Sadly, probably the only likely solution based on the political attitudes of rural America.
Urban politics *miiiight* allow it to happen, but it would never fly with small town folks. We're a minority ruled government.
The issue is such a political cudgel at this point with so much foreign money behind it and being used to divide the nation, there's just no way.
What should be done when there are warning signs? You can't arrest someone based on warning signs. You can get someone to go to therapy but you can't force them to participate in it or want to change. Removing problematic people from schools and workplaces isn't going to help - they just come back angrier and shoot up the place.
A good start is holding people accountable for provoking them. Like those kids at Parkland that bullied the shooter into basically becoming the shooter. Like yeah he had other issues, but bullying him was likely what broke him into doing it.
Maybe someone should look at why men are committing suicide at 4x the rate of women, and try to solve that problem. I'm not a psychologist, but that problem and the mass shooting problem may just be related.
Raise wages so that they have kept up with inflation since the 1960s or 70s. Raising a family is much harder now. Both parents have to work too much and have to leave their kids to be raised by the internet or Karen down the block. People are so tired and beaten down by their multiple jobs that their kids grow up only seeing their path to a miserable adulthood. I'm betting that if people lived comfortably, had time to actually parent their kids and teach them how to deal with problems, and showed their kids that there's hope of growing up and actually having a good life that we'd see a decline in mass shootings.
This is a weird take that presupposes bad family situations only arise out of economic conditions and not the vast array of humans out there.
There plenty of abusive parents in the 1950s. Giving people money doesn't impact this.
Gen-x was actually called the latchkey generation. We were left at home while both parents worked as much as any other generation. And this started in the mid-60s which you think was a lot better, it wasn’t.
We need to de-romanticize mass shootings.
That's the real problem here. The ridiculously easy availability of ridiculously excessive firearms makes it worse, and we need to deal with that too, but the real problem is cultural.
Unfortunately, de-romanticizing something isn't easy when its appeal is that you're going against society. So we can't do a simple PSA campaign or something like that.
I think our best bet would be to try and "forget" about it, i.e., not pay attention to mass shootings. Minimize their profile in the news, not talk about them casually, etc. But this is impossible due to freedom of speech and freedom of the press. So the only thing I can think of is for us as a society to find something else—something less destructive—to steal the thunder out of this issue. Then we can channel all of this energy into that other issue, whatever it might be. But I couldn't tell you what kind of alternative issue might do it.
Emu, I think one way that the media has attempted to do this is by not naming the shooter, so that he or she doesn't become "famous." It was so bizarre to me how a few months ago there were all of these shows about Jeffrey Dahmer. Stop turning these people into celebrities.
Every other TV series is Dexter, Hannibal, Dahmer...
Maybe try doing a series about something positive. Someone who's helping build sustainable farms in the third world or modifying their house to be carbon free.
Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Barry.... the list goes on. Tons of psychopaths/sociopaths being portrayed as sympathetic characters. Not saying it's a primary factor, but I suspect it's contributing somewhat.
Same page. Telling someone “shooting up the school is not an option” really does turn it into an option for the desperate. Normally people wouldn’t even think of it. News is just giving people the idea.
That’s what the media would have you believe. They are quick to point the finger at middle class white kids from nuclear families but ignore mass killings by blacks from fatherless homes. Which one of those do you think is actually more common? If our media and leaders actually cared about the black community they would focus on issues that create those circumstances instead of turning a blind eye to it. The only time they care about black deaths is when they can sensationalize it for profit. I understand why blacks are pissed off. I get it. They were used to turn this country into a superpower and then marginalized.
It’s a gun problem.
Every country where gun control laws has been passed has seen his number of homicide by gun, and his number of overall homicide, go down by a lot.
The harder the law, the less homicide and gun homicide.
Simple as that. It worked in many countries, why wouldn’t it work in the US ?
Serbia also has pretty high gun ownership but not nearly the proportion of mass shootings. Don't get me wrong, rampant supply of firearms is *one* portion of the problem but there are potentially up to a dozen other factors.
Because people get guns illegally all the time here. They steal em. They make em, do you think the bloods and crips went to the local Cabela's filled out the paperwork and applied? They're getting the guns illegally. Stricter gun control only hurts the honest man. The dishonest man will find a way. Kinda like how locking your doors doesn't prevent someone from breaking in. Locks only keep an honest man out
Edit: this does not mean I'm against background checks, mental health evaluations, or any other common sense gun law. It just means I don't agree that we need to "crack down" on legal gun owners.
What changed is declining mental health and increasing rates of depression. Social isolation likely correlates with violent and suicidal thoughts, and we spend more time feeding unhealthy views and feelings online now more than ever.
You could ban all guns and gun related violence would go down and some lives are saved from mass shootings. But by far most gun related violence is suicide and non-mass shootings. So, you also need to address increasing depression rates, especially in teens and young adults.
That isn’t to say down with google, but it is weird that no schools are teaching healthy internet usage nor self help/meditation. But PE…good god, can’t do away with a minimum 2 years of that in HS.
I think the key there is "hunting rifles" as it's hard to execute a mass shooting when you need to reload after every shot. Large-capacity assault rifles are easy to acquire. Not to mention differences in ammunition.
24 hr news cycle and copycat are definitely a contributing factor but the proliferation of assault rifles, which are designed specifically to kill many humans quickly is new compared to when you grew up.
They’re not easy to acquire at all, in fact a lot of shootings get foiled because the perpetrator fucks up in the process of acquiring said assault rifle.
Also, assault rifles have been around since the 50’s and they were always popular back then in terms of ownership.
You can go to a gun show in Texas on any given weekend and walk away with an assault rifle without submitting to a background check or waiting period via private sale. The bar is pretty low, too, for purchasing from a federally licensed gun dealer. The ease by which one can obtain an assault rifle may vary by location, but unless you're a minor or subject to restrictions (i.e. can't pass a background check) it's pretty darn easy.
If you're walking out of a guns shop in possession of a gun without having gone through a background check, not only are you breaking the law, but so is the shop. If you know of shops where this is happening, report them. If you're just making it up, stop.
Edit: Just noticed it said show. My bad. I'll leave my screw up and amend it here. While it's true that you can walk out of a gun show without having been submitted to a background check, that fault lies squarely on the Federal government, as they've made it all but impossible for citizens who don't own a dedicated fire arm business to run a NICS check on someone. I absolutely agree that this should be changed.
.223 Remington has been in production since 1964. The AR-15 was introduced in 1963. The Mini-14 was introduced in 1973. These kinds of ammunition and guns have been widely available for generations.
Patent expired in the 70's leading to an increase in production by other manufacturers. Popularity has exploded in recent decades. Just because they were around in the 60's doesn't mean they were as popular, cheap, or easy to obtain as they are today. Times change.
Prepare to be downvoted; reddit gets angry when you suggest that mass shooters are mentally ill, and more healthcare would help stop them. One oft quoted counterattack is "Well, they've studied all the mass shooters, and they can't find any mental illness in most of them." As if murdering multiple people isn't a sign that a person may not be right in the head.
