Mass shooting in Las Vegas.

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Dona Worry, Oct 2, 2017.

  1. slc

    slc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    19,841
    Likes Received:
    12,002
    No.....
     
  2. savethewhaley

    savethewhaley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2016
    Messages:
    328
    Likes Received:
    404
    Wow. I always say I'm going to stay away from these kinds of posts, but I end up putting my two cents in every time...
    First, I do not love the stigma floating around here that mental illness is inherently violent. Mental illness comes in just as many forms as there are people, and a large mass of it is not violent at all. Stigma of violence comes from ignorance- it seems people have a natural inclination to separate things they don't understand. I deal with the 'mentally ill' every day and most of them are lovely people who just happen to take medication when they wake up in the morning- myself included. Saying that guns are only violent in the hands of the mentally ill is just ignorant- a gun is a weapon no matter which way you look at it. It was created for violence, it was intended to harm. Anyone who wants to dispute that is perfectly welcome.

    Saying that the shooter is a sick, bad person, is also ineffective. I am willing to bet that every single one of us was raised to know that hurting others is bad. However, nowhere is there a written rule that says that all humans instinctively know that certain actions are 'bad.' Humans don't like to admit that we've all been trained, but sorry, you've all been trained. Look at the baby labs done at (correct me if I'm wrong) Harvard. From the day you are born, you are being molded by society. There's no proof that humans know from birth what is right and wrong- evidence would prove so, but I've yet to see a study done on babies that have been treated poorly- it's unethical. If you raised a child away from modern society and taught it that killing others was perfectly normal and an acceptable way to get what you want, would the young child question it? I'm inclined to think that many children do exactly what you tell them.

    Personally, I am terrified of guns. I will NEVER own one, and I'll admit that I lose a lot of respect for people who are 'gun nuts.' I've lost a lot of respect for people just reading this thread... people chose to ignore fact because it disputes their opinion. Where is the line where ownership of guns is more important than over 50 human lives? Thinking of guns as means of hurting others, even in 'self defense' or concealed carry still makes me feel physically ill. I live in a major US city which has had periodical violence during the time I have lived here. I am extremely proud of how my city has handled the violence and I very rarely feel uncomfortable in public. However, there have been multiple fatal shootings here in the past year. They would not be considered 'terrorist attacks' to me by any means, but a murder by gun nontheless.
    I know that I am personally biased about guns. Having had the experience where someone I love more than anything was threatened with a gun multiple times, I am strongly anti-gun. I am against concealed carry. Said person had a concealed carry license and was clearly using it inappropriately. With my continual loss of faith in this country and the people here, I can easily see where something like that could happen again. Say what you want, but I am more scared that there are people around me daily that have guns hidden under their clothing than I am of a mass shooter. Seeing pictures of clothing specially made for carrying guns posted on here, nonchalant, seriously makes me want to vomit. How desensitized to violence are American people that this seems acceptable?

    I understand that others on this site were raised in an environment where guns are normalcy, shooting is a sport, and you can literally feel unsafe walking in the woods by yourself. I feel lucky to live in a 'liberal' place where I don't find people bragging about their guns or pretending that the gun laws put into action during the Revolutionary War still apply to modern day weapons- honestly, get a reality check. There's a reason that countries with stricter gun regulation have less mass shootings- it's almost as if you can't do anything with a weapon you can't get your hands on. It shouldn't take tragedy after tragedy for the American people to wake up and have some sense about guns. Children have been shot, and no one can feel safe when they go to a concert? Get real, this is not the country I want to live in.
     
  3. equinitis

    equinitis Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,487
    Likes Received:
    7,804
    So the flaw in you wish for a gun free USA is there is no way to collect the millions of guns already in circulation. Some folks would turn theirs in, some would not.
    I suspect most would not, or would not turn all of them in. The are so many un registered.
    I have total respect for your dislike of guns, I just have no idea how to help you be comfortable. Removing guns from private citizens is just not a feasible option.
     
  4. savethewhaley

    savethewhaley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2016
    Messages:
    328
    Likes Received:
    404
    I'm not demanding that all guns be taken off the streets immediately. Stop marketing them, stop advertising, stop romanticizing weaponry. Why are so many things that were once hugely popular now never heard of? Everything becomes obsolete if it's not supported by the media, big businesses, politicians, etc.
     
