Connecticut elementary school shooting

[Ella]

Ladies and gentlemen, a gentle reminder that there are PSers who may have been affected by this tragedy personally and discussing these topics in such a callous way may hurt them more than they are already hurting.

Please, out of respect keep the political issues at bay.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Oh, Deb, I am just now catching up. I agree with what you wrote. I don't really like talking about personal things on here, but I also have a child with Asperger's and bipolar disorder. Don't think I haven't been very troubled over the last few days for more than one reason. There will be a new stigma on these poor kids now. There is no way we can just lock up thousands and thousands of young adults to prevent the one or two from committing a terrible crime.

 

[iheartscience]

The sad truth is that nothing will change. People say enough is enough. There must be tighter gun control laws. But, nothing will change. And, sadly, this WILL happen again.

Americans seem to be exceptionally good at forgetting this sort of thing. And, we ARE desensitized to random shootings at this point. If only 2 people get shot in a mall, we barely notice. Six people killed in a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin got barely a notice. Yes, it was on the news, but no one discussed it at my work, it wasn't mentioned on any of the forums I visit, no one called to tell me they were devastated. Because they were not. It's the new normal, and far enough away, and remote enough, and random enough, that it was barely noticed. Only six lives taken there.

And, people in this country love their guns. They hold onto their semi-automatic weapons tightly. Except when they are safely locked away in their gun safes. Away from their children, they all proudly tell me when I ask. Give it a few days, and we will surely hear that this mother had her guns "safely locked away" as well.

Give it few more days, maybe a few weeks, and we will forget. Until it happens again.

I completely agree. Nothing will get done. Apparently people love unfettered access to guns more than they love protecting children. Everyone wants to THINK OF THE CHILDREN when it comes to nudity, fast food, etc., but no one thinks of the children when it comes to guns.

I saw a post in the NY Times about how some guy gave a coffee shop $125 to buy 100 coffees for the residents of Newtown. WTF is that going to do? Donate to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence instead. All of the signs saying "Pray for Newtown" bewilder me, too. Prayer is going to do NOTHING, and that's not a knock on religion. Action is needed, not prayers or thoughts.

And I may be liberal, but I'm not anti-gun in the least. I grew up around guns, I'm a great shot, my grandfather and great grandfather were gunsmiths, my father hunts regularly, and has my entire life. But he doesn't use a handgun or a semi-automatic rifle to kill deer.

 

[zoebartlett]

Thing2, I think prayer comforts people and lets the residents of Newtown know that others are thinking of them. I think that does a lot. Some people may not be thinking of gun control and government policies right now. For those affected personally, I can imagine that that might not be on the forefront of their minds at this moment.

I do understand what you're saying though.

 

[perry]

An editorial I agree with:

Perry

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/17/why-cant-america-care-for-mentally-ill/

 

[iheartscience]

Thing2, I think prayer comforts people and lets the residents of Newtown know that others are thinking of them. I think that does a lot. Some people may not be thinking of gun control and government policies right now. For those affected personally, I can imagine that that might not be on the forefront of their minds at this moment.

I do understand what you're saying though.

I'm an action person. I donated money to the Brady Campaign immediately after I heard about the shooting. That will hopefully go towards curbing the insane pro-gun lobby in this country. Prayers and thoughts are nice and all, but do nothing to solve the problem of gun violence in this country.

This IS the time to talk about gun control, while everyone's horror is fresh. Give it a few weeks and the country will have moved on, until the next mass shooting, that is. And there will be another mass shooting.

 

[iheartscience]

An editorial I agree with:

Perry

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/17/why-cant-america-care-for-mentally-ill/

There's no evidence Adam Lanza was mentally ill. He had Asperger's, which is a developmental disorder, not a mental illness. I think it's all too easy to point to mental illness in order to deflect attention from the actual problem, which is the ridiculously lax gun laws in this country.

Besides, let's be real-no one is willing to pay higher taxes to fund mental health care. Who's going to pay for it then? Private businesses? Right.

 

[hlmr]

The sad truth is that nothing will change. People say enough is enough. There must be tighter gun control laws. But, nothing will change. And, sadly, this WILL happen again.

Americans seem to be exceptionally good at forgetting this sort of thing. And, we ARE desensitized to random shootings at this point. If only 2 people get shot in a mall, we barely notice. Six people killed in a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin got barely a notice. Yes, it was on the news, but no one discussed it at my work, it wasn't mentioned on any of the forums I visit, no one called to tell me they were devastated. Because they were not. It's the new normal, and far enough away, and remote enough, and random enough, that it was barely noticed. Only six lives taken there.

And, people in this country love their guns. They hold onto their semi-automatic weapons tightly. Except when they are safely locked away in their gun safes. Away from their children, they all proudly tell me when I ask. Give it a few days, and we will surely hear that this mother had her guns "safely locked away" as well.