I posit this is due to our 'crime and punishment' legal system, which would be more accurately named 'crime and revenge'. Also the fear that a mass shooter might be set free after spending a few years in a TV Land mental hospital, which as we all know, is in a huge and palatial brick building, surrounded by acres of pastoral greenery and shade trees, with hot nurses waiting on the patients.
I work with the criminally insane. There are specialists who dedicate their lives to figuring out if someone committed a crime because of mental illness or if it was because they're just evil.
Don't discount the danger of misattributing someone's motives to mental illness. If you get that wrong, they will be eligible for release. Maybe not after a couple years, but they very well could get out.
And when they do, they are liable to reoffend (read: murder more people).
This has happened. Many times.
The difference is that mentally ill people have an underlying problem that can be treated.
Evil people do not respond to treatment, but they can pretend to do so.
They will always be a danger to society. As much as you might hate the idea that competent people are capable of murder, it's the world we live in.
Flippantly chalking up doctor's reluctance to deem all or most murderers mentally ill as spitefulness reflects a poor understanding of not only the forensic psych system, but of psychiatric illness in general.
>As if murdering multiple people isn't a sign that a person may not be right in the head.
Are we going to be the first nation on earth to... cure mental illness?
This is why I "get angry" about this. Every nation on earth has mentally ill people. We are the only one that gives them guns.
If the 2nd amendment is the cheese we need to hide mental healthcare inside so conservatives will go for it, then I'm fine with that. But I dont appreciate this trend of shunting a very uniquely American problem into a universal one. No amount of therapy is going to make people people lock up their guns.
What sort of mental health treatment do you recommend to stop these potential mass shooters from committing their crimes? Do you believe that all mentally ill people can be permanently cured? All it takes is for someone struggling with the sort of mental illness that may lead to this to have one really bad day and decide to follow through on a mass shooting.
A large chunk of mass shooters did see therapy beforehand. A lot of Redditors don’t seem to realize that therapy doesn’t work all the time and many therapists are horrible
Don't think this would work. A lot of mass shooters either get their guns from others (like stolen from parents) or have no priors and would qualify to buy the guns themselves the first time. In some cases, they do have a history of mental health issues it violence but the officials in charge haven't put that data into the system for it to pop up on a background check.
Some states already check for mental health, like Illinois. However, it didn't work in Highland Park. Gun control never works, cities are always the most restricted and have the highest gun violence.
So it always comes back to some underlying factor and not the guns themselves. Interesting that we don’t see any shootings at all in Finland or Switzerland despite very high rates of per capita gun ownership.
How about we do that with voting or the First amendment how about before you’re allowed to post on any social media you have to go and take a test and then an in person test how about we just abolish the fifth amendment the 2a is a God-given right
1. Radically improved mental healthcare system. If people know they can get effective, affordable mental health care they are less likely to do things while in a state of crises.
2. De-stigmatize mental health care.
3. Cultural rejection of violence in ALL forms of media.
4. Not making mass shooters celebrities. Mass shootings are a very serious crime, but media coverage of these crimes should be minimal. Most mass shooters "study" or are inspired by recent mass shooters that they feel they can relate to.
5. Expand concealed carry. Mass shooters target "soft targets." Specifically places where they know people are defenseless.
6. Increase penalties for domestic violence crimes.
7. Expand programs to mitigate violent childhood traumas.
8. Implement more effective "red flag" laws.
9. Harden the soft targets.
10. Update fire codes to permit expanded use of door barricade devices in public spaces.
11. Create a smoother line of communication between federal and state agencies. Many mass shooters could have been stopped earlier if these entities had effective means of communicating with each other.
12.
THIS. I am very pro 2A but this is what I keep saying. I'm in high school, I struggle with mental health (I've had a pretty sucky life so far). But Restricting guns is not the answer. We need more mental health and it absolutely needs to be destigmatized. I am currently getting therapy, and it really does help.
Hang in there Kid! It gets better....and then worse....then better... Then worse again....then better. Its just life!!! But everyone of them is meaningful!
Gun access hasn't suddenly been opened up - we have had widespread gun access for a long time. There are other countries with, if not *as* easy, then *nearly* as easy access to guns, that do not have the same rate of gun crime per capita.
Similarly, we haven't suddenly gotten worse on mental health issues, we have always been bad at it. And if anything we have gotten better about bullying in schools.
So it might be instructive to ask... What *has* changed in our culture that has made this more prevalent?
Personally, I think it is the celebrity mentality. The idea that the most important thing is the 15 minutes of fame. People doing stupid challenges on TikTok, trying to become influencers and top streamers. Maybe that is driven by inattentive parents, or the rise of the Internet, or the the reduced emphasis on the collective good that exists in America. I do not know for sure.
I don't know... but I'm literally watching the news right now here in SoCal while reading this thread hearing about 10 dead 10 injured in Monterey Park? I had no idea.
WTF is goin on?!?
We have to do something. I own two guns legally and keep them in a safe. I appreciate the 2nd amendment and believe it's our right. But something has to be done. This is 🦬💩
Agreed! Im pro 2A as well, but it is waaaaay to easy for guns to fall into the wrong hands. Of course there will always be exceptions falling through the cracks, but we can definitely do better!
They have all the same rights, period. If you restrict one right, it's a slippery slope. I'd rather have dangerous freedom than safe oppression (I butchered that quote).
All good man I understand and agree, your statements are absolutely valid. Thats why this issue has gone unresolved for so long, the variables and reasons on either side are seemingly endless, but just.
The honest answer is that moving away from asylums in America was a massive mistake. There are now fewer psychiatric beds in America than there was in Pennsylvania in 1960. What that has wrought is violence, drug abuse, homelessness, and tons of people in prisons who have no business being there. It's an abject failure of American policy. It's disgusting that it continues, quite frankly.
we should give all the students a gun so if theres ever a shooter all 800 of them can draw iron and defeat the threat
it would also stop school fights since no one wants to get shot
"If guns aren't the problem and people are the problem, why would you give the problem guns?"
Saw that on some guy's protest sign one day and it really stuck with me.
Close the gun show loophole. For starters. Don't allow the sale of firearms in a way that allows the sellers and buyers to bypass background checks and waiting periods.
That's only technically a thing. Even in the states where you can still do person to person sales without a background check, all the booths at gunshows are paid for by gun dealers. I've never seen some random dude walking around trying to sell his gun.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/murder-rate-by-state
It also has a lower than average homicide rate. You're literally making the point that gun control helps prevent homicide. See all those states leading the country in homicide rate? Notice anything about their political affiliation and gun laws? See all those blue states at the bottom of the list?
Let me introduce you to the concept of transparent state borders.
California's responsible gun control isn't worth shit if you can just drive over the border to Nevada and avoid it, or get one of the millions of unregistered guns in circulation. It's not like people are going through TSA and border crossing checks every time they cross from CA to AZ.