    Varisha, JKetsche and manesntails like this.
  5. slc

    slc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    19,841
    Likes Received:
    12,002
    savethewhaley, post: 8147148, member: 85436" Wow. I always say I'm going to stay away from these kinds of posts, but I end up putting my two cents in every time...
    First, I do not love the stigma floating around here that mental illness is inherently violent.

    No one with a modicum of brain capacity says that mental illness has some inherent violence. That's an absurd thing to even propose, let alone believe or expect anyone else to believe. Mental illness ranges from very mild to very severe. Like all disorders with a range of severity, MOST of the people with mental illness are mildly affected.

    The vast majority of people with mental illness never hurt anyone - maybe they just hurt themselves, or no one at all. Most mental illness is rather mild and is 'garden variety' things like mild depression or anxiety. Most people with mental illness never even tell anyone about it, many never get any treatment. The work, marry and do all the things other people do, they simply feel awful and suffer internally.

    The people who are mass shooters, however, 90+% of them are not ONLY mentally ill, they are very SEVERELY mentally ill. Most have been in that condition for years. And yes, in fact, SOME of the severely mentally ill may become violent. Let's not go around pretending that's not true. That may be very popular (America's mental health care system is designed to cater to the 'worried well' because no one is interested in paying for the mental health care treatment the more severely mentally ill individual needs). Violence is POSSIBLE. However, in over 45 years of dealing with the mentally ill, mostly SEVERELY mentally ill, most off treatment, many with multiple disabilities or multiple severe diagnoses, so symptoms are EXTREMELY severe, I've never been injured.

    But in fact, violence isn't even really that common among the SEVERELY mentally ill, EVEN when you look at the most severely ill of the severely ill. Further, even if they don't take medication, most severely mentally ill individuals, even if they do hurt someone, don't hurt them severely, and certainly don't hurt MANY people.

    So truly, the mentally ill individual who performs a mass shooting, is the 1% of the 1% of the 1%. He's a rare, extremely ill individual, and even among severely ill individuals off medication, he's RARE....you seem to know these things, I repeat them in the hopes that prejudiced, ignorant and hateful people will eventually accept the truth....I ain't holdin' my breath.


    Mental illness comes in just as many forms.....Saying that guns are only violent in the hands of the mentally ill is just ignorant- a gun is a weapon no matter which way you look at it. It was created for violence, it was intended to harm. Anyone who wants to dispute that is perfectly welcome.

    Saying that the shooter is a sick, bad person, is also ineffective.....

    But 90+% of mass shooters are severely mentally ill.

    The problem is that too many people, for various selfish reasons, want to pretend the severely mentally ill individuals don't exist, when they need help. We simply allow these people to deteriorate. Then, when a tiny number of them become violent, we suddenly are shocked that they exist, and we hate them and they are 'animals' and 'evil' and 'must be treated like a rabid dog.'

    The fact is, though, that the individual is not rational. Punishment is not a deterrent when you can't tell reality from hallucination. Psychosis is an irrational world in and of itself.

    Personally, I am terrified of guns. I will NEVER own one, and I'll admit that I lose a lot of respect for people who are 'gun nuts.' I've lost a lot of respect for people just reading this thread... people chose to ignore fact because it disputes their opinion. Where is the line where ownership of guns is more important than over 50 human lives? Thinking of guns as means of hurting others, even in 'self defense' or concealed carry still makes me feel physically ill. I live in a major US city which has had periodical violence during the time I have lived here. I am extremely proud of how my city has handled the violence and I very rarely feel uncomfortable in public. However, there have been multiple fatal shootings here in the past year. They would not be considered 'terrorist attacks' to me by any means, but a murder by gun nontheless.

    Pro gun people come in many different stripes of extremism. One type is so adamant about having his 'right' to have guns that he doesn't care who suffers from them, there must NEVER be ANY gun regulation and if mentally ill people shoot people with guns, we need more guns to shoot them down after they shoot their first victim. Problem solved, right? Some people are just more insane in their extremism; this entire argument, whether said nicely or not, is irrational. I've always found that a psychotic person makes far, far more sense and is far more logical, than this line of logic.

