Mass shooting in el paso

weisses

Aaannnddd the reps blaming video games :rolleyes:

El_Duderino 09

banie01 wrote: »

Yep he did.
Claimed that both shooters had severe mental health issues.

If that's true* then what will he do.about mental health services in the country?

*if it's true meaning if they were both receiving treatment for diagnosed mental helt problems. If he's just declaring them mental health problems without evidence, to take pressure off fun Control legislation, then it's just nonsense and not at all helpful to the situation.

Bateman

Sure nobody in power feels the need to help the situation, they don't care about people shooting each other up

Tony EH

Bateman wrote: »

Sure nobody in power feels the need to help the situation, they don't care about people shooting each other up

And this is the biggest problem with the modern western political class. Just look at the heads of state of both the US and Britain. People born into extreme wealth that never had a day in the real world.

How are those kinds of people supposed to legislate for the majority of ordinary folk?

None of their own political decisions even affect them in the slightest.

alchemist33

Tony EH wrote: »

I don't think this is true. Nobody of a sound state of mind would even consider such an action.



That fear shouldn't eliminate the obvious.

Nobody is saying these people are just mildly depressed. They have serious sociopathic and psychopathic issues. Nobody of a normal state of mind goes to a school to shoot up kids.

Depends on your definition of sound state of mind. Just because someone has different values to you and me doesn't mean they're "unsound", even if they're abhorrent and held by a minority. If this was the case few murderers would go to prison but would instead be in secure hospitals.

This doesn't mean there's no role for psychological help for some people with a grudge against society, but it's limited when up against the twin forces of personality and a society that serves to radicalise and drive them on.

super_furry

weisses wrote: »

Aaannnddd the reps blaming video games :rolleyes:

They’ll blame whatever the NRA pay them to blame, just protect the religion of guns and nothing else matters to them.

Mad how every single other civilized country has the exact same videogames but those mass-murders don’t happen there.

YFlyer

tuxy wrote: »

Very rare for anyone to carry out more than one mass shooting so not really a hobby.

Deflection

Tony EH

alchemist33 wrote: »

Depends on your definition of sound state of mind. Just because someone has different values to you and me doesn't mean they're "unsound", even if they're abhorrent and held by a minority. If this was the case few murderers would go to prison but would instead be in secure hospitals.

There's a world of difference between somebody who murders another person and a mass killer.

And some someone that goes into a shopping centre to kill as many people as he can before getting killed by the police isn't someone who just has "different values".

It's somebody that's clearly not firing on all cylinders.

alchemist33 wrote: »

This doesn't mean there's no role for psychological help for some people with a grudge against society, but it's limited when up against the twin forces of personality and a society that serves to radicalise and drive them on.

America has a HUGE problem with mental heath and access to mental health facilities. Most of the people who end up on the streets do so due to some mental health issue.

The health system (mental or otherwise) in the US is in an appalling state, full stop, and it directly plays into issues like these mass shooter nut cases. That, coupled with infantile obsession with guns is a recipe for the disasters of this nature that we see over there on an all too regular basis.

El_Duderino 09

Tony EH wrote: »

And this is the biggest problem with the modern western political class. Just look at the heads of state of both the US and Britain. People born into extreme wealth that never had a day in the real world.

How are those kinds of people supposed to legislate for the majority of ordinary folk?

None of their own political decisions even affect them in the slightest.

It's a strange point that some people should just be wealthy and people feel wealthy people should make decisions for them. Just look at the attitudes towards inheritance tax. The most ardent supporters of meritocracy will support inheritance without tax. The very opposite to merit, is inheriting wealth.

Likewise people feel more Comfortable with wealthy people in power. I'm often amused by the American republicans who slag off AOC for having recently been a bar worker. You'd think they would be all about someone pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. But in reality, they straddle both sides.


On a separate note I chatted with an English bloke about this and he opposed inheritance tax because, the British nobility system would collapse in a generation if interitance was abolished. I asked if he thought the nobility was a good thing and he said "no". It's amazing how people just believe that some people should be born extremely wealthy but would also support meritocracy.

markodaly

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Pathetic losers who fail at life and blame all their problems on brown people/women/liberals?

