The rise of mass shootings

[Curious George]

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.

And cars. And planes. And trains. And chemicals. And... well you get the point.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

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.

Seems fair - guess I jumped the gun a bit with my argument. I just tend to find a lot of discussions of this type tend to lean heavily into that way of thinking.

 

[Shad]

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.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Mister Emu]

What do you recommend, do nothing?

Better background checks with more information sharing and an automated NICS website for private sellers to run checks on. Fight the social and moral decay of the last 5-6 decades. More investment into all aspects of the mental health realm.

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

Anticipate, or prepared for? I am prepared for a home invasion by multiple perpetrators. I am prepared to respond to a riot; one Korean-American in the L.A. riots said he expended 500 rounds into the ground or air while driving rioters away.

You never see this brought up with suicide bombers or your run-of-the-mill serial killer.

You do, you see people all of the time talking about how we have to fight radicalization and the "triad" of psychopathic behavior is well known.

 

[dfnj]

Better background checks with more information sharing and an automated NICS website for private sellers to run checks on. Fight the social and moral decay of the last 5-6 decades. More investment into all aspects of the mental health realm.

Personally, I would rather see effective public policy. I don't care if it's right wing based by taking guns away or left wing based by throwing money at mental health providers. All I care about is results. These numbers are sickening:

Mass Shooting Tracker

I hear people complain about how statistics are engineer to manipulate public policy opinion. But sometimes the data is just data! And the data sucks.

I don't think your solution will work. But as I said, I really do not care what the public policy is that gets tried. I'm just sick of partisan BS politics. We need governance in this country not anarchy!

 

[whirlingmerc]

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?

Some of it is related to a lessening of respect for human life,
isolation of some troubled people, many cases involve people using some types of psychologically related drugs,
and there is the media giving noteriety of sorts in their minds and maybe some copycat effect going on

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Anticipate, or prepared for? I am prepared for a home invasion by multiple perpetrators. I am prepared to respond to a riot; one Korean-American in the L.A. riots said he expended 500 rounds into the ground or air while driving rioters away.

I'm sorry, but that sounds ridiculous, frankly. First of all, the AR-15 is not a suitable weapon for use indoors, even if you believe home invasion by multiple persons who intend you harm is likely enough to prepare for. As for riots, is there a reason, say, a decent security door would be inadequate for your purposes? Firing rounds into either the air or ground sounds like a brilliant way to escalate a situation. You think a riot looks bad? Wait till you see a riot after one of the rioters gets hit by a ricochet.

And lest you think I'm some silly antigun liberal who doesn't know what he's talking about, I was in Iraq in '05, and spent some time going door to door, so I have some idea about practical weapons in urban environments.

 

[LuisDantas]

I am a comicbook fan, and that has the side effect of giving me a snapshot into cultural trends and values along the years.

I get the impression that the zeistgeist changed considerably during the 1990s to a decisively more violent and egocentric form than we used to have since the 1950s.

Odd as it may seem, there was a massification of highly aggressive and individualistic attitudes in popular art (or at least mainstream comics), probably as an attempt at countering a sense of powerlessness that seems to me to have grown at the time.

Some historical context may help. GHW Bush was POTUS from 1989 to 1993, succeeding Reagan. The Berlin Wall fell in 1989, the Soviet Union in 1991. The Gulf War, including Operation Desert Storm, came during that time as well.

I think it is reasonable to guess that the end of the Cold War brought a measure of confusion among Americans. Some wanted to keep apart from military actions abroad, others were more hawkish, and the internal confrontation between the two postures became less avoidable without a clear "external" "enemy" such as the Soviet Union. That led to raised levels of personal frustration as people found considerable less common emotional ground with family and friends, and the temptation to lash out that frustration became that much greater and more overt.

And of course, there was 2001-Sep-11 to further stir those feelings of powerlessness, frustration and aggressiveness.

Couple that with a highly competitive and armed society and the shootings become all but unavoidable.

 

[Mister Emu]

I'm sorry, but that sounds ridiculous, frankly.