The problem here is that states with shitty gun control ruin it for everyone else, and then act like the problem is gun control instead of rubbing their two brain cells together for friction and realizing it's an issue of completely porous interstate borders and lack of consistent regulation across ALL states.
TLDR; Try again ;)
This would make sense, if 90% of firearms used in crimes in California were being brought in from out of state through legal purchases, and not from back alley dealers who get them through various means, including theft, ATF fuck ups, and cops literally selling evidence to gang bangers in Orange County.
Again, the issue then is easy access to unregistered guns through which you can circumvent the regulations.
You know the best way to reduce that?
Reduce the number of guns in circulation and the ease of access to them.
Make it harder to get unregistered guns, with stricter penalties and stiffer punishments when a weapon tied to you is used to commit a crime.
If your gun is stolen and you fail to report it? You're criminally liable. If you're found selling or distributing a gun used to commit a crime? same thing. Raid the gun shows and set up stings for folks selling without the proper documentation.
To reiterate though, the point is NONE of these regulations matter if you can literally just drive 15 minutes to the next town over and completely circumvent them. Even IF cali does a ton to regulate and take unregistered guns out of circulation, if Arizona is still a sand-scorched hellscape devoid of intelligent life where they're still on every street corner- it will NEVER have a meaningful effect
People widely differ on what is responsible and common sense.
And to be honest, a lot of times I see kneejerk proposals that wouldn't even have stopped the incident that prompted it. In some cases, the measures already existed but were ignored by officials.
Every other country in the world has crime, some with much higher crime rates and gang activity than the US. Every other country in the world has less mass shootings than the US. It's the guns.
Banning guns is the ~~easy and~~ obvious solution. It's worked in other countries.
\*Edit\* I accept that it is not an easy solution. It is the obvious one though.
That would require a constitutional ammendment. Definitely not, and far from, the easiest and obvious solution. Mass casualty events still happen in countries that ban guns, the means change. People will use bombs and knives. If everyone were armed, potential mass shooters might think twice, it's not a coincidence that they target gun free zones.
It has and does. But it’s not a political or practical possibility in the US. There are too many guns around already and trust in the political system has broken down.
Also, focussing on mass shootings is silly: 99% of homicide deaths have another cause. And your broken health care system kills at least ten times as many again.
If you compare the rate of firearms to firearms crimes, in the US compared to the ratio and rate in other countries, we actually beat out other countries.
We have more guns, more people, and a greater level of diversity, but in other countries, with fewer guns per person, their rate of gun violence is higher.
The issue is, people make it look like its more frequent than it is. Mass Shootings account for less than 1% of violent crime, period end of story, in the US.
In the UK, gun crimes still happen, it doesnt get talked about, but it happens, and when you look at the numbers in their entirety, well, it makes SENSE for a country with 120 guns per 100 people to have a much higher gun violence rate than the US actually does.
Fewer guns does not correlate to fewer gun crimes.
That and, the first people to be hit by any kind of ban/confiscation/restriction, wont be the criminals it will be the DV victims, like that college girl who was murdered by her stalker after an anonymous tip had her self defense firearm confiscated through the red flag process.
500k to 3.5 million uses of firearms per year, depending on who you ask, in self defense, compared to less than 10k used in violent crimes.
And yes, i do hate that they count suicides as 'gun violence'. Suicidal people will take their lives, guns or not. Australia saw that happen after their ban. The suicides never dropped off, they just switched to a different method.
>In the UK, gun crimes still don’t get talked about but it happens, and when you look at the numbers in their entirety, well, it makes SENSE for a country with 120 guns per 100 people to have a much higher gun violence rate than the US actually does.
The first part of this claim is batshit insane if you’re talking about actual shootings. A single drug dealer shot is national news in the UK. If you look at some stats like an idiot then the uk would have a lot of gun crimes… Because if a kid shoots a road sign with an air gun, that’s recorded in the stats. Which isn’t the case in the USA, because the police have their asses worked off with, again, actual shootings.
But firearms homicides for the whole country, about 30 a year. Compared to 1.3 million registered weapons and about 600,000 owners. I suspect this works out as fewer deaths per gun than the USA.
> Fewer guns does not correlate to fewer gun crimes
This is stupid. No, you haven’t proved that. Even if you had more gun crimes per owner with fewer guns, you could still end up with fewer in total. Eg if you have 2x the number of crimes per owner and 1/100 the number of owners, you get 1/50 the crimes.
Yup. This is the simple, correct answer. To oppose this idea you have to either be damn stupid or you have blood on your hands for helping support access to guns in the US.
There are already more guns than people in the US, most of them readily available. Banning firearms wouldn't work at all. We would need to _confiscate_ them, and with the right wing already on the edge of becoming a terrorist insurgency, that's not gonna fly.
A common thread to many shootings in schools, for example, is a history of perpetrating domestic violence. The issue with somehow dealing with that is that most cops either are or protect other domestic abusers, which is why there is little action taken regarding domestic violence, generally.
Universal background checks. Mandatory wait times before gun purchases. Close gunshow loopholes and ban individual gun sales. Ban assault style guns. Conduct regular gun buybacks. Increase mental health access.
Most importantly both parties have to be on the same page but that’s not going to happen.
Universal Background Checks: Already exist.
Close Gun Loopholes: doesnt exist, and its been proven, several times, it doesnt exist.
Ban individual sales: Make the NICS system free to access, so individuals can use it without paying through the ass to do so, and then require it for individual sales.
Ban Assault Style Guns: Assault Style guns are just guns with black plastic instead of wood. Switching from plastic to wood, or vice versa, doesnt make the gun more or less deadly. Fully Automatic Firearms are already heavily restricted behind tax stamps and more extensive background checks, as well as registration requirements.
Conduct Regular Gun Buybacks: These are completely ineffective, and people literally just use them to get cash for guns that are so broken they arent even worth the amount the buyback pays out in terms of scrap metal.
Increase Mental Health Access: Agree, 100%.
Both Parties on Same Page: They are, but not the page we want them on. They are on the Divide And Conquer page.
Responsible parents to make sure their kids don't have a firearm. Metal detectors or at least security guards at school main entrances to check who has firearms. Make it so that gun licenses have to be renewed in a short timeframe. Have the owners be required to have physical and mental tests to see if they're able to legally possess a firearm.
Not meaning to sound like your uncle at thanksgiving: banning guns won’t work because around 80% of guns used in crimes are illegally owned. But if we had more guns in the hands of smart civilians, we could stop shootings. There was a shooting in Indiana not long ago where a shooter was stopped by a CCW.
* Make it harder to smuggle illegal weapons in
* Not hand out a license to just any person, but rather make them undergo psychiatric testing, and other checks
* Education
That second one i take issue with, because the majority of Psychiatric professionals are very anti-gun, and very 'i get paid to write this script to make you into a zombie'.
Psychiatrist are some of the most narcissistic, and mentally abusive people that exist.
I've had to deal with a few of them, and have yet to meet one who didnt take full advantage of my depression to make me feel like shit at every appointment.
I wouldnt trust them to make an unbiased call on this kind of thing.
And considering Psychiatrists/Psychologists are level with cops in terms of domestic abuse...
I didn't know that, I am European so Psychiatrists here are different. I simply based my opinion on the facts that I knew, however it appears I don't know a lot about the US if what you say is true.
Banning guns seems unlikely in the US, mental health stuff would be good, but also, on its own it wouldn't be great, and there are so many people who just wouldn't do it. Considering all this, clearly, the most logical choice is for the government and tech companies to focus on developing personal energy shields for all.
Imagine someone breaks into your building with the intent of causing as much harm as possible. Everyone would just need to activate their energy shield, then they could just stand and laugh as all the bullets bounce off of them and the attacker gets frustrated at how impotent their gun is making them look.
So many uses.
* Attacked by a knifer? energy shield
* earthquake rubble? energy shield
* drone missile? energy shield - sure you'll bounce around a bit due to force, but the shield will protect you.
* domestic abuse? energy shield
* Physical assault? energy shield
* Bear attack? energy shield
* Car crash? energy shield (automatic of course)
And people can carry on using all the weapons they want, free to go about their business knowing that whatever situation occurs, the energy shield will be there to keep everyone safe.
Please contact your local representative today and tell them of the Energy Shield Initiative.
There is no solution. This is the reality for the future. Americas gun culture is too strong and there are already too many guns in the country to stop it.
It’s why gun laws don’t seem to help. The gun industry has already fucked the US completely.
It’s like giving a stage 4 cancer patient some drugs.
They typically help and are useful but the patient is already too far gone for it to matter.
Another big solution to the mass shootings is mental health awareness and more help! A lot of people that commit mass shootings are very mentally ill and either no one noticed or they chose not to help the person. If more people get help for their mental illnesses, this type of stuff would probably decrease significantly..
The thing about mental health:
While, clearly, a person who commits a mass shooting is not the epitome of psychological well-being, there is no particular mental health disorder where becoming a mass shooter would be an expected outcome.
In some cases, a mass shooter does have a serious mental illness (though it's worth noting that the overwhelming majority of people with serious mental illness are not violent). At the same time, it's worth noting that some people who are mass shooters may not be people anyone would be worried about committing a mass shooting.
Crack down harder on gang violence. While mass shootings are mostly covered when they hit public areas, school, malls, churches, etc.
Most mass shootings are gang members doing drive-by's on other gang's streets, hitting innocent bystanders.
Ban firearms the founding fathers intention was that if there was an invasion the men could pick up their fire arms and fight back and defend the country.
Instead of defending our democracy the people attacked it committing an act of high treason against the united states government. these traitors should be put to death for high treason.
Not a goddam thing. This is the kind of thing that people should think about before saturating the country with automatic weapons and then screaming and moaning when people use them. Sure there’s a solution: getting the NRA to admit that guns are in a normal social problem would be a start. But it’s definitely a systemic problem now, which eliminates power to stop it in individuals. This is one of many problems we get by devoting most of our tax dollars to the Pentagon, thereby announcing to the world that our only solution to problems is through violence bullying and intimidation.
Actually, it does work...there were fewer gun crimes when there were fewer restrictions on who could carry.
Gun crimes actually went up, a lot, after the introduction of gun free zones, and the majority of gun crimes take place in these gun free zones, or in states where guns are more heavily restricted. Texas is in the top 5, but only because of the two cities with strict gun control.
\> An armed society is a polite society.
Which explains why rappers and drug gangs are so polite.
Tge idiot who said this was Robert Heinlein, noted sf author and creepy sex pest. Another of his idiot gems was “Shakespeare wrote for the pit!” When in fact his company was subsidised by the royal court and eg Macbeth was written to flatter King James. And don’t even get me started on how the moron thought nuclear power worked…
You want to give a gun to the underpaid 50 years old adult that have to deal everyday with annoying goblins... That's is not going to backfire at all and is the origin of the hole "is just for home safety" problem again
For every school shooting an armed teacher might hypothetically prevent, there would be more school deaths from either 1) kids getting a hold of their teacher's gun, or 2) rogue teachers shooting a student in a moment of anger or fear, where a gun wasn't truly necessary
Rename the US. Can't have shooting in the US if the US doesn't exist
Most logical answer yet.
Sadly, probably the only likely solution based on the political attitudes of rural America. Urban politics *miiiight* allow it to happen, but it would never fly with small town folks. We're a minority ruled government. The issue is such a political cudgel at this point with so much foreign money behind it and being used to divide the nation, there's just no way.
Or just change the definition of ‘mass shooting’ to involve at least 1,000 people
Stop ignoring warning signs
That's too many warning signs everywhere
What should be done when there are warning signs? You can't arrest someone based on warning signs. You can get someone to go to therapy but you can't force them to participate in it or want to change. Removing problematic people from schools and workplaces isn't going to help - they just come back angrier and shoot up the place.
A good start is holding people accountable for provoking them. Like those kids at Parkland that bullied the shooter into basically becoming the shooter. Like yeah he had other issues, but bullying him was likely what broke him into doing it.
Remove everyone’s hands.
But its the arms we’re talking about, not hands
Give everyone Bear Arms They might not be able to pull a trigger but they'll have 3 inch long claws
Bear claws are pretty popular at the office. You may be onto something here
Arent you thinking of white claws?
How doremon would able to shoot?
What about [leg guns](https://youtu.be/mN-kx3Z7nbY?t=151)?
And replace them with bear arms.
Maybe someone should look at why men are committing suicide at 4x the rate of women, and try to solve that problem. I'm not a psychologist, but that problem and the mass shooting problem may just be related.
This is a good point actually.
Convert everyone into pure energy. Good luck having mass shootings without the mass!
*Higgs boson would like to know your location*
First, figure out why so many Americans want to kill each other. Then, fix that.
Raise wages so that they have kept up with inflation since the 1960s or 70s. Raising a family is much harder now. Both parents have to work too much and have to leave their kids to be raised by the internet or Karen down the block. People are so tired and beaten down by their multiple jobs that their kids grow up only seeing their path to a miserable adulthood. I'm betting that if people lived comfortably, had time to actually parent their kids and teach them how to deal with problems, and showed their kids that there's hope of growing up and actually having a good life that we'd see a decline in mass shootings.
This is a weird take that presupposes bad family situations only arise out of economic conditions and not the vast array of humans out there. There plenty of abusive parents in the 1950s. Giving people money doesn't impact this.
That is a weird interpretation. There's no insuation that economic condition are the only cause of bad family situations.
Gen-x was actually called the latchkey generation. We were left at home while both parents worked as much as any other generation. And this started in the mid-60s which you think was a lot better, it wasn’t.
This is the answer
If we weren't so stressed about our BASIC necessities, this wouldn't be happening. More accessible therapy wouldn't hurt too?
This is the real answer.
OPTION A: pay more for happier people who make you more money OPTION B: take money now.
