There’s a Way to Stop Mass Shootings, and You Won’t Like It.
That’s right. You’re not going to like it because it’s going to require you to do something personally, as opposed to shouting for the government, or anyone to “do something!”
You ready? Here it is:
“Notice those around you who seem isolated, and engage them.”
If every one of us did this we’d have a culture that was deeply committed to ensuring no one was left lonely. And make no mistake, as I’ve written before loneliness is what causes these shooters to lash out. People with solid connections to other people don’t indiscriminately fire guns at strangers.
I know what you’re thinking. That’s never going to work because no one is going to make the effort to connect with the strange kid sitting by himself at lunch each day. No one is going to reach out to the gawky, awkward guy at work and ask him about his weekend.
You’re probably right and that’s an absolute shame.
Because I can tell you the things that aren’t going to work in this country when it comes to stopping these heinous acts. But they seem to be all anyone says, when inevitably, another person comes forward to inflict their tortured pain on innocent people.View Post
- Ban All Guns! – Due to the reading of the 2nd amendment and the precedents established by recent Supreme Court cases, this isn’t going anywhere. You’d need an amendment to the Constitution and there will NEVER be 30+ states willing to overturn it. Never mind the multitude of good reasons for its existence, no amount of outrage will overturn it so let’s just stop.
- Ban All Guns! (pt. 2) – Assuming you actually could overturn the 2nd and outlaw every firearm in the country, then you’d have to go out and get them. Famously, there are more guns than people in the U.S. You couldn’t come close to collecting them all. Further, if Prohibition and the War on Drugs have taught us anything it’s that those intent on breaking the law are going to do just that. Laws be damned.
- Ban Scary Guns Like the AR-15! – Fully auto weapons are already banned*. Most of these shootings occur with a handgun, plain and simple, and these aren’t going anywhere. Murder is illegal, and that doesn’t seem to stop these individuals from performing these atrocious acts. Do you think if there was a ban on shotguns that would stop them?
- Keep Them Out of the Hands of Bad People! – Felons are prohibited from owing a firearm already. But let’s not forget, the overwhelming majority of these mass shootings aren’t done by criminals and their guns were obtained legally. How can you know who is going to do something like this? You can’t.
- Do Something About Mental Health! – Cool. Yeah. So, like, free psychologists visits for everyone? Even if you could, the people that have done this haven’t been mentally ill, by and large. And, let’s not forget that medical records are private. Would you endorse mandatory psych screening for everyone and those records being sent to the government? Maybe just those who wish to own a gun? Remember, not every person who has engaged in a mass shooting has owned the gun they performed the act with. This is a complete non-starter of an issue with an insane price tag that does nothing to actually keep a person committed to violence from putting their hands on a gun.
- Do… SOMETHING! – Gotcha. What do you want to do? “SOMETHING!” Ok, what do you have in mind? “I DON’T KNOW! BUT SOMEONE NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING!” Sure. Agreed. But what? Even Obama has had to say in his latest speech how routine it’s become.
If you can’t tell by this point in the list, there is NOTHING the government or any other organization can do to prevent these events.
You can’t effectively keep drugs out of the hands of those intent on doing drugs. You can’t keep beer out of the hands of high schoolers intent on getting beer. You have a HUGE supply of weapons everywhere and concrete federal law protecting those weapons. You’d have as much luck passing regulation against tornadoes. It would be equally as effective.
So there it is. The god’s honest truth. No entity can do anything meaningful (more than is presently being done) to thwart a disaffected person hell-bent on committing such an act.
But you can.
You can talk to your co-worker for a few minutes. You can talk to the kid in your Physics class that appears to be all alone. You can teach your children to do the same, to make sure no one is left to feel totally isolated. Because that’s the breeding ground. That’s where the seeds are planted.
Community is easy to take for granted. Most of us have strong family connections and healthy friendships. Most feel as though they’re part of a group, be it community, religious, or work related. But it’s increasingly easy for people on the edges to withdraw and it’s easy for us to forget them.
No, it’s comfortable to forget them. It’s preferred to forget them. It’s highly desired to forget them. And we have to change that.
Holding a sign isn’t going to do anything. And writing your congressman will do even less. But you can do something today, this week, this month. The people you engage may not become life-long friends, and they don’t need to be, but it could be enough to keep someone away from the darkness and isolation needed to eventually think lashing out is an effective strategy for dealing with their pain.
If you’re conflicted at all about the subject, I can’t encourage you enough to read this post by Sam Harris on the subject immediately following Newtown, CT, that I’ve written about before.
* Edit: Fully auto weapons are legal, but only under the strictest of conditions and at a price that makes them nigh affordable for the vast majority. For all intents and purposes, let’s just call them banned. The AR-15 is not a fully auto weapon, but is confused for one based on appearance.
One thing I’d add: Don’t try this unless you’re seriously interested in becoming someone’s friend.
I think the angriest day in my teen years was when I was taking a summer class at a different church-owned college. Chapel attendance was mandatory and was an exercise in tolerance for boredom–you were supposed to pay rapt attention to some inept speaker’s mumbling about the financial statement of some mission that had nothing to do with you, just because it was chapel. But at least I had found a cute guy to sit beside. I didn’t know him well enough to like him, particularly, but he’d do for someone to be seen with.
So, naturally, he was late. I sat in the front row, on the aisle, and kept looking around for my date as other people trickled into the room for what felt like hours. Finally a small child crept forward to say “That lady wants you to sit beside her.”
“That” was no lady, just a White girl who was even younger than I was and, if that hadn’t been bad enough, she had a funny-looking face and was the slowest kid in my summer class. Also the seat toward which she shoved me was right behind a column and maybe two feet away from the child, who had a cold.
“What do you want?” I said with painfully obvious patience.
“We just wanted you to sit with us!” Funny Face had a couple of little friends who might have enjoyed being behind the column in order to grope each other.
At that point the speaker took the stage and, also, my date walked in and gave me a poisonous look, as if he thought I’d *planned* to dump him and sit with these horrible children.
I have no idea what the speech was about, but I was polite enough to wait until we’d walked out to ask Funny Face, “So what was so allfired important that you had to say to me?”
“Oh nothing,” she said, and the boy chimed in, “We just thought you looked lonely.”
I don’t remember exactly what I said, although it qualified as verbal abuse. What I would have said, if our psychological understanding had progressed that far in 1984, was, “Child…introverts do not *get* *that* lonely.”
Am I misreading your comment or are you just an asshole?
A typical product of Christian Colleges, that’s all. They’re not all like that – but many, perhaps most, are.
They see nothing wrong with it, either.
I think the “just an asshole” interpretation is just you introspecting. Try to be less of one from now on.
that’s just you introspecting.
First: Congrats on missing the point of the article. Second: You appear to still be angry about this how many years later?
Not only is Priscilla there a complete jerk who is still angry about some random event from 31 YEARS ago, Zoebrain is not much different. It always kills me when you have one huge group of people who non-stop attack another huge group of people for being judgemental. Congratulations Zoe, you will always be the other side of the same coin with that attitude. …or you can change and realize that there is really no good that comes from any sort of stereotyping. Nope, not towards Christians, nor atheist, Republican, nor Democrat. Just don’t indulge in that crud or you might end up a leathery skinned, former homecoming court-queen, with ciggie-related pucker wrinkles framing her thin lips, still crying (and half-way bragging) about the time she went off on a kind-hearted little girl… just because she (Priscilla) was too addlebrained to tell the little girl, “I’m actually waiting for someone, but thank you anyway!”
BTW, “funny face”, as you call her, was the slowest in your class? Were you the close second?
Thank you. Her post seriously made me want to cry for the future of this country. You can sit by me in a boring chapel service any day.
Visitor: You don’t get it…..
@Visitor, if you think I’m still angry about this incident, whatever will you think when I write about something that *does* annoy me? Apparently I wrote the anecdote all wrong…for those who didn’t go to church prep schools. The point was that the child here referred to as Funny Face had set up a situation that disguised her intentions of scoring a point by claiming she was being “kind” to someone who “seemed lonely”; without Disrupting The Chapel Service, there was no way to clear up the misunderstanding.
Was I a mixed-up kid, too? Obviously. People who “seem lonely” are likely to be mixed-up kids just like the kids who want to “seem friendly”…but that doesn’t mean that they’re desperate for any attention at all.
I was in fact one of the large number of people who got A’s in the class. I was even prepared to be charitable, and laugh about it with my date, if Funny Face had been asking for help with an assignment (I was aware of that way to score social points in church schools, too).
But those who’ve reacted to my comment with hate are the ones who most need the reality check. You’re reacting to an anecdote recounted by a nice, nonviolent, middle-aged adult who now thinks it was sort of funny–who, as a teenager, wanted to be alone to listen to classical music and write poetry. You think the lonely *guy* who wants to be alone to design *bombs* is going to appreciate a “handout” of attention from someone who does not actually want to talk to him? The only person who’s going to relieve his loneliness would be, at best, an admirer who shares his interests. Mainstream guys who honestly need one more body for a team game might be better than no attention at all…or not. Someone who’s obviously just salivating at a chance to express “I feel sorry for you, I think I’m better or at least better off than you” would not be better than no attention at all.
So, because some innocent children dared to attempt to be nice, you verbally abused them. And their atrocious niceness was responsible for your having the “angriest day” of your teenage years? And, to make matters worse, they were funny looking? And SLOW? But THEY were the ones at fault for your angriest day, because they were just trying to be polite and not aggressively campaigning for a lifelong friendship. Wow.
Thanks, Aubrey! For the life of me, I don’t know why Priscilla is even posting! NOT helpful in any way, misses the point, and spews venom on anyone being kind to another!
How dare she have a face that wasn’t aesthetically pleasing to you! The nerve!
Seriously?!?! This act of kindness made you SO upset that you are still pissed to this day? What is wrong with you?
Stfu racist, immoral Christian idiot
@moderator…where did “racist” come in?
Sounds like someone with a ‘superiority complex’ which is another attitude that brings out ‘inferiority complexes’ in others like the ones who end up doing the things this article was written to help.
This wasn’t terribly Christian.
Yes we do, you piece of shit. This is horrible. You’re a horrible person. You ARE the worlds problems.
I am not quiet sure why everyone is so upset with what you wrote here. In your defense, It’s a free country and you can say what you want. What I get from what you wrote was that you liked a guy but could not sit with that guy because you were all but forced to sit with some kids you did not particularly like? I don’t know about every one else, but volunteering to sit, make friends whatever with some one who looks a bit lonely is a great deal different than being forced to sit with someone you don’t know. This used to be a free country if memory serves me right, no one is supposed to be forced to like or dislike anyone.
I’m confused. How was she forced? Did one of the kids have a gun, a knife, scandalous photos? What? How did they force her to do anything she didn’t want to do in this free country?
I feel like people are missing Pricillas point entirely. I feel that maybe there was sarcasm in her original post and that she does not agree that just talking to someone will change their path. Truth is, very limited would this change. Doing something without sincerity is worse than doing nothing at all. Is this Pricilla what you were saying or am I just as confused?
I agree. The people bashing Priscilla, are just as big of assholes as they perceive her to be.
That was insanely boring and irrelevant.
You just want kudos for good fiction writing, correct?
You’re what is wrong with America
This article is the dumbest uninformed article I have read in a long time, people don’t do mass shootings because they are lonely. There are much more deep and complex issues that often are related to mental health. Being nice to a lonely person is not bad, but it will not stop the next shooting either.
Fine then, why don’t *you* come up with an alternative, since you think the article is so “dumb” and “uninformed?” Rob is trying to introduce a possible strategy to address a critical problem. I don’t see any ideas coming from you …
Here is a possible alternative:13 ingredients in primer powder so find the rareist.You know where i am going with this.What good are guns without bullets?
Hey, it’s a start and, what’s wrong with that ?
Sooooo, treat people badly and we’ll all live with the results.
Or die from them.
Mental illness does not cause or correlate with violence. Your bizarre assertions are stupid and irresponsible.
Oh, so extreme anger isn’t considered a mental illness these days?
Check the facts, @Ferguson. People’s self-perception as “depressed” or “anxious,” or others’ perception of them as “borderline autistic,” *can* be entirely an emotional problem created by social anxiety. Their reactions to either street drugs or prescription medications that seem to relieve the emotional problem are a physical disease pattern that can and often does include an urge to kill others and themselves. The street name is “Prozac Dementia” although all the serotonin boosters, as well as meth and PCP, can produce similar effects. As a side effect it’s documented in 3-10% of people who use SSRIs (see Glenmullen, J.; Breggin, P.).
Actually having friends, or friendly acquaintances, to eat lunch or play sports with, if it happens at the right time in these people’s lives, might in theory help some of them not to feel a need for these drugs.
On the other hand, if they’re already reacting to drugs and feeling the urge to kill, the people standing closest to them at the time (sometimes including their own children) are likely to be their targets.
If you worked where I do you would know that mental illness can correlate with violence. But so does poverty, drug abuse, gang activity, etc. Some people just fall too far to ‘the dark side’, so to speak, that they stop caring about other people (been there, it was a long road out). Some are just born with no sense of empathy what-so-ever, so harming or even killing another human being doesn’t matter to them. I’m doing my part to make sure the youth I work with don’t follow those paths, what are you doing to better our future?
Do you not believe it possible that much alienation begins with simple loneliness and a sense of isolation?
Yes, @Caroline, I actually do. That’s the beginning point. The problem I was pointing out is that “handouts” of attention “From Wonderful Me to Pathetic You” won’t help. Others have pointed out that some people are genuinely, permanently isolated by brain damage–the one time I’ve spoken to a child who had real autism, he lost his balance and almost fell down, which couldn’t have been very encouraging for him. And some people reach the psychotic urge-to-kill stage immediately after using certain stimulant drugs.
The appearance of solitude (being lonely, if you will) is the signal that something may be wrong. That’s a general statement so don’t go stereotyping everyone for that reason. However, have there been mass killings by someone who has a good relationship with people in general and has not been radicalized in their thinking? There are signals one may be able to read, and a simple “hello” with a smile doesn’t cost anything as long as the recipient is not mislead later by the intention. The article is with sound reasoning in that it points out we can no more remove guns from the hands of would be killers than automobiles from would be killers (check the stats produced by the CDC in case you think there’s a difference).
So maybe personal stories don’t count as statistics, but while I was visiting a social group that had several cliques and favorites I had briefly met a nice but painfully awkward, shy, and lonely boy who later killed his parents. I wish to this day I could have done something for him, anything to have kept that from happening. I understand it wasn’t my fault, and their family had troubles, although I didn’t know their story. But if more people in that group had reached out to him and been inclusive and kind enough to listen to him, it may have helped just enough to avoid the tragedy and horrible deaths. It’s no one’s fault in particular, but socially, we’re just a little too likely to pass up the weird and clumsy and ugly for our own friends and the people who are familiar to us. That should change.
I agree with you Blackdenim. One thing I don’t understand about Priscilla…if that is the person who told the story about sitting alone, the boyfriend and the child who thought she was lonely is why there was such animosity towards the little girl who invited her to join her group? This little girl saw someone that she thought needed a friend. Any normal or “enlightened” person would simply say thank you and stay seated waiting for her boy to show up.
I was bullied like crazy when I was in Grammar School. I KNOW first hand how it feels to be “left out”. I am thankful that I had the wherewithall later in life to recognize this behavior being perpetrated on others. I have a daughter. I have taught her to befriend anyone for any reason. When she was in fourth grade, she told me that there was this little girl who came up to her and started talking. She welcomed her with open arms. When she came home from school and told me this, she and I almost burst into tears. Me…because I was so proud of my daughter, and her, because she realized what a difference she might have made in this little girl’s life.
I often ask strangers if they need a ride. I often offer up my coupons or sale ads to other shoppers to save money. I compliment people wherever I go. What is wrong with saying…”hey…I like your hair”, “shirt”, or whatever? What is wrong with being kind to one another? It costs nothing to be nice, and who knows, perhaps you might have impacted the way that person felt about themselves or their decisions. Nothing is for certain, but I’m willing to take that chance.
@Mary Lou Miller, there’s nothing wrong with being kind. My point here is that anything remotely like “Wonderful Winner Me Being Kind to Pathetic Loser You” is *not* being kind. If you can actually offer practical help, like asking if somebody wants a coupon you don’t, or sharing a car (or taxi), that’s fine. If you actually *like* someone and want that person as a friend, that’s also fine.
On the other hand, if you see someone who’s not surrounded by friends every minute and sincerely imagine that that person is lonely and pathetic, you’re being (at best) incredibly naïve–I find it hard to believe that anyone could sincerely be so naïve after about age twelve. And if you think you can score points for being a big humanitarian (or clever verbal abuser) by calling attention to that person’s real or imagined loneliness, you’re being an obnoxious jerk. I do in fact recommend getting to know people who are outside of the popular crowd at school; I don’t recommend even making eye contact with people you don’t honestly want to get to know, because if they *are* very lonely and alienated, anything like “false friendship” is a trigger that may lead to stalking or worse.
Nobody should ever be conceited enough to imagine that the sight of their teeth is going to rescue someone else from a “breakdown” into violent psychosis–or even from backsliding into an addiction. Don’t delude yourself that a forced smile is an act of charity. Actually, a forced smile is an ugly, annoying sight.
This incident took place at a Seventh-Day Adventist church school. I shared this story here because every Seventh-Day Adventist or ex-Adventist with whom I’ve shared it got the point–the kid was *not* being kind, she was deliberately setting up a “Wonderful Me Being Kind to Pathetic You” diss. Maybe people don’t develop such sophisticated verbal abuse and social bullying skills in other churches and schools…or maybe they’re in denial about them. I’m surprised that so many young readers here either aren’t recognizing, or aren’t admitting they recognize, something that college freshmen in my day recognized at once.
WOW! Thank goodness there are more positive people than negative people out there! I find it hard to believe that there wasn’t ONE occasion in your life that you WISHED someone payed attention to you! You are one mixed-up person! How dare you insult me! Did I EVER state that one should give out their phone number, address, email? NO! It doesn’t cost ANYTHING to be kind and inclusive……you should try it sometime!
Priscilla…..you are so caught up in your own hatred that you just don’t get it. You see, whether you believe it or not, being “nice” is an innate response in ANY situation. Never once did I mention that being nice should also include intense therapy, friendship, taking them home with you or anything else! You truly are an idiot!
Sorry Pricilla, you lost me at “was cute enough to be seen with.” Screw you.
I strongly agree with your approach of looking for opportunities to be kind and generous. The more people do this, the more cumulative impact it has. Each of our daily actions, whether kind or hostile, are like molecules that together form the body of our society, and currently it’s harboring some real illnesses.
Both politics and the media seem to champion division lines, so that mentality has infected the populace. They want conflict to get what they all want: elected, viewership, gun sales, and whatnot. This is the downside of capitalism: effective fear marketing masquerading as truth so you’ll open your wallets.
Heck, even #vampires get this. http://cedarcrestsanctum.com/2015/10/03/vampire-verisimilitude-ending-violence/
Whether or not this stops mass shootings, it’s still the right thing to do. Being genuinely nice to people is not something you should grit your teeth about doing. Having gone through times of loneliness and isolation myself, I will say that the key word is ‘genuine’. The most sincere people I’ve met are the ones who could relate to being outcasts themselves. The most insincere ones were those who had an agenda for reaching out, sadly, those who did so only from religious conviction.
No….Priscilla was THE slowest in her class. The other girl was one of the smartest…she had learned compassion
Or trying to impress others in the religious group (which was the point of my anecdote–no, it wasn’t sincere “kindness”).
That was @Chris Snyder. Dittos to you, Chris. I didn’t see @Georganne Frase’s comment in between ours, but since it’s there, Georganne…if you honestly think what I described was an act of kindness, you either don’t know any hypocritical churchgoers, or don’t know anything about genuine kindness.
My point is that leaping to project your own “loneliness” onto someone else, in a way that says “I feel sorry for you; I’m better, or at least better off than you; I don’t actually like you, but I’ll *donate* a little of my time to contribute to your boredom and/or homesickness and/or social alienation, to show other people that I’m ahead of you,” is not kindness. It’s arrogance.
What makes you think she was trying to do that? Nothing in your story even hinted at it. You “thought” this, but she never said it. I’m sorry for your experience and how people are castigating you. It’s a chance we take when we out our opinions or feelings out there, unfortunately. But the writer does make some good about compassion. Will it solve the problem of violence? Maybe not, but what’s the harm? Jesus said to love your brother AS YOURSELF. Think about that. As Yourself. Would you have wanted someone to call you funny face? Or assume wrong motives for a compassionate act? Of course you wouldn’t. Nor would I. I think your story just lacked some compassion, which I’m not going to assume you personally lacked. It was a long time ago. Forgive, and be forgiven, ok?
@Lynn, what I’m seeing here *is* a failure to communicate. Things that are dead obvious to members of the church culture seem unclear to those outside of it. I’ve shared the story with others who attended that church, and the question has been “How is it possible that you didn’t see the wrong motives and just tell the child to tell ‘that lady’ to speak for herself.” The use of a third party to deliver a “summons,” rather than making the invitation herself, was generally seen as the tip-off.
Since I’m not part of the “student apartment” community (didn’t intend to revisit this site until it showed up as a source of several hundred visits to my site), my concern here is strictly with making sure that those who react emotionally to what I posted do so for the right reasons. If I were seeing outpourings of support for other introverts, especially those who sound young, I’d be more inclined to believe that the extroverts on this site have any idea of what the words “kindness” and “compassion” mean. They don’t. Which is typical. I’m much more interested in helping introverts develop consciousness than in whatever effect my words have on extroverts.
I know exactly what you’re saying. Basically, what you’re saying is you saw fakeness and phoniness in that girl and she didn’t really give a crap about you but wanted to look good. Sort of similar to those who do charity work not because they give a crap about the poor but just want to pad their resumes.
You’re right and I a agree with Priscilla too. Insincere or pitying attention, especially if it isn’t followed through will make things worse. I have a habit of befriending introverts and people who border on antisocial . Some are content, self-reflecting types who are not a danger to anybody.
The problem is when people who need social connections have their overtures ridiculed or tgey are used as a joke. Which is what Priscilla was talking about. Children can be malicious while pretending to be good and nice.
Priscilla…just because YOU thought that this little girl “looked funny”, and had devious intentions, doesn’t make it so! Shame on you for thinking anything other than “what a beautiful child, a caring child, a child that reached out to me because she CARED”! To think otherwise is extremely unhealthy, and the fact that you have the same thoughts today about an extremely simple gesture of kindness, shows an extremely disturbed human being!
Maybe now, all the sanctimonious “We (meaning everyone else except me) must reach out to the loners” people have had a nice preview from Priscilla of exactly the kind of response you’re likely to get when you reach out to them. Even more so if you’re reaching out because they’re so unhinged that they might go on a killing spree if you don’t. I have yet to come across one of these Sanctimonious Von Holier Than Thous who say “From now on, I’M going to befriend loners. I’M going to reach out to anyone who looks like they’re struggling.” Nope. It’s always on other people to take the risk of getting close to the kinds of people who are likely to commit mass murder, while the Holier Than Thou stays at a safe distance and pats himself on the back for being such a compassionate little saint for putting the danger and responsibility on others to prevent someone from going on a killing spree. And Rob Myers is no different.
Just because you haven’t met people who believe in making all good faith attempts to include others doesn’t mean those people don’t exist. They do. And there are lots of them.
I should have done a better job of making the point that the best time to be inclusive is earlier in life. I’m certainly not saying that having lunch with the San Bernardino shooters a week prior to their spree would have done anything. Ditto with any of these shooters. However, if they’d felt included in society: friends, family, community, they’d likely not have gone on murderous rampages.
It’s not a panacea, certainly, but it is something, and it’s more realistic an approach for the overwhelming majority of citizens than anything else I’ve heard. Also, I told you that you wouldn’t like it.
I agree that we all have a responsibility to try and help our fellow man and be attentive to their needs and emotions, but realistically that is not possible for every single isolated feeling person out there, so there will always be those who feel left out, and feel like they have nothing to lose, and might be willing to lash out.
I don’t agree that our society (aka governemnt as that is what government is) can’t do anything.
1: You can ban the manufacture of guns in the U.S.
2: You can ban the import of guns or make guns very expensive to obtain.
3: You can ban the import or sale of bullets.
4: You can add more saftey features on guns, we have gps on our phone, but nothing on our guns to tell us that they’ve been moved/taken.
The point is not to get rid of every single gun or bullet, that would be impossible, the goal should be to make it extremely impractical to obtain firearms and/or bullets.
Yep. Done those things with drugs. How is that working out?
Didn’t know you could grow guns. Where are the illegal gun factories?
http://gizmodo.com/3d-printed-guns-are-only-getting-better-and-scarier-1677747439
Sorta- you can 3D print a gun now.
Actually, despite efforts to make it impractical to obtain meth, crack, and PCP, we as a society have made it easy for anyone who admits feeling sad or tired to obtain prescription stimulants that have a similar effect on a minority of users.
I think the best thing to do is to ban liberals like yourself from this country this would be the greatest achievement in America.
You obviously are completely unaware of how guns or gun owners think… Right so under your plan, only the wealthy can afford to hunt, but not the poor? Many people feed their families on wild game. In addition to this, how should we then defend our selves from home invaders? Shall I tell the thief with a gun that it is illegal to have a gun so stop being naughty? So with that GPS thing? Relay? Until we are all carrying lasers that run on electricity… how long will the batteries on that GPS last and do you think that if we made them common people might figure out that you need to remove it before you move it? All you are going to do is keep track of the honest people’s guns until they are stolen… Guns also don’t break very often, most guns are well taken care of and passed from generation to generation. Many of my families guns are 50-70 years old and show little ware because people that own guns take care of them well because they are already a luxury item… You can’t buy a decent hand gun for less then 500.00, but my guess is you are not in the market for one so you probably did not know that, and most semi automatic rifles start around 700.00. No one is rampaging with 120.00 hipoint hand gun that jams every other shot, or a single shot bolt action ruger American rifle for 399.00, so cheep guns are out, and are not the problem.
Solution then… We need to open the gun market, mandate gun safety training in our schools, and arm our teachers that are willing.
The government can’t keep us safe but my family is safe, the ten perfectly functioning, well lubricated, locked, cocked and ready to rock guns that every member of my family knows how to safely, load, shot, clean and put away are ready and accessible to each of them ages 10 and up. My wife is a great shot with her 9mm and my daughter age twelve is ore then capable with the 20 guage. Even my ten year old has a working knowledge of both the 10 safety rules of gun safety, and how to clean and shoot my Smith and Wesson M&P 15 assault rifle, which is get for both home defence and hunting deer. Stop by any time, I’ll have my up and coming expert on gun safety teach you all about them, hoe to safely hold them and what the rules are… she’s only 6 years old, and is the best shot I have ever seen with her red rider bb gun…
Oh the irony of arrogant gun owners like this. These guns are accessible to all of the kids in your family huh? And probably to their friends too, sounds like. You are the problem.
My wife is a stay at home mom actually, and we don’t leave kids unattended. Ever… because they are kids… But because our kids know about guns and all the mysteries of them, have been de-mystified, and they know they can have friends over and ask to see and use them any time they want, there is no draw to mischief with them. It’s like fire. It’s not bad, it needs to be controled, people need education, not ignorace. If you teach them how to make it right, and give them the tools, and tell them they can do it anytime they want with supervision there is no need to mess around. I have the keys, my wife has the keys, all they need to do is ask.
Instead of educating people why don’t we demonize everything and let the government take it all away or regulate it. Then people could not overeat or get pregnant without having the income to take care of a baby, or dye their hair green cuz it looks stupid? Where does it stop?
You want to know why our country has these random acts of violence? It’s really simple. Because there is no consequence for them. We teach them in school, that life is meaningless, that there are no absolutes, there is no moral truth, no right or wrong… and the majority of parents are two busy either working two jobs and not paying attention and depending on other people to instill values in them, or they are not working at all but living selfishly for themselves not paying attention to where their kids are or what their problems are. No one is raising them to believe in anything, so they believe in nothing. They are empty, searching, lost kids, with no love or guidence. People talk about these mass shootings but what about the mass suicides that are popping up, groups of kids making death pacs. This kills hounds a year… no press on that? This gun agenda has more to do with government control, then it does with the welfare of our kids. Our society is broken, it is godless, insincere, and impatient. That is the problem let’s fix that?
Goofy guntard. I will lAugh when someone in your family accidentally kills them self lol
“arm our teachers”
“My wife is a great shot”, “my daughter age twelve is ore then capable with the 20 guage.”,
“Even my ten year old”, “she’s only 6 years old”
You terrify me. America’s bizarre logic of more killing sticks will make you safer. The rest of the civilized world looks on in horror, like watching a train slowly de-rail. We can’t help you, and it seems you can’t help yourselves.
Please USA. Please, stop, and think.
It’s adorable you think you family is safe. If we were invaded, it would be with tanks and drones. If our own government comes for us, it’s with tanks and guns. I mean, keep your guns. I don’t have children and could care less about if your kid accidentally shoots the neighbor kid, as it won’t be mine. But please be honest: you have guns because you like to shoot things. Fine. But it’s very sad if you actually think your guns are keeping you safe from anything. At most, they are great things to have because it keeps you from eating factory farmed meat, as they did for my family growing up. So, I mean in a sense, yes, you are right. They are protecting your kids from chemicals and disease. But only if you only eat hunted meat.
Hey, are you the same genius that opened that gun range/roadside burger joint in AZ, where the little girl killed her instructor with an Uzi!?
No. We should not “arm teachers who are willing.”
Tont…and what would happen if your 6-year old gets the loaded gun, ready to go, and murders another family member? A 6-year old does NOT have the capacity of knowing the dangers of the gun, no matter what you say, plus your other children, have the capability due to their underdeveloped brains at that age, to truly UNDERSTAND how, why, when and where to use a gun! I pray that you don’t have to be a statistic Dad that regrets having loaded guns in the house within reach of young children. Some states prosecute the PARENTS if a child gets their hands on a gun and harms someone else.
There were 2 recent incidents in the news this week. One..an 11 year old boy who shot an 8 year old girl dead because he was mad at her for not showing him her puppy. Second…a 6 year old who show his 3 year old sibling DEAD! Children have not developed their brains, nor have any experience in dealing with deadly weapons! Shame on you!
Yes, a 6-year-old can learn that a gun is dangerous. Look up “Eddie Eagle” to see the gun safety education program that should be taught in every school.
Points 1-3 have not been effective in stopping drug use and manufacture nation-wide (and the high prices helps fuel the illegal trade). Why would we expect it to turn out differently for guns?
For #4, most illegal firearms on the streets are purchased fraudulently through legitimately licensed retailers. A GPS locator won’t be of much help unless we’re trying to track it down AFTER a crime has been committed and recognized.
But what your missing is that it doesn’t have to be a gun. Instead of using the tired but true, “Guns don’t kill people, people do”, might I expand on this? While guns may be the easiest “weapon of choice” to use for violence, the drive for violence lies within. If a heroin addict can’t obtain heroine, what does he do? Does he say, “Ah hell, well, guess it’s time to quit!”? No, he scrapes by with oxy’s or hydro or spray paint fumes. If a person’s desire is to kill, that person will kill. They will get creative with their resources and their weapon becomes a car, a knife, a pipe bomb or, do you know what the weapon of choice was that killed more lives than all of the mass shootings combined, and the date on which it was used is now a national day of mourning?? Two Boeing 767s! If a person has no regard for human life and little fear of the consequences for carrying out the heinous act of violence and murder, do you think that person is going to give a shit about imported weapons, inaccessibility of new bullets or licensing regulations and mandates? Will they suddenly gain perspective and appreciation for the law and rethink their plan to murder school children they have yet to meet or innocent movie theater patrons because it would just be too scary to break the law and obtain one of the billion guns stashed away in this country without a proper license or training? No, the gun has nothing to do with it. Nor does the implementation of mandates, regulations and laws. A mentally ill person (and make no bones about it, despite the columnist’s suggestion that the majority of mass murderers are not mentally ill–um, sorry, murder even one innocent person in cold blood, you automatically are mentally ill. In addition, most, if not all, of the mass murderers in this country have a psychiatric rap sheet a mile long) whose intent it is to murder even one person, silently tells you to take your threats of legality and shove it. Even with no prior convictions, never even having had a speeding ticket, a murderous person knows that the act of KILLING SOMEONE is illegal and any illegal activity commited to carry out their plan is not even an afterthought, let alone a deterrence. Yes indeed, guns don’t kill people. Freaking psychotic lunatics who don’t even give a shit about your precious guns, kill people.
So a madman is running around with a fully-automatic rifle is the same as a madman running around with a kitchen knife?
And everything you proposed is unconstitutional “A well regulated Militia (trained citizenry), being necessary to the “security” of a “free state”, the “right of the people” to keep and bear Arms, shall not be “infringed”.” One sentence, not two.
I don’t care what you think about firearms they will never not be a part of this Country. They are after all why we are a Country and not a colony of England. If you don’t like firearms, don’t own one. I on the other hand own several and not one of them has shot anyone and likely never will. They will never do anything that I don’t make them do as they are only objects, tools for the purpose I bought them. Same as the extinguisher in my kitchen and the smoke detectors on my walls. Tools for my safety, not yours.
No you can’t do any of that, the 2nd has been affirmed by the Supreme Court as a fundamental right and as such banning bullets or gun manufacture would fly exactly as well as banning paper or stopping the manufacture of ink. The courts must at very least use intermediate scrutiny when deciding whether or not a law is constitutional and the vast majority of gun laws won’t pass that bar. Over the next 30 years we will see a continued loosening of gun laws and likely a continued drop in violent crime.
It’s not impossible that people could come together and decide that reasonable registration, insurance, training and qualification requirements serve compelling societal interests. We’ve created new laws – even constitutional amendments- when changes in society (like rights of women, minorities, even economic and trade changes) make the earlier constitutional interpretations incompatible with contemporary democracy.
What about the most fundamental right? The right to live!
How is it not possible that someone could reach out to everyone?
How have those same techniques
worked out in the war on drugs.
1: You can ban the manufacture of guns in the U.S.
2: You can ban the import of guns or make guns very expensive to obtain.
3: You can ban the import or sale of bullets.
Not much of a constitutional lawyer or even a fan of the Bill of Rights are you, Kane?
“You” (the Senate & House of Representatives, since we still don’t elect KINGS in this country) could try all that by passing legislation at some point…although it’s not going to happen anytime soon, you can bet your last dollar on that….but any law or laws like that will wind up being challenged in the Supreme Court and there are already multiple precedents (rulings) on the books that would certainly result in ruling of such laws as blatantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Nice try, though….
@kane Translation of your post: Make it near-impossible for honest, law abiding, citizens to obtain firearms for self-protection… While Criminals can still get all they want illegally. (See “the war on drugs” for an example of how that will play out)
Oh my gawd, you gun nuts are just so quick on giving up on trying to inhibit CRIMINALS access to guns. You don’t even want to try to lift a finger. You just clench your fists and grab a tighter grip to YOUR guns.
Big Hint: You aren’t helping.
Kane – while your suggestion to simply ban guns is a possible response, it is neither practical nor reasonable. There are certain realities and constraints we have to work with in trying to solve the problem and violating both the constitution as well as the natural rights of everyone just won’t work.
I’ll also point out that society is NOT government, nor is government equal to society. To believe they are equivalent is to not believe in liberty, only the illusion of it.
Jesse Bareil – Since you’re so fired up that “gun nuts” won’t do anything, perhaps you’d favor us with your solution – provided it’s not going to violate the constitution or people’s rights.
It might work once in a blue moon, I suppose. The author was correct in his title … as I was reading it, I *didn’t* like it. Because I am not entirely convinced it would work or that it is a good strategy, overall.
I don’t believe we have it in us to save the social misfits who are bent in that direction just by buddying up to them. I say this because I was the type of kid and young adult who would actually try that. The more frequent outcome is that you end up with a borderline psychotic cling-on stalker control freak as a friend, who wants you to spend every waking moment with them and have no other friends or life. And when you, as a healthy individual, break out of that, there is often hell to pay.
The plain, sad fact is that there is no way to stop mass shootings, or any other kind of evil, and people who don’t want to say hi to these folks and spend time with them have good instincts. I bet if Gavin DeBecker saw this article, he yelled at the monitor and banged his head on his desk. If you get a copy of “The Gift of Fear” in the mail, you’ll know why.
And what about those potential future mass killers who are befriended as children, before they’ve gone down a bad path, who might have been normal, non-violent citizens if only those around them had been taught inclusiveness and compassion? Might not these folks avoid a future of violence if their social and emotional needs are met as they grow up? No, we can’t stop all violence, gun or otherwise, but we can certainly have an impact one way or the other. And even if there are some people who are just trouble from egghood, wouldn’t keeping them involved in society possibly mitigate potential outcomes? Wouldn’t it at least be obvious to others that they needed to be helped, to be monitored for their safety and that of those around them? I’m better off knowing there’s a strange man living next door than I am not knowing there’s a potential lunatic quietly working in his basement, building bombs, am I not? We can’t protect ourselves from the absolute unknown, can we?
The truth of the matter is Americans always put profit before anything else.A good look at the statistics worldwide puts american way ahead of any country in mass murders and gun related deaths.Some years ago we in Australia had a horrific mass murder Hobart Tasmania,the Prime minister John Howard instituted a gun buy back which was very successful,we haven’t had a mass murder since,suicides have fallen and gun related incidents have more than halved.It can be done! with out all the precious bleating about your rights.The right to life trumps all your whining,besides the semi automatic weapons have nothing to do with hunting anything but humans.
excellent. except for the harris link.
This strategy would not work. It is based on the presumption that ” loneliness is what causes these shooters to lash out,” and this presumption is demonstrably false.
It may not be loneliness in the purest (or most literal) sense but even those who act in concert with others tend to be socially inept types who’ve found others like themselves who basically feed off of one another’s anger and sense of otherness. Instead of “I’ll make them pay” it becomes “we’ll make them pay.” But what if they’d been able to find friends and develop healthy relationships instead of just finding others already on the periphery, already damaged and angry? Just being kind to others, trying to keep people from falling through the cracks, isn’t the absolute solution…but it could have a real effect, so why not consider it part of a larger solution. Or do we just abandon all hope and wait our turn to be cut down in a school, movie theater, airport…?
I agree with your comments, Caroline. I don’t understand why everyone just can’t be nice or compassionate, or show some empathy for others? It costs NOTHING to say something nice to someone else.
For the person who said..”don’t befriend strangers”, or some such….we are NOT talking about taking this person home with us! We are talking about being compassionate and caring of other human beings. We have the “CHOICE” to continue being friends or not! Most circumstances go no further than a “hello”…or a “I like your shoes” or something else. A little goes a long way! Obviously, the person who is terrified of being nice to another human being because she thinks it will end up in some kind of Psycho situation, doesn’t have a grasp of what we are talking about! For those that do, keep on being compassionate, caring, and happy, for we NEVER know how much it might cheer someone up, change their mood, make them want to do the same.
How? Citation needed.
Actually it is.
No. It’s more often people with a sense of personal impotence and mild narcissistic tendencies. And, it would seem, an obsession with guns.
It ain’t about “loneliness.” It’s about a sense of futility, of their lives being out of their control (welcome to the club) and a sense of personal impotence so complete that they are driven to project power in the only way they know how.
And, yes, loneliness can be a part of that sense of impotence. But it’s rarely all of it. Plenty of lonely people manage not to kill anyone. People suffering from impotent rage, on the other hand, are a bit like a bullet themselves. They are pushed by the expanding gases in the only direction that seems open to them.
It’s also a bit like how a gun in the house increases likelihood of suicides for those susceptible. It requires very little foresight or preparation.
Not true. There is something the Gov can do. Make them so damn expensive that people can’t afford them. The 2nd Ammendment doesn’t say anything about that! Make a $200 gun $10,000 and see how many people buy guns then. Also, start holding the seller and family member responsible if someone commits an act with their gun. I guarantee you’ll see a slowdown in mass-shootings.
The government could do that for crack and cocaine? Price people out of the market? 300 million are already in private hands. You don’t think an efficient black market would emerge very quickly? Holding family members responsible for acts they knew nothing about would fly in the face of our criminal justice system. There’s a reason no one has proposed either of those as solutions in Congress.
Come on. Crack and cocaine aren’t legal, so how could the government set a price on it? As you point out, there are already many criminals with guns. And that’s why we have a police force. The point is to decrease the availability of guns in this country so they aren’t sold to any Tom, Dick and Nut-job who decides not to take his pills that day and go out and shoot a bunch of people.
You want all of us to “connect” with the loners so they won’t shoot people. How about the families who brought them into the world and thrust them upon us do it instead. It’s called being a parent. And if they can’t/won’t do it; and if they wan’t to allow access to their guns – guess what – we hold them responsible too. I’m sick and tired of seeing the surviving family member say “I had no idea, he was such a nice young man. I’m sorry.” BS. If you’re that out of touch/clueless then maybe they’ll start tuning in if we hold them responsible. It’s not our job to raise your kids!
Feel free to write me in for President😉
What you’d see in that scenario would be a lot of murders committed with stolen guns. I saw it in Washington, D.C.
I personally have spent the past 20 years working in social work from domestic violence, drug addicts, adolescents in schools, widows, VA’s with PTSD and so on….You would be surprised how allowing someone who is currently high, struggling with PTSD, and has experienced trauma like you could not even imagine–I have talked them down with empathy and a conversation of what I could do to support them. Many will take the help, many soften throughout the conversation. I have orchestrated police showing up to assist a homicidal Vet and had it turn out, getting him to a hospital with a CD/PTSD program. Do not take lightly what listening can do–until you have been there you do not know. If you want to tear this subject down and criticize then that is your right, and proof that you are not committed to being a part of the change but hang out at the edges worrying about your private gun rights, and you absolutely have a right do to so…The only thing I know for sure is that what we are currently doing is not working, and is getting worse.
What a beautiful response, DrL. Why are people so against being compassionate? People we meet may have big issues and perhaps a kind word, or lending an ear can move mountains!
Note that every one of these mass shooters have been on anti depressants or anti psychotic meds. No previous generation has engaged in so many senseless shootings until the introduction of these meds. The lack of insight and willingness to consider the effect of these meds on people’s actions is baffling but it seems to be the norm with mainstream commentators.
We use these meds. They do help many people. In times past, these same people were kept in Mental Health Hospitals (Asylums). These no longer exist, so some of the people who would have been helped or permanently kept away from innocent people now walk the streets and commit heinous crimes
Georganne…AND! if you think about it, the same conditions existed for many years! The difference is: perhaps there wasn’t a gun readily available at the drop of a hat to use!
This is the first and only suggestion different than all the others I’ve read thus far. IF it is true that all or the majority of these mass shooters (which is sadly different than those kill for religious purposes) were on some typ of antidepressant or other drug(s), there may be something to this! Heck, we’ve all heard how some of these drugs can cause extreme cases of exactly what they are meant to stop(depression, suicide, anxiety, etc). Are the drugs these people are on all from the same manufacturers? Are these the “one in 500” studies? How about knowing THAT on a television commercial? “One in 400 cases have been known to commit mass shootings in schools, military bases, and/or movie theaters”. Seems like this might be something to explore and EXPOSE. Yes, it doesn’t take away from the attention that is needed for those whom are painfully neglected or teased. That is not right. Also, I know drugs to be very helpful to those whom need it. I’m just saying this is a good avenue to research.
@Interesting: Right on. Into the 1990s doctors were releasing, and newspapers were reporting, which legal and illegal drugs were in these people’s blood (some, like Timothy McVeigh, *did* use only street drugs). Why’d they stop? Because pharmaceutical companies pressured them to withhold this information. (See Breggin, P.; Huffington, A.) Much as tobacco companies pressured the media to withhold information about cigarettes and lung cancer.
I can concede that these medications may play some part in this. But it’s hard to say exactly what that part is. First, it’s possible some of these folks would have become mentally ill even if everything and everyone in their lives had been ideal. But if we take those folks away, we’re left with those for whom mental illness wasn’t necessarily a given. Now is it the fault of the medication? These guys (I’ll go with masculine pronouns just because they’re almost all male) are treated with meds after they’ve gone quite a ways down the path to violence. (I think. I don’t have their medical records or any medical background.) So maybe it’s too much to ask of anti-depressants to fix patients who need much more than medication by the time these meds are prescribed? Also, if some of these guys are truly depressed, the antidepressants may just be making them feel energetic enough to act on their violent fantasies. (The same way there are more suicides at the end of the winter when those who’ve been too depressed to act find themselves feeling just motivated enough to go through with killing themselves.) Does that make it the fault of the medication? I don’t think so. I think it’s more a failure of family. society, supervising physicians than it is just the medication. I’m not saying, of course, that there aren’t side effects to medications that the pharmaceutical companies do their level best to downplay. I’d just be more inclined to point the finger at anti-depressants if there were cases where they said “He had friends, he was on the football team, his grades were great, he was getting ready for prom…his depression seemed to be under control…and then he stocked up guns and killed everyone. We never saw it coming.” I think the victims never see it coming, but those nearest to these shooters know there’s something wrong and either they do nothing, or their efforts are too little, too late.
What if there’s alcohol involved. or other drugs,or illegal drugs? I hope the FBI is taking tissue and blood samples of the shootera.
There is absolutely NO evidence to support a causation between the use of anti-depressants or SSRI medication and mass shootings. Note: I said no evidence for causation. What you’re post is asserting is a correlation. People, PLEASE LEARN THE DIFFERENCE! Its the same as a heroin addict blaming his constipation on the cheese pizza he ate the night before! Cheese does NOT cause constipation in ALL people…
The only thing that’s been on the rise the last decade, is our dependency on the 24 hour news cycle. Shootings, like the Oregon or Colorado shootings, have been happening for a long time, and consistently to boot! They’ve not always been carried out by one deranged individual, and they’ve not always happened in the workplace or schools or highly populated areas like a movie theatre, but they’ve happened none the less! We’ve all become so accustomed to being inundated with “breaking news” alerts on our damn smart phones; stories are reported and shared within minutes now as they happen no matter what the circumstance; that we as a society can’t fathom having to discover such tragedies through the Sunday paper, days later!
THIS…is a large part of the problem! Journalists are no longer allowed or even capable of being true journalists. When you only have minutes or hours to report on a story like the Oregon shooting, Bhengazi, Hillary Clinton’s email debacle, Anthony Wiener’s wiener, etc…how can we expect decent FACTUAL journalism?! We demand up-to-the-minute details and scoff at any news organization that’s late to the frenzy! Knowing this, if you assume that some statistic, report, or op ed is BIBLICAL TRUTH…then you’re as much a part of the problem- ESPECIALLY concerning issues as polarizing as gun control. There is NO CLEAR CUT SOLUTION NOR CAUSE for this matter. And unfortunately, we can no longer depend on our government or news media to keep us all a well-informed republic. We all have to do our due diligence to research and be open to ALL solutions, not just the ones we agree with, or support our own religious or political bias. But…PLEASE stop spouting off shit from half-baked 3rd party news zines like Conservative Tribune, The Blaze, Briebart, or Samual-Warde.com, Expose Today, Reverb Press or any other with an obvious political bend. The only stats you get, or reports are spun and skewed to support their political narratives. 90% of it is complete bullshit, and it would serve you well to treat ANY news site who’s viewership is predominantly made up of people who “liked” their FB page as nothing more than entertainment. This particular era of “news” absolutely sucks goat ass, which means you pretty much have to read everything, and then draw your own conclusion. If that makes me a skeptic, then I’m a skeptic. At least I’m a well-informed skeptic.
Until WE start vetting OUR sources the way we expect our sources to vet THIERS… we can never have a true, honest, factually coherent debate in regards to issues like gun control, mass shootings and how to prevent such tragedies. As for this particular article, I agree whole-heartedly with the author. Not because I believe that what they propose is some fool-proof solution, or if it will help at all, but what harm could come from just simply being kinder and more respectful to other people?! Some of you insist that by doing so would cause more strife than its worth; that poor and lonely souls just become obsessive and clingy. Based on personal experience, I can tell you YES that absolutely can happen. But isn’t that what discernment is for?! You must practice discernment on a daily basis to get good at it, I’ve found, but when you do, you can avoid such pitfalls. Like I said, it’s not a fool-proof solution, but if prevents a few isolated incedents… It’s worth it.
Sorry for all the ramblings…peace.
Josh…you have stated exactly what I would state. Why is there ANY argument about treating others with respect, compassion, caring, and empathy?
No they have not. There is literally no way to know what prescription medicine someone is on because that information is protected under HIPPA. Not only that, people are trying to make a giant stretch in saying that suboxene, found in possession of the latest shooter, counts as a psychiatric medicine. It does not.
Stop blaming the meds. MANY people benefit from them. Stop blaming the meds and look into the cause. There will always be an element of society who will stop at nothing to kill other people, or take revenge. Making guns harder to get their hands on IS the solution!
If a crazy person wants to kill someone else and there is no gun available, they will find another weapon. The people doing these shootings are all wackos who would have been behind bars in the days before deinstitutionalization. Here are five examples:
On September 16, 2013, Aaron Alexis killed 12 people and injured 3 others in a mass shooting at the Washington Navy Yard in Southeast Washington, D.C. Alexis had numerous mental health issues, including claims that the voices in his head were harassing him and an incident where he disassembled his hotel room bed, believing that someone was hiding under it.
On December 14, 2012, 20-year-old Adam Lanza killed 20 children and 6 adult staff members at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, Lanza was a schizophrenic psychopath who could barely function on his own. He lived with his mother but communicated with her only by email.
On July 20, 2012, James Eagan Holmes killed 12 people and injured 70 others at a mass shooting in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, Holmes had met previously with several mental health professionals at the University of Colorado. He had made homicidal statements to one of his psychiatrists, and she believed that he could be dangerous.
On January 8, 2011, Jared Lee Loughner killed 6 people and wounded 13 others during a constituent meeting held for U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona. Loughner was a longtime drug user whose behavior frightened his parents. His teachers were afraid of him. He had had five contacts with college police for classroom and library disruptions.
On April 16, 2007, Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people and wounded 17 others at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia, Cho had exhibited numerous incidents of aberrant behavior beginning in his junior year of college that should have served as a warning about his deteriorating mental condition.
The politics and religion of these killers probably have nothing to do with their actions. But one thing that is common among them and other mass murderers is that they were all known to be mentally ill, and their actions caused their acquaintances to fear them. In the past, they would have been safely locked away in a secure facility where they could not hurt members of the general public. But the mental health system in this country has deteriorated to the point where the only way a person can end up behind bars now is if they injure or kill someone.
My suggestion is to provide a way for citizens to report dangerous people like this, and allow the police to pick them up and take them to a secure psychiatric facility where they can be evaluated by a professional. Right now we are using our police (with some minimal training) as street psychiatrists, and they’re not qualified to do that. Let the professionals handle things, and if they decide that the person is a danger to himself or others, keep him behind bars.
Politics and religion and guns are not the issue. The ability to incarcerate those who are dangerous mentally ill is the issue. In other words, the problem is not unlocked guns. The problem is unlocked homicidal maniacs.
