• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is the solution to mass shootings in the United States?

Risky Thicket said:
Most all of us have read, watched and listened to stories about the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida. Media has flogged this story hard. They've interviewed countless people, many of them politicians.

One thing I have yet to hear any member of the media ask is "Why does this continue to happen?" One thing I have yet to hear any politico say is "First we must understand why these mass shootings continue to occur in the United States."

The press isn't asking why it continues to happen. The press is asking "What are you going to do about it?" As a result politicians attempt to answer to "What" question while either not having the balls or the brains to suggest that the question we must first address is "Why".

So here we go again doing the same thing and expecting different results. How is that going to work out? Same as always. We will blame guns, kids, poor security, mental health, etc. and the politicos will offer prayers and promises. Nothing much at all will change between now and the next mass shooting.

You cannot provide a successful solution to a problem you don't fully understand. WHY do mass shootings occur again and again in America?

I have no answers, but I would submit that there are a number of contributing factors. I don't know all the factors or how much each factor contributes to the overall problem. I have no idea if or to what degree each of the contributing factors affect each other