Live data from Hacker News

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

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

311–320 of 1001 posts

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

#311

As a foreigner I find this subject very complex since the right to bear arms in on the US constitution. To change or "rewrite" the constitution trying to deal with this subject could dissolve the US. Banning guns altogether (rather improbable) will only leave law abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals. More protection in schools could be a starting point to address these awful events. I'm still in favor of law ab…

This really isn't the shape of the policy debate in the US. Nobody is seriously talking about rewriting the constitution or banning guns outright. The fundamental issue is that there's a politically powerful minority that is able to block essentially all meaningful attempts at any kind of gun regulation and they do. That's it and it's not likely to change in the short term.

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

#312

Maybe slightly off-topic, but I think this is a part of a larger trend of a declining empire - its inability to solve problems that have already become non-issues in other societies. From big issues like healthcare to small stuff like getting rid of pennies, I'm amazed at how the US is beholden to special interest groups under the guise of democracy and freedom, as well as its exceptionalism. One can see this in dysf…

We don't need complex theories. It's as simple as a political party opposes action on gun issues. The solution is to vote them out.

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

#313

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…

Lots of reasons. But I'd say the culture of glorifying gun ownership is a root cause combined with an institutionalized and deliberately flexible attitude to any form of gun control. It varies between states of course. But the net result is that people are assumed to be armed to the teeth. Which leads to shoot first and ask questions later situations. Which is actually something you can legally get away with under some circumstances and something that is glorified as well. And it's getting worse because it's getting worse. People respond to feeling insecure by getting more guns. And bigger guns. And this is big business in the US. Gun manufacturers advertise on TV, lobby the local authorities, and spend billions on marketing. There's more scrutiny on advertisements for cigarettes and alcohol in the US then there is on gun commercials. There are more rules around owning a drivers license or a car than there are on owning a gun.

That's why things have gotten much worse in the US in the past decades. The rules haven't changed but the number of guns has. And given the percentage of people with guns and the percentage of people with mental issues, the Venn diagram of those two groups intersecting produces a percentage of armed homicidal maniacs at a high enough frequencies that stuff happens. Simply put: when millions of assault rifles get sold, a few of them are going to end up being used by exactly the type of people you'd never want to own such a thing. Simple math. There's nothing mysterious about that.

I'd probably want to own a gun if I lived in the US. There are war zones that have less casualties per year than some cities and areas in the US. I think Kiiv probably has better statistics than Chicago in the last half year or so. That, or it's alarmingly close. Combat medics actually get trained in hospitals in in big cities in the US. If you work in the ER in Chicago, LA, etc., you are going to get plenty of practice. Every day. So, yes, I'd probably feel a need to defend myself in such a place. I'd be part of the problem.

However, I don't live in the US. I live in Berlin, Germany. I feel safe here and feel no need to own a gun and tough luck if that weren't the case because it's pretty hard to get one here. It's not a perfect city and there are occasional incidents involving gun violence just like everywhere else. Generally if you see a gun you are either in an armed robbery, looking at a person in uniform, or in the country side with people responsibly handling their legal guns while hunting. The first happens but not very often. Most crime does not involve guns. And when it does, the sentences are steep, the guns are typically small (easier to conceal), and highly illegal. Anything involving illegal guns is not cool with the authorities. People in uniform discharging their arms is generally involves lots of paper work and scrutiny. More so for civilians with permits and legally owned guns. Getting permits is not super easy and keeping your permit requires sticking to the rules. So, that narrows down the situations that can escalate considerably. It still happens but not very often. Same math, different variable values.

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

#314

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…

[deleted]

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

#315
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its because buying a gun is a civil right. Smoking is not. That said, the 21yo requirement may be unconstitutional as well.

What limits, if any, does the 2nd amendment or the rest of the constitution place on the type of arms? Eg should you be allowed to use - pistols? - rifles? - machine guns? - explosive / armour piercing bullets? - grenades? - nuclear bombs? - chemical weapons? - biological weapons? Basically I’m asking where is the line drawn. Because I don’t think the constitution sets such limits, no distinction for weapons of mass…

My thoughts on this... Considering the purpose and context of the 2nd, it essentially protects a contemporary citizen-soldier's "kit". The stuff he/she needs to join up in common defense with their community, which includes survival gear, protective gear, and of course, a weapon.