Hal, I don’t understand that you can’t see that we need more gun regulation. The argument that “the criminals will find “something else” to murder others” is a lame argument, in my opinion. Tell me how many mass murders occur with a knife, an ax, or any other non-gun weapon?
The fact that there are sooooooooooooooo many guns floating around, makes it easier to react on impulse, or for revenge. Why won’t you see or try to understand?
It’s not that I can’t see it, it’s just that I don’t agree that we need more gun regulation. Criminals don’t obey gun laws anyway, and law-abiding gun owners already follow the law. Your opinion is wrong about criminals finding something else if they don’t have a gun. Britain banned guns, and now they are trying to ban knives because there are 130,000 knife attacks every year. There are fewer guns, so knives become the weapon of choice. Criminals will use whatever is available to commit their crimes.
In the US, our right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution not to be infringed by federal law. A gun ban would mean nothing when there are already millions of guns in the country. As almost everyone with any sense understands, mass shootings occur in gun-free zones and are perpetrated by people who are already known to be dangerous. Those two factors, more than anything else, are where we should concentrate our attention if we are truly interested in stopping mass shootings.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4318286/
@CK: As long as accurate information about the chemicals present in homicides’ bloodstreams can be suppressed, we’ll see more back-and-forth “debate” about whether more guns mean more crime, less crime, more gun-related crime, more respect, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam. Most people don’t realize that there’s a specific pattern–which is NOT present in ALL shooting deaths, let’s be clear about that–related to a specific class of drugs, many of which appear to be safe for most people and are therefore handed out like aspirin.
If guns did not exist, then there’d be no shooting deaths…but there might, arguably, be more wars and more deaths. (Human life expectancy has been greater in the last few centuries, with widely available guns, than it was in the centuries before guns were invented.) People would find other ways of acting out violence. Some might be less lethal. Some would be more so.
If serotonin boosters were used only under carefully controlled conditions, such that all patients who showed signs of dementia were immediately sent to detox before they could become violent, then *most* of those school shootings probably wouldn’t have happened. (Of course, homicidal psychosis can also be caused by the stimulants we as a nation at least try to regulate and control, e.g. meth…and some homicidal people are motivated by envy or revenge rather than psychosis.)
Priscilla…the reason why more people are living longer is because of education, healthcare, and lifestyle.
These shooters are angry young men that no one ever noticed. If they commit this terrible act the world has to notice. Maybe passing a Federal Law that it is illegal to reveal the name and/or a picture of the shooter in the media in any crimes that include 3 or more shooting victims. If violated a large fine will be paid by the media outlet to the school and victims of where this crime was committed. It would prevent the shooter from getting the glory they crave. A second law could also be passed that if after one week the shooter is not killed or captured then the name could be released if it is decided by law enforcement public knowledge could lead to a capture. (Just throwing around ideas)
Why ban revealing the shooters name only if they kill less than three people? Assuming attention is what they seek, they then get it even if they shoot one or two. It would be better to ban releasing their name completely, in connection to a shooting. Or, ban the media from creating a non-stop media circus, which is part of what a shooter is desiring. But even so, this alone will not end shootings. But the media definitely needs to be reined in from their rabid enthusiastic coverage and competitive push for ratings with their “first with the story” mindset. . .
It might be tried but the research I’ve done suggests that it wouldn’t help much. School shooters are likely to be listening to the voices in their own heads more than those on TV.
Priscilla…you just don’t get it. They may be listening to “voices in their own heads”, but they certainly have listened to the news to get their ideas of fame, otherwise, why the same modus operandi?
It sounds like a nice idea but this can be really dangerous advice, especially for women. I used to always befriend the outcasts, but I ended up with a stalker who literally sat outside my job regularly for hours at a time and followed me all around, popping up in the most random places. I’m still avoiding this guy, 20 years and 3,000 miles away. He was in my current town recently and contacted me. I was so nervous that whole week and kept making excuses to avoid him because there is no way to shake him (I’ve tried.) Be kind, yes, but be careful.
For women who are worried about the danger of being nice to a stalker, I’d recommend being nice-in-a-group. Christian colleges are excellent places to practice that. There are lots of different “student ministry” groups to join. If you have found something you actually like about this person, so will your friends, and they can prevent the formation of any thought pattern like “Nobody else cares about me but Jane Doe, my only friend, whom I can’t live without and must cling to forever.”
At the college where I was a regular student, one of the outpatients from the hospital used to hang out in the library where I worked. I liked him; he’d been a student, before a brain injury, and was trying to re-learn things he’d studied in the past. So I figured others in the “student ministries” crowd would like him, too. And they did. So when he asked me for a date and I said no, he had a self-comforting assumption to make: “Because you like Ed better, right? Ed’s a good man.” No obsession. No stalking. No creepiness. I think he’d got up the nerve to think of dating again *because* he now had a few same-age, same-sex buddies.
But if someone really is creepy, and you have friends who have interests other than “popularity,” and they agree that he’s too creepy to be part of your crowd…he probably is.
It was in a group yes but he insisted on stalking me around town on his own otherwise. So creepy.
What Christianity are you studying Priscilla? You stated earlier that you thought that poor little girl (with all GOOD intentions) was evil and her face was unattractive! I would think at the very least, that you would have learned how to be compassionate and unassuming with all the Christian people and clubs you talk about! Furthermore, the guy with the “brain” injury asked you out. So what? The poor guy has decreased mental capacity. Where is YOUR compassion?
Joan, there will ALWAYS be situations where an act of kindness is mistaken for vulnerability. I believe that the author means is to be kind. Like…hold open a door, offer your seat up….tell them you like their jacket, tell them they are pretty. This does NOT mean offering up personal information about yourself, inviting them over for coffee or anything else! Too many people are missing the gist of what was authored.
Sometimes people aren’t unhinged because they are alone, they are alone because they are unhinged. A simple act of kindness is all it takes to get on a stalker’s radar, and the police can’t do much about stalking until the stalker gets violent. This is a recurring problem that leads to the deaths of (usually) women and girls. I recommend viewing “Stalked: Someone’s Watching” for the story of a teen girl (Cameron Wallace) who was ultimately murdered by someone she tried to be nice to (Ryan Clutter) who became obsessed with her. That is hardly the only time this has happened.
You could argue it’s a relatively rare occurrence, but it’s less rare than mass shootings, so the statistical improbability is hardly an effective argument in this case.
Oh ya, for that stalker problem… Conceal and carry permit, the course is only about 150.00 bucks in my places. Problem the wrong forum to bring that up in though. By the way sorry about the typos using my phone to chime in.
Unfortunately, this confuses correlation with causation – these young men who commit these crimes are lonely; but the extreme antisocial behaviors that culminate in these massacres isn’t just “loneliness”. And lots of lonely and alienated kids don’t end up blowing away their classmates. The difference between the Adam Lanzas of this world and countless other frustrated and lonely young men is access to guns. Access to guns makes a moment of internal pain become violence directed either outward or inward in a way that has devastating and exponentially more damaging effects. Pulling a trigger is much too easy. Could that desperate man harm himself or others, even without a gun? Of course (and people without guns do) but it’s just harder, and the results are far less deadly. It’s the gun in the hand that makes the difference.
So what can we do? We can stay focused on this. We can stop buying the line that it’s “too hard” or “too complicated”. Can we get every gun out of reach of anyone who might turn it on themselves or others? Of course not – but that doesn’t mean we throw up our hands and say there’s nothing we can do. You don’t need to ban all guns – but you start by making it much, MUCH harder for anyone without insurance, training, regular certification and appropriate screening to get their hands on a gun. It’s a firearm, it’s only purpose is to cause damage – it’s not crazy in a modern society for us to demand that the privilege of owning one comes with some serious responsibility, and to hold gun owners accountable. It won’t make all illegal guns disappear overnight, but it will stem the flood, and eventually it will give us a way to keep guns out of the hands of SOME of the people who shouldn’t have access to them. I don’t understand the argument that because we can’t eliminate EVERY possibility of inappropriate uses of guns, we shouldn’t do ANYTHING… That’s ridiculous, and the longer we believe this lie – that is being fed to us by a special interest group in the hopes that we’ll succumb to our own frustration and fear – the deeper the problem becomes.
Yes, the world will be a better place if we all reached out to try to include the lonely and disenfranchised around us. Let’s do that – but please don’t kid yourself that all Adam Lanza needed was for someone to invite him to sit at their lunch table and he wouldn’t have turned murderous. And don’t accept the lie that there is “nothing we can do” to prevent this. There’s nothing we can to to guarantee this never happens again, but there are LOTS of things we can do dramatically reduce the odds, and to make it more difficult for someone who wants to hurt themselves or others to get their hands on a gun that turns that impulse into fatal action. We need to shake off our complacency and wake up as a country and refuse to allow this to continue.
Not going to fly constitutionally. The RKBA is now considered a fundamental right under the 14th amendment which means both federal and state government must now prove any law passed is the least restrictive means to achieve the end.
That’s not true – and perpetuating that myth is a prime tactic of special interest groups (we can’t pass effective laws, or the related “we already have good enough laws that just aren’t being enforced” myth). It’s not a difficult argument that there is a compelling state interest in requiring reasonable regulation that can include registration, training, insurance and qualification.
It’s not about banning guns – it’s about trying to make sure that only people who obtain them for the right reasons and agree to be responsible for them can continue to own them going forward. Yes, that’s going to DRAMATICALLY lower the market for guns in America (except the black market) so that’s why the NRA and the gun lobby are so adamant about keeping regulation off the books. But we regulate all kinds of industries whose products impact society in even lesser ways. There’s nothing in the 2nd (or 14th) amendment that prevents reasonable regulation.
My thoughts exactly, Lori. I live in Chicago. You know, where all the gangs and young people own guns? If these guns were “unavailable”, the majority of drive-by’s, or retaliation, would decrease dramatically. In fact, there is a movement to prevent shootings in Englewood, a gun-infested, gang-infested, fed up community.
The mothers have decided to unite. They now hold “block” parties where they welcome anyone. They provide food and advice to young people. There has NOT been ONE shooting since they started. In fact, there is an old lady who lives in a house where she welcomes others to drop off food for barbecues, clothing, etc. to hand out to the community.
You see, they are showing love to the community. I would think it would be difficult for a gun-toting person to shoot anyone while they occupy the community, show their presence, for two reasons. One, if they did come by and shoot someone, they would be caught because they would be reported. Two, how could they possibly conduct criminal activity with such an audience!
I truly think that MANY of these thugs would NOT be able to obtain a gun if fewer were available! What is wrong with trying to stop the flood of guns? If it is more difficult to obtain one, perhaps the vast majority of spontaneous reaction thugs wouldn’t have a gun available to react spontaneously!
Driving a car threw a school yard is a way easier way to kill kids, then to load up a dozen magazines, strap on a vest, and go shooting up a school building. Do we ban cars? Sue auto manufacturers, drivers Ed teachers, and auto insurance companies for the actions of the driver? Make gasoline and oil incredibly expensive? Should all law abiding drivers suffer for the actions of a few?
Wrong! Matt Walsh suggested this too. The problem is that it ignores sociopathic behavior. People that inherently lack empathy will actually use this to their advantage against you although I do agree there some value in not isolating people this will have little effect because their perceived wrongs against them are generally not justified anyway. The main problem is that we continue to discount and deny that young males view guns as an object of power and use them express themselves in destructive ways.
People who lack empathy can be taught empathy. Stop demoralizing these people by insisting they have no redeeming qualities. Your barbaric insights into the topic of the human psyche is bordering on pathetic. It is called Aspergers. Look it up! Learn something about it! Educate yourself!
People who are lonely, introverted, or have ADD do not kill people. However, people who are onely, introverted, have being misdiagnosed or have comorbidities with ADD and have very much more serious problems can break and go shoot people.
It takes a great deal more wrong with your psyche than being “lonely” to go shoot up a classroom of children. If that were true, people would be clamoring in Orwellian choruses to diagnose the crimethink of introverts and people with ADD so all of us library and nerdy types could be put away before we shot people.
That’s so absurd. Most of us are far more interested in steampunk literature, computers, science, knitting, and other very quiet peaceful things, which keep us entirely out of the public eye.
Clinicians are very reluctant to diagnose a young person as having schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, or other disorders that might interrupt their school or career by putting them on medications that make it hard for them to function in an academic environment. Anti-psychotics are serious drugs — and unfortunately, are neurochemically nearly opposite from the drugs commonly prescribed for ADD. So if you put a young person on the drugs for ADD, you are actually aggravating their schizophrenia, for example, if that is the actual underlying condition.
Since most of these cases are not monitored, but prescribed and then left without counseling, it’s very unsurprising that psychotic behavior is more and more common as more and more children are put on medication for ADD when that may not be appropriate.
One thing we desperately need to do is learn to *value* introversion. Can you imagine the flamewar if @Shava23 had written “lonely, ‘gay,’ or ADD”? “Lonely, Black, or ADD”? Yet introversion is permanent, hereditary, and valuable–like Blackness, or lefthandedness, or blood type.
This kind of misperception *does* make me angry. It’s why I stopped going to church, although my beliefs never changed. I’m a *writer*. I meet most of my needs for human communication by writing to a minority of people who share my interests, rather than stifling my needs by wasting my time in idle chatter with people who don’t know there’s anything more interesting than idle chatter in this world, poor idiots they.
I think why I’m reading down through these comments is to look for kindred spirits, to reassure them that yes, you’re *meant* to need quiet time; there are other people like you; we understand, and we like you much better than the yappy bores who assume that you’re meant to be like them.
Actually, studies show that introversion is the result of positive Gifts & Talents (at least three separate traits, all completely *positive*). And extroversion? Well…at best, extroverts just fail to develop the “extra” brain circuits, for beauty, morality, spirituality, music, mathematics, etc., that introverts really enjoy using in the company of our small select circles of close friends. At best, extroverts are *neurologically less developed.*
Young introverts should read the works of Elaine Aron, Marti Olsen Laney, Thomas Sowell, and Susan Cain. And say it loud and proud: we do love people, even extroverts–but if we love extroverts, it’s more in the way we love dogs than in the way we love our real friends. We may bond, but we certainly shouldn’t try to be more like them.
For someone who claims to be an “introvert”, you certainly got your “stereotyping” down pat! How’s that workin’ for ya? What you are portraying is that ALL “introverts” are alike, and ALL “extroverts” are the same! Something CLEARLY went wrong with your upbringing! In fact, YOU are the BIGGEST naive, self-consumed poster on this thread! Perhaps YOU should take your meds!
Excellent post. As an educator, father, and somebody that cares deeply about vulnerable people, I agree whole-heartedly that people’s apathy to others, the isolation inherent in modern living, are strong factors in these crimes. As you said, people who are connected with others don’t do these things.
Hal, I completely agree. All of the points in these posts have some aspects of validity, for sure, however; mental health is probably the most overlooked, and in my opinion, probably THE MOST OBVIOUS REASON FOR THESE ACTS. Not all, but most. As a kid/adolescent who didn’t think “I hate my parents” or “he/she/they are so mean to me” or “they would be sad when I die”, but never acted on instincts of murder or suicide? Most people of normal mental health. The spiraling of mental health issues can happen at any age, but are commonly known to begin in the later teenage years to early 20s. Mix that with still forming body chemistry and adolescent social development and things can be quit overwhelming for someone with mental health issues. What doesn’t add up is that it happens so much in this country. Why is that? We can not be the only country that has people suffering from mental illness or saddened by teasing or isolation. Why does it happen more frequently here, in the US? Please note that I’m not saying that it doesn’t happen in other countries. I’m only questioning the frequency in the US. I don’t agree that it is loss of religion as this country has major religious ties and outlets. I don’t think it’s lack of understanding as we have a major social care network. Why does it happen here so much? All I can come up with is 1) media 2) pharmaceutical drug side effects 3) access to weapons 4) Poor parenting 5) mental health, as previously discussed. Not all in that order and not all with the same ratios of cause.
“5. Do Something About Mental Health! – Cool. Yeah. So, like, free psychologists visits for everyone? Even if you could, the people that have done this haven’t been mentally ill, by and large.”
Oops, that’s wrong. Here are five examples:
On September 16, 2013, Aaron Alexis killed 12 people and injured 3 others in a mass shooting at the Washington Navy Yard in Southeast Washington, D.C. Alexis had numerous mental health issues, including claims that the voices in his head were harassing him and an incident where he disassembled his hotel room bed, believing that someone was hiding under it.
On December 14, 2012, 20-year-old Adam Lanza killed 20 children and 6 adult staff members at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, Lanza was a schizophrenic psychopath who could barely function on his own. He lived with his mother but communicated with her only by email.
On July 20, 2012, James Eagan Holmes killed 12 people and injured 70 others at a mass shooting in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, Holmes had met previously with several mental health professionals at the University of Colorado. He had made homicidal statements to one of his psychiatrists, and she believed that he could be dangerous.
On January 8, 2011, Jared Lee Loughner killed 6 people and wounded 13 others during a constituent meeting held for U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona. Loughner was a longtime drug user whose behavior frightened his parents. His teachers were afraid of him. He had had five contacts with college police for classroom and library disruptions.
On April 16, 2007, Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people and wounded 17 others at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia, Cho had exhibited numerous incidents of aberrant behavior beginning in his junior year of college that should have served as a warning about his deteriorating mental condition.
The politics and religion of these killers probably have nothing to do with their actions. But one thing that is common among them and other mass murderers is that they were all known to be mentally ill, and their actions caused their acquaintances to fear them. In the past, they would have been safely locked away in a secure facility where they could not hurt members of the general public. But the mental health system in this country has deteriorated to the point where the only way a person can end up behind bars now is if they injure or kill someone.
My suggestion is to provide a way for citizens to report dangerous people like this, and allow the police to interview them, and (if necessary) pick them up and take them to a secure psychiatric facility where they can be evaluated by a professional. Right now we are using our police (with some minimal training) as street psychiatrists, and they’re not qualified to do that. Let the professionals handle things and if they decide that the person is a danger to himself or others, keep him behind bars.
Politics and religion and guns are not the issue. The ability to incarcerate those who are dangerous mentally ill is the issue. In other words, the problem is not unlocked guns. The problem is unlocked homicidal maniacs.
Can I just say my fave GL is Hal, and this comment has made my life complete? Yes. Yes I can. Thanks for reading and being my favorite thing ever.
Sounds wonderful, Robert. You keep up the scholarly writing and I’ll keep protecting Sector 2814. And don’t worry, no evil shall escape my sight.
and… exactly how does a person get his rights back (to possess a firearm) after they have been treated & are no longer a danger?
Often, admitting one needs mental help is a one-way ticket to losing your rights.
The family, not all, has failed teaching: Respect. Responsibility. Morality.
I think families could have done more in keeping guns away from their troubled kids, but they seem like otherwise normal families horrified by the actions of their kids. I wish that good parenting automatically raised a good person, but these young men are not normally developing or functioning people. They needed intensive mental health services, daily- if not residential- programming, and supervision. There are some people who will never have the capacity for empathy or moral reasoning, but we can teach them self- control and purpose- if only to serve their own interests.
Sorry mental illness is not solved by the family or anyone else teaching respect, responsibility and morality. It’s a disease/ chemical imbalance of the brain that can sometimes be treated with drugs and counseling. Sometimes it can’t even be effectively treated by those things and then all you are left with is locking the person up so he or she and society can be safe.
Scott…nobody is saying that mental illness can be “solved”, however, the people around the mentally ill should have resources in which to reach out and share their concerns with professionals! I believe what Hal was saying is that there MUST be a way of talking to the professionals in order to PREVENT the inevitable!
True, to some extent, because those are the things introverts naturally do best, and the twentieth century’s attempt to normalize extroversion relies on de-valuing respect, responsibility, and morality.
Although “mass” shootings are down (hey, the numbers don’t lie), this is the most logical suggestion I’ve heard in a long time. Media has fueled the illusion that there is a epidemic of shootings. In reality, the proportion is down; however, one is indeed too many. Kindness will NOT prevent all shootings, but, unless the shootings are the result of some lunatic who subscribes to a hateful ideology, as are many these days, it may have a positive effect. Why not try it? It’s the right thing to do anyway.
Agreed that lack of social connection is part of the killers problem, but I see the belief systems of our society as the truest source of the problem.
We tell children through our words and actions that personal gratification is everyone’s purpose for existence, and then wonder why they judge everyone worthy of death. It’s time to tell the truth, recognize we die and will all be judged by God, your purpose for existence in this life is so much more important then any selfish thoughts you might have.
As long as people worship their money, possessions, careers, sexual freedom, and rights to kill their unborn children, you will have children who conclude nothing is worth living for and nobody is worthy keeping alive.
It’s time to start worshipping God, reading His word, and caring for His children.
Reblogged this on The Never Chronicles.
Bizarre, poorly written garbage. The authors claim is not supported by any evidence. Sounds like a retarded millennial.
@moderators, could this site benefit from a flag system?
Just to counter Priscilla (fancy pants) King, I always greet strangers with a smile and a hello or nod, even just in passing. Most you can see light up. I don’t know if I’m the first of the 50th to greet them that way on that day, but to some it might be the only one and I think it matters.
I’ve done this my entire life and it has brought me some great friends. I don’t judge. I don’t care what you look like or what language you speak, a smile and a nod is universal. Maybe if we all cared just a little about the people around us we wouldn’t be so callous and cold-hearted like miss fancy pants. But even knowing that people like miss fancy pants are out there I will continue to greet people the way I have always done, You never know, someday one of them might just be you Priscilla King. Will you greet me back with a smile or will you puss and cringe? Sorry, but people like you are the problem.
You mean you greedily inflict your needs for attention on strangers? Btw I can tell the difference between the tooth-baring of a public nuisance and a genuine smile.
Astigmatism is a completely separate issue, but just in case @ChristineDalton wonders why I don’t believe she’s actually being friendly…I have astigmatism; although I’m still glasses-free even for reading or driving, after age 50 (which is a reliable HSP-introvert indicator), it takes my eyes longer to change focus every year.
So on the street I probably have my left eye focussed on scanning the horizon, right eye focussed on scanning what’s right under my feet. Oh, here comes one of those human-shaped blurs, making noises…is it anybody I *need* to notice?
At first glance it probably seems to pests that I’ve made eye contact with them, briefly; what my eyes are actually doing is just *guessing* whether the size, color, gender, etc., indicates that the person *might* be someone I know. Then there are a few seconds where my eyes are no doubt communicating something. What we communicate is what the other person understands, but what my eyes are actually saying is “Oh, what a bore, do we HAAAFF to focus on this blur.”
Which is probably why, by the time the face shows up clearly to me, it’s expressing blatant hostility. I’ve lived many years and walked many miles in many places, and I’ve *never* found one of these pushy pests who demand attention/chatter from strangers who was honestly trying to express “friendliness.” *Not ever.*
(Even though I have found extroverts who were honestly confused about the possibility of feeling or expressing “friendliness” instead of becoming friends through a process that begins by feeling and expressing respect.)
What I have learned to do is, unless I recognize the voice or understand it to be saying something urgent enough to justify speaking to a stranger, just walk on by and let my *shoulders* say to the world “That person obviously mistook me for someone else.”
Not everyone will agree with me, but I think seeing isolation as a strong risk factor for deranged mass-murder is a really bad idea. I do not want strangers invading my personal space and disrupting the delicate emotional subtleties and impressions melding on my mental palette with their invasive “company.” Stay away, really, unless we’ve nonverbally negotiated an engagement with our body language first. I’m not going to go as far as accusing you of psychological rape if you invade my personal space, and I’ll be perfectly nice to you, but I won’t like it. At all.
People break not from isolation, but from the reasons that led to their isolation, say, ugliness or another friend-repellant development issue. If they don’t have a cause for their isolation, then they /want/ to be isolated. Otherwise, what is preventing them from seeking out the social interaction they so desperately need? If there is a negative cause for their isolation, then the problem is that cause, not the symptoms of that root cause. If I’m isolated because I’m so ugly no one wants to be around me, and I snap and kill all my classmates, I did so because I was ugly, not because I was isolated. If you want to change something, work on the causes for their isolation, not the isolation itself which is a natural and rational reaction to those causes.
Also, you cannot pretend engagement with someone. If isolation is a problem for them, and they don’t attract friends, etc, than you pretending to be friends with them out of a duty to society because you’re scared they’ll shoot up your school, is not going to make anything better. If they’re so ugly or stupid or mean or whatever that they are effectively removed from the social economy, then THAT is the problem; the isolation issue can’t be solved directly.
Also, if their isolation IS undesirable, well, in general people don’t like having their problems noticed. It’s humiliating. If the recipient of your benevolence really does hate isolation, then how is having you very obviously try to reach out to them lest they shoot up their classmates going to make them feel? When I worked on the street selling merchandise with my cult when I was little, I hated it when social workers came by and pulled me aside and asked me questions. I felt so deeply deeply disrespected. They would run through a checklist to make sure I had everything I needed, and I didn’t have anything on the list. I wasn’t feeling that bad about it before you told me what I should have and made me feel jealous and bitter that I don’t have those things I wasn’t even thinking of before you came along. I would much rather have been admired for helping my parents with business and being such a strong dependable hard-working child than pitied for not having the things other children have. It is not a nice feeling being pitied.
And if their isolation is desirable to them, what will it do to them to look down on them for their isolation? What if we respected them for their isolation instead, for all the wonderful qualities that can be born of deep introspection and quiet and withdrawal into the backwaters of social osmosis? Isn’t it possible that seeing isolation as a negative thing would make them see their isolation as negative over time, and thus create a problem that didn’t exist? In a way, this is like pitying a girl for wearing jeans until she starts to feel ashamed of wearing jeans, but oh don’t worry, you, good samaritan that you are, are right there to pull their jeans off them and smother them with pretty dresses!! If you’d just respected their isolation from the start, there wouldn’t be a need to save them from it. Most of the time when someone is wearing jeans, it’s not because they can’t afford dresses or skirts. It’s because they actually want to wear jeans.
In the few cases where isolation isn’t desirable, the isolation itself is a superficial symptom of deeper problems. Most of the time, isolation is natural and healthy and desirable. Isolation has far more positives than negatives; deeper self-awareness, spiritual development, developing an identity of substance and intricacy, coming to unique perspectives which can be a jumping-off point for future innovation and creativity, learning to make peace with your inner demons instead of hiding from them in the convenient distraction social interaction presents, processing more of the information you take in rather than letting it wash over you while you escape your mind, etc.. etc. And maybe we don’t always like our isolation, but the longer we stay the course, the more we come to terms with it. It’s an alternate path, an alternate preference/default, and just like social people take time to perfect their social skills, isolated people take time to perfect their isolation skills. Just because an isolated person whines about it one day doesn’t mean it’s undesirable for him/her. Maybe she was just having a difficulty with it in that one moment. I whined about my isolation on an introvert forum on here yesterday, and five minutes later and for the rest of the day I was basking contentedly in my isolation, like a long delicious soak in the hot tub of my soul.
Isolated children merit your respect and admiration and support, not your pity and rescue. If you don’t see that, then please forgive me for rescuing you from your excessive social behavior by locking you in my spare bedroom. I’m just trying to help, and I’m secretly scared that you’ll spend your life spreading inanity and superficial cliches everywhere you go like a moving raincloud of osmotic mediocrity.
Dittos.
Wow…
I think the reason these loner/outcast shooters go on a rampage is out of a profound frustration at life, because for whatever reason, they’ve been unable to connect with the world in positive and meaningful ways.
Your advice, to try to engage with these outcasts/loners, may actually be dangerous and bring the full brunt of their destructiveness upon the very persons trying to help them.
It would be like a layman trying to psychologically heal a very psychologically disturbed person. It’s not practical or advisable. Profound damage has already been done to that individual and for a layman to try to help him/her at this point would be but a drop in an ocean of turbulence.
Sometimes this makes sense to do, and I do work at engaging people who want to be engaged wih.
However, as a woman, I say this is not the correct thing to be selling to is to do.
1) The majority of shooters are self described “lonely, nice guys” who are actually not very nice at all. It’s not my job, as a woman, to be friends with a man that makes me feel uncomfortable because the majority of these men seem to have issues with women. Being friendly towards a lonely guy seems to indicate that I owe him sex, which is absurd. And when this doesn’t happen, mass shooters like the young man from Santa Barbara happen.
2). This feels like victim blaming. If only we had paid more attention to these men, they wouldn’t act like this. Maybe. Maybe not. We would need to pay attention to everyone starting at birth, which of course I wish we would. And also being honest. You say thry aren’t mentally ill, I say, of course they are. Not in the way you think of it– they probably aren’t schizophrenic or something that easy to define. They are privileged white males that most likely suffer from narcissistic tendencies, which some people these days call “introverts”, but it’s rare to be an actual introvert (or extrovert for that matter) and more common to just be self absorbed to the point where you think the world revolves around you. Thank you special snowflakes.
3). People do pay attention to these people. Yhe majority of these white male mass shooters are not ignored, forgotten about people: they may have wealthy parents who thought they could overlook their child’s bad behavior because of “love”. Friends don’t report their weird behavior because they think it’s a phase. Even neighbors and classmates want to give these men the benefit of the doubt. But we all know that if a black man started posting rants about women or religion on a blog or vlog, we’d be investigating immediately. It’s not that we aren’t paying atttention, it’s that we don’t report people when we should. Or, again in the case of the kid from Santa Barbara, the cops show up, see a white kid in a dorm room at college, and leave.
We have to start admitting that the people most prone to acting out in a violent rage are actually the most privileged peoplenin our society, who become infuriated that after a lifetime of hearing “yes of course” may hear no, or dissension for their ideas. Between 20 and 30 is the time in life when people leave the safety net of doting parents and childhood friends who hold the same views as they do and have to enter into the “real world”. They get told No a lot. For many of us, we were told No all through our lives, even as children, and the transition is bumpy, but manageable. But for our mass shooters, they never learned how to deal with rejection or that it’s normal that not everyone wants to be your friend and that you have to add value to other people’s lives in order to be valued by them.
Whereas look at the way people feel entitled to hate and mislabel introverts. Btw, it’s not true that introverts are necessarily born into well-off families. It *is* probably true that introverts who survive childhood have *supportive* families, or surrogates for same.
Priscilla…the reason why more people are living longer is because of education, healthcare, and lifestyle. Where do you get off by “assuming” that an extrovert “hates” introverts? This is totally WRONG! Ever think that a person is just being friendly? If there were MORE friendly people in this world, there would be less violence. Pure and simple. Are you so self-absorbed, so self-centered, so ignorant of the facts that you actually believe what you are saying? What a real pity that you think that just because someone says “hello” or “thanks for holding the door for me”, that they somehow are devious? You are one sick person!…..and NOT because you are an introvert, but because you are an IDIOT!
One thing I need to say upfront. I’m definitely in the camp that believes in what you believe won’t solve the problem. I do think amending the second amendment will help. That doing something about the mental health problem will help and even just enacting some sort of ban on assault weapons will help. WE have a problem with gun violence in this country. I can’t help but believe if the element of GUNS were removed in any way from the gun violence equation, it would be a step towards a positive outcome. Won’t solve everything, I grant you that. So you and I are on different pages here.
However, Rob, your article confirmed what I’ve always believed about this issue of gun violence in America. That there is no one answer to the problem. And I agree with you that what you believe in will help and is a good step. In fact, your article is one of the first calm and thoughtful ones I’ve read, and I’ve read plenty of posts/articles, blogs etc. But we as a country have fallen so far under the thumbs of the NRA and the fear they love to instill in our politicians and our citizens, that we can’t see past all of that to who they are anymore and how they contribute to our problem still existing. I truly believe that for the NRA fear=money. The second amendment is only a curtain they hide behind to line their pockets with cash and politicians. If the NRA really cared about anything other than that, why do they disappear every single time there’s a horrific shooting event? They’re so securely nested in their beliefs, they can just stay hidden, knowing they can’t be challenged.
I also believe that what seems to be the first and only reaction to these nightmare events isn’t the answer either, and that is to do nothing. Doing nothing is never going to help. And I consider yelling back and forth across the “aisle” of belief not all that helpful. We all rightfully get emotional about it when the incidents occur, and then wait for the next event, which if nothing at all is done, will keep happening. I don’t think anyone can deny that, regardless of what side of thought you take. And the excuse that taking one step, such as enacting stricter gun laws, won’t solve the entire problem is a shameful one. This disease has become so insidious, that no one action is going to eradicate it.
Now I’m ranting. I really just wanted to thank you for your article and the reminder that there are many avenues towards our common goal of ending the almost daily occurrence of unnecessary gun violence in America. I will definitely keep your words in mind as I go through my days.
Jeff, I thank you for your post. You hit the nail on the head. Thanks.
I have a different theory.
My theory is that the poor, like the poor all through history (and the poor are those who perceive themselves as not having their fair share of what they need and want, not the objectively poverty-stricken), imitate the wealthy, not the middle class.
When the middle class compel the wealthy to stop stealing, the poor will stop stealing – and starve voluntarily, if the nation will do so as a whole. When the middle class compel the wealthy to stop using war for quick profit, the poor will abandon violence for profit. When the middle class compel the wealthy to accomplish genuine public good, the poor will voluntarily seek work.
On what evidence is *that* one based?! Countries that succeed in eliminating wealth, e.g. Soviet Russia or Castro’s Cuba, have in fact succeeded in making everyone poor–but has that been an improvement?
It might also be worth teaching students in school what to look for. Train them like you would a fire drill, or what not. There should be some sort of procedure in places like schools, if these events still keep happening. Teach them that these things happen.
But to be fair, because this is such a huge issue, there’s not one solution that will fix it. There needs to be a constitutional amendment with stricter gun laws, improved focus on mental health, and a general shift in public discourse about this type of thing.
My kids elementary schools have active shooter training and drills. It’s sad that it’s even necessary.
The rate of mass shootings has increased exponentially in the past thirty years, and so has the number of prescriptions for antidepressants, nearly 200 million since 1980. Maybe if the gun industry paid the Media a few billion a year in advertising like the pharmaceutical industry does, we’d get some truth, for a change. Until then, the killer is still roaming free.
Hello from every other developed nation,
Please guys, come join us. Stop killing each other and enforce proper gun control. It’s not hard, the UK went through the same, as did Australia. No mass shootings since. It really is as easy as that:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html
Surely. Surely surely surely this makes you think:
And we didn’t have implement your ridiculous idea of being friends with the weird kid. What a strange idea.
Love from the rest of the world.
You’ve overlooked Britain’s bombings?
Er, what? You mean the 7/7 attacks? What on earth has that got to do with gun control? The USA has had 38 mass shootings in the lasts 6 years. Second place in OECD regions? Germany with 3.
I have a graphic that I got from somewhere on the Internet. It says the following: “Britain banned guns in 1997. In Britain today there is a knife attack every 4 minutes. 130,000 per year.” The picture shows a blood knife blade. I don’t know about the accuracy of the numbers but I do believe that if someone is disturbed enough to decide to go hurt someone, they will find a weapon to do it. Any comments on that from the rest of the world?
There is now a “Save a life, Turn in your knife” campaign over there. With collection boxes on the streets. There’s even been some legislation to limit each household to one kitchen knife. Because of course, knives aren’t tools – they are evil incarnate.
Ever tried killing 50 people with a knife? Or even one? People can be killed with knives, but it’s much easier to defend oneself against a knife than against a gun. Also, you really have to want to kill someone with a knife in almost all cases – hard to do it by accident.
“How can you know who is going to do something like this? You can’t.” – Doesn’t that statement contradict your main point of the article? (Though for the record, I’m in favor of inclusion and kindness.)
As a left-leaning moderate, I’d say that tighter gun control isn’t going to stop homicides, but I could see it making a dent in *mass* murders. There aren’t a ton of other legal tools that enable an untrained person to kill lots of people at once. And these loners likely don’t have the criminal connections to obtain them illegally.
At the end of the day, I sincerely don’t understand the deeply personal connection that law-abiding people have to this thing that was invented to kill stuff. I’m not trying to be critical of law abiders, or to be funny or antagonistic. I really don’t understand. And in this day and age, it’s tough to have good discussion about that without someone reverting to liberal insults.
Please, no. I’m always isolated because I’m both an introvert and I have SEVERE social anxiety. Anytime I’m alone in a group of people I don’t know, I spend the entire time hoping that no one tries to talk to me. Am I lonely? Yes. BUT, being lonely is the better alternative to making an ass out of myself in front of a room of strangers because of a panic attack that I legitimately have no control over. I isolate myself purposely to avoid having to talk to people, even well-meaning people, and I have not once considered going out and shooting up anything. I largely dislike people and I want them to go away but I have zero interest in killing them. Loneliness does not equal a predisposition to wanting to kill.
To add to my point, the anxiety started because I got picked on a lot (by both kids and their parents–fun, huh?) so I should be a prime candidate for wanting to go nutsy cuckoo and shoot the place up, but nope. I know your article is well-intentioned, but some of us isolate ourselves because we’re broken and can’t handle people and we dread the people who think like you do and insist on trying to pull us into the group. So just please, no.
@M_E : Thank you for sharing. I was painfully shy, preferred being hit by adults to talking to other children, in middle school (after the year of bullying). I got over it in high school, mainly because supportive adults didn’t try to “help,” and in college even managed to shift the content of the hate-for-introverts from “poor, clumsy, sickly child” to “Queen Bee of a popular clique.” (Which is probably why I’m sort of enjoying the hatespew generated by telling just one introvert story here, and don’t mind sharing a few more. Haters, step forward and identify yourselves; if it helps just one good introvert say no to the poison pills, all to the good.)
We were not a clique, I might add. We tried addressing that charge rationally by actively recruiting people to do the stuff we did. And some of those kids responded to the real-world incentives to cultivate our kind of interests; at least two of my college friends have written books by now, four have sold music albums, and others have made serious money in the once unfashionable computer field. The only limit my friends and I placed on how many people could hang with us was how many bodies could fit into the available cars. But, let’s face it, the introverts *were* the more mature, more talented kids who were already earning our own money. Kids who depended on spending Mother’s and Daddy’s money to impress others were not comfortable with us.
Hang in there M_E. Lose as many unsupportive people as you have to. You *will* find the supportive ones. We *are* out there.
I would also add to this excellent writing, ENFORCE the laws already on the books. Many states do nothing to enforce the gun regulations we have. If they did it would make a difference.
This article could do a lot more harm than good.
First of all, not all mass shootings are done by the socially isolated. There were almost 300 mass shootings this year (may have surpassed that by now) and only a handful were done by people who appear to be painfully introverted. There are millions more introverts out there that would never go on a spree, but by pretending they all need friends to prevent killings, it’s going to backfire. Since when do people in this country actually attempt to befriend those othered who might possibly be dangerous? We don’t. We persecute them.
People who are socially isolated are that way for a reason, most of them choose to be that way because social anxiety is painful. Other people are painful.
Many, but not all by a long shot, do have mental issues that have caused the isolation and if you are not aware of how that mental illness affects them day to day, it’s a bad idea. You could trigger a melt down by suddenly deciding to invite them for coffee or sitting by them. One of the hallmarks of paranoia is to be leery of behavior that seems to target the person who is paranoid.
If you don’t know their history, if you don’t know what they can handle, do not approach someone you only peripherally know and if you choose to approach them, make sure it’s natural and build up a friendship, don’t just go pat them on the back and invite them for lunch with the guys. They’re is a good chance they’ll feel mocked.
That said, if you have a family member who has self isolated, DO approach them. Do invite them to family gatherings, check in on them, take them out for coffee, call them. Make them feel like they are part of something and their input is appreciated. Don’t pressure them, don’t start with a huge wedding as your first invite, but most of these particular shooters had family members who knew their was an issue and chose not to get involved or made it worse.
Start with your own cousins, siblings, nieces and nephews, children.
If you are truly concerned about a co-worker or neighbor who has given you reason to think they might be dangerous, then contact family, their doctor, or if it’s imminent, law enforcement.
But don’t think you can “fix” someone who has felt persecuted by singling them out as someone who is friendless.
I agree with everything except for his idea on how to fix the problem. It sounds really nice to try to “include” these crazies in your life. If you try to reach out to them on some superficial level like smile and say “hi” that won’t really do anything to alleviate their feelings of loneliness. Maybe you could invite them to an activity or out to lunch, or just talk with them for a while? The problem is that they’re crazy so the activity or lunch will probably kind of suck. But hey, you’re doing your part to possibly stop the next mass shooting so “grin and bear it”. But here is the problem with that: one lunch, bowling trip or hour long “conversation” where you hear them ramble on about a bunch of crazy stuff before you can politely extricate yourself will not be enough. It has to continue consistently for months or years. This will require a significant time commitment to someone that you probably won’t really like to spend time with and there are so many other things that we would like to be doing with so many other people. And if you stop or move away, that could be the trigger to send them into a shooting spree… so now it’s your fault.
I look at these shootings as another thing in life that has a VERY low probability of happening which I also can’t control. It isn’t worth worrying about, wasting my emotional energy. If I see someone is down and out I can try to be a good person and help them because I love everyone. But if you go into it with the motivation of trying to stop the next killing then you’re worrying about it way to much.
While making efforts to be friendly to someone who is a loner/isolated is a nice thing to do, that’s far from “a way to stop mass shootings.” This problem goes deeper than that…. and it’s not a mental health issue as much as it’s a societal problem in that there’s no regard for human life in today’s society. This is a by-product of the horrific images and attitudes about life/death that are portrayed EVERYwhere. Death, murder, torture, etc. is everywhere – books (for all ages – think about the premise of The Hunger Games series), video games, television (all hours, all channels), movies (and not just the R-rated ones any more)… and we’ve become numb to it. You used to have to go to an R-rated movie to see such things, and now you can’t turn on the TV WITHOUT seeing it. That type of daily barrage of images/messages/language lessens the impact in your mind of such things…and that affects people…especially younger people who have literally GROWN-UP seeing it, day in and day out. They never experienced the same reaction those of us in our 40-50’s and up did the first time we saw a horrible death/murder scene in an R-rated movie. They never experienced that shock, horror, disgust, nausea because they’ve literally grown-up seeing it as something normal and expected. That’s why this problem can’t be addressed by anything other than in a way in-keeping with what other nations have done in response to mass shootings on their land… and those nations have seen success. For example, after enacting new gun laws following a mass shooting in Australia, the risk of dying by gunshot in that country fell by more than 50% – and stayed there. A 2012 study also found their gun buyback led to a drop in firearm suicide rates of almost 80% in the following decade. THAT is what we need in America… before it’s your or my child or loved one who gets shot, killed or maimed for life at the hands of someone who values their “right” to bear arms more than they value the life of another individual. http://www.cnn.com/…/can-legislation-prevent…/index.html, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/20/america-gun-laws_n_7624088.html, http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/politics/121217/sandy-hook-newtown-shooting-gun-control-australia-scotland-finland-changed-gun-laws-after-shooting
Your parents did a better job keeping you sheltered than mine did, @Lynn Marble. Vietnam and the Manson murders and the Chowchilla kidnappings and the Jonestown tragedy made older people say the world was going to Hell in a handbasket in the 1970s, too. And remember the Cold War and the *certainty* of Nuclear Winter (or, if we did avoid that long enough, the Ice Age)?
In all honesty sometimes people just want to be left alone. Human interaction is annoying and at times uncomfortable for some. If someone truly wants to be involved in society we as a whole should be more tolerant and understanding of differences. There by not alienating someone in the first place. I personally don’t like being around people. I’m 44 and never had any thought of shooting or hurting anyone either. I would put more emphasis on being a coward instead of lonely. Although it may sound cold and heartless. If these individuals had the balls just to kill themselves it would be awesome. As far as fixing society not gonna happen. The best advice look for odd behavior and actions. Have personal on hand to report them to. Monitor those individuals then. Just like shoplifters bank robbers criminals.
Dittos, @Tony.
As someone who self isolates nothing infuriates me more than pointless small talk and fake concern. Please leave us hermit types alone. If we wanted social interaction we’d seek it out.
Both of my thumbs and several friends’ thumbs up, @Vgnsocjust.
Google “home built machine gun.” It will be very educational for some of you.
Bombs can be even easier. And lots of these people get away with using cars, because Americans want to believe that homicides involving motor vehicles are “accidents.” (At least this shows that they’re too focussed on driving sanely to notice the way the maniacs drive.)
I agree that we need to identify and engage lonely, isolated people. But other advanced countries have lonely people too, and yet their gun violence rates are nowhere near ours. The difference is that they have strict gun laws to protect public safety.
For instance, in Germany, as the New York Times reported last week, citizens have to show that they know how to operate and store a gun and its ammunition before they own one. You also need to be 18 years old to have a weapon, and if you’re under 25 you need to pass a psychological exam. Germany ranks fourth in the world in guns per capita but has comparitively few gun crimes. What’s wrong with that?
We’re an advanced nation with a long democratic tradition. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. There’s no good reason why we can’t have both a Second Amendent and certain restrictions on gun ownership to protect the public interest. The Supreme Court has already said as much.
We all need to get our heads around this and think differently about this issue. If we don’t, we’re in effect supporting continued mass shootings on a regular basis. That is not a viable path forward for the country.
Child pornographers use computers and the Internet. Do we need to license people who want to own and operate a computer? Alcohol is involved in far more death and destruction than are guns. Is there a need to license consumers of alcohol?
Okay, this ridiculous comparisons don’t really merit a response, but in the interest of trying to hold a constructive dialog: we normally regulate things in proportion to their benefits versus their harm. Computers have a lot of “non-child porn” uses, we do heavily regulate the manufacture, sale and distribution of alcohol (ironically by the same Federal agency that regulates firearms). But whether your argument is deaths from alcohol, cars, swimming pools, bee stings… Those are all other things that can regrettably lead to deaths, but they are completely irrelevant to how we regulate guns. There’s no “order of operations” that says we can’t choose to address guns now, and those other issues later.
@Rob Myers: Hope you didn’t mind my “hijacking” your post after realizing that my original comment generated a frenzy of hate against the physical hereditary trait that best defines me. If these follow-up comments bother you, please feel free to delete them.
@young introverts: Our hereditary trait has more survival value than any racial trait has. (It doesn’t hurt to recognize that it also gives us more in common than any racial trait could.) Be true to yourselves, and be proud.
I agree to a point. I think it’s absolutely true that isolation and and a lonely life can create such misunderstood and frustrating pain in people that they lash out in violent and destructive ways. It sucks to be disliked or disregarded as weird, unimportant, and unfairly judged directly or behind ones back. I can relate I’m not accepted socially and am a Misfit and it pains me deeply honestly it sucks to have a heart and good intentions to be creative and know that yeah I have quirks but I’m a good person but there is just simple something about me that is unable to form lasting bonds with others. I wouldn’t murder others because of it, but I often contemplate suicide. But I’m somehow an optimist and no matter how many times I get knocked down and get hurt by society and pack, gang, sheep mentality I don’t loose hope that one day I’ll find at least one other person who I relate to and who we can have a lasting friendship. I never give up hope. However, on the flip side of this I have never been discriminating and always given people a fair chance…The problem is I have felt afraid for my own safety in the process. When unstable people start to form bonds what can happen is they might become obsessive or act socially unacceptable and that is the catch 22. Is it okay even for someone who is socially unacceptable to reject it in others? I mean when your comfort is in check and you wonder why your new friend is showing up at your house with viatimins in the middle of the night because they are worried you are not getting enough, and random things like that. I withdraw and I know that is what others do to me if I get intense…so are my fears founded or am I being a hypocrite. I don’t want to get killed instead because I was latched onto by a lonely person who now has unreasonable expectations of my kindness when I say no more.
I’m with Hillary on this. For some, there is no such thing as enough attention. You can give and give, but it’s still not enough. You find yourself walking on eggshells trying not to offend them. If you don’t hang out when they want, don’t talk often enough on the phone or online, don’t love them the way they love you, or, god forbid, try to hang out with other people, you will be the target of much of their rage. Been there done that. I’ve tried to help so many… too many… i’ve nearly lost myself. Most others would just say “that guy creeps me out. Let’s go.” It’s a rare person who actually gives everyone a chance.
Your comment is very well understood, however, engaging someone who is extremely needy is difficult…but one of the ways that helps is to direct the person to groups and outings that have similar needs. You don’t have to be their personal safety net, however, helping them to find such groups is a positive.
Some social outcasts can be socially inappropriate, but people who have always had friends and family to love them can be the same way. The socially-inappropriate are not necessarily outcasts, though being inappropriate tends to result in ostracism.
The neediness and clinging, in my opinion, come from two things: an inability to feel warmth/affection, and a hyper-vigilance towards detecting anything suggesting rejection. Long-term ostracism conditions people into feeling helpless. Positive emotions, and love and compassion from others, all become threatening, because it can all vanish like it had before, so they’re always watching for the other shoe to drop. Since their emotions only cause them grief, they grow numb to them, which means they’re unable to pick up on signs if someone genuinely enjoys spending time with them.
Thank you for sharing your story. You sound like a very kind and strong person. I hope you stay that way. It’s true–there seems to be no simple answer, but keep the faith, try new things and don’t give up–I bet you will find a caring friendship/relationship.
I’ve been in your shoes, but I had a choice to make, I could become bitter and vindictive like the kids and adults always giving me grief or turn it all into a positive, I chose to be positive, which even now can be hard, because being a half breed, prejudices never end, whether it is nonindians, or my own Comanche and Kiowa people. But because of all of this, I have become a stronger person spiritually and have done and accomplished things that few people will ever do, and in doing them, have accomplished many of my dreams and made many friends in other states and other tribes, because I was always willing and ready to help. So if someone like me can turn all the bad used against them into something positive, others can too. I had to do it by myself, but with a little help, others can do the same, and it just takes one small act of kindness or help to make a difference.
Well said, well done! Bless you!
Very Well said Jim. Your step toward reaching out and the slow but sure strength that you gained- little by little, builds on itself. Your thoughtful post is the proof.
All the Best to you!
Life is Great,if ‘We allow it to Be ” Proud of You and your inner strength !
I doubt that I’m unique, but I LIKE being alone. Never been very successful at it. Animals, kids and women seem to like my company. The reports I’ve read suggest approximately half of the mass shooters had some contact or were under a psychologist’s care at some time. The shrinks had no clue as to what was coming. What we CAN do is remove the safe killing fields: end “gun-free zones.” –
As Robert A. Heinlein noted: “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.,” and:
“The price of freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle anywhere, anytime and with utter recklessness.”
keep going mate! i’m in the same boat as you are.. find something you like doing and stick with it. for me it’s sky- and BASEjumping! you’re not alone!
I’ve always been a misfit, too. I’ll bet you have a high IQ, like me, and are seen more as a threat than a friend. That’s been my experience.
No one likes to seem less in anothers eye.
Hi Hillary! If you believe in your fears, they are real. However, I would hope that not ALL of your experiences were dreadful! The things that you describe are not acceptable by any normal standard! I have many friends. I have dropped many friends from my company. I am always kind to others, at least I try to be. My kindness can be misconstrued as being naive or gullible, however, I’ve learned this from my experiences. Trust in yourself. If something doesn’t feel right in your gut, then turn away from it at once. It took me a long time to realize my next door neighbor (female) was nuts! She was friends to my face, then stab me in the back. I did more for her and her family than anyone else in her life. I was dumbfounded every time she would turn on me. Finally I had enough. I no longer speak to her. I am 100% okay with not speaking to her ever again.
