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

691–700 of 1001 posts

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

#691

Post by pc86 »

BobbyJo wrote: post #685

I think a good first step everyone can agree on to stop gun violence is: stop it's gamification. Almost every mass shooting in the last decade was someone looking for media attention and high score. And yet, every shooting is followed by detailed biography and a tally of bodies. Something as simple as a one month moratorium on information for anyone outside the community would probably work wonders, as the public eye…

Enforced by whom? What is the punishment if you break it?

This is just not realistic suggestion.

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

#692

Post by politician »

When I was in high school, two classmates committed suicide through overdose and one shot themselves.

When are we going to address the elephant in the room: that the public school system systematically creates hopelessness in children by stripping them of their agency and reducing them into cattle to be managed by an authoritarian hierarchy in overcrowded conditions.

There are so many more people that died or have been psychologically maimed by their public school experience than have shot up schools.

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

#693

Post by andyjohnson0 »

christophilus wrote: post #652
andyjohnson0 wrote: post #593

As a non-American I found Heather Cox-Richardson's recent substack newsletter post [1] to be useful in understanding how the US has got to this point. She's a history professor at Boston College and she does a good job of describing how gun ownership and control came to be (intentionally) politicised, and how the NRA's role has changed over time. Honestly, I don't see how the US is ever going to dig itself out of thi…

Regardless of the gun issue, there’s a glaring issue that seems more obvious to me: mental health. The solution seems to be a much better mental health system and safety net. If we got rid of all the guns in the world, psychopaths would make pipe bombs, etc. Getting rid of guns would help, no doubt. It would add friction to the process of pulling off massacres. But the real, root problem seems to me that we have comp…

> But the real, root problem seems to me that we have completely gutted our mental healthcare system.

I'm not American, but yes it seems that way. Its not available or accessible to the people who need it.

Poverty, poor housing, unemployment and dead-end jobs, ambient violence, social media, endless precarity and culture war. People are being driven mad.

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

#694

Post by bitxbitxbitcoin »

Spooky23 wrote: post #681
bko wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> empirical evidence instead of lofty ideals The problem with a lot of anti-gun measures is that the proponents readily admit that they would not have stopped any particular shooter. For instance, people talk about background checks, but this shooter and many others did not have a history and were not known to police. They would have passes a background check. Often times the person acquiring the gun already broke a…

The school shooting club thing is an example of how regulation works. Just as you don’t see soldiers on military bases walking around with guns on their hips for fun, there were strict rules around high school shooting ranges - kids didn’t take guns home and had strict protocols around handling, etc. The big difference now is you have a fetishization of guns combined with a low intensity insurgency. If you ask a more…

The school shooting club thing is also an example of how education works.

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

#695

Post by bitxbitxbitcoin »

dgfitz wrote: post #677
bko wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> empirical evidence instead of lofty ideals The problem with a lot of anti-gun measures is that the proponents readily admit that they would not have stopped any particular shooter. For instance, people talk about background checks, but this shooter and many others did not have a history and were not known to police. They would have passes a background check. Often times the person acquiring the gun already broke a…

I was talking to my wife about this the other night and we came to the same conclusions as the points you made. What we posit at this point is: what didn’t exist in 1969? Social media. The internet. Legislation won’t change anything. Proponents of stricter gun control are being idealistic. Having kids in school right now, we are both quite concerned about the current state of affairs when it comes to school shootings…

Unfortunately, a lot of legislation seems to come from a place of ignorance.

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

#696

Post by bitxbitxbitcoin »

idiotsecant wrote: post #667
amelius wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If at all, perhaps allow geo-fenced guns, which don't work in and around schools?

The point of a gun is that it's a simple machine that works when you need it. Geofenced microcontroller safeties somewhat compete with this and would not be a popular idea.

I’ve seen plenty of sci-fi that leads me to believe that the future of this is some sort of finger print reader on the trigger that only allows the designated shooter to shoot.

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

#697

Post by refurb »

idiotsecant wrote: post #664
fredgrott wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some points of interest: -60 percent or more US states have no gun registration, I know as I live in Indiana which changed to a no gun registration state despite objections from their own citizens and cops. -Among religious right guns are seen as a male status symbols -Can we cure this economically by requiring liability insurance in addition to gun registration? It work by, if you have a past history of danger signs…

I am deeply supportive of the second amendment but liability insurance for guns seems like a fantastic idea to me. Love in rural Montana and own a long rifle for hunting? You insurance is quite cheap. Live in Brooklyn, are 17 years old, and own a handgun? Quite expensive. Unfortunately like automobiles all this would due is punish the honest people. The people who most should have this insurance just wouldn't buy it.

I know plenty of people driving around in CA without insurance.

People may have issues with the NRA, but their basic stance - enforcing existing gun laws - seems like a reasonable start. We haven’t even met that threshold yet.

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

#698

Post by ibeale1 »

BobbyJo wrote: post #679
doctoroctogon wrote: post #625

Question for the pro-gun folks: where is the limit on what a civilian needs to defend themselves? Assuming you agree civilians shouldn’t have nukes. How about fighter jets. What about tanks. What about bazookas. How do you make that call. If, for example, greater than 5 round magazines isn’t the limit, where is the limit and why?

I think a good test is the risk an accident poses to others. An accident with a nuke, tank or fight jet can easily kill 10's, 100's or millions. With guns, a bullet is a bullet for the most part (if we are talking about human fired calibers), an the risk any given undirected bullet poses is effectively the same. Larger magazines don't increase accident risk, while being automatic or explosive does. I.E. if you're a r…

I agree that risk is a good measure, but I think the question still stands. Since there aren't any laws saying "you can't have x if it could kill y amount of people", you still have the interpretive aspect of "how many people is okay to kill?" It sounds established that a number greater than 0 is okay, so again, where is the line drawn?

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

#699

Post by doctoroctogon »

BobbyJo wrote: post #679
doctoroctogon wrote: post #625

Question for the pro-gun folks: where is the limit on what a civilian needs to defend themselves? Assuming you agree civilians shouldn’t have nukes. How about fighter jets. What about tanks. What about bazookas. How do you make that call. If, for example, greater than 5 round magazines isn’t the limit, where is the limit and why?

I think a good test is the risk an accident poses to others. An accident with a nuke, tank or fight jet can easily kill 10's, 100's or millions. With guns, a bullet is a bullet for the most part (if we are talking about human fired calibers), an the risk any given undirected bullet poses is effectively the same. Larger magazines don't increase accident risk, while being automatic or explosive does. I.E. if you're a r…

One follow up question - does risk-with-ill-intent play into your calculus at all? EG if there was a gun that had same accident risk as a revolver but you could kill 1M people with it before being stopped, should that be legal? If not, where’s the limit of risk-with-Ill-intent.

A related, follow up question is your thoughts on requirements to get said items. Should background checks be required? Training?

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

#700

Post by Koshkin »

amelius wrote: post #642
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…

If at all, perhaps allow geo-fenced guns, which don't work in and around schools?

Knives, too? Because I need my gun to work when someone charges at me with a knife in their hand.
Post reply on HN