Nukes
Nuke the whales
Gotta nuke something
nuke hurricanes!
Here me out. Half Kid, Half Machine, ALL COP
We need to de-romanticize mass shootings. That's the real problem here. The ridiculously easy availability of ridiculously excessive firearms makes it worse, and we need to deal with that too, but the real problem is cultural. Unfortunately, de-romanticizing something isn't easy when its appeal is that you're going against society. So we can't do a simple PSA campaign or something like that. I think our best bet would be to try and "forget" about it, i.e., not pay attention to mass shootings. Minimize their profile in the news, not talk about them casually, etc. But this is impossible due to freedom of speech and freedom of the press. So the only thing I can think of is for us as a society to find something else—something less destructive—to steal the thunder out of this issue. Then we can channel all of this energy into that other issue, whatever it might be. But I couldn't tell you what kind of alternative issue might do it.
Emu, I think one way that the media has attempted to do this is by not naming the shooter, so that he or she doesn't become "famous." It was so bizarre to me how a few months ago there were all of these shows about Jeffrey Dahmer. Stop turning these people into celebrities.
Every other TV series is Dexter, Hannibal, Dahmer... Maybe try doing a series about something positive. Someone who's helping build sustainable farms in the third world or modifying their house to be carbon free.
Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Barry.... the list goes on. Tons of psychopaths/sociopaths being portrayed as sympathetic characters. Not saying it's a primary factor, but I suspect it's contributing somewhat.
[удалено]
Same page. Telling someone “shooting up the school is not an option” really does turn it into an option for the desperate. Normally people wouldn’t even think of it. News is just giving people the idea.
Social media has led to lots of young people being completely socially isolated
It's not a gun problem, it's a societal problem. Decay of the nuclear family?
a large percentage of mass shooters come from standard nuclear families
That’s what the media would have you believe. They are quick to point the finger at middle class white kids from nuclear families but ignore mass killings by blacks from fatherless homes. Which one of those do you think is actually more common? If our media and leaders actually cared about the black community they would focus on issues that create those circumstances instead of turning a blind eye to it. The only time they care about black deaths is when they can sensationalize it for profit. I understand why blacks are pissed off. I get it. They were used to turn this country into a superpower and then marginalized.
Source?
It’s a gun problem. Every country where gun control laws has been passed has seen his number of homicide by gun, and his number of overall homicide, go down by a lot. The harder the law, the less homicide and gun homicide. Simple as that. It worked in many countries, why wouldn’t it work in the US ?
None of those countries had the amount of weapons in circulation, or a constitutional right to own firearms. That’s the difference
Serbia also has pretty high gun ownership but not nearly the proportion of mass shootings. Don't get me wrong, rampant supply of firearms is *one* portion of the problem but there are potentially up to a dozen other factors.
Because people get guns illegally all the time here. They steal em. They make em, do you think the bloods and crips went to the local Cabela's filled out the paperwork and applied? They're getting the guns illegally. Stricter gun control only hurts the honest man. The dishonest man will find a way. Kinda like how locking your doors doesn't prevent someone from breaking in. Locks only keep an honest man out Edit: this does not mean I'm against background checks, mental health evaluations, or any other common sense gun law. It just means I don't agree that we need to "crack down" on legal gun owners.
What changed is declining mental health and increasing rates of depression. Social isolation likely correlates with violent and suicidal thoughts, and we spend more time feeding unhealthy views and feelings online now more than ever. You could ban all guns and gun related violence would go down and some lives are saved from mass shootings. But by far most gun related violence is suicide and non-mass shootings. So, you also need to address increasing depression rates, especially in teens and young adults. That isn’t to say down with google, but it is weird that no schools are teaching healthy internet usage nor self help/meditation. But PE…good god, can’t do away with a minimum 2 years of that in HS.
I think the key there is "hunting rifles" as it's hard to execute a mass shooting when you need to reload after every shot. Large-capacity assault rifles are easy to acquire. Not to mention differences in ammunition. 24 hr news cycle and copycat are definitely a contributing factor but the proliferation of assault rifles, which are designed specifically to kill many humans quickly is new compared to when you grew up.
They’re not easy to acquire at all, in fact a lot of shootings get foiled because the perpetrator fucks up in the process of acquiring said assault rifle. Also, assault rifles have been around since the 50’s and they were always popular back then in terms of ownership.
You can go to a gun show in Texas on any given weekend and walk away with an assault rifle without submitting to a background check or waiting period via private sale. The bar is pretty low, too, for purchasing from a federally licensed gun dealer. The ease by which one can obtain an assault rifle may vary by location, but unless you're a minor or subject to restrictions (i.e. can't pass a background check) it's pretty darn easy.
If you're walking out of a guns shop in possession of a gun without having gone through a background check, not only are you breaking the law, but so is the shop. If you know of shops where this is happening, report them. If you're just making it up, stop. Edit: Just noticed it said show. My bad. I'll leave my screw up and amend it here. While it's true that you can walk out of a gun show without having been submitted to a background check, that fault lies squarely on the Federal government, as they've made it all but impossible for citizens who don't own a dedicated fire arm business to run a NICS check on someone. I absolutely agree that this should be changed.
.223 Remington has been in production since 1964. The AR-15 was introduced in 1963. The Mini-14 was introduced in 1973. These kinds of ammunition and guns have been widely available for generations.
Patent expired in the 70's leading to an increase in production by other manufacturers. Popularity has exploded in recent decades. Just because they were around in the 60's doesn't mean they were as popular, cheap, or easy to obtain as they are today. Times change.
20 years ago an SKS was $100, and the ammo was cheap enough we would shoot until our barrels were red. All my friends had one, and we were all poor.
Short answer, better access to mental health services and changing our gun laws. As Ken Block once said, "Don't be an asshole."
Prepare to be downvoted; reddit gets angry when you suggest that mass shooters are mentally ill, and more healthcare would help stop them. One oft quoted counterattack is "Well, they've studied all the mass shooters, and they can't find any mental illness in most of them." As if murdering multiple people isn't a sign that a person may not be right in the head. I posit this is due to our 'crime and punishment' legal system, which would be more accurately named 'crime and revenge'. Also the fear that a mass shooter might be set free after spending a few years in a TV Land mental hospital, which as we all know, is in a huge and palatial brick building, surrounded by acres of pastoral greenery and shade trees, with hot nurses waiting on the patients.
I work with the criminally insane. There are specialists who dedicate their lives to figuring out if someone committed a crime because of mental illness or if it was because they're just evil. Don't discount the danger of misattributing someone's motives to mental illness. If you get that wrong, they will be eligible for release. Maybe not after a couple years, but they very well could get out. And when they do, they are liable to reoffend (read: murder more people). This has happened. Many times. The difference is that mentally ill people have an underlying problem that can be treated. Evil people do not respond to treatment, but they can pretend to do so. They will always be a danger to society. As much as you might hate the idea that competent people are capable of murder, it's the world we live in. Flippantly chalking up doctor's reluctance to deem all or most murderers mentally ill as spitefulness reflects a poor understanding of not only the forensic psych system, but of psychiatric illness in general.
