/ a single mother, I had numerous chances to escape violent activity by proxy because my mom and extended family put an emphasis on me forming friendships and relationships with those outside of where I was living. For just about everyone else living their, they didn't have that. And while growing up this way sucks, I think it gave me many lessons and a level of resilience I wouldn't have had otherwise. And looking back, some of my early childhood friends diverged in their teenage years because they weren't just exposed to a violent lifestyle, they were expected to thrive in it.

So, there certainly is something to single motherhood and violence. But it's mostly because where single motherhood dumps you off in life, which is around other single moms, in low-income, high-violent areas. Even if you've landed there through no fault of your own (as in my case), the dark side of the force is constantly pulling you in one direction, and it takes a crazy combination of will power, determination, luck, and support to not fall into a trap.
 
Start building more prisons, longer sentences, repeat offenders get life, no parole. No more treating hardcore criminals like human beings. If they want to act like wild animals, then treat them that way.
Re-open all the mental institutions that the liberals closed back in the 80s and 90s. The mentally ill can be as dangerous as any other criminal. Some need to be locked up for the safety of the general public.
My dad was sentenced to 10 years in prison for numerous charges of sexual assault on children. He was out in 7. There are people spending more time than this in prison today because they got caught with a dime bag one too many times. Within a year of his release to a state paid halfway/rehab house, he tracked down my mother at her work and tried killing her. Didn't go back to prison despite being on parole.
 
I agree with most of this. However, I think the "single parent home thing" has been validated by some statistical evidence with one key modifier that doesn't get mentioned: income levels and, of course, culture as it relates to proximity of violence. My hypothesis is that the closer you are to violence, the more likely you are to become victim to it and victim=victim of violence and/or someone that becomes violent in response to your surroundings.

I grew up in the projects in Chelsea, MA until I was 16. My dad got hooked on drugs when I was young, did a bunch of violent stuff to myself and my mom, and was in prison by the time I was six. We ended up in the projects while my mother went to school and worked two jobs. When she got a "good job," the housing authority takes a bigger chunk of your paycheck, so you can never really save as a mom w/ two kids.

If you know anything about Chelsea, it was one of the most violent cities in America for years (including during my childhood and teenage years). Mostly because there was a tremendous surge of gang violence mixed with a very tiny footprint (just over 1.5 square miles).

By the time I was 10 years old, I had been held at knifepoint twice (once for two dollars, once because an older guy thought it was funny). I saw my first clinically dead body before I was 12 (and who knows how many other ODs that ended up dying). By the time I was 15, I had been a few feet away from walking into gang related gun violence, had a firearm pulled on me because some gang member thought I was another gang rival from afar, and had been at a birthday party where someone shots had come through a window. Many of the kids from Chelsea I attended high school with ended up in prison, including murder and attempted murder. More than I can count for firearms and drug charges, all before the age of 21. These are just the people I knew of directly, on a first-name basis.

Numerous opportunities as a kid and teenager to end up in a bad spot, most of the time just through wrong place and wrong time. I wasn't hanging out with the "bad kids," but every kid was inevitably a "bad kid" just by proximity. I walked the edge many times, but never crossed over, and luckily no one ever pushed me over.

Why did I turn out different that 99% of my peers of the same age? For one, I had a good extended family including uncles that were cops/firefighters. But more than anything, I was taught right from wrong, it was constantly enforced, and my mom set a good example of overcoming adversity by working hard and non-stop while the other people living in the projects were scamming the system, working under the table, lying about income, and producing more children for more benefits. We were driving a beat down Buick with elastic bands holding the seat up while our neighbors were buying new cars, some on a yearly basis, even though they had "no income."

In other words, even though I grew up raised in the projects w/ a single mother, I had numerous chances to escape violent activity by proxy because my mom and extended family put an emphasis on me forming friendships and relationships with those outside of where I was living. For just about everyone else living their, they didn't have that. And while growing up this way sucks, I think it gave me many lessons and a level of resilience I wouldn't have had otherwise. And looking back, some of my early childhood friends diverged in their teenage years because they weren't just exposed to a violent lifestyle, they were expected to thrive in it.

So, there certainly is something to single motherhood and violence. But it's mostly because where single motherhood dumps you off in life, which is around other single moms, in low-income, high-violent areas. Even if you've landed there through no fault of your own (as in my case), the dark side of the force is constantly pulling you in one direction, and it takes a crazy combination of will power, determination, luck, and support to not fall into a trap.

This is an awesome example of how it can go wrong, and how it can go right.

It looks a lot like it's an economic problem. We have a shitty support system and f***ed up incentives, so once you're in a shitty situation it's really hard to get out of. It requires a great deal of help from extended family, and is basically impossible by yourself.

This is a great argument for better social services. Yea, some people are going to game the system to take advantage, but I don't really care if it means that more people can get out of poverty and *don't* turn to crime/drugs or just get stuck in a repeating cycle.

Universal health care, free daycare, school vouchers so it's possible to separate your kids from the ones who are in gangs, personal exemption on taxes that is meaningful, more progressive tax rates above that so there's never a disincentive to work/save, etc.
 
I had started another thread. There cannot possibly be "an" answer.

 
The country became more divided during the eight years of Obama‘s presidency which is the opposite of what voters thought would happen by voting for the first black president.
Sorry ! Clinton was the first black president !!!! :mad:
 
I know it's an old cliché, but this country has gone to Hell. There is very little hope for a brighter future. Not that things can't be turned around, but the way we are force-fed doom, gloom, division, violence, etc by the media (both social and legacy), I'm pretty sure these events are going to Halen more and more.
 
This is an awesome example of how it can go wrong, and how it can go right.

It looks a lot like it's an economic problem. We have a shitty support system and f***ed up incentives, so once you're in a shitty situation it's really hard to get out of. It requires a great deal of help from extended family, and is basically impossible by yourself.

This is a great argument for better social services. Yea, some people are going to game the system to take advantage, but I don't really care if it means that more people can get out of poverty and *don't* turn to crime/drugs or just get stuck in a repeating cycle.

Universal health care, free daycare, school vouchers so it's possible to separate your kids from the ones who are in gangs, personal exemption on taxes that is meaningful, more progressive tax rates above that so there's never a disincentive to work/save, etc.
I agree with your assessment and expansion on social services. Unfortunately, it's difficult to politically advocate for such things and not also be aligning yourself with politicians and leaders who also want to chip away at your individual liberties and freedoms, too (2A included but also not exclusively). I was in a focus group once by a polling org and they were dumbfounded that two of us (out of 18) thought the MA gun laws were screwy and we still thought things like expanded healthcare were also good things. It breaks the algorithm.
 
Back
Top Bottom