    I know that I am personally biased about guns..... With my continual loss of faith in this country and the people here, I can easily see where something like that could happen again. Say what you want, but I am more scared that there are people around me daily that have guns hidden under their clothing than I am of a mass shooter.....

    That's rational. Mass shootings are rare and you're statistically unlikely to be caught in a mass shooting.

    However, the truth is that we do not treat the severely ill individual (who is usually too ill to ask for help or know he needs it - someone else has to step in and make that decision). We ignore them. We cater to the 'worried well.' Not them.

    And people DO get hurt by severe mental illness. No, not often by mass shootings, but by other means. The loss of productivity from schizophrenia alone runs into billions of dollars. People die of the cold, of skin infections. Family members get shoved, yelled at, scared out of their wits, and occasionally killed, as do social workers. But it's one by one. Not sensational enough for us.

    Without rapid diagnosis and treatment, people become more disabled. Outcomes get worse. For everyone. Years ago I read a study and talked to a schizophrenia expert. I commented that I had learned that duration of untreated psychosis was a big determinant of long term outcome and quality of life. Oh definitely, he said, that's my experience.
    We chatted about the chart. But I was in for a big surprise. The 'duration of untreated psychosis' on the chart? The 'duration' was not MONTHS, IT WAS WEEKS. What's the average delay to treatment? TEN YEARS.

    We have an incredible serious problem here. We should be talking about that. We're not. We're talking about how so and so doesn't want to give up his or her guns, because it's fun to shoot targets.

    We need to be talking about mental illness.

    Do they all do mass shootings? No. Many of the severely ill untreated will die of self injury, or accidental deaths, or by being deprived of treatment for physical disease, or malnutrition, or of staying out in the cold. And they MAY hurt someone. Often it's a single family member, so we just don't notice. We don't care. We only notice the extreme, the sensational. The toll on the family of the severely ill individual can be collectively far reaching, and millions are affected each year, not dozens.


    I understand that others on this site were raised in an environment where guns are normalcy, shooting is a sport, and you can literally feel unsafe walking in the woods by yourself. I feel lucky to live in a 'liberal' place where I don't find people bragging about their guns or pretending that the gun laws put into action during the Revolutionary War still apply to modern day weapons- honestly, get a reality check. There's a reason that countries with stricter gun regulation have less mass shootings- it's almost as if you can't do anything with a weapon you can't get your hands on. It shouldn't take tragedy after tragedy for the American people to wake up and have some sense about guns. Children have been shot, and no one can feel safe when they go to a concert? Get real, this is not the country I want to live in.

    The history is interesting. Many claim that our gun love is rooted in hunting and farming. It's not. It is politics, pure and simple - and money, obviously. The NRA changed drastically in the 70s and started to appeal to a whole bunch of people. A lot of it was about money, too, the gun companies had to find a way to be profitable when they were not.

    This country isn't full of 'gun rights' people because of our noble frontier heritage traipsing about shooting our dinner and banding together in a militia to repel the British. It's about politics and money of the last few decades. It's about the politics of extremism.
     
  6. ginster

    ginster Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,777
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    I read that they closed DMV offices in a few states especially in those areas that had a majority poor, non-white population. Making it impossible for people to go to the nearest office that is hours away since a lot of them either don´t have the time or the funds to go there.
     
    Varisha and manesntails like this.
  7. ginster

    ginster Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,777
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    I have a problem with the "mentally ill white shooter" because of the way the media portrays white shooters differently than those of other skin colours. POC are portrayed as violent thugs or fanatic terrorists - white men almost never are.
    I am not doubting that there is something wrong with anyone who plans to kill people just for the sake of killing them. That is obviously not normal behaviour.
    For most of these people there will never be an official diagnosis if they do not have a history of being treated for mental illness. So we can only assume that they suffered from schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder, etc.
    I do think that with some of these guys there is a sense of entitlement that is a driving force.
    Like that young man who went on a killing spree two years ago. He posted his ramblings on YouTube and his intent was to kill blonde women because they had dared to say no to him. He was the ultimate "friendzoned" idiot. He felt entitled to female attention and companionship and in his opinion they withheld it from him. He then spent a lot of time online on sites like reddit, in the sub forums where the meninists gather to spout their hate of all things female.
     