Give it few more days, maybe a few weeks, and we will forget. Until it happens again.

I completely agree. Nothing will get done. Apparently people love unfettered access to guns more than they love protecting children. Everyone wants to THINK OF THE CHILDREN when it comes to nudity, fast food, etc., but no one thinks of the children when it comes to guns.

I saw a post in the NY Times about how some guy gave a coffee shop $125 to buy 100 coffees for the residents of Newtown. WTF is that going to do? Donate to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence instead. All of the signs saying "Pray for Newtown" bewilder me, too. Prayer is going to do NOTHING, and that's not a knock on religion. Action is needed, not prayers or thoughts.

And I may be liberal, but I'm not anti-gun in the least. I grew up around guns, I'm a great shot, my grandfather and great grandfather were gunsmiths, my father hunts regularly, and has my entire life. But he doesn't use a handgun or a semi-automatic rifle to kill deer.

Brava!!!!!!!

 

[hlmr]

An editorial I agree with:

Perry

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/17/why-cant-america-care-for-mentally-ill/

There's no evidence Adam Lanza was mentally ill. He had Asperger's, which is a developmental disorder, not a mental illness. I think it's all too easy to point to mental illness in order to deflect attention from the actual problem, which is the ridiculously lax gun laws in this country.

Besides, let's be real-no one is willing to pay higher taxes to fund mental health care. Who's going to pay for it then? Private businesses? Right.

There's no denying that mental health is under-recognized and underfunded, but you are right. Who is willing to pay?

 

[perry]

There's no evidence Adam Lanza was mentally ill. He had Asperger's, which is a developmental disorder, not a mental illness.

A question: If a woman gets pregnant. When is she considered pregnant? When a fertilized egg successfully attaches itself and starts to develop; or when some "medical professional" diagnoses her as being pregnant?

I propose that the evidence is quite clear that Adam Lanza was not sane by any normal standard based on his quite visible public actions. That is regardless of whatever he had been "officially" diagnosed with.

I would also point out that the medical communities ability to accurately diagnose any specific problem is not that good except for the most obvious cases (broken bone, major cut, etc). For most symptoms there can be a variety of causes - and I think most of us have struggled through the sequence of multiple possibilities until something is actually figured out - if it is ever figured out.

I do not, and I am sure that most people in the world do not, accept the concept that you don't have a "condition" unless you have been diagnosed with that "condition" by a "Professional."

Is this solely a mental health case. I doubt that. A very real question in regards with American Society - multiple factors - is in play.

Why is it that our fathers and grandfathers (mothers and grandmothers) also had easy access to similar firearms (and back then locked gun cases were very rare - and are now more common) - and mass shootings were a lot rarer than today based on rate per population?

What factors have changed in American Society? That the current generation has been raised with movies and videos where mass violence is common and accepted (thus reducing or eliminating any concept that mass violence is not acceptable); That people no longer are held responsible for their actions like they used to be (Personal Rights - regardless of Personal Responsibility); The fact that our society allows all kinds of lawsuits over many things (if a teacher disciplines a student now - will they be sued is a now common concern where it was extremly rare in the past). The fact that our society has generally punished people who have stepped in to resolve a situation that was not their immediate family personal responsibility. The "mainstreaming" of mental health patients and elimination of effective treatment for many (and why did we do that - my recollection was the argument was that we were limiting the potential develpment of some people who could in fact cope in society if given a chance; but what about the ones who cannot cope in society and the cost on society of releasing them). Other reasons?

I believe that the answers are in these other factors since the access to effective firearms has not really changed since after WWII when millions of "surplus" military rifles and pistols were dumped into the civilian markets. See my previous post on the history of these kinds of guns, which have been available to the civilian population of the world for over 100 years.

The problem is that addressing these other factors is really not a question of cost in dollars term. Its a question of cost in terms of personal morality and personal balancing of responsibility versus rights; personal balancing of allowing others to discipline (is it OK for teachers and others to discipline your child or other family members - and if so by what means) and then getting others in society to agree with those changes. Then both expectations and laws get changed. Then things will change.

Have a great day,

Perry

 

[stepcutnut]

There's no evidence Adam Lanza was mentally ill. He had Asperger's, which is a developmental disorder, not a mental illness.

A question: If a woman gets pregnant. When is she considered pregnant? When a fertilized egg successfully attaches itself and starts to develop; or when some "medical professional" diagnoses her as being pregnant?

I propose that the evidence is quite clear that Adam Lanza was not sane by any normal standard based on his quite visible public actions. That is regardless of whatever he had been "officially" diagnosed with.

I would also point out that the medical communities ability to accurately diagnose any specific problem is not that good except for the most obvious cases (broken bone, major cut, etc). For most symptoms there can be a variety of causes - and I think most of us have struggled through the sequence of multiple possibilities until something is actually figured out - if it is ever figured out.

