Why?

[Natebishop3]

I've been thinking about this a lot today and I understand that the knee jerk reaction is to blame guns, but guns aren't the problem. The problem is figuring out why these gunmen are willing to kill innocent people who they've never met, and in this case small children. What is bringing these people to cross that line? The guns are just the tool of choice for these evil deeds. The reasoning behind the actions is what we need to be targeting.

Is it mental illness?

Is it too much violence on TV or video games or the internet?

Is it a desire for attention?

Guns have been around for hundreds of years, and automatic guns with high capacity magazines have been around for nearly a hundred years. Thompson sub machine guns were available to the general public back in the 1920's. Why are people suddenly acting out and killing people they've never met?

If we can figure out the "why", maybe we can stop these shootings from happening, because taking away guns is not going to stop the problem. It might diminish the damages, but it won't fix the imbalance in these people's heads.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Aspergers

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...disturbed-kid-article-1.1220752#ixzz2F6hBjjRI

He was dark and disturbed, a deeply troubled boy from a wealthy family who unnerved his neighbors and classmates.

Mass murderer Adam Lanza, 20, was a ticking time bomb, people who knew him told the Daily News.

“This was a deeply disturbed kid,” a family insider told the Daily News. “He certainly had major issues. He was subject to outbursts from what I recall.”

Lanza, who friends and officials said suffered from Asperger’s syndrome or a personality disorder, had a tortured mind.

He was socially awkward and at times unstable, but also extraordinarily bright.

“He was smart,” the insider said. “He was like one of these real brainiac computer kind of kids.”

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

He probably watched that scene in Star Wars where anakin skywalker slaughtered the young Jedi kids and copied it.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

What does Japan do about their mentally ill?

Japan has a huge problem with suicide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Japan

Also, this is interesting:
[video=youtube;4FDSdg09df8]

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

oh and here is the answer to the question:

[video=youtube;a01QQZyl-_I]

 

[Natebishop3]

Ok, so if it's just plain, old fashioned, crazy..... how do you stop that? You can't just lock them up for no reason, but if they make threats or can legitimately be considered a danger to themselves or others, then something has to be done. Therapy and drugs only can go so far.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Japan has a huge problem with suicide.

Also, this is interesting:
[video=youtube;4FDSdg09df8]

They commit suicide rather than shame their family. It has a long history of being an honorable way to go out

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Ok, so if it's just plain, old fashioned, crazy..... how do you stop that? You can't just lock them up for no reason, but if they make threats or can legitimately be considered a danger to themselves or others, then something has to be done. Therapy and drugs only can go so far.

Isn't that the argument for banning guns essentially? Even though a small number of guns result in gun deaths, you have to ban them for the greater good?

 

[Natebishop3]

Isn't that the argument for banning guns essentially? Even though a small number of guns result in gun deaths, you have to ban them for the greater good?

But that's the whole point.... you ban guns, you aren't addressing the problem. You're just changing what these people will end up using. Perhaps it will be a bomb next time, or a knife. They're still crazy. They will still have thoughts of killing innocent people. Maybe you don't have a huge mass killing with a knife, but China has mostly disproved that thought. Though there weren't any deaths today in that mass stabbing, the prior stabbings took many young lives. If someone is intent on killing, they will find a way.

After England restricted guns, assault with a knife went up to the highest numbers in the history of the country. We aren't going to restrict knives, so at what point do we actually start looking at the problem? Why are so many kids being born with autism? The numbers have gone up drastically over the last twenty years.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Some people say immunizations. There are other theories as well. But like I said earlier that people don't want to talk about it or the negative repercussions. How many more mass murders Aspergers individuals will it take to realize they aren't all Rainman.

 

[Natebishop3]

Some people say immunizations. There are other theories as well. But like I said earlier that people don't want to talk about it or the negative repercussions. How many more mass murders Aspergers individuals will it take to realize they aren't all Rainman.