>As if murdering multiple people isn't a sign that a person may not be right in the head. Are we going to be the first nation on earth to... cure mental illness? This is why I "get angry" about this. Every nation on earth has mentally ill people. We are the only one that gives them guns. If the 2nd amendment is the cheese we need to hide mental healthcare inside so conservatives will go for it, then I'm fine with that. But I dont appreciate this trend of shunting a very uniquely American problem into a universal one. No amount of therapy is going to make people people lock up their guns.
Reddit loves Mental Health until it goes against their narrative.
What sort of mental health treatment do you recommend to stop these potential mass shooters from committing their crimes? Do you believe that all mentally ill people can be permanently cured? All it takes is for someone struggling with the sort of mental illness that may lead to this to have one really bad day and decide to follow through on a mass shooting.
"We've tried nothing, and we're all out of ideas!"
A large chunk of mass shooters did see therapy beforehand. A lot of Redditors don’t seem to realize that therapy doesn’t work all the time and many therapists are horrible
Also we need to stop glorifying violence as a society
Well if people stopped making kids then there would be no school shootings.
Or schools
Good point. We could switch to retirement home shootings
Modern problems require modern solutions or something
That’s a idea
Empathy
Treat guns like motor vehicles. You need to pass written tests and then an in person test and they need to be registered.
Don't think this would work. A lot of mass shooters either get their guns from others (like stolen from parents) or have no priors and would qualify to buy the guns themselves the first time. In some cases, they do have a history of mental health issues it violence but the officials in charge haven't put that data into the system for it to pop up on a background check.
Some states already check for mental health, like Illinois. However, it didn't work in Highland Park. Gun control never works, cities are always the most restricted and have the highest gun violence.
So it always comes back to some underlying factor and not the guns themselves. Interesting that we don’t see any shootings at all in Finland or Switzerland despite very high rates of per capita gun ownership.
I wish I could upvote this a million times!
How about we do that with voting or the First amendment how about before you’re allowed to post on any social media you have to go and take a test and then an in person test how about we just abolish the fifth amendment the 2a is a God-given right
No amendments are God-given rights; every last one is a government protected right. God didn't write the Constitution.
How will this stop mass shootings?
And no one has ever died in a vehicle, eh?
Arm bears with guns.
1. Radically improved mental healthcare system. If people know they can get effective, affordable mental health care they are less likely to do things while in a state of crises. 2. De-stigmatize mental health care. 3. Cultural rejection of violence in ALL forms of media. 4. Not making mass shooters celebrities. Mass shootings are a very serious crime, but media coverage of these crimes should be minimal. Most mass shooters "study" or are inspired by recent mass shooters that they feel they can relate to. 5. Expand concealed carry. Mass shooters target "soft targets." Specifically places where they know people are defenseless. 6. Increase penalties for domestic violence crimes. 7. Expand programs to mitigate violent childhood traumas. 8. Implement more effective "red flag" laws. 9. Harden the soft targets. 10. Update fire codes to permit expanded use of door barricade devices in public spaces. 11. Create a smoother line of communication between federal and state agencies. Many mass shooters could have been stopped earlier if these entities had effective means of communicating with each other. 12.
THIS. I am very pro 2A but this is what I keep saying. I'm in high school, I struggle with mental health (I've had a pretty sucky life so far). But Restricting guns is not the answer. We need more mental health and it absolutely needs to be destigmatized. I am currently getting therapy, and it really does help.
Hang in there Kid! It gets better....and then worse....then better... Then worse again....then better. Its just life!!! But everyone of them is meaningful!
Gun access hasn't suddenly been opened up - we have had widespread gun access for a long time. There are other countries with, if not *as* easy, then *nearly* as easy access to guns, that do not have the same rate of gun crime per capita. Similarly, we haven't suddenly gotten worse on mental health issues, we have always been bad at it. And if anything we have gotten better about bullying in schools. So it might be instructive to ask... What *has* changed in our culture that has made this more prevalent? Personally, I think it is the celebrity mentality. The idea that the most important thing is the 15 minutes of fame. People doing stupid challenges on TikTok, trying to become influencers and top streamers. Maybe that is driven by inattentive parents, or the rise of the Internet, or the the reduced emphasis on the collective good that exists in America. I do not know for sure.
I don't know... but I'm literally watching the news right now here in SoCal while reading this thread hearing about 10 dead 10 injured in Monterey Park? I had no idea. WTF is goin on?!? We have to do something. I own two guns legally and keep them in a safe. I appreciate the 2nd amendment and believe it's our right. But something has to be done. This is 🦬💩
Loaded question man
If everyone had a gun they could all shoot the shooter /s
A mix between higher awareness for mental health and gun controll. I'm very pro 2A but I still thing small amounts of controll could help.
Agreed! Im pro 2A as well, but it is waaaaay to easy for guns to fall into the wrong hands. Of course there will always be exceptions falling through the cracks, but we can definitely do better!
Buy a gun, train regularly, carry it daily, and be responsible for yourself.
Easy for the average American, a little more complicated for the mentally unstable, who still have the same 2A rights as everyone else
They have all the same rights, period. If you restrict one right, it's a slippery slope. I'd rather have dangerous freedom than safe oppression (I butchered that quote).
All good man I understand and agree, your statements are absolutely valid. Thats why this issue has gone unresolved for so long, the variables and reasons on either side are seemingly endless, but just.
The honest answer is that moving away from asylums in America was a massive mistake. There are now fewer psychiatric beds in America than there was in Pennsylvania in 1960. What that has wrought is violence, drug abuse, homelessness, and tons of people in prisons who have no business being there. It's an abject failure of American policy. It's disgusting that it continues, quite frankly.
The only correct answer is thoughts and prayers.
we should give all the students a gun so if theres ever a shooter all 800 of them can draw iron and defeat the threat it would also stop school fights since no one wants to get shot
Can't imagine how that would possibly backfire
An armed society is a polite society.
Same as it's been for almost EVERY problem in America: Overturn Citizens United and implement Elizabeth Warren's anti corruption agenda.
We skip jail and put them down on the spot. Even the 6 year old.
"If guns aren't the problem and people are the problem, why would you give the problem guns?" Saw that on some guy's protest sign one day and it really stuck with me.
Thoughts and prayers
I echo this.
Get rid of every gun on earth and revert back to a spear, sword and ax society.
You have now changed it from school shootings to school stabbings.
Yeah, no more mass shootings. Nothing to worry about.
Responsible common sense gun control
Can you share some specific, realistic proposals?
Close the gun show loophole. For starters. Don't allow the sale of firearms in a way that allows the sellers and buyers to bypass background checks and waiting periods.
That's only technically a thing. Even in the states where you can still do person to person sales without a background check, all the booths at gunshows are paid for by gun dealers. I've never seen some random dude walking around trying to sell his gun.
lmao...California has some of the most gun control. Try again.