Her sons are heroin addicts and I have been ripped off beyond belief. I was TOO trusting and caring. I learned my lesson, however, I have many long time friends and I have many new friends. Some friends I talk to once in a while, get together with once in a while, and some I talk to almost every day. The only way to find out if someone is a friend is to trust them in the beginning, and see what happens. 99% of the time, we become great friends. However, it is all in how you think of what a friend is. It is all about time. If it is “working” and I am happy, then there is no problem. I don’t know what I would do without my friends! They have provided me comfort, have been there when I’ve needed them, and it is a two-way street. I do the same for them as they have done for me.
Hillary, most importantly I would trust your intuition. Does this person make you feel good? Does this person give as much as he/she takes? Does she understand you? Does she listen to you? Does she do things to make you feel special? These things do not have to be monetary, in fact, there is more friendship with someone who actually cares than money could ever buy. It’s the little things. A hug. A phone call. A birthday card.
Friendships are meant to be a “soft place to fall”. Friendship is non-judgemental. I’m sorry that you have had some bad experiences with friends. Actually, they weren’t really friends at all. That is why I say….”trust your gut”! You have everything you need inside you to be a friend and have friends! Don’t be afraid of meeting new people. Just be aware of how they make you feel. If they make you feel good about yourself, then they are a true friend. If not, they were never a friend in the first place.
I could be your friend! We can chat online if you would like. Just let me know! Mary Lou
There is one MORE thing that you can do. ARM and train teachers etc to deal with these guys. Not all of them, of course, just enough that nobody has any illusions about a school being ‘gun-free’. This will both prevent mass shootings and also cut them short.
Training up a child is the parent’s job, Teachers teach and they are not private detectives or the secret service.
But schools can’t afford properly trained security services. That school in Ore. had a security guard (hardly) without a WEAPON!
It is, of course the parents job to bring up their child, but teachers spend a lot of hours with kids – they see interactions with other kids – that’s something the parent doesn’t see – as much as I dont want to give teachers more jobs? they are the only ones that can provide feedback on everyday interactions when the child is young.
Yes Maureen this is very true and giving feedback is within the scope of a Teacher’s job, but not toting firearms and playing Cagny & Lacey. This is unfair to school administrators and what the Education system is all about or here for.
But they take responsibility for our childrens’ education and safety while the kids are on school grounds. Think that safety duty ends with telling them not to run in hallways? I think not.
How are first responders going to be able to tell a teacher with a gun from a bad guy with a gun? Secret handshake? Safe word?
I vote for secret handshake.
In situations where individuals have been forced to stop someone using their own gun, that person immediately places the gun on the ground when the police show up so that they are not suspect.
The gun is holstered or dropped and hands shown to be empty when the uniforms arrive. Simple.
Bad guy with gun: killing innocent people and attempting to evade or shoot it out with the police upon their arrival.
Teacher with gun: shoots the lunatic (or, best case scenario, doesn’t even have to do that), puts down weapon and cooperates full with authorities on their arrival.
Should be enough to tell the difference.
Having worn a badge, I can tell you it’s very easy in such a scenario to know the bad from the good. The teacher, once the threat is stopped, will have holstered the weapon. The bad guy would still be shooting.
Because we don’t have enough guns now and teachers of course are perfect humans who never lose their tempers or their judgments. And even so once we are sure all the PUPILS are also armed we will have completely eliminated any possibility of gun violence. Just look at how it’s gone so far, the more guns, the more widespread, the fewer shootings. This is the perfect solution.
Since when does one have to be perfect to have the basic right to self-defense?
Tim, nobody is perfect, but if your version of self defense is a semi-automatic weapon you are either a coward or need to look into ISIS ya heard? With love from Baltimore, (Bodymore Murderland) JR
apologies, that’s bloodymore, murderland. and guns aren’t self-defense. they’re tools of murder. self defense is using your own hands, arms and legs. If you have them, strengthen them up, because when the guns are gone, you’ll need them.
Because of course no teacher is a human being who could lose their temper or control of themselves and use a firearm in a bad way…well it won’t matter because once we arm all the teachers we would want to arm all the pupils, so they can protect themselves. Indeed once we have armed every human there will be a complete end to all gun violence. In fact we’ve already proven it. Simply observe that as more and more guns are more and more widespread in our society, violence against people has dropped and dropped. We hardly ever see mass or spree shootings more than once or twice a day now, and thirty years ago they happened every five or six minutes. What more proof could you need. Great idea. Also I think all athletes and officials should be armed at games to ensure that no one engages in an unwarranted attack on anyone else. What would have happened if Nancy Kerrigan had been armed? No injured knee for her!
We don’t have enough guns now? You’re right. One more firearm in the hands of one of the helpless victims in these cases would have changed the entire dynamic of these events. Possibly stopped them from becoming “mass shootings” in the first place.
And what is your solution?
Arming teachers is a HORRIFIC idea! I would not want to go nor would I allow my children to go to a school or college where guns were allowed. The Oregon college allowed guns and there were armed students & faculty. They neither prevented nor cut short that killing spree. It took trained police to do that.
In fact, not ONE mass shooting in the US has been stopped by an armed civilian!!! NOT ONE!! That idea is pure fantasy sold to people by the NRA & gun manufacturers. More guns = more deaths!!
LOL , not one massed shooting has been stopped by an armed civilian, because if it was stopped, then it wouldn’t be a mass shooting. Liberal Logic.
Wrong here’s 5 for you , but you can keep your lies going if it makes you feel better.
1. In April 2015, an Uber driver with a concealed carry permit shot 22-year-old gunman Everardo Custodio when Custodio opened fire on “a crowd of people in Logan Square,” the Chicago Tribune reports. The driver was not identified in the Tribune piece, but he was able to provide supporting documentation to police, who brought no charges. Everardo was struck in the shin, thigh, and lower back. There were no injuries or casualties to those he fired upon.
2. West Philadelphia, March 2015: An unidentified man heard gunshots inside a barber shop. Children were present when 40-year-old Warren Edwards got angry, started a fight, and pulled his gun. Edwards didn’t hit anyone, but the concealed carry holder entered the barber shop and shot Edwards in the chest. The gunman would die later, NBC10 notes. Police found no basis for charges.
3. Plymouth, Pennsylvania, 2012: William Allabaugh became enraged when a fight he engaged in resulted in him being ejected from the bar. He shot one dead and wounded another before approaching concealed carry holder Mark Ktytor, who was inside with the bar manager. At this point, Ktytor returned fire. Allabaugh would survive the shooting; so would a lot of other people due to the concealed carry holder shooting him, police claimed. WNEP notes that video evidence exonerated Ktytor.
4. Spartanburg, South Carolina, 2012: Jesse Gates, claiming he wanted to see his kids, came to a church armed with a shotgun and kicked in a door. A concealed carry holder, Aaron Guyton, was able to get the drop on Gates, who was forced to surrender his gun to other parishioners once he realized that there was the very real possibility of him being shot, FoxCarolina notes.
5. Winnemucca, Nevada, 2008: Thirty-year-old Ernesto Villagomez entered a bar filled with 300 people and shot two dead while injuring two others before one of the patrons at the bar, a concealed carry holder, pulled his gun and shot Villagomez dead, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports
Not true on both counts, dlrose51. The Oregon college was a “Gun-Free zone” and the NRA keeps records of such incidents – and there are many. Go to their website and hunt down the information, then you can cross-check with the newspapers of the community and date each event happened. I’d far rather accept the discomfort of being armed than the mental agony for NOT being armed should the need ever arise to defend myself and/or those I love. I also buy insurance for what I hope never happens, and I drive around with a spare tire. Don’t you?
That is because 92% of all mass shootings in the US have been in gun-free zones, which the Oregon school was, btw. Even the ‘security’ guard was not permitted to tote. How ridiculous was that. The only thing that stopped the bad man with a gun was a good guy with a gun. Face it!! It is not an NRA thing, it is a fact. The isolated, lonely and deranged men (no women, I might add) who see this as a way to go down in history as one-bad-a**, will always chose the cowardly act of firing on the unarmed.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/?postshare=6261443917104644
The police didn’t either, for the same reason that the few armed students on that campus couldn’t: they weren’t in the place where it was actually happening when it was actually happening. And unfortunately, armed citizens don’t have dispatchers being fed information through 911 calls and passing it on to them. The armed soldier (safe to say he is at least as well trained as the police) that MSNBC and other left wing publications have been dishonestly trotting out to “prove” gun owners can’t stop events like these, did exactly what he should have under the circumstances: stood at the ready to protect himself and those around him should they be attacked.
As for your claim that no armed citizen ever stopped a mass shooting, here are eight, for starters:
Not one mass shooting has been stopped by an armed civilian because every mass shooting has taken place in a gun-free zone and law abiding citizens do their best to follow the law.
The police, in most cases, are not as well trained and practiced as most people who carry on a daily basis. I know this as a fact and from experience. I’ve carried for about 30 years and at every competition where there were LEO’s competing, I out scored them and so did most of the other competitors.
Gun-free zones are the real danger, here. You have to understand the criminal psyche in order to fully understand the issue. A criminal looks for the easy mark, the soft target. He doesn’t want to go where he might be stopped before he can do what he came to do, and most don’t want to get hurt or caught.
I speak from experience and after having studied the issue for the past 30 years. Also, the College was a gun-free zone, none of the faculty or students were armed except for the shooter.
Your facts are not correct…the college has a “gun-free” policy….http://www.newsweek.com/weapons-common-oregon-college-campus-despite-gun-free-zone-379860
Also, how do you know that a simple shooting from a law abiding gun carrier didn’t stop a mass shooting?…
You generally don’t hear of “mass” shooting being stopped by a legal gun carrier. Usually because they stop the situation BEFORE it can become a mass shooting. The people in Oregon that had weapons were prevented from trying to intervene in the situation by the staff. You also don’t hear of legal gun owners stopping crime because it doesn’t sell. Fact are facts, areas with heavy handed gun control laws have the highest incident of gun violence. Places with fewer gun laws have fewer incidents of gun violence. Look at the CDC stats on violent crime. Individually, hammers and bats have been used in more murders than guns.
not true at all, there have been plenty. the most recent that comes to mind was Texas where they were having the “draw a Muhammed cartoon contest”
Are all teachers stable enough to have guns? How will a gun be accessible to a teacher yet mot accessible to the children? Will a teacher be able to use the gun effectively and not injure children? The potential for this solution going wrong is huge. Put water on this fire rather than gasoline!!
Who advocates arming ALL teachers – or even those who may not want to carry a gun? Concealed Carry permits require both use and safety training for applicants – and something you can look up: the concealed carry community has fewer wrongful deaths per capita than our trained and sworn law-enforcement community according to FBI reports. There’ve been surveys of incarcerated felons, including to determine what they’re most afraid of: the armed victim or armed witness to the crime who may intercede is their greatest fear – not law-enforcement!
The fact that certain faculty are armed is enough to turn the criminal away. Having worn a badge, and having carried a sidearm for nearly 30 years, I know what I’m talking about. Criminals go to gun-free zones not to places where they know guns are present in the hands of good people.
Familiar argument. Every time CCW has been proposed in every state, predictions of doom and gloom are trotted out. Same here.
Yeah, good idea! Let’s throw more guns at it, and that’ll fix the problem. And while we’re at it, let’s put the responsibility of protecting and saving lives on the shoulders of a bunch people who chose to teach kids as a career. Problem solved – good thinking!
Don’t be a pin head. This isn’t a discussion about arming every teacher.
If a teacher or administrator obtains training because she/he wants to be able to protect the children they see every day, they should be able to carry a handgun to do so.
Reasonable precautions must be taken to prevent students from getting their hands on the guns of course…and there’s no way to insure that every teacher will never have a careless moment where they set their purse down for a minute.
However, the presence of even a few firearms on sight contained in gun safes accessible by trained staff may deter bad guys.
Oh yes, there is ONE MORE:
Exercise the Boy Scout motto ~ “Be Prepared”.
Heed the suggestion of Dr Ben Carson: Employ class discussions/ drills on becoming proactive in dealing with these kinds of situations before they occur again since they seem to be springing up somewhere now about once a week.
Best way to prevent nuclear war is to make sure more countries have nukes.
M.A.D.: Mutually Assured Destruction works well – with one exception: when those with the suicide-bomber mentality get nukes – like Obama just afforded Iran, all those nut-cases are looking forward to their 72 Virgin goats in a delusional paradise. Robert A. Heinlein: “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”
Caio.
Exactly! That makes as much sense as more guns making people safer! Of course, more instruments of death are always a great idea!
You’re going to train teachers to shoot their own kids huh? Great idea,..
I understand why this may seem like a good idea, but in my opinion, giving guns to teachers would fail because the shooters won’t bother with procuring their own weapons; they’ll just steal them off the teachers.
I agree that the populace needs to be prepared to defend themselves at a moment’s notice. You don’t see criminals going into a police station to rob anyone because they KNOW the inhabitants have guns.
Ban,guns? That is the not so easy solution, to a problem that is not even the question. Yes, ban guns will stop one thing. Easy way to kill other, people are resilient take away the guns. They will find another way to kill.
They may use a vehicle, or edged weapons. Perhaps, they may even use explosive etc.
What we need is a change of heart, respect life! Give up on reporting the names of people who commit these crimes. Refuse, to give a moment of time to these people.
I think you over emphasize the tenacity of criminals, who, unless they are also activists tend to be ones which are orchestrating the simple solution. Making weapons more difficult to come by, is going to reduce gun violence, because in many cases they are crimes of passion, not premeditated.
That said, the cases that tend to get spoken of at present are certainly premeditated, so there can be an assumption that risk aversion is not a valuable deterrent, so the only significant way to reduce such crimes would be to avoid the situation entirely, or to make it so difficult to hurt people that it is not a feasible plan.
From an analysis standpoint one needs to recognize which is less costly the production of more firearms or the facilitation of more effective mental health… but from my personal perspective, if one cannot make mental health easily available, and there is a quantifiable reason for having it (made equivalent to the price of guns) then a more effective social solution may be necessary.
Given the reasons most people major in Psychology, and having studied the icons in the field (sending me from PSY 101 to Management & Marketing majors), a good bartender and or a puppy would often give far more comfort and satisfaction than any shrink to most people.
ok then how by banning all guns it would make it illegal to own a gun just like it would be illegal to shot someone Rob someone Smoke crack drive drunk … you see that will not work people will find a way to do the above if you think a ban of something will bring unicorns and rainbows to take away the guns away from the bad ones you are amazing cause is impossible to live with your head up your own ass yet you seem to do so If someone wants to do harm they will find a way to do it Anything can be used as a weapon including your own ignorance
OMG! If “Dave” has a “brain”, then why is he so illiterate? Talk about ignorance! You are a perfect example of everything you wrote! lol
If loneliness was the culprit of mass shootings, then there would be more mass shootings. If loneliness was the culprit of mass shootings, then I would be a mass shooter and so would scores of other lonely individuals. If loneliness was the culprit of mass shootings, then there would be mass shooters in the mexican culture, the native culture, the jewish culture, the african culture, and so on.
Clearly, individuals aren’t going out and committing mass murder because they are lonely…this is a poor excuse to use when society doesn’t want to deal with the true causes. First, we have to look at the statistics –
1. Mass Murders are committed predominately by the caucasian ethnicity.
2. Mass Murders are committed predominately by caucasian males.
3. Mass Murders are committed predominately by young caucasian males under age 25.
4. Mass Murders are committed predominately against the caucasian ethnicity where they are specifically targeted.
5. Mass Murders are committed predominately as a result of hate and anger.
These notes are statistically proven, so when it comes to Mass Murder in America, whether murder at once or over time by a serial killer, we must be willing to take a look at the caucasian community and ask the simple question: “Where are these parents and families failing in the raising and teaching of their children, particularly their young males?”
There has to be a clear breakdown in raising caucasian males and an increase in young caucasian male psychosis that is leading to such a hatred towards mostly their own ethnicity. On the occasion when Mass Murder is racially motivated, then we call it Genocide to a particular race/ethnicity of people; and this usually occurs all at once and/or a few here and there over a period of time that can last for centuries.
The bottom line is caucasian Americans are in a crisis and have been for a very long time; and fear is things are going to get worse real quick!
Your “statistics” are unqualified. It’s obvious you live in a US bubble where the majority of ALL people are Caucasian, but you act as if it’s a racist sexist issue. Your “statistics” are insane when looking at the rest of the world. Your focus on causasian males looks ignorant if one had to consider Europe statistics. Your ignorance of mass murders in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia shows in your ill-defined “statistics”.
Here’s the big surprise for you. The majority of mass murders in Asia are done by Asian males against Asians. The majority of mass murders in Africa are done by African males against Africans. The majority of mass murders in South America are done by South American males against South Americans. Catch the trend? Or still think the problem is just with Causasian males in USA?
If you read this article at all, you would have referenced the clue that the author was referring to an American problem of a certain ethnicity of people. Got that? Nice that you have a world view of crime, but we were discussing the problems in America.
Not sure where your getting you so called “facts” i dont think the FBI database would agree using the last 35 mass shootings as a referance, still it sounds like you’ve got some personal issues on what contitutes a Caucasians in the US. Maybe you could point us all to the readily avalable referance your refering to.
Use your own sources and you would come up with the exact same info, and that includes the database of the FBI, CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, and any other including local PDs and the US Marshalls. It is what it is and the reactions were predictable, this is statistical as well; you only have to go as far as social posts for this statistic. Every human being is 100% certain what constitutes a caucasoid in thd US, what a silly point. But if certain of society can deal with facts and truth instead of arguing facts and truths, then maybe the nation can see a change and growth in the caucasian male community…you think?
You obviously don’t do research before you start spouting off your prejudice comments. The last 20 mass killings 9 were perpetrated by non-whites. That would be 45 percent, which exceeds non-whites’ 37 percent share of the population. Stop believing everything the news says and do your own research.
Sweet Scott I do not watch the news or television for that matter…too violent! So sorry you thought this truth was being prejudice, but facts are facts, the reporter is neither prejudice or biased of it! As a Journalist, our writings are based on our own reasearch. When we reference statistics in America, we do not look at the last 50 or 60, or even the last 100, but we look at the history of the nation since its inception. Perhaps this is too long of a time period for your brain to comprehend, I understand. Okay, let’s just have a look from the time of the immigrants arrival from Europe. What do the statistics say from this time period forward til now? Now you do the reasearch before you “spout” off, ok?
Perhaps it isn’t loneliness but the lack of ability to practice empathy– And by that, I mean the chance to understand others perspectives, and even further so, feel like they have a role in others people perspectives– By intermingling with others we often create webs of socials cues as well as a value system which respects it– These things cannot be artificially created, and any attempt to do so, especially by means of reward and punishment, can ultimately backfire by resentment of the system–
Many of our children issues are our own issues in a different and perhaps more extreme form; though if we took an honest look at what is going on in the world; school shootings really aren’t all that surprising considering our nationality as a father figure, and extreme lacking of a mother figure–
Well said Cody P…that was truth and heartfelt.
maybe you should quit calling white young males “the enemy” we have been persecuted in the united states for my entire life. we are told that we are the only group that can be racist, we cannot have our own group like the NAACP. we cannot have our own college group, we cannot have our own month like national Hispanic month. What do you expect? hell, our children can’t even wear an American flag on their shirt.
What I perceive is a whole lot of ignorance going on or a blatant lack of intelligence.
Earlier Scott commented that out of the last 20 mass murders, only 9 were committed by “non-whites”. If we just used these statistics, then when I said Mass Murders are committed “predominately” by caucasian males…what part of Predominately didn’t you understand? Out of the 20 murders, 11 were committed by caucasians and 9 were not…that means “predominately” or the majority! It’s simple english really, nothing difficult.
Jeff, again there is blantant ignorance going on here: “Can you point out the statement where I called “young white males the enemy”? Statistics regarding the ethnicity of predominate mass murderers and serial killers in America are just that: facts, history, and statistics. For the record, caucasian Americans do not have a history of being persecuted except by England when they ran from them.
But here is some info that may help you out. As a former teacher and provider for children in different capacities, these observances may help in your child rearing…
1. When your children are born -love them, do not replace your love with things and do not hire someone else to raise your children, they can sense you do not care.
2. Bath your children and keep them clean.
3. Spend quality time with them yourself, do not send them to camp to get rid of them and do not let them play alone at an age when they should be supervised, this is how many are abducted because they are unattended for hours.
4. Take responsibility for your own mistakes and quit blaming the teacher, nanny, or babysitter.
5. Do not spoil your children with expensive things when they are young, this behavior leads to a sense of entitlement when they get older, which leads to a hatred toward you when you fail to provide.
6. When you first notice that something is psychologically wrong, don’t hide it or think it will go away, but get help for your kid and don’t worry about what the neighbors will think.
7. If you suspect your child is being sexually abused by your spouse or son, again, do not hide it!!!
Theses are just a few things you can do every single day to help keep your children sound and sane…Love them, Talk to them, and Listen as a good Parent.
This is actually very true.
Ms. Sahiyena, can you please provide a link to where you got your statistics? And are these numbers just for the U.S., or worldwide? I agree that it can’t just be attributed to loneliness, since most all of us feel lonely at some time in our life. In my early teen years, I was extremely lonely, and at times felt mistreated. But it never occurred to me to respond in a violent way to hurt others. Of course, my mother taught me the principles of returning evil with good, and treating others as I would want to be treated, without regard to whether they were treating me fairly or kindly. Maybe these principles are not being taught anymore? I do think these mass shootings may more be attributed to mental illness, because people thinking in a healthy rational way would not respond in such an excessively unreasonable way.
I love your title: born2bfree. I am not quite sure your age, but when you have lived a while, history itself and everyday violent acts are statistics. But, what I would invite you to do is your own research: research serial killers, mass murderers, serial rapists, child molesters in America from the time of the Civil War, this would be a good start to get an overall view of the history of America. And yes I was referring to only America as I have stated numerous times already. Any research pre Civil War will increase the statistics to an unimaginable number.
Also research video sources, audio, and old newspaper clippings, this you can do at your local library. Some government database on statistics are open to the public, as well as local police reports across the country. The best believer is one who puts forth his own efforts to inform himself.
I realize that I could spend the time to do all you have suggested, if I had time to do that on one topic alone. But since you provided statistics, I assumed you must have done the research, and are not just throwing numbers out there. In all honesty, I can’t consider your statistics to be credible if you are unable or unwilling to provide your source. As I’m sure you know, just because someone says it on the internet doesn’t make it true, any more than in the old days just reading something in the newspaper made it true. And when I was in school years ago, when submitting a research paper, we always needed to provide our references. Otherwise, what we wrote could be considered no more than a work of fiction. Of course, there are always those that will believe anything that is said if it is said with a tone of authority. I’m not one of those people, though. That is why I asked for reference to your source(s).
Predominately is a word, not a numbered statistic, the validity of its usage in regards to the identity of majority serial killers and mass murderers in America requires very little effort on the part of one with minimal intelligence.
I assumed you hold enough of an education, since you posed the question for sources on a word like predominately, that you know how to conduct research of your own. If you could not believe sources out there, why believe any of my research?
Obviously you are unaware that libraries have actual copies of periodicals throughout American history, what this can give you is the actual name, identity, and sometimes photo of a killer. But if you can’t believe even this information, you are out of luck. Research implies knowing how to conduct an investigation and cross your references and info to gain more info.
When I started writing, there was no internet! Good journalism is the abbility to both research and write. If you yourself are not willing to put forth an effort to acquire your own unbiased information, then you are not in a position to question another’s findings. Laziness isn’t an option and remember, we are talking about revealing source statistics on a word called predominately…this must have been a word far above the pay scale of many!
Ms. Sahiyena, I understand the word predominately. To be truly accurate though, you really must consider the proportionality within the population as a whole. I am providing here a link to an article that references what you are inferring by your use of the word “predominately” to say that mass murders are somehow a white male problem. Please consider the numbers in relation to percentage of population: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/06/are_most_mass_murderers_really_white.html
It is what it is and so is American History…move on! Remember to raise your children with my suggestions in mind and try to raise a better generation of young males for the future. Focus on your children and their problems rather than use your energy to question statistics when you already know the answer. Centuries old rhetoric! Some of us have a life, Good day and good bye
I must say this is about as racist as you can get.Your facts are simply silly. 6000 blacks kill other blacks every year thats more then all other races kill anyone in several years. Do you think somehow ganstas that kill dozens of people are somehow not serial killers?
The majority of Africans living throughout this world has been killed by slave owners, especially if they ran, racists groups, kkk, white supremacist and such. The largest number of caucasians who lost their lives in America was due to the Civil War. This is not about race, we were addressing whether or not loneliness causes mass murders. I addressed statistics of a mass murderer and here is where we found ourselves to be.
Maybe we should ban all cacacian males under the age of 25? %○\
Sorry I can not respond, I have no idea what a cacacian is? Is that new or slang for Caucasian? Do you want to ban only 25% of males or all?
i see you forgot to mention that they were also liberal democrats…
The mass murderers, who cares? Off the wall non sense is what we say when we lack a valid response, eh?
“It’s the quiet ones you gotta watch!”
George Carlin made an elaborate piece on this. I suggest you watch it. Because it is bullshit (yes I don’t like it). I am in complete isolation in almost all of my time.I wouldn’t want some yuppie pseudo-psychiatrist collegiate asking “what’s wrong?”. Because they wouldn’t care for my response.
Fuck you all.
The killer in Oregon was 1/2 black and 1/2 white. Hey, he could be the President’s son! Isn’t that what Obama said about the “kid” in Florida?
If he were the President’s son he would only be one quarter caucasian, this is simple fractions we learn in elementary.
I see that ignorance breeds, still a lack of understanding of what the word “predominately” means. If you haven’t gotten a GED by now I cannot educate you in one session. Most are silly and unintelligent, perhaps this is a reason why the mass murders continues in the caucasian communities!
Where are your facts for this. You need to do a little more research and you’ll realize it’s less than a quarter.
and your statistics are? please post.
Majority of the United States is Caucasians, now wouldn’t you agree, because of this wouldn’t it be a correct statement to say if you have a majority of said race, then more people of said race will have more murders. Example in Mexico more Hispanics kill people than any other race, in China more Asians, mainly Chinese, kill people. if you have a group of people in an area while an attack is happening there’s your mass killings. I say killings because it could be done with more than a gun.
Thank you for this info from your lips. Yes the majority committing crimes are caucasians, however, the majority being incarcerated are Africans, Mexicans, and Latinos. So from your own lips you have spoken the truth: the majority of problems being caused in America are being caused by the moral majority of ethnicity that exist in America. You are absolutely correct, now where did you get your statistics from on who the moral majority are in America?
How did this become a race issue? I’m going to have to read the comments backwards; sounds like a bad game of ‘telephone’ (you have to be a senior, no matter your color, to remember that game)
Someone probably mentioned that the vast majority of mass shooters in America happen to be white males, and that set off the rest of the comments you’ve been reading.
Go to the FBI crime database online and open up Excel. The results, Ms. Sahiyena, may awe you.
Ae you mentally deficient, or are you intentionally obtuse?
Event-based statistics are not privy to the same rules as sampling statistics. Go back to Google.
Good logic. Unfortunately, logic fails among the vast army of illogicals!
Been to Shitcago lately lady?. Everyday is a mass shooting in the Black community.
So, we do agree Obama is half white. So, technically, Obama isn’t our “first black President”. He is our first bi-racial President. Michelle Obama has “white” blood in her. So, Obama’s son would be more than a quarter “white”. Serial killers do tend to be a “white”. Blacks are out killing blacks. At the end of the day, do whites or blacks commit more crimes? Maybe, silly and “unintelligent” come in all races. You are proof of that point.
Then if you replied to “unintelligent” what does that make you?
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_race.jsp right here shows the number of people in jail for a crime, it shows percentage, as well as the actual number of people in jail for crimes, not just percent, since percent isn’t necessarily accurate example there is 2 of brand new race we’ll call it x, if one person of that race commits a crime then 50% is considered criminal. Compare that to the rest of the other percent and that’s a really high number.
So after reading the article and most of the comments here, there are some very valid points being made. The one point I’ve yet to see is to me, the most blatantly obvious. There is a mental health issue here in America that is not being addressed. It has not been addressed in years! The only way that it is addreesed, is by tossing some of the worst of the criminally insane into our prison system. The rest are where you find them, being taken care of by their families, some are institutionalized in the few that still exist. (Ask your government why that is). But many many more are on the street and unmedicated because they don’t have, or dont like their meds. One other thing, most are trying to act normal. They don’t wear signs or helmets, or walk up to you anywhere and explain their situation. They are just about any place you go looking or waiting for something better to happen to them. Sometimes they get fed up and no one catches that until it’s to late…
Just saying!
Michael,
You seem to forget one other population. The ones like myself, severely mentally ill..tax paying, working, voting..that has fought hard..17 long yrs of battling an illness I never asked for, nor caused to myself. Would I be the “one” of the folks you seem to think are “just waiting to do something worse? Wrong..I am a good person..in fact I spend most of my time dedicated to volunteering to local human rights committees both local and state, I speak to 4 localities in my community for Crisis Intervention Team classes to offer my perspective of living daily with severe mental illness to help law enforcement in our areas understand what it is like to live daily with severe mental illness..Ive led bipolar support groups..I am secretary for our local mental health of America program..I also operate a local human rights area of which helps residential facilities..that sir is taking something that happened to me and giving back from it..even in a society so callous as to judge me for an already terrible illness. Many of whom are indeed law enforcement themselves. So before anyone goes to “lock us all in a cage” to throw away the key..just remember..not all mentally ill people are out to torment this highly judgemental world.
CAUSE, OPPORTUNITY & AFFECT… IT’s HAS TO BE a ONE on ONE DEAL. WITH EVERYTHING THAT MATTERS. And EVERYTHING DOES MATTER.
Hate to bust your bubble, but the shooter at Virginia Tech was Asian, last name was Cho. So it would seem that mass murder is not exclusive to Caucasians.
Yes, he was….and the next murder on the Tech campus was committed using a butcher knife. There was only one victim, so it didn’t get the headlines…but the fact that it was a knife and not a gun doesn’t make her any less dead. Determined individuals will find a way
to accomplish their goal(s),,,,,good or bad.
Your own ignorance and racism is revealed in your comment as well. Ever heard of Cookie Thornton, black man who stormed a city council meeting and killed 6 people 7 years ago? How about the DC sniper John Allen Muhammad and his sidekick, both black. The asian Virginia Tech shooter. How about the biggest mass murder on American soil on 9/11? which race did that one?
I’m sorry but African-Americans kill more in a weekend then these mass shootings alone, where is your beating heart or comment on that? Better figure your stats before you racistly blame white people. Pure ignorance and a perpuated race baiting agenda.
Ya because african americans dont kill each other off in mass quantities every day in gang related violence.
You’re kidding, right? I’m thrice degreed – maybe I can educate you. You may wish to wipe a few more times. [Posted on Wednesday, July 17th, 2013]: In the 513 days between Trayvon dying, and today’s verdict, 11,106 African-Americans have been murdered by other African-Americans. You have absolutely no place gauging violence in Caucasian (capital C) communities.
Most murders are committed by blacks, in the U.S. It’s not even close.
That was a great way to bring race into a situation that doesn’t call for it. Those who cry out the loudest against others’ lack of intelligence without actually contributing anything of real value to the conversation amaze me.
On that note, as to not become a hypocrite, I think the article hits on several good points. Yes, it is important to reach out to those who are isolated – it is amazing how simple a “hello” and smile can be but can make such a difference to someone feeling lonely. But, my issues with the article stem from the idea that this could all be fixed by something so simple while dismissing any further efforts that could very well also make a difference.
There is no one solution to this issue. As there is no one cause, the remedy will be multi-faceted and call for a great effort from everyone if there is to be any real change. One point that I do understand and agree with is that many people are quick to say, “Well, SOMEONE has to do something!” But, why can’t the someone be you? Write, protest, reach out, VOTE!
We can’t sit back and wait for someone else to fix it and we can’t keep blaming the left or the right, or the whites or the blacks, or the extremists or the pacifists, etc. Blame is so easy to pass and action is hard to come by.
Do what you can. But just do it.
Thank you for an intelligent response. It was refreshing, considering many of the other comments. They do nothing to ameliorate the problem. Some people would rather just hurl insults and try to prove their superiority over others than actually come up with a reasoned response.
Racism isn’t helping anyone here, you bigot.
Then don’t participate in it!
Blacks are far more likely to kill with a gun than a white. Statistical fact.
Reread your post Ms. “thang.” While your call people ignorant, YOUR post is barely legible. Don’t any of you people ever proof before you hit the “post” button?
I don’t understand how Your blatant blanket statements are being tolerated. The hate and racism that you are portraying has got to stop.
Been to Shitcago lately lady?. Everyday is a mass shooting in the Black community.
Can you find “predominately” in any dictionary of the English language?
Someone got an associate degree from Phoenix didn’t they?
You missed black on black murders, but I do like the way your mind works. If you understood your unique place in the universe, you might at times find yourself alone, but loneliness would not be part of your experience. That’s my experience talking. Namaste.
The Irish where the first American slaves. They were cheaper and treated far worse than any other slave in the US. They were beaten and killed in front of black slaves to show what would happen if they ran. Also your stats when researched say thatb 69.2% off all crime the key word being all is committed by white people (mainly white collar). I would love to know where you got your stats because you have not mentioned per capita.
Correction: Native Americans were the first American slaves.
Meredith the Irish slaves came over with the settlers making native Americans the second slaves in the Americas. Correction to you Tom was right.
1624 began forced slavery of Africans, in 1619 they were indentured servants along with the Dutch, when were the Irish enslaved in America and by whom? Slavery And The Making of America https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24U156LHXYM
The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.
Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.
From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain’s solution was to auction them off as well.
During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.
Many people today will avoid calling the Irish slaves what they truly were: Slaves. They’ll come up with terms like “Indentured Servants” to describe what occurred to the Irish. However, in most cases from the 17th and 18th centuries, Irish slaves were nothing more than human cattle.
As an example, the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.
Both Europeans and Native Americans had slavery as a punishment for debt or crime and sometimes as a result of kidnapping, yes. French, English, German people came here as slaves too…but they were privately owned and, if freed, had civil rights. Same for Native American slaves. The Bible recognizes this type of slavery system, which has been described as a very flawed version of a welfare system–slaves had to be fed, and had other rights, most notably the guarantee of freedom at a predetermined date *unless they refused it*. However, the plantation system depended on large numbers of slaves who were isolated, conspicuously different from other people, capable of being seen as a slave caste, and denied social rights even if they were emancipated–exactly what the Bible teaching on slavery seems to have been meant to prevent.
Omg. You are beyond delusional. The Black mass murder rate on any givin weekend (especially a holiday) is 5,000 times that of the once a year black /white boy killing of 8 or 9 people. Or does 1,200 blacks murdered in Shitcago not matter? I thought that blacklivesmatter#? Pick another race honey. You suck at being RACIST.
Please stop saying “Shitcago”! I live in Chicago. A very culturally diverse educated people.
I live in Chicago. Although the shootings at schools, movie theater, s, etc. are committed by “caucasians”, what about the black community here? Far more shootings by young black men! DON’T make this racial! YOU are part of the problem, NOT the solution!
Blah Blah Blah…a typical response from the problem people themselves to blame their victims when they complain. If you wanted a solution, there would no longer be a problem. If you knew the history of Chi Town, then you would know that the conditions in the inner city that produces such violence in that one area was caused by the powers that be segragating Africans out from other areas and piling them into the inner city then making sure no money was poured into the neighborhoods, no jobs were available, and no funding for extra curriculum school activities. On top of all this despair, their “solution” was to further destroy the people by introducing heroine into the community! Next time you open your mouth, at least have a clue as to what you are talking about and the history of the place!
Repealing the Second Amendment does NOT mean a “ban on all guns.” It means a shift in the “burden of proof” for the PRIVILEGE to bear arms onto the gun-owner and prospective gun-owner. By far, the vast majority of current gun-owners will easily qualify for ownership (including registration, licensing and mandatory liability insurance, as required of automobile owners).
Repealing the Second Amendment DOES mean that you need a majority in 75% of the states.
As for the rest of what you say, that is just 1 way that neutering the Bill of Rights may play out. Ultimately, removing the 2nd amendment lets the government alone decide what your human rights might ultimately become.
As the foundation documents have it, “the government” is technically a function of the system of checks and balances built-in to the American system. It’s NOT “the Other,” as in “Them”: it’s US. If you don’t accept the People–and the tried-and-true democratic balances–as the Sovereign, decision-making power in this democracy–then why would you assume that the Second Amendment rights are immutable? Reasonable registration, licensing, and insuring of all gun-owners will help disable this peculiarly American sub-culture of nut-case suicide assassins.
Registration does not even come into the picture until -after- an incident takes place, at least as pertains to guns. It does not stop incidents from occurring, nor does it weed out those who aren’t fit. Registration serves no purpose but to provide a tool for eventual confiscation. And yes, it DOES lead to confiscation, in spite of all claims to the contrary by people who push for it. “Nobody’s coming for your guns, registration doesn’t mean confiscation.” Except in California, where it did. And in Chicago, where it did. And in the UK, where it did. And in Australia, where it did. And in Canada, where it did. The icing on the cake for that last one is that Canada subsequently did away with its long gun registry because it proved to be simultaneously expensive to maintain and virtually useless to law enforcement. So how is that ‘reasonable,’ again?
You do not need to know where the guns are, or who has them. You may be able to make a more convincing case for licensing.
I beg to differ! Registration IS important – to stem the black market flow of guns, straw purchases, and the notorious private sale loophole. Why would a responsible gun owner object to something as simple and effective as registration? Because of the paranoid belief that “they’ll come for your guns one day”? Well, if your registered gun isn’t going to keep the government from taking your gun, how is your unregistered gun going to that?
if they come for your guns, isn’t that what you’re armed for? To resist that kind of “tyranny”? Or is that just the excuse you’ve been fed as the extremist argument to keep us from taking even simple effective measures that will lower the overall rate of guns in this country?
Yes Lori let’s look at Chicago where they have to register all guns. Wow the crime rate with firearms sure seems high. Now let’s look at DC where until just a few years ago hand guns were illegal that didn’t work either did it.
I can’t seem to reply to your last post, but I completely agree that the approach of piecemeal regional regulation – which is all we’ve been able to do so far – is terribly ineffective. It rarely is for consumer goods that can easily be carried from a regulated area to an unregulated area (i.e. Fireworks) which is why for *most* other products we set national standards. There are certainly some things that we can use a state-by-state or regional approach as “laboratories of democracy” – but those should be governance issues, not safety issue that create hazards for our neighbors… So the example of Chicago’s policy is a perfect illustration of why we need to implement regulation on a national level.
These are the laws for concealed carry in CO.
http://www.usacarry.com/colorado_concealed_carry_permit_information.html
For those of you who won’t read the article, this is #8 under the rules that are listed:
8. Demonstrates competence with a handgun by one of the following means:
a. evidence of experience with a firearm through participation in organized shooting competitions or current military service
b. certified firearms instructor
c. honorable discharge from the Armed Forces within past three yearss
d. proof of pistol qualification in Armed Forces within past ten years, if discharged
e. retired law enforcement with pistol qualification within past ten years
f. proof of completion of a handgun training class within the past ten years
This makes no sense to me. Since you acknowledge that “the majority of current gun owners will easily quality”, what’s the point? If the majority qualifies, which obviously proves that group is not the problem, what’s the point of the exercise?
Must we always regulate to the lowest common denominator in our society? Must we continually punish the majority in an attempt to slap a tiny minority of wrong doers? What’s wrong with holding them accountable them accountable for their actions, like we supposedly do with drunk drivers????
The premise is correct (i.e. we should all do more), but points 4 and 5 arrive at wrong, hopeless conclusions. The partially sad truth is many Americans have long-since accepted inner-city gang violence, so what many people really want is to reduce the number of shootings in mainstream society (e.g. schools, offices, malls), therefore bringing society back to “normal”. And many of these mainstream shootings are carried out by unstable people who, despite having no criminal history, would never pass the US military’s psychological screening and thus should not be able to buy guns legally either. This approach, which is not expensive and basically means saying “NO” to 15% of gun applicants, obviously won’t stop all the mainstream mass murders, but it likely would have stopped the Colorado theatre massacre and this latest Oregon school shooting. Let us please try this much.
I bet a certain Army officer stationed at Ft. Hood passed the military’s battery of psychological tests.
I know of no objective test that can accurately forecast individual behavior. In a tightly controlled, heavily regimented society like the military, daily interaction and observation is the key method of detecting troublemakers. I don’t see that kind of thing working in everyday society.
But my biggest problem is that once again, it appears that some of us anyway, are more than happy to allow our freedoms to be dictated by the inappropriate actions of a minority of people in our society.
The comments sadden me (I know. Never read the comments). Something every individual can do for free presented neatly. But it puts responsibility in your lap so you hem and haw and nit pick and agree up to a point. I’m just going to take this message to heart and put some more effort int to reaching out. I won’t stop yelling my ideas at the brick walls in charge or the online echo chambers, but I won’t pretend that that’s enough to make an actual difference.
I disagree with the notion that most of the people who committ mass murders are NOT mentally ill, ALL of them are mentally ILL in my humble opinion. How can you have such a callous disregard for life, and not be though of as mentally ill, whether they were diagnosed by a mental health professional. IF we want people to stop doing this kind of thing, we DO have to find a way to take care of them, AND better reporting of those diagnosed with illness would at least get them on lists of people who can be stopped from buying weapons, at a legally run gun store.
This is by far the most ignorant comment I’ve read yet. Educate yourself on Aspergers Disorder, a neurological disorder of the autism spectrum, not a mental illness. Empathy is not natural, love thy neighbor, the golden rule all must be learned and it takes families, schools and communities to teach these social skills to, yes, predominately Caucasian males. While the author failed to mention the diagnosis specifically, the news media has focused on this common denominator in each of the mass killings at schools. We, society, have failed them. Their families failed them. The school systems failed them. They are not mentally ill. This is an isolating disorder. The author made some really good points about reaching out and making people feel included. You want a list to exclude them from one more thing? In no way do I defend the actions of someone who takes the life of another but the stigma of Aspergers needs to be removed so that these kids get the social skills they need to be productive, contributing members of society. Not a list of shame.
But as sad as it is there are people that are isolated in all countries and yet they isn’t the mass shooting that there are in the USA.
I agree with the article and I think it is often the school culture that is the problem. Think about it: why do most mass shootings occur in schools? It’s because certain people there get so disgusted and depressed with what’s going on in that environment that they want to kill everyone around them.
I think these shootings would happen less if we educated people the way we did in the 1700s. The rich got private tutors, the middle class got apprenticeships/homeschooled and the poor played around in the streets. Bringing people into a building full of folks who aren’t of their choosing and forcing them to sort it out day after day for what seems like all their lives (to the young) is not really healthy for the mentally vulnerable if you think about it. It seems to be burning out many teachers as well and only enriching textbook and testing companies.
People get typecast as losers in kindergarten and learn repeatedly year after year that they are unwanted. At least a kid could choose a different crowd to kick the can with in the streets. We’ve had school style education for a century now at least and income inequality is very high, so it is not like “playing in the streets” would disadvantage the disadvantaged significantly more than they are now. At least they’d be fit, and what I hear of kids who have all day to “unschool” in impoverished African villages is that they are soon building interesting things/creating jobs for themselves.
Then there’s paying for schools. It seems like rackets have developed where more and more money can be tossed in and it only gets sucked into a black hole of corporate greed while student outcomes diminish and a pipeline to prison establishes itself. I think we should quit with the mass education experiment.
Shrug. That is my 2 cents.
Are you serious? So education becomes a privilege for middle and upper class and the rest of the nation becomes a bunch of uneducated and unemployeeable poverty stricken and broken people? Think about this for a minute.
The only problem with Rob Myers’ line of reasoning here is that there is a certain type of person who is so inherently twisted that they can NEVER be left alone, or they get up to all extremes of evil mischief. In other words, what I’m saying is that it’s not merely a problem about people being alone, but about certain types of people who simply must never be left alone.
A person born with an innately reasonable temperament can be left alone for long periods of time and, though they may get lonely and depressed, they don’t have that instinct for sadistic malevolence and so nothing particularly bad will come of it. But in a society that is unwilling or unable to confine or exterminate those born with the gene(s) for sadistic malevolence, the only option is that they must never, ever NOT be surrounded by people. Such people may very well crave or demand their privacy, but they simply cannot be allowed it.
I do hope that, someday soon, science identifies the gene(s) that create the sado-malevolent personality type and also develops the ability to perform gene therapy upon them in order to transform them into reasonable people with a passion for fairness. Because our culture has been hijacked over the past several decades and transformed into one which actually selects for the cruelly demented individual as the exemplar of ideal corporate capitalism. And those who have both the power to hijack and derail societies and then exterminate all dissent against that are the ones primarily responsible for the sheer hell we’re living in today.
I guess there’s just a meanness in this world.
Bruce Springsteen
Nebraska
*who* seem isolated. Great message- I just check out as soon as your grammar is wrong.
Tragedy is a part of existence…..
Article gave me a lot more information than I had previously. Not to mention, I can still learn new words. Thanks for helping me learn this one: tendentious.
ten·den·tious. [tenˈdenSHəs] ADJECTIVE
1.expressing or intending to promote a particular cause or point of view, especially a controversial one: “a tendentious reading of history”
Reblogged this on Kelly Roberts Writing and commented:
Could it really be this easy? Even if it’s not the solution for ending mass shootings, what harm could come from acknowledging the isolated? What harm could come from taking SOME kind, any kind, of direct, personal action? Please consider giving it a try.
As a woman, these types of guys turn their harm on you? This happens all the time.
sorry but I disagree. You can’t prevent a mentally ill person from shooting cause you are nice to that person. It’s sounds great and makes sense regardless to just be nicer and more accepting of weird people rather than isolating them. However, I will just give a small example that will explain why I am skeptical. Did you see American Sniper? Or hear about the story? He was a great patriot and a wonderful and kind person, who embrased mentally ill people and actually hanged with them as well as went for activities with them. Because he was close to one mentally ill person and spent time with him – he was shot by him. Actually in my opinion if you are close with a mentally ill person you can even be more of a target – just like the guy from American Sniper was. So I am more for gun control. Starting from scratch and just banning this dangerous piece of equipment. It’s true you can’t find everyone who owns a gun but it’s a good place to start. And hopefily in a decade or two or three or more you will get somewhere..
We are not a continuous presence in the lives of most people with whom we casually interact day-to-day. We are not trained social workers or psychiatric caregivers. We cannot be an effective substitute for the kind of intervention that would be necessary. Don’t be naive.
Here’s another idea you’re not going to like!
While I like your idea of noticing those around you that seem isolated to engage them, but I disagree with your premise that loneliness is the only thing that causes these shooters to lash out, and that people with solid connections to other people won’t indiscriminately fire guns at strangers. Here’s why; apparently, this doesn’t apply to the two high school seniors who committed the Columbine High School shooting, Eric David Harris and Dylan Bennet Klebold.
One perception formed was that both Klebold and Harris had been isolated from their classmates, prompting feelings of helplessness, insecurity, and depression, as well as a strong need for attention. Although, this concept was questioned, as both Harris and Klebold had a close circle of friends and a wider informal social group, so that opinion does not appear to be accurate.
Some people are just killers. Harris was a psychopath, who exhibited a pattern of grandiosity, contempt, and lack of empathy or remorse, distinctive traits of psychopaths that he concealed through deception. Klebold was a depressive influenced by revenge. Although Harris did let one of his friends go, I don’t think anyone was going to talk him out of killing kids. You may have had an outside chance of talking Klebold out of it, but Harris would have been shooting at you during that conversation.
My point is we need more folks that are trained to use weapons and allow them to carry them! There was ONE armed Sheriff’s Deputy on site at the time. He was not notified by security staff because the security video was off while the custodian changed the video tape.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Harris_and_Dylan_Klebold
I agree with most of your article, however you did make one mistake in your ban scary guns comment. In the US it is perfectly legal to own a fully automatic firearm. While some states have banned it most have not. However it is illegal currently to manufacture new machine guns for civilian use, machine guns registered and manufactured prior to the National Firearms Act of 1986 are completely legal to own. However they are retardedly expensive and require registration and a $600 tax stamp to possess
The stamp is $200, not $600. We have the belt-fed machinegun, M16s, suppressors, and short-barrelled rifles to prove it.
This is the dumbest shit.
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
Reblogged this on jisbell22 and commented:
Finally a plan that would work!! Very well written!
This is a well written piece and to a certain extent I do agree with it. Congress is practically useless at the moment and benevolence is something that works every time. However, since, as you state, this alone simply won’t happen on the scale it should, seeing as people simply aren’t all kind, we need something in the mean time to supplement this. We CAN expand background checks and we can successfully ban assault weapons as well, it you look at the shootings that happened from ’94-’04 during the ten-year assault weapons ban, there were no shootings carried out with assault weapons, even Columbine. But of course, to your credit, Dylan Harris and Eric Klebold would have been unlikely to kill their classmates had they been approached and cared about.
Overall, one thing is clear. Nothing will come out of any extreme and one-dimensional solutions. No more “arm/disarm every civilian”
“…during the ten-year assault weapons ban, there were no shootings carried out with assault weapons, even Columbine.”
Source??? Link?? I can find nothing to back up this statement, one way or the other. I do know that the Columbine killers used PC federally approved non-offensive “low capacity” 10 round mags in their pistols (along with pipe bombs and propance IED’s) to do their dirty work.
The crime fighting impact of the original AWB was minimal.
http://www.propublica.org/article/fact-checking-feinstein-on-the-assault-weapons-ban
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html?_r=0
Given the fact that more people are killed every year by the use of bare hands and feet than long guns of ALL kinds (including the dreaded “assault rifle”), even if the evil AR’s were totally done away with, we’d see a significant difference in murders in the the US.
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2013/01/16/assault-rifles-are-not-involved-in-many-u-s-murders-a-look-at-the-data/
A ban on AR’s? They’re built all over the world. Tons and tons of illegal narcotics come into our country every day. What would stop guns?? (See borders: porous.)
A ban on AR’s? Why not build your own, using commonly available tools and materials? Easily done.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/RKBA/gun/www.thehomegunsmith.com/zoomedschematic.html
https://eatgrueldog.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/9mm-sub-machine-gun/
“High capacity mags”? 3D printing is the answer for those so inclined. (Besides there are billions already in the hands of private citizens.)
Mass shootings with AR’s? Have we already forgotten the Navy shipyard shooting, where the maniac used a Remington 870 pump shotgun. The gun your grandpa probably used to hunt pheasants.
I believe any ban is largely a “look good, feel good” piece of legislation, designed solely to dupe the uninformed.
The only way to end gun violence it to ban all guns. Period.
the journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. A ban on guns that serve no purpose other than to enable mass shootings (i.e. high-capacity and automatic firearms) is the first step.
Actually, Dylan Harris was fairly popular and well liked. He wasn’t a “social outcast” at all. Eric, too, but to a lesser degree.
Actually, Dylan Harris was fairly popular and well liked. He wasn’t a “social outcast” at all. Eric, too, but to a lesser degree.
