Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015) • Hacker News Board

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#51

Post by KerrAvon » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

buscoquadnary wrote: post #41

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take social media activity into account during background checks. Increase the age to purchase to 21. 1 month waiting period. I'm a gun owner btw. I also wonder what interesting things would happen if in order to own a gun you must drill with a militia.

What do you mean by take social media activity into account? Should people who have unfashionable or unpopular opinions be not allowed to purchase a firearm? Or is it that they made a threat of violence at some point?

I think the latter should be somewhat disqualifying! Obviously, a standard would need to be created, but it's not impossible to draw that line.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#52

Post by rco8786 » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

KerrAvon wrote: post #38

freediver wrote: post #2

I sincerely hope this does not descend into a flamewar. We can't have discussion about this in an intellectually stimulating way in congress, we can't have this discussion in the media, we obviously can't have this discussion on social media so HN is the last bastion of hope. It is a multi-faceted problem with a lot of complexity. The fact stands that USA has a school shooting problem [1] unlike any other country in…

> It is a multi-faceted problem with a lot of complexity It really is not. There are too many guns available, too easily obtained, to too many citizens who have not been properly indoctrinated with a sense of civic responsibility, let alone trained in the proper ways to handle a gun. The answer isn't to throw more guns at the problem or to blame inadequate mental health facilities. It is to reduce gun availability. A…

Basically this. No other country comes remotely close to the US on availability and ubiquity of guns.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#53

Post by [deleted] » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

netsharc wrote: post #27

bifrost wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not wrong.

Sure, people who are mentally stable don't usually tend to kill other people, but where else in the world (or modern world) can people with mental illnesses easily acquire guns? Ah, only in the Land of the Free!(TM)

[deleted]

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#54

Post by bifrost » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

buscoquadnary wrote: post #41

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take social media activity into account during background checks. Increase the age to purchase to 21. 1 month waiting period. I'm a gun owner btw. I also wonder what interesting things would happen if in order to own a gun you must drill with a militia.

What do you mean by take social media activity into account? Should people who have unfashionable or unpopular opinions be not allowed to purchase a firearm? Or is it that they made a threat of violence at some point?

It'd have to be threat of violence.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#55

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

buscoquadnary wrote: post #41

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take social media activity into account during background checks. Increase the age to purchase to 21. 1 month waiting period. I'm a gun owner btw. I also wonder what interesting things would happen if in order to own a gun you must drill with a militia.

What do you mean by take social media activity into account? Should people who have unfashionable or unpopular opinions be not allowed to purchase a firearm? Or is it that they made a threat of violence at some point?

Nope. When doing a background check for a clearance they do it just fine. I worked with all sorts of nutjobs in defense. They just weren't violent nutjobs.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#56

Post by astrange » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:39 PM UTC

jasonhansel wrote: post #17

bifrost wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not wrong.

"Being a violent criminal" is not a mental disorder; most people who commit acts of violence do not have any diagnosable mental health issues. Only a small minority (3-5%) of acts of violence are attributable to mental illness: https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2015/10/1/18000532/gun-viol... edit: Even most mass shooters are not mentally ill: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/most-mass-shooters-aren...

This is a very popular statement on the twitter and all, but I think it comes from their need to support marginalized people, which ends up requiring mental illnesses to make you more virtuous and never less.

So then you have to go around saying that serial killers are the most healthy people there can be and 100% rational. Surely this is a mistake?

Of course we have mental illnesses that describe things like this, like "antisocial personality disorder". If anything, all we need to do is invent "wants to shoot people personality disorder".

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#57

Post by whatshisface » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:39 PM UTC

Although this article is full of false dichotomies ("far from posing threats to others, people diagnosed with schizophrenia have victimization rates 65% to 130% higher than those of the general public."), the message that we should not allow the damage done by mass shooters to extend to making us treat mentally ill people even more poorly than we already do is an important one and worth sharing.

The way fear makes us do things that increase the damage done to society by a violent attack is an old phenomenon that shows up again and again in our history. We should be careful to avoid it.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#58

Post by koolba » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:39 PM UTC

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #28

freediver wrote: post #2

I sincerely hope this does not descend into a flamewar. We can't have discussion about this in an intellectually stimulating way in congress, we can't have this discussion in the media, we obviously can't have this discussion on social media so HN is the last bastion of hope. It is a multi-faceted problem with a lot of complexity. The fact stands that USA has a school shooting problem [1] unlike any other country in…

Take social media activity into account during background checks. Increase the age to purchase to 21. 1 month waiting period. I'm a gun owner btw. I also wonder what interesting things would happen if in order to own a gun you must drill with a militia.

> Take social media activity into account during background checks.

Besides the blatant first amendment violations, this would be incredibly subjective and abuse prone.

> Increase the age to purchase to 21.

We should take away 18 year olds right to vote as well. If they’re incapable of owning a firearm then they’re clearly incapable of having a voice in deciding the rules around them.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#59

Post by onesafari » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:40 PM UTC

freediver wrote: post #2

I sincerely hope this does not descend into a flamewar. We can't have discussion about this in an intellectually stimulating way in congress, we can't have this discussion in the media, we obviously can't have this discussion on social media so HN is the last bastion of hope. It is a multi-faceted problem with a lot of complexity. The fact stands that USA has a school shooting problem [1] unlike any other country in…

The root cause may be bullying and ostracization combined with the media contagion effect. This is a repeating pattern.

Bullying: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/05/25/uvalde-texa...

The gunman in Tuesday’s elementary school massacre was a lonely 18-year-old who was bullied over a childhood speech impediment, suffered from a fraught home life and lashed out violently against peers and strangers recently and over the years, friends and relatives said

In middle school and junior high, Ramos was bullied for having a stutter and a strong lisp, friends and family said. Stephen Garcia, who considered himself Ramos’s best friend in eighth grade, said Ramos didn’t have it easy in school.

“He would get bullied hard, like bullied by a lot of people”. Ramos’s cousin Mia said she saw students mock his speech impediment when they attended middle school together. He’d brush it off in the moment, Mia said, then complain later to his grandmother that he didn’t want to go back to school.

Contagion: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mass-shootings-ar...

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#60

Post by UnpossibleJim » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:40 PM UTC

OK, I'm hoping for a nuanced and civil discussion, but here goes... America (where I live and was raised) does not like to parse numbers, when it comes to these things. Both "mass shootings" and "mental illness" are dividable into smaller chunks than their current definitions and need to be handled in different ways than a "winner take all" approach.

"Mental Illness" is a broad spectrum and cannot be lumped into a giant bin, and should in no way be discussed a such. Of course there are mentally ill people who should not be near guns. I don't think that's a question... well, to most. Anyone who says different is using them as a lever to get things pushed through or has no experience. This, however is not all mentally ill people. The definition is so vague as to be almost meaningless, at times. Oh, do you have a sexual deviancy like being choked?... You might, technically, have a mental illness, but since it isn't very detrimental to your well being, so long as you set boundaries, you're probably OK. Probably.

"Mass shootings" are defined by any shooting that has 4 or more victims. This does get divided, once you dig down a little further in the database, but it's all lumped under the "Mass shooting" header. This is driveby's (sp?), party shootings, drug buys, etc... not that that is better, or should be taken with a cavalier attitude. Far from it. But, if you are looking at it from a preventative stand point, it's a completely different equation. These aren't going to be legally obtained, randomized violence, caused by mental illness. These are generally crimes of poverty, means and lack of opportunity. Gun laws and access to mental health facilities aren't going to stop these, but job programs, education, birth control, manufacturing facilities, infrastructure and treatment services might.