Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 1001 posts

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

#541

Post by themacguffinman »

Aeolun wrote: post #366
jstream67 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody was talking about reducing access to cars after that guy ran over a ton of old folks in Kenosha a couple months back. In fact no one is talking about it at all as he does not fit the correct political narrative

I always hear this argument, but it’s like people forget what the primary purpose of guns and cars is. If the primary purpose of cars was to drive over people then they would be banned. This is why you can own a car, but not a tank.

It's a little disappointing to see a whole thread of people who clearly haven't even seen a pro-gun perspective at all. The primary purpose of guns as they see it is self defense, as noble a purpose as any, especially compared to travelling really fast.

Why don't I ban you from browsing the internet, clearly the primary purpose of the internet is porn, which drives a lot of human trafficking and ruins lives every day.

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

#542

Post by multjoy »

chmod600 wrote: post #513
jeffbee wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rifles with detachable magazines, or internal magazines with more than 5 rounds, should be as hard to purchase as machine guns. That's narrow enough for me.

Long guns (rifles and shotguns) account for something like 2% of gun-involved homicides. People use them for mass shootings, but they also use pistols, and there's not a huge difference in the outcome. Your proposed law would have very low effectiveness, but impact millions (maybe tens of millions) people who want to buy rifles. Maybe you don't care about those people, but maybe that's part of the problem? They are f…

Notwithstanding "because", why does a civilian gun owner need a firearm with more than (say) 5 round capacity?

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

#543

Post by prawn »

mahastore wrote: post #286
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…

>> Also any argument like "mental illness" or "ease of access to firearms" needs to explain why the same does not apply to the rest of the world - Well Afghanistan people have access to lot of guns , lots of it and maybe even tanks. But they don't go to school that much. And in Serbia the population is thinly spread across vast swatches of ice. Not exactly LA. Lets simply stop talking and just bring a bill to buy bac…

Likely some clues about guns in Serbia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia_in_the_Yugoslav_Wars

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

#544

Post by Emma_Goldman »

glogla wrote: post #493
eyelidlessness wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a former gun rights advocate who is now in favor of basically eliminating guns except for hunting… > I think gun owners would be much more receptive to regulation if they felt people were genuinely trying to separate narrow and effective laws from broad infringements that annoy many and accomplish little. From both positions, I’d favor regulation that explicitly aims to limit gun possession as much as legally poss…

According to wikipedia, Mexico, Belgium, Czech Republic, Afghanistan and Somalia have basically the same amount of guns per person. Yet some of these are among the safest countries in the world and in some of these you are very likely to get shot basically any time. Just looking at the number of guns is very shortsighted and makes it sound you're focusing on "punishing sinful people" instead of making reasoned policy…

Those are not like cases. The picture in Belgium and the Czech Republic does not seem inconsistent with the thesis that lax gun rights, and mass gun ownership, are heavily related to rates of mass shootings.

Belgium:

"Until 2006, Belgium had surprisingly lax gun control laws. After a man shot two innocent people, however, the nation become increasingly concerned with the illegal flow of firearms. The 2006 legislation requires gun permits to be renewed more frequently and sought to prevent the impulsive purchase of guns by requiring prospective gun owners to go through a three-month process which includes an extensive police screening. Six years later, in 2012, the European Union passed regulation aimed at interrupting the transportation of guns across borders by requiring exporters to obtain a special license.

Today in Belgium, it's not easy to own any type of gun, unless it's a rifle or shotgun. The nation prohibits the private possession of fully automatic weapons, and permits ownership of semi-automatic weapons only in certain case scenarios. Furthermore, the private possession of handguns is only allowed after obtaining special permission from the government. In the country, long guns, such as rifles and shot guns, are the only guns not prohibited by the state. According to GunPolicy.org, these regulations categorize Belgium as a country that has "restrictive" gun control laws."

https://www.bustle.com/articles/149385-what-are-brussels-gun...