You seem to know not enough about weapons. Firstly, there is no such thing as an “assault WEAPON”. The term is the product of media-theater. Therefore, nobody has ever been killed with an “assault weapon”. The term that IS defined is “assault RIFLE”, which is a selective-fire rifle what discharges a medium-powered cartridge. AR15s, being semi-only, are not assault rifles. The M16, which is selective-fire, is.
I must be a racist as well. I stand with All of Me. Caucasians have been killing ever since arriving. Go west young man. Take what you want ,oh the other people that are already there. Kill them then take it. Heyand when they fight back call them savages. Caucasians have been doing it for years. And guess what im Caucasian . i just see society destroying itself.
I need to say that the American society is quite tough to deal with. I have lived on three continents and in Europe most of my life but the hardest place to socialize and make friends was in California. People are just arrogant and neighbors do not know each other, and do not try to connect in years.people say whatever crosses their minds and have no shame, even if they say hello today, the next day they just pass by you with no word because they are not in the mood. People smile and make small talk but it’s always fake, shallow kindmess and in fact there is nothing behind it. Even if you are a sane, normal person you feel alone and alienated and frustration builds up. If you are not a church goer or do not have children to take to play dates, it’s quite impossible to socialize. I work in a school and I need to say that my colleagues are the most arrogant, unfriendly people I have ever met. Nobody talks to anybody, it’s just the morning hello routine and that is pretty much it. They are rude with each other and attack each other in staff meetings but would never say a genuine nice word to one another. And these are the role models for the next generation. It’s a hostile society with people who have no common sense and act the way they feel with no consideration to somebody else’s feelings. There are many lonely people out there who get frustrated with the careless society and some of them just lose control eventually. Being nice and considerate says a lot about somebody’s level of intelligence and education. I have experienced situations in my school where young colleagues recently hired did not bother to answer to your greeting or turned their back to you just because they were not in the mood that morning. This is a sign of lack of common sense and shows a defect character. Sometimes I ask myself looking at the arrogant faces what makes these people feel so superior because they really do not exceed in pretty much anything and the saddest thing is that they do not even realize how ridiculous and ignorant they are. It’s so easy to be nice and it feels so good, you have no idea what happens in somebody’s life so you should not judge or act like that person is not good for you, but unfortunatelly, most of the Californians are just pure rude and arrogant and believe they are superior and entitled.
Kora…I’m so sorry you have had such a horrible experience. I live in Illinois, and I must say the schools that my daughter have attended so far have been exceptional. Friendship, accountability, and leadership has always been upheld. I have one horrible neighbor, but the rest of my neighbors are friendly and wonderful. They are the kind of people you could count on in a time of need. I also try to be there for them when they are in need. Please don’t judge the entire U.S. based on your experiences in California! We love you here!
Simple math yes, but you are talking genetics now, in genetics it’s split Dominant and Recessive we’ll call it D for dominant and r for recessive, and lets say Mrs. Obama’s history has no history of Caucasians, for the presidents son it is split as DD, Dr, DD,Dr, meaning dominant all black no Caucasian genes, carries the Caucasian gene, meaning half, all black carries no Caucasian genes again, or again half. This is because a mom gives the baby HALF of the chromosomes, and the dad gives another half. In biology and genetics it doesn’t reduce to an undetermined amount. Second please look at the majority of the United States, now wouldn’t you say if the majority of the race is say Caucasian, then naturally one would think more crime would be committed by said race. Same with any other country as a whole.
I just want to say – I was that child, I am that adult. Not only do I not make friends easily, I don’t particularly want friends; but that doesn’t make me a killer. I love people, I love to write about people, but to get involved in superficial relationships and small-talking social clusters is anathema to me. I point this out because there is always a negative aspect: well-meaning as the sentiments expressed here are, a danger exists in ascribing labels to anyone. I have always held dire our tribal necessity to hunt down anything or anyone we see as weak or different. No, unacceptable as it may be to America, in the long term the only cure is disarmament: no-one can pretend it will be easy, but without it, the killings just go on – and on – and on…
You forgot one idea: ban gun free zones. Almost all mass shootings happen in gun free zones, by law or owner policy. Victim disarmament attracts lonely cowards. Many shootings that might have become mass shootings were stopped by an armed civilian. Ban the gun free zone.
1. Gun free zones are not a legal institution, they’re a private one. As a private proprietor, I have a right to say that I don’t want guns in my establishment.
2. there’s nothing about a gun free zone that attracts mass shootings.
3. There WAS an armed military vet at the UCC shooting. He made the conscious decision to avoid the violence.
4. The absurd insistence that an armed citizen “might have prevented a mass shooting” is simply that… absurd. It’s a delusion rooted in Hollywood’s depiction of heroism and machoism. Talk to anyone who has been in a real firefight, including law enforcement, and they’ll tell you what really happens to you when shots are suddenly fired.
5. the number of mass shootings that have been prevented by an armed citizen are very, very, very few. Especially when compared to the number of mass shootings that have been prevented by a ban on guns.
1) Depends on the state. In some states, it’s an automatic violation of the law to carry in a posted place. In other states, the owner/manager can ask the person to leave and if they don’t comply, they can be charged with trespassing. Again, depends on the state. Some venues, like courthouses for example, are universally GFZ’s.
2) Is this your opinion or do you have facts/links to provide? Given that the majority of mass shootings occur in GFZ’s, I’d say there might be a correlation.
3) The vet (a CCW holder) I saw interviewed, was told to stay in place, in lock down. Had he been in the same room, who knows? He was a little vague if he was actually carrying at the time, as it is a violation of campus regs.
4) There have been several instances where an armed citizens intervened and reduced the number of victims.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/
Evidence clearly suggests that the sooner the nutcase meets resistance, the less casualties there are. Was a “mass shooting” prevented? Nope, but again, the number of victims was reduced.
5) Pure conjecture on your part. How can you prove that something that didn’t happen, didn’t happen? And I would suggest that as the number of GFZ’s go down, the number of citizens fighting back will increase. As it is, such a low percentage of the US population actually has a permit to carry and an even lower percentage of those actually carry regularly, the chances of an armed citizen actually confronting a nutcase are low. Of course, I don’t mean to suggest that private citizens is a bad idea in any event.
The devil doesn’t make appointment after all.
CCW permits holders are probably the most law-abiding groups in America, as evidenced by Texas Dept of Public Safety stats on the conviction rates between permit holders and the general populace:
https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/reports/convrates.htm
I believe all responsible, law abiding adults should have the choice to carry or not. Our right to self-defense doesn’t end at the front door.
1. What will you do when an armed gunman comes to rob you? Call 911? Oh, wait, no… you’re dead.
2. Yeah there is. There is no deterrent to give a shooter pause.
3. This is a fact?
4. How many firefights have you been in, exactly? As luck would have it, vets and police have been in many. Save the “sh*t your pants” argument for pansies that jump when the door slams.
5. This number is few because of the number of licensed carries are reluctant to fire. Why? Because of deliberation like this. Libtards like you will try to sue them.
America is a nation of socially isolated douchebags because it’s society, as a collective whole, is sick and takes immense pride in traits and behaviors that are deeply sociopathic and apathetic towards others.
It’s more than common for Americans to live side by side with their neighbors for 40 years and never get to know them. This is unheard of in 99% of the nations of the world.
Stereotype much?
Been here how long, “Agustin”?
Reblogged this on Through My Eyes.
I was just reading a comment elsewhere by a person who knew Elliot Roger. Apparently, plenty of people DID reach out to him, DID try to talk to him, DID try to befriend them, and he just shut them all down.
Sometimes, the person who is the problem actually is the person who is the problem.
Interesting article, but once again, only making a stab in the dark at the real problem. Hiding your head in the sand, looking for a person who is depressed, white, black, male, female, all just a guessing game. 18 states have figured out how to protect students, train, arm staff. In these 18 states where staff are armed, there has NEVER been a mass shooting, no guessing what works, they have a proven record. BTW, you may want to know, “most” mass murders are registered Democrats. Some of those very people trying to take our rights away, are the ones we really need to be most fearful of.http://clashdaily.com/2013/01/the-5-worst-mass-murders-in-the-usa-with-a-firearm-came-from-democrats/
Wow. You just turned the deaths of scores of people, INCLUDING CHILDREN, into a partisan politics attack.
You truly are a disgusting person.
Nice to finally read an article that points out criminals don’t follow the law. As for psychologist are required to report if they believe their patients are a threat to themselves or others beyond that all communications with patients is covered by doctor patient confidentially.
I think you’re 99% spot on.
I like your message, but it comes off a little trite when you get half your facts wrong. The federal assault weapons ban expired in 2004–they’re only illegal in certain states now–and there is no background check required for a private sale of a gun, which means felons can still get them. If the government ‘can’t do anything’, how did Australia make it work?
I also refuse to believe that erasing the stigma around seeing a psychologist will not help. We’re already required to have a physical check-up annually; shouldn’t a mental one be universally recommended too?
Apart from the fact that you’re oversimplifying the problem–a lot–what you’re suggesting IS part of the solution.
You can institute all the background checks you like, but the black market trade in firearms will only continue to flourish. Heck you can even make guns as illegal to purchase as heroine and cocaine and I bet folks still manage to get them.
That’s a false equivalency. What drives the black market for illegal drugs is people’s ADDICTION to drugs. So you either need to admit that guns, like drugs, are an addiction (and like all addictions rooted in disorders including fear and anxiety), or your point is completely invalid
Black markets spring to life powered by those foik who don’t follow the law so they can evade and overcome government edict. It’s basic human nature. Black markets have been with us from the dawn of time. If there’s a demand, there will be a supply. The folks who want guns will get them. The people who want drugs will get them. There will be a supply, regardless of motivation of the buyer. Legalize drugs, presto! No more black market.
So, I admit to liking and owning guns. To me, they symbolize freedom. I shoot recreationally and for competition, iwhich includes the use of those awful, but inanimate “assault rifles.”) And yes, an AR-15 is my home defense firearm of choice.
Firearms as an addiction based on fear and anxiety? More likely I simply want to preserve a basic human freedom, that of self defense.
And I positively despise exercises in futility, like gun control sold as crime control.
I agree this makes allot of sense. Loneliness and rejection are a horrible feeling that can lead to resentment. I believe caution is needed in this as well. Some people who are mentally stable try to overcome it without lashing out, but for some they don’t have that will or frame of mind. My concern would be if lets say a female talks to the lonely isolated person and he is male and he then gets the wrong idea and wants a relationship with her but she is not interested in him in that way. That could cause a broken heart on top of everything else and cause him to go over the deep end and kill her and others. So although I agree you are on to something here, caution is advised. Just my thoughts
Rob, your perspective is so similar to mine, I wrote my blog before I saw yours and have the same concern about the role of community.
It is not the guns people it the people behind them and the fact we don’t have god anymore. put god back into our country and thing will get better and get ruid for the night mare we got in office there and things get better and stop him from ruining this country our country anymore than he has …
What a load of crap!
Stop trying to deflect the issue and admit that the main ingredient of gun violence is GUNS! Every country in the world has sad and disaffected people, but only the US has such a high number of guns and such a high amount of gun violence.
As long as there are people on this planet, there will be people suffering from mental illness of some sort. It’s part of the human condition. The problem is the nearly unrestricted access those people have to guns.
Yet more people are killed by drunk drivers every year. And cancer from smoking is the number one cause of death every year, yet no one wants to ban them.
Not even true. Gun deaths and car accidents are approved the same. 32-33,000 per year.
2/3 of all gun-related deaths are from suicide. Cancer is a killer. Drunk driving is a killer. Yet no one gives the attention to them at all – nothing like guns. Your expressed concerns are politically and “shiny-thing” driven. This is why serious change to anything is hopeless. I’m for background checks. I am for registration. But check the UK / “gimme your guns” sh*t at the door.
I don’t have time to read all the comments, so I apologize if this point has already been made, but while I agree in theory with the theme of your post, it seems to me to ignore a major fact:
There have been lonely people since the dawn of civilization, certainly since the founding of our country, and they haven’t as a rule decided to go out and massacre as many innocent others as they have been for the past twenty years. Something else is going on.
There is a difference in the past three or four decades in the level and types of asocial violence occurring in our country. There are various causes, and I don’t pretend to have teased them all out, but I do believe that the movements toward unearned self-esteem and utopian risk avoidance for kids are two of the major culprits. Kids with inflated egos who can’t handle the slightest slings and arrows of life are dangerous to society. Having more free time and a more disconnected society in general I think also don’t help.
I have only known one person who planned a mass school shooting. He was a high school aged, Caucasian male which I’ve included due to that being a topic. During the planning phase for the shooting, a friend invited him to Church. Surprisingly he agreed to go. He found Jesus there, and it changed everything. Some will say, “so what that he got brainwashed or whatever.” He will say that he got transformed. He is now a youth pastor, married, employed, a productive and positive influence on society. We live in a fallen world. It can be a lonely, sad, and sometimes a horrific place to be. Yes, kindness can help, but we really need a cure for sin, and I only know of one who claims to be that. Religions and philosophies can offer positive thoughts and even acts of goodness, but only Jesus offers remedy for sin and a way to transformation.
I disagree. My town’s shooting, Marysville. WA was committed by the homecoming prince. Columbine wasn’t that awkward kid either. We should all engage people but that isn’t what will stop shootings. I wish it were that simple but it goes so much deeper. As for the isolated kids that commit the shootings they usually isolate themselves, we don’t create it, they do. When society creates it then we see suicide but not murder/suicide. There is something broken long before they plan their attack. What we need to look for is those that stock piles guns, discuss shootings on social media, have agendas with groups of people and take proactive steps.
Great opinion piece. A couple of points; 1. gun laws need to change. If we are going to require background checks for gun sales, it needs to be for all gun sales. You don’t get a pilots license or teaching certificate online or from a buddy, you go through some layers of checks and requirements. Will that stop all shootings? No. Just as it won’t stop a creep teacher from acting inappropriately, but in the U.S. this is the system we have, licensing, checks and the like and for the most part it works.
2. This epidemic of gun violence in America is very complicated and requires a multi-pronged approach. Just having stricter gun laws or only being kinder is not going to do it. We need to address this from any and all angles that have a chance to work.
Do we all need to have more kindness and grace? Abso-fucking-lutely. It is far too easy to look the other way when someone is being ‘weird’, to ignore it or make fun. Even good people do this; even strong religious people.
Having said all this let me get very personal. My brother believed in Jesus. He read the Bible and believed in forgiveness, love and grace. He had a great girlfriend, family and life-long friends. He would talk to anybody, anywhere. He was bipolar and struggled with the side effects of the meds and just not feeling ‘normal’ like he used to be. I believe that Satan took a foothold in his damaged brain and kept at him night and day. We knew all this and tried hard to keep in touch with him, to ask how he was doing. He had a good support system. He didn’t want to be the one we coddled, which I think is typical human behavior. He had a good job and liked his coworkers, or so he said. He kept his most horrific, black thoughts to himself. He chose not to show us his dark side, until it was far too late for us to help him, and he shot 2 people, fought with another, then took his life. So in our case there was no getting through to his black heart. Now we have to live with the choices he made. There is no amount of I’m sorry or money that can make up for what he did.
I disagree that Do Something is ineffective. Me Doing Something is to share his story whenever I can. Me Doing Something is being kind to all the diverse people I am blessed to meet in my government job. Me Doing Something is speaking out in favor of more gun control.
Thank you for caring so much to eulogize your brother but since Cain and Abel; even brothers were killing brothers over one failed character trait or another. If everyone were able to carry weapons as most all did for protection from the “bad guys and vermin” not many even those with mental illnesses would venture to attack others, perhaps unless they were wanting to commit suicide by “cop” or anyone else! Everyplace that has removed guns have now more violence and killings with them than before the bans…
Oh Jackie! HUGGS! Thank you for sharing your story. Perhaps if your brother could not get a hold of a gun, this would never have happened. There are too many guns. Why someone would not want to comply with background checks and registration is paranoid, in my opinion. We need to at least TRY to curb the amount of free flowing guns! I live in Chicago. I cannot watch the news without hearing of crimes and murders with guns.
If someone has a knife, at least that person has to get close enough to another person in order to cause harm! Since so many guns are floating around, anyone at anytime can use one to do harm! Perhaps if it took awhile to obtain one, there might be a change of heart, or another way to deal with a problem! I’m quite certain that people don’t “intend” on shooting innocent bystanders! Yet, it happens every day. Where are those innocent bystander’s rights?
Sorry, but this “solution” is as impractical and unrealistic as banning guns. How exactly do you propose we get everyone to engage with every lonely, isolated person? There are 300 million of us, and it only takes one to kill dozens. And it’s not as if every isolated person will turn into a murderer. We’re talking about less than 1% of the population here. You are also suggesting that simply talking to mentally ill people can fix their illness. It won’t. Metal health is a serious issue, usually involving a chemical imbalance, and I doubt all of the mass murderers would have elected a different course had someone simply been nice to them. In the case of Columbine, the killers had friends and family. The reality is that there are no easy answers. The solution, if there is one, has to be approached on multiple levels, including some measure of gun control.
The other problem with your line of thinking, which I agree with the premiss, is that most people even when they do talk to the isolated person, are rude, abrassive, and judgemental. How about we all put way our guns, because we are afraid of everyone, and start thinking about other people insteed of ourselves!!!!!
How about we all put way our guns, because we are afraid of everyone,
Classic projection.
Bring back the draft. Teach these kids discipline and responsibility. Heck, they will even learn to use and respect a weapon.
Either that, or you’ll create more efficient killers.
Love one another as I have loved you and follow the golden rule….most all religions teach this in some form or another nd it is just s clear mandate today as it has been for thousands of years…only the technology has changed..
Islam says to kill those that defy Allah. It’s also one of the largest religions. There went that theory.
The problem with this argument is that it assumes loneliness equals a rash desire to murder innocent people. If that were the case there would not be terrorist organizations, there would be terrorist individuals. Those people who attacked us on 9-11-2001 were not loners, They were repeatedly described as being nice, and friendly. Terrorist have groups of other terrorists they hang out with to plan their dastardly deeds, they are not lonely.
The other problem is that the argument assumes that loneliness equals a rash desire to murder innocent people. I am lonely. I am alone (except for my 6 year old son), but I have no desire or even thought to go murder innocent people. Would I be happier and less depressed if I had people who came up and talked to me, probably, but I have trust issues and I don’t really know how to let anyone in my life. That is my issue, not any one else’s and I certainly don’t want to murder anyone, not even the people that have hurt me and caused my trust issues.
David Berkowitz didn’t kill people because of loneliness, he killed people because the voices in his head told him to. Charles Manson certainly wasn’t lonely, he had a bunch of “family” around him…he is crazy, but wasn’t lonely. Jim Jones (albeit, he didn’t use a gun to kill his people, he used kool-aid) absolutely wasn’t lonely, he was surrounded by hundreds of followers who loved him.
Just because I am lonely, does not mean I am a murderous psychopath. I am just lonely.
Hi Barb! I’m sorry you are lonely! I could be your friend! Your point of “loneliness does not lead to murder” is spot on. I’ve been lonely at times and I’m sure that most people have experienced periods of loneliness. I think that most people need to learn how to trust their intuition. Trust your gut. If you feel a friendship isn’t right, then end it. You don’t “owe” anyone anything!
I’m sure that you are an intelligent person, a person with morals, and with experience could learn to trust. I think many people are missing out of meaningful friendships. I also think that there are far more good people in this world than bad. Trust in yourself. You will know if a friendship is worthwhile or not. Don’t miss out on the beauty of friendship!
I am a grouchy asocial introvert. In MY case, people just randomly deciding that it’s their responsibility to invade my alone space and “cheer me up” are MORE likely* to trigger a shooting than leaving me alone is.
*A nonzero probability
Interesting perspective, but do we really think that the US is the only country in the world with isolated lonely people, and that Europeans, for example, as so much better at reaching out to the “awkward”? I’ve spent quite a bit of time in Europe, and don’t think so…Must be something else going driving mass shootings in the US.
tok tok WEAPONS
Quick! When was the last time you heard of a mass shooting at a gunshow????
Lots of weapons there!!!
Yeah, Like Europe doesn’t have problems either.
You mean like frequent mass shootings at centers of learning? I know, let’s give everyone in university the right to carry firearms. That way if someone starts firing, we can all join in the carnage in the classroom.
Specifically how does that fact help avoid shootings in US Mike?
I agree. I appreciate the perspective of this article, but his argument depends on the assumption that these people committing the shootings are lonely. I’m not convinced that’s the case. In the case of Columbine, it was latter discovered that the boys were not outcasts. I mean they had each other and had to have been pretty close to plan and carry this out together. I think something else is going on. But not isolating these people is a step because then maybe others would see the warning signs and something could be done before they carried out their disgusting shooting fantasies.
@” it was latter discovered that the boys were not outcasts”
I’m afraid you’re dead wrong on this. It’s pretty well established now the Columbine kids were bullied and were outcasts, e.g.:
“One of Harris’ last journal entries read: “I hate you people for leaving me out of so many fun things. And no don’t … say, ‘Well that’s your fault,’ because it isn’t, you people had my phone number, and I asked and all, but no. No no no don’t let the weird-looking Eric KID come along.”
(Hey, that sounds exactly like what Rob Myers is saying.)
Dylan Klebold said on the Basement Tapes, “You’ve been giving us shit for years.”
(Hey again, that also sounds like what Rob Myers is saying.)
“Accounts from various parents and school staffers describe the bullying that has been described as “rampant” at the school.[43] Nathan Vanderau, a friend of Klebold, and Alisa Owen, Harris’s eighth-grade science partner, reported that Harris and Klebold were constantly picked on. Vanderau noted that a “cup of fecal matter” was thrown at them.[44] “People surrounded them in the commons and squirted ketchup packets all over them, laughing at them, calling them faggots,” Brooks Brown says. “That happened while teachers watched. They couldn’t fight back. They wore the ketchup all day and went home covered with it.””
“”A lot of the tension in the school came from the class above us,” Chad Laughlin states. “There were people fearful of walking by a table where you knew you didn’t belong, stuff like that. Certain groups certainly got preferential treatment across the board. I caught the tail end of one really horrible incident, and I know Dylan told his mother that it was the worst day of his life.” That incident, according to Laughlin, involved seniors pelting Klebold with “ketchup-covered tampons” in the commons”
Sure the two had each other, but only in that their common ground was that they were both outcasts – both had experienced that torment and loneliness.
We see in the animal kingdom that if you maltreat an animal it can become aggressive and unpredictable. But apparently we believe we can maltreat humans. No, Rob Myers has hit the nail on the head.
Bravo. Thanks!
And to be clear, I only mean to say in all this that being nicer and inviting to each other, especially at a young age, can do wonders for our society. I don’t pretend this idea to be a panacea, but rather what I believe the best available option we have for the overwhelmingly majority of us.
Psychopathy still exists, and there’s nothing to be done about that, but maybe we can reduce the number of sociopaths through a kinder, more inclusive American experience.
They were BOTH outcasts!! As we’re ALL the shooters. More mental health attention to the YOUNG, ….that would help
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/04/20/columbine.myths/
Please see article concerning the assumption that the murderers were outcasts
In order to properly discuss the tragedy at Columbine, please read “Columbine” by Dave Cullen. His book is considered to be the most factual, most in-depth account of the Columbine shootings and their perpetrators, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. Much of what gets reported in the media is false. As we all know too well, the media often opts for what is sexy over what is true. What Eric and Dylan did was heinous. And, they might not have been popular, but they did have friends. They weren’t loners. On a side note, The Trench Coat Mafia was a media fabrication as well! Cullen spent over a decade meticulously reasearching every aspect of the Columbine shootings. His book is the definitive guide to what really happened. It’s a fascinating read. Please take time to read it. I promise that you won’t be sorry that you did!
“Columbine” by Dave Cullen is considered to be the most factual, most in-depth account of what actually happened on that tragic day and the days, months, and years that followed. Cullen spent a decade meticulously researching the shooting and its perpetrators. What Eric and Dylan did was heinous, but they were not loners, they did not specifically target jocks, and there was no Trench Coat Mafia. These are all media fabrications. Dave Cullen’s “Columbine” is a fascinating read. Please take the time. I promise that you won’t be sorry! Cullen’s book is the definitive guide to the Columbine shootings and the aftermath.
@Matt and @Angela,
The best way to get insight into the Columbine kids’ motivations is to actually read what they themselves wrote and said … we don’t need to sit and guess what their motives were, because they told us, in plain English, why they did it. E.g. in addition to what I’ve already mentioned, Eric Harris also wrote the following:
“Whatever I do people make fun of me, and sometimes directly to my face. I’ll get revenge soon enough.”
Could that be ANY clearer?
He also wrote: “Thats where a lot of my hate grows from, the fact that I have practically no selfesteem, especially concerning girls and looks and such. therefore people make fun of me… constantly”
He also wrote, and this is ESPECIALLY telling: “Once I finally start my killing .. there are probably about 100 people max in the school alone who I dont want to die”
Wait, what? Read that again. He WANTED some to live. If he was just killing randomly, why would he *want* a specific 100 or so to live? There must be *something* those ‘100 people max’ people had done differently toward him … and it doesn’t take a genius to figure out, these 100 or so people were the ones who treated him with at least some kindness. He didn’t kill randomly – he was selective, and he was keeping track of those who had treated him kindly.
Sure they had a small group of friends – but they were also generally the geeks/nerds/outcasts – obviously they were severely bullied and humiliated on a long-term basis and were obviously outcasts at the school – the Jeff Kass in the CNN article Matt links is *blatantly* lying where he claims the kids don’t mention bullying/isolation, as one can easily find multiple references to the bullying by simply reading Eric Harris’ journal (go on, the journal is online, it’s trivial to refute the CNN article with five minutes of reading the journal). Instead of dishonest third-hand accounts who have some motivation to falsely perpetuate the idea that these kids weren’t bullied and weren’t outcasts, read the kids’ own words.
Excellent point, not to mention the fact that this whole bit about ‘isolated, lonely people’ is a gross generalization. Some of these shooters have been extremely anti-social, rejecting the overtures of people who’ve tried to be friendly and lashing out at others who are just going about what most of us consider to be normal routines.
I would like to find out how much of that “rejecting the overtures of people who’ve tried to be friendly” came as a result of years of cynicism building up.
When one is bullied, it is easy for that person to develop a distrust of the motives of those who try to reach out.
I know. I have been there. I have had a few of my peers pretend to be friendly with me at first, only to betray my trust later down the road.
I think (having lived there) europe is a little different with regards to it’s views about community. The US is a much more transient society, we live with far more strangers among us than more traditionally settled countries. Here I think it’s much easier to be that person that “keeps to himself” and goes unnoticed. Don’t make the mistake so many others do of bad comparisons, the ie “but these guys don’t have the same problem” fallacy. They aren’t us, and we aren’t them. Comparisons of that kind are of limited use in that regard. Now, if another country had a similar problem AND found an innovative way to solve it or reduce it’s impact, then I think it is worth looking into comparative issues to at least find inspiration for a solution or at least being able to mitigate the issue.
Also because in europe….. its a lot harder to get a gun fam….
And then there’s the case of Switzerland, where nearly every head of household is part of the militia and has a full auto genuine, real “assault rifle” at home as mandated by the government.
They also have one of the lowest murder rates in the world, year in and year out.
Hmmm…..
http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/
We need to treat causes, not symptoms. Even if you could by magic keep guns away from potential shooters, that would do absolutely nothing to ease the loneliness and torment of the kids currently being maltreated in every school across the US, still today. In fact it would be worse, as it would be easier for everyone to ignore their loneliness and pain, having happily plastered over a symptom.
Tim, the problem is in Switzerland, you aren’t allowed to keep ammunition at home nor carry it with your weapons. So that invalidates your argument completely.
@Max,
Yep, since 2007 the law was changed so that the ammo for the rifle couldn’t be kept at home. HOWEVER, ammunition for privately owned firearms is allowed to be stored at home.
And Switzerland still has one of the lowest murder rates in the world, despite a fairly high rate of privately owned firearms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
Dave,
You’re correct. The US is not the only nation with lonely isolated folks. But, we are the only country on the planet that glorifies gun violence in all media, protects them with laws, and denies that anything meaningful can be done. That AND we have lonely isolated people…There’s the toxic cocktail.
VP Biden, when he’s not advising us to shoot at possible, yet un identified home invaders through closed doors, has explained that the federal government “doesn’t have the time” to prosecute those who lie on the form 4473 when purchasing a firearm. Lying on that form is a felony btw.
Quite often I see firearms charges plea bargained away in criminal cases. These charges would significantly increase jail time if successfully prosecuted in most cases.
Wouldn’t it be “meaningful” for the Feds to at least enforce present law before clamoring for more laws? It seems to me anyway, the government really isn’t serious about fighting crimes involving guns. Demonizing the NRA and vilifying gun owners, yes. Fighting crime, no.
What else do you think is going on?
SSRI drugs
You’re partially right, there is something deeper. If we do this along with not desensitizing us to violence as we’ve been doing for so long then we could see a change.
Yes. Guns. Isolating, pestering others to the point of suicide, is everywhere. Mass shootings? USA.
Family values in the US aren’t the same as they are in Europe. They were at one point, but now they’re not. You can’t even punish your child any more without getting a visit from child protective services. When I was younger, if I did something wrong, I knew what was going to happen, so at a certain point, I learned that if I did something I wasn’t supposed to do, I would receive a beating, but not to the point of abuse. Believe me, I didn’t like it one bit, but I am who I am today because of it. I don’t break any laws and am glad to have been raised in a traditional European way. Today kids do whatever they want and suffer zero consequences. Then they grow up to think that they can do whatever they want because they’ve never been taught boundaries.
This isn’t even touching upon the mental health aspect of this. Mental health meds account for roughly 30% of the meds that are prescribed in the US. Is it that we’re better at diagnosing mental illness, or diagnosing mental illness when it isn’t there? The vast majority of mass shooters have been on some form of mental illness medication. It’s interesting how the focus isn’t on that, but rather on banning guns outright. I’m a gun owner, a responsible, sane one. I’ve never once fantasized or even seriously considered killing people. That thought has never even entered my mind, not even once. Is that a product of my upbringing? I believe it is.
We also have to take a closer look at the role of entertainment in the American way of life. Also looking at how we portray “being normal”. Most of these mass shooters are loners. Most of these kids probably fall under the “introvert” spectrum of the personality scale. Combine introversion with feelings of being inadequate because they don’t fit into the mould of what a teenage American male should be, the feelings of depression from that perception, and the subsequent meds that are administered, and we can begin to see how this unfolds.
This is a complex problem that has to do more with the American way of life as it’s currently known than anything to do with guns. Blaming guns is the easy, lazy way of addressing this problem. But that’s typical of American’s these days. Always looking for the lazy way of doing things. I hate to say that, but being born and raised here gives me the right to criticize my fellow countrymen.
beating your child is not a way to stop gun violence – it is also not the way to teach a child anything but to fear another beating.
Except that every study has shown that corporal punishment is not actually effective in curbing a child’s behavior, and, for the icing on the cake, actually increases the child’s proclivities to be violent himself.
So aside from the fact that more beatings will do the exact opposite of what you said, I’m totally with you.
It’s the media that pumps these shootings out! so much to the point where a child or disturbed person see’s it and thinks yeah this is what I need to do to get attention or help. What people need to do is talk to their kids everyday make sure they are ok.. Lock up guns at home secure is the only way they don’t get in to hands they don’t need to be in.. I don’t have any but this is what I would or know how best to stop this on my end..
Seriously? No shit. Let’s keep arguing about this or just simply…SAY HELLO TO SOMEONE WHO LOOKS LONELY and teach kids the same thing. That’s all this article is suggesting. No shit there’s something else going on in the US. Crikey.
That is it Lorie. People get so entrenched in their own agenda. It is ludicrous to think mass shootings evolved from one problem. Reaching out to one another may not be the cure all, but just think, if just one person is thwarted from committing a mass murder that saved your family…is it worth the effort?
I’m a loner. There’s nothing wrong with me, I’m just an introvert: it’s a normal variation of human personality. If strangers start talking to me I feel really uncomfortable, especially if they start asking personal questions like “How’s your day been?”; if they persist I feel panicky and wonder what their agenda is and why they won’t leave me alone. Sometimes I have to be what they think of as rude in order to shake them off, when to me their intrusiveness is what’s rude.
I hate the way whenever someone commits a bizarre crime the media always point out that the person is a ‘loner’; it makes it look as if we’re all dangerous nutcases, when it’s just that social contact just doesn’t suit us.
Yes, be nice, don’t bully, stick up for people being bullied; but extros, don’t try to force your way of life onto the rest of us.
There is…the fall-all-over-themselves-for-a-twisted-story media and there constant drum beat when one of these happens. They are fostering the behavior. Even recent communication found by dead shooters has said as much, looking to be deadlier and more famous than the last guy. Also, I’d suggest that handing out psychotropic drugs like Pez ain’t exactly helping the problem.
I think you make a valid point Dave. As a lifelong gun owner, AND one of the awkward folks mentioned, I don’t disagree with anything Myers says. What I do wonder about is just why I never had an inclination to go on a shooting spree, or fantasize about doing so, or ever even consider shooting any of my major tormentors. At 72 yoa, I can look back and say “it was a different time”, and, yes, it was. The things I can’t explain are the changes that have occurred since that “time”, because there were always we outsiders, “loners”, and, especially back then, many of us were armed; yet it wasn’t, really, until Charles Whitman climbed the Univ. of Texas tower in 1966 that mass shooting in the current mold began. I do agree with Myers’ philosophy of inclusion, at the very least it couldn’t hurt; and yet, I can’t get away from the idea that other things are being missed, and, unable to qualify those “things”, I think we have to take all the measures suggested AND keep searching for all the missing links to clearly understanding this present behavior. It has always appeared to me that the analogy of banning guns and the clear failure of prohibiting alcohol in this country (or recreational drugs) should occur to those who propose repealing the 2nd Amendment, banning and confiscating all guns.
I really like your comment but I feel compelled to add that I haven’t heard rallying for 2nd amendment appeal or banning and confiscating of guns. Just, let’s try something else. If what we currently have on the books isn’t working, let’s do some things differently.
We brought guns to school to work on in shop. There were guns in pickup trucks in the school parking lot as many of us hunted after school on the way home.
No shootings occurred.
Maybe someone took the time to make us understand “Thou shalt not kill.”
Maybe someone just took the time to care.
Your perspective is really interesting. Do you think it could be increasing economic stratification or food additives/gmos/pesticides? I’ve done intense studies on a similar question and these are the hypotheses that stand up.
The thing is they do happen in Europe. The president said they happen here more, but he was Wong. Norway has the highest rate of mass shooting. It happens everywhere. I think this articl is on to something. If you look at quantity that’s one thing, but if you break that down to how many, per person. Norway has he most. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/22/barack-obama/barack-obama-correct-mass-killings-dont-happen-oth/
Way to completely misinterpret the numbers. The one shooting in Norway was arguably a terrorist attack, certainly not a school-shooting like the ones deign discussed in this thread.
Norway had ONE mass shooting that bounced the stats. Normally, zilch. Small country, one event blasts the percentages per capita. Lies, lies and statistics.
@Pat The Norway shooter was badly abused by his mother so I think it is stil apt; I suspect that is more the root cause than politics.
the author can start with himself – his descriptions of those who are lonely and/or isolated is not very compassionate.
There’s a difference between a lonely 12 year old who has been ol isolated and could become a sociopath, and a person who has made it to that point some years later.
It isn’t my intention to confuse isolated people with sociopathic mass shooters, merely stating that if anything can be done, today, by all of us, being mindful of exclusions is a good start. No intended disrespect to ostracized parties out there.
Why does the author feel the need to add “and you’re not gonna like it” to the title? You’re not gonna like being nice to people who are lonely, who are different? That is hardly the right message.
*”and you won’t like it”
But violent crime rates are rising in Europe and they’re dropping in the US, so…..apparently we’re doing something right.
I believe people should be held responsible for their firearms, background checks should be done on all handguns and some assault weapons and registered to the owner. No more sales without some kind of track. When a gun is used it goes back to the owners responsibility. There are to many untrackable guns out there.
I take it you are not a gun owner or you would know that those are already required. And as for untracked guns… the Federal Gov’t has the record on that or did you not hear about Obama’s Fast & Furious blunder along with all the USA made weapons he handed to the Libyan Rebels, the Syrian Rebels, and the Iraqi military that are now in the hands of isis because of his idiotic foreign policies. ( I refer to it as Treason!!)
It has lots to do with a culture of violence we’ve fostered in the U.S I think. Not the guns or the weapons themselves, but the violence that we’ve glorified as a society. Also, Europe is a very violent place. Its a lie to believe its “safer” just because they don’t have the same access to guns.
They may not have the school shootings the U.S sees, which is great, but their criminals have adapted to different forms of crime that are just as potent. Instead of killing 10 people in one event, they have higher rates of stabbings and knife crime that often goes unsolved. So that’s lead to those in England creating a massive system of cameras to monitor most of the roads and streets in the city, and allowed police to randomly search and pat down people at will.
There is a trend. Europe is slowly losing the freedoms that it once enjoyed, while granting its government much farther reaching powers over the population in my opinion. America is simply walking down a different path, with its own pros and cons.
In a way you are correct it must be something about us. First and foremost is press coverage lets face it big citys are Democrat big media is based from larger citys and staffed with city people. Leading to the huge agenda of turning every single incident into a political campaign. Like outside of Utah pretty much extremely limited coverage of a shooting that took place at mall. That had a person use their concealed weapon to take out shooter. Top it off the few articles that did pop up made it sound as if it was a responding cop. While he was a cop he was off duty using a weapon he only had because of his civilian concealed carry permit.
Top it off with other countrys being for the most part around the size of one of our states and less in limelight. We are the loud kid and other places are just so much smaller that. Its easy to go well the UK hasnt had a shooting when its barely bigger than minnesota. Again there is also a agenda while people bash the usa for wanting stronger border protection. Most of europe has a system like e-verify but not just for jobs but to rent a house as well. Combined with harsh laws huges fines prison time for even first time offenders.
As for the social aspects of why we are different than other countrys is we are radically racially different . But top it off with our learning experience I think us schools are more of a social event than other countrys from frats/ to sorority we have plenty of legitimate ways to ostracize and create hierarchy. But throw in fact we are mental illness stupid society. Aka the only time we talk about it is when were calling someone crazy. Or talking about ways to penalize people for mental illness. (yeah I am sure thats going to want people to seek help).
But a big thing is our “mass homicides” are a blip I mean police kill 3-4 times as many people as that. As for the big thing behind homicide it is specifically our drug situation in us we have demand for them and harsh laws. But if it were not for drug related homicides we would be in one of the lowest homicide category’s in world.Seriously between japan and switzerland so if you are worried about high homicide rate. Avoid drugs and those that use them and you are once again in one of safest countrys.
The premise of taking personal initiative is completely valid, but it does not disprove the effectiveness of sane gun policy, like the author seems to imply.
Good idea, but super slanted presentation.
Really? This is an article about being compassionate to those who are lonely and isolated. No, we’re not the only country with lonely, isolated people but exercising a little compassion can go a long way! I agree with the author; we all need to do our share and the world will be a much better place!
I agree Dave, I have suffered from depression for 20 some years and I am 53 years old. What you don’t understand is there are so many kinds of mental illness. My depression is the type that I would hurt or kill myself before I would hurt anyone ever at all. I stay in my home alone and in the dark thinking that someone might see me. I even when I would once in a while if someone pulled into our place I would go hide in the bathroom so they didn’t know I was anywhere around. There are so many types of mental illness and around this area I live in or county I live in I would hate to say how many people save committed suicide and not hurt anyone but themselves. I would say when I was an EMT there was at least 15 to 20 people who did commit suicide so please stop saying do something about mental illness unless you have been in those shoes! I will keep praying so that someone can figure out how to stop these mass shootings! God might take care of the situation for all of us!! Just be praying everyone!
Oh Carol! Hugggs! I truly think that depression is caused by one’s life experiences, or at least one of the causes. I was bullied all thru grammar school, was never told how to do anything by my parents, was kept in the dark about everything, even though I had 4 older sisters, and was always forced to wear my sister’s hand-me-downs. In other words, I never had my own identity. My parents thought that children should be seen and not heard. I got punished for being loud when I was outside playing. We NEVER went out to eat ANYWHERE! I was 8 when my grandpa died and we went out to dinner/lunch for the very first time. We were served soup and I gathered up all the crackers and was enjoying my soup when my mom said…”don’t fill up on that….you will spoil your appetite”. I said, “there’s more”? EVERYONE laughed at me. There were MANY times like this in my life.
I was NEVER treated like a person….not even till this day. I never got credit for anything. I was hit in the legs in grammar school by a boy who’s desk faced mine. He took the rung of the wooden chair and hit me in the legs. I dare not let out a scream, nor tell the nun, nor tell my mother, because I would be singled out….probably have my desk moved right next to the nun’s.
I’ve had a series of abusive boyfriends. If I had access to a gun, I’d probably be in jail now! My first boyfriend was wonderful. He went to Eastern, Illinois University and was good friends with Jimmy John. Yes, the infamous “Jimmy John”. I was at Eastern when my boyfriend and Jimmy John and his cousin Mike made their first sub. Jimmy John’s father Jim gave Jimmy an ultimatum. Either you go in business, or I’ll drag you out of school. Hence, the restaurant business began. Actually, it is his father’s business!
I got my father a job at Jimmy John’s father’s business. They welcomed him with open arms. Never did I hear a positive thing about the job I got him. Rather, I heara d about the long drive it was to go to and from work, even though, mind you, he was reimbursed for gas, and made good money in sales.
My dad HATED playing. All he ever said was…”you are staying in because you did this wrong”, or “that’s because you are in a hurry to go out to play”! When he was washing the walls it was my duty to go and rinse out the heavy towels in the tub. My hands were too small to wring out the towels and when I brought them back to him, they were dripping. That was another punishment I had to endure.
When my dad was at work, Jimmy John came in with a remote controlled car and zoomed it all around the office. This made my dad furious! You see, play was a dirty word to my dad. To this day, my dad hates Jimmy John! He comments every time we pass one of his restaurants!
He is now 89 and I couldn’t have a better relationship with him if I tried. I simply forget the past. No sense going into it with him!
I got married at 35, had a baby girl who died inside me when I was due in 5 days. I thought this too was my fault! I thought I didn’t deserve to have a baby! I felt incompetent. I thought it was my fault. It wasn’t until weeks later I found out the reason she died with an autopsy.
Luckily, I had a healthy baby girl 2 years later. She is the most wonderful thing to have happened to me! I turned 40 the day I took her home. What a blur!
I’m happy to say that I treat her NOTHING like I was treated! There is no question a child could ask that cannot be answered in an age-appropriate way. She is a great kid.
The reason I’m telling you all of this is because I, too, have been diagnosed with depression. Ya think? Zoloft did me a world of good. It helped me figure out my life, which is a work in progress!
I know for a fact that my mom, my grandma, my aunt and other family members suffered from depression! If only it was recognized back then, it could be treated. So, to say that “pills” are too often prescribed, is ludicrous! Perhaps for some, but for the most part, they are very effective!
I pray that you get better. I don’t know if you are on meds or not, but life isn’t meant to be in isolation. You are missing out on your life! The old “grin and bear it” is no longer an option! I’m sorry that you are suffering. You are in my prayers.
Huh. I had no idea Utøya was in the U.S.
Except that this isn’t true .check the stats yourself. There are just as many mass shootings in Europe. Norway holds the record.
Diversity plays a huge role in it. Because we’re so unlike one another, we’re afraid of each other, or as a culture we’re more concerned with minding our own business to avoid offending one another. Sure, loners exist elsewhere, but the cultural response outside the US is to do something about it.
We are also selfish attention-mongers here. We all want to be famous and get noticed, and when we become obsessed with that idea and run into a wall, we snap.
These are cultural nuances in our country that cannot be weeded out with legislation.
Interesting how so many Europeans and Canadians care so much about US shootings, but not so much about Sharia law in their countries… and the rape, beatings, and abuse. You’re ignorant, and didn’t read one thing in this brilliant post. Meaningless posts from the soon to be conquered. Keep your nose out of American laws. We’ll keep ours out of yours.
The US has a big pharma industry dictating healthcare. Meds prescribed by profit, not need. The side effects of psychotropic drugs are ignored because of liability issues. Why won’t MSM touch this?
This is actually true – to an extent. There was a boy in our school that made a hit list, and the two people that weren’t on it were me and my sister, who just would say hi to him in the hallways every day. We didn’t even have to have full conversations. We would just say hi. That’s all it took.
That being said, some of these couldn’t have been helped. That kid that shot the sorority house shot it up because the girls wouldn’t date him. If someone doesn’t want to date someone, they’re not going to simply so you won’t shoot up the place. Another kid stabbed a girl and killed her because she wouldn’t go to prom with him – she shouldn’t have to say yes to going to prom with someone she doesn’t want to go with because she’s afraid of getting killed. Those people that were in that church that was shot up – no amount of talking was going to get that kid to be talked out of his racist massacre.
So yes, it’s a good thought, and in some situations would work, but others, it’s a bit too optimistic.
At the point of their actions, no, being “nice” would have done nothing. It starts much much earlier-grade school, high school. These shooters blame others for their ordeal, then take it out on those they blame. Adam Lanza shot up a grammar school he hadn’t attended for years, but something in him blamed that place for his dismal existence. The kid in SC blamed blacks for his lack of a girlfriend or social life, so he shot blacks and those people took him in to pray as part of the group-too little too late.
The blame is based on imaginary snubbing and rejection. It can be years before it surfaces but in every instance, from the kid in California who killed 6 people to the fired newsman in VA, they all blamed someone else for their dismal existence. Saying “hello” to that awkward kid doesn’t sound like much, but it’s a start.
Fair enough. The author didn’t say that saying good morning to your neighbours would turn the country into Utopia. Just like exercise and a healthy diet doesn’t guarantee you’ll never get sick. He’s just pointing out that a healthier social environment will go farther towards mitigating these and other problems than all of the knee-jerk “someone other than me needs to do something to fix it” solutions combined.
Stanley – brilliantly put. My take exactly.
I went to school with a girl that was bullied beyond belief, especially on the bus! She no longer wanted to take the bus and decided to walk to a public bus. She would have to walk thru or by a small forest preserve, and got murdered. So, perhaps if someone, anyone would have been friendly with her, she would have been on the school bus!
Very well written.! I have taken to heart some of the things you wrote here and will do my part to execute it in my small world. Thanks for the article. Stay safe out there.
Thank you for posting this! I hope we can make it viral (I’ve already shared), this is the closest thing I’ve seen to a legitimate option in years. Thank you!
I think your argument would be more effective if you stayed neutral on the issue of gun control. I’m referring to the last sentence of point #1. That’s where I quit reading and started skimming. That said, I believe you make a very good point about showing interest and compassion to those who might be isolated and lonely. However you can’t ignore the fact that countries with legitimate gun control don’t face this problem to the same degree—except, of course, in the world of FOX News.
How about adding to that, that we stop giving these people exactly what they want. Endless press coverage for weeks at a time. One thing most of these shootings have in common is the shooter wants to be famous. And we’re giving them exactly that. Needing pics, names, family members, and the most idiotic thing of all……WHY??
Let me let you in on a secret. If someone has it within them, to pick up a firearm and kill innocent children in a school. There is NO WHY on this earth, that’s going to make seance to a sane person. So all of this press coverage does what? It does absolutely nothing, except give the shooter everything they want. Coverage, publicity, and makes them a household name.
Will it stop this? Not all. Do I blame the media for mass shootings? No. But I do believe they have a responsibility for enabling this to continue. Will it ever happen? No. They are to scared another station will get the headlines and breaking news and they will get left behind. There should be a gag order against releasing any shooters names or info. It serves no purpose except to enable. Just my ¢.02
Except, you know… First Amendment… But, whatever…
There is that, your right. But we sensor speech everyday in this country. The first has been degraded over a long period of time now. Have you seen the “free speech zones” at colleges. Speech is censored everyday when someone gets or may be offended.
We need to eliminate the “cool” factor in these events. We need to show this for the ghastly, horrible, self centered, mindless act that it is.
While I agree with the general perspective and that this might result in a reduction of violent incidences, it’s crucial to note that shootings are not just the result of isolation but also of mental illness. A prime example was the recent incident (sad that I don’t know where it occurred, because there have been so many shootings recently) where the homecoming king lured all of his close friends into the cafeteria and then opened fire. It’s a much larger problem than just connecting with another person. While banning guns may not be an answer – limiting access to them may be. How this can be accomplished? I won’t even pretend to know.
That was here in marysville WA. at marysville pilchuck high school
As stated in the article, for obvious reasons, you are not going to be able to limit access to them any more than you can limit access to meth or any other damn thing that’s illegal……. Why limit the access of law abiding citizens to quell the actions of a handful of nutbags shooting up schools etc? Why limit my ability to protect myself from such a nutbag? Does not compute! BTW, Isolation is often times a symptom of depression etc. which I do believe qualifies as mental illness. These days I think, from what I have read, there seems to be a huge problem with depression and the inability to cope or the lack of learning how to cope with life. It isn’t easy. Let’s blame the gun though……….
Well, in theory it seems like this is the answer, but it’s kind of like Bush’s thousands points of light. If we just wait for neighbor to minister to neighbor, history has proven this does NOT work. Reaching out to the isolated kid is scary. Believe me, I’ve lived more years than I care to admit with abusive father and husband trying to be the more of sanity in their insane world. Asking us to individually fix the problem is like asking the school children to fix the shooters coming into their schools.
All it is asking is for us to exercise compassion for our fellow man. It’s certainly not a comparison to abuse victims being compassionate toward their abusers nor is it asking for the children, themselves to reach out to the shooters. Apparently, you missed the point. Just be kind to one another. That’s all.
Banning gun free zones would be a significant game changer!
All banning of free gun zones is an infringement of the peoples right to keep and bear arms. This banning is a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment.The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment, and NO infringements are allowed against it! Whenever there is a law against gun ownership and it’s use, this law is an infringement.
Amen!
Like most suggested solutions, this one is good–as far as it goes. But it is not a comprehensive one by any means and the generalization about loneliness is not supported by the facts in all cases of mass shootings.
It is entirely true that our culture (because in many ways it is the ultimate expression of the Protestant Reformation) focuses too much on the individual and thereby isolates all of us from each other. That may, in fact, be part of why we emphasize the “right” to own and use guns. But the proliferation of guns and other weapons of mass destruction (like automobiles, which also kill thousands every year) means that we have to decrease the number of weapons in circulation as well as deal with other underlying causes. The mutual reduction in nuclear weapons by the USA and the USSR-Russia, conducted by negotiation over the past decades, offers a path we can follow.
Hmmm…. we have a problem with obesity in the US too. Is that because we have too many spoons or is it because of a lack of self control????
Only low capacity spoons should be allowed NO ONE “needs” a tablespoon!
Self control is a learned response. Anything “learned” requires a teacher–either living experience, or a mentor–so the problem of obesity like the problem of mass shootings begs the question, “why are not the shooters (or eaters) being taught the necessary self control before they encounter a myocardial infarction, lethal injection, or law enforcement bullet”?
