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

931–940 of 1001 posts

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

#931

Post by librish »

bko wrote: post #662
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…

> 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 anti-gun rebuttal is that having that many guns around makes breaking the existing laws. I don't care how you do it (buybacks + making it much more cumbersome to get one seem like a good start), the end result that I'm after is that the US goes from 120 guns per capita to 30.

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

#932

Post by charles_kaw »

kodah wrote: post #463
charles_kaw wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I see no mechanism by which those laws would reduce mass shootings. A mass shooter would simply ignore them. On virtue of how many shootings have begun "without warning", the cultural context in canada versus the us is quite different. The expectation of actions when you see a firearm is very different in these two countries! - in the US, someone with an openly carried firearm may be transporting it or any number of…

> Gun owners consistently misrepresent and come up with inconsistent interpretations of any gun control. Maybe sometimes, but there's also gun laws like in California that affect large populations of gun owners. I don't think they're making their dissatisfaction and confusion with the gun laws up. Owning a gun in the US isn't very simple; different states have wildly different laws you have to observe, and those are…

>but there's also gun laws like in California that affect large populations of gun owners.

Is your rebuttal that there are laws?

>"they just don't understand" to the people who actually have to live with the laws

No, I just don't care. Guns should be a utility.

>As a gun owner

So, I guess my question to you is: aside from home defense (which surely requires a limited amount of rounds) and practice (which can be done by a range selling and enforcing no carry out of rounds, like in many other countries), what is your daily use case for firearms?

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

#933

Post by jrs235 »

nothingisbad wrote: post #706
dgfitz wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

That's not consistent with the reality of the rest of the world. Australia banned guns in 1996 and has had one mass shooting since, compared to 66 in the US in April of this year.

66! Where are these? Also, what is the definition of a mass shooting?

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

#934

Post by charles_kaw »

chmod600 wrote: post #485
charles_kaw wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I see no mechanism by which those laws would reduce mass shootings. A mass shooter would simply ignore them. On virtue of how many shootings have begun "without warning", the cultural context in canada versus the us is quite different. The expectation of actions when you see a firearm is very different in these two countries! - in the US, someone with an openly carried firearm may be transporting it or any number of…

"The expectation of actions when you see a firearm" The poster to whom I replied was discussing concealed carry and transport in a car . Your reply to me is nonsensical. If someone is intent on harm, they are unlikely to broadcast it with open carry.

No post body was provided.

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

#935

Post by lliamander »

karmelapple wrote: post #170
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…

Here’s a roadmap for policymakers that I think is steeped in evidence: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/claireboine/files/policy.b... There are 3 recommended policy changes in there.

As someone who supports the elimination of virtually all firearms restrictions, this is a gun control position that I think deserves to be taken seriously by gun rights advocates.

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

#936

Post by lliamander »

scotty79 wrote: post #612
sb057 wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People should safely store their fire-arms, but they don't and guns get stolen and sold illegally, or used by their teenage child. This is extraordinarily rare. >People shouldn't point a gun at someone unless their life is in danger and they're prepared to take a life, but they do and people get shot by accident, or road rage turns deadly. Brandishing weapons is illegal in every state and not pointing the muzzle of…

> There's no evidence to suggest that gun ownership causes higher levels of suicide. Literally 5 seconds to google: https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/06/handgun-owner... > Additionally, suicide isn't a crime. Why would that matter? Restricting access to guns is not aimed at reducing crime, but tragedies.

The suicide rate in South Korea is quite high, yet the rate of gun ownership is low, and guns are typically not the method of choice.

There is more going on in US suicide statistics than merely the presence of guns.

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

#937

Post by lliamander »

pnutjam wrote: post #862
wyager wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's time we start legislating based on empirical evidence instead of lofty ideals. I would take anti-gun people more seriously if they actually paid attention to what this entails. For one, anti-gun enthusiast would stop going on about "assault rifles", because only around 200 people a year in the US are killed by rifle homicides. It's totally negligible. Less frequent than blunt instrument homicides. Yet, that's…

There are plenty of people advocating for limits on ammunition, or other reasonable stuff; but go ahead with your strawman.

What's "reasonable" from an informed perspective vs. an uniformed perspective are vastly different. There are already limits on ammunition and they don't work.

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

#938

Post by mahastore »

lliamander wrote: post #914
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…

I agree, but I also think a more controversial step is needed: eliminate gun free zones. If the expected outcome of an attempted mass shooting is a quick and ignominious death it will be a major deterrent. Teachers and administrators have been voluntarily carrying concealed firearms in Utah for roughly a decade.

No post body was provided.

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

#939

Post by mahastore »

coinbasetwwa wrote: post #925
lliamander wrote: post #914

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but I also think a more controversial step is needed: eliminate gun free zones. If the expected outcome of an attempted mass shooting is a quick and ignominious death it will be a major deterrent. Teachers and administrators have been voluntarily carrying concealed firearms in Utah for roughly a decade.

This is the solution people should get behind. You can’t wave a magic wand and make 320 million guns disappear, the alternative is much simpler.

No post body was provided.

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

#940

Post by mahastore »

lliamander wrote: post #914
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…

I agree, but I also think a more controversial step is needed: eliminate gun free zones. If the expected outcome of an attempted mass shooting is a quick and ignominious death it will be a major deterrent. Teachers and administrators have been voluntarily carrying concealed firearms in Utah for roughly a decade.

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN