The rise of mass shootings

[Twilight Hue]

This discussion is about the possible reasons why mass shootings are happening.

I wonder where it all went wrong?

Back during and before the 1980's. It was common for people to leave their doors and windows unlocked or open. It was common even to have gun racks in pickup trucks with 2-3 guns in them loaded 24 hours per day. I knew as a child not to use them without a parent around.

Mass shootings were uncommon in those days and gun control laws were extremely loose compared to what it is today. So what has happened since then? Gun control has become more strict yet shootings continue to happen. So there must be some other reason why people feel the need to go on shooting sprees.

What is your thoughts on the reason why mass shootings have become an issue in the last 30-40years?

Horrible irresponsible parenting and abandoned children left to take care of themselves with little or no oversight. AKA latchkey children.

People were warned that the breakdown of the nuclear family would lead to more unstable children growing into unstable adults for a large extent.

 

[Enoch07]

So, an angry American wants to show the world that nobody will tread on him - he's not taking guff from anybody - and he takes out the school or country music concert or night club.

Sorry but that is nonsensical.

 

[savagewind]

Sorry but that is nonsensical.

Shooting into a crowd isn't sensical

 

[Enoch07]

Shooting into a crowd isn't sensical

True

But that poster insisted Americans shoot other Americans because we don't want other Americans "treading on us". Which is nonsensical.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sorry but that is nonsensical.

I notice that anti-gun types who don't understand arguments for gun rights, will
see our perspective as nonsense. And they respond with insane misinterpretations
of our views. Is it mischief or ignorance? Hard to tell at times.

 

[fantome profane]

This discussion is about the possible reasons why mass shootings are happening.

I wonder where it all went wrong?

It certainly is an interesting question. One problem is that in the US it is against the law for the government to even study the issue. It is very hard to find a solution to a problem if you are not allowed to research it. But the “Dickey amendment” (a very appropriate name if I may say so) prevents any research into this question by government agencies.

 

[Revoltingest]

It seems that the Dickey Amendment doesn't really prohibit gun violence research.
Another part of the spending bill did that job.
Dickey Amendment (1996) - Wikipedia
In United States politics, the Dickey Amendment is a provision first inserted as a rider into the 1996 federal government omnibus spending bill which mandated that "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control."[1] In the same spending bill, Congress earmarked $2.6 million from the CDC's budget, the exact amount that had previously been allocated to the agency for firearms research the previous year, for traumatic brain injury-related research.[2]
:
n a 2012 op-ed, Dickey and Rosenberg argued that the CDC should be able to research gun violence,[6] and Dickey has since said that he regrets his role in stopping the CDC from researching gun violence,[7] saying he simply didn't want to "let any of those dollars go to gun control advocacy."[8]

 

[dfnj]

Trained officers hit their targets around 15-25% of the time. That isn't even taking into consideration suppressive fire. Thanks, but I'll keep my three 30rd mags for the AR and two 14rd for the .40. Now, if that isn't enough I'll concede I'm in a real bad spot.


Machine guns are heavily restricted. Semi-automatic AR-15s are not machine guns.

Police officers would obviously have more advanced weaponry. We are talking regulations as public policy and safety. What do you recommend, do nothing?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Rather, I'd suggest that the increasing partisanship and political discord is another symptom of the rot.

It's a bit of a chicken/egg thing, I'd say.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Trained officers hit their targets around 15-25% of the time. That isn't even taking into consideration suppressive fire. Thanks, but I'll keep my three 30rd mags for the AR and two 14rd for the .40. Now, if that isn't enough I'll concede I'm in a real bad spot.

Serious question. Under what POSSIBLE circumstances do you anticipate as a civilian where you will need either 90 rounds or to provide suppression fire?

 

[Shad]

Regulating shots per minute should solve the problem and a maximum of 6 bullets per magazine should be enough for people to protect themselves.

That could be problematic for hunting certain animals. My brother has had to use multiple shots to put down a moose when his first shot didn't disable nor trigger a flight reaction. Bears can react in the same way. 10 seconds can be a long time if using the numbers you have posted.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

That could be problematic for hunting certain animals. My brother has had to use multiple shots to put down a moose when his first shot didn't disable nor trigger a flight reaction. Bears can react in the same way. 10 seconds can be a long time if using the numbers you have posted.

6 rounds not enough to take down a moose or bear? I've never hunted either of those, but I find that problematic.

 

[Shad]

6 rounds not enough to take down a moose or bear? I've never hunted either of those, but I find that problematic.

I was talking about rounds per min not capacity hence "10 seconds is a long time". His rifles are low capacity anyways.

The slash he was using created the situation. Sure poor choice given hindsight

What type of rounds per minute did you have in mind if I am far off?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

By all means do more, but it needs to be a primary aim and objective in schools to identify at-risk individuals and to be trained to act for the best in as many cases as possible. Psychology pros (and where necessary psychiatrists) should be assigned to groups of schools to deliver pro-care.
I think there should be a lesson in sociology which addesses all of these issues including IT harassment victimisation and bullying, together with IT and other privacy laws.

Surely........ ?