I do not, and I am sure that most people in the world do not, accept the concept that you don't have a "condition" unless you have been diagnosed with that "condition" by a "Professional."

Is this solely a mental health case. I doubt that. A very real question in regards with American Society - multiple factors - is in play.

Why is it that our fathers and grandfathers (mothers and grandmothers) also had easy access to similar firearms (and back then locked gun cases were very rare - and are now more common) - and mass shootings were a lot rarer than today based on rate per population?

What factors have changed in American Society? That the current generation has been raised with movies and videos where mass violence is common and accepted (thus reducing or eliminating any concept that mass violence is not acceptable); That people no longer are held responsible for their actions like they used to be (Personal Rights - regardless of Personal Responsibility); The fact that our society allows all kinds of lawsuits over many things (if a teacher disciplines a student now - will they be sued is a now common concern where it was extremly rare in the past). The fact that our society has generally punished people who have stepped in to resolve a situation that was not their immediate family personal responsibility. The "mainstreaming" of mental health patients and elimination of effective treatment for many (and why did we do that - my recollection was the argument was that we were limiting the potential develpment of some people who could in fact cope in society if given a chance; but what about the ones who cannot cope in society and the cost on society of releasing them). Other reasons?

I believe that the answers are in these other factors since the access to effective firearms has not really changed since after WWII when millions of "surplus" military rifles and pistols were dumped into the civilian markets. See my previous post on the history of these kinds of guns, which have been available to the civilian population of the world for over 100 years.

The problem is that addressing these other factors is really not a question of cost in dollars term. Its a question of cost in terms of personal morality and personal balancing of responsibility versus rights; personal balancing of allowing others to discipline (is it OK for teachers and others to discipline your child or other family members - and if so by what means) and then getting others in society to agree with those changes. Then both expectations and laws get changed. Then things will change.

Have a great day,

Perry

What a great post! A lot of food for thought!!!

Looking back on history of mass killings in the US, it seems that the peak was in 1929 and then mass shootings rose from 1960-1990 and then fell in the 2000's. Sadly these psychotic breaks are not anything new!

2 things we must remember is that firstly-the media and government will feed us the information that will serve their agendas best. And secondly, if a person wants to do harm they will find a way.

Examples(so many to choose from):
http://www.examiner.com/article/media-blackout-oregon-mall-shooter-was-stopped-by-an-armed-citizen

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248054/China-stabbing-22-children-elderly-woman-stabbed-outside-primary-school-Chinese-knifeman.html

 

[iheartscience]

There's no evidence Adam Lanza was mentally ill. He had Asperger's, which is a developmental disorder, not a mental illness.

A question: If a woman gets pregnant. When is she considered pregnant? When a fertilized egg successfully attaches itself and starts to develop; or when some "medical professional" diagnoses her as being pregnant?

I propose that the evidence is quite clear that Adam Lanza was not sane by any normal standard based on his quite visible public actions. That is regardless of whatever he had been "officially" diagnosed with.

I would also point out that the medical communities ability to accurately diagnose any specific problem is not that good except for the most obvious cases (broken bone, major cut, etc). For most symptoms there can be a variety of causes - and I think most of us have struggled through the sequence of multiple possibilities until something is actually figured out - if it is ever figured out.

I do not, and I am sure that most people in the world do not, accept the concept that you don't have a "condition" unless you have been diagnosed with that "condition" by a "Professional."

Is this solely a mental health case. I doubt that. A very real question in regards with American Society - multiple factors - is in play.

Why is it that our fathers and grandfathers (mothers and grandmothers) also had easy access to similar firearms (and back then locked gun cases were very rare - and are now more common) - and mass shootings were a lot rarer than today based on rate per population?

What factors have changed in American Society? That the current generation has been raised with movies and videos where mass violence is common and accepted (thus reducing or eliminating any concept that mass violence is not acceptable); That people no longer are held responsible for their actions like they used to be (Personal Rights - regardless of Personal Responsibility); The fact that our society allows all kinds of lawsuits over many things (if a teacher disciplines a student now - will they be sued is a now common concern where it was extremly rare in the past). The fact that our society has generally punished people who have stepped in to resolve a situation that was not their immediate family personal responsibility. The "mainstreaming" of mental health patients and elimination of effective treatment for many (and why did we do that - my recollection was the argument was that we were limiting the potential develpment of some people who could in fact cope in society if given a chance; but what about the ones who cannot cope in society and the cost on society of releasing them). Other reasons?

I believe that the answers are in these other factors since the access to effective firearms has not really changed since after WWII when millions of "surplus" military rifles and pistols were dumped into the civilian markets. See my previous post on the history of these kinds of guns, which have been available to the civilian population of the world for over 100 years.