“Fully auto weapons are already banned.” Not true.
The ATF, as a representative of the U.S. and with authority from the National Firearms Act, can authorize the transfer of a machine gun to an unlicensed civilian. An unlicensed individual may acquire machine guns, with ATF approval. The transferor must file an ATF application, which must be completed by both parties to the transfer:
-executed under penalties of perjury
-both parties must reside in the same state as the individual
-pay a $200 transfer tax to ATF
-the application must include detailed information on the firearm and the parties to the transfer
-the transferee must certify on the application that he or she is not disqualified from possessing firearms on grounds specified in law
-the transferee must submit with the application (1) two photographs taken within the past year; and (2) fingerprints
-the transferee must submit with the application (3) a copy of any state or local permit or license required to buy, possess, or acquire machine guns
-an appropriate (local) law enforcement official must certify whether he or she has any information indicating that the firearm will be used for other than lawful purposes or that possession would violate state or federal law
-the transferee must, as part of the registration process, pass an extensive Federal Bureau of Investigation criminal background investigation.
If ATF denies an application, it must refund the tax. Gun owners must keep approved applications as evidence of registration of the firearms and make them available for inspection by ATF officers.
You forgot the fact that most people couldn’t afford one even if they get the tax stamp!!
Dr Ben Carson made a great suggestion: Class discussions/ drills on becoming proactive in dealing with these kinds of situations…..”Let’s Roll”
All of the above may in fact be in effect, but it ALL is an infringement of the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which is a violation of the U. S. Constitution by the ATF.
Severely restricted. Requires federal paperwork and approval of local police chief. No new manufacture since 1986 resulting in exorbitant price gouging. A big waste of ammo.
Correct. They are highly regulated NFA items. Two year waiting list for a tax stamp. Also way beyond the reach of most American’s. On the low end they start at around $15,000 and that’s for a beater.
I think this is a good start to addressing the problem, aka, engaging one another, making people feel that they are a part of a community… but at the same time I feel like the U.S. has been snowballing for some time now into the trend of mass shootings and there are several complicated issues which are intertwined within that problem.
One of those issues is, in fact, women’s reproductive rights. Now I know some people are going to roll their eyes at this but I would like to point out that in Freakonomics the economist Steven Levitt points out a correlation between the rise of violent crime in the generations following abortion bans.
When women are subjugated by laws which restrict access to birth control and abortion, more children are born into an economic climate which cannot support them.
Look, we as Americans have fucked up by trying to take freedom of choice from women. If a woman does not believe she can support an infant within her own resources and wishes NOT to have that child – it should be her choice! Why is it right to tell her that she must bear a child and then force that child to live in a system that is already unsustainable? It makes NO sense. It’s like putting your finger in a crack in a dam and promising it won’t leak and THEN ordering more water to be dumped into the reservoir; you can’t hold your finger in that crack forever, it is not a sustainable solution.
Here IS a sustainable solution: SUPPORT ABORTION/ REPRODUCTIVE SERVICES FOR WOMEN IN ALL 50 STATES!
Stop the problem before it starts! PREVENT children and women from suffering within this broken system and being fed into the assembly line of birth > poverty > violent crime > imprisonment or death by allowing women TO MAKE THEIR OWN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE DECISIONS!
Gee, then maybe we would be able to stave off homelessness (because of all those extra people who are NOT being born into economic hardship) as well as diminishing our nation’s carbon footprint, eliminating the extra cost of health care, food, housing, unemployment, etc, should I go on or have I said enough?
Basically… just make the right policy decisions and you can prevent an entire host of other problems down the line. I really hope legislators are starting to see the benefit of supporting women. When you take freedom of choice from a woman, you are punishing her AND her child. Because you cannot promise that they will have access to a proper education (because our educational policies change every time we get a new president), you cannot promise that they will have food and housing resources (because every time a president wants to reduce the deficit they will first make cuts to welfare programs that support these children and their families AND WILL NOT TAX THE WEALTHY), and the only job opportunities available to them will be at minimum wage pay with no job security or benefits.
If you are on the fence about what I’m saying or you think I’m full of bullshit, then let me tell you one more thing, won’t take but a moment:
Between the 1970’s through the 1990’s women’s access to abortion became highly restrictive, allowing only certain types of procedures or not allowing Medicaid to support abortion services at all. So those children born to mothers who would have gotten an abortion otherwise in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s are now a large part of our population. That group includes Generation X, Generation Y, and the Millennials.
Adam Lanza was 20 years old when he carried out the Sandy Hook shooting.
Chris Harper-Mercer of the Umpqua shooting was 26. He literally was quoted in his manifesto as saying he had, “No job, no success, no life,” and that he was hated, “since the moment he arrived in this world.”
My point being?
If a woman does not want to become a mother then there is a hell of a good reason for her making that decision – BECAUSE IT IS HER DECISION. So we should respect that.
I personally do not want to have kids because I was abused as a child and I don’t feel like I am mentally prepared to support another tiny, helpless person while I am trying to heal from the abuse laid down by my parents. Abuse is a cycle and it is carried from generation to generation. Violence pervades every aspect of American life because we do not see the connection.
Here’s a citation for the info about abortion restrictions starting in the 70’s:
http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/health-info/u-s-abortion-history/
And a link to a People article for the Chris Harper-Mercer manifesto quote:
http://www.people.com/article/oregon-shooting-chris-harper-mercer-said-he-was-born-bad
I’m more inclined to think the widespread disregard for the value of human life has done more to encourage mass killings than any kind of population pressure you seem to think comes from slowing the carnage in the abortion industry.
We should find out how Canada, England, and Australia eliminated loneliness, and do what they did.
Well, actually we’re kind of all known for being ….*cough*….friendly…..
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_race.jsp right here shows the number of people in jail for a crime, it shows percentage, as well as the actual number of people in jail for crimes, not just percent, since percent isn’t necessarily accurate example there is 2 of brand new race we’ll call it x, if one person of that race commits a crime then 50% is considered criminal. Compare that to the rest of the other percent and that’s a really high number.
Whether it is a gun or a knife. These violent killings will still happen. Getting rid of guns is not the answer for the USA.
Try killing a fifteen people in as many seconds with a knife. Find me a news report about a “mass knife killing”. (9/11 doesn’t count.)
Ask and you shall receive:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/01/world/asia/china-railway-attack/
There are mass knife attacks going on right now in the Middle East
Try looking at Africa or South America. There are even youtube videos of crazy people killing 10+ people in a few minutes with a machete or knife.
If someone attacks you or your family with a knife, do you think *you* have a right to defend yourself or your family? Or do you believe you must submit and let your attacker kill you?
oh, right-there was a knife attack in china THE SAME DAY as sandy hook-wait, how many kids died in that one? yeah-NONE.
When shooters get nationwide coverage, it encourages other potential shooters to follow suit. We should do like old Russia…when a shooting occurs, remove the perpetrator without releasing his name and, if he survived, throw him into a cell to rot. Give them no publicity whatsoever.
Great article; if I could add just one thing, it would be that the following is probably also a “contributing cause”:
http://healthland.time.com/2011/01/07/top-ten-legal-drugs-linked-to-violence/
“some antidepressants like Prozac — have also been linked to increase risk for violent, even homicidal behavior.
A new study from the Institute for Safe Medication Practices published in the journal PloS One and based on data from the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System has identified 31 drugs that are disproportionately linked with reports of violent behavior towards others”
Still, the core problem is isolation, and even if we could stop school shootings by means of a hypothetical magic spell (or by laws), ALL that would do is allow us to conveniently forget and continue to ignore the large-scale suffering of the lonely and bullied. We need to figure out again what the word “community” really means, and implement this within our societies, and teach these values and practices to kids. Schools are currently part of the problem.
Not all f the mass shooters were isolated an lonely. I remember one was pretty popular in school.
Maybe some people are just born to kill.
It is really as simple as giving law enforcement the capabilities they need to successfully mitigate an active shooter incident and simultaneously protecting everyone inside the space.
For more information on how this is happening right now in the state of Indiana. Please go to http://www.OurKidsDeserveIT.org
*ensure
Point 3 is incorrect. Fully automatic weapons are not banned. They are highly regulated NFA items but not banned. Also AR 15s are not full auto. That being said…… Good article
And how do you explain Australia’s success when they banned guns?
And why use the example that fully automatic guns are already banned, but then say banning anything doesn’t work? Which is it? Why not let people own nukes?
The only way this is gonna change is when guns are outlawed. Everything else is just noise.
Australia didn’t have a constitutional amendment affirming the right to bear arms. Plus, they had no entrenched culture for gun ownership as they didn’t have to fight a war for their independence. In line with that, they had few guns overall, maybe 3 million by some estimates.
So, keeping score: a place with no protections for guns, no entrenched love of guns, and few guns to actually ban. Plus, the added political will to make the adjustment equals vastly different outcome.
My points are that those conditions don’t exist here and to think otherwise is to lose the plot.
You can’t put the genie in the bottle again. 300 million guns can’t and won’t disappear.
Automatic weapons have been vastly banned since ’68 & ’86. There are legal exemptions, but for all intents and purposes, we’ll call them banned. Also, few existed overall to start with in the country.
Banning something that’s legally guaranteed and in huge supply so as to be ubiquitous is useless. Banning private citizens from owning nukes will be pretty effective I think.
It might be the case that if all gun ownership were controlled in a similar manner to the way ownership of fully automatic weapons is supposed to be controlled (the NRA has lobbied against the details of ATF control of fully automatics since before it was the ATF–current name created in 1972) there could be a reduction in the number of gratuitous shootings. Heavy stress on “might be the case”.
A “success” at what, at violating the rights of millions of people to own some means of self-defense, forcibly leaving them defenseless? I wouldn’t call that a success at all.
I don’t consider gun bans successful when a) violent crime increases, b) there are still mass shootings (Sydney Cafe in April 2015). Lack of means to provide self-defense and and criminals with guns does not equal success.
Did you read the article? This kind of “just outlaw 200+ million guns” nonsense is like saying that the solution to illegal immigration is to just deport all 11 million people — irrational, fantasy thinking.
Some folks here seem to imply or say “Lonely outcasts? Bullshit. They were evil.” Okay, that may be true for some of these guys. So what’s your solution to the existence of evil people?
Because if your solution is to take the means of self-defense away from the evil people AND the many, many more law-abiding citizens, then it doesn’t make any sense. When the evil use the tools of defense against the good, that is all the more reason for the good to be able to defend themselves.
There does seem to be a racial component to this: it seems to be white teens who are mainly affected. So the question becomes why? White teens didn’t used to do this, so something changed. Something genetic? Doubtful. Something in society? Yep. That’s where I’d look. So what changed in the schools for white guys? Very simple: they were told that they are scum of the Earth. They are by their very nature, racist, homophobic, sexist, bigoted and and responsible for every single ill of the world. Every bit of social justice is about making white guys pay. The vast majority of the white guys saddled with this garbage either reject it and just endure the reverse barbarism or they internalize it as white guilt. But a few, those who are lonely, those who feel put upon, those who realize that they are damned if they stay silent (loneliness) and damned if they speak out (criticized, ostracized, expelled from school, etc.). These few get angry – very angry. So they lash out. And the world then has a convulsive gun-gasm and we have to deal with all the BS all over again until the next isolated, ticked off white teen goes off the rails. And the solution to their problem will never be accepted in today’s society. Stop using white guys as scapegoats. Can’t do that. So expect more of the same. If not with guns, then with knives or whatever else they can get to lash out.
….Or, as they are taught to get everything they want BECAUSE they’re straight white males (if ya just work hard enough!) and realize that that is NOT how the world works they get pissed off. Which is why they kill girls who reject them, jocks who won’t befriend them, and teachers who won’t give them an A. Reverse barbarism. Jeez, take your fedora elsewhere.
Your comment was quite accurate up until the “fedora” part. Stop using Internet memes to try to augment your point, it just makes you look like a twat that came from 4chan. Stick to the actual point on target, you have proved that you do a good job of it. Adding the ‘fedora’ meme in there just makes you look like an angsty teen.
Reblogged this on Stuff From Hsoi and commented:
If you must “do something”, do this. It’s likely the only thing that will make an actual difference — and will likely make the world overall a better place too.
Let’s face facts. Some humans by nature are violent. Look back to Biblical days, Roman times and so-forth. We will never stop violent acts! Some are destined to kill. A sad reality. Humans are one of the only animal species that kill for the sake of it, whereas most other animals only kill for food. Will better family structures, early age diagnosis of mental health conditions, zero tolerance for bullies in schools all help? Possibly, but, in my opinion less media attention or no media attention, less violence on TV and in video games, (these kids become accustomed to blood and guts and it does not have an impact on them), keeping kids busy outside of school, stronger family values, stronger communities with more family involvement, learning to care for others feelings and helping those in need at a young age just may help. I am no expert by any means, but having raised kids and helping to raise grand kids opens your eyes to many things. One thing for sure, times are a changing and we all need to do what we can to make our towns safer. No matter how little, every little thing each of us can do to try to improve will eventually turn things around. But, you have to actually get out there and do something! No more talk, we need action.
I read the article and found it interesting. Bottom line it could possibly save someone from feeling this was their only choice but even if it did nothing but make people more aware of feelings of others it’s a great idea.
I liked this article. I’ve read through most of the comments and I feel there is one thing that is missing and nobody seems to want to talk about it. If you ask me, I want to know where the parents are. Growing up, my mom was all up in my and my siblings business. If we were going to plot a mass killing, my mom would have known long before we would have written down the first name to take. Parent need to talk to there children, be involved in there lives, know what’s going on with there lives. If your kid is an outcast, and they don’t want to talk about it, don’t chalk it up as they are just shy or its just a stage, find them the help they need. Find things to get them involved in to make them feel welcomed in, something. Parents need to get to know there children. There is to much denial inparenting, saying my kid wouldn’t do that, or its just a stage or he’ll grow out of it. Take responsibility for you children. And same goes on the other side of the fight. Know if your child is the one provoking, bullying these other children. Forcing them out. Those parents are just as bad, once again claiming kids will be kids or its just a stage. I agree with this article, yes, we need to open up and just say hi. Include them in the games, whatever it may be, but that starts with parenting, and being a parent to your children. But hey, who wants to do that. Who wants to admit there child may have an issue. That would be embarrassing. It’s easier to ignore the issue and pretend it’s a stage.
There is something else you can do, too. Since almost 100% of the mass shooters were white progressive liberal democrats on anti-psychotic medication and voted for Obama and since all the Chicago shooters are blacks between the ages of 15-30… prohibit anybody who voted for Obama from owning a gun if they are black or white and young and male. Then, if they are found with a gun, shoot them in the face with their own gun in accordance with the Sharia law Obama wants to put into America. Problem solved.
From a “Cleric”? Really?
I truly hope this answer was purely sarcasm.
gr8 b8 m8
Great article, but one thing I disagree with you on is that doing something about mental health wouldn’t help.
You state that most mass shooting were not committed by someone mentally ill; I’d argue that anyone who is so willing to take lives is mentally ill. The article you link to says that fewer than 5% of mass shootings are committed by someone diagnosed with mental illness. I think the key word here is, “diagnosed.”
Insurance premiums are often expensive (although the Affordable Care Act has greatly reduced the cost), and the copayments/deductibles for mental health services are frequently much higher than they are for physical health. So, even if these shooters had recognized and cared that they were mentally unwell, they may not have been able to afford to be diagnosed and treated. Furthermore, semi-affordable mental health centers have trouble keeping up with “demand,” therefore, it can be a long wait to see a professional… that can cause someone to change their mind about getting help, or it can just end up being too late.
There does not, as you suggested, have to be psych evaluations in exchange for gun ownership; just making mental health treatment more affordable and accessible can have an impact. Friendship is a great start, but cannot conquer mental illness by itself, and that is a dangerous implication to make.
There are such things as mental illnesses. There are such things as social outcasts. There are such things as EVIL, too. Never forget about that. EVIL is real! Not many people have included this in these comments, but this is probably the biggest reason for all these mass killings. EVIL!
Well said, Mr. Myers. The simplest solution is to be decent to each other. More often than not, we forget that we act the way we do based on what we’ve observed, endured or grown into learning into our adult lives. No one is ever born a gun-toting clinical mess, after all. Also, being decent can reduce—and hopefully stop—suicide rates, and this is for the US alone.
But, well…based on the few comments left here, I’m sure there’s quite a many that don’t take Murphy’s Law to heart.
Maybe, but there are a lot of factors like mental illness as well. And a lot of the time, loners kind of get off on being veiwed as weird. 😕
I’ve seen this type of comment elsewhere in the thread and feel the need to point out that loners are not necessarily lonely. The author doesn’t seem to advocate pushing our noses into other people’s business. There’s a world of difference between being inclusive, and being intrusive, just as there’s a difference between feeling exclusive and feeling excluded.
We humans, as intelligent, social animals, like wolves, have hierarchy in our culture. It is our nature to fight and claw and even kill to assume a higher position in the pack, or submit to others will. Sometimes a pack member may be killed or driven out of the pack for social reasons. When resources are meager the infighting is even more brutal. This is all done to keep the pack strong. I encourage anyone to do some research on the social structure of wolves and do an honest comparison to how humans interact at a base level.
STUPID and SELFISH. AND COWARD.
Finally somebody who says something close to what I am thinking. Address motive. For a person to commit a crime they must have means, motive, and opportunity. The ban guns only addresses one mean. This can have a small impact on opportunity but as the saying goes, where there is a will there is a way. Some pro-gun activists say put guns in everybody’s hands. This is to reduce opportunity. The issue is that it doesn’t address what is causing the issue, the motive. People don’t tend to want to kill everybody at school. There is something that drives them to it.
For the other countries don’t have this problem with school shootings, argument. You are right. It is hard to have school shootings when people don’t have access to guns. That doesn’t mean people don’t die. Look at Japan. No guns. People are still mistreated. This results in all sorts of other issues. An increase in the number of stabbings and suicide. They even have a whole sub-culture of people, that is growing, that isolate themselves from the world, a sort of social suicide. They are still breathing and stuff but they rarely if ever leave their residence. So the world is still losing people in all of this. It is just one or two at a time with high frequency instead of large clumps irregularly.
After reading the article and some of the comments it has become clear that some people do not comprehend what they read. Is it really more important to argue the point then to just admit the article is correct? Guns are not the issue, people are the issue. People that cannot understand that their everyday actions take a toll on the people around them.
I am sure one of you will argue my point, and one of you (if not more) will disagree. Not one of us can say we have treated everyone we have met with dignity and respect. Not one of us can say we have always been treated with dignity and respect.
Stop arguing over who’s fault it is and just realize that it’s our fault. All of us are at fault, all of us need to change, and all of us need to work together. Only then will things change.
I ask you think before you respond and only response with honesty and integrity…..I have not excluded myself from this post as I to am to blame as well. Please take the time to reflect on how to help rather than how to hurt….
Thank you,
May America become as great as it once was!!
Great. Just what every introvert wants and needs…more people trying to make them social. How are you going to tell the ‘left out’ person apart from the ‘I want to be left alone.” person?
I’d hoped that it would have been clearer what I was pitching. I think there’s a difference between people that are isolated and those that choose to refrain from prolonged exposure to others. I was stating that we should seek to keep from isolating people. If people want to stay to themselves, that’s entirely fine.
That won’t work on sociopaths or psychopaths…
Good point of view, however, I’m pretty sure the AR15 is legal in most states
The AR15 is legal as it’s a semi-auto rifle. Nothing crazy about it. Other than how it looks, one could argue.
If there was a solution, would you be interested to learn about it? There is, WE ACTED, after the mass murder at Sandy Hook Elementary School. We, Templar Integrated Security Solutions, developed the Templar Rapid Response System, and it will save lives. If you want to make a difference in what has become near epidemic proportions of mass/spree killings, look at templariss.com, share it with your school board and superintendents, share it with your house of worship, even share it with you employers. The simple act of checking Templar Integrated Security Solutions out, and sharing the info you learn may save the life of someone you know. I think it’s worth the time and effort, I hope you do too!
Great perspective – too bad we tend to legislate based on emotional outpourings and not so much on hard, logical facts… and too bad the general public the more infantile attitude of “Do something to protect me,” rather than the responsible attitude that you advocate here.
I wrote something similar to this a couple of years ago – slightly different approach, but the same basic observations about isolated individuals. Spot on!!
https://formingthethread.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/the-common-denominator-in-mass-murders-isnt-guns-its-psycho-social-isolation-and-hostility/
In this article you state that these people don’t have mental illnesses… That’s not true. Half the mass shooters alone suffered from schizophrenia. I agree that being kind and reaching out a hand to the outcasts could make a difference for various reasons. But mental illnesses have a lot to do with it also.
I’m a middle school teacher, and I want to share this article with my students. I think it’s a great lesson in how to be human. One point I want to bring up is standardized testing. The tests, and forced standardized curriculum, turn each student into a dollar sign for the school/district. This puts the focus on students’ scores and the funding they will provide/inhibit, instead of children as individuals. It is because of the good-hearted nature of teachers that human connections are still made with kids, and values taught (during the school year, kids are at school more tha at home).
But as I see it, fewer and fewer connections are made (and therefore modeled) at this age because of pressures to teach to the standardized tests. In addition, we are losing so many great people in the teaching profession because of the stress that comes with standardized tests/curriculum.
So – I want to share this with my students, but I’m not sure how, because it doesn’t fit in with my very stringent curriculum.
You don’t have to beat your kid…and it is legal to spank your child…nothing has to go as far as abusing a child…sometime just the tone in your voice is enough to let your child know something will not be tolerated.
Parents are lazy and afraid to discipline their kids and some of the parents are so self centered that think it is OK to walk around and be an asshole to whomever they want…There is a total lack in family values, morals, and responsibility not just for the kids out there…the parents are just as bad…too busy wanting to “live their life” that they are not being responsible for the life they brought into this world…the kids have no one to look up to or respect because they see the parents act this way too…filthy mouths are just fine and they talk like that to the children then expect them not to talk to them that way because they think they are such cool parents…all of this starts in the home…teach the parents how to be decent humans and how to raise decent humans…manners, values, and boundaries for each family member including the parents.
This attitude of well if you don’t like how I am then get out of my life needs to change and it needs to change fast…the people saying this are generally a big jerk that cares for nobody but, themselves….Yes these kids are isolated and messed up they can’t help but be…look at who is raising them…all of humanity needs help man…these shootings are the wake up call to look into our own souls and figure out how to be a decent, caring, responsible society.
We once were and can be that again…work hard at finding out how…start with yourself then fix your family.
What I haven’t heard yet, although you’ve touched on it, is to force responsibility on relatives and friends who are: aware that their son, friend, nephew is disturbed AND yet encourages and supports their interest in guns. This is the second shooting that I’m aware of where a disturbed young man lived with his mother, had many guns in the house and when he couldn’t legally buy more, his RELATIVES bought guns for him. Enough! One random act of madness, one death is one too many. The shooters are visibly disturbed individuals; why would they be permitted to have access to guns?
In Japanese culture, they isolate and single out the person different. It is a bully/group mindset and culture where individuality is not accepted. They also tend to pick on the weak. In the past, there were always bullies in a sense, but it seemed more on a one to one level. These days, it seems more group oriented. I’ve always been the type of person to invite others to my table. There are some people out there who come off as weird or awkward, but I think people can change. People can become better. They can improve themselves, if given the chance to do so. Especially if the have friends to motivate themselves and support them. I personally despise the Japanese. Something in their nature wants people to be this way, from experience living here.
I believe billing is a huge part of this problem. If we all would quit thinking that bullying is a part of growing up and just deal with it and stop allowing it in our classrooms and I have been the most bullied at my work place even though I told my boss. Even there I was told to get over it and wasn’t believed. This needs to be stopped and not tolerated anywhere. From what I have heard many of these people were bullied for years before they took action in the worse way. People be kind to one another.
Great article, however, I’ll point out that fully automatic weapons are still legal and obtainable; a person just needs to go through some hoops to obtain one (fingerprints, sheriff’s sign-off, tax stamp, and waiting period for processing).
But, I DO like your solution and I will personally try to implement it as much as I can.
This sounds like an NRA screed giving all the reasons we can do nothing, even when some are blatantly false.
Yes, it is illegal for felons to own guns… unless his state restores his rights…
All the attempts to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them fail because the gun lobby compromises the programs to keep them away.
Yes, mental health records are private, but the “Duty to warn” rule requires mental health providers to warn the officials or potential victims if they find reason to believe the patient is a threat.
“Yes, it is illegal for felons to own guns… unless his state restores his rights….”
You are correct but, please name one that went on to become a mass shooter. Can’t? Then why is it relevant?
“Yes, mental health records are private, but the “Duty to warn” rule requires mental health providers to warn the officials or potential victims if they find reason to believe the patient is a threat.”
This requirement already exists, and it obviously does not work, or at least hasn’t stopped the killings being discussed… So,what’s your point?
“All the attempts to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them fail because the gun lobby compromises the programs to keep them away.”
Please tell us the specific measures which would accomplish said goals.
Can’t or won’t? Because, invariably you guys propose: 1) either measures which are known would not impact said shootings (such as a waiting period when the shooter acquired guns well in advance and waiting period would have had no effect whatsoever). or, 2) won’t because your real goal is just to severely limit ownership and access.
Excellent article, well reasoned and researched. I particularly appreciate the (probably futile) effort to point out the fact that “mass shootings” are such a tiny part of the overall story of violence in this country. The tragedy vultures in our media latch onto these events with such obsessive tenacity that it’s almost impossible to keep the real risk in perspective. Focusing solely on the tools of violence only distracts our efforts in finding a real solution.This is not a problem that we can expect our politicians to “solve” for us with a flurry of ineffective new laws. It is going to take effort on all our parts, and a long term change in the way we treat the marginalized in our society.
You mentioned in your article that “Holding a sign isn’t going to do anything.” I think it depends on what the sign you hold says. Type Free Hugs Campaign into youtube and watch any of those videos. All those people are making a difference with a sign, and it’s a way to start a conversation without actually speaking.
The main point of this article, or rather the part that sticks out to me, is that we tend to wait around till others do something. I mean, how many of us sit around behind a screen and voice our opinions and tell others how they should change things to make life better. I think it truly comes down to “me.” What can I do for someone else today? If everyone has that mentality then lots can change. In the end, bad things will always happen. We can only do our best, and many times we barely do good. When was the last time I told a co-worker,student, employee, etc. Good job? When was the last time I went to visit grandma Helen? Have I helped my next door neighbor with something this week, or asked how they are? Think about it and asking yourself, could i have been the one who could have stopped a shooting like this?
This article is way too simple minded. Yes, you should not be a dick to people and care about others, obviously. But it’s not like there is an epidemic of uncaring people in the world. This problem is way bigger and the reason people aren’t going to like it is because it will require massive social change. We need to rebuild American health care and education and safety net and infrastructure. Many components. It seems like too big of a challenge, but we need a collective vision and a visionary leader to unite us an get us on the same page. If I am going to blame anything for gun violence and isolation of people it is the DIVISIVENESS of our corporate media and politicians. They basically teach us to hate each other while they fleece us. I won’t stand for that. Who could be a visionary leader that wants to unite us, not divide us?
Why don’t you become this leader? Why don’t we all become leaders and advocates for a better future for our children? I believe you can be…you already are a visionary by your response.
the epidemic is in the continuation of kids being more and more disconnected. living life in a 6 second highlight film on snapchat… they are not really connecting with other kids anymore…no one wants to get their hands dirty or share their dirt with others…
“…it’s not like there is an epidemic of uncaring people in the world…”
The prosecution guffaws and rests, Your Honor.
I don’t agree with everything you say but for the most part you are spot on. Apathy is becoming a huge issue and many are behaving in a manner that is threatening to groups that have never come under any kind of fire before. It is becoming a matter of life or death through a social “norm” that is creating bullying in record number of cases. You glossed over and ignored this fact when you stated that “it is not like there is an epidemic of uncaring people in the world.” Your statement makes no mention of the huge social issue of mobbing which is the biggest crime wave going on but you don’t hear of – do some research and open your eyes to the truth if you don’t believe me. That only begins now to allow the mind control aspect of these behaviors to become part of the big picture and the real problem it is.
I disagree. There IS an epidemic of uncaring in this world. It’s having devastating consequences. Politicians absolutely count on this divided mentality to get and stay elected. You say that teach us to hate each other while they fleece us. Since when do you look to politicians for lessens in humanity? I think it’s time we simply start to care for one another. Without prejudice of any kind. Look inside yourself, and not to political “leaders” fir answers on how to treat your fellow man.
I thought Obama was the great uniter. We are closer now than we have ever been. (Sarcasm).
Bernie Sanders!!!
hmmm- I guess this is why there are little to no mass shootings every couple of months in European countries that enjoy the same standard of living and wealth that America does. Goodness knows their populations have far more arms than Americans could even dream of, and yet they hardly ever have mass shootings because they don’t leave anyone out or left behind….
There are *not* more arms among European countries than in America. As of 2009, according to the Washington Post, there were 112 guns for every 100 residents in the US – updated to today, there are 40 million *more* guns (over 350million) in the US than there are people.
Other than Switzerland, where the rate is around 45 guns per 100 people, every other European state has fewer than 32 guns per 100.
In short, the US holds more than 1/3 (and as much as half!) of *all* civilian guns in the entire world (estimated 600-900Million)
Is it any wonder than many of these get into the wrong hands?
There are mass shootings in other countries but you don’t hear much about them there are also a lot of mass stabbings there were 100 people killed in a mass stabbing in China the same day as the last shooting here the week of the Sandy Hook shooting 49 people stabbed to death in China the week of Newtown 29 people stabbed to death YES in China it happens every where
I agree with this ! and I do reach out to others that seem to be lonely. My youngest granddaughter sat next to the young man in her class the day before he shot Claire at Arapaho High School in Littleton 21/2 yrs ago. Her class on the day of the shooting was on the same floor & they heard the shooting. Hannah was devastated that she had not reached out to him as she noticed that he was “different”. Sometimes we say we can’t reach out but would you want someone to reach out to you if you were lonely, someone who cared????
Virtually all mass killers have one thing in common, no girlfriend…most of them were virgins. So ladies it is up to you, spread it around more, give it up often, to strangers, the stranger the better. Ladies if you see any guy that looks even a little bit lonely, hit on him, take him home, have you way with him..extra points for lots of hugs and kisses. Give it up until he can’t go on any more, give him your number and say “call me anytime you want to hook up. Ladies our fate is in your hands.
You think this is funny. This is a serious issue and you’re expecting women to expose themselves in order to stop a shooting? You are an illiterate scumbag and its clueless people like you that probably drive people to do such things.
I can get you were being sarcastic mr. Slaughter, but i believe that a man your age should have known better than making sexist comments for such a serious issue. It’s neither smart nor funny. Instead do yourself a favour and start getting better informed about matters such as social isolation and oppression
The first two suggested solutions will actually work most effectively. The reason why it will not work given by the author is ‘because it is too hard’, which imo is not a very good argument.
Will never happen in our lifetime or ever
Margaret Thatcher said the same thing about a female Prime Minister in the UK..
One person at a time. We can choose to be the difference a little at a time.
Do you realize how many million guns are already in the hands of private citizens in the US? Are you going to go door to door to every house in America and do a complete search??? How much manpower and $$$$$ would that cost???
And eventually, blood would be spilled.
And predictably enough feee, you ignore the black market, our exceptionally porous borders and the fact that effective fully functional submachine guns can be built at home, using commonly available tools and materials.
A little real world experience with NY’s “SAFE” act:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-safe-act-weapons-registry-numbers-released-article-1.2267730
So yeah, it would be hard. Very hard.
Agreed. It’s not worth trying because it’s too difficult smacks of a petulant teenager being asked to tidy their room or finish their homework before logging onto their Xbox..
Seems to me we tried banning alcohol once or something, didn’t we?
If I remember right, it didn’t go so well.
You truly have no concept of the dynamics of America. You should really take that 1984 crap and expatriate.
No they don’t. People that want to commit crimes are going to get a gun regardless. Disarming society only disarms the decent people from being able to defend themselves. You can’t be ignorant to something you don’t know anything about. Why are all these shootings happen in gun free zones? It’s pretty simple dude the people with guns want to go attack people that do not have guns so I would wre perpetuate that same behavior all across the United States? Your comment isn’t even remotely educated. Sorry not to be rude but you just are clueless!
Cocaine, heroin, and weed have been illegal for decades, and are still readily available in every corner of our country. So, how is that going to work again?
No, but the continued insistence despite being repeatedly voted down, would be similar
You missed the whole point of this article. The writer believes the only viable solution is to engage and interact with our fellow human beings…the ones who are shunned for their looks and actions, the loners. The writer lists the old worn out suggestions for actions and gives the reasons they will never work. Reading for comprehension is not a gift it just takes an open mind and willingness to do so.
“Too hard” is just a shorter way of saying that, even if you could convince 291 Congressmen and 67 Senators and a President, and then the legislators in 38 states to repeal the Second Amendment, the elections of 1996 and 1998, following the Clinton assault weapons ban, prove that all those people are likely to be voted out of office in the next couple of elections.
So, even if those legislators care nothing about the lives of the law enforcement and military men and women who would have to then confiscate all the guns from the rest of us, they do care about their political lives.
How does banning all guns keep guns it out of the hands of bad people? Just like banning Cocaine or heroin has kept it out the hands of drug dealers and users? Oh I know just like making drinking and driving illegal has effectively stopped people from being killed by a drunk driver. Laws don’t stop people from doing things, they only give punishments after people break them. I’m not suggesting that we don’t have laws, they give us the structure we need for society. Getting rid of guns doesn’t get rid of people hell bent on inflicting as much pain on others as possible, nor does it make it harder for them, anybody remember timothy mcvay? Oklahoma City bombing? Making a Fertilizer bomb is illegal to by the way.
Well let me explain because your reasoning seems superficial.
Not as much as it is too hard but because it is impossible and will never happen. There is no way an amendment change like that will happen anytime soon because of the will of the majority of the people for the amendment
And if somehow a dictator ruled over the US and said guns were illegal a black market would arise for guns.
Well, that’s the REASON we have the second amendment, so the people can overthrow a bad government, say a dictator. We also have the right to rise up and overthrow the current governing bodies if they become oppressive. Banning guns in ANY form needs to be stopped, we need citizens sitting in congress pointing weapons at the legislators, we need many citizens surrounding the president with guns, not to protect him but to shoot him if he keeps making bad decisions, we need guns in the courtrooms to shoot judges that let people go who are declared guilty. We need citizens with guns on airliners, to shoot terrorists who try to take over a plane. NOT organized groups of citizens, but random law-abiding citizens, should be allowed to make their own decisions. Now, if some random teen gets hold of a gun, and wants to shoot the bullies who have made his life unbearable, that is not the problem. It’s the problem of the bullies, of the ones who think only of themselves, of those who will do anything to step on others to put themselves above the rest, who are just asking for retaliation against themselves and probably will involve innocent people as well.
Ridiculous response, if we were somehow able to remove guns, we’ll have school bombings instead or some other murderous scenario. the cause is not that the perpetrators have guns it that they are isolated and estranged. In any problem solving scenario you need to address the actual problem. Most of these kids end up killing them selves but the ones that don’t aren’t blaming the fact that they were able to get a gun, as the reason for their actions. In every case they are outcasts and alone and want someone to notice them. Reducing our freedom and liberty is not the solution to make people not want to lash out. Sure we could put everyone in a padded white box with no sharp objects and then no one would ever hurt anyone but of what value would that existence offer?
You need to do more research… there is a great Harvard Law study on the topic, looking at the real numbers of crimes, homicides, and such AFTER gun bans & confiscations in MANY other countries. Your assertion is wrong, baseless ‘feeling’ and blind ‘belief’ in fairy tales (i.e., a fantasy). Cain killed Able with a rock! More people are killed with a hammer in America than a Shotgun, or rifle, for that matter. Evil, twisted, angry people that won’t seek help or follow their treatment protocols will do evil and bad things… banning guns is beyond silly, and will statistically & historically proven to actually ENDANGER MORE CITIZENS in society.
Do some research… look at the numbers of increased rapes, home invasions (while the unarmed people were home), robbery’s against the elderly & women… and ask yourself, can you honestly stop anyone intent on harming you or your loved ones without a gun?!?! The police don’t ‘prevent’ crime, though their presence can help detour it to another location. And the liberal answer of peeing themselves is less productive than faking a faint… or just ‘taking it’ and hoping to live. SMH ~
Here is a place to start: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
Kudos to the author, well written, and great points. However, there are some in society that purposefully isolate themselves, and plot some ‘grand scheme’ or plan to ‘show the world’ – it’s a mental wall that can’t always or often be scaled. However, trying is the key… and knowing if someone is likely or probably dangerous to others is important.
Sadly, most of the ‘homicide’ stats include ALL homicides, including gang on gang, thug vs thug, domestic violence, and even bad guy shot by police (or good guy). There really needs to be more accurate break outs on the numbers… and the reality is, multiples more people are killed by drunk drivers than guns in our nation, and we all know how banning alcohol went, and how well the war on drugs has gone.
Wrong. They are not the easiest. Americans. Law abididing Americans will not be subjected to a government TAKING their guns. That’s what it will boil down to.
Yeah, I guess you could say he is copping out by saying it’s too hard, if by “too hard” you mean that he is not willing to ignore other parts of the Constitution, in the process.
1) Article V mandates that any amendment be ratified by 3/4 of the states. Meaning that if “30+ states [are] willing to overturn it,” then the likelihood of getting 37 states to ratify it is HIGHLY improbable, even with the best of lobbyists. Now for arguments sake, lets say we either ignored that or the lobbyist were successful, then you still run into the constitutional issues attached to #2
2) Do you propose that we ignore the 4th and we search everyone’s house, vehicles, and person to ensure that all weapons have been confiscated? If not, then how do you propose we go about getting all the guns? We could always just ask people to turn in weapons and I am sure that the criminal element of the US would hand over their guns, because after all we would ask EXTREMELY polite and criminals respond to that and value fair play. Of course, we could always just get the rest of the guns when they are used in a crime, like it is done now.
If you mean that if there were no guns, that there could be no gun violence, then you are correct. But that isn’t the point. Alcohol was banned during prohibition, and the end result was the empowerment of the mafia, and a massive number of deaths and maiming from denatured alcohol. Many drugs are banned. Are the drugs gone? What is your argument for making a gun ban work? You look like the one without an argument.
Do tell how you expect that the government, or anyone else, is going to get criminals to turn in their guns. So basically you’d like the law abiding citizens to hand their firearms over so now only criminals have them. Smart approach! If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns😦
You are insane. Imagine how that would work. Knock on door. We are hear to collect your “BOOM”!!!!! That would turn into a revolution. SMH
I dunno. It’s really clear that this article is written by someone of the male persuasion who does not face the routine daily risks that women do, and, at least judging by the article, hasn’t thought about it a whole lot in this context. Given that a common thread in many (though certainly not all) shooting is an attitude that “women are essentially property and don’t really need to be seen or treated as human”, this is actually potentially dangerous advice that will certainly not result in women being stalked or obsessed over, then shot when they reject unwanted advances because clearly they wanted him and were just being teases/sluts. Or maybe it will. Seems you have not considered this at all. It’s not that your article gives bad advice, it’s just that it’s good advice for a man and either good or potentially disastrous advice for a woman, without that actually being addressed at any point.
You’re right, women don’t need to help, because it’s dangerous for them. WRONG
This offends me as a woman who reaches out to and engages strangers every single day. You’re simply making an excuse so you don’t have to leave your comfort zone. Get over it. Regardless…
This isn’t about sexism, at all. I don’t understand why the theme was even brought up. This article clearly explains the facts about what contributes to people feeling so isolated that they make such a huge irrational decision. If people reached out to one another the way the author describes, it would be more effective than all the other proposed “solutions” combined. Our society is just too lazy and people tall like they care, but when it comes down to helping others, no one wants to step up.
What youre saying about me is simply untrue, and a huge assumption on your part. I’m not saying “don’t engage with people”, I’m saying “This article did not even consider the under urrent of violent misogyny common to many shooters, and I think that’s a problem”
Your comment seems to portray women as meek damsels in distress. This article is just saying to TALK to people who seem isolated. It is not saying to invite everyone into your car or house. It is not saying to give personal info out. Feelings of isolation are terrible and do breed anger + resentment. If just saying hi, holding the door, asking about weekend, makes a person feel a little less isolated; then itbis well worth doing.
Okay…I understand now. Thank you for clarifying. She’s saying that a woman going out of her way to befriend a lonely man who’s feeling isolated is potentially disastrous and invites assault. Yes, that can be true, esp if the male she’s befriending has problems with relationships. Definitely use good judgement and include people in groups, be careful and wise. My apologies.
Fair enough, I can see how you would get that, though it wasn’t my intention. My main objection was that the author of the article didn’t even address the safety issues that really are more prevalent to women, since a distorted sense of male entitlement is a huge risk factor for violence towards women, and also can lead to people being socially isolated and lonely. I’m all for approaching people, but I also do think there are safety issues involved that I really think the author should have mentioned. A sentence addressing this and saying “of course, you need to use your own judgement and consider safety” would have been sufficient for me. I don’t think women are meek damsels in distress, I think that some socially isolated people deliberately target women, or else that they have such a distorted sense of reality that they feel that women owe them something (sex, love, relationships) just because they want it, and react with rage and possible violence when women insist on being people who make decisions for themselves. This certainly isn’t the case with every lonely person, or even most, but unfortunately it’s pretty common.
I don’t understand your reasoning at all. As a woman, I’d feel much more protected against assault while carrying a gun. A gun can be utilized effectively from a distance – a knife cannot. A gun is also more effective deterrent than pepper spray, mace, or hornet spray. A knife as a defensive measure is easily taken from a woman in a close contact situation. Most women would be on the losing end of a physical altercation/wrestling match with a man. A gun can be used effectively before the situation becomes physical -that is the point.
What’s that have to do with it? Women, as well as men, can approach someone lonely, they can do it in a group or convince several men to come with them, to befriend that loner who is seething inside. If you approach them not as a sex object, but as a person, and if you don’t feel safe doing that, get a mixed group to help, it will work. Your sexist attitude is just as bad as a man who thinks of women as sex objects and nothing else! Women are no more vulnerable than men IF THEY CHOOSE TO stand up for themselves.
Unfortunately, crime statistics do not in any way bear out your statement that women are no more vulnerable than men. And the idea that male violent entitlement is due to women “approach(ing) them as a sex object” is not only false, but dangerously so–it seems that your position is that violent misogyny is due to women actively choosing to be regarded as sex objects and not as people? You are putting the responsibility for violent objectification of women on those who are victimized by it, and then saying that the reason they are vulnerable isn’t because of abusive people, but because they don’t choose to stand up for themselves?That is a really terrible position to hold. Apparently in your world misogyny is the fault of women?
For some people, everything boils down to girls (good) vs. boys (bad).
Possibly, but that’s not my position. My position is that everyone, both male and female, is a person, but for a multitude of reasons there are many people who don’t feel that way. For example, at the checkout counter this weekend I heard someone saying “the woman is always right” in relationships. I think that’s a terrible thing to say, because it’s not true and because it treats all women and all men as if they are the same. But it’s dishonest to ignore the fact that a fairly large number of shooters have very specifically held the belief that women should not have power, do not have the right to make decisions, and owe men a relationship. (I’m thinking specifically of Eliot Rodgers and that guy who opened fire at the Trainwrecked screening. I don’t remember his name and I don’t care)
Rigggghhhttt because everyone is out to rape or kill us women. Get over your feminazi bullshit.
I think your username is inaccurate. For pointers on how to disagree with class, see Terry below.
@punkhellokitty – Wow…. turning a well thought, and accurate article, into some sexist rant? Really? The majority of ‘mass murders’ in this nation aren’t singling out women, didn’t involving any stocking, or sexist slant… so help me understand your point, because it’s lost.
Frankly, YOU sound like a victim of domestic violence… and I’d honestly suggest you seek some counseling to deal with those feelings of anger, hurt, and betrayal. Also, some self-defense classes, both hand-to-hand and with weapons. It will likely help boost your own self appraisal, and ability to protect yourself and your loved ones.
The point of the article was REACHING OUT… and LISTENING… and INCLUDING… and, where possible, helping another human being. And that act, that little bit of time, COULD help prevent and stop some of the craziness, hurt, violence, and even suicides that sadly exist in our country.
The points have nothing to do with gender, religion, or income class… or even education, everything to do with ‘community’ and ‘humanity.’
Personally, I’m saddened when I see gender bias responses to a genderless topic. Maybe there needs to be more ‘stats’ break outs, to display what the age & gender, income, class, and CIRCUMSTANCES were for the shooting (or other homicide). Sadly, there is far too much domestic violence in our nation (and in the world), but please don’t think it’s all (or always) men doing it (there are some wicked women out there too). One of the primary differences in ‘mass shootings’ is that women historically and rarely commit (or attempt to commit) any such crime, and are usually the victims (though I’ve yet to see any case that ONLY WOMEN were targeted, or purposefully targeted). It’s usually been unarmed strangers, co-workers, family members… or children these whackos target.
And, with few exceptions, their ‘body armor’ and precautions weren’t to ‘survive’ or escape the chaos they would create, but to survive long enough to take more lives. Otherwise their choice of weapons and methods would have been different.
Please take the time to read this indepth, multi-year study: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
This is a really thoughtful comment. I think the main issue is that I don’t really agree that all of these crimes are genderless–and there was at least one mass shooting specifically targeting women. It was a while ago in Canada–one guy specifically lined up female engineering students against a wall and shot and killed the. Both Eliot Rogers and the guy who shot up the Trainwrecked movie were very specifically motivated by anger against women. Adam Lanza was also motivated by feeling that his mother cared about her job more than she cared about him. And unfortunately, though it certainly does happen the other way around, the majority of those family murders are male family members targeting their partners and children. That’s exactly my issue with this article–a number of these crimes really are gender based violence. Obviously there is also violence within gay relationships, and there are certainly women who are violent towards male partners. However, I feel that both your response and the article ignores a very real undercurrent of violent misogyny that does exist, both in the culture at large and in some mass shooters. What I was looking for in the article and did not find was some acknowledgement of disproportionate or disparate risk, because that is a real thing. And although I appreciate your thoughtfulness, I am not a domestic violence survivor.
Thanks for the comments. My thoughts when writing this were focused on isolation, a loss of community, and the results of that type of exclusion on people – on all walks of life. I know there are issues and stats for male vs. female, and white vs. black, and so on, but I didn’t want to get into those issues. That’s someone else’s post to write, or one I’d write on a different day.
I wanted to talk about a loss of community and I was doing so with the assumption that no one would seriously interpret my suggestion as an “at all costs” sort of scenario. By all means, I’d hope everyone would exercise all due caution and manners when attempting to reach out to someone near them.
No, this conversation was really about how we, perhaps unnecessarily, make people feel lonely.
I really appreciate everyone that read it and all of your comments. They’ve informed a lot of my thoughts for a follow up piece and I’ll do my best to quantify the feedback into a few points I can expand upon.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/07/world/montreal-gunman-kills-14-women-and-himself.html. This is the link. Like a said, it was a long time ago (1989)
I wish I (as a woman) could even BEGIN to understand how asking people to create a community and care about those around you turns into a sexist argument…explain please!
Women are disadvantaged and preyed upon, generally because they are the “weaker” sex. Physically, on average, they just don’t match men. You know what the great equalizer is? A gun. If anyone practices good situational awareness, avoids dangerous areas and situations, and gets skilled with a gun, that person is on a level playing field, at the least.
dear “punk”— Did you read this article?? It is not about gun control. It points out how gun control is not the answer. The over-riding message is contained in the first couple of paragraphs: We can’t control a lot of the issues causing mass shootings. But we CAN control our own thinking and actions. We can begin to take more notice of the lonely and withdrawn and “engage” them (say and do uplifting things that will leave them feeling less alone). It is SO TRUE and is a great article. No one of us can save the world, but each of us can have an encouraging, uplifting influence on those around us. We can make a difference to SOMEBODY!
I dot usually comment on these things but I feel compelled to, as a woman who is not a victim. I don’t know why you say that the attitude in many shootings is “women are property”. That’s so bizarre. It has zero to do with the issue but in a US Dept of Justice Study done in 2009, 77% of homicide victims were male and of those, 60% were killed with guns. I’m not opposed to guns in any way, I’m simply opposed to citing false information.
Interesting statistic Vanessa…. I wouldn’t doubt that. Men and woman are quite possibly victimized in different ways – I wonder if that is a player in the statistics you presented. It’s difficult to tell without fail.
I’m referring specifically to mass shootings –rather than typical homicides. Though I’m not sure what a “typical homicide” would be, come to think of it. Most specifically, Eliot Rogers, Adam Lanza, and that jerk who shot up the screening of Trainwrecked. Adam Lanza felt that his mother cared more about her job than about him, Eliot Rogers was very specifically anti-female (like, really really really explicit about how women owed him a relationship and deserved to die because they wouldn’t go out with him), and the Trainwrecked shooter (I don’t remember his name and I refuse to look it up) was likewise found after the fact to be at least in part motivated by his feeling that women had too much power. I’m not saying every shooter has these motivations, but enough do.
check out my video !
“Even if you could, the people that have done this haven’t been mentally ill, by and large.”
The source used for this statement was a study about gun violence *in general* not about mass shootings specifically.
The writer also assumes mental illness implies something genetic, and not something that can be caused by environment. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is a perfect example of mental illness that can occur in someone not genetically predisposed to any mental illness. Bullying and isolation are both environmental factors that can develop existent mental illness or create new mental illness.
This article is spreading misinformation. Sure, it’s good to go up to someone who looks lonely and include them. I’m not saying that’s bad. But to deny that mental health is the main issue in mass shootings specifically is simply dishonest.
Um no YOUR contention is dishonest. The only thing wrong with these thuggish brats is that they weren’t getting their way. These mass shootings are nothing more than murderous temper tantrums. That’s it. Just stop the mental illness excuse Bs. Just stop. Use the sense you think you have but don’t.
It is our entitlement attitude, and the generation itself. By making the statement “I’m going to give my kids ALL the things my parents couldn’t” we let the whole generation down. This, pound for pound CAN cause someone distress and trauma if they are expecting something, and do not get it. Like a lollipop… or a horsey.
What the entire generation needs is a good ol’ fashioned ass-whooping. So do their parents.
So you’re advocating ‘regular’ gun violence by marginalising the relevance of the source of the study? IMO ALL gun violence should be addressed, not just the REALLY bad ones..
Mine must be defective. They just sit in the vault. If I open the door, they still just sit there. If I bring them out, they just lie there on the floor, quietly.
When I shoot with them, together we put holes in the paper target. I guess that’s violence to the paper, but obviously I had a hand in it.
Apparently my guns are totally unable to generate violence unless I, the human element, am a participant. I guess they’re defective.
I was thinking that what he meant is that they were not previously *diagnosed* with mental illness–I think we can agree that there’s something wrong with the mind of someone who commits a mass shooting. The author was talking about the proposed “solution” of regulating gun sales based on mental health evaluations or simply providing free counseling to anyone who needs it, and makes the point that it wouldn’t be very effective because “most of the time” either the signs wouldn’t show up or the person would not seek out the help even though it was free.