My experience as a teacher is that schools too often became social engineering tools.
Teachers are a pretty mixed bag in terms of their ability to even deliver what they are trained and paid to deliver, let alone being able to identify and deal with mass shooters.
Combine that with the large number of shootings in the US, and the relatively small number in places like my homeland, and I think there is a risk that 'schools/education' gets treated like a fix when it should at most be a small part of an overall plan.

Even when this particular boy was reported as a risk, for example, what was done?

 

[oldbadger]

My experience as a teacher is that schools too often became social engineering tools.

Of course they do!
The absolutely most crucial centre for human-socialising preparation is in the large groups of children....... in schools.
That's why 'learn-at-home' licenses can sometimes produce more academically able and intellectual but less socialised children.

Teachers are a pretty mixed bag in terms of their ability to even deliver what they are trained and paid to deliver, let alone being able to identify and deal with mass shooters.

Which is why I disagree with expecting teachers to identify and deal with any killers.

Combine that with the large number of shootings in the US, and the relatively small number in places like my homeland, and I think there is a risk that 'schools/education' gets treated like a fix when it should at most be a small part of an overall plan.

Yes, but schools tend to be the places where groups of minors combine together and bond, and in that environs the children that for various reasons are unable to integrate can tend to get estranged further, and harassed more, and victimised traumatically. This can lead to mindsets that fixate upon retaliation in various forms and actions. The reason why mass shooting don't happen in Oz and UK is because youths can't get a gun so easily. You still have the problems.

So this severe problem is beyond teacher briefs and skills, and Psychologists, Therapists, Counselors and even Psychiatrists should be available to help. All teachers would need to do is report instances where they believe that such needs might exist.

Even when this particular boy was reported as a risk, for example, what was done?

A kid reported a kid.
Where on earth were the teachers when this youth was falling out of the human social grouping, or being isolated in any way?
I've even known teachers to make fun (to the class!) about surviving suicides that are still in hospital. The 'Oh well, she's done it again!' stuff, and yet that teacher survived all the way through to retirement.

Teachers, all teachers, need to receive basic training in the identification of pupils that are falling out of the grouping, bonding conditions so that professional people can approach, communicate, counsel...... specially.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I was talking about rounds per min not capacity hence "10 seconds is a long time". His rifles are low capacity anyways.

The slash he was using created the situation. Sure poor choice given hindsight

What type of rounds per minute did you have in mind if I am far off?

I was thinking more about magazine size, sorry. Like, if you have a 5 round mag, fire them as fast as you like, but then you have to swap out.

 

[Enoch07]

It certainly is an interesting question. One problem is that in the US it is against the law for the government to even study the issue. It is very hard to find a solution to a problem if you are not allowed to research it. But the “Dickey amendment” (a very appropriate name if I may say so) prevents any research into this question by government agencies.

Its only illegal for the CDC to study the issue. Which is the only branch liberals want to study it.

 

[Curious George]

Its only illegal for the CDC to study the issue. Which is the only branch liberals want to study it.

We must be fair in our evaluations. While the CDC is prohibited from using funds to create studies that support gun regulation, there can certainly be a chilling effect on all gun violence research as a result. If that is the argument that is being made, we should listen to the argument, and, if true, perhaps we can find a better worded law.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

This discussion is about the possible reasons why mass shootings are happening.

I wonder where it all went wrong?

Back during and before the 1980's. It was common for people to leave their doors and windows unlocked or open. It was common even to have gun racks in pickup trucks with 2-3 guns in them loaded 24 hours per day. I knew as a child not to use them without a parent around.

Mass shootings were uncommon in those days and gun control laws were extremely loose compared to what it is today. So what has happened since then? Gun control has become more strict yet shootings continue to happen. So there must be some other reason why people feel the need to go on shooting sprees.

What is your thoughts on the reason why mass shootings have become an issue in the last 30-40years?

People are crazy and you can't always predict what they're going to do, especially when they have access to weapons designed to efficiently kill dozens of people.

Really, the very idea that you can somehow "get the root cause" of mass shootings and "do something" about that is hilarious to me. You never see this brought up with suicide bombers or your run-of-the-mill serial killer. But as soon as guns are involved, suddenly we have to stop looking at the actual, DIRECT cause of death and take a step back to think about how to solve the broad, far-reaching and impossible to solve issues surrounding the reasons why people randomly want to kill other people.

Maybe start with accepting the fact that psychopaths who want to kill people will always exist, and they can happen randomly with absolutely no direct or inteventionable cause, and maybe in said instances it's a good idea to keep such people away from automatic firearms.

 

[Enoch07]

Really, the very idea that you can somehow "get the root cause" of mass shootings and "do something" about that is hilarious to me.

Nobody said anything about a root cause. There is no silver bullet to fix this problem. I believe it is a combination of complex issues is the cause, @Epic Beard Man listed one of the causes. In order to fix that alone is an insanely complex issue of solving poverty, segregation, education, and elitism/racism. @Mister Emu also pointed to part of the problem which also a complex multifaceted issue to solve. Psycopaths of course are an issue as well. But it would be just foolish to blame solely one of these and expect to fix the problem as a whole.