Frankly, I don't give a damn. People do have their homes broken into with the result of being tortured to death. People are burned alive by arson or shot in riots. Terrible stuff happens all over the world, including in America. There are sometimes children in my home, I'm not going to be unprepared to protect them, and it isn't your place to suggest otherwise. Over preparedness is greater than under.

First of all, the AR-15 is not a suitable weapon for use indoors, even if you believe home invasion by multiple persons who intend you harm is likely enough to prepare for.

People always bring up likelihood, no one says it is ridiculous to prepare for a natural disaster, never mind how rare that may be. I am aware of how unlikely it is to need my weapons.

Also, I do know the limitations, and advantages, of my weapons; I hope that the rifle is never made necessary by my circumstances, but if it is I'll be glad to have it.

As for riots, is there a reason, say, a decent security door would be inadequate for your purposes?

Yeah, security doors don't fight back. They also don't protect the windows, or against fire. Never mind that other safety measures I employ, and I do so, are beside the point.

Firing rounds into either the air or ground sounds like a brilliant way to escalate a situation. You think a riot looks bad? Wait till you see a riot after one of the rioters gets hit by a ricochet.

Firing rounds into the air is just irresponsible, and I should have mentioned that when I brought it up. That said, I'll take extra angry rioters who are wary of my ability to retaliate over normal everyday rioters who only have to overcome passive resistance to their animalism.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Frankly, I don't give a damn.

And there it is. "Don't bother me with facts, my minds made up"

People do have their homes broken into with the result of being tortured to death.

As often as they are killed or injured with guns accidentally or from someone they live with? No.

People are burned alive by arson or shot in riots. Terrible stuff happens all over the world, including in America. There are sometimes children in my home, I'm not going to be unprepared to protect them, and it isn't your place to suggest otherwise. Over preparedness is greater than under.

If your "preparedness" is more likely to cause harm than the problem you are "preparing" against, no.

People always bring up likelihood, no one says it is ridiculous to prepare for a natural disaster, never mind how rare that may be. I am aware of how unlikely it is to need my weapons.

How many people get injured or killed every year by survival food and water filters? Further, I say again, the AR-15 is NOT suitable for the scenarios you claim to be preparing for.

Also, I do know the limitations, and advantages, of my weapons; I hope that the rifle is never made necessary by my circumstances, but if it is I'll be glad to have it.

Still waiting for you to describe a situation where an AR-15 is appropriate for "defence".

Yeah, security doors don't fight back.

Why the heck is "fighting back important? If you're safe behind a security door, that's the aim of the thing, isn't it? You talk preparedness, preparedness is avoiding having to "fight back" in the first place.

Firing rounds into the air is just irresponsible, and I should have mentioned that when I brought it up. That said, I'll take extra angry rioters who are wary of my ability to retaliate over normal everyday rioters who only have to overcome passive resistance to their animalism.

That's great. Still doesn't explain why you need a 30 round magazine for "defence". Even against rioters.

This all smacks of Red Dawn fantasy.

 

[Mister Emu]

And there it is. "Don't bother me with facts, my minds made up"

The fact of what you find ridiculous? Yeah, don't bother me with that.

As often as they are killed or injured with guns accidentally or from someone they live with? No.

If your "preparedness" is more likely to cause harm than the problem you are "preparing" against, no.

Applying statistical averages to the individual case is an argumentative fallacy. The fact, that you would ignore, is that I can take preventative action against improper usage of the my weapons. I can't do much to stop gangbangers from shooting at my house, or trying to set it on fire, or local crackheads from trying to break in my backdoor, which have all happened. That last one was the final straw, I'm not leaving lives up to chance or hope.

Further, I say again, the AR-15 is NOT suitable for the scenarios you claim to be preparing for.

Still waiting for you to describe a situation where an AR-15 is appropriate for "defence".

You've said that AR-15s are not suitable for home defense, in any scenario apparently, why? It is easier to aim, especially with a red dot, has less recoil, a larger magazine just in case, and it has less penetration than my .40 S&W. It is in nearly all respects superior to a pistol.

Why the heck is "fighting back important?

Why did you cut my statement off? A door doesn't protect the whole home, sometimes you can't sit back and do nothing.

