No, but permanent insanity is an actual thing that we like to pretend doesn’t exist, and don’t adequately deal with.
1 Like
how many of the mass killers really are permanently insane though?
1 Like
I can’t say that the shooter did this, but the gun manufacturer offers ‘buy now pay later,’ and some lenders in this space have pretty loose standards. Someone fact check me, I’m speculating, but he may have been able to go this route.
None, because that’s not a thing that exists here. Like gay people in Iran… they simply don’t exist because the nation’s leaders have declared it so.
And to be clear, I’m not suggesting that all or even most mass shooters would be institutionalized if we had better mental health care. But a couple of them might.
And if we had better mental health care, a few more might have gotten effective treatment.
I don’t think there’s any one magic cure. I think there’s several things that will reduce the frequency.
1 Like
Oh, and to be super clear… I do not mean to compare gay people to insane people. I was just thinking of groups of people that obviously do exist that a country’s leaders pretend do not. That is the only similarity there. I hope I did not cause offense.
I am really glad that we have a thread about this. Thank you so much…
I keep thinking what if those that were killed were my kids. What would I do? Would I go after the gun control authority to do something? Would I go to Home Depot to ban sales of hammers? Would I go to the used car dealership to not sell customized Humvee’s with nerf bars? Would I go rugue and kill everyone in that FLICKERS family? I **don’**t know. But I really try to engage in the logistics of these conversations. So I appreciate you all educating me fo sho!
The recent events just sicken me. I do not know what to do about it, wether it be local, or closer to me in terms of family. I like having guns for hunting and protection (and eventually survival (GEEZUSS!!!)). Everything recently has got me scared shatless! For me and my daughters…
In actuarial terms I have 3 seconds to decide what to do in these, obviously crazy, situations, if they so happen to me. If they happen, I hope, i so hope, that they’re the right decision, and I can live with it.
I wish a ton-and-a-half that this makes sense. So ,if I reread this, or someone PMs me about my thoughts, and I revisit this with safer, thoughtful and a more thought out opinion, you understand that I am on the side of decency and everyone getting along and no one gets hurt and everyone has the care they need.
It’s not enough to pick off a few. You need enough to break a filibuster.
1 Like
True. I guess we have to imagine a future where there are enough Democrats plus moderate Republicans to do that, at least for the most obvious / low-hanging fruit kinds of reforms.
You are feeling what any decent human being is feeling at this time. There is no way to rationalize or minimize this awful event.
I turn to The Guardian for their perspective when bad stuff happens. There were a few interesting observations in this article.
Until guns become an actual threat to the powers that be and not a way to thin the herd of the undesirables, guns will be allowed.
2 Likes
Imagine the difference if teens looking to shoot up something as a last statement picked corporate offices or political offices rather than schools.
1 Like
From the article:
I think the answer here is infinity. Getting rid of guns is not going to happen and it’s folly to suggest it.
-
It violates our Constitution. The Constitution is very difficult to change and a change requires very broad consensus. This is by design - a feature rather than a bug. And that broad consensus does not exist.
-
It goes against our heritage. The country exists, in part at least, due to ordinary people with guns taking on their own government: one of the most powerful armies in the world. The thought of ordinary people with guns not being a credible threat to our own government is unthinkable and literally un-American to a great many Americans.
-
Even in the (basically impossible) hypothetical scenario where guns, or certain types of guns, were made illegal for ordinary Americans to buy, you’ve got over 425 million guns already here, of which maybe 125 million* are semi-automatic and about 20 million are AR-15s. The horse is out of the barn. You’re not realistically getting those back.
-
Guns can be 3D printed these days. I’m not sure how printed guns compare, quality-wise, to traditionally manufactured guns, but it’s a thing.
*I had difficulty finding a source for semi-automatic weapons. A source from 2013 suggested 20% of the then 300 million guns were semi-automatic, but semi-automatics accounted for 50% of new sales. 300 x .2 + (425-300) x .5 = 122.5, which I bumped up slightly on the guess that the 50% figure might have increased since 2013.
1 Like
I’d first say it’s a bit of a joke that ordinary people are in any way a credible threat to the US military. I mean if we define government as just the Capitol then clearly people are, but it all really just comes down to the military.
And then surely we could do something closer to Canada? Canada hasn’t outlawed guns, but they’ve managed to effectively outlaw the type of gun that does the most killing (handguns, mainly). To me a lot of the rural arguments go out the window when Canada seems to manage it, they’ve got a lot more moose than we do.
Alas, we’re scuppered because of the way the SCOTUS has interpreted the 2A so I think we’re stuck in this struggle for a long time. I know in NJ I’m certainly in favor of extremely strict gun laws, right up to what the Constitution will allow (a bit like Oklahomans on abortion, if you will). If the SCOTUS makes that challenging I think they really run the risk of losing legitimacy. What happens if the SCOTUS strikes down much of NJ gun laws and NJ refuses to comply?
That’s why it is difficult to use words without qualification. People love “freedom”, but is it freedom from government intrusion or freedom from intrusion of other individuals? I think it should be clear that the power of government is necessary to defend individuals’ rights, especially those of the defenseless. That same powerful government can drift to overreach. It is a delicate balance.
I believe we have arrived at the situation where it is impossible for the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, and the right to life to coexist. The founding fathers didn’t envision a world with 8chan, semi-automatic weapons, and unchecked government corruption. Free speech with global platforms + guns = daily mass shootings.
1 Like
Are you including defections, including defections with military equipment in your math? I mean, for ordinary stuff, sure. But what percentage of service men & women are pro-second Amendment and would be willing to fight to defend it?
What percentage of service men & women would be willing to take up arms against ordinary Americans fighting to defend the Constitution?
You are right that handguns kill far more people than so-called “assault rifles”. But I don’t see Heller being overturned in my lifetime, if ever.
You’re asking what happens if state officials violate federal law? I assume they can be sentenced to a federal penitentiary.
I will grant you that the current administration will probably choose to look the other way.