Because nobody wants to look at what could be the reason...

Is it all the radio waves floating around out there? Cell phones, wifi, etc.

Is it our diets? Could be from all the GMO foods.

Is it the immunizations?

We have our comfort level and we don't want to take a long, hard look at what is causing our kids to be born with some serious problems.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Or let them run Sony.

I have to admit, i started this thread out of profound heartache for those children. That said, I got a big laugh out of your comment. The primary reason is our Sony dvd/cd disc changer went bad last night and the wife and I had just settled in with some popcorn, Christmas lights on and a good Christmas dvd in and the Sony decided to fail.

But to add to it, we went to Worst Buy and bought another Sony CD player, Sony dvd player- but the new receiver (the old one only works now via remote) is a Denon.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Ok, so if it's just plain, old fashioned, crazy..... how do you stop that? You can't just lock them up for no reason, but if they make threats or can legitimately be considered a danger to themselves or others, then something has to be done. Therapy and drugs only can go so far.

(when sober, my dad was an MD for the state hospital system, so here is my insight based on what I learned from that) Most people with profound mental/emotional illness do not fully "blossom" until their late 20's. So prior to that a lot of time is spent diagnosing and looking into various treatments. It's not until via trial and error it is determined they need to be in institutionalized. And the hope is that along the way something like this doesn't happen. Also, most states (like Oregon) have placed money to run institutions into education or other to pay for pensions and out of mental health. I know 3 large Oregon state hospitals went extinct and the money reappointed. Add to that the federal money has also shrunk over the years.

 

[Natebishop3]

(when sober, my dad was an MD for the state hospital system, so here is my insight based on what I learned from that) Most people with profound mental/emotional illness do not fully "blossom" until their late 20's. So prior to that a lot of time is spent diagnosing and looking into various treatments. It's not until via trial and error it is determined they need to be in institutionalized. And the hope is that along the way something like this doesn't happen. Also, most states (like Oregon) have placed money to run institutions into education or other to pay for pensions and out of mental health. I know 3 large Oregon state hospitals went extinct and the money reappointed. Add to that the federal money has also shrunk over the years.

And rather than look at that, we have a horde of angry people screaming about gun control right now.

Why aren't people looking at the cause and not the effect?

Guns are not the cause.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

And rather than look at that, we have a horde of angry people screaming about gun control right now.

We need both. But add to it out of control and glorified violence in every form of entertainment.

 

[Natebishop3]

We need both. But add to it out of control and glorified violence in every form of entertainment.

The thing is, we could add stricter gun control laws. Make it harder to get certain types of guns, or take longer to get a gun, but that's not going to stop these shootings. In both cases, the Clackamas and the Newtown shootings, the gunmen took the guns from other people. They did not acquire the guns themselves. What's going to stop that from happening after stricter laws are put in place?

 

[andalusian]

Guns are not the cause.

Man, I hate this cliche. Guns are easy to get, easy to use and capable of causing a mass damage. This most certainly is part of the problem. Will you eliminate the problem completely if there were no guns? Of course not. Will you eliminate some of the problems (and not a trivial amount)? Yeah, I believe so.

Sure, guns are not the problem. It's (unstable) people with guns that are the problem. Separate the two and you have less of an issue...

The obvious solution is to make them harder to get and better controlled. It does not mean eliminate them. It means however that you need better checks on getting them, better education on using them - and bigger fines for losing them or not reporting them lost/taken.

Heck, many states have mandatory periodic vehicle checks for safety. No reason not to require the same for guns.

The modern world gave us many efficient ways to get lots of dangerous stuff produced and distributed, not using better technology and processes to control it will cause problems. It's really not hard to grasp.

and lets face it - if you bought a dangerous equipment and you can not protect it from unstable people - than maybe you should not be entitled to own it...