Boggles wrote: »

Nothing complex about him.

Racist saddo who spent his pathetic life online ranting and raving about foreign people, blaming his inadequacies on others.

Sounds all too familiar.

Just a general observation on this issue, but I do not think comments like these are actually helpful to the overall situation of mass shooters.

I know, probably the worst forum to talk about its as its full of passive-aggressive keyboard warriors but sure, ill try.

Columbine was seminal as it brought this issue of mass shooters into the mainstream of public consciousness and marked a clear escalation in the frequency of these types of shootings.

I also think back to this clip.

Mostly, I think MM is spot on here. The overall level of paranoia, fear, hype and mass consumption of media and pharmaceutical drugs play havoc into the mindsets of many Americans, especially young white males.

It's easy to say that these people are sexually repressed losers, who can't get it up so they hate this group or that group.

The same nonsense was bandied about after 9/11 as Americans struggled to get their heads around the fact that so many people could willingly kill themselves by hijacking a plane and flying it into a building. These people were labeled sexually repressed virgin goat herders who hated the world and wanted to lash out, or something equally silly.

Almost 20 years later, we are wiser into the creation of suicide bombers and would-be lone-wolf terrorists. This is why there are so many government-funded outreach programs.

However, with this issue in America, nonsense simplistic responses aside, we need to examine the psychology and reasons as to why people flip and go and shot up a mall/church/school/festival. It's much more complicated than simply being a 'loser' or a 'racist'.

dodderangler

Tony EH wrote: »

A proper hunting rifle will yield much better results than a toy like an AR15. Ask anyone that actually does hunting, genius.

I do hunt you clown

Tokyo

dodderangler wrote: »

I do hunt you clown

Mod: cut it out.

Manic Moran

Tony EH wrote: »

A proper hunting rifle will yield much better results than a toy like an AR15. Ask anyone that actually does hunting, genius.

Not quite sure where you’re going with that one. An AR-15 is a perfectly serviceable hunting rifle and is commonly used for that purpose.

It’s why it’s so popular, it’s so good at so many different jobs. It can be a short-shoulder .22 plinker for your twelve-year-old, and five minutes later, your lanky self with long arms can be hunting hogs with .50 cal rounds by extending the stock and swapping the upper. The reason it's the most commonly bought centerfire rifle in the US isn't because it's cool or people have delusions of military grandeur. It's because it's a damned good rifle.

JohnnyFlash

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not quite sure where you’re going with that one. An AR-15 is a perfectly serviceable hunting rifle and is commonly used for that purpose.

It’s why it’s so popular, it’s so good at so many different jobs. It can be a short-shoulder .22 plinker for your twelve-year-old, and five minutes later, your lanky self with long arms can be hunting hogs with .50 cal rounds by extending the stock and swapping the upper. The reason it's the most commonly bought centerfire rifle in the US isn't because it's cool or people have delusions of military grandeur. It's because it's a damned good rifle.

Your 12 year old? Jesus Christ.

lawlolawl

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Your 12 year old? Jesus Christ.

Murica!

tuxy

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Your 12 year old? Jesus Christ.

There's nothing in the constitution that says 12 years old should not be part of the well-regulated militia.

markodaly

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Your 12 year old? Jesus Christ.

I don't think MM was specifically advocating that AR-15s should be sold to 12-year-olds, merely that he was commenting on the adaptable and functional nature of the rifle itself.

I think this is where there is a disconnect, especially among Irish people when it comes to guns themselves. The average Irish person, in general, hasn't a bulls notion about guns. However, there are many people out there especially Americans, who are into them from a hobbyist point of view. The same way someone may like classic cars or fixing up old radios or bikes.