The problem is that addressing these other factors is really not a question of cost in dollars term. Its a question of cost in terms of personal morality and personal balancing of responsibility versus rights; personal balancing of allowing others to discipline (is it OK for teachers and others to discipline your child or other family members - and if so by what means) and then getting others in society to agree with those changes. Then both expectations and laws get changed. Then things will change.

Have a great day,

Perry

What a great post! A lot of food for thought!!!

Looking back on history of mass killings in the US, it seems that the peak was in 1929 and then mass shootings rose from 1960-1990 and then fell in the 2000's. Sadly these psychotic breaks are not anything new!

2 things we must remember is that firstly-the media and government will feed us the information that will serve their agendas best. And secondly, if a person wants to do harm they will find a way.

Examples(so many to choose from):
http://www.examiner.com/article/media-blackout-oregon-mall-shooter-was-stopped-by-an-armed-citizen

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248054/China-stabbing-22-children-elderly-woman-stabbed-outside-primary-school-Chinese-knifeman.html

Right, but notice that of the 22 children stabbed in China, NONE of them died? 22 children HURT is a lot better than 20 children MURDERED.

Additionally, I'm not sure what the point of your pregnancy analogy is, Perry. Adam Lanza may have been mentally ill, but had exhibited no symptoms that would warrant psychiatric intervention. Blame society, blame video games, blame whatever you want. The bottom line is he had easy access to assault weapons that his own mother taught him to use. If he hadn't, despite his upbringing or mental illness, this would not have happened. Worst case, he went on a stabbing rampage. I'll take stabbing over shooting any day.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

And don't blame this all on the times or video games...mental illness has been around for a long time..mass school killing in the 1920's with a bomb, not guns:

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

 

[justginger]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

They also require more intelligence than a gun, knife, or baseball bat. Or at least they used to - not so sure with the Internet now, and its step-by-step guides.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Oh, and we have no idea if AL had a psychiatrist or not, right??? I'd bet some money he was on medication. But that will all come out eventually.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

They also require more intelligence than a gun, knife, or baseball bat. Or at least they used to - not so sure with the Internet now, and its step-by-step guides.

Oh, sure, it would be easy to get those instructions. I am sure an average kid could make a bomb. But in this case, the killer was said to be highly intelligent.

 

[iheartscience]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

And don't blame this all on the times or video games...mental illness has been around for a long time..mass school killing in the 1920's with a bomb, not guns:

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

Well if we want to go down the worst case road, a nuclear bomb or a bomb with chemical or biological agents would be worst case.

Now if we're talking about someone whose goal is walking into a public place and killing people himself, I'd prefer to be stabbed.

 

[stepcutnut]

There's no evidence Adam Lanza was mentally ill. He had Asperger's, which is a developmental disorder, not a mental illness.

A question: If a woman gets pregnant. When is she considered pregnant? When a fertilized egg successfully attaches itself and starts to develop; or when some "medical professional" diagnoses her as being pregnant?

I propose that the evidence is quite clear that Adam Lanza was not sane by any normal standard based on his quite visible public actions. That is regardless of whatever he had been "officially" diagnosed with.

I would also point out that the medical communities ability to accurately diagnose any specific problem is not that good except for the most obvious cases (broken bone, major cut, etc). For most symptoms there can be a variety of causes - and I think most of us have struggled through the sequence of multiple possibilities until something is actually figured out - if it is ever figured out.

I do not, and I am sure that most people in the world do not, accept the concept that you don't have a "condition" unless you have been diagnosed with that "condition" by a "Professional."

Is this solely a mental health case. I doubt that. A very real question in regards with American Society - multiple factors - is in play.

Why is it that our fathers and grandfathers (mothers and grandmothers) also had easy access to similar firearms (and back then locked gun cases were very rare - and are now more common) - and mass shootings were a lot rarer than today based on rate per population?

What factors have changed in American Society? That the current generation has been raised with movies and videos where mass violence is common and accepted (thus reducing or eliminating any concept that mass violence is not acceptable); That people no longer are held responsible for their actions like they used to be (Personal Rights - regardless of Personal Responsibility); The fact that our society allows all kinds of lawsuits over many things (if a teacher disciplines a student now - will they be sued is a now common concern where it was extremly rare in the past). The fact that our society has generally punished people who have stepped in to resolve a situation that was not their immediate family personal responsibility. The "mainstreaming" of mental health patients and elimination of effective treatment for many (and why did we do that - my recollection was the argument was that we were limiting the potential develpment of some people who could in fact cope in society if given a chance; but what about the ones who cannot cope in society and the cost on society of releasing them). Other reasons?

I believe that the answers are in these other factors since the access to effective firearms has not really changed since after WWII when millions of "surplus" military rifles and pistols were dumped into the civilian markets. See my previous post on the history of these kinds of guns, which have been available to the civilian population of the world for over 100 years.