Today's citizen-soldier would carry an AR-15 or variant. If there's one modern gun protected by the 2nd, that's the one.

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

#316
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're being disingenuous with what you surfaced from your Wikipedia link. We are literally the only country on there that has more guns than people (the 2nd highest is literally half our amount per capita!). Now look at the ratio of unregistered to registered in the US. We clearly have a problem compared to other countries. 392 times more unregistered guns than registered, good god.

Sorry, correlation != causation. Has never been a problem until recent times so maybe you can find another scapegoat if you need some pablum.

I have no doubt we've increased the per capita, especially unregistered in recent times.

Maybe we could try, I don't know, literally what Australia did after their mass shooting?

Heck, if it doesn't work, feel free to have all the guns you want. But can we at least fucking try to change it?

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

#317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

It's weird how the absolutely right answer is yours, as in, reduce the guns and take away the guns but almost all comments that talk about gun reduction is either downvoted to hell or flagged. if the supposedly intelligent HN can't arrive at the conclusion that reducing guns is the right answer since it was already successfully done by Canada and Australia then what chance do the rest of the US have? it's been instil…

> if the supposedly intelligent HN can't arrive at the conclusion […] what chance do the rest of the US have?

Honestly, probably not much worse odds. HN may be knowledgeable about computers, but there’s a big contingent here that doesn’t want to be told what to do, and doesn’t care whether other people get hurt in the process. And once you adopt that ideology, it is all downhill from there

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

#318
post #83

Canada is the U.S.'s neighbour and is probably closer, culturally, than any other nation. Gun ownership is also high in Canada. In terms of guns per capita, the U.S. is #1 by a long shot, but Canada is #7 [1]. In Canada, guns owned per capita is one third of what it is in the U.S.. Canada also has mass shootings. The annual deaths from mass shootings per capita in Canada is 0.032, which is about one third that of the…

I think it's pretty well established that high rates of gun ownership and proliferation of firearms produce mass shootings. Anyone who tries to argue otherwise has their head stuck in the sand.

This isn't obviously the case (if you consider gun homicide, which is arguably more important since strictly more people are killed than just in mass shootings): https://hwfo.substack.com/p/everybodys-lying-about-the-link-...

> Gun Murder Rate is not correlated with firearm ownership rate in the United States, on a state by state basis. Firearm Homicide Rate is not correlated with guns per capita globally. It’s not correlated with guns per capita among peaceful countries, nor among violent countries, nor among European countries.

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

#319
post #83

Canada is the U.S.'s neighbour and is probably closer, culturally, than any other nation. Gun ownership is also high in Canada. In terms of guns per capita, the U.S. is #1 by a long shot, but Canada is #7 [1]. In Canada, guns owned per capita is one third of what it is in the U.S.. Canada also has mass shootings. The annual deaths from mass shootings per capita in Canada is 0.032, which is about one third that of the…

Interesting. When compared to places like Australia, where guns are highly regulated and barely anyone owns a gun, such that there have been no mass shootings for 35 years, the solution really is obvious.

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

#320

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…

There aren’t really any automatic weapons in the US, unless they were manufactured before a certain date and you have a particular hard to acquire license. You may mean semi-automatic. I assume you don’t know many gun owners. I grew on a farm in the south and Incan assure you that when people there say “come and take them,” they mean it. At this point you’re talking about a lot of very armed veterans and hunters, it just doesn’t seem practical. If you could wave a magic wand, who knows it may work but that isn’t really an option.

I think there have to be other approaches here that can actually happen. The element of cultural memesis and role of the media in making anti-heros of these deranged young men is worth examining. It’s also pretty clear that the current approach to bullying in schools isn’t working at all. It also seems like it’s just too easy for some young men in their late teens to just fall through society’s cracks, I don’t know what the answer is there.

Post reply on HN