That's great. Still doesn't explain why you need a 30 round magazine for "defence". Even against rioters.

Anytime I might be faced with more than 2 people out to harm me or anyone I'm protecting I'm going to want as big a magazine as doesn't cross into unwieldy.

This all smacks of Red Dawn fantasy.

And now your imagination has kicked into gear to attempt to tar me by false association to a position I have never advanced.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

The fact of what you find ridiculous? Yeah, don't bother me with that.



Applying statistical averages to the individual case is an argumentative fallacy. The fact, that you would ignore, is that I can take preventative action against improper usage of the my weapons. I can't do much to stop gangbangers from shooting at my house, or trying to set it on fire, or local crackheads from trying to break in my backdoor, which have all happened. That last one was the final straw, I'm not leaving lives up to chance or hope.



You've said that AR-15s are not suitable for home defense, in any scenario apparently, why? It is easier to aim, especially with a red dot, has less recoil, a larger magazine just in case, and it has less penetration than my .40 S&W. It is in nearly all respects superior to a pistol.


Why did you cut my statement off? A door doesn't protect the whole home, sometimes you can't sit back and do nothing.


Anytime I might be faced with more than 2 people out to harm me or anyone I'm protecting I'm going to want as big a magazine as doesn't cross into unwieldy.


And now your imagination has kicked into gear to attempt to tar me by false association to a position I have never advanced.

Whatever dude. If you don't want to listen to someone experienced in the use of, and training of others in, small arms in urban environments, there's not really much I can do.

So go ahead. Buy all the AR-15s you want. I'm sure they'll keep you perfectly safe against non-existent threats. Who cares how many others die from gun proliferation, so long as your Freudian safety blanket is there to keep the monsters away?

 

[Mister Emu]

Whatever dude. If you don't want to listen to someone experienced in the use of, and training of others in, small arms in urban environments, there's not really much I can do.

I asked why you think the way you do. I'm willing to hear you out, but just saying "I'm an expert, the end" doesn't give me anything to understand; all it does it pit you against similarly experienced people who do advocate for the AR as a home defense weapon.

So go ahead. Buy all the AR-15s you want. I'm sure they'll keep you perfectly safe against non-existent threats. Who cares how many others die from gun proliferation, so long as your Freudian safety blanket is there to keep the monsters away?

Now, this is just pathetic.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I asked why you think the way you do.

No you didn't. You said, and I quote "Frankly, I don't give a damn."

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

 

[Mister Emu]

No you didn't. You said, and I quote "Frankly, I don't give a damn."

You've said that AR-15s are not suitable for home defense, in any scenario apparently, why?

I simply don't give a damn about your efforts to avert engaging with me by instead casting aspersions, whether it be calling something ridiculous, a cinematic reference, or laughably uninformed psychological statements. I am willing to actually engage, as with asking after what specific deficiencies you find with the AR platform for home defense.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I simply don't give a damn about your efforts to avert engaging with me by instead casting aspersions. I am willing to actually engage, as with asking after what specific deficiencies you find with the AR platform for home defense.

Fine. It's unwieldy in close quarters and it's over powered, so any round you shoot is likely to keep going long after it's passed out of your targeted zone, which is a bad thing in a populated area.

How's that?

 

[Mister Emu]

Fine. It's unwieldy in close quarters

I agree that its size is less than ideal; if they(semi auto replicas) weren't prohibitively expensive for me I might get something on the order of an MP5. Would you agree that it is fair for me to weigh being more unwieldy against easier aiming and reduced recoil with an AR?

it's over powered, so any round you shoot is likely to keep going long after it's passed out of your targeted zone, which is a bad thing in a populated area.

I brought up penetration in the response you passed over. .223 ammo will penetrate less than pistol rounds. That is, of course, not to say that over penetration is not a concern (it always is when firing in an area with an innocent population), just that it isn't a special concern of a .223 system.

It is one of the reasons the FBI and SWAT teams in America switched from SMGs to .223 carbines.

About .223 Penetration
"In every test, with the exception of soft body armor, which none of the SMG fired rounds defeated, the .223 penetrated less on average than any of the pistol bullets."

Do you know of any penetration tests which would refute this information?