I am not into them myself but a colleague of mine is, and is an active member of a gun club and is an avid collector and shooter. The level of work, detail, and effort that goes into his hobby is something else. He makes his own bullets and has been trying to fix one of his guns for the past year by making different types of bullets for it, in an effort to find out why the thing won't shoot as straight as it should. He goes as far as clamping a vice around the gun to see if tweaking this or that can straighten the thing up. He is fairly responsible himself and his wife is equally into it as a hobby. They met at the gun club decades ago and have four kids.

Naturally, guns are in of themselves a different tool, so people get very emotive about the topic and can only see them as a lethal weapon and not as a means of sport or hunting or self-defense.

gandalf

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not quite sure where you’re going with that one. An AR-15 is a perfectly serviceable hunting rifle and is commonly used for that purpose.

It’s why it’s so popular, it’s so good at so many different jobs. It can be a short-shoulder .22 plinker for your twelve-year-old, and five minutes later, your lanky self with long arms can be hunting hogs with .50 cal rounds by extending the stock and swapping the upper. The reason it's the most commonly bought centerfire rifle in the US isn't because it's cool or people have delusions of military grandeur. It's because it's a damned good rifle.

Just as you are demonstrating it's versatility as a hunting weapon it still doesn't take away its genesis as a military assault weapon. It's original design was to kill humans, not game. If you need a 100 round magazine to succeed as a hunter then you're not very good at it.

At the end of the day this doesn't effect us directly here in Ireland. If a US citizen is happy to take the risk of being gunning down by a disillusioned 20 something year old white guy fair enough, if they are happy that their kids have to enter their schools through metal detectors and then do shooter drills then peachy. Personally I couldn't live in a society like that.

jill_valentine

markodaly wrote: »

It's much more complicated than simply being a 'loser' or a 'racist'.

But those things aren’t untrue...

There was a complete failure, imho, to understand the Colombine killers at the time, and a whole semi-sympathetic mythology was built around them which Michael Moore's movie helped contribute to.

The narrative of the shooters as victims of bullying who just snapped, or miscellaneously frustrated outcasts, was set out early on and repeated uncritically, until it became the template on how these people are presented in media.

The reality is, both Columbine shooters were known *as bullies* by their fellow students. This is true of a huge proportion of teen shooters - they consider themselves pushed-to-the-brink victims, and will often be described as such in tv profiles because that's the Falling Down story expect - but in reality they've been making everyone else's lives miserable and picking on people around them for years.

The major lapse in Moore's treatment of them is in barely even mentioning that Klebold and Harris were enthusiastic Neo Nazis. They were not shy about telling people as much, writing and bragging about it at length, Harris in particular based his whole personal identity around it. *They* considered it a big part of their mindset, but it was something only mentioned incidentally in coverage at the time - far behind all the music and videogame stuff.

Now if you or I were making a movie unpicking the circumstances that produced Columbine, would that not seem like something worth exploring in depth? Maybe somebody prone to thinking everyone in their school is out to get them and should be attacked, is also prone to thinking black people, women, immigrants etc out to get them. Maybe the consistent persecution complex of these folks could have had more to do with what happened than some random missile factory?

Maybe it's simpler than we often want to think it is.

dodderangler

mike_ie wrote: »

Mod: cut it out.

Cut what out❗️❓ he sarcastically calls me a genius but I call him a clown and I get a warning.
Boards really is gone liberal sided isn’t it.
This is why I generally stick to the hunting and shooting side of boards.
It’s not run by dems and libs

dodderangler

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Your 12 year old? Jesus Christ.

I was shooting when I was eight. What’s wrong❓ Nothing wrong with teaching children from a young age about using guns and the safety behind it. My children are being taught that atm. Well my eldest is.

BorneTobyWilde

Needs to be a push for people to report suspect would be mass shooters before they do harm. Those who talk of killing people should be reported, and have their weapons removed. These guys don't just pop up out of nowhere. There are many people who knew what this guy was thinking, yet they said nothing.

tuxy

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Needs to be a push for people to report suspect would be mass shooters before they do harm. Those who talk of killing people should be reported, and have their weapons removed. These guys don't just pop up out of nowhere. There are many people who knew what this guy was thinking, yet they said nothing.

So report anyone who owns a gun and makes a political statement on social media that is anywhere right of centre?