 

[RR7]

The thing is, we could add stricter gun control laws. Make it harder to get certain types of guns, or take longer to get a gun, but that's not going to stop these shootings. In both cases, the Clackamas and the Newtown shootings, the gunmen took the guns from other people. They did not acquire the guns themselves. What's going to stop that from happening after stricter laws are put in place?

All depends on the stricter laws. Like someone mentioned in the other thread, something like not allowing guns in a house with someone with mental problems, defined...somehow. I don't know. There's likely a line you can draw. You're never going to stop them all. Would that stop some? Possibly.

 

[Natebishop3]

Man, I hate this cliche. Guns are easy to get, easy to use and capable of causing a mass damage. This most certainly is part of the problem. Will you eliminate the problem completely if there were no guns? Of course not. Will you eliminate some of the problems (and not a trivial amount)? Yeah, I believe so.

Sure, guns are not the problem. It's (unstable) people with guns that are the problem. Separate the two and you have less of an issue...

The obvious solution is to make them harder to get and better controlled. It does not mean eliminate them. It means however that you need better checks on getting them, better education on using them - and bigger fines for losing them or not reporting them lost/taken.

Heck, many states have mandatory periodic vehicle checks for safety. No reason not to require the same for guns.

The modern world gave us many efficient ways to get lots of dangerous stuff produced and distributed, not using better technology and processes to control it will cause problems. It's really not hard to grasp.

and lets face it - if you bought a dangerous equipment and you can not protect it from unstable people - than maybe you should not be entitled to own it...

That's not the cliche. I didn't say guns weren't the problem. I said they aren't the cause. They aren't causing these attacks. They are definitely part of the problem, but they aren't the cause of the problem. That's the whole point of this thread. Why? What is causing this to happen? People are becoming so fixated on the aftermath that they aren't seeing the forest for the trees. Why are people walking into a school full of strangers and killing them?

Terrorism is a horrible thing, but at least you can say that you know why a terrorist does what he does. Why are these people going through with these shootings?

 

[RR7]

That's not the cliche. I didn't say guns weren't the problem. I said they aren't the cause. They aren't causing these attacks. They are definitely part of the problem, but they aren't the cause of the problem. That's the whole point of this thread. Why? What is causing this to happen? People are becoming so fixated on the aftermath that they aren't seeing the forest for the trees. Why are people walking into a school full of strangers and killing them?

Terrorism is a horrible thing, but at least you can say that you know why a terrorist does what he does. Why are these people going through with these shootings?

Well, judging by the way most people want to fight terrorism, there is no use in finding the root cause, just kill the people, and try to stop the means in which they carry out their attacks.

 

[Natebishop3]

Well, judging by the way most people want to fight terrorism, there is no use in finding the root cause, just kill the people, and try to stop the means in which they carry out their attacks.

Unfortunately we can't fight mental illness the way we fight terrorism, but I think the key right now is trying to find a way to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill people. Can that realistically be achieved though? I don't think it can.

 

[RR7]

Unfortunately we can't fight mental illness the way we fight terrorism, but I think the key right now is trying to find a way to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill people. Can that realistically be achieved though? I don't think it can.

Probably not. But you can make an effort. Like I said, not having guns in the house at the very least makes them have to go elsewhere to get the gun instead of right in their own house. It's easy to know where stuff is hidden in your own house. More difficult a neighbor or something.

 

[andalusian]

That's not the cliche. I didn't say guns weren't the problem. I said they aren't the cause.

I am sorry, the problem is not that the attacks happen. The problem is the damage the attacks cause - and guns are most certainly the cause here. If an unstable person goes into a rage armed with a plastic spoon he is going to cause a lot less damage - so the size of the tragedy is definitely caused by guns, their power, speed and ability to inflict damage, compounded by their ready availability, ease of use and lack of control.

You can cause a lot more issues by poisoning water sources - but water reservoirs (at least in most urban areas) are much better controlled - so this issue is not as prevalent.