I’m worried about the 2% of people who could care less about someone trying to engage them. They’re the type I feel I might be better off engaging with a warning shot to the head if push comes to psychopathic attack. Does that make me scared? No, realistic. And more so for weaker persons, regardless of gender. What we do need though, is an understanding of responsibility, one that we take (and this is where women generally fall very very short) regardless of the circumstances, the choices we make are and the consequences of our actions are ours personally, and we should be judged by them (and stand by them too, of course).
Hey shaiyena or however you spell your name. I’m sorry but African-Americans kill more in a weekend then these mass shootings combined, where is your beating heart or comment on that? Also you talked about how a more African Americans are incarcerated than Caucasians why do you think that is? The worst neighborhoods and streets in the United States are not predominately Caucasian so I think you’re just about as clueless as could be. Its not a conspiracy they’re creating these crimes and that’s why they’re in prison. Better figure your stats before you racistly blame white people. Pure ignorance and a perpuated race baiting agenda.
Bingo. I am getting a little tired of being called racist, just because I am white. To those Jane Elliot subscribers, I say ____ you!
You’re not being called a racist *just because* you’re white. You’re being called a racist, because you are.
LeFly
Do share with your insight on the human race and all things, telepathic – what makes you think that I am racist? Is it my mixed family? Is it my diverse team at work? Is it the cross-sectional view of people in the military that I sweated and struggled alongside with?
Don’t waste this topic’s time with your baiting. Don’t be one of those statistics that Booker T. Washington warned us about.
Aaron
@Aaron
No telepathy needed: anyone who would posit such a statement as “I am a little tired of being called racist, just because I’m white” as being a commentary of some sort of PC-culture in which he’s oppressed, indicates a mentality of racism. That you would respond to an obviously racist response above with “Bingo” seals the indictment.
Clue: The very act of pointing out your “white” background marks you as someone for whom that is a significant point of racial identity.
Are black people genetically predisposed to criminality?
Are white people and black people treated equally by our criminal justice system?
1. Not genetically, but culturally (in the US)
2. Yes they are.
I am so sick of people saying “oh well the shooter was lonely, or oh well the shooter was mentally unhealthy” or some crap like that. Because thats exactly what it is crap. They were just bad people period and we shouldnt be talking about any of them. The bottom line is all the mass shootings happened in an area, or on a premisses that didnt allow guns. If i am a criminal looking to commit a crime this would be the perfect place for me to do such a thing. Start allowing people to constitutional carry firearms and i garantee the mass shootings stop. No one is going to take a gun and walk into a school and try to shoot it up when the janitors, teacher, and other staff are armed and trained. And if they did, the loss of life would be non existent.
IMO the bottom line is that all mass shootings happened in an area where an individual HAD A GUN. it’s kind of hard to conduct a mass shooting without one. The US constitution already allows for people to carry firearms and there are frequent mass shootings. In the UK by comparison [where the entire country is a no gun zone] there has been exactly ONE shooting spree on record since 1996 [By your reasoning the UK should be a haven for gun crime]
“The bottom line is all the mass shootings happened in an area, or on a premisses that didnt allow guns.”
This is not true and simply another of the NRA’s tired talking points. For example, the campus in Oregon was not a “gun free zone” and as we saw with the protesters when the president went there, guns are very important to the people who live in that community.
The campus in Oregon did not allow carry, in general. The state has worked to make it legal. They had an option to allow folks to carry by written permission. Guess how many of the students there had permission…..
http://www.armedcampuses.org/oregon/
https://web.archive.org/web/20151003020203/http://umpqua.edu/resources-and-services/academic/student-code-of-conduct?showall&start=4
Joshua Bullard, there were actually more than you could imagine that were conceal carrying that day. including the army vets who were in the veterans center when the initial shots were fired. who also chose not to engage the shooter because of the were in a building about 100 or so yards away. additionally, they did not want to be confused with the shooter by the swat team that was on the way and be shot themselves.
beyond that, oregon state law, as of 2013 states that public post-secondary institutions cannot ban weapons on campus if the students have a valid conceal carry permit except in certain buildings and sports facilities.
Bob, you state that most of people who do these crimes aren’t mentally ill. Here is proof you are wrong. http://www.disclose.tv/news/every_mass_shooting_over_last_20_years_has_one_thing_in_common_and_its_not_guns/119552?utm_content=bufferd5631&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
America dug its own grave with a constitution which encourages citizens to arm themselves. No it’s not easier to get the whole population to talk to outcasts that is more difficult than banning guns.
The constitution does not ENCOURAGE people to have guns. It states:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This is “NECESSARY for the SECURITY of a FREE state.” This is so, if invaded, we can fight back, or if a dictator tries to take over the country, he can be overthrown, or if armed mobs begin creating havoc, a CITIZEN MILITIA can control the situation. It also provides for a “well regulated Militia” (note that does not say army, or police) that is allowed to protect our freedoms. If that Militia be an army, or a police force, so be it, but also allowed are citizen groups, as long as they are “well regulated” which actually has very little meaning.
Something else that the contemporary media masters won’t tell you, especially all of these non-US policy commentators: 2/3 of all gun related deaths in this country are by SUICIDE. We do not have a gun problem. We have a suicide problem. So while liberal trash-spinners take every opportunity to exploit this negative press (re: Oregon’s response to Obama’s politicizing the event) the fact is – suicide is terrible. However, if someone has committed to ending their own life, wouldn’t common sense tell you that they are able to do it with other means? Yet all we care about is the TOOL in which killings take place. Europeans and especially Britons should really mind their own business and focus on their imminent Sharia problem, and stop trying to remove our ability to deal with THAT when it comes. Our outcry and response like this only fuels a denigration of our rights. Read this gents’ post to heart. America is NOT the UK. We’ve not been disemboweled of our right to self-defense.
”
Liberal trash-spinners”?
Who, pray tell, are the “contemporary media masters” who have been keeping secrets from the rest of the world?
Hint: The rate of gun deaths by suicide is well-reported in the “media”:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/guns-suicide_n_3240065.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/upshot/gun-deaths-are-mostly-suicides.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/14/many-more-people-are-dying-from-gun-suicides-than-homicides/
But here’s the key thing you may not realize about suicide: people who attempt to kill themselves by means other than guns usually don’t succeed. According to Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, there are between 25 and 33 attempts at suicide for every one that succeeds.
Of reported statistics from emergency responders, the “success” rate of suicide-by-gun far exceeds any other method, 85-90%!– so if you try to kill yourself with a gun, more than likely you don’t get a second chance.
The next most successful method? Suffocation (i.e. asphyxiation) which results in 69% fatality.
The most common attempt, however, is poisoning/drug overdose (up to 300,000) which has a 2%-3% chance for success.
Thus, due to efficient lethality, more than half of all suicide deaths were by guns (57%)
Here’s something else worth pondering: people who live in homes with guns are 2-3 *times* more likely to successfully commit suicide-by-gun, as shown in a meta-study of suicide deaths, reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/01/21/gun-ownership-tied-to-three-fold-increase-in-suicide-risk/
Lets stop making those that commit these crimes famous. Stop broadcasting the events and planting the seed in others heads. They know the story will get out and be broadcast to the world, take that “ammunition” away! Every time you see one shooting happen, you will see others follow in the same path, its all for attention and to make a statement. This approach will be far more effective and less costly than disarming the masses.
There is a way to stop mass shootings and you won’t like it.
I believe it is good and right to make the effort to be a light to others and to teach our children the same thing. We should make the effort to be there for others. To get to know others. To laugh together and cry together. That is good.
Overall though, this author misses the point entirely and not only does he miss the point, but he encourages others to miss the point as well. To tell others that writing your congressman won’t help couldn’t be further from the truth. We have been winning with gun rights, even under a liberal federal government. Texas laws have gotten better and better. Sure there are other states that are going the wrong direction. Engaging the political system, finding a good lobbyist to support, these things work. Left the plan of the author our gun laws would erode further and further until our children had no chance. We owe it to the next generation to make a stand. When you see new law come into effect and think ‘how did that happen’, generally it’s because not enough people stood up for that issue a number of years back.
Not only does the author miss the point, but he is only considering one angle. Just as the rest of the world we will see more mass shootings, stabbings, and bombings, etc. This is due to terrorism. They won’t hug it out with us, no matter how hard we try to reach folks that are isolated. Violent and murderous gangs are moving further and deeper into our society.
Currently mass shooting are a very small in number, when tallying up the daily toll of violent attacks. We need to address it and confront it, but it needs to be done in a way that continues the political fight and takes on the other violence we see on a more regular basis in our country.
The author misses the point with mental health as well. Sure, do your part to be a light to others. Let’s all do our part to help folks that are isolated and need help, I agree. Then, once you realize there is a problem you can’t fix, get them to the right people. Often that will mean finding someone who knows them well or someone who is trained in mental health. To suggest this isn’t relative is ridiculous and short sighted. It negates the authors point.
Do write your congressman, do make phone calls, and do support a good lobbyist. If you need help understanding how to do that, or if you would like me to tell you of exact and specific times I’ve seen this work over the years, just ask. I can give you examples when we have made great political strides, doing just what the author says won’t work.
Why does writing you congressman matter? Why does winning on the political front matter?
The rhetoric offered by the author is no good, once the shooting starts. Just like the author makes the point that we will never get drugs off the street, we will also never effectively reach all of the isolated and mentally ill. There will be more terrorism, not less.
We have to keep up the political fight. The truth is, firearms are a great tool and we need to have them and we need to be mentally and physically prepared to use them. Once the evil shows up and someone is shooting and taking lives, it will be a brave human that stops them in their tracks. The better prepared and the better tooling we have, the better the chance we have of stopping the murderer sooner and the better chance we have to save lives. This is reality and we see it happen.
The way to stop a mass shooting is to have more good people prepared. More good people armed. This increases our chances of stopping these shooters – sooner. The author would do good to see a bigger picture and not limit the battle to one approach as that one approach does not cover the wide span of issues that all build into our current societal issue with violence.
Being around many people in my life time, I have learn that when you greet some one, wave as they do out in the country side, you will break down a person bad day. Each time you come across this person who may have ill intent or loneliness, that person’s will give into their human side. So what if that person doesn’t reply or expresses more insult. Each day you greet them, each day that you “see them”, each step taken is for our good. For all of us. One does not have to bend at the knee to someone but a simple eye contact-a smile- a simple “Howdy” will help change their world. Be the “one” who turns some one’s bad day into a better day.
I have worked as a cop/first responder for more than 30 years. People are people, we are just human. We each need the human touch-the human voice.
Greet some one today and put my idea to the test. Look into their eyes and let them know—I see you. The most important race is the Human race. Some where a long the way we have forgotten this simple-no technical-non mechanical way of seeing each other.
For those how took the time to read this—–“Hello”!
Be the one who discredits the idea of the person who hates the world. The one that thinks no one cares. Ever see how a hug will disarm the baddest person?
True, but we also need changes to the law. I don’t know how many people actually know that there are huge loopholes in the law that are not fixed yet and dealers not being prosecuted for not following the law. We do make it easy for anyone to get guns and the incidents of late did have some kind of criminal or known mental depression. We need both!
https://empoweredthoughtsblog.wordpress.com/
The black market will always supply guns to those determined to get them. No government edict can overcome basic economics and human nature.
You could write a letter to the VP and ask him why he believes “the federal government doesn’t have the time to prosecute those who lie on form 4473” (a felony) when they purchase a gun from a dealer.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/biden-to-nra-we-dont-have-the-time-to-prosecute-people-who-lie-on-background-checks/
So… because this author can’t come up with solutions to solve the problem of this country’s horribly high rate of gun violence, and can’t envision reinterpretations of the second amendment, that means nothing can be done but “engage”. Right. That’s related to the fallacy of incredulity. Just because you can’t come up with a solution (or let’s be honest, doesn’t WANT to come up with a solution) doesn’t mean there aren’t solutions. Get over yourself.
I was merely attempting to offer a solution each of us could affect, and to juxtapose it with the often offered “solutions” that don’t go anywhere – and why that is. You can ignore the facts as they are, but the possibility of any solution that involves getting rid of guns from the U.S. is a non-starter for the reasons I laid out.
What are you talking about? They offer a solution. The problem is you only believe in banning guns as a solution, like our idiot president. Get over yourself.
You forgot one huge point. Make Gun Owners Responsible for their guns. Unless they have reported the theft of a gun or the fact that someone has access to it who is showing signs of mental instability they are legally responsible for actions taken with that gun. That would create a whole new industry of gun liability insurance. That’s the American way.
If a gun owner does the responsible thing and keep their guns in a vault and yet they get stolen out of that vault, are they still responsible?
How about a car owner whose car is stolen and is later used in a crime, are they responsible?
How about a homeowner whose liquor cabinet is raided by a burglar? Are they responsible for any ensuing mischief and mayhem?
I’d say the fault lies with the thief in each instance.
Responsible gun owners already keep their guns in a safe. Good luck enforcing that law.
The whole point of this article was not a “ban guns initiative” but a “be more compassionate” issue – dang people – get a grip! (and not necessarily on a gun) – if people stopped judging others and just treated people the way they’d want to be treated, there’d be less of the problems.
Bravo! Sure I really like this article – largely because I have quoted from that list many times in the past.
In High School I had an acquittance that eventually became a really close friend. He a lot of anger in his heart. The typical jocks vs creatives or the “misunderstoods.” We shared in this outrage. We were beat up. We were chastised, picked on, etc. Instead of taking a Columbine approach, however, I introduced him to my love of music. We eventually started a band together that lasted through High School. The anger and hurt feelings never went away, but we found a healthy outlet.
In college, I became an RA in the Jungle at UCONN. My predecessor left because residents were urinating on his door. Just the kind of thing you want to hear when you are getting a new job. In a short period of time I turned our floor around. These were, in most cases, misunderstood kids that just wanted to be heard. To my knowledge, no one ever urinated on my door. It wasn’t perfect – but I have no doubt that engaging with EVERYONE was the key to making a difference, not just the popular kids. Also, getting the popular kids to recognize the fallacy of “popularity” as they knew it.
I could be wrong, but I cannot think of a good example of a person(s) with a good support group that goes on to cause such tragedies. Now, I am a parent and I see kids everyday being to cool and bullying other kids. I see teachers looking the other way. I see breaches in school entires on a daily basis. I see rampant neglect. But I also see teachers who really care. Reaching out. Trying to make a difference. Getting involved. If we don’t reach out as individuals and try to help one another, do we really think some government mandate is going to fix things for us? Even if it could – why wouldn’t we want to try harder as individuals. What’s the harm in that?
Reblogged this on Views from the Hill and commented:
This is one of the most “Spot on” articles I’ve read on the topic!
If you were hoping to engage the psychotic racist demographic, you did a fantastic job.
Maybe analyze why it is that these are the people who agree with you.
And also draw out the liberal trolls who can’t help but try to get in a cheap shot when they can
Aww, thats sweet. I would ask if we should all sing “Kumbaya” while holding hands, however, since a liberal wrote this, I’m sure that would be offensive coming form a white, gun owning, employed christian male.
If loneliness were at the heart of the matter, we’d probably see dozens of mass shootings every day.
From what I have observed over the years, it’s not loneliness, but perceived slights and mistreatment that is the common thread in many of these incidents. Think of the two Columbine guys, or the guy who felt women were not giving him the attention to which he felt entitled. If they were simply lonely, the only ones they would have hurt—if they hurt anyone at all—would have been themselves.
This is why we cannot exclude mental health from the discussion. People who are well-adjusted enough to deal with their feelings, or to express them in a safe manner, do not let their frustrations build to the point where they feel compelled to take revenge on others by committing mass homicide.
I share your conviction, and your passion about ‘moving toward one another.’ A year and a half ago I launched my own pilgrimage to move toward and get to know my own neighbors – I mean really KNOW them. In Seattle, this is considered foreign, being known here for the Seattle Freeze. I’ve been blogging about my journey and I encourage anyone looking for ideas, support and encouragement to pop in anytime: eatplaythaw.com
Telling people to be caring, sharing people is a great start. Engaging people and talking to people is great. Listening to people and making sure people know someone cares enough to engage their thoughts and listen to what they have to say are all excellent points. It’s something everyone can do. These aren’t necessarily the people who grab a gun to solve their problems. Anyone amenable to being engaged in conversation is not the person likely to shoot up a college campus. If you read some of the manifestos left behind from shooters, you’ll find they were very difficult people to talk to. They were prickly, weird, unpredictable, angry and unengaging in general. Thinking untrained people engaging with people who have an unhealthy world view will somehow head off a mass shooting is at best Pollyannish, but I agree, being polite is rarely a bad choice; however I also think that those who talk back weren’t going to shoot anyone anyway.
Our problem is that we don’t have a “well regulated militia”. We have people who feel entitled to pick up a gun and shoot it toward people they think have wronged them in some way. Just this week we had a guy shoot a man after a fender bender and a man kill his wife in the middle of the night with a shot gun blast to the chest. Last week we had a woman shoot at shoplifters. This isn’t “mental illness” as much as it is cherry picking the second amendment and a civics lesson gone off the rails. Everyone focuses on owning a gun, but pays no attention to the well regulated aspect.
We learned our lesson with alcohol. We tried banning it and that didn’t work, but no one suggested more alcohol was the solution either. We have common sense alcohol regulations and drunk driving deaths are way lower than they were thirty years ago. No one has suggested banning all guns. What we are suggesting is better gun safety regulations.
But this article is about conversation. Why not have a conversation about why we want a gun? If the answer is “for protection”, then ask, “How will you feel if you kill a family member by mistake?” Why not ask, “Where do you keep your gun?” “How do you make sure children don’t play with your gun?” “Have you ever wondered if your gun could be used in a crime?” “What do you do to make sure your gun doesn’t fall into the wrong hands?” “Are you aware that having a gun dramatically increases the chance that you will be killed by a gun shot?” “What other self-defense training have you taken?” “What else is a gun used for other than killing?” “How do you feel about being called a killer if something goes wrong with you handling your gun?”
Anyway, thanks for the conversation. I found it engaging and provocative
Re: Alcohol. Yes, we enacted more regulations. We lowered the BAC to be considered “under the influence.” We stiffened the penalties for drunk driving convictions. We didn’t make it more difficult for the average Joe (who most likely isn’t the problem) to purchase and possess alcohol.
See the difference?
Well regulated, commonly misinterpreted phrase:
http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm
http://www.guncite.com/journals/senrpt/senhardy.html
As for your questions, I’ve answered them long ago in my mind and taken the appropriate steps. Still have the guns.
“the overwhelming majority of these mass shootings aren’t done by criminals and their guns were obtained legally.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/weapons-and-mass-shootings/
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
This is what we are talking about. There is NO MENTION OF “GUNS” or even “WEAPONS” in the second amendment. Since that was written when a gun was a fairly inefficient arm, black powder, one shot, misfired quite often, and swords, pikes, etc. are also included! As a matter of fact, anything considered Arms, is included. The “Militia” is allowed anything considered “Arms” up to and including nuclear weapons!
The reason for Arms is to keep our nation “Free.” The People are the only ones who can do this.
The modern definition:
Arms: 1. A weapon, especially a firearm: troops bearing arms; ICBMs, bombs, and other nuclear arms.
2. A branch of a military force: infantry, armor, and other combat arms.
3. arms
a. Warfare: a call to arms against the invaders.
b. Military service: several million volunteers under arms; the profession of arms.
4. arms
a. Heraldry Bearings.
b. Insignia, as of a state, an official, a family, or an organization.
The people (not a PERSON) have the right to bear ICBMS, bombs, and nuclear arms, as well, if you consider modern weapons in the original definition.
The reason? To keep the country free, not to shoot people who are part of society. HOWEVER, you also cannot legislate against, say, a knife, used to cut up food, nor a gun, used to shoot a dangerous animal, nor explosives, used in mining, etc. These are not “arms” but serve another purpose, as well!
I personally think we went wrong with modern warfare, modern weapons, automobiles capable of killing people, etc, but what’s done is done.
The authors suggestion is to treat the CAUSE of certain events by making them less likely. In school, I was bullied, I was outcast, I was different, and if I had access to guns I probably would have shot those kids picking on me! Does this mean, by preventing me from having guns, I was prevented from killing a bunch of kids? Maybe. BUT the point is, if I had not been picked on, outcast, etc by bullies and those trying to make themselves feel big by putting others down, I would NOT HAVE HAD the urge in the first place!
In medicine, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Preventing bullying will do more to stop certain things than banning guns or anything else.
“You can’t keep beer out of the hands of high schoolers intent on getting beer.” But we do have an age limit and we do card people. -No one- is even being carded to buy a gun, especially at these “gun shows”. I dare say it is easier to buy a gun than a six pack of beer in this country.
Have you ever been to a gunshow?
Tell ya what.This Saturday night, go try to buy a six gun and then buy a six pack. Tell me which is easier to buy.
Of course, you may be able to find a gun on the black market Saturday night, but what law will shut that market down??
Let Americans keep shooting each other en masse. Forget the presidential “thoughts and prayers” and visits with the families post-massacre. Do nothing when these mass shootings happen except report the facts, just as one might report that “today is Monday,” unless these shootings become so routine, they are no longer considered real news except by the families of the victims.
Maybe there will be a tipping point at which the Second Amendment is no longer regarded as sacred and a majority of Americans will voluntarily overturn this killer addition to the Constitution because it aids, abets and enables mass murders, and as such is an accessory to murder, which in other parts of American law is actually an illegal act punishable by execution or life in prison without parole.
The usefulness and comfort of the Second Amendment to the body politic has been over for a couple of centuries, ever since the British were kicked out of the driver’s seat. The tyranny some say it is meant to prevent never threatened America and, because of the political setup the Constitution establishes, never will.
So let the killing parties continue. Have fun, folks.
The 2A also allows private citizens the opportunity to protect themselves if they desire.
Even the Clinton DOJ estimated that there are over 100K defensive gun uses every year in the US. Some sources say it’s an even higher number.
The good guys outnumber the bad guys. Disarming the good guys won’t make the bad guys weaker. I don’t get this desire to punish the majority for the inappropriate actions of a tiny minority.
Did any of you actually read the article? That list he made was talking about why those solutions cant work. Please read the entire article before bashing it. He is right.
Yeah, I guess this would work if we lived in Teletubbie land. Seriously, all you 2nd amendment gun defenders have to agree that reasonable licensing of objects that can kill a lot of people (.e.g weapons of mass destruction ….i.e.. Not a knife) is a good thing? Arming teachers/students/guards is totally unrealistic. All of this is just a distraction until the next one happens. But … “we need to focus on mental health.” Good luck with that.
Basically I agree with four of the five point. We won’t/can’t/shouldn’t ban all guns. And we should do something. Focusing on mental health is a waste of breath. AR-15 isn’t banned … there are different states with different rules. But since we stupidly let the “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994” expire in 2004, many states have relaxed regulations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15#United_States
I guess we need to wait until a “Port Arthur” event (and it would have to be a bigger scale than that one … maybe someone that wipes out an entire pre-school, God forbid) until we have reasonable controls. Until then, we have the Aussie’s spouting common sense wall we just look at each other stupidly.
Just out of curiosity, would you agree to licensing everyone and anyone with a computer and access to the Internet? Child pornographers use these items you know.
How about those who use alcohol? The death and destruction wrought by those who misuse alcohol is massive and rampant. Every year in the US there are over 2X alcohol related deaths are there are firearms related deaths. Do we license everyone and anyone who wants to buy/possess alcohol?
And what is unrealistic about arming teachers who want to be armed? They do it in Utah and South Dakota among other places. Where’s the problem???
“6. Do… SOMETHING! – Gotcha. What do you want to do? “SOMETHING!” Ok, what do you have in mind? “I DON’T KNOW! BUT SOMEONE NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING!” Sure. Agreed. But what? Even Obama has had to say in his latest speech how routine it’s become.”
here are some suggestions, and if these aren’t acceptable, then why not?
1. require mandatory background checks in all locations with a 7-10 day waiting period before purchase and receipt of weapon
2. During the waiting period, all perspective gun owners (and possibly, those living in the same household? maybe if they only have children?) should take a mandatory gun training class. note: not the same as getting a conceal carry permit
3. gun owners should be licensed, registered, (the conceal carry permit classes can fulfill this obligation), and should take re-certification classes every 1-5 years to maintain their license.
4. possible requirement to be insured. this would help with #5
5. if your weapon is used in a crime, including an accidental shooting – think the kids that are getting killed and/or shooting each other because they find guns laying around the house – then the gun owner is liable and can be charged with negligent homicide.
6. if you have children at home, you should be required to keep your weapon in a lock-box, gun safe, and/or store it without ammunition when not in use.
7. (if the above aren’t acceptable, again why not?, but perhaps this): current manufacturing of all ammunition and current gun models ceases immediately and stock is removed from the shelves and destroyed. in its stead, the weapons will be remodeled to include smart gun technology in which only the registered gun owner(s) will be able to unlock and discharge the weapon. people who currently own guns would be able to trade in their conventional weapons for those with smart gun technologies at no additional cost to the consumer.
I’m not sure why the gun advocates (or the “do-nothing” advocates) keep perpetuating the idea that there is a push from any reasonable person (including our President), that we need to BAN guns.
We don’t need to and should not do so. We are talking about REASONABLE controls on guns and ammunition in conjunction with the community/social responsibility for all of us.
It does not need to be all or nothing.
The problem is, “reasonable” is a different thing to different people. It appears to me anyway, that EVERY gun control proposal offered is touted as “reasonable.”
Us “gun advocates” question their effectiveness as crime control measures, which is what gun control schemes are sold as.
They often point to the UK as an example of the effectiveness of gun control. Color me skeptical.
Well, there’s the CBS news version and the actual version.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmniaf/67/2071702.htm
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm
People control, yes. Crime control, I’m not so sure.
Reblogged this on The Vocal Viking and commented:
I have very little to add to this. My gun-control favoring friends will not agree. I don’t see anything in this that is not a provable fact…
Ah, so THAT is how European countries manage to avoid mass shootings every couple of months or so- they talk to each other! Makes sense- all of those weapons that European households typically have, despite their lack of stringent gun control measures- and, still, hardly anyone ever gets shot in their schools, restaurants, churches, or cinemas.
What a brilliant solution to America’s gun problem- just talk to each other, and you’ll never need any laws anyway!
Reblogged this on Hashemite Tales and commented:
So many times after hearing about a tragedy in my community, in the news in the US or abroad, I feel extremely upset. Yet, I always default to some pathetic acceptance of the dark reality of the world and shrug “well, what could I even do?” This type of response is truly the most mindless thought because I choose to not think seriously about how I can effect action or change. This article urges each and every one of us to look inside ourselves and engage outwards to connect. “An individual action, multiplied by millions, creates global change” (Jack Johnson).
Lets ask the simple question. How many other countries have this issue? How many mass shootings have been reported in England, France, Germany, Australia (Since they banned guns) or anywhere else? Almost none, if any. What the difference? Ummm… oh yes “more guns than people in America” Do these other countries have similar social problems? Yes. Do other countries have isolated people? Yes … Is a ban on guns going to happen ..of course not. But you just need to sit down and understand the price for that gun you have in your house. That price is young children being shot. Its your choice, you’re helping that to perpetuate. DEAL with it.
How many other countries have the RIGHT to bear arms written into their constitution outlined as one that will not be infringed? When the left-leaning policy wonks state “we just want more controls in place, not eliminate them” and then reference other countries that do not have them, you’re asking for apples with a pear bucket.
I wish there was a way to filter these forums so that foreigners that have their own issues, including Sharia law, rapes, stabbings, terrorism training camps, coups, etc., can focus on their own issues.
The article poster made recommendations that WILL help.
2/3 of all gun related deaths are related to suicide in this country. Yet debate-baiters don’t seem to give a shit. Although the shootings in Oregon and other places are devastating and horrific…. in the grand scheme of numbers, it is a SHINY THING…. SQUIRREL.
It really disappoints me that this thread has degenerated into race-based name calling. It also disappoints me that so many gun-ban enthusiasts just can’t admit that their preferred option isn’t even remotely based on reality. You can’t just “wish” three hundred million weapons away, it’s never, EVER, gonna happen. Any attempt to register and/or confiscate every weapon in the U.S. would lead to a bloodbath against law enforcement, akin to another civil war.
Think I’m smoking crack? A frothing gun-owner extremist? Hardly, if anything I’m a moderate on this issue. Just look to the wildly unsuccessful efforts in Canada to register all the long guns in that country if you have any doubts. Their government finally gave up on the effort after wasting billions of dollars to get barely above single-digit compliance on the part of gun owners. Put plainly, Canadians gun owners just wouldn’t do it. And that happened without a Canadian version of the NRA, without an equivalent to our 2nd amendment, without anywhere near the political baggage that gun control has in this country. No politician with any grasp of reality, at any level of government, would seriously propose that we could do any better in this country. It would take the imposition of a literal police state to make any inroads at all on the supply of guns in this country, and it would be a decades-long project at best. That option is not on the table, despite how comforting the purported goal would be to all the hoplophobes out there wishing that the guns would just go away.
So where does that leave us on the mass-shooting issue? Right back where we started, nothing accomplished but another round of confirmation bias and name calling. No minds changed, no reason or compromise attempted on either side. Status quo; wait for the next shooting incident and repeat as necessary. So, how would I “solve” the problem of mass shootings at schools and campus facilities? Good question, no easy answer. Every part of my potential “solution” would infuriate some significant fraction of the population, since any true compromise means that everyone leaves the table just a bit unhappy about something.
I’m not going to lay out all of it now, since it would take hours that I don’t have to spare and it would just lead to another round of vindictive diatribe by gun haters. I will lay out my first step though, since it is the single most important part of the puzzle.
STEP ONE: for every mass shooting incident in the future, implement a total ban on releasing any information on the shooter, complete media blackout. Zero publicity equals zero notoriety, and notoriety is what these psycho/sociopaths crave over all else. Does this step all over 1st amendment right? Of course it does, but in this case it is a demonstrable public good, akin to the restriction on publicizing classified military information. Our teeming flock of media tragedy vultures would scream bloody murder, since this step would deprive them of their favorite red meat, the gobbets that they gleefully shovel out to the public to pimp their ratings. Too bad. As long as our media keeps endlessly fawning over every little detail of the shooters pathetic lives, it will continue to encourage further copycat shootings.
Whether or not we can stem this tide of pathological obsession is a good question, but it’s worth trying. And as those who would ban all guns are fond of saying “if it saves the life of a single child, it’s worth sacrificing that right”. If it’s good for the 2nd amendment, it’s gotta be good for the 1st, right?
I bet they happen they’re just not reported hence my point below. Stop giving these gunmen air time. Stop making them famous.
So, I like the sentiment – I really do. It’s kind, and makes sense at an emotional level. The problem is: England. England is always the problem, isn’t it? Spill coffee on your interview shirt? England. Forget to call your mom on her birthday? England.
A society with way less mass shootings, which is famous globally for being a bit chilly on the interpersonal level, and more than willing to _not_ seek out people who seem isolated, which kind of kills the entire argument put forth here? England. Also: Japan. They’re as bad as the English. Why, the other day, I was trying to find excuses for why we’re way ahead of almost every nation that could be considered civilized, in gun crimes, and I finally yelled “Japan! Also: Finland! Germany!” Seriously: when’s the last time a German hugged a stranger? Or, engaged in a mass shooting?
Insightful article. I wanted to point out one thing that makes your argument stronger, though. No one is calling for a complete ban on firearms. Rather, they are calling for a ban on civilian ownership of firearms. This is an important distinction. There would still be millions of guns in the hands of the secret service, fbi, local and state police, military, etc.
So, even the most extreme, impossible dream would not get rid of guns. Some would be misplaced or stolen or sold on the black market. Further, one of the worst lone gunman massacres in history was committed by a police officer in Korea in 1982. Finally, the Soviet Union did successfully ban civilian gun ownership but had a murder rate 4 times higher than the US in the 1980s.
The sad truth is bad things happen. Mass murders is nothing new. They are done for as many reasons as there are murderers. Some of the murderers are mentally ill, some are socially outcast-ed, some want attention, some are just plain evil. It boils down to justification. If a person or group of persons can justify to themselves that they have a good reason and right to kill others, then they will. Guns or no guns. It doesn’t matter. You can’t stop the justification process that people have, there are just too many of them, with possibly one exception. The more people there are that follow the teachings of Jesus, the less murderers you will have. I don’t refer to the teachings of the “church”, I refer to Christ. If only Christ was on the fore front of people’s decision making process, then there would be no justification available for those people to commit murder. No matter what they try to come up with, if they asked the question, “what would Jesus do?” then they would not be able to justify the killings.
The author completely misses the mark on the root cause. Mass shootings occur because so many people do not know Christ and do not follow Him. They are overwhelmed by their sin and their hatred because they are dead in their trespasses and sins. The narcissism of the “self-life” leads to their tendency toward being loners – a mere symptom / not the cause. An added and underestimated contributing factor is the multiple negative effects of psychotropic drugs being prescribed by psychiatrists – which is being swept under the rug by the pharmaceutical companies, not to mention the blind eyes of the mental health professionals themselves. I know what I am talking about. My friend, the Greeley Gunman, Robert Scott Helfer, a church going ex-seminarian, took his pistol to work, murdered one of his bosses, wounded the other, and committed suicide by cop. It is time to stop listening to authors with pet theories of the causes of shootings – those who pretend to know something so they can meet a deadline or see their name in print.
Many of the gunman did it for fame. Take that away and you can also stop this. Next time there is a mass shooting don’t cover it in the media. Don’t give the shooter thousands of air time after the fact. No fame no future shootings.
Like everything else this won’t happen either but I think it would work.
This is great in theory, but it’s just not practical. Most people are so busy with their daily lives, going to work 50+ hours a week and then trying to get stuff done around the house, take care of their kids, go out and get some exercise, there is no time left to go around seeing who looks ‘isolated’. It comes down to family units, and those family units are generally so messed up that this entire concept you have goes over their heads. We need to make the process of getting guns by legal means at least somewhat challenging, so that only people who are RESPONSIBLE can get them. Of course there are criminals and the black market, but you have to know someone to go that route, and if someone in that market thinks they’re selling to a psychopath they don’t want it to come back to them.
This isn’t a feasible plan. Pretty much everyone is super busy with their own life and their own family. There is no time to go around trying to talk to those loners, who are probably not even out in public very often to begin with. We have to make it more difficult to purchase guns and ammo, so that only highly motivated and organized people can get them. Most will be responsible gun owners, the others going the black market route will be mafia types like in Japan, purchasing their guns for their business and not mass shootings.
Too bad I watched The Voices the other night (a very weird movie with Ryan Reynolds), I might agree the best thing to do is try to reach out to people who might seem to need a friend, but this movie, albeit a fictional comedy, just reminded me exactly why I do not. He winds up killing someone by accident by stabbing her repeatedly because the voices told him to, but hey, he’s just a nice guy who happens to be sick. I’m sure it was just a simple mental break. I’m sure the girl he murdered was really glad to reach out. Some people out there are just too sick to engage with and professionals that are prepared for mental breaks and outbursts are the ones that really need to be doing this.
Sadly, there is no true resolution here in sight. Nobody cares about anybody but themselves.
This is excellent and I would call it part 1.
Part 2 is this: “OK, I’m at the end of my rope and I’m ready to lash out. How shall I do it?”
Due to the CONSTANT reinforcement in every TV show and movie and poster and preview, we have replaced the glamour of cigarettes in pop culture images of the 1940s with images of people with guns. If you are sitting around wondering how you should lash out, we pump it into everyone’s brain 24/7. Someone dis you? Pull out a gun. Someone cut you off in traffic? Pull out a gun. Want to be cool? Want to have the power? Want to be in charge? Want to make other people do what you want them to? Pull out a gun.
We make it both glamorous and show it to be very satisfying on TV all day, every day.
Yesterday I saw a promo spot for Chicago Fire. The image was “Tough guy with a gun.” These are firemen. Why is there an image of a guy with a gun? It’s shorthand for “This guy is going to get things done. He has a gun. He is cool.”
If you watch those fictional representations all the way to the end, you will see that invariably the bad guys with the guns get taken out by good guys with guns. That’s what happened in Oregon and that’s what happens whenever bad guys run amok. So the moral of the story is that misconduct with guns always has bad consequences. There’s no glamour in that.
“… to make sure no one is left to feel totally isolated. Because that’s the breeding ground.”
Lol poor choice of words in this context. Insensitive really. Dick
Terrorist killed 3000+ people with planes, why don’t we ban planes? The simple fact is, you can’t stop murder. Murder has been a part of human nature as long as humans have been around. Yes its sad, especially when you lose a loved one, but when it comes down to it there is nothing you can do about it. We have tried for thousands of years, to stop those who pray on the weak, we make countless laws then make laws to cover loopholes from previous laws. The sad but honest truth is murder will always be a part of human nature. For as long as we walk this earth.
Hundreds of millions of guns. A hundred million gun owners. If there were ANY “cause” for these incidents that we could point to it stands to reason that mass shootings should happen a thousand times a day.
The reality is that, even if you’re a lonely gun owner on SSRI meds, the odds of your going gazoo at the local gradeschool are close to nil.
With over 300,000,000 in the country somebody is going to lose it occasionally. It’s inevitable.
Arm yourselves, and know how to shoot.
I know a way and a bunch of people won’t like it everyone over the age of 21 should be issued a firearm that is not a criminal and have them carry this weapon every where they go and let Darwinism take place. but this will never happen due to our country as turned into a bunch of whiny punks that want everything handed to them
The author makes an excellent point. “Love your neighbor as yourself” doesn’t mean let’s get the government . . . or anyone else . . . to “do something.”
“Notice those around you who seem isolated, and engage them.” Sounds like the beginnings of “love your neighbor as yourself” to me.
Funniest spoof I’ve read in a while. I hope no one takes it seriously.
BTW, the Oregon shooter was frustrated by his lack of success with women, and a potential shooter in Idaho threatened to “kill all the girls” because the cheerleaders would not send him any nude photos of themselves. Perhaps Rob Myers can write a follow-up spoof in which he recommends that mass shootings could be stopped if girls would only put out.
I believe it is good and right to make the effort to be a light to others and to teach our children the same thing. We should make the effort to be there for others. To get to know others. To laugh together and cry together. That is good.
Overall though, this author misses the point entirely and not only does he miss the point, but he encourages others to miss the point as well. To tell others that writing your congressman won’t help couldn’t be further from the truth. We have been winning with gun rights, even under a liberal federal government. Texas laws have gotten better and better. Sure there are other states that are going the wrong direction. Engaging the political system, finding a good lobbyist to support, these things work. Left to the plan of the author our gun laws would erode further and further until our children had no chance. We owe it to the next generation to make a stand. When you see new law come into effect and think ‘how did that happen’, generally it’s because not enough people stood up for that issue a number of years back.
Not only does the author miss the point, but he is only considering one angle. Just as the rest of the world we will see more mass shootings, stabbings, and bombings, etc. This is due to terrorism. They won’t hug it out with us, no matter how hard we try to reach folks that are isolated. Violent and murderous gangs are moving further and deeper into our society.
Currently mass shooting are a very small in number, when tallying up the daily toll of violent attacks. We need to address it and confront it, but it needs to be done in a way that continues the political fight and takes on the other violence we see on a more regular basis in our country.
The author misses the point with mental health as well. Sure, do your part to be a light to others. Let’s all do our part to help folks that are isolated and need help, I agree. Then, once you realize there is a problem you can’t fix, get them to the right people. Often that will mean finding someone who knows them well or someone who is trained in mental health. To suggest this isn’t relative is ridiculous and short sighted. It negates the authors point.
Do write your congressman, do make phone calls, and do support a good lobbyist. If you need help understanding how to do that, or if you would like me to tell you of exact and specific times I’ve seen this work over the years, just ask. I can give you examples when we have made great political strides, doing just what the author says won’t work.
Why does writing you congressman matter? Why does winning on the political front matter?
The rhetoric offered by the author is no good, once the shooting starts. Just like the author makes the point that we will never get drugs off the street, we will also never effectively reach all of the isolated and mentally ill. There will be more terrorism, not less.
We have to keep up the political fight. The truth is, firearms are a great tool and we need to have them and we need to be mentally and physically prepared to use them. Once the evil shows up and someone is shooting and taking lives, it will be a brave human that stops them in their tracks. The better prepared and the better tooling we have, the better the chance we have of stopping the murderer sooner and the better chance we have to save lives. This is reality and we see it happen.
The way to stop a mass shooting is to have more good people prepared. More good people armed. This increases our chances of stopping these shooters – sooner. The author would do good to see a bigger picture and not limit the battle to one approach as that one approach does not cover the wide span of issues that all build into our current societal issue with violence.
i believe he does make the point…it starts right here, right here with us…secondary is the call to your senator..please don’t misinterpret or downgrade this theory.
The areas in this country with the strictest gun laws have the highest gun involved crime rates! So your theory is not correct! Your not winning any thing. And many of these shootings are done with stolen and parent owned guns.
In every one of these cases, if there was only one armed citizen, the toll would add up to TWO: the knucklehead’s first victim, and the knucklehead himself… period.
29 (and counting) voted thumbs down . That’s a big part of the problem. They loooo ed the feel good story and YOU.YOU BASTARD!! Made them sad. The truth does that to libtards intent on getting innocent people killed. Well written retort.
Would it be possible for you try and have a grown-up response instead of childish name calling? Why should anyone listen to you when you can’t get a point across without insulting those with whom you disagree? THAT is what is wrong with this country, also. No one wants to hear another opinion; or, no one can hear another opinion without responding so immaturely. This does nothing to help others or solve the problem.
Libtard… really? How old are you? And why don’t you explain what that word means, extrapolate it and then try to justify use of an expression like that.
I’m sorry, I’d like to take a moment to ask where you get your information.
Firstly, you’re wrong about governments being able to do ANYTHING about gun crime by passing laws. Laws are only effective on those individuals willing to follow them. Case in point: How many times per week do you drive over the speed limit? While gun crimes are far more devastating than speeding, the individual’s neglect to follow a set law is not.
Secondly, I guess 300 mass shootings (shootings involving 3 or more victims) in 287 days ( http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Mass_Shootings_in_2015 ) could be considered a small number. Oh wait…No it’s not… And the fact that 5% of these mass shootings happened in Texas argues that their new gun laws have done little to change things. That fact that there were only 336 mass shootings in 2014 (number 300 wasn’t committed until November 26) also argues that these number are trending in an upward direction.
The one thing I agree with you on is that you’re right about being able to help all of the isolated individuals. This country has become so exclusive that it’s “trendy” to ignore, or worse bully, those who don’t have as nice of a life as we do. There will always be individuals who feel ostracized because that is what we teach our children is okay. It’s okay to look down on those “beneath” you. I mean, if they didn’t want to be there they’d work harder to change that, right? But while we many never reach every individual, and including that fact that at minimum there are 3 victims to every shooter, wouldn’t helping just one be enough? Doesn’t that sound like a pretty good place to start?
Now I’m sure most of this has fallen on deaf ears. After all, we can’t admit that we, as a society, have failed, right? We can’t admit that exclusion leads to the anger needed to commit these acts. We refuse to believe that we are all (myself included) a part of the problem. And that’s precisely what the writer stated we, as a society, are lacking. Personal responsibility and personal action. We just can’t be bothered. These shootings aren’t affecting us anyway, right? At least…until one does…
Shootingtracker has been shown to drastically inflate their numbers and misrepresent mass shootings to push their anti-gun agenda. I wouldn’t trust those numbers a bit.
Good grief – what a load of nonsense. Who, exactly, teaches their children the things you claim? I have lived in 12 states, coast to coast, and to my knowledge have never once encountered a single person who taught their children such things.
Your assertions about “mass shootings” is similarly nonsense. Your definition is arbitrary and almost perforce insufficient to its purported task. There is a lot more to the issue than just the numbers. Motivations are more important. How many of those 300+ incidents that you cite were drug-war related? I’d bet money I don’t have that it is far more than half.
Your so-called “reasoning” regarding “exclusivity” is ridiculous on its face. Nobody holds the least obligation to be “inclusive”. However, we all hold the obligation to respect the rights of our fellows – something criminals fail to do. When people act in violation of the rights of others, decent people put them to ends by whatever means are required.
***While gun crimes are far more devastating than speeding***
Really? Excessive speed Is a factor in 1/3 of all fatal crashes and the economic impact to society of speeding-related crashes is estimated at $27.7 billion per year. Speed was a factor in 30% (12,477) of all traffic fatalities in 1998 alone, second only to alcohol (39%) as a cause of fatal crashes. I guess we should ban cars.
I think you are missing the point. Start with the children, making all kids feel accepted and loved and welcome, will most likely, over time, negate the need for more gun laws, etc. because the shootings probably won’t occur as often. In addition, these same kids, instead of growing up as loners, grow up well-adjusted and feeling accepted, won’t feel the need to own a bunch of guns for protection. Hence, again the need for gun legislation will be a moot point. Start with the kids.
I agree with you Susanne. We are really missing the key here…early intervention.
I wrote an article similar to this and I can’t figure out why nobody seems to feel so strongly about all this..
here it is if you care to read it
http://www.megansweet38@blogspot.com
Well said, all good points. For what it did address, it was not bad at all. But the points you brought up are very important.
I think the author makes some great points. My understanding of the comment about calling your representatives was that it would not be useful to call your representatives to enact more anti-gun legislation…for all the reasons the author wrote about in this piece. Joshua, you are talking about pro-rights legislation…which I believe is very helpful in informing our representatives that we support the Second Amendment as is. Just depends on how you interpret what the author wrote.
Personally, I think this piece presents a very solid position for more reasons than just reducing mass shootings. But one thing that I think increases an individual’s isolation is the way we have become a more “connected” society through technology…but our interpersonal skills suffer as a result. Nothing can replace a physical handshake, pat on the back, or a hug…or just looking another person in the eye to see that they “get you.” As much as the tech companies want to…you can’t replace necessary human interaction with machines.
I find agreement both with the author and you on a number of points. However, I think you misunderstood the author’s intent when he said don’t bother writing your congressman. I believe that he meant don’t bother to write to ask for MORE gun control legislation. As you point out, it’s moot and useless, as the trend nationwide is in a positive, pro-2nd Amendment direction, thankfully. The engagement of our elected representatives by pro-2nd A citizens has definitely worked and we definitely outnumber the anti- crowd by a long shot.
Simplistic and defeatist baloney. By this reasoning:
-Pediphiles are going to harm children, so don’t implement ways to stop them.
-Thieves are going to rob you, but no need to call the police or your insurance company.
-Drunks are going to drive, so just talk to them, but don’t take away the keys.
-Children fund an unsecured gun and accidentally kill others or themselves.
-So-in the words of Jeb!, “stuff happens”-don’t expect to make things better.
Instead of guns, ban, “Texting.” Let’s return to communicating and connecting to others with the human voice.
TALK, not text.
There is nothing man or women or laws can do to stop evil,,,only WEN JESUS RETURNS AN OLNY THEN WILL IT END ,
The author made some good points but overall being nice to strangers is not going to solve the problem…it would help but not realistic as THE answer. Significantly investing in mental health system is the most effective path. Step one is to invest in marketing to take the negative stigma of mental health issues. We need to start down the path of changing the perception of mental illness and looking at mental health as no different than Diabetes and Asthma….no absolute cure but treatable but much more complex….and then invest significantly in resources and money into completely revising, changing, innovating and modernizing the system. We invest now and there is overwhelming evidence that identifying and treating mental illness early in one’s life significantly increases the chances of that person living a happy productive life…. or we pay later with paying for prison cells, long term institutionalizing and/or a dependent of the state and welfare….or homeless…. and of course sometimes horrific tragedies.
I would even go so far as to say….We need in our grade schools and junior high schools and high schools have trained professionals… that make up our Guidance Counselor Departments….yes that’s right the department that….back in the day….everyone thought was a waste of time. Make it a significant department that has innovative social events and programs and therapy. Kids that might start having troubles would have a valuable resource or even just a person to trust and talk to and more.
Also…an overall change in the perception of the mental health system in this country that makes PARENTS feel comfortable seeking help for their children and seeking advice on dealing with a child that they see might be slipping into isolated dark places….. instead of being in denial and thinking they can deal with it privately as a family to keep it a secret. Part of the dollar investment is in changing peoples perception with a campaign to communicate to the public. Marketing. Only then will the authors idea of people being kind and reaching out to someone who looks isolated and troubled.
On a different note….It can’t hurt to have more comprehensive back ground checks for buying a gun and close gun show loop holes and empower the ATF to enforce the existing gun laws more effectively. That is not going to infringe on 2nd amendment rights.
Ban “texting” instead of, guns. Perhaps people would not feel socially isolated if communication returned to the exchange of words via the human voice.
TALK, not “text.”
Thank you for this. I believe this is the right direction. Social isolation is certainly one of the most devastating things you can do to a human being. But far worse than that, and what I have been contending as being a direct connection to the problem of mass-shootings is that of the fatherless children epidemic. That includes emotionally distant dads, but when some 40 percent of children are now born out of wed lock and growing up without dad in a severely disconnected society that is not going to produce a generation of stable, mentally healthy kids who feel good about themselves.
Sadly, I don’t think this is going to turn around until we rediscover the power of family again.
The U.K. is about to break the record and the U.S. is headed in the same direction: Most children will be born out of wedlock by 2016.
“In families where parents break up children do less well at school, are more likely to suffer mental health problems…” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10172627/Most-children-will-be-born-out-of-wedlock-by-2016.html
http://mattpennock.com/angry-young-men/
Perhaps better social support (like the author is suggesting), more community, and, dare I say it, more birth control could help with these issues. Community can help take the place of missing parent figures in the lives of kids. Community can help support kids so they don’t turn to gangs and become missing parent figures in their kids’ lives.
Seems like many of our social issues are wrapped up together — high incarceration rates, low community support, isolation, and lashing out in violence.
It might work, talking to people who seem left out. But aren’t they left out because they act weird? They want girlfriends. No one wants to risk trying to be a friend, only to have them mistake you for a girlfriend and then get angry because “you dumped me” and have them kill you first. It’s a totally realistic scenario.
Sure it’s realistic, but I think that attitude is still part of the problem. We see these individuals as undesirable as romantic partners, and sometimes that’s justifiable, but sometimes it’s nothing more than shortsightedness and a stereotype. We believe they don’t make enough money, believe they have an undesirable physical trait, believe they talk too weird, or have an interest that’s too outside the mainstream.
Sometimes they are just selfish and harmful, and those interests can truly be scary (like those who obsess over violent real world political movements, white supremacy, the IRA, ect. ect.), but that is not always the case.
Truly, relationships are where society is most selfish to each other, both men and women. If we could start addressing that on a larger scale, move beyond mere evolutionary instincts and standard expectations for attraction, I think we’d all be a bit better off.
Do these people have a responsibility for addressing their relationship failures? Did they lash out in the worse way possible because of their failures? Yes and yes. Do men do the same if not worse to women who don’t deserve their isolation? Absolutely, yes.