The problem is that addressing these other factors is really not a question of cost in dollars term. Its a question of cost in terms of personal morality and personal balancing of responsibility versus rights; personal balancing of allowing others to discipline (is it OK for teachers and others to discipline your child or other family members - and if so by what means) and then getting others in society to agree with those changes. Then both expectations and laws get changed. Then things will change.

Have a great day,

Perry

What a great post! A lot of food for thought!!!

Looking back on history of mass killings in the US, it seems that the peak was in 1929 and then mass shootings rose from 1960-1990 and then fell in the 2000's. Sadly these psychotic breaks are not anything new!

2 things we must remember is that firstly-the media and government will feed us the information that will serve their agendas best. And secondly, if a person wants to do harm they will find a way.

Examples(so many to choose from):
http://www.examiner.com/article/media-blackout-oregon-mall-shooter-was-stopped-by-an-armed-citizen

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248054/China-stabbing-22-children-elderly-woman-stabbed-outside-primary-school-Chinese-knifeman.html

Right, but notice that of the 22 children stabbed in China, NONE of them died? 22 children HURT is a lot better than 20 children MURDERED.

Additionally, I'm not sure what the point of your pregnancy analogy is, Perry. Adam Lanza may have been mentally ill, but had exhibited no symptoms that would warrant psychiatric intervention. Blame society, blame video games, blame whatever you want. The bottom line is he had easy access to assault weapons that his own mother taught him to use. If he hadn't, despite his upbringing or mental illness, this would not have happened. Worst case, he went on a stabbing rampage. I'll take stabbing over shooting any day.

???

Yes-you are correct that hurt is better than dead! Actually there has been such an increase in China with elementary school stabbing(knives, hammers, cleavers) since 2010 where there have actually been so many deaths that they are now posting security at the schools----I'll let you look up the numbers! My point is simply, that psychotic breaks resulting in deaths will sadly still happen-no matter the modality. Consider bombings in that instance as well---not difficult at all to find instructions for those on the internet-unfortunately!

 

[stepcutnut]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

And don't blame this all on the times or video games...mental illness has been around for a long time..mass school killing in the 1920's with a bomb, not guns:

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

Well if we want to go down the worst case road, a nuclear bomb or a bomb with chemical or biological agents would be worst case.

Now if we're talking about someone whose goal is walking into a public place and killing people himself, I'd prefer to be stabbed.

What a bizarre comment!

 

[stepcutnut]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

They also require more intelligence than a gun, knife, or baseball bat. Or at least they used to - not so sure with the Internet now, and its step-by-step guides.

Sadly-that doesn't seem to be the case anymore!

 

[innerkitten]

An editorial I agree with:

Perry

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/17/why-cant-america-care-for-mentally-ill/

There's no evidence Adam Lanza was mentally ill. He had Asperger's, which is a developmental disorder, not a mental illness. I think it's all too easy to point to mental illness in order to deflect attention from the actual problem, which is the ridiculously lax gun laws in this country.

Besides, let's be real-no one is willing to pay higher taxes to fund mental health care. Who's going to pay for it then? Private businesses? Right.

I think what just happened is a pretty sure sign that he had some sort of mental illness going on. Not saying that everyone with a mental illness is violent. But a person has to have some serious problems to do what he just did.

And I would be willing to pay higher taxes to ensure that people get the long term treatment they need.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

And don't blame this all on the times or video games...mental illness has been around for a long time..mass school killing in the 1920's with a bomb, not guns:

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

Well if we want to go down the worst case road, a nuclear bomb or a bomb with chemical or biological agents would be worst case.

Now if we're talking about someone whose goal is walking into a public place and killing people himself, I'd prefer to be stabbed.

I was just replying to your statement: ""Worst case, he went on a stabbing rampage."

So I was saying that there have been cases including one in the 1920's of mass killings with homemade bombs.

I am for tight restrictions on assault weapons, but not hunting and self protection guns. But banning guns is not going to prevent these kinds of tragedies because bombs can so easily be made.

 

[iheartscience]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

And don't blame this all on the times or video games...mental illness has been around for a long time..mass school killing in the 1920's with a bomb, not guns:

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

Well if we want to go down the worst case road, a nuclear bomb or a bomb with chemical or biological agents would be worst case.

Now if we're talking about someone whose goal is walking into a public place and killing people himself, I'd prefer to be stabbed.

I was just replying to your statement: ""Worst case, he went on a stabbing rampage."

So I was saying that there have been cases including one in the 1920's of mass killings with homemade bombs.

I am for tight restrictions on assault weapons, but not hunting and self protection guns. But banning guns is not going to prevent these kinds of tragedies because bombs can so easily be made.

