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

981–990 of 1001 posts

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

#981

Post by lliamander »

renaudg wrote: post #980
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.

Uvalde police let the shooter do its thing for an hour because they feared being outgunned by his AR-15. Tell us again how giving a firearm to Betty the school lunch lady will help in any way ?

An AR-15 is not a shield of invulnerability. A CCW holder with a handgun and the element of surprise can get the drop on someone with an AR-15.[1]

I know Betty the lunch lady is supposed to be a strawman of sorts, but women are actually pretty good shots. It's amazing how quickly criminals, even when they are armed and outnumber you, will fold once you present armed resistance[2].

[1] https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-man-shot-colorado...

[2] https://sandrarose.com/2016/09/georgia-woman-shoots-three-ho...

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

#982

Post by karmelapple »

dgfitz wrote: post #844
vmurthy wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite a quick read and sounds somewhat better than knee-jerk reactions people might have The 3 policy changes in the paper : ``` Evidence suggests that three priority policies would have the greatest impact in reducing overall firearm homicide rates: • Universal background checks; • Prohibition of gun possession by people with a history of any violent misdemeanor, threatened violence, or serious alcohol-related cri…

> • Universal background checks; Break that one down. Universal for everyone, or just those who want to buy a gun? If I buy a gun because I pass the background check, and then snap and shoot up my place of employ 4 years later, what good was the background check? Who pays for the background check? Who does the background check? What do they check? HIPPA laws would eliminate anything health/medical related. Do they co…

Understand that you don't think they'll do much, but states that have that, along with the two other items, have witnessed roughly 30% fewer gun homicides.

If we test this out in more places, we can have better evidence than, say, what you or myself think are a good or bad idea. :)

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

#983

Post by raisehuman12 »

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…

Guns are built with a purpose. The purpose is to kill someone. So it is not difficult to comprehend why Government needs to make it difficult to buy a gun more than it is difficult to buy medicine. But there are people who propose to remove all restrictions instead to acquire guns. To take it to its logical conclusion that is how wild Wild West used to be. No police no governance no authority.

Now question is this. Which option seems more sane to you? You decide.

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

#984

Post by renaudg »

wyager wrote: post #649
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…

> 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…

> 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 exactly what anti-gun people focus on.

Yeah, for some reason people keep going on about the ability for any 18 yo nutcase to go into a shop and buy a military-grade weapon designed to shred organs beyond all repair*, enabling them to efficiently slaughter as many school children as possible before terrorized and outgunned LEOs finally have the guts to take them out.

These pesky humans and their dislike of living in fear of violent death for their children... Can't they just think about this in spreadsheet terms and look at the totally negligible numbers, like the rest of us psychos ? C'mon...

*https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-...

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

#985

Post by mulmen »

curiousgal wrote: post #497
Aeolun wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If enough people actually cared about this, then you’d have people marching on the capitol, like after a certain president was not re-elected. If people haven’t gotten motivated enough after literally decades of this shit, I find it really hard to blame the law.

> If enough people actually cared about this, then you’d have people marching on the capitol, like after a certain president was not re-elected. THANK YOU! Say what you will about those supporters but the fact they went that far to support something they believed in (albeit dumb honestly) is admirable. Meanwhile the people with actual good values are just sharing senators' edgy tweets thinking that makes a difference…

There's nothing admirable about the January 6th attackers. Do you also admire the 9/11 hijackers? How about the gunman in this most recent school shooting? These are all "true believers".

Most people exist in the expansive middle ground between regurgitating Tweets and insurrection.

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

#986

Post by RickJWagner »

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…

Great points.

I grew up in the midwest, where pheasant hunting was (and still is) popular. Many people had gun racks in their cars, and often parked with the guns in plain sight.

We had little crime and very few incidents of gun violence.

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

#987

Post by neartheplain »

throwntoday wrote: post #578
neartheplain wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Canada is the U.S.'s neighbour and is probably closer, culturally, than any other nation. Your point about cultural similarity holds true mainly for descendants of European immigrants. The shared culture here isn't just Marvel movies but values passed down among families from the Old Country like a Christian moral framework, Anglo-American law, the Protestant work ethic, Puritan attidues towards sex, etc. If you bre…

Thank you for honestly stating the issue. Often times I see people get defensive or reactionary and jump to calling racism when simply stating these facts. How on Earth do you expect to solve an issue if you can't even admit it.

Thanks for the positive comment. I sometimes wonder what it feels like to be the parent of a child murdered in these communities, like the moms I see on Twitter occasionally doing anti-violence marches and rallies, and be told that your son or daughter's death is a "white supremacist talking point."

Lots of people in America, including black people, feel uncomfortable around poorer black communities because of the high rate of gun violence. Telling those people they're just uncomfortable because of "internalized white supremacy" or "white nationalist talking points" doesn't convince most and won't make them feel safe. This discomfort is the root of so-called white flight, social distance-keeping, school self-segregation, and other problems. If we fix the problem of gun violence in these communities, tackling other race-related issues gets easier. The first step is talking about it openly and honestly.

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

#988

Post by notch656a »

erklik wrote: post #598
hunterb123 wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Guns are a force multiplier, they allow someone that is armed to have much greater lethality than someone that is not. So is a van, see Europe. > Guns are a force multiplier, they allow someone that is armed to have much greater lethality than someone that is not. Tell that to wild hogs. Population control is a thing, especially needed for invasive boar. > and they have obvious use in military activities. Exactly,…

> Gun crimes usually happen in strict gun controlled areas because criminals know it's unlikely they will be met with force. Huh. That's an interesting point. I wonder if there are statistics showing that there is less gun crime in states with more lax gun laws. Edit: I found two things: https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/22/3/216.full https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/a... Seems like t…

>It does not seem like guns prevent crime really.

>If that was the case, then states with the most guns would have the least gun deaths, no?

gun deaths != crime

The statistics you cite include suicide as "gun deaths", which is typically not a crime in the US when it is unassisted.

Therefore you would have to remove suicide and other non-criminal (such as self defense) actions from "gun deaths" to make your claim.

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

#989

Post by pnutjam »

lliamander wrote: post #937
pnutjam wrote: post #862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Citation. Perp had over 350 rounds.

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

#990

Post by LoveGracePeace »

raisehuman12 wrote: post #983
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…

Guns are built with a purpose. The purpose is to kill someone. So it is not difficult to comprehend why Government needs to make it difficult to buy a gun more than it is difficult to buy medicine. But there are people who propose to remove all restrictions instead to acquire guns. To take it to its logical conclusion that is how wild Wild West used to be. No police no governance no authority. Now question is this. W…

The purpose of a gun is hunting, self-defense and deterence. Except in the hands of someone intending to murder.
Post reply on HN