    Varisha, JKetsche and savethewhaley like this.
  8. JKetsche

    JKetsche Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,760
    Likes Received:
    4,910
    This isn't about my standards, but about knowing the difference between scholarly work and an op-ed. A pretty basic understanding of the types and reliability of sources is all that is required. And yes, you were hyperboliying.

    My point in general was that we may or may not agree on the specifics of reasonable (15 vs 30 days, for example), but the assumption that those of us who favor action on guns and "gun control" are, in fact, not necessarily zealots out to take people's guns despite the rhetoric.

    One is used to discriminate. The other is self-selecting and not discriminatory. Of course, we could also discuss gerrymandering, but I vote we stay on topic.

    People function without ID all the time.
     
    Varisha likes this.
  9. slc

    slc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    19,841
    Likes Received:
    12,002
    Some stupid writers on poor quality media, or on white supremacist websites, do this.

    But this sort of ugliness is NOT universal in America. Yes, definitely, the mainstream media is automatically picking up stories from white racist media without examining them. That is a PART of the issue, the rest is...well, read on.

    Look at some recent cases. A severely mentally ill, suicidal black man shot a white woman at his church. I read a lot of reporting, all expressed concern for his welfare, sorrow for the woman who got shot, and a hope that treatment would help the man find peace. NOTHING was said about him being a 'thug'. NOTHING. A very nice photo of him was published. It was a very sad event, and that's all it was. It was unfortunate he was so severely ill. His dad had sent police to his home when he was suicidal, but they did not take him to the hospital. That was quietly pointed out as a fact. Church members were praying for him to recover AND grieving for the girl who was shot. It was a tragedy - what the Treatment Advocacy Center calls a 'preventable tragedy'. Because they are preventable. Completely. Gun rightists who insist they are not preventable are only serving their own agenda.

    In contrast, a story that was auto picked up from white supremacist sites described a black 'thug' 'sociopath' 'evil serial rapist of white women'(who the 'libtard judges always release back to the community,' of course), who kidnapped 3 little golden haired white girls on their way to church on Sunday. Not quite. They were three juvenile delinquents who ran away from the residence and spent the night with a man who provided some booze and a 'good time.' He had been busted for a small amount of pot, but that's all. When the girls were caught, one lost courage and claimed he'd kidnapped them. The white supremacist media lapped that up, but the fact was that the instant the one girl said that, the other two laughed uproariously at her and told the authorities she was a liar. The fellow got charged for being with underage girls. In the US it's always the adult's legal responsibility to establish someone's age, even if the someones lie about their age or show fake IDs.

    The question for me was how lousy is our treatment of juvenile delinquents, and how in the world do three girls get that angry, rebellious and unhappy, and what does their future hold. I felt similarly for the fellow providing the 'good time.' What does that guy's future hold? Very little, I'm afraid. For the white supremacist media, it meant it was time to go to war and everything they could do to start a race war, they did.

    Be careful WHO you read if you don't like reading black people knee-jerkingly called 'thugs.' We have a president and many cabinet members who toss around white supremacist terms like 'cosmopolitan' and 'thugs' and seem to be disinterested in helping people of Puerto Rico, and coincidentally many of them are people of color. The administration has emboldened racists and racist writing in the media is going to get worse. So? Fight it. Point it out everywhere it occurs, complain, put together a lawsuit, protest it, do whatever we can. That's what some courageous Americans are doing. And it's going to take more and more courage to do so as the administration plows onward in its effort to destroy this country.

    And condemn such writing where ever you find it. Complain to the editors and sponsors.

    There's a lot of white supremacists in America, and a lot of 'White Supremacist Lite' thinking, too, what my husband calls 'near Nazis' (rather than neo Nazis). They sympathize with racism while denying they're racists.

    No, the mass shooters are not about 'entitlement'. They are about severe mental illness, diagnosed or undiagnosed.

    And YES there are idiotic 'criminal profilers' who toss around words like 'sociopath'. I just read one of their 'analyses'. I wanted to barf, it was so stupid, just throwing jargon around to try to sound clever and profound.

    Most of them have absolutely no comprehension of what psychosis does to people. Further, I suspect that most of the people they label as 'sociopaths' are actually suffering from a psychotic disorder like bipolar or schizophrenia. Out of ignorance they fail to realize that. I've worked with such severely ill people for decades, and I dearly love them. And most of them couldn't and wouldn't hurt a flea. But a few could become violent. That's the reality. Again, the mass shooter is the 1% of the 1% of the 1%. He's unusual even among the most severely mentally ill.

    In general, a mass shooting requires a 'perfect storm.' Mental illness, substance abuse which worsens those symptoms(no, in this case, I think the comments about valium causing his violence are totally ridiculous), years and even decades of no treatment, companions who don't recognize mental illness, people who benefit from leaving the situation as it is and not rocking the boat(like Paddock's girlfriend), inaction of companions when red flags came up in the past, and so on.

    But the two biggest factors in that perfect storm are the severity of the individual's illness and the inaction of the mental health care system when it comes to the most severely ill individuals.

    Paddock's father clearly had signs of bipolar disorder and psychosis, and offspring MAY inherit these disorders(the 'heritability' rate is rather low, as is always the case with illnesses that involve multiple genes, but it still can happen). But even the public has a hard time of accepting that. The public wants sensationalism and 'sociopath' is a nonexistent diagnosis that satisfies the morbid obsession with sensational crime.

     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  10. equinitis

    equinitis Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,487
    Likes Received:
    7,804
    Have you noticed the quiet advertising for firearms? A person almost has to be looking for a firearm to find them advertised, Cabela's, Shooter Supply, etc. Walmart carries both guns and ammunition but they only very rarely advertise them. It is not a politically sound move to advertise guns and ammo these days. It used to be. I remember Gibson's and the local hardware store having full color fliers (A huge expense in the 60s and 70s) in the local paper advertising whatever deal of the week there was on firearms. We have some locally owned gun shops in town that advertise with signs in the parking lots, no radio spots, no newspaper adds, just the sign in the parking lot.
    The political aspect of this would be covered if politicians were not permitted to take money other than the pay and benefits offered for their position. No campaign contributions, no private donations to "the cause", no side business deals, etc.They might be less likely to vote the money rather than their heart.
    I can not comment on the idea of people buying firearms because they have been romanticized. I have firearms and love to shoot because it has always been a family experience for me. My family, for many generations, have been shooters. Not necessarily hunters, although many have hunted and some still do, but shooters. Some competition with pistols and shotguns but mostly just being on the range and target shooting. My father went with his father, I went with my dad, my kids went with me and my one grand-kid goes with his dad. When we get together, everyone that can brings their weapons and ammo and we go to the range and shoot. These gathering are typically at my home these days and I have a range in my back yard. We have had 5 generations on that range at the same time. 5 generations.
    We also play a marble and dice game we call Wahoo. Everyone has a hand made board, mine was made by my dad in 1957. Everyone brings their board, dice and marbles so we can have multiple games going at the same time since the game is limited to 4 players. I have photos of the same 5 generations playing wahoo at my kitchen table, dinning room table and the coffee table in the living room!
    Both activities are the same for us, family fun.

    The bold above is mine. My love of guns and all things gun has nothing to do with politics or money! Nothing at all. I am a "gun rights" people, make no mistake about that, but I have no issue with reasonable gun control rules. I don't consider myself a "gun nut" in the derogatory way a lot of people use that description, but I am indeed nuts about all things gun except for the violence brought on innocent people with them. That violence against innocents is the very reason I am not against reasonable gun control.

    Look at this! A healthy discussion without name calling or belittling. I have learned everything has at least three sides these days. Those that are zealots for, those that are zealots against and those trying to reach a compromise of some description. The middle ground usually has the most folks but the zealots on both sides are usually loud and dramatic. Doesn't matter what the subject is, gun control or hoof care, there are always those who are not willing to compromise or admit someone else may have a valid point.

    I am a middle grounder for sure. I see the need for action and am willing to not have as many options when it comes to firearms and ammo. I would love to see a comparison of the health care, mental health specifically, in those countries with fewer murders to the USA. I think that may be as important as gun regulation. I would also like to see what the illegal drug front is like in those countries.

    How do folks function without a valid ID? I know they do, I see them daily in my town, but how? I have had to present my DL to even have a PO box, electricity, water, etc. How does this work when you have no ID, how does a person have even the basic necessities of life?
     
    AmyK likes this.

Share This Page