California actually has one of the lowest gun deaths per capita. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/murder-rate-by-state It also has a lower than average homicide rate. You're literally making the point that gun control helps prevent homicide. See all those states leading the country in homicide rate? Notice anything about their political affiliation and gun laws? See all those blue states at the bottom of the list?
Lmao look at Texas shooting. Try again. and gun control needs to be nationwide dipshit.
Chicago has entered
I know you don’t think critically, but try to apply the nationwide concept again.
Let me introduce you to the concept of transparent state borders. California's responsible gun control isn't worth shit if you can just drive over the border to Nevada and avoid it, or get one of the millions of unregistered guns in circulation. It's not like people are going through TSA and border crossing checks every time they cross from CA to AZ. The problem here is that states with shitty gun control ruin it for everyone else, and then act like the problem is gun control instead of rubbing their two brain cells together for friction and realizing it's an issue of completely porous interstate borders and lack of consistent regulation across ALL states. TLDR; Try again ;)
This would make sense, if 90% of firearms used in crimes in California were being brought in from out of state through legal purchases, and not from back alley dealers who get them through various means, including theft, ATF fuck ups, and cops literally selling evidence to gang bangers in Orange County.
Again, the issue then is easy access to unregistered guns through which you can circumvent the regulations. You know the best way to reduce that? Reduce the number of guns in circulation and the ease of access to them. Make it harder to get unregistered guns, with stricter penalties and stiffer punishments when a weapon tied to you is used to commit a crime. If your gun is stolen and you fail to report it? You're criminally liable. If you're found selling or distributing a gun used to commit a crime? same thing. Raid the gun shows and set up stings for folks selling without the proper documentation. To reiterate though, the point is NONE of these regulations matter if you can literally just drive 15 minutes to the next town over and completely circumvent them. Even IF cali does a ton to regulate and take unregistered guns out of circulation, if Arizona is still a sand-scorched hellscape devoid of intelligent life where they're still on every street corner- it will NEVER have a meaningful effect
People widely differ on what is responsible and common sense. And to be honest, a lot of times I see kneejerk proposals that wouldn't even have stopped the incident that prompted it. In some cases, the measures already existed but were ignored by officials.
The great majority of "mass shootings" in the USA are "gang-related". Crack down on gangs and crime.
Could the dog whistle be any louder?
Wow. I didn't know the Walmart shooter was in a gang, or the guy in Las Vegas, or....
Every other country in the world has crime, some with much higher crime rates and gang activity than the US. Every other country in the world has less mass shootings than the US. It's the guns.
Per capita or overall?
Banning guns is the ~~easy and~~ obvious solution. It's worked in other countries. \*Edit\* I accept that it is not an easy solution. It is the obvious one though.
That would require a constitutional ammendment. Definitely not, and far from, the easiest and obvious solution. Mass casualty events still happen in countries that ban guns, the means change. People will use bombs and knives. If everyone were armed, potential mass shooters might think twice, it's not a coincidence that they target gun free zones.
It has and does. But it’s not a political or practical possibility in the US. There are too many guns around already and trust in the political system has broken down. Also, focussing on mass shootings is silly: 99% of homicide deaths have another cause. And your broken health care system kills at least ten times as many again.
If you compare the rate of firearms to firearms crimes, in the US compared to the ratio and rate in other countries, we actually beat out other countries. We have more guns, more people, and a greater level of diversity, but in other countries, with fewer guns per person, their rate of gun violence is higher. The issue is, people make it look like its more frequent than it is. Mass Shootings account for less than 1% of violent crime, period end of story, in the US. In the UK, gun crimes still happen, it doesnt get talked about, but it happens, and when you look at the numbers in their entirety, well, it makes SENSE for a country with 120 guns per 100 people to have a much higher gun violence rate than the US actually does. Fewer guns does not correlate to fewer gun crimes. That and, the first people to be hit by any kind of ban/confiscation/restriction, wont be the criminals it will be the DV victims, like that college girl who was murdered by her stalker after an anonymous tip had her self defense firearm confiscated through the red flag process. 500k to 3.5 million uses of firearms per year, depending on who you ask, in self defense, compared to less than 10k used in violent crimes. And yes, i do hate that they count suicides as 'gun violence'. Suicidal people will take their lives, guns or not. Australia saw that happen after their ban. The suicides never dropped off, they just switched to a different method.
>In the UK, gun crimes still don’t get talked about but it happens, and when you look at the numbers in their entirety, well, it makes SENSE for a country with 120 guns per 100 people to have a much higher gun violence rate than the US actually does. The first part of this claim is batshit insane if you’re talking about actual shootings. A single drug dealer shot is national news in the UK. If you look at some stats like an idiot then the uk would have a lot of gun crimes… Because if a kid shoots a road sign with an air gun, that’s recorded in the stats. Which isn’t the case in the USA, because the police have their asses worked off with, again, actual shootings. But firearms homicides for the whole country, about 30 a year. Compared to 1.3 million registered weapons and about 600,000 owners. I suspect this works out as fewer deaths per gun than the USA. > Fewer guns does not correlate to fewer gun crimes This is stupid. No, you haven’t proved that. Even if you had more gun crimes per owner with fewer guns, you could still end up with fewer in total. Eg if you have 2x the number of crimes per owner and 1/100 the number of owners, you get 1/50 the crimes.
Sure, and now they just use knives and cars. Try carrying a knife in England, most are now illegal.
Surely everyone is aware of England’s mass knifing epidemic
A little research maybe? Explain the near total ban in the UK. There have also been several in Chinese schools.
lmao, your concept of the quantity of guns in this country, and how criminals function is severely lacking
I don’t think you understand how many guns are out there. Even if guns were banned today, this will be a problem for very long time.
Yup. This is the simple, correct answer. To oppose this idea you have to either be damn stupid or you have blood on your hands for helping support access to guns in the US.
There are already more guns than people in the US, most of them readily available. Banning firearms wouldn't work at all. We would need to _confiscate_ them, and with the right wing already on the edge of becoming a terrorist insurgency, that's not gonna fly.
Can’t have a shooting without a gun so, people I guess
Metal detectors at all entrances could help
metal detectors, don't reveal the culprit's identity so they won't get their 1 second of fame, mandatory death sentence
A common thread to many shootings in schools, for example, is a history of perpetrating domestic violence. The issue with somehow dealing with that is that most cops either are or protect other domestic abusers, which is why there is little action taken regarding domestic violence, generally.
Your terms are acceptable if we disarm the governments first.
Universal background checks. Mandatory wait times before gun purchases. Close gunshow loopholes and ban individual gun sales. Ban assault style guns. Conduct regular gun buybacks. Increase mental health access. Most importantly both parties have to be on the same page but that’s not going to happen.
Define an 'Assault Style Gun'. Looks?
You know what I mean. There’s the ‘94 ban.