But pretending that this isn’t part of the problem is simply living in denial. A bit of sincere non-judgmental compassion in their lives may well have saved more lives, and I can practically guarantee the ones who lived in that mid-life crisis mid-20s age didn’t get enough, just as those who were younger mostly came from broken, unhealthy family situations.
You seem to think that people who are selfish and harmful deserve romantic partners. They don’t. No one should have to be with someone they don’t want to be with. When it gets to actually acting it out physically, we call that idea rape.
It’s one thing to find someone who wants to be with you despite your shortcomings, but that’s not what you seem to be advocating. No one is obligated to just agree to be with whatever romantic partner.
I engaged somebody today.
What about the argument of better security? Even if there isn’t a security officer armed, there should be a system in place in case shootings happen. The problem is, we are not prepared. Kip Kinkle had friends I knew a couple of them, and he still did what he did. We do fire drills at schools, what about intruder drills monthly? Every classroom should have a walkie talkie radio. Even without spending millions of dollars nation wide, there definitely can be a system in place and drills ran. I am going to send an email to my kids’ schools and I would encourage others to as well!
Schools do mandatory lockdown drills. It’s not fun and increases fear.
Just because a student has a few friends does not mean that they feel accepted and supported by their community, which is what the author is talking about.
You forgot the easiest way to prevent mass killings. Arm everyone. No way he would have had time to commit all those killings if everyone in that room (or anyone for that matter) was armed. They had to wait for someone to come who was armed. And people died while they were waiting for someone to come that was armed. When someone finally arrived who was armed, the killing stopped. Amazing how that works.
No, please, no. I am a teacher. Arming everyone (or even every teacher) is a horrible idea. I have had students throw chairs, pencil boxes, etc at me. I have had students yell and rage. It’s rarely about me — when a student gets beaten by their parent or screamed at before school, and then something small happens at school, they just snap. I can’t even imagine what could happen if a student lets it all lose in a classroom and manages to get the teacher’s gun.
Secondary reason why not: school is a safe place for many kids who have no other safe place. There are, unfortunately, kids who are exposed to violence on a regular basis. Having a gun present in the classroom would not help these students feel more safe.
Third reason why not: not every teacher is mentally stable. Let’s not arm those teachers. When they snap, I want them to throw a desk and storm out rather than shooting the student that has set off the reaction.
Schools are allowing teachers (and students at some colleges/universities) to be armed in various states now. No issues that I’m aware of.
Your ignorance of weapons is showing. I am an ex-teacher from NYC. No student was going to get my weapons. If you are properly trained in weapon retention, students will not hijack them.
Your second reason is unsupported. FAIL. Do you think a student will feel more safe knowing there is nobody who can protect them from a loon intent on killing him?
Third reason: more nonsense. There can be standards of behavior set for teachers. There are no guarantees in life, so walk away from the fantasies. Do you believe it is better for a student to die from being hit with a desk than it is by gunshot?
How many teachers have “snapped”? How many have killed students? If a teacher snaps enough to shoot a student, they have snapped enough to beat them to death with their hands or throw them from a window or stove their skulls in on the hard floor. Your hypothetical hand-wringing scenarios are grossly disconnected from the real world.
If that were true, the Wild West would have been the safest part of our country, and the safest time period. I shouldn’t have to tell you that wasn’t the case. Also, if that were true, the U.S., with its high rates of gun ownership, would have lower rates of mass shootings than other countries, but instead we have the highest. additionally, a gun is not required to stop a shooter. Bravery is what is required, along perhaps with training. Just look at what was recently done on a train in France to stop a terrorist gunman.
The evidence simply doesn’t support your position.
Actually, during the height of the “Wild West” per capita murder rates were higher in the “civilized” eastern cities, like Philadelphia, than they were in cow towns like Dodge City.
http://libertarianstandard.com/2010/04/07/how-wild-was-the-wild-west-in-fact/
To a European living in the US for many many years, this discussion remains absolute mind-blowing. Western societies are the coldest, most selfish societies ever created in the history of mankind. There are rudiments of community left in families, small towns and some city neighborhoods, but altogether it’s everyone for himself. This is no better in Europe than it is in the United States and it certainly can’t be turned around without destroying the foundations of our culture.
If you want a judge on this, ask any immigrant from anywhere outside of this hemisphere. They will tell you all the same thing. And it’s not about them feeling excluded, some might, others might not, they are looking at the way WE are behaving towards each other. That’s the real shocker to them. It’s our society that is producing these killers, and human nature made this society. You can’t just turn around and be someone else after hearing about another school shooting.
However, there is a realistic way to stop most of these killings, not all but most. Nobody has to turn in their guns, guns don’t need to be banned. Just make it hard for people to buy a gun. Introduce a federal gun law binding for all states, and make applicants go through regular training over a period of time to get a license. Never sell guns without a license, not at gun shows and especially not over the internet.
Criminals will always find illegal guns, but criminals usually kill other criminals. 83 gun deaths every single day, but if we’re honest, we don’t really care. We care about mass shootings at schools, and they are never done by criminals. They are done by lonely kids, and for these kids it is easier today to pull the trigger on twenty people in a high school than to illegally obtain a gun. They don’t know any criminals, where are they going to turn to get the guns? There were some mass shootings in Europe too, but they were always carried out by guys stealing guns from their parents or relatives who hadn’t locked them away properly.
Make it difficult to get guns and you will prevent most mass shootings. There will still be a lot of loopholes, but pointing these out doesn’t undermine the argument. At the end of the day, it will be significantly less.
But, of course, it’s never going to happen. There is a 7-10 billion annual revenue on the line and thousands of jobs. The industry and Wall Street investors are funding the NRA who is yelling freedom and everything remains the same. You would still have that freedom of getting your gun if you had to go through a difficult process to obtain the license, it would just take a little longer. But it would reduce the profits by at least 50%, probably more. And that will never happen here, because the word freedom still has the power to shut down any reasoning and any question. Actually, there should be a license for using that word.
And, yeah, I like it here but I’ll be swimming back to Europe if you want me to. But the truth is still going to be the truth.
I am confused by your comment. First you identify the problem as being a relational one, based on person to person relationships and interactions but then go on to say that the solution is laws about making it harder to obtain guns. I’m not following the logic.
How about fixing the relational & morality problem and then ease or difficulty of obtaining guns for ownership will become a moot point.
Part of the reason there is difficulty about gun ownership in our culture is that certain sections of America simply have very little gun related crime while also having a long standing and a large (numerically compared to the gun crimes)tradition of sport and hunting related gun practices. I grew up and am currently living in such a section of America. These people find the tragedies saddening and of concern but cannot fathom how guns and ease of ownership are the problem seeing as their sole interaction with firearms has been nothing but safe and positive. They wish to place to focus where it belongs on the people and the problems in those peoples lives that led to the shootings. However they are forced by others to panic over their rights and seemingly harmless gun ownership into fear based defense mode.
Everyone loses in these situations. No one can come together because one side is terrified of weaponry and the other is terrified for their weaponry rights and all the while hurting people are going to continue to shoot and kill with a firearm. While the two sides fight, protect their own rights and try to control the other.
Fix the humans before they pull the trigger and then there will be no more shootings. It is the easy route to say laws, regulation and difficulty of ownership. It is far harder and requires much more of the individual to say break the walls and start seeing and treating each other as needy human beings that we have to get personal and vulnerable with.
Thank you, I’m living in the Midwest and I mostly agree. All my neighbors got pistols and rifles, and I don’t feel unsafe. Introducing stricter firearm rules would not mean for them to lose any of their guns. It would be a longer process to show responsibility, mental stability, etc. to obtain the license, and there would be fewer, better monitored ways for purchase. But they could still buy all the guns they wanted to.
Having said that, it also confirms that we are not speaking the same language. To me, my logic is quite clear. There is nothing to “fix”, our society is ailing, producing loneliness by default. School shooters are a symptom of a disease. That disease cannot be cured, the core is rotten. All we can do is make the symptoms tolerable to be able to live our lives. That was the reason I argued for stricter laws to keep the guns out of the crazy loners’ hands.
Again, we have created the most materialistically successful society in the history of mankind. How did we do it? By understanding the human nature, by turning the cardinal sins one by one into virtues and pillars of our culture, more or less concealed. Greed obviously being the no. 1 driving force, today’s democracy is almost entirely undermined by corporate interest. No need to go through all seven to make the point, just look at our lives, our conversations, our role models.
At the same time, our alleged (Christian) values remain hollow at best, many of them having turned into their opposite. There are remnants in small communities, as I said before, but the benevolent society is an illusion. Nonetheless, our leaders (political, religious, economic) keep repeating the old values over and over again knowing that human beings become dysfunctional without a spiritual framework that gives our lives a meaning. Telling us that we are part of that great commercial project of eternal economic growth and ever-increasing profits is not going to rally anyone. So we can’t blame ourselves for listening, we have no other choice. The alternative would be admitting to a worthless life. So we do our best believing them and at the same time creating our families, our small communal entities where we have control and can insist on our virtues.
Accepting the truth, though, is one of the hardest things to do in life. We are not cynics by nature. We can joke about this or that, but, if it comes down to our core values, we want to believe there is something substantial to live for. Like in the old song: “I know it ain’t perfect but it will be some day.” Well, it won’t. Since that song, since Eisenhower’s farewell address, we have come a long way, and most of it, although not all, was leading in the wrong direction, most dramatically over the last three decades. “Follow the money” and you will understand almost every conflict, discourse and process in current secular societies.
To me, it’s naïve to think we can rise up, turn away from our mentality and, symbolically, hug that lonely kid. It would mean a complete reversal of our lifestyles from taking to giving without a true crisis and catharsis, and I don’t believe it’s going to happen.
This is by design and is being engineered by US leftists. By destroying the cohesive family and weakening community ties, trust and relationships, it is far easier for a controlling government to take power, by promising to restore that which is missing from our lives.
I’ll ask you the same question that I’ve been asking all and have yet to receive an answer.
Every year in the US, there are approximately twice as many alcohol related deaths in the US as there are firearms related deaths.
Should we make it more difficult to purchase alcohol in the US?
Are we talking about improving public safety or not?
Best comment by far, had to come from us that come from different cultures. wow nailed it.
Paul’s comment.. together with teaching our young to reach out to the lonely. Paul’s comments are right on.
Don’t let the sharks bite you in the ass on your way back. You Euros have had the tyrant’s boot on your necks for so long that you have come to love it and feel uncomfortable without it. That’s OK with me, but I will not accept such life. We have enough tyranny here in the USA as it is. We don’t need more, thanks very much.
Your assertions about America are all wrong. I don’t know where you live, but based on what you write it must be a large population center. That is not the real America.
All your talk of licensing demonstrates your serf’s-eye world view of things. Believe whatever you wish and live as you please. Just stay out of the ways of those who do not agree with your opinions.
“Just stay out of our way!” … don’t make yourself even more ignorant than you already are. I guess you really don’t get it? I don’t want more laws, more government, more anything. I don’t give a damn. It wasn’t me crying about school shootings. All I said was, if you really care and want to reduce them, there is a way that works, not some idealist appeal that gives you some cheap nods.
And it’s not about where you’re from or where you’ve lived (I’ve spent 13 years in the South and Midwest), it’s about the consequences of putting money, greed and hypocrisy at the center of our world and celebrating the worst cheaters as winners and role models. It changes a people’s mentality. Now I can either try to understand that world and accept that truth or not use my brain and keep feeling good in my little dream world where I’m nice to everyone around me, listen to the media’s bs and pretend I’m still free, have choices and the world out there doesn’t exist. Maybe it feels great to die with the same convictions you were taught as a baby.
Hi Rob! I don’t understand the process of posting and replies. I have received a few emails indicating that someone else had commented about someone else’s post. I don’t see any of MY posts on this thread. Also, is there a way to research these comments by date? They seem all mixed up, making it hard to follow. Please advise and thanks. Mary Lou
Considering you can have a gun delivered discretely to your door, or a drop point, for under $1,000 QUICKLY and EASILY via the deep web, making it harder to get guns will do nothing. No risk of gun death, as it’s done online
no just no lol the only way to get a gun online is have it shipped to a licensed dealer where they transfer the gun into your name if you can find a way to have a gun delivered strait to your door without the back round check and without transferring the gun in your name p.m. me because id love to know about it
You can order a gun over the internet, but it is shipped to a licensed dealer, at which point you have to go pick it up from that dealer after they run the background check
the best way to stop someone from shooting someone is not to let someone have gun,
why is it more important what race the shooter was , then the fact that there was innocent people killed?? it does not matter what race the shooter was…the shooters are all human and was very mentally sick…it does not matter where they came from…..this article was about trying to get our children to be more social to all children…..there are so much bulling going on in schools today and they are abused at home……no wonder that there is so many teenagers commits suicides in schools or they become bad adults shooting people ….PEOPLE stop making everything about racists !!!!
If it was one shooter, yes, but when it’s every mass shooter, we need to understand that it’s a factor.
Am I the only one that finds it a bit ironic that an article telling you to reach out an engage one another in a positive light sparked a negative racial argument in the comment section.
This is an incredibly important conversation and we are all just at the tipping point of broaching it. I am glad others are starting to realize that there are ways to look into this kind of violence and intervention is key. If anyone is interested here is another similar article in my website with resources. Hoping to get this conversation going and going.
http://megansweet38.blogspot.com
If only this was true. I use to think that people need a reason to do crazy things or hurt other people. I learned that is so not true. There are many causes for mass killings that have nothing to do with isolation…mental illness, political extremism, drugs, alcohol, desperation, fear, etc.
I use to think that if you don’t bother someone, they won’t bother you, until I was approached by a serial killer over thirty years ago. I was lucky enough to escape…others weren’t so lucky.
That experience taught me a lesson. Always be aware of your surroundings, and never assume that the world is full of normal people.
And go armed everywhere. It is a very good policy because you never know when trouble will find you, despite your best efforts not to be found.
Why do you say #5 won’t work? Nearly your entire article is about mental heath! In Switzerland and done other places, mental evaluations ARE required to get and to renew gun permits, sometimes as frequently as 4 times a year! That could, and should, be a requirement here, also.
Child pornographers use computers and the internet.
Should everyone who has a computer and access to the Internet be required to undergo annual mental evaluations?
You apparently fail to understand the nature of fundamental human rights. They are not subject to arbitrary standards of qualification. Furthermore, a right implies the right to exercise, which further implies the right to acquire and employ the means of exercise.
Therefore, if you claim your right to life, and I surely hope that you do, then you similarly hold the right to defend that life against destruction. So holding, it follows perforce that you hold the means to exercise your right of defense, which in turn means you hold the right to acquire, keep, and make use of the instruments that further your ability to exercise.
A right is not a right if you cannot exercise it. You cannot exercise it without the instrumentality by which to do so. Licensing reduces a right to a privilege. Privileges are handed out and taken away by others whose authority to do so exists nowhere in reality. The only authority such people hold is that of the ends of guns and the threats made thereby.
Some people are afraid to give up guns because the they feel there is no protection for them if they do. Some feel its not safe in thier homes without weapons to defend themselves and i feel that we have no way of know if we will be protected or not and some think if they give up their guns they will be killed in thier homes from others.
Bull shit! Everyone SHOULD reach out to the people who are isolated because it’s not right to make someone feel alone but with that being said…I was picked on and isolated a lot when I was a kid and I NEVER ONCE thought about picking up a gun and shooting someone! Why you ask? Because I had good parents who taught me right from wrong, disciplined me when it was needed, and taught me values, love, loyalty, faith, and compassion! To turn the other cheek and do unto others as you would want done unto you! They taught me that it didn’t matter what other people thought or how they behaved that I was a good person inside and out and they expected me to treat others with respect! Maybe if the parents of today did that and reached out to their children when they are hurt or lonely instead of just letting them fumble around we wouldn’t have this problem! Don’t make this society’s responsibility because parent’s aren’t doing their job! Society should want to help not HAVE to! And the members of society that do are because their parents raised them right!!!
In my view, all our problems, while having their own unique root causes, share one common cause. We have a system which is supposed to work to help us manage our resources so that our needs can be met but that system is not working. This is a simplification of a larger set of extremely complex issues but it is true and offers a glimpse at a solution. Fix the system. Imagine if our system were more efficient and we didn’t waste our limited resources doing things we really don’t need to do. Imagine if we used our resources for more of the things that are important, like reaching out to those who suffer and help alleviate their suffering. If our system worked to support our true priorities I guarantee we would see a huge decrease in crime and violence across the board.
A boy who is kind of nerdy if that is an appropriate term, came up to my daughter and handed her a note professing his love. She is in seventh and he is in sixth. She is not ready to profess anything other than her dislike of homework at the present time. Well, some boys grabbed the note and were teasing him and she laughed out of nervousness like anybody else as a child generally would. When she told me, I asked her how she would have felt if that was her. I asked her what it would be like to be a loner and not have people to talk to or share your day with. Then I told her she owes the kid an apology. We went over several tactics so as not to offend or give the wrong message. My daughter was so happy when she came home because she did apologize and he explained how he wasn’t mad at her that the other kids just embarrassed him. My point is she got just as much out of the apology as he did and ensured some young kid didn’t become depressed or alienated. I have raised 4 daughters that are extremely beautiful (they are my daughters so I am totally objective…LoL). They have all gotten calls or texts of guys professing their love and several have even stated if she didn’t like them they had nothing to live for. So we do a lot of talking about how to deal with each and everyone of them based on their actions; however, I am adamant that they never belittle, tease or cause anyone else to be hurt the same way they would like not to be hurt by others. My other point in all this dribble is it works. Treating others the way you want to be treated and not destroying their feelings works and they have lots of friends. Popular friends as well as not so popular because I instill in them that we all have feelings and we all deserve to be treated with a little kindness and decency.
“I asked her what it would be like to be a loner and not have people to talk to or share your day with” I agree with the pain point of your post, but I just wanted to say that I hate when people use loner as a negative term. Many people are loners by choice and are happier that way. I think instead of society placing so much importance on having friends and being in a relationship, we should be teaching people to be able to be happy on their own, because the fact of the matter is you can’t depend on others and there will be times in your life when you are on your own.
Well stated.
We can point to any number of surface causes for mass shootings. The underlying cause is rage, primarily of white males who are losing their centuries-long position of dominance and power over women and non-white men. Loneliness is rage at being ignored. We see very few news reports of mass shootings by women and non-whites. The comments in social media and news media from those who oppose gun control are almost never rational arguments based on facts, they’re angry, vitriolic, use name-calling, threats and repetitions of pro-gun talking points.
We can’t do anything about the equalization of power between white men, women and non-whites, nor should we. What we can do is reduce the number of guns available — reduce it drastically. It’s quite true that criminals will still get guns, but we can ensure that there are fewer guns for them to get. And garden-variety criminals don’t go into schools and theaters and malls with guns blazing.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2014/04/anger_causes_violence_treat_it_rather_than_mental_illness_to_stop_mass_murder.html?wpsrc=sh_all_mob_tw_top
Very short-sighted view. You cannot eliminate guns and reducing the numbers will do nothing to help. People crazy enough to become determined to shoot up a school, theater, etc. will be determined enough to acquire the means, whether it be guns, knives, bombs, or what have you.
Get real.
Of course you can’t prove it, because it’s patently untrue. People deterred from owning guns do not inevitably commit murder or suicide with something else. When Australia restricted guns, homicide by other means did NOT–I repeat that if you’re hard of hearing–DID NOT see a resulting increase in homicide or suicide by other means. Instead, their overall homicide and suicide rates decreased.
No.
This article is, at its core, engaging in victim blaming. This is the exact same kind of mental narrative that keeps people in abusive relationships. The idea that if an individual is just a good enough neighbor or partner they can change this terrible person is a very dangerous one. Nobody should have to be the sacrificial lamb who sits next to the creepy homicidal guy just to keep him from snapping. Maybe parents can do something early on, but by the time a young man is about ready to commit mass murder, it’s too late for a stranger to fix him with a few kind words. Yes, everyone should be nice to each other, and bullying is completely unacceptable social behavior, but mass murderer is even more unacceptable! Becoming a mass murderer is not some completely sympathetic, inevitable result of being ostracized.
This isn’t a problem we see with female outcasts, and it’s not something outcasts of color do. It’s always a white guy, and it’s only a recurring issue in America. We have to ask ourselves what is different between the attitude of the mass murdering outcast American white guys and outcast women, outcast men of color, and even the vast majority of outcast white guys, who don’t do anything like this. The difference I see is a sense of entitlement. These men who commit mass murder don’t think it’s their fault they cannot find friends. If they don’t have friends or a lover, they don’t think to change themselves and make an attempt to earn those things. They aren’t getting the message outcast girls like me are getting that if they just take off their glasses, get a makeover, new stylish clothes, and maybe lose some weight, they can catch the eye of the quarterback. They aren’t even getting the message to search out people like them and form their own group of friends. Instead, if they didn’t get friends and dates, they believe they have some kind of right lash out at others. Well, they don’t have that right. It is incredibly dangerous to spread a cultural idea that they should have an expectation of a right to other people’s company, because they don’t. No one has a right over others. We should not be creating a cultural expectation that will lead to these men feeling even more entitled to a flourishing social life, and lashing out because they think it’s everyone else’s fault if their life isn’t good enough, and those other people have to pay.
It’s one thing to have an expectation that everyone should be nice to each other – that puts some onus on both people to behave well – it’s another thing to force other people to have all of the social responsibility for good behavior toward those who are isolated. It’s that guy sitting alone in the corner’s responsibility not to murder. Let’s not give him a pass to shift that responsibility onto others.
Brilliant reply, hope more people see it.
In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.” ― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man
Leaving a comment so there won’t be “666 Comments” —
But Seriously, loving and reaching out to people is an option we should all take and apply in all our lives.
Thanks! – http://www.projectfaithjourney.com
Reblogged this on Potholes in the Road of Life and commented:
A well thought out article that many won’t like (as the title says) because it requires work on all of our parts b
It’s gonna have to be guy-on-guy, because this woman knows all about lonely isolated men who can develop a murderous obsession with a woman just from her “reaching out” to him in friendship. So guys–it’s up to you, because nearly all of these shootings are YOUR bros. Don’t shuffle this off on the women AGAIN.
It’s always a good thing to engage people and just be kind in general. BUT…I believe individuals either have it in them to kill innocent humans or they don’t. Maybe some are loners because others sense that in them and avoid them. Most everyone has been treated unfairly, ignored or picked on at some point. I sure have and it never crossed my mind even once to go shoot people. But then again, I’m female. How many mass shooters have been female?
With the exception of ONE instance, all of these so-called “mass shooters” had been taking powerful psychotropic drugs like Prozac and Zoloft.
I tend to suspect that therein lies much of the problem. It certainly is NOT the guns.
No. Really stupid idea. Truly gifted in its level of stupidity. What we are arguing for is a society where the slaves have no swords. Rebellions are much easier to put down. Who doesn’t loves the Movie Spartacus? The ruling elite. They didn’t like the slaves having swords then, and they don’t like it now.
Also we have as a society begun to entertain the thought that it’s fine to abrogate our right to self defence to an outside agency, The Police. When seconds count, they are there in minutes. You are stupid to think there are enough Police to be everywhere to stop every tragedy. Stupid or a Hillary voter.
Allow the adults in the buildings to carry firearms. It will be a personal choice. They will protect the children with return fire until the Police can get out of the donut shops. Argue for the common man not the Oligarchy.
Ban “texting” instead of, guns. Perhaps people would not feel socially isolated if communication returned to the exchange of words via the human voice.
TALK, not “text.”
Before there was a telephone to “exchange words via the human voice”, we penned letters to each other.
I like talking, vs. SMS, but your post is really pretty silly. Engagement does not imply a preferred format. Additionally, I don’t think anything should be banned, except calling for the banning of things, maybe. No, actually, don’t even ban that; just point out what a useless idea it is, every time. Infringing on anyone’s liberty infringes on all of our freedoms. We have laws for dealing with people who are out of line, no need to be banning this or that by fiat. Engage the disenfranchised humans, great article, I love it!
You are an idiot.
Laws do not stop bullets. .constitution is full of it and as you can see it works……. you must prevent people from buying firearms. but no one will do anything because of crazy Nra lobby
If you think that to prevent your liberty you should let people buying guns well go for it but do not cry when kids are killed in the street. Liberty has borders and you should not impose your right against some one else rights in the name of liberty
You’re preaching to the choir Brother, Keep it up!
I was waiting for the suggestion for teenaged girls to sleep with these lonely guys. Because, in the least Elliot Rodger and Chris Harper Mercer admitted they couldn’t “get a girl” and wanted a girlfriend so badly and was likely the case for most shooters. The problem is these people are not learning how to connect with others because their parents are often relying on video games to baby sit instead of “GO OUTSIDE AND PLAY WITH OTHERS.” Once a human has been so mis-formed, what is there to do? Mental illness is something that deflects many people, so simply asking people to engage with them is a bit unrealistic. It would behoove those who do notice this instability in others as well as their fascination with guns to be reported to authorities to be evaluated, and aggressively so.
How is taking away one form of communication helping people communicate? Idiot. Kids plan, organize and express themselves via text.
You must be a kid or you would understand.
God, fuck this.
Guess what. I was a fucking loner in high school.
Know what else?
I didn’t fucking kill anyone.
The “you should feel bad for not reaching out to loners” attitude this author has in a conversation regarding said loners murdering people is, frankly, disgusting. If someone sees murder as an appropriate response to their loneliness then it’s more than likely they’ll see it as an appropriate response to other things. What if that loner becomes clingy and starts stalking someone? What if they decide to kill the person that you said should “reach out.”
Fuck this article.
And for the person that said “ban texting”; social media has allowed for people to expand their friendship circles. I have a healthy community of friends that I can easily meet in person as well as friends that live all around the world that I can keep in touch. Connecting with the rest of the world is a good thing. It can also give people different perspectives. I’ve known friends who grew up hating themselves because of how narrow minded and isolating their families and communities were and finding people they could relate to helped them substantially.
I was a bit of a loner too, and I didn’t kill anybody.
But if you don’t think I wouldn’t have liked the girls to be less snotty and more pleasant to me, you’re nuts.
I’ve always been one to be nice to people I thought were left out because I’ve been there.
A) There’s an entire segment of humanity that has found a voice and a sense of community only thanks to technologies like texting.
B) What you’re suggesting is tantamount to banning the internet (since the role that texting fills can easily and immediately by replaced by the whole of social networking, for example), and as with Myer’s list outlining why banning guns (as much as I wouldn’t mind that) would never work, no one could effectively dismantle distance communication devices for long before the people would figure out their own mass-illegal workarounds.
C) I can only imagine the resentment bred from actually succeeding and taking some peoples’ escape from making direct contact with other people away from them.
Might I suggest we simply raise our kids to appreciate human interaction more? That way, they can find their own sense of moderation and inherent motivations for putting their phones down — all by themselves!
Mass shootings have been around longer than texting.
I agree texting is a much more superficial means of communicating but all too often, talking is not effective either. Most people are so out of touch with their own emotions they are unable to articulate, especially in the moment, during a verbal and real-time conversation.
Also, writing is extremely powerful. People have written letters (you’ve heard of the Pony Express and USPS, right?) and have become incredibly connected using that medium.
The challenge we’re having in today’s world is people aren’t connecting, as people, and on a deeper and real level. That’s what Rob was talking about by reaching out to people and especially to those who are already isolated. Here’s a similar post on the same topic: https://goo.gl/yal4jU
I made the mistake of engaging with a loner–The result was I got a long-term stalker causing implications to my personal safety. Needless to say, I leave the loners alone now.
Stalkers don’t need someone to talk to them to start the madness. I am sorry that you went through that, however, not every loner will stalk you and not every stalker is a loner.
an unfortunate side effect. I applaud your efforts though. Don’t let one creeper dissuade you from looking out for those who really need a friend like you. I was the loner once. No social life, no friends, you name it. Someone gave me a chance at friendship. Took 5 years for me to get out of the darkness but I did because of people like you. Now I seek out the loners to lift up.
You missed the point.
Mentally ill people without guns never shoot people.
No they beat them, stab them or use some other way to murder. Go ahead on believing it’s the guns.
Now you’re just completely lying.
Show the last few “mass beatings” in the United States, by one person that was mentally ill. Then list he “mass stabbings”.
Otherwise, this is just one of your “mass lies”.
Definitely a lot less likely for the news to pop up with “HUGE MASS KNIFING 20+ DEAD ONE GUY”. He’ll be stopped at the first person he stabs…
Loneliness is insufficient as to cause, the shooter must also accept the consequences. If an atheist or a jihadist, hell on earth ends with a bullet. However, if law enforcement let it be known that they might shoot, not to kill, but to maim, that might deter a shooter who may not be able to face an ongoing painfully diminished/ dependent life.
One common thread with mass murders is a background usage of SSRI antidepressant, such as Prozac. This applies to suicides and homicides as well. This may give us a point of discussion toward the root cause of these issues. To read more use a search engine and enter “Prozac and mass murder” for extensive research on SSRI and share your thoughts. To keep attacking and defending firearms is simplistic when there are other more valid considerations.
No, they build bombs.
Number 5 is bullshit. Unless you consider 40 percent of shooters to be the majority of shooters. Whomever wrote this either sucks at percentages or didn’t bother to do any research.
The “solution” is probably the worst part about this. “Just keep crying wolf”. The more people come running every time they think something’s wrong the less likely it’s going to be taken. Mental health is the problem. But not everybody can see when there’s a problem until it’s too late. Only a professional can identify those with mental illness with any kind of accuracy.
The “solution” is probably the worst part about this. “Just keep crying wolf”. The more people come running every time they think something’s wrong the less likely it’s going to be taken seriously. Mental health is the problem. But not everybody can see when there’s a problem until it’s too late. Only a professional can identify those with mental illness with any kind of accuracy.
Ya… They stab them instead… YOU missed the point!
You can’t take away guns…inconceivable people. It’s not a solution. It’s a complete lack of empathy that is the problem. Lack of empathy is a brain malfunction common in most, if not al,l of the notorious serial killers over the last century.
No they just use fertilizer and a u haul to blow up a building killing adults and children.
they use handguns predominantly because they can be easily concealed, and quickly reloaded. Ban handguns and they’ll use or make something else. Ban all firearms and they’ll use knives. Ban knives and they’ll use forks (ask a prison inmate). Want to stop drivers from speeding? Want to eliminate high-speed chases? Well, duhhh… Stop making vehicles capable of exceeding the max speed limit. Stands to reason that, If a car can’t go faster than 65, risk to the driver and those around them, is dramatically reduced. No one will be pulled over for driving 80-85 because no one can drive that fast….except emergency services and the outlaws who would tinker with their cars to enable them to drive at illegal speeds. So there’s the bumper sticker…When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. I am not NRA, but I did grow up with a hunter and gun collecting father, fishermen,…I grew up cleaning, firing, handling many types of handguns. I understand the responsibility and dangers of owning and using guns in a household that, by the way, had 4 kids… We all learned. Guns were locked up when not in use. No one got shot. Only time I got “hurt” was a cut when fishing out lead from the basement target box of newspaper and steel plates. Yeah, we even learned to melt down lead and make new ammo. 40-45 yrs later, I am not a gun carrier. I do not need one. I do not want one. But if I did want or need, I have absolutely no problem with whatever paperwork, background checking might be required to be licensed/registered. And any intruder toting a shotgun should keep in mind that the household they are invading might know full well how to use their own weapon…they should know that I will be more accurate with my one shot than they will be with their random spray. Oh, wait, did I say I do NOT have a gun? Perhaps I misspoke…perhaps not…
They will use forks?
Please tell me the last “mass fork killing” in the US.
Actually it seems to be the normal lately. Stop reading into things and Taking out of context. There seems to be a lot of that in this thread, and most others. Fork comment is a prime example.
I would hate to see the end of this if it were a verbal face to face debate….. Js
how about pressure cookers?
Maybe not forks, but Timothy McVey sure didn’t use any typical weapons, did he. How about the Boston Marathon guys? The point he made is a valid one.
NO, it isn’t. It’s a foolish, childish, NRA response.
Show the number of “mass fork” killings.
Then show the number of “pressure cooker” killings, which included 3 in Boston, (and 18 major injuries) and none anywhere else.
Oh, and pressure cookers, set up as bombs, aren’t legal, and there is no “National Pressure Cooker Association” trying to make them legal.
Other bombs aren’t legal either.
it’s called “STABBINGS” moron. You can use machetes, knives, hatchets, axes, broken glass, forks, etc., etc., Every heard of the Tate and the Labianca killings in California by the Manson Family in 1969. Maybe you’re a low I.Q. teenager or you just don’t care. Need more proof moron?
So the most recent “mass stabbing” you can come up with is when 5 people were killed by a team of 5 people over 45 years ago?
And you called me a low I.Q. teenager or moron?
You actually made my point. Now try to get the notes from someone else in the class so you can catch up.
You are missing the point! If you want to hurt someone you will.
the point was, people who want to kill or seriously maim will use what is available to them, what they can get their hands on. We know darned well what kinds of harmful tools can be fashioned from ANYthing in prisons. These tools are small and easily concealed for a reason. Mass killings? let’s talk terrorism. Weapons of choice are airplanes, land vehicles and bombs. So are we going to ban all of those? How do you ban a bomb that’s essentially comprised of household and electronic piecework? Ahhh, and further down the slope is an ideal weapon: ICE. Melts, evaporates, and sayonara to fingerprints. We gonna ban that too? No. Make no mistake, our Fed/State and Local governments are knee-deep in contributing to the mess, with budget cuts to hospitals, rehabs, prisons, Psych hospitals and health programs. Policies that discharge patients by a shortened calendar date, not due to a level of health achieved. These folks most often end up on the streets.
While you are pulling up numbers, how many registered gun owners have be involved with mass shootings since the concept of registering gun owners?
How many registered vehicle owners have been jacked up on drugs or alcohol and killed people with there cars? Don’t hear much talk about banning cars or alcohol. Not saying cell phones should be banned but when is the last time you talked to people in person? You would be surprised what a smile can do.
I don’t belong to the NRA
but own weapons and even plan on getting a black rifle, not to go out and kill people but to protect my own if need be.
When and if the poop hits the fan, I’ll not only protect them but put food on the table with those weapons. Do that with your cell phone.
“Just wait here, person with a shotgun, while I go get my gun, which is locked up for safety.” Uh huh. Sounds like a much better idea than making guns harder to buy.
And of course, people DO use knives (forks? not so much). Why, just the other day ONE person was stabbed with a knife. They recovered, because of course you have to get much closer to your target to use a knife and that means the person can physically defend themselves, increasing their odds of survival. And it was just that one person, because (again) its much harder to kill multiple people with a knife than it is to kill many people easily with a gun.
Other than that, solid argument.
Harder to BUY? So how many violent gun-toters do you think actually bought their gun?
on the contrary…the guns I grew up with (in a house with children) 45 yrs ago were the ones that were locked up. Today is a different story. And if I were to purchase a gun, it would be for different reasons than my father had then. But I would make the decision based on an education of responsibility, safety, use, respect. A person with a weapon entering a dark room with me in it does so with a disadvantage. I see them b4 they see me. If lights are on, I can be just as resourceful in protecting myself. And sometimes the smartest move is to just get out and let them take whatever. But if it’s me they want, you better believe I’m going to give them a fight with whatever I can get my hands on, including a firearm, kitchen knife or fork.
Yes, there are alternatives to guns (although as far as mass killings go, firearms seem to be the preferred weapon–it takes a lot fewer balls to pull a trigger than plunge a knife or fork(. Guns are the only items used whose primary purpose is to kill. I can’t recall the last time I heard of a murderer in the USA using a saber or a spear.
If guns are banned criminals will still use guns. You just won’t be able to protect yourself with one.
yes, and if you have immigration laws, immigrants will still get in, so let’s not have any,
and if you have tax laws, criminals will still break them, so let’s not have any,
and if you have automobile laws, criminals will still break them, so let’s not have any,
…
Good thinking.
Arm yourself with the shield of Jesus and pray before these and all incidents to stop before they happen not after.
Not every mass murderer or crazed gunman is mentally ill. THEY’RE ANGRY, FOLKS! Fired, pissed off cause he can’t find a job that pays enough for a one bedroom apt a.d some good.. Pissed off because his needs don’t matter.
The shield of Jesus has been proven the least effective way to stop a mass shooting. Just ask all those involved who were PRAYING they won’t get shot by the shooter. Oh wait, you can’t. They’re dead, and your Jesus was more concerned about the free will of the shooter than the life of his victims.
Rob, I think you think made some good points. But you missed an important link between psychiatric drug use and mass shootings involving young white men.
https://www.madinamerica.com/2015/10/breaking-news-about-the-oregon-shooter/
and
https://www.madinamerica.com/2015/10/the-link-between-psychiatric-drugs-and-violence-a-petition/.
There is a growing number of well educated psychiatrists and mental health researchers trying to get the media to publish scientific data on these linkages but it has been an uphill battle getting corporate (big Pharma included) owned media to cover this topic so we could at least have this dialogue in the public.
Really? Well I would love to discuss this topic with you Robin Myers, as if you had thought about the topic and suggestions enough, instead of why coming up with reason why completely taking guns away does not work, you would know as you point out that this will less likely happen than all the other things.
Nobody reasonable suggests to make guns illegal, take them away from people or collect them from every household.
However, this is another article simply going, OK analyzed it besides making all people happy and not being lonely there is nothing to do, so let just do nothing.
I like my gun owners educated and well trained on gun safety. I advocate a “drivers” license style permit for bullets/guns. I believe a gun owner has to carry liability insurance. I believe you have to take medical professionals into the boat, by requiring them to report prescription of heavy anti-depressants aso. or be held liable.
I am all for approaching people and involving them, but I also believe there is a better framework for a gun loving culture like the US.
“Shooters” are targeted individuals that feel they have no hope. They perform evil acts because they feel they cannot be heard otherwise. It’s sort of a fantasy that “shooters” are just outsiders. Even “rejects” have SOME friends and family and have a job. It’s far beyond that. Plus, “pity” friendships don’t last. I hope that ti’s don’t have 430 years left to be free from this.
I am now dcms2…why wp did not change this I don’t know
if you are intent on killing someone a gun is not the only choice. are bombs, knives, lead pipes, baseball bats outlawed next? cars kill a lot of people, are we outlawing them? in the oregon mass killings those killed were interviewed and killed individually based on response. they waited their turn. could nine of those killed have overpowered the killer before 9 were killed. in france where the killer was overpowered by three, nobody was killed. what made the difference? is it worse for one person to be killed by one shooter than one killer killing many? look at the murder rates in detroit, chicago and etc, mostly one on one. are they better?
Fallacious argument:
1) We require training and licensing for cars, along with insurance and constitutionally-approved random stops by police and checks for sober use. We could do the same with guns without issue, I assume?
2) Bombs are not the only way to kill someone…you could use a gun or a knife. So we shouldn’t outlaw bombs? Allow concealed carry of bombs? Open carry? Laws that state all people have a right to carry any bombs they choose in all public places?
3) The “interview” narrative has been shown to be overblown
4) Your solution to gun violence is “somebody should just sacrifice themselves cause he can’t kill us all”? Really? Are you volunteering first? Will you take care of the families of those killed if they try but fail to stop the shooter? It’s acceptable if he kills a few, but not as many as he could have otherwise? Really?
If you wish to purchase a firearm -at a store or at a gun show- you go through a background check. I know. I have done both. You have to go through training to have a concealed carry permit. I know. I have one. If shootings happen because there are so many guns, then why aren’t there a lot more shootings? Shootings -read killings- happen because a bad person is bent on doing a bad thing. The gun is merely the instrument.
If I leave a pencil on my desk and nobody ever touches it, no letters, words, sentences, paragraphs etc. will ever come from the pencil. If I leave a baseball on the ground and nobody ever touches it, it will never bean a batter.
If I leave a gun on the table -loaded or unloaded- if nobody ever picks it up, it will not harm anyone. The person who picks up the pencil causes it to write. The person who picks up the baseball beans the batter. The person who picks up the gun is who does the killing.
Those who grasp this agree. Those who do not grasp this want to ban guns.
Guess you’ll never know because you’ll be the one sitting there begging for your life waiting to get shot. I’m not a hero but I’ll be dammed if I’ll go down without a fight armed or unarmed.
Check out the ALICE training which makes that same point. BTW the three on the train did not have guns but they did have guts.
Reblogged this on Patwatters's Blog.
This isn’t always the right thing to do if the loner turns out to be a psychopath. I agreed to be friends with a loner. As time went on, she talked of suicide and hatred of certain people and organizations. I pleaded with her to get professional help. She didn’t ‘believe’ in medication for mental problems, so she wouldn’t go to a doctor. I pulled back on seeing and doing things with her. She became enraged at me. Shortly afterwards she tricked our church minister to come out to her house to visit her under the pretense of her mother’s death and being upset about it. (Totally made up lie!) As soon as the minister arrived, she viscously attacked her with a knife and killed her. Then she killed herself.
I learned my lesson. Some people don’t want help and will even refuse to be helped.
The NRA’s new favorite blog post…look for it in the next issue of Armed Preschoolers Monthly.
Reblogged this on EKSUPALAVA.
so essentially none of them are viable options is what they’re saying at the same time. Mental Health is a big possible fix but we have to stop acting like seeking help is something to be ashamed of.
The “loner” narrative has been debunked as a myth. This is psychopathy, not loneliness. By all means, have a more engaged community because it creates a better world for us, but it does nothing to stop a psychotic episode of murder.
There is no “cure” for this that will stop 100% of shootings, but reducing opportunity DOES work. Reduced access to guns, increased access to mental health care, increased resources for teachers/students who report issues, and ending perpetuation of the fallacy that guns make us inherently safer. Those are steps we can take that will be effective.
Yes! YES! Yes! I’d add some form of accountability(fine, incarceration and, loss of right #2) for those whom negligently provide direct access to those they are aware have an intellectual &/or emotional deficiency/devoid that, presents in physically violent outbursts toward others.
This alone, could have, at the least, cause the gun owner to take pause and, the visions of incarceration may have deterred the fuckwit of a mother & family of at least, the emotionally & intellectually deficient &/or devoid OR UCC & Sandy hook & & & shooter from providing direct access.
5 people killed with a hammer –
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_family_murders
8 Children killed with a knife –
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings
21 killed by arson-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_Hill,_New_South_Wales#Nursing_home_fire
There are more if we wish to go on. The point is if you outlaw firearms then they just move on to new ways to kill. Oh yeah, all of these were in Austrailia, but that doesnt matter much does it? or how about the murders involving firearms that still happen there?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Hectorville_siege
thanks for the fire arm info. we’re trying to figure out how to stop mass shootings. not stop firearms. try again
You realize, Australia’s largest mass killing happened in 1996 at port Arthur in Tasmania by a guy with, wait for it…a gun.
You seem to of missed that one on your list.
Celebrate Recovery can help anyone with Hurts, Habits and Hangups! Google for the one nearest you.
I am stunned so many of you missed the entire point, even that poor girl that was stalked!! If we all reached out and took care of eachother then their wouldn’t be mass killing via fork, knife, gun or pressure cooker. You could put a machine gun in my hand and I still would never shoot anyone. We don’t need to ban anything we just need to embrace everyone. Julie made the point she was stalked…that is likely because she was the only person that was ever nice to her “loner.” If others in his community consistently reached out then he wouldn’t
have been so desperated for her attention,
I too agree with the author’s point that compassion will go a long, long way, but he is way off on a number of points.
1. “You can’t ban all guns” is a moot point—no serious gun reform advocate is suggesting that. That’s not even the case in Australia, Canada, and Britain—after stringent gun laws were enacted all three countries have widespread legal private gun ownership. However, they have enacted legislation that has virtually eliminated mass shootings.
2. “Banning scary guns [read: semi-automatic weapons and assault rifles] does nothing.” Let’s look at mass shooting deaths in the US pre-, during, and post-Federal Assault Weapons Ban (according to Stanford MSA).
– Pre-ban (9/13/1984- 9/12/1994): 154 killed
– During AWB (9/13/1994-9/12/2004): 132 killed
– AWB expired (9/13/2004-9/12/2014): 397 killed
The FAWB was not a perfect piece of legislation, but when it comes to mass shootings I know which decade I’d rather live in.
3. “Nothing to be done about mental health.” Really? We can’t expand and improve mental health treatment in this country? The author also pooh-poohs mental health screenings as a prerequisite for gun ownership—would that be such a bad idea?
I try to practice compassion, but that is not something you can legislate. If somehow Western Europe, Canada, Japan, and Australia have vastly decreased mass shootings through compassion, fantastic: I want to know how. The fact that they have enacted strong gun laws and universal healthcare is not a coincidence.
Look at the pre ban and ban numbers. Pretty even distribution. Now the post ban numbers have a serious spike. Was it the lack of the ban that caused this? Judging by the lack of significant difference between pre ban and ban numbers, I’d venture to say it was something else that led to the uptick after the ban expired. Its a people problem, not a gun problem.
How many of those shootings pre ban, post ban or at any point included actual “assault” weapons (even though any weapon used is an assault weapon.)? The majority of mass shootings are done with hand guns. Media reporting is horrible and biased to get your eyeballs focused on the idiot box to sell commercial time.
So many shootings are sold as mad man walks in with AR15…wait…it was an AR15 type…wait it was a long gun…story drops off on type of gun then they just insert pictures of AR15 whether it was used or not. Just as in this latest Oregon case.
I am obviously not pro mass murder but don’t lie to my face saying, we just want to fix the problem. Also pro-guntards waking around with rifles saying they want to make the public more comfortable aren’t helping. Stop it.
Finally, three black or brown people shot downtown in any US city = gang violence. No one cares. Three non urbanites get shot= mass shootings. Ban guns. Make America safe. Just saying.
so where is the explanation why the united states is the only country with this problem
Don’t forget: depression is a mental illness.
The City of Chicago called a similar approach The Interrupters and there is a great movie addressing it and the success it achieved. There are two things we citizens cannot do that we need to urge the State to take up:
1) Institute Community Integration for the mentally ill that we booted out of the institutions but never implemented the replacement housing and programs they needed. This resulted in over-burdening already strained support resources so that very few, if any, are truly getting the help they need. It also turned the homeless housing we spent our life blood to develop into insane asylums.
2) Fund education to reduce class sizes and increase support services (counseling, etc.) in order to re-humanize the school environment and allow staff and faculty the breathing space to meet students well.
I largely agree with you and appreciate you addressing isolations and lack of community. But I suspect that mental health workers might be as ineffective at preventing this kind of outwardly directed violence as they are at preventing suicide. But there are of course both helpful and unhelpful responses. It is misleading though to imply one’s privacy is going to be protected by MH workers or the system, I believe they tend to label most if not all as mentally ill, and once that label is affixed, good luck with any rights, or even being treated as a human being. Maybe, maybe not.
Most lonely people don’t cross over into madness. Public health services needs to be on top of mental health just like it’s on top of physical epidemics. Be careful, people. Mass shootings isn’t just loneliness.
Isolation is a sad thing to endure, and these mass killers most likely do have this one thing in common . I am a child of the early sixties of last century. Kids were so very cruel to each other to me then when people cared much more about being civilized, kind, morale and even modest. There was a sudden change in T.V. shows at the beginning of this century. Being a hard ass towards others to win or survive is what tv shows are about. Instead of shows about heroes. There is a lot of heroes in this world and a lot of story lines tv shows could use. Games don’t have to be about killing other people either. We are actually guilty of training our kids up and so the isolated ones have become not just killers but mass killers. I remember when the not so religious still believed that people would answer to their maker some day for their actions. We kicked God out of most everything. So where is Society’s plum line for morals and ethics now? I can’t see it.
So very well thought out and written–BRAVO.
As Dr. Orange always points out, all the world’s problems can be traced to backaches, loneliness, soil compaction, and soil erosion.
Help run set up a peer recovery center have mental illness 32 years do my part current culture violence instant gratification bad parenting who cares do the crime pay the price no FREE room and board nothing FREE !!!!!!
howcome the shooters are all men? ages approx between 16 and 26? That really needs to be examined. A very vulnerable period time in a young man’s life.
Honestly, I think metal detectors is the answer. Actually, body scanners like those at the airport are more accurate.
Is it too much to ask to do your little part in an attempt to minimize damage by one lonely or troubled person? I would like to see one small change in each person. I challenge you to making an effort towards change just once (or more) a day.
The Change? You pick. Smile at strangers wherever you are. Do something nice and different for someone you see that seems to be carrying a heavy weight on their shoulders (it could be anonymous if you are afraid of that person might cling to you in return of your goodness). Seek out teenagers. What’s up in their lives? Find a way to let them talk, not you.
Change happens one person at a time. You can help make this a better world. You have to be willing to give of yourself every day. What about putting down our phones, iPads, computers, ect and really engaging the humans around us? Even if it was just within your family and extended family.
Don’t just sit there and complain! Do something positive every day. Make the commitment TODAY!!! Your inner flame can help light the world and bring about positive change!
There are many factors contributing to the gun fetish and violence culture that is unique in the US as the only large developed country with high rates of violence. I live outside the US now but visit occasionally back home and the longer away the more obvious the core problem. Stress and fear permeates the society, with fear of “other” and stress from many causes but the most visible is the fact that the once middle class and poor are not adapting well to the decline in options and quality of life. Few people can take care of themselves, having rest or vacations anymore, the bills pile higher than income for anyone except the wealthy. When first engaging someone, a stranger, there are often smiles, but soon the false happiness or enthusiasm fades and the conversations, behavior and focus suggests someone under extreme stress. Few have the security or options they had 25 years ago, they expected life to be less…well, stressful.
Unless in an active war zone, stress and fear just is not such a part of people’s daily life in other societies(I have been in 86 countries) I observe. People in Scandinavia, Europe, much of developed Asia, Russia, are living while for most in the US, they are merely surviving. Bad decisions are made under duress ans when stressed, the escape often is virtual friends or relations on internet while being isolated from actual relations with actual people. That isolation has spawn a great many extreme conspiracy believers, and and people or organizations to hate. Hate is one thing that bonds many together. A feeling of powerlessness can be a dangerous thing. Almost all the shooters had radical views of being controlled by races, organizations, secret conspiracies etc.
Want to lower gun deaths? Easy…(not really), bring back the middle class and a path for economic mobility for those who now see no options. Encourage people to think of themselves as a member of their community, where problems can be seen personally and addressed by the people impacted by them. Now, everyone seems to be focused on the big picture which they can only see by interpretation by media or pundits, and have no ability to impact and which has little impact on their daily lives. Millions of people are focused on every detail of a scandal or trumped up “issue”m of which they have no ability to know the truth, and regardless of truth, is beyond the personal’s control or understanding. This “external” focus, has supplanted any engagement in local issues which really DO impact their lives, and they can see the real situation plus have the ability to influence them. How many people complaining about life being controlled by big banks or various international conspiracies ever attend the local park district meetings or school board? Those local events really do impact daily life.
Failing a priority effort to bring back economic mobility and the middle class, about the only real option is to do as millions of Americans have done in recent years: moved to other countries.
Gun fetish.
How about the desire to protect our Constitutional Freedoms? How about the desire to put the blame on the human beings rather than inanimate objects? How about the desire for actual, effective crime control measures?
Gun fetish indeed.