BorneTobyWilde

tuxy wrote: »

So report anyone who owns a gun and makes a political statement on social media that is anywhere right of centre?

These guys are far deeper than that. They have a long history of suggesting they'd carry out a mass shooting. These guys are few and far between.

steddyeddy

dodderangler wrote: »

I was shooting when I was eight. What’s wrong❓ Nothing wrong with teaching children from a young age about using guns and the safety behind it. My children are being taught that atm. Well my eldest is.

I'm afraid there is something wrong D. It doesn't really apply in Ireland but in America every bit of research demonstrates that more guns = more crime. It's that simple. Making your children familiar with guns is ignoring the causative factors in this. I don't think mass shootings are anything to do with someone lacking knowledge of gun safety.

Scientists Showed How More Guns Led To More Violent Crime
A Supreme Court case may soon create a constitutional right to freely carry a gun everywhere, but that would be a dangerous mistake to make, suggests a new study of violent crimes.

Right-to-carry handgun laws trigger a 13% to 15% increase in violent crime a decade after the typical state adopts them, suggests a new statistical analysis of 33 US states.

The Journal of Empirical Legal Studies report released Monday is the latest in a thorny academic fight over how letting people more freely carry around guns affects those crimes.

The research is conclusive. Mass shootings are more prevalent where gun laws are weaker.

A bit dramatic but this fact needs to be embedded in the head of everyone who doesn't think guns are part of the problem. Here's an article linking to the study.

Quote:
Study: where gun laws are weaker, there are more mass shootings
The study lines up with other research linking weaker laws and higher levels of gun ownership to more gun deaths.
And here's the actual study with the key findings presented below:

Quote:
Objective
To determine whether restrictiveness-permissiveness of state gun laws or gun ownership are associated with mass shootings in the US.

Results
Fully adjusted regression analyses showed that a 10 unit increase in state gun law permissiveness was associated with a significant 11.5% (95% confidence interval 4.2% to 19.3%, P=0.002) higher rate of mass shootings. A 10% increase in state gun ownership was associated with a significant 35.1% (12.7% to 62.7%, P=0.001) higher rate of mass shootings. Partially adjusted regression analyses produced similar results, as did analyses restricted to domestic and non-domestic mass shootings.

Conclusions
States with more permissive gun laws and greater gun ownership had higher rates of mass shootings, and a growing divide appears to be emerging between restrictive and permissive states.

BattleCorp

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Your 12 year old? Jesus Christ.

You can get a training licence here in Ireland at 14.

I was shooting with my Dad at about 7 or 8. He held the gun and aimed while I pulled the trigger. He taught me about gun safety and being responsible with a gun. I'm sure Manic is the same with his children.

If you want to be an Olympic target shooter, you have to start that young.

steddyeddy

dodderangler wrote: »

Cut what out❗️❓ he sarcastically calls me a genius but I call him a clown and I get a warning.
Boards really is gone liberal sided isn’t it.
This is why I generally stick to the hunting and shooting side of boards.
It’s not run by dems and libs

It's amazing that I spend a lot of time in Colorado and when I come back I find people talking the exact same way. This is Ireland. There's no liberal, Dems or Republican divide.

steddyeddy

BattleCorp wrote: »

You can get a training licence here in Ireland at 14.

I was shooting with my Dad at about 7 or 8. He held the gun and aimed while I pulled the trigger. He taught me about gun safety and being responsible with a gun. I'm sure Manic is the same with his children.

If you want to be an Olympic target shooter, you have to start that young.

But again we don't have a problem with mass shootings and gun crime like the states does.

dodderangler

steddyeddy wrote: »

It's amazing that I spend a lot of time in Colorado and when I come back I find people talking the exact same way. This is Ireland. There's no liberal, Dems or Republican divide.

There is trust me. You got to explore Ireland and find it. But it is.

steddyeddy

dodderangler wrote: »

There is trust me. You got to explore Ireland and find it. But it is.

Then you don't know what Lib, Dem or republican means. There's nothing like those here.