Czech Republic:

"The most recent statistics show that on a per-capita basis Czechs own about one-tenth the number of guns Americans.... Still, owning a gun in the Czech Republic isn't so easy. Permits are for 10 years and are reviewed after five years. People have to pass a written and practical test, as well as a medical check that includes mental health, and a clean criminal record...

Mass shootings are rare in the Czech Republic, but not unknown. In 2019, seven people plus the gunman were killed in Ostrava, and in 2015, eight people plus the gunman were killed in Uherský Brod. There was also a case in 2009 with four victims plus the gunman."

https://www.expats.cz/czech-news/article/how-does-gun-owners...

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

#545

Post by eyelidlessness »

glogla wrote: post #493
eyelidlessness wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a former gun rights advocate who is now in favor of basically eliminating guns except for hunting… > I think gun owners would be much more receptive to regulation if they felt people were genuinely trying to separate narrow and effective laws from broad infringements that annoy many and accomplish little. From both positions, I’d favor regulation that explicitly aims to limit gun possession as much as legally poss…

According to wikipedia, Mexico, Belgium, Czech Republic, Afghanistan and Somalia have basically the same amount of guns per person. Yet some of these are among the safest countries in the world and in some of these you are very likely to get shot basically any time. Just looking at the number of guns is very shortsighted and makes it sound you're focusing on "punishing sinful people" instead of making reasoned policy…

I’m not sure if you’re replying to me or just using the reply button below my comment as a place to dump objections to things I didn’t say?

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

#546

Post by hycaria »

DeathArrow wrote: post #519
librish wrote: post #89

It's time we start legislating based on empirical evidence instead of lofty ideals. Yes, if everyone was responsible perhaps it would be OK for all of us to own firearms. But so many people are utterly irresponsible, and guns make that irresponsibility lethal. People should safely store their fire-arms, but they don't and guns get stolen and sold illegally, or used by their teenage child. People shouldn't point a gun…

Before fire arms being invented people took other's lives with knives, swords or clubs. Or poison. Or bare hands. What makes you think that not owning a gun will make people less murderous?

The murder rate in other countries that do not have this gun legislation?

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

#547

Post by watwut »

jimbob45 wrote: post #455
colechristensen wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have to start by giving less attention to these events. We have to start by being kind to the people who need it most and are often the most difficult to be kind to. You can’t just create a way to think of people who do things as some sort of “other”, we are all human and capable of similar things given the wrong circumstances.

Replacing the perp’s name with “John Doe” or “Jane Doe” in major publications seems like a strong first step.

Unfortunately, that would be also great ground for misinformation about those shootings. Which is already large factor - both with regards to concrete incidents and general culture.

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

#548

Post by DeathArrow »

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #60

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 gi…

>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.

So someone is killing people because he is poor and needs money? Why doesn't he work instead?

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

#550

Post by ht85 »

DeathArrow wrote: post #516

People say that gun owning should be restricted. But are the mass shootings done by people who have a gun permit and legally bought the guns? Also, forbidding guns, doesn't change people minds. If someone has a psychiatric condition he can drive a large truck into the crowd, light up a crowded building or event try to poison a water reservoir, destroy a dam, derail a train, make a bomb using gasoline, fertilizer and…

Mental illness surely is a factor, but I don't think it's what pushes people over the edge.

Remembering my teenage years, the times I acted badly were because of anger. Extreme frustration towards a society or people who I felt treated me unfairly.

The hardest to deal with was (perceived) hypocrisy from people who were in a position of power.

Looking at US media, politics and justice is infuriating as an outsider. Everything that's done under guise of "freedom" and "democracy". All the "morality" work from people who by their own standard would go straight to hell. Zero accountability for anything.

Trickling down might not work for money, it surely does for the poison that this system produces. At least in openly totalitarian countries, people get a chance to see their government for what it is.

Post reply on HN