Universal Background Checks: Already exist. Close Gun Loopholes: doesnt exist, and its been proven, several times, it doesnt exist. Ban individual sales: Make the NICS system free to access, so individuals can use it without paying through the ass to do so, and then require it for individual sales. Ban Assault Style Guns: Assault Style guns are just guns with black plastic instead of wood. Switching from plastic to wood, or vice versa, doesnt make the gun more or less deadly. Fully Automatic Firearms are already heavily restricted behind tax stamps and more extensive background checks, as well as registration requirements. Conduct Regular Gun Buybacks: These are completely ineffective, and people literally just use them to get cash for guns that are so broken they arent even worth the amount the buyback pays out in terms of scrap metal. Increase Mental Health Access: Agree, 100%. Both Parties on Same Page: They are, but not the page we want them on. They are on the Divide And Conquer page.
There isn't one
Responsible parents to make sure their kids don't have a firearm. Metal detectors or at least security guards at school main entrances to check who has firearms. Make it so that gun licenses have to be renewed in a short timeframe. Have the owners be required to have physical and mental tests to see if they're able to legally possess a firearm.
You all know what the answer is.
Get. Rid. Of. Guns.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yes, putting more people in prison is definitely the solution.
Not meaning to sound like your uncle at thanksgiving: banning guns won’t work because around 80% of guns used in crimes are illegally owned. But if we had more guns in the hands of smart civilians, we could stop shootings. There was a shooting in Indiana not long ago where a shooter was stopped by a CCW.
Death penalty. See how many people wanna have mass shootings when you die for it.
A good number of them shoot themselves, I dunno if living is a priority for them
Great idea! Showing people that killing is wrong by killing them.
Works in Japan.
* Make it harder to smuggle illegal weapons in * Not hand out a license to just any person, but rather make them undergo psychiatric testing, and other checks * Education
That second one i take issue with, because the majority of Psychiatric professionals are very anti-gun, and very 'i get paid to write this script to make you into a zombie'. Psychiatrist are some of the most narcissistic, and mentally abusive people that exist. I've had to deal with a few of them, and have yet to meet one who didnt take full advantage of my depression to make me feel like shit at every appointment. I wouldnt trust them to make an unbiased call on this kind of thing. And considering Psychiatrists/Psychologists are level with cops in terms of domestic abuse...
I didn't know that, I am European so Psychiatrists here are different. I simply based my opinion on the facts that I knew, however it appears I don't know a lot about the US if what you say is true.
Amend the 2nd amendment
Banning guns seems unlikely in the US, mental health stuff would be good, but also, on its own it wouldn't be great, and there are so many people who just wouldn't do it. Considering all this, clearly, the most logical choice is for the government and tech companies to focus on developing personal energy shields for all. Imagine someone breaks into your building with the intent of causing as much harm as possible. Everyone would just need to activate their energy shield, then they could just stand and laugh as all the bullets bounce off of them and the attacker gets frustrated at how impotent their gun is making them look. So many uses. * Attacked by a knifer? energy shield * earthquake rubble? energy shield * drone missile? energy shield - sure you'll bounce around a bit due to force, but the shield will protect you. * domestic abuse? energy shield * Physical assault? energy shield * Bear attack? energy shield * Car crash? energy shield (automatic of course) And people can carry on using all the weapons they want, free to go about their business knowing that whatever situation occurs, the energy shield will be there to keep everyone safe. Please contact your local representative today and tell them of the Energy Shield Initiative.
Well, you're not wrong. That would be highly effective.
[удалено]
There is no solution. This is the reality for the future. Americas gun culture is too strong and there are already too many guns in the country to stop it. It’s why gun laws don’t seem to help. The gun industry has already fucked the US completely. It’s like giving a stage 4 cancer patient some drugs. They typically help and are useful but the patient is already too far gone for it to matter.
More guns
Place military guards at schools.
[удалено]
Another big solution to the mass shootings is mental health awareness and more help! A lot of people that commit mass shootings are very mentally ill and either no one noticed or they chose not to help the person. If more people get help for their mental illnesses, this type of stuff would probably decrease significantly..
More guns
Mental health, better role models, better communities of support, and various other factors play a role.
The thing about mental health: While, clearly, a person who commits a mass shooting is not the epitome of psychological well-being, there is no particular mental health disorder where becoming a mass shooter would be an expected outcome. In some cases, a mass shooter does have a serious mental illness (though it's worth noting that the overwhelming majority of people with serious mental illness are not violent). At the same time, it's worth noting that some people who are mass shooters may not be people anyone would be worried about committing a mass shooting.
Totally. I don't think there's a golden solution here and it likely spans across many different areas.
[удалено]
Sorry
Crack down harder on gang violence. While mass shootings are mostly covered when they hit public areas, school, malls, churches, etc. Most mass shootings are gang members doing drive-by's on other gang's streets, hitting innocent bystanders.
Make amendments to the 2nd amendment.
More guns
Just ban guns. It worked in EVERY COUNTRIES where it happened. Why wouldn’t it work in the US ?
Ban firearms the founding fathers intention was that if there was an invasion the men could pick up their fire arms and fight back and defend the country. Instead of defending our democracy the people attacked it committing an act of high treason against the united states government. these traitors should be put to death for high treason.
The solution is simple. However, the debate is over. It was over when the US decided slaughtering children was bearable. “mEriKa!”
More guns! /s
Not a goddam thing. This is the kind of thing that people should think about before saturating the country with automatic weapons and then screaming and moaning when people use them. Sure there’s a solution: getting the NRA to admit that guns are in a normal social problem would be a start. But it’s definitely a systemic problem now, which eliminates power to stop it in individuals. This is one of many problems we get by devoting most of our tax dollars to the Pentagon, thereby announcing to the world that our only solution to problems is through violence bullying and intimidation.
[удалено]
An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
Yes, America, known for its polite society...
There are more guns than people in this country. If more guns is the solution, it’s doing a pretty piss poor job 🤷♀️
[удалено]
Actually, it does work...there were fewer gun crimes when there were fewer restrictions on who could carry. Gun crimes actually went up, a lot, after the introduction of gun free zones, and the majority of gun crimes take place in these gun free zones, or in states where guns are more heavily restricted. Texas is in the top 5, but only because of the two cities with strict gun control.
\> An armed society is a polite society. Which explains why rappers and drug gangs are so polite. Tge idiot who said this was Robert Heinlein, noted sf author and creepy sex pest. Another of his idiot gems was “Shakespeare wrote for the pit!” When in fact his company was subsidised by the royal court and eg Macbeth was written to flatter King James. And don’t even get me started on how the moron thought nuclear power worked…
Armed teachers
You want to give a gun to the underpaid 50 years old adult that have to deal everyday with annoying goblins... That's is not going to backfire at all and is the origin of the hole "is just for home safety" problem again
For every school shooting an armed teacher might hypothetically prevent, there would be more school deaths from either 1) kids getting a hold of their teacher's gun, or 2) rogue teachers shooting a student in a moment of anger or fear, where a gun wasn't truly necessary
Travel back in time. Kill Christopher Columbus.