 

[e_blazer]

The "why" question is one that any sane person inevitably asks after an incident like this. The problem is that these things aren't done by sane people and to the insane "why" isn't something that even necessarily factors into their actions. It seems to me that the key action that needs to be taken is to do a better job at identifying and treating people with mental health issues.

The issue of gun control is certainly something that is due for some discussion and action on a national policy level. It's brought into sharp focus when, on the same day as the Newtown rampage, there's an attack on school kids in Beijing by a guy using a knife to stab 22 children. Some were critically injured, but there have been no deaths from the attack. I'm in favor of responsible citizens being able to own guns for hunting and for personal protection. I do think, however, that there need to be some changes to the procedures necessary to buy guns, both to reduce access by those with mental health issues and to require more training buy purchasers . There probably also need to be changes in the types of guns available for purchase, possibly limits on who can buy semi-automatic weapons or maybe reduction in clip size. I'll be the first to admit that I don't have the answers as to what needs to be done, but it's time to start talking in a reasonable manner about this topic.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Unfortunately we can't fight mental illness the way we fight terrorism, but I think the key right now is trying to find a way to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill people. Can that realistically be achieved though? I don't think it can.

I have had experience with dealing with mental illness. A) The laws protect people to the point that you can not deny anyone of their civil rights without proving that they are a threat to them selves or others. This is done before a judge and is a long process, can take up to a few weeks to get before a judge. Once you can prove that someone is a threat they can be placed in an insitiution for an evaluation and can be treated and detained for up to 180 days. Once they are deemed "stable" that are released. Many never follow up with treatment or counceling, they fall through the cracks, end up othe streets, in shelters or dead. Those that have family or are fortunate unough to have a support system need little to constant care. Some may end up in a group home where care can be all over the map. The lucky one will be taken into a relitives home if there is someone available to provide supervision.

with all of that said..you cant jus tsay we need to make X law to protect us..those who suffer mental illness dont play by ANY rules in many cases.

 

[Natebishop3]

I am sorry, the problem is not that the attacks happen. The problem is the damage the attacks cause - and guns are most certainly the cause here. If an unstable person goes into a rage armed with a plastic spoon he is going to cause a lot less damage - so the size of the tragedy is definitely caused by guns, their power, speed and ability to inflict damage, compounded by their ready availability, ease of use and lack of control.

You can cause a lot more issues by poisoning water sources - but water reservoirs (at least in most urban areas) are much better controlled - so this issue is not as prevalent.

I can't argue with that, but like that Chinese knife attack, 22 kids were stabbed. And while that attack didn't take any lives, there have been many stabbings in China in the last few years that did. So like I said, we need to understand the cause rather than worry about the aftermath. But it's easier to blame the guns than to take a long, hard look at what is causing this.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Combo of mental health and easy access to guns.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Combo of mental health and easy access to guns.

does not take "easy access to guns" a bic lighter will do..

 

[andalusian]

I can't argue with that, but like that Chinese knife attack, 22 kids were stabbed. And while that attack didn't take any lives, there have been many stabbings in China in the last few years that did. So like I said, we need to understand the cause rather than worry about the aftermath. But it's easier to blame the guns than to take a long, hard look at what is causing this.

I am sorry, but "need to understand the cause" is irresponsible. What happens if it takes 100 more incidents of "understanding the cause" to get to it? What if it is 200, 1000?

I said it before, and I will say it again, a percentage improvement in damage control is well worth the cost - even if it does not eliminate the problem completely. Understanding the human psyche is complicated. Improving control over dangerous tools is much easier - and even if it does not eradicate violence completely - it is still well worth pursuing.

I suspect that each one of the parents of the dead children would take an injury over death 10 times out of 10 if given the option.

The fact is - it is easier to manufacture and distribute guns nowadays, and their performance has increased with better materials and science - this leads to the fact that they are easier to obtain and use than ever. The idea that there should not be better measures to control it are out of touch with reality, as is the idea that if we can not fix all cases we should not strive to remove many...

 

[donkiez]