Actually, Australia enacted strict gun laws after a horrible mass shooting in 1996, and they haven't had a mass shooting since. So apparently banning certain types of guns does prevent these types of tragedies.

http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/08/20/aler.ahq013.full
http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/20...hooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html

But if you have data to support your assertion that banning guns won't prevent mass killings, I would be happy to read it. Also, please note that I never said all guns should be banned.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Knives is not worst case...a bomb is. Think Timothy McVeigh. And those supplies are easy to get. Just sayin'.

And don't blame this all on the times or video games...mental illness has been around for a long time..mass school killing in the 1920's with a bomb, not guns:

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

Well if we want to go down the worst case road, a nuclear bomb or a bomb with chemical or biological agents would be worst case.

Now if we're talking about someone whose goal is walking into a public place and killing people himself, I'd prefer to be stabbed.

I was just replying to your statement: ""Worst case, he went on a stabbing rampage."

So I was saying that there have been cases including one in the 1920's of mass killings with homemade bombs.

I am for tight restrictions on assault weapons, but not hunting and self protection guns. But banning guns is not going to prevent these kinds of tragedies because bombs can so easily be made.

Actually, Australia enacted strict gun laws after a horrible mass shooting in 1996, and they haven't had a mass shooting since. So apparently banning certain types of guns does prevent these types of tragedies.

http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/08/20/aler.ahq013.full
http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/20...hooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html

But if you have data to support your assertion that banning guns won't prevent mass killings, I would be happy to read it. Also, please note that I never said all guns should be banned.

Whew! I was just making a statement that there have been mass killings with bombs that are easily made at home. History proves that this is the case. I did not in any way mean to imply that you personally wanted all guns banned. I made a general statement about guns since some people apparently think that banning all guns would be the solution.

 

[vintagelover229]

The shooting was another tragedy. But locking up every kid with issues isn't the answer either.

If that was the case I'd be locked up for life. I had a terrible childhood resulting in many issues during my teenage years and young adult years. I was diagnosed PTSD-depressed-ODD (oppositional defiant disorder)-and many others-to many to name. I was hospitalized more than once-sent to a long term home-threatened to harm my family (never would have but it got them very upset-which was my goal).

I regret all of this behavior now-but I now have understanding and healthy ways to deal with my emotions. I wasn't ever taught that and when I finally did get "help" from the "mental health community" they only gave me labels and made me think I was worse than I was. Not one person told me I had a right to be angry-that I was "normal" for the way I was reacting to the things that had happened in my life that were beyond my control-that no child should have had to see/do/go though what I did and that I was strong for coming though it all. That the way I was dealing with the trauma was normal but wasn't healthy and was harmful and to try and help me find healthier ways to deal with them.

No-I figured all that out on my own. With no help from anyone but God and my husband. Panic attacks were normal for me-destructive unhealthy behaviors were normal for me. Why should I try and why should I care when no one else did? I had no self esteem-even though I had a 4.0 GPA in HS before dropping out due to circumstances beyond my control-I was great at sports-never drank had sex or experimented with drugs until well after HS-was a very talented musician and was accepted into a private orchestra when I was 16.

But when no matter how hard I tried none of it made a difference-none of it was good enough I gave up. That's when things really got worse for me. But eventually I hit my rock bottom-much different than many others-but I always wanted better for myself-for my life.

When I met my husband and he freaked due to my panic attacks and I could see how much my unhealthy mental and emotional state was harming him-I decided to walk away from the best thing that ever happened to me. He wouldn't let me since he saw that I cared so much I'd leave just to spare him-we'd get though it together.

I had to rewire myself. Every thought would race into a million different unhealthy thoughts/emotions. I had to tell myself to stop believing the lies-to let go of the past-to forgive those who hurt me-and in turn forgive myself for some dark things I had done. It took a long time-and it wasn't easy. When things were triggered I would try something different every time-not the right thing-but my then bf could see I wasn't making the same decisions with my reactions. Eventually I could separate my feelings from my reactions and not be sensitive to constructive criticism. I was able to not blow my top and allow myself to escalate and then feel guilty for my reactions. I'm sure there will be times in my life I'll have to readjust some things as well-but now I'm living instead of using unhealthy survival techniques that are destructive.

I now consider myself a very healthy individual. No medical professionals or medication since I was 17 years old (didn't start the healing process until 22 years old-now approaching 25) and it was only because I knew something was wrong WITH ME and not because someone told me I was messed up making me feel like some sort of freak. That since I was to young and to immature to pull back and be honest with myself-because that hadn't developed in myself yet- that I needed to be heavily medicated to the point where I can't remember parts of my teenage years.

It took me a long time not to resent my adopted parents since they did what society and the medical community told them was the only/best option for "a child like me". But once I realized that they did what they felt was best-although IMO wrong-and that's what society does with children who are products of their environment I was able to forgive them and move on.

I'm not trying to take anything away from what happened at that school. What that boy did was wrong-but locking every kid up who has ODD and is depressed and pissed off at the world isn't going to work. Well perhaps it would-but from my research into state mental health faculties and from family members who used to work there the abuse on the people there is horrific. They were treated as less than human. Electro-shock therapy? Seriously? To think that because I had issues that the people who deem themselves as healthy individuals or are "professionals" get to decide what can/can't help me and get to force me to take medications that in reality they have NO CLUE the long term side affects (recalls anyone? Suicides linked to SSRI? The withdraw? -what mixing them with other medications does-and the list goes on and on? I'm sorry-but I TOTALLY disagree there. I am a wife-a mother-and the list goes on and on-but based on my history you'd never think I'd make it to where I am today. I could have been locked up for life-forced to be medicated (which I would have refused-which would make me not complaint-which would get me into more trouble since I'd refuse to take my meds and then'd hold you down and if fight you'd be sedated-put in a jacket and locked in a padded room) and YES I've seen it done.

I'm not saying there isn't room for the mental health field and they haven't helped some people. But I feel we've come so far from listening and helping first to medicating and ignoring the underlying issues.

I'm sorry this is so long and all over the place. I've debated if I should write on this thread at all-and my newborn is sick and my husband was up all night with severe acid reflux and so my thoughts are a bit jumbled. No doubt not helping my statement that I'm healthy and normal lol!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

{{{{{hugs}}}} to you, vintagelover!!! You have overcome so much!

I emphatically agree that we cannot simply lock people up!!! We just need more access to trained counselors and probably less reliance on meds that make people crazy as they go off of them. I have seen that and it is scary.

(Better clarify as that probably will be misunderstood. Meds are life-saving for some people, absolutely. But to throw prescriptions at people without counseling to help them overcome some of the issues that CAN be helped is sooo irresponsible to me!)

 

[Circe]

The shooting was another tragedy. But locking up every kid with issues isn't the answer either.

If that was the case I'd be locked up for life. I had a terrible childhood resulting in many issues during my teenage years and young adult years. I was diagnosed PTSD-depressed-ODD (oppositional defiant disorder)-and many others-to many to name. I was hospitalized more than once-sent to a long term home-threatened to harm my family (never would have but it got them very upset-which was my goal).

I regret all of this behavior now-but I now have understanding and healthy ways to deal with my emotions. I wasn't ever taught that and when I finally did get "help" from the "mental health community" they only gave me labels and made me think I was worse than I was. Not one person told me I had a right to be angry-that I was "normal" for the way I was reacting to the things that had happened in my life that were beyond my control-that no child should have had to see/do/go though what I did and that I was strong for coming though it all. That the way I was dealing with the trauma was normal but wasn't healthy and was harmful and to try and help me find healthier ways to deal with them.

No-I figured all that out on my own. With no help from anyone but God and my husband. Panic attacks were normal for me-destructive unhealthy behaviors were normal for me. Why should I try and why should I care when no one else did? I had no self esteem-even though I had a 4.0 GPA in HS before dropping out due to circumstances beyond my control-I was great at sports-never drank had sex or experimented with drugs until well after HS-was a very talented musician and was accepted into a private orchestra when I was 16.

But when no matter how hard I tried none of it made a difference-none of it was good enough I gave up. That's when things really got worse for me. But eventually I hit my rock bottom-much different than many others-but I always wanted better for myself-for my life.

When I met my husband and he freaked due to my panic attacks and I could see how much my unhealthy mental and emotional state was harming him-I decided to walk away from the best thing that ever happened to me. He wouldn't let me since he saw that I cared so much I'd leave just to spare him-we'd get though it together.

I had to rewire myself. Every thought would race into a million different unhealthy thoughts/emotions. I had to tell myself to stop believing the lies-to let go of the past-to forgive those who hurt me-and in turn forgive myself for some dark things I had done. It took a long time-and it wasn't easy. When things were triggered I would try something different every time-not the right thing-but my then bf could see I wasn't making the same decisions with my reactions. Eventually I could separate my feelings from my reactions and not be sensitive to constructive criticism. I was able to not blow my top and allow myself to escalate and then feel guilty for my reactions. I'm sure there will be times in my life I'll have to readjust some things as well-but now I'm living instead of using unhealthy survival techniques that are destructive.

I now consider myself a very healthy individual. No medical professionals or medication since I was 17 years old (didn't start the healing process until 22 years old-now approaching 25) and it was only because I knew something was wrong WITH ME and not because someone told me I was messed up making me feel like some sort of freak. That since I was to young and to immature to pull back and be honest with myself-because that hadn't developed in myself yet- that I needed to be heavily medicated to the point where I can't remember parts of my teenage years.

It took me a long time not to resent my adopted parents since they did what society and the medical community told them was the only/best option for "a child like me". But once I realized that they did what they felt was best-although IMO wrong-and that's what society does with children who are products of their environment I was able to forgive them and move on.

I'm not trying to take anything away from what happened at that school. What that boy did was wrong-but locking every kid up who has ODD and is depressed and pissed off at the world isn't going to work. Well perhaps it would-but from my research into state mental health faculties and from family members who used to work there the abuse on the people there is horrific. They were treated as less than human. Electro-shock therapy? Seriously? To think that because I had issues that the people who deem themselves as healthy individuals or are "professionals" get to decide what can/can't help me and get to force me to take medications that in reality they have NO CLUE the long term side affects (recalls anyone? Suicides linked to SSRI? The withdraw? -what mixing them with other medications does-and the list goes on and on? I'm sorry-but I TOTALLY disagree there. I am a wife-a mother-and the list goes on and on-but based on my history you'd never think I'd make it to where I am today. I could have been locked up for life-forced to be medicated (which I would have refused-which would make me not complaint-which would get me into more trouble since I'd refuse to take my meds and then'd hold you down and if fight you'd be sedated-put in a jacket and locked in a padded room) and YES I've seen it done.

I'm not saying there isn't room for the mental health field and they haven't helped some people. But I feel we've come so far from listening and helping first to medicating and ignoring the underlying issues.

I'm sorry this is so long and all over the place. I've debated if I should write on this thread at all-and my newborn is sick and my husband was up all night with severe acid reflux and so my thoughts are a bit jumbled. No doubt not helping my statement that I'm healthy and normal lol!

VintageLover, this brought tears to my eyes. You've gone through so much, and come through it beautifully: it really is a testament to your determination and your husband's love and patience. I know I'm just an internet stranger - but if it's not too weird, I'm really, really proud of you.

 

[Circe]

One thing I'm not seeing acknowledged in too many places - either because it's so obvious that it's functioning as a baseline assumption, or because it runs so deeply counter to our overall cultural values that people are rejecting it out of hand - is the issue of gendered socialization. It's not the young women with depressive issues we need to be concerned with in this context.

I have seen so many comments in the last few days from women empathizing and identifying with the shooter.

I would like to emphasize those two words: empathizing and identifying.

In the same breath that they acknowledge their own anger, pain, separation from general society, and say, "Oh, if I were a boy, I think I would totally have been a violent sociopath," they're demonstrating that they're, uh ... not. Women are generally trained to turn their pain inwards - women commit self-harm at exponentially higher rates than men do. Men, on the other hand ... looking at rampage killings, at incidents of domestic violence, including the ever-popular murder-suicide ... men appear to be encouraged to turn their anger outwards, even when it stems from the same emotions, and leads to the same impulse towards self-annihilation.

I think the two things we're seeing a lot of focus on are, a) gun control, and, b) mental health care, not necessarily in that order. And I support both of those things. But I'm also wondering if maybe we shouldn't also take a long hard look at what it is that boys are hearing that girls aren't that leaves this sort of thing as an option.

P.S. - 15 years ago, I WAS one of the alienated depressed girls who said things like that, so, no judgement: just frank curiosity about what causes the phenomenon.

 

[partgypsy]

There are proximal and distal causes or contributors to what happened. A proximal cause is access to guns. Sure we should address this, if it is too late to put the genie back in the bottle. For example, we have a right to bear arms. What does that mean? People also have the right to drive a car IF they are above a certain age and pass a test. In the same way since gun ownership is a big responsibility, there should be restrictions on ownership. I do not see why any responsible gun owner would disagree. For example, I don't understand why a person who is buying a gun at a store goes through a check, but does not have to at gun shows (just one example).

In turn there are many distal causes to what has happened. Some has to do with the lack of interest in funding mental health. I agree there is also an issue where there is at least some societal breakdown in that people can be easily isolated from other people and the rest of the community, and no one even notices! I thought it was telling that people said good things about the kid, whether they were a teacher, a fellow schoolmate and friend, or even other brother, but in each of these cases, none of these people spoke to the assailant for years. But I guess no one notices. This strikes me the same when I hear about child abuse cases, of children who are not going to school, have been moved from place to place, and no one is keep track, of, this child has not even been seen for the past 6 months.
Not saying there is an easy answer to all of this, but I think that just throwing money at the problem doesn't solve it, but that everyone is responsible for the well being and safety of one's community.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

I think the two things we're seeing a lot of focus on are, a) gun control, and, b) mental health care, not necessarily in that order. And I support both of those things. But I'm also wondering if maybe we shouldn't also take a long hard look at what it is that boys are hearing that girls aren't that leaves this sort of thing as an option.

.

Maybe it is the video games. When boys need to unwind or take their mind off things, they turn to video games. Often first-shooter games. How much could these games contribute?