No problem with the “well regulated militia” but the threat to all citizens is a great risk when not regulated and where a fetish for amassing guns and risking all those around is a serious problem and diminishes quality of life and well being of all citizens.
Yes, a fetish: is an object believed to have supernatural powers, or in particular, a man-made object that has power over others. Essentially, fetishism is the emic attribution of inherent value or powers to an object.
Gun flashers apparently so afraid of life that they must have extra power over others to feel safe or as if the matter.
I wonder if you would suggest extending to all Americans? do you include all immigrants? I ask because we have created a culture that says it’s perfectly reasonable to round up 11BB people as cattle, but abhorrent to consider rounding up guns. The olive branch approach is certainly well intentioned, but dead on arrival, especially in a time of abject self absorption.
The causes of mass shooting is due to not protecting our children from harmful influences such as sex, drugs, violence. We need to protect our children from harmful influences and help them find their life-long, loving partners when they are mature enough. The process starts at 13 with a male’s crush. In high school we need to teach our children how to have a loving relationship. Our children need to enter adulthood in a loving, sexual. Young males need to develop crushes so they can start to begin to understand and appreciate the concept of LOVE. It is vital for their continuous empathy development. It is vital for them to become loving husbands and fathers. Target age for male to discover the orgasm is 16. Why, it gives time for the crushes to migrate from male to female. The first crush a male has will be on an older male. It will migrate to female if the male is not exposed to sex. The other reason is that at 16 the girls the males see in class will have the mature form. The male becomes attracted to the mature female form. Getting our children into loving relationships is vital for their continuous empathy development. It is vital for world peace. We need to mentor our children through out our lives. This is vital for world peace. http://www.worldpeaceempathy.com
This is an argument built on strawmen and lack of data. Your list results in the finding that “there is NOTHING the government or any other organization can do to prevent these events” because you wrote it so it would lead there. And the easy response to that statement is: Oh, really? Based on what research? The research that has been prevented by NRA-backed legislators since the ’90s?
(And, by the way, who are these people shouting “Ban all guns?!” I’ve never heard that ever.)
Just because you’re not smart enough to think of a solution (or properly fram an argument)doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
}}} ” And make no mistake, as I’ve written before loneliness is what causes these shooters to lash out.”
This is certainly relevant in many cases, but claiming this is all that is wrong is itself wrong. Some of these people are alone because they’ve driven people away deliberately, due to whatever issue it is they’re dealing with in the first place, which may well be an actual chemical imbalance in their brains. People interacting with them were scared of them, in some instances, and all “being friendly” with them would result in would be for you to be one of their first targets — after all, you’re probably their “handler” for the nefarious forces that are after them.
Keep in mind that some of these shooters killed their parents first and foremost. Patricide and Matricide are hardly easy things to do. Many have a hard time doing it even when those parents are in deathly pain at the end of their lives.
When on a crowded elevator, talk to the person next to you. Stop watching the stupid numbers over the door.
Evil has been here since the beginning of time and , I suspect, will remain until the end of time. A gun is a tool and like any other can be used for good or bad. Banning guns? Didn’t we once ban alcohol? How did that work out? Aren’t most narcotic drugs bannned? How are those things working out? There ARE no easy solutions…actually there are not total solutions at all. The suggestions in this article certainly would be a starting point. But nothing will ever stop murder from occurring…..and mass murder??….. remember, household chemicals can produce a bomb…..
The great “assault weapon” ban. The great hope. The cure all for our ills.
The Aurora madmen did their dirty work at the height of the AWB, using handguns, “low capacity” magazines and homemade bombs. The AWB had no practical impact.
And let us not forget the Navy yard madman, he used a Remington 870 shotgun, a pump shotgun that has been in production since 1950, to kill 12 people. It’s a common ordinary shotgun much like your uncle would use to hunt pheasants or ducks. The AWB would have no impact on this.
Ban AR’s? Get a shotgun, kill anyway.
And the AWB itself. What exactly did it do? Banned the sale of rifles that had the ability to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following features, Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following features:
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher mount
Purely cosmetic features.
Apparently many still place great faith in the crime killing ability of such bans but like most all gun control schemes, it’s all sound and fury. Look good, feel good legislation and in the end, actually accomplishing very little.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Cosmetic_features
Good luck banning the millions and millions and millions of “assault rifles” already in the hands private citizens. And the “high capacity” mags? How many BILLION are out there now? 3D printing makes a mockery of a ban on “high capacity” mags anyway.
And again, Invite the reader to google “homemade machine gun.” Very educational experience. I guarantee you.
Thank you for posting this! I found it through a Facebook friend. Reminded me to say another prayer for a student I had when I student taught 3rd grade in 1990. He is now in his early 30’s. Thanks. I love prayer reminders.
I am a runner. A few weeks ago, a runner was macheted to death on a well-travelled trail by a man who was upset and “wanted to kill someone.” Neither man knew the other. The runner was there, and the killer picked a random stranger to murder. There was no history of mental illness. The killer was not a loner. It was stupid, senseless, and not a gun. WHO THE HELL MACHETES SOMEONE TO DEATH?
Well, the author did a great job of disagreeing with himself:
“those intent on breaking the law are going to do just that.”
and
“the overwhelming majority of these mass shootings aren’t done by criminals and their guns were obtained legally.”
There was a time when nearly all people – grown ups. teens and even little children and ESPECIALLY older folks could sense when something was amiss in someone else’s life….Asking “WHAT’S WRONG” or “ARE YOU OKAY” were questions that flowed from concerned hearts on such a normal bases that most feelings of negativity were not given much chance to fester. Not like they flourish these days .. If we were simply “aware” of what is seeming out of place, or that someone is acting just a little more differently than usual, imagine different things could be..how simply having someone care – when your mind is tricking you into thinking no one does – or that the “WRONG KIND” care for you when they are using people….ANYWAY…If I am to expect good things in life then I have be taking action that preps me to see when and where those “good things” appear and most of all I ALSO need to be wanting and expecting good things to happen to others as well…
Nearly every mass shooting incident in the last twenty years, and multiple other instances of suicide and isolated shootings all share one thing in common, and its not the weapons used. It is the fact that all the shooters either were on or had taken powerful psychological SSRI prescription drugs like Zoloft, Prozac, Ritalin, Paxil, Celexa, etc. Also, many of the shooters were without a Father figure most of their lives.
What Mr. Myers also fails to address is that modern technology is one of the main causes for social isolation. Technology has helped in the breakdown of communication and parental support & influence. When the new millennial turns 18 years old & they will on avg, watched 10K hours of violence, 10K hours of suggestive sexual promiscuity. & have access to multiple video/cell phone resources. The next generation has tuned out on the world, their neighbor, & their family & is tuned in to technology who is always there, always their friend, & always available.
Hi Rob, this is a great post of bold suggestions, all aim at helping the public arrest a problem which is driving fear into all because nobody knows who the next victim could be. I think we all owe ourselves a duty to be selfless, altruistic and genuine ‘brothers’ keepers’. We need to love others much more, we need to share with others, some of those things which make us happy. Yes, it’s not your fault that your neighbour is unhappy and fed up with life but he may not want to quit this life alone, he may want to go down with an unwilling partner. So, let’s love more and accomodate more.
Here is your solution to number 6….
Enforce the laws we already have. You get caught with a gun you aren’t suppose to have, send them to jail and not let them out.
Require mandatory safety training before you can buy one. You have to take a drivers test to drive a car, you should have to take a test to buy a tool which primary use is to kill someone. This will cut down on accidental deaths. If you don’t want a mandatory safety training because you grew up with them, fine, let’s get something in schools where kids have to take them and pass a test then or something. EDUCATE PEOPLE. And don’t come back with that crap on who is going to pay for it, just do it.
As far as the mental health checks, records are private, yes. But this is a simple solution, just like the background checks work. When you do the check, it just needs to come up with YES or NO. No one needs to know why, or what it is. This of course, would only work if you went to a doctor actually was diagnosed.
A waiting period. Why do you need it today, right now, this second! This won’t stop mass shootings, but it will stop crimes of passion, or at least curb them.
No person to person sales without proper documentation and background checks.
RESPONSIBILITY! Some of these mass murders are done with guns they took from parents or friends. Keep your guns locked up and secure! Would they have been able to do it otherwise, maybe, but you put in obstacle in place for someone that is going to cause harm, it may deter them. Who the hell knows how many more killings there would be in the UK or Australia where there are mandatory gun bans are enforced because it makes it difficult obtain another way to kill someone…
… And before you say a knife or a bomb, it’s a hell of a lot harder to kill someone with a knife then it is a gun. I can stand 20 feet away and shoot someone. A knife, you gotta be point blank. And the likely hood of being over powered by other people or the person you stabbed, is higher. PLUS, because you have to physically stab them and not stand across a room, you always have the option to, ummm, run. It’s hard to run when someone has a gun. Ask someone that’s been shot in the back how well that worked for them.
As far as making a bomb, you’d need to know what you are doing to do that. Good chances are, they’d blow themselves up first.
Unfortunately, there isn’t anyway to measure any type of solution if it works or not, because the only way to measure if it’s not working, is by how many people are killed. We could say that our current gun control is working because only “x” amount of people were killed when before current laws were passed there were “x” killed. And then the what-if questions come into play, if we had these systems setup, would there be less or more.
The problem is, no one wants to try anything. Everyone is all scared that the government is going to come and take the guns away. OH NO… That evil Government. It’s not going to happen, ever. No one is going to take the guns away. Let’s be adults here, be responsible and WORK TOGETHER to come up with a solution to this problem.
I can tell you things that won’t work:
Number 1 – banning guns, we’ve gone over this.
Number 2 – giving everyone a gun, that’s not going to work. You’re only going to put weapons into the hands of people that will A) be irresponsible with them or B) cause more crime of passion because there will be an easier way to kill someone and C) More guns in the hands of bad guys when they steal them all.
It comes down to it, any changes we make will not stop you from getting a gun, unless, you aren’t suppose to have one. And I can tell you for sure, some of the people that scream and yell that it’s their constitution right to have a gun, are some of the people that aren’t legally allowed to have them because they are hiding something.
PS…. Before you go and flame the hell out of me, I own guns.
Either you haven’t done your research or are ignoring some important points. Almost every mass shooting that has happened in the 90’s and 21st century was committed by someone with mental illness. And although it would be unrealistic to ask mentally ill folks to submit papers saying they are to gun shops, because they can get guns other ways, would it not be worth a try to put some effort into treatment and awareness of mental issues? Not every mass shooter was a complete loner either. Some of them did have friends and people they hung out with. I seriously think most shooting have to do with psychopathy not being diagnosed at an early age and thus, it doesn’t get treated. Psychopaths are often the type of person to do that sort of thing.
This is mostly nonsense. Gun safety laws work in every first world country, they work in the USA (few shootings with NFA weapons, look it up). We don’t need to confiscate guns, and we don’t need to put up with 100,000 shootings a year. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
I will say the “talk to people” thing is an excellent idea.
You have covered the problem well.
I have said all along, Everyone needs to be a little more kinder than necessary to every one they meet along the way. Mentally ill, lonely, down trowden, rich or poor. All most or anyone person wants is to be accepted as well as appreciated for who they are.
Barbara Olind. Baker, Mt.
Children need to start learning empathy at a young age and parents need to support this. Parents must lead by example!
Reblogged this on Dharma and Belligerence: Mad Rants from a Free-Range Buddhist Hooligan and commented:
Outstanding.
“: Fully auto weapons are legal, but only under the strictest of conditions and at a price that makes them nigh affordable for the vast majority.” He forgot the un as in unaffordable. And is not all that expensive to do a full auto conversion or to buy one after you get a license which is not all that difficult either. Finally, praising and providing a link to a piece total of idiocy like “Riddle of the Gun” by a trolling moron like Sam Harris – writing immediately after the Sandy Hook school massacre – casts this article into the stupid garbage heap.
No he didn’t. Look up “nigh.”
This article cannot be “garbage” based on your argument (the second point is an opinion, which is irrelevant to this article’s assertion). Nothing you say invalidates the main point of the article, which boils down to noticing who the people are that are struggling with, and withdrawing from, social interaction, and engaging them. If helping to make a person feel like they have value can help someone, even a non-violent one, feel like they belong and have something meaningful to contribute, thus detering them from acting their anger and frustration out on innocent people, why not?
So you think the writers suggestion regarding involvement in the lives of seemingly lonely people is incorrect? Are you suggesting that it’s more realistic for a government action to collect hundreds of millions of guns from people unwilling to part with them is realistic?
The author of this article certainly threw a curve when he used the word ‘nigh’ !
I agree whole-hearted with the premise that we should all begin to teach and practice kindness, especially to those who are withdrawn, different or alone in so many ways. However, I don’t agree that this is the only avenue left to help correct this problem.
True that legislation to eliminate guns is foolhardy at best….no, that won’t happen, but that’s not really what most people are asking for.
True that someone who is bent on venting their anger and feelings of hopelessness are always going to be out there and often can’t be identified.
True that most guns are obtained legally and that they often don’t even belong to the shooter.
Those truths withstanding, there IS more that we can do thru laws that will curtail at least some portion of this sad, sad chain of events. We can address those issues if we are willing to open the debate and listen instead of throwing up our hands and saying….nope, can’t be done.
Kindness IS an answer….a very powerful answer…but that takes time and self-awareness. It’s about time we begin to soften our society instead of feeding the anger, the hatred, the divisive attitudes among us that create hate but while we are learning, re-learning, teaching and preaching we need to take some solid action.
Be Kind. Be aware. Be willing to Be Pro-Active. Begin in your own community to educate and think as a collective for safer living. Doing those things START with kindness because you can’t be kind if you don’t first care.
So, I take it that you don’t believe restricting access to firearms will help at all – despite evidence that it does. Good to know – nice that you are pretending it’s about caring for your fellows, but perhaps you should not spend most of your post discussing how gun bans (which aren’t being suggested) are impossible and thus so is _any_regulation_of_guns – a leap you made with no support at all.
You mean UNaffordable.
Decent article. I’ve held forth on most of these points at one time or another, but I have an actual constructive suggestion on the “mental health” issue.
Mandatory psych screenings are nonsense. All that means is that the truly mentally dangerous will steal guns. Adam Lanza was a raving nutter, and he failed when he tried to buy a gun because…he’s a raving nutter. So he killed his own mother and took HER guns. (A ban is going to help, when a killer is willing to MURDER HIS MOTHER to arm himself? I think not.) Using someone’s history of seasonal depression and their use of Prozac or something during the winter to prevent them from buying a gun is equally asinine. A person with the winter blues isn’t a danger to himself and others, he’s a bit depressed. Give him a full-spectrum light and some Prozac and don’t worry about him.
But the truly disturbed, who can go disastrously off the deep end and become irrationally violent, THEY should be kept from getting guns. The question isn’t how can we do this, it’s what is allowing them to get guns in the first place? It’s actually a simple answer when you see it. And it’s an unintended consequence of yet another “progressive” movement that’s causing it.
There already is a clause in the law related to mental health and firearms. It says that you cannot buy a firearm if you were ever involuntarily committed to a mental institution, or were adjudicated incompetent by a judge. For a long, long time, that worked fine. The really sick were the ones who were at some point involuntarily committed or a judge said was not able to run their own life effectively and needed someone else as a guardian. But something changed.
In the 70’s, some progressive thinkers decided that putting a mentally ill person in a mental hospital was a form of oppression. Some of those hospitals were truly awful, but the proper action would have been to clean up the hospitals, not to get rid of mental institutions in general! But that’s what these progressive thinkers set out to do. They wanted to “deinstitutionalize” the mentally ill, and “destigmatize” them. The problem is, the ones involuntarily committed generally should have been in an institution, and should have had at least one stigma follow them around: the inability to purchase a firearm. When the progressives managed to change things, the truly ill were no longer sent to a mental institution whether they liked it or not. They were ASKED to VOLUNTARILY go to one, or worse, handed a referral slip to a therapist and a prescription for some drugs and put back out on the street.
Voluntary commitment to a mental hospital does not trigger the restriction for the purchase of a gun. So even if someone is REALLY disturbed, and willingly signs themself into the lock-ward for treatment, that doesn’t make them a prohibited person under the current gun laws. Now, the progressives would say “well, let’s change it so voluntary commitment is enough!” Bad idea. Such a law would quickly be misused to strip someone of their rights for going in for post-partum depression, or getting treatment for other conditions that don’t threaten anybody. “Mentally ill” is a broad enough brush, without anti-gunners extending it to anyone who felt a little depressed or had a mood swing.
Leave it the way it is. Just go back to institutionalizing the truly dangerous persons with mental conditions that threaten themselves and others. Go back to stigmatizing them JUST ENOUGH that they can no longer buy guns legally. It won’t stop all of them. They’ll buy them from Bubbie in a back alley, out of Bubbie’s trunk. Or they’ll murder their mothers in order to steal them. Those are terrible and heinous…but they’re already illegal. We don’t need new laws. We need to allow the ones we already have to do their job.
I found a great article that goes with what you are proposing. It is very eye-opening, stating that the whole idea of deinstitutionalization in the 70’s and 80’s was not well-thought out and partly done for political reasons, one being that people did not want to support these mental institutions with their tax dollars. My brother-in-law worked at a state hospital when it was shut down, and I worked as a Corrections Officer at the regional jail shortly after and he would ask me about certain patients that he had known, and sure enough they were regulars at the jail. So how did that save us tax money? We are paying dearly now. http://www.nytimes.com/1984/10/30/science/how-release-of-mental-patients-began.html?pagewanted=all
It was not progressives that let the crazies run free. It was the Republican darling, good old Ronald Reagan: http://www.povertyinsights.org/2013/10/14/did-reagans-crazy-mental-health-policies-cause-todays-homelessness/
According to Wikipedia–“Automatic variants have a three-position rotating selective fire switch, allowing the operator to select between three modes: safe, semi-automatic, and either automatic or three-round burst, depending on model. Civilian Colt AR-15 models do not have three-round burst or automatic settings; they can only be fired as a semi-automatic, and are therefore not selective fire weapons. In semi-automatic-only variants, the switch only functions to rotate between safe and fire. Some other manufacturers may mark their rifles with three-positions for collectors and re-enactors, though the guns will not fire in those modes. However weapons modified to full automatic using a lightning-link are capable of full automatic fire only—unless a special full automatic fire select mechanism and modified selector-switch is substituted.[18] Also many AR-15’s made before 1986 were converted to be M16’s Via gunsmiths who legally turned them into Form One rifles in the U.S.[20] Ways to Identify the converted AR’s is by seeing an Auto Sear in an AR-15 marked lower receiver.[20]
Today, while the civilian manufacture, sale and possession of post 1986 select-fire AR-15 variants is prohibited it is still legal to sell templates, tooling and manuals to complete such conversion. These items are typically marketed as being “post-sample” materials for use by Federal Firearm Licensees for manufacturing/distributing select-fire variants of the AR-15 to Law Enforcement, Military and Overseas customers.[21]”
Thus it seems that this article bends the facts a bit to make its point!
It is illegal to convert a semi-auto to full auto on your own. Do it and show it to a LEO and let us know how that works out for you.
mm… then Canada, most Western European countries, Japan, Australia, etc… are doing something that we don’t. Oh yes, could it be that they have strong gun control in place????
educate yourself: http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/27/opinions/us-guns-evidence/
Gun regulation does work (Australia is a clear example of what the US could do, if only…)
You will not confiscate my weapons, plain and simple. You wouldn’t be able to do so anyway, but would be looking for someone else to do it for you. So, forget it…Australia and Great Britain do not have a Second Amendment and as the article said, this is not going to be overturned. Besides, you might want to read Dr. Thomas Sowell’s articles pertaining to gun control oversees before claiming that Australia is a model for us.
All violence comes from a psychopathic belief that one must harm another person.
IF you honestly believe any law – in regards to [particular means to that end] – would have any impact on these factors…
THEN you are quite naive.
but then again… maybe you’re stance is correct:
If so…
They should really make hard drugs and sex-trafficking illegal as well.
That way people wouldn’t be able to get drugs…
and women wouldn’t be trafficked.
Demand dictates supply.
one must address causes to problems;
not seek to compensate for the problems with additional actions.
Educate myself with an opinion piece? k?
Did Australia ever have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms in the first place? The images of the stacks of confiscated guns in Australia is one of the things that motivates gun owning Americans to KEEP their rights and what many think is the strength of America. Most of those other countries have never had all the rights Americans enjoy nor as diverse populations.
Well said. I have hosted international students, coming to “America” to attend college and tour the country, over the last few years, and they all have mentioned being afraid of coming to the United States because of the gun issues. Hearing about the mass shootings in our schools has been the main concern. When we ask about their gun problems, the share it is not a problem. They are banned, and people follow. Seems simple to me!
Hysteria. Their odds of being a victim of gun violence (or any kind of violence for that matter), are extremely low. How many theatre visits are made in this country versus how many people are gunned down in theatres? Same with schools. The odds are hugely in your favor of NOT being gunned down. Stop the paranoid hysteria and enjoy your life.
When they come to get mine there will be AT LEAST two people dead. The first guy in line and me. Then they can have my gun. But be careful, the barrel is going to be pretty hot!
Well that sounds really helpful. But then violence always begets more violence,- just a vicious circle I’m afraid.
Whoa there cowboy. We all get it that you’re SO tough. No need to whip out your… weapon and compare sizes. *Facepalm* Come on man, this is an adult conversation. We can discuss something this serious without the transparent bravado.
The real issue is
“WHY DO WE RETREAT FROM SOCIETY IN THE FIRST D*MN PLACE?”
Human beings are social creatures.
There’s a reason why us weird loners act that way
speaking for my self…
I know I just wanted to be left the f*ck alone.
I didn’t want that guy to come follow me to my secluded place that I would sneak off to during lunch…
WHY?
That was my one solace during the school day where I didn’t have to deal with the f*cking system, or any other person in it…
There IS something the government can do though.
The real answer is for society to quit trying to force people to fit in with their asinine molds.
It’s not anyone’s business but mine what I learn or how I learn it.
If I wouldn’t of been able to drop out of school when I was 11… I’d very likely of ended-up on a bad path… acting out frustrations that start with resentment in regards to the f*cking arrogance of a system dictating what a person “learns” when, where, and how.
I’ve literally had people assume in person that I was a college professor.
I’m an elementary school drop-out.
(what does that tell you about the effectiveness of public education? That me a person that dropped out of the system… can be easily mistaken for someone that worked their but off for years to excel in it.)
What America calls “learning” is forcing people to do things in specific ways.
Again: luckily I was able to drop-out before my love of learning was beaten down by the system.
lol: people actually wonder why there’s so much rebellion in teen years…
Take ancestors of the most risk-taking and adventurous people…
(we are talking about people that risk life and death on boat trips… just for the chance of freedom. Read that again: a personality trait that valued freedom over life. This isn’t rocket science it is incredibly simple cause and effect)
You force a people group like that to then acquiesce to a system designed to compensate for a lack of actual learning (because said system inspires hatred of learning (you force feed someone to eat asparagus… they’re going to hate asparagus. It’s that simple…)…) …and then wonder why they act out in self-destructive ways:
your precious princess wants to go down on the entire football team…? why do you think? Because it’s the only way she feels like she’s alive and free!
They’re trying to convince their self of some level of control in their otherwise self-righteously policed lives… parents… teachers… everyone has their idea of what these kids are supposed to be doing with THEIR lives… and arrogantly don’t see the problem with forcing that agenda on said kids… (and they justify this arrogance with the fact that they have the best intentions) …and anyone that doesn’t fit in with the little hypocritical cliques – that are formed by the all the kids wanting to express their ‘individuality” in the same cliche ways -… doesn’t have that avenue to vent frustration in a mutually affirming way…
and so all that energy in these loners turns dark.
They don’t know what’s going on.
They haven’t studied psychology…
They just know they don’t relate… and just want to be left alone…
and the fact that they can’t be left alone… always some teacher or parent on peer group reacting to their desire for autonomy…
Anger.
They repress it because they start out not wanting to hurt anyone… but after a while… they no longer empathize with most others;
and they resent repressing it.
and that is the critical element of violence: lack of empathy.
People will do the most horrific things to a person they don’t personally empathize with.
(this gets into race violence, animal cruelty… bullying… rape… domestic violence… when society beats down the natural freedom seeking desires of humanity… you get psychological problems;
most of these problems are passive in nature; and have common coping mechanisms woven into the resultant fabric of our culture; “reality” tv… social drinking… holidays to look forward to and back on… anything to distract the self from being present thus having to consciously face their self-loathing due to hell society has made of your life… you hate your job… and your self… because of the cog society has made you… but yay it’s labor day… and selfies….
Your criminals and sociopaths are the ones that have more aggressive coping mechanisms; and that’s the tragedy: because they could be real movers and shakers in history, precisely because they have such an aversion to the status quo.
then you have what I call the “enforcers”
those are the people that have been truly broken by the system; and thus: emotionally identify with it at the deepest level.
These are the police and government workers;
and anything that questions their sense of control based on that system… becomes a personal affront to their self-image
(which is where the police brutality comes from: it’s essentially a tantrum: you are contradicting my paradigm of control and order in life… I must smash you. MUST.)
(also: guidance counselors telling you your dreams aren’t realistic. lol: they’re a guidance counselor… what do they know about risk or living dreams? their dream likely died. So they need yours to die as well; so they won’t feel like a failure; but it’s all subconscious… consciously they really do believe they only “want the best for you”
It sounds like you would have been well worth following and getting to know, so it’s a shame you would have resented someone trying to engage you when you withdrew. Not that I’d have been able to do it anyway, because I am a shy person and just saying Hi to someone as they walk by me gives me anxiety (will they be looking at me when I say it, will I say it in the right tone of voice, will they ignore me if I say it and make me feel like a fool?) So although I think this article has a point, I would have to overcome my own personality to be able to follow it’s advice. Anyway, I just wanted to say I hope you don’t withdraw all the time, because, although I don’t agree with everything you say, you’re a thinker and you have a lot to offer. A lot of what you say about the education system I do agree with, and it’s part of the reason I homeschool my son.
Recent video showed guns going into the dumpster in Australia. Then a list of statistics showing crime up several percent marks in a follow up. Please check for facts. The old bumper sticker is reality: When guns are outlawed, Outlaws will have the guns.
That is a sensible theory but I would venture to say that there have been kids that have been “loners” for generations. I know at my 30th high school reunion, there were adults that talked about how painful Jr and High school was because they had no friends. That was 20 years ago and nobody (Not one!) person from that time period took a bunch of weapons and shot at random people. There has to be more to this dilemma – further investigation must continue. You didn’t hit “pay dirt” with this one. Sorry!
Twenty years ago? Where were you when Barry Loukaitis and Kip Kinkel opened fire?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States
Are there really *more* school shootings? Or are they just getting more media coverage these days?
Well by the list you linked us to, yes.
60s (10 yr period) = 17 mass shootings
70s (10 yr period) = 20
80s (10 yr period) = 21
90s (10 yr period) = 41
00s (10 yr period) = 45
2010-2015 (5 yr period) = 117
Well, if 20 years ago isn’t far enough back, how about 40 or 50 or 60 years ago? I don’t recall a single instance of a school being shot up in the early ’60s or the ’50s. I know there were kids who were isolated and lonely and bullied because I was one. And there were many other stresses, like the the threat of a nuclear attack, to cause the kind of anxiety in kids and adults that today ends in violence. But that was before we as a culture decided to throw off civilizing morals and responsibility, in order to be free, in order to become self focused and self absorbed. That was back when violence in the media was used to teach a lesson about consequences, instead just being used to make money from viewers who needed more and more realistic violence to get the same thrill. That was back before legalized abortion taught kids that a person’s life could be taken indiscriminately, and such action would be seen as legitimate, even necessary for one’s own good. It has been the lessons we as a culture have been teaching ourselves and our children for 40 years that have led to the lack of restraint exercised by those who kill and commit other acts of violence because they feel angry or alienated or abandoned or whatever.
I totally agree we have to start at home with our children I for one have always told my children if they see a child alone or someone picking on them you go over there you help them. make them part your group have others Friends do the same . welcome them I am very strong on . I’m a grandmother now, and I said the same things today my grandchildren and I’m also a great-grandmother, if I’ve done a good job they will teach their children the same. I tried to teach my children to respect all people.
Grade school, high school,leaders young men and women of the future have to stand up against the BULLIES. There is strength in numbers so if you all would get together and just gold face those bullies and tell them no more. Not in our school.
I’ve read ALL the replies… lots of good thoughts. BUT, the Second Amendment is still the Second Amendment… it’s NOT going to go into this good night. And ANY restriction is doomed to failure! Is there a solution? Afraid not! Why? Because this country is probably the only country that NEEDS the Second Amendment. And, Obama is proof of that pudding…
the 2nd amendment doesn’t give you the right to have a gun. READ it.
Yes, please read it. Because it most certainly does.
Tell it to the Supreme Court.
You’re correct. It only prohibits the government from depriving you of your right to have guns.
The Bill or Rights does not grant any rights at all. All of the rights, if you read it carefully, are assumed by the authors to be pre-existing. Whether you call them “God given” or “natural rights” they predate the constitution. Per the constitution and bill of rights, Congress has no power to disarm the people either directly or “effectively” through excess restrictions.
This would do a ton of good. Great counsel:
“Notice those around you who seem isolated, and engage them .” Talk to them & show interest.
Watch the movie “October Sky” and see what great good came from befriending an isolated individual.
Yes, I believe in community as both prevention and cure. But then again…the nice church folks in Charleston tried this approach of welcoming in/engaging a young man who used that opportunity to massacre them. What gives??
Guns don’t kill, people kill. Millions were killed during the crusades in the name of God, without firearms. If every legal American were armed, crime rates would plummet. Fully automatic weapons are less accurate and are not responsible for the majority of shootings. Murders will continue regardless. Killing outdates guns by thousands of years. Mental health programs may prevent sporadic violence, however as a professional in forensic psychology, a person who seeks to commit homicide will use anything available. They have been doing this for centuries. Swords, knives, spears, clubs, bare hands, fire, etc. A motivated murderer finds a myriad of possibilities. Strangulation is popular in many cases. To pay extra attention to those in need of help is admirable, however, nothing near a cure. Wolves and humans are thrill killers, and my family are not sheep. I will protect by any means necessary. I will not plead, or beg, or cry for help. I will use my 2nd Amendment right to neutralize the threat, without prejudice.
The arguments presented here against stricter gun regulations boil down to this- gun control won’t work because gun control won’t work. Weakest argument ever.
“You’d need an amendment to the Constitution and there will NEVER be 30+ states willing to overturn it” Well guess what, it only took 13 years between the 18th amendment and the 21st amendment that effectively overturned it.
While I appreciate the comments regarding a more compassionate culture, a growing number of people DO NOT includes guns on everyone all the time as part of that vision, despite the best efforts of the NRA and like-minded people.
I think the author has a good idea when it comes to being more involved with the people around you. As a society, we DO have to become more engaged with each other. Where I work, I deal with mentally ill people all day long. Last week we had a paranoid schizophrenic violently assault a man right in front of me. The attack was completely unprovoked. I’m just glad he didn’t have a gun.
But while looking out for the mental wellbeing of others is all well and good, it doesn’t address the more tangible issue of easy availability of firearms to the mentally ill. We have to ask ourselves what is easier – getting a mental ill person the help they need (which may be substantial) or someone with mental problems legally purchasing a firearm?
It’s instructive to remember that it was the NRA who originally proposed background checks and legal prohibitions on firearm ownership for individuals with a demonstrable history of mental illness. Why did the change their position? Probably has something to do with the huge influx of money into the organization from the firearms industry.
The writer’s argument might hold water if the only firearms available to the general public were muskets and blunderbuses, which were the only firearms available when the 2nd amendment was written. The notion that the founding fathers, in all their Enlightenment wisdom, would be okay with the general public owning the technologically advanced, high-capacity, military style firearms we have today not only beggars belief, it is a self-serving mythology promoted by the firearms industry because, after all, they have a bottom line to look after.
“I have grown up with guns all my life, but people who like assault weapons they should join the United States Army, we have them.”
Four star general, Wesley Clark
Eric Rife – Yessssssssssss. To all of it. Yesssss. High five.
One suggestion that would help is this… The media needs to stop providing so much undeserved notoriety for the demented shooter. Do not tell us his name or show us his picture. Sane people do not want their name and family problems put into circulation for the World to disect. However, those folks with mental issues are different. They dream and fantasize about going out with a bang. Simply stop giving them a platform where they become the center of attention and you will see tremendous reductions in this crime.
Exactly. A lot of these guys feel powerless in their lives, so commit mass shootings, partly, to become powerful, to frighten all those who they feel rejected them. Perhaps if the media only spoke of them when absolutely necessary and strictly in terms of what losers they were we wouldn’t see so many copycats.
Like….I agree…..pick up the awareness and the kindness genes. We may just begin to see some differences for the better.
There is another option, not saying it’s a good one, it’s just an option. Make a law that requires everyone to carry a concealed weapon.
Let the flames begin!
Most American’s do not know what the American gun laws are and yet there is constant outburst about gun control. People can own fully automatic weapons, assault rifles, fully automatic machine guns, M-60 machine gun, 30 caliber machine gun and even a 50 caliber machine gun. In order to do so you apply for a Federal Automatic weapons permit for each of the weapons that you wish to own. You must never have been CONVICTED of a felony. Last I heard a permit was $500 per gun.
I was also surprised to find out that civilians can own Silencers for either rifles or pistols. They just are not called silencers. They are called sound or noise Suppressors. If you are hard of hearing you can have them to protect the rest of your hearing.
How about exploding 12 gauge shotgun shells? Yes you can own those as well.
Did you know that it is legal to sell the internal parts of a gun in order to convert the gun to fully automatic. It is however illegal to install those parts without having an automatic weapons permit. The sellers of these products are not required to report the sales of these parts to the government.
With all this being said, you DO NOT hear of mass shootings by people with fully automatic weapons, machine guns, silencers or exploding shells. Most of these shootings are done by people that have just been pushed to the end of their limits. It is a shame that they wind up killing innocent people.
Also, if the Federal government were to try to take semiautomatic weapons away from law abiding citizens, I am afraid that our government when be pushing a whole lot of people over the edge. They had better stop all of this gun control talk or there may be more mass shootings than they can count.
Just saying.
The problem with this article isn’t the message, its who you are preaching to. We live more and more every day in a world where social networking and cell phones and iPads and computers etc. exponentially and overwhelmingly dominate the vast majority. Never in our history has it been more clearly illustrated; that burying your head in a cell phone and ceasing communication with others is the new norm and is increasingly more widespread. Most of you are reading this on your phone right now………Perhaps this in itself helps explain why the number of these occurrences seems to be rising.
The solution as you put it becomes harder and harder with each day that passes. People aren’t greeting each other anymore when they pass by on the street. People walk into restaurants and businesses surfing posts and Facebook etc. People are to worried about making themselves look happy on Twitter, and Instagram and Facebook and on and on. This country isnt just in an epidemic with guns, oh no, it’s in a constant deterioration of social destruction never seen before. Millions of families sit together in silence daily with all family members buried in iPads, computers, cell phones and even ear phones. So while this may actually be a reasonable solution in theory, society just isn’t paying attention…….
I want to like this post but there are some easily countered logical fallacies in this. I feel like doing the whole rundown would be something a waste, but here’s an easy one.
Quote: “Further, if Prohibition and the War on Drugs have taught us anything it’s that those intent on breaking the law are going to do just that. Laws be damned.”
This argument essentially states that all lawmaking is ineffective and therefore meaningless. Using the same logic, I could argue that the second amendment is therefore meaningless, and thus something we could easily ignore – just like those drug addicts – and via the power of anarcho political ideals, break the law to ban all guns. Problem solved!
Except that’s not quite how reality works.
I think that there’s a lot of truth in what you say, but one thing missing: it is not loneliness alone that causes people to lash out. Loneliness exacerbates things, yes, but it is not the sole cause of the trouble. I have a rare disorder that make me unable to use an airplane or public transportation or leave my home, for most of the year. Most of my friends no longer associate with me because I cannot do things with them that are ‘fun’ any more. I cannot be out in crowds any more, cannot do physical activities, I can’t even talk on the phone for too long or my throat will swell up and I cannot breathe. I will never get better – this is it, for the rest of my life. And this crushing loneliness is still not enough to make me want to go kill any of my ex-friends or old co-workers, or people who are enjoying life more than me.
Eliminating loneliness alone is not the answer.
But I do think engaging is part of the solution, or the intent to, anyway.
Sadly, sometimes loneliness is caused by mental problems that are not solved by merely having people engage with them. They are lonely because no one makes a connection because their mental illness causes people to end up turning from them.
However, that said…TRYING to engage can, I think, solve a lot of these problems. Because it makes you look at the people around you rather than letting your eyes pass over them, and it makes you see them as people…and sometimes, that helps you see that they are mentally ill, or need help. And if simply seeing them doesn’t do it, often you’d still have multiple people trying to engage with someone and realizing there is something wrong there. And then when they engage with other people, they will come across those who have ALSO tried and failed to make a connection with this same mentally ill person. And you’ll end up with a group of people who realize this person needs intervention or help, or may be a danger to others.
And in an society where we all engage, you do no simply see a problem and walk away from it, because you are connecting to people around you and the problem is view more as ALL your problem. You help this person get help…and THAT may be the answer to stopping mass shootings.
Engaging with others because they are a part of the society you live in, seeing each other as people, but really trying to see them. i
Thank you. I cringed when the OP said most mass shooters aren’t mentally ill. Uh, hello? Since when does a stable person take a weapon and intentionally aim and shoot to kill unarmed people? Does that sound NOT mentally ill to you?
I was referring specifically to a diagnosis they’d been given which would have kept them from being able to purchase a gun, legally.
There are very few replies/comments in this thread that indicate actual experience. Just lots of opinions. That said, I’ll offer mine. When a friend of mine and I were in high school, we took it upon ourselves to befriend a fellow who seemed a loner, a bit stand-offish. As we hung together, he warmed up a bit and went places with us, but remained a bit off. About a year later he was arrested for literally dicing his father into small pieces. Claimed insanity – referring to martians – but the court declined that plea. So to Alexa’s point, about halfway through the thread, sometimes people are alone because they are unhinged. I’m sure this kid would have blown a gasket somewhere no matter what. Should he have been allowed to purchase a gun? Hell no. He just used a knife and an axe, but at least he only took out one person, not a dozen. Could he have been identified earlier? No. He was highly functional, so who would have thought to give him a test? But what if we tested everyone? That would have flushed him out, probably, maybe, but to many that also means we would be living in an Orwellian society. Do we want that? No, but I’d rather be dealing with a guy holding a knife or a hatchet than one holding a semi-automatic with extra clips in his pocket.
That said, I like guns. They are cool. But registering a gun, and registering a gun owner, to me is kind of like a car and a driver, a pilot and a plane, I don’t see the problem. To paraphrase, cars don’t kill people, people kill people, So we take a test, get a license, carry proper insurance. and do spot checks. I fly, so I have to take recurrent training and a physical every two years to maintain my certification, and believe it or not, that includes a brief analysis of my mental condition. Drivers licenses have been required since 1913. Pilots certification since 1917. When the second amendment was written, there were no bolt-action guns, let alone semi-automatic weapons,. It is time resolution of this issue takes the leap from the 18th centry into the 21st century.
Reblogged this on Women and Guns.
I reposted this on my own website markoworld.com is that okay? I would have emailed you but didn’t find any contact or email info. Though maybe I missed it.
Magically,
-Marko
Regarding your pingback.
Of possible interest:
The Bully Soulution http://www.markoworld.com/the-bully-soul-oution/
Mean/hurtful People http://www.markoworld.com/when-people-are-meanhurtful/
Rob, I appreciate this piece. I first read Thresholds of Violence http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence by Malcolm Gladwell bf a friend of mine share your blog. Unfortunately, applying Gladwell’s theory I don’t believe we have yet hit a maximum threshold of violence in our schools. I agree that the routine “solutions” we hear with each senseless act of violence are nothing more than pandering and political rhetoric.
Human beings are wired to belong. People will find a group to identify with regardless of the groups intentions. Creating a sense of belonging within our schools is not hard and is necessary. I first started working on creating a sense of belonging as an elementary principal. I thought it could raise student achievement. Never did I think it might save someone’s life.
While I certainly do see the value in what the writer is saying and agree that we need to be more inclusive in our society, the reality is that some of the more dangerous kids are truly scary. I’ve met some socially awkward kids (was friends with quite a few) and I’ve encountered some that made my blood run cold. We should be very cautious about assuming these kids are all sweet, lonely little dears who just need a little attention. School shooters are absolutely usually suffering from a true mental illness that mere friendship may not be able to conquer. Being around these people is difficult for a reason. The other kids often shun them because they behave aggressively or inappropriately. They can be very difficult to be around, which just creates a vicious circle between loneliness and pushing others away unintentionally. If you try to befriend one of these guys, then realize that they make you very uncomfortable and start avoiding them that could hurt them deeply and be the rejection that sends them over the edge. My recommendation is, yes, pay attention to those around you. Be kind and compassionate whenever possible. But don’t engage someone who seems to be troubled unless you are fully invested and know what you are getting yourself into. I encourage my children to also be inclusive and kind, but I always recommend that they tell me if they feel someone is “off” rather than try to deal with the situation themselves. Sometimes a professional is required even for adults. We are not all capable of understanding how to help a violently aggressive teenager or young adult.
Aww, they’re lonely? Come on! They’re ANGRY, not lonely. Our society not only condones anger, it glorifies it. Everybody is made to feel that if they’re not angry about something, they’re not engaged. The one characteristic that all these shooters have is that they all are nursing some kind of grievance against society. If we could bring back civil discourse and rationality, we would alleviate much of the suffering we’re experiencing today. When was the last time you looked at Facebook and DIDN’T see some kind of diatribe against something?
I must say talking to the lonely is a nice suggestion, albeit naïve. The people who do these mass shootings are people who feel marginalized and angry – not angry. Enraged. They don’t want friends. They want revenge! As for guns: I have not heard much about people wanting to take anyone’s guns outside of paranoid facebook memes and extreme right “news” articles and from the mouths of Sarah Palin and Fox News anchors (why do people keep saying this?! It’s like the imagined “war on Christmas.” It’s like the imagined war on the pledge of allegiance or the flag or whatever.) I think there are people who want common sense regulations. There are countless loop holes that need to be closed .
I think starting in our own back yard is a good notion, but this is really pretty misguided.
Reblogged this on Christ Proclamation Church.
Well written article, only have a technicality to mention.
You wrote “the overwhelming majority of these mass shootings aren’t done by criminals and their guns were obtained legally”.
Actually, after beginning to review the mass shootings of 2015 (as complied by a website with that in their name), and actually driving down into who and what instead of the initial reports, nearly half of all mass shootings are committed by felons (who are already prohibited persons) who obtained their guns illegally; much of the remainder are done in relation to gangs or drugs.
I haven’t completed the YTD yet, but that’s what my preliminary research indicates so far.
My use of “mass shootings” was the FBI definition. Related to the high profile incidents like Oregon, etc…
Some organizations made a list of all the mass killers who were on pharma drugs (anti-depressants, etc…) and the evidence is astounding, especially the school killings. Almost everyone one of them were on some type of psychotropic drug…want to stop the mass killing? Stop the drugs being handed out like candy…
Correlation isn’t causation. How many millions on anti-depressants that don’t shoot people? Not sure that’s the lynchpin to solving it.
There ARE things that we can do that don’t violate the constitution or privacy.
We are looking at the wrong thing when it comes to these shootings. It isn’t the gun or how easily that gun was obtained. It isn’t about gun control, or the lack thereof. It isn’t even about being mentally ill.
IT IS ABOUT BEHAVIOR.
While the author here says the vast majority of these mass shootings were perpetrated by people who were legally allowed to purchase guns, the vast majority of guns used in crimes from robbery to murder are being perpetrated by criminals.
We have laws against committing actions considered to be crimes. The problem is, there is no real disincentive to commit these crimes. Sure, the actor might get arrested and go away for a year or few, but most of them will end up getting out in months — to do it all over again.
NEW RULE: If you commit a crime with a firearm, then say goodbye. We will lock you up for the rest of your life. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.
ANOTHER NEW RULE: If you commit a crime with a firearm that results in serious injury or death, then say goodbye, because we are going to put you to death.
The recidivism rate would plummet to zero for crimes committed with a firearm.
YET ANOTHER NEW RULE: If you are considered to be “too dangerous” to fly, or own a firearm, then you are probably too dangerous to be walking around free on the streets. Because even without a gun, you could still blow things up, and cause mass carnage anyways. So say goodbye, because you are too dangerous to be walking around free.
Just do those three rules, and there would never be a need for “gun control”.
It won’t prevent all shootings or attacks or whatever you want to call them. But it would certainly make them much more rare…
So if I read this right you’re saying that it’s just too hard to change laws. It’s way easier to just watch 1.4 Americans get killed by guns since 1968. When will Americans get so outraged by the carnage that they will demand that the laws be changed?
Rick, I’m not saying it’s too hard to change laws – I’m saying: 1. It’s impossible to change them in anything approaching a meaningful way given the feelings of half the country. No amount of “outrage” is going to get people to that point. 2. Even if you were to achieve something as complete as a total ban on guns, it wouldn’t have an impact as murderous criminals aren’t deterred by laws, and the act of outlawing them or making them difficult to get doesn’t erase the fact that over 300 million exist in the country at this time.
There’s been bans on drugs for a century in this country and no one’s had too hard of time getting their hands on those. Guns would be no different. To think otherwise is to bury one’s head in the sand.
I don’t buy that these mass shooters are not mentally ill. The DSM is a political book, and only conditions that *experts agree are conditions* ever go into it. So if they don’t see anything sick about, say, sexual entitlement (Elliot Rodger), it’s automatically not an illness. Wanting mass numbers of people dead (pick any politician or military officer) isn’t an illness either. That’s because they define crazy all wrong. My take on it, and you’ll find that a lot of people feel this way, is that if your mental state leads to you doing harmful things to yourself or to other people, you do not have a healthy mental state. The DSM can go hang.
Accordingly, one of the reasons people do not reach out to odd loners is that it doesn’t result in angelic choirs singing and flowers blooming and bunnies hopping and Kumbaya. Sometimes when you reach out, you develop a friendship. Just as often, though, they’re off in their own little world and you can’t reach them at all. What are you supposed to do when that happens? You have other relationships you must also maintain and you also need to take care of yourself.
And not everyone’s psychologically suited to go around approaching random strangers–especially random strangers acting funny. We often have our own issues and we can’t play psychotherapist to the whole damn planet. Actually, no one can do that. Real therapists get nights and weekends off and they have a limited patient load.
So while I think your advice is generally in the right spirit, it’s also not the panacea you are making it out to be. This is a complex problem (some of these mass shooters HAVE had friends and supportive family, thank you) and it needs more than one solution.
I think that trying to include others, even in small ways, is definitely a good thing all around. I’ve never contemplated any shooting sprees, but I am pretty lonely and isolated, and I know that that sort of thing can make your thoughts turn strange. And conversely, I know from long experience that even having a short, casual conversation around the coffee machine at work can do wonders for getting me back into touch with reality when my head is in danger of getting shoved too far up my ass. I’m not talking about any deep friendships here, just someone saying hello and making a remark about the weather. That sort of thing really does go a long way, in my personal experience. So anyone who sees a chance, by all means go for it.
(and don’t listen to that Priscilla person upthread. Introverts do indeed get lonely. In fact, they’re in more danger of getting lonely than extroverts, because they’re likely to avoid contact a lot of the time because it’s too scary and difficult – which means that they’re that much less likely to get the kind of face-time with other people that they do in fact need. They might not thank you the attention, and you probably shouldn’t overdo it, but giving them a reminder that other people than themselves are real is doing both them and everyone they might later come into contact with a favour)
On the other hand, I think that calls to individual action are unlikely to result in very much. You can’t legislate for people to be nice and try to include others, and in the sort of atmosphere we have today (where “do not suffer a [insert name of your own personal enemy group] to live!!!” is more and more considered an admirable statement), I just don’t see it happening.
So as far as solutions go, I do in fact think getting rid of the guns is the only thing that will even somewhat work. You’re right of course, you can’t just ban all guns tomorrow and then it will be fixed. What we’re talking about is ways of making the number of guns out there taper off over the next several decades until it reaches a point where any nut can’t just go out and get one. Which means that even in a best-case scenario, we’ve got several decades of shootings to look forward to, and yes, I find that every bit as demoralising as you do… but it’s still the only thing I can think of that might eventually do a non-negligable bit of good.
It seems to me that every reply I read missed the point. He is talking about a cultural shift where community and inclusion is the norm. Right now we have a global society that is intent on division and isolation. We help that along with our technologically induced disconnection. Our society is one that fosters these tragedies. Adjusting our society to one where most actually care about the well-being of their neighbors would be an effective solution.
I came to this conclusion myself a while back.
My head hurts from reading the replies. Here’s something we DO KNOW. Shooters or murderers often skip over the people that had shown small acts of kindness. People don’t have to become lifetime friends or commit to relationships by showing a coworker some kindness. Giving someone half your sandwich because they forgot their lunch. Taking their side when a group of others make fun of them. Simply choosing the big clunky kid for your kick ball team. Remembering someone’s name. I find that being positive and looking for the good qualities in people who don’t fit the mold often brings out their best. Even if I’m not preventing mass shootings nobody loses. The world is a little better anyway. I like medicines that help even when they fail. We all have to remember, YOU are not that important, or smart. Take pleasure in the success and pleasure of others. When the happiness of others makes you glow inside you succeeded. On the other hand if someone wants to kill you, that’s time to flip on your switch and be ready with enough force to stop their act. This is why you carry everywhere and hope you never need it.
The answer to drugs? Just say “NO”. The answer to gun violence? Just say “HI”.
Deeply stupid article based on the premise that gun control can’t stop mass shootings. It can and does basically everywhere else in the developed world. America’s own massive spate of mass shootings coincides directly with the lapse of the assault weapons ban. It is not difficult to connect the dots.
As for engaging the socially isolated: social isolation is no more a universal predictor for mass shootings than “mental health” is. (Omar Mateen for instance had a loving wife and family, he was not “socially isolated.”) In any case, “engaging” the “socially isolated” is a worthy but complicated goal that’s a damn sight more complicated than telling people to get out there and be positive and hug someone. Often the “socially isolated” are introverted by choice, or by shame about circumstances beyond their control that they can’t or won’t talk to other people about, or because they are actually socially maladjusted and/or toxic or plain nasty, and/or because of mental or personality disorders, along with a hundred other reasons. It’s pure chicanery to try to present “engaging the socially isolated” as a simpler option than gun control.
First, love the Del the funky homosapien reference in the user name. Just heard that song again last week.
The article was written after the Oregon shooting and was intended to speak to the issue of indiscriminate, lone-wolf shooters without a particular target or bone to pick, ideologically speaking. You are correct that it wouldn’t be sufficient for terrorists or psychopaths who lack any actual empathy.
My further point though, was there is nothing about “gun control” that would have kept the guns out of the hands of any of these shooters. If you or anyone has a gun control argument that would address the issues I raised in the column, I’d love to hear them. Thanks for reading!