Senate Gun Control

How does it not test the question? There was literally a school resource officer with a gun who failed to stop the shooter from getting into the classroom.

 

But what does one thing necessarily have to do with the other? Does every mental health patient have an urge to go out and buy a gun?

What I want to know is, what problem does addressing the mental health concerns of the country expect to solve regarding gun violence? How? Are we suggesting giving these people adequate care, that they can be "cured", and would never pose a threat to themselves and society? Or is it something more up in the air like saying that they're only looking to get these people in so there's a record of having a mental illness on file; and then with background checks they wouldn't be able to purchase the gun (we'll leave the loopholes out of the argument for now).

 

I think, like, 99% of an elementary school's population is made up of educators and children. It's likely not one of them would carry a firearm even if they were allowed. Unless little Billy is always strapped.

 

Republicans don't even trust teachers enough to not propagandize their kids, but somehow are fine with arming these same teachers with guns to protect their kids.

Right. Makes sense.

 

I trust teachers with a lot. I don’t trust them with guns. I don’t trust anyone with guns

 

I stand corrected.

 

Here’s a good report on this.

https://time.com/5644578/good-guys-with-guns-el-paso-dayton/

Due to the amount of lead these weapons can dispense it doesn’t matter if there is a good guy with a gun or not. People will die lots of them. Plus there have been several incidents of the good guy being killed by the cops arriving on the scene.

 

There are teachers that have been trained and if it's allowed, do have access to a gun in their classrooms. My question is; among all of those teachers in particular, has there EVER been an incident in the last say, decade, where a teacher successfully prevented a mass shooting because he/she at least threatened the perp with a gun?

And it's one thing if you want to suggest that the teachers of younger kids in elementary schools could protect their children with proper training and guns locked away; but what about High Schools? You know as well as I do that more often than not, HS kids can easily overpower a teacher if they wanted to. Locking a gun in one of those classrooms is only begging for trouble.

 

Good points and those are answers that we can actually do something with. If there could possibly be some hard data and stats on the weapons used in these mass murders and when the weapons were first issued/sold/put on the market, we'd have data we can actually use as evidence to support laws.

The people doing this are buying guns TO do this. They have a sick fixation on death and get a high on dying themselves. They should have their @$$#s tracked and monitored constantly.

 

It's somewhat cathartic to see someone saying "We've tried nothing, and we're all out of ideas" being called on their ****.

 

Governor Abbott is a dickhead! Lt. Governor Patrick is an even bigger dickhead! I'd say some things that everyone would agree with, but the admins and mods would have no choice but to ban me!

In a nutshell, people want action and want this carnage to stop. Others say that those wanting it to stop are using this event (and every other atrocity) are taking advantage of this for political reasons.

 

I haven't seen anyone respond to this by saying since this shooting has happened, it's time to stop cops from having firearms because cops having firearms don't have any impact on mass shootings. I'm certainly not objecting to a "strip guns from police" approach, but that wasn't going on when that's brought up, it's about non-law enforcement civilians having access to firearms. The subset to look at would be any shootings in places where anyone (or most) that can legally own a gun can legally have a gun.

(Frankly, I'm also not sold on them qualifying under 'good guy' specifically either but that's a much more cynical point about cops at this point in time)

What they have to do with one another is that the broad stigmatization plays a big role in people avoiding mental health treatment because of their concerns of how they'll be singled out for that. Most people who have mental health issues are not threats to others and most violence isn't associated with mental illness (down the page here), and a huge portion of Americans will experience mental health issues at some point (CDC puts it at 20% in a year, 50% in a lifetime). And in areas that already reinforce that stigma heavily, like the military (where soldiers feel punished for seeking help) or law school (where students avoid mental health treatment because they fear that it will disqualify them from future job opportunities). An unsubstantiated targeting of people for having mental health issues (despite not representing them being more 'dangerous') is going to encourage people to avoid mental health treatment to avoid that stigma (both the direct elements if they actually want firearms access and the indirect elements that involve things like being treated by others as though they're a threat because they have a mental health issue that they're having addressed or managed) and that treatment as a second class person.

There's a huge difference between narrow efforts to target specific people whose specific mental health issues that are linked to a greater risk of violence and blanket stigmatization. And every time there's a shooting, there's a bunch of people that springboard right into stigmatization of dealing with mental illness, like clockwork. It's the routine reinforcement of prejudices because it's easier than using nuance in a discussion.

 

Almost all school shooters were suicidal days/weeks before and/or during the shooting. That seems like something mental healthcare could help. Similarly, almost all mass shooters (any kind) were facing some sort of crisis before the shooting. See: David Chou, the homeless man who recently attacked a church. Seems likely simple shelter could have prevented it.

School shooters are almost always young. If we could simply get them well past the age at which people shoot up schools, they may move past the desire to shoot up a school.

A lot of people have poor mental health due to their external circumstances. Fixing/sorting those external circumstances can absolutely result in radical improvement to their mental health and reduce anger/aggression. Similarly, a significant amount of criminal behavior is due to external circumstances, which is why actual rehabilitation, particularly educational and occupational, is the best way to prevent recidivism. I do think people who are headed down the path of a mass shooter can be rehabilitated. Therapists aren't miracle workers, but they can help sort your life and put you on a better path.

And, yes, some of those who have an actual, diagnosable mental illness can be greatly improved by medication.

Asking if they would never pose a threat is the wrong question. It doesn't have to be never. Simply reducing the likelihood a significant amount would be worthwhile.

 

I don't know how much of a fan I am of this program. I don't see how throwing "at-risk" depressed children into the criminal justice system before they've even committed a crime helps. And I mean, what are you even going to report? "Hi, we bully this kid a lot and he's depressed he might be planning a school shooting?"

 

@Ahsoka's Tano has a valid point. Even IF we can identify those with mental issues (before they show signs), it's not like that identification alone can stop them from doing this. They are not going to immediately be taken out of society and put into an institution-not even the most severe cases. And just how long and what kind of treatment will prevent them from doing harm?

And what gun shop owner who just wants money is going to care?

The mental health issue is huge, but it is also used as a major deflection against the biggest issue of all which is guns in the hands of anyone who wants one. And any kind of gun at that.

 

Michael Kay opened up his show today taking a time out from sports.

 

Of course Republicans are gonna say “criminals don’t follow laws” as an excuse not to enact laws which makes me wonder why we have laws

 

Except abortion laws. "People will get illegal abortions and die" is apparently NOT a reason to keep Roe vs. Wade. Because those people are just women so **** them.

 

This piece of garbage DID follow the law.-the law that allowed him to buy 2 AR rifleS in one day. Almost ALL (if not ALL) of the mass murders are caused by animals that LEGALLY purchased guns or got guns from parents/relatives who obtained then LEGALLY.

And the minute someone speaks out or proposes that change is needed, the Republitards say that they are "politicizing".

It's about time those wanting change stop pu$$yf@@ting and caving like little pansies!!! Confront these right wing bastards and tell them how it is and what they are and how they have destroyed the country!

 

US Politicians: We want the truth!
Sane US individuals: You can't handle the truth!

As it is:

 

The only surprise at this point is that there hasn't been another gun massacre.

 

Australia did it too following a mass shooting there in 1996.

 

Give it time. We’ll have another by June 1st given our current pace. Still plenty of thoughts and prayers to go around.

 

Oh, I'm wary of the program myself, Vivec. I was just posting this specific PSA--one of the most chilling I've seen. Our society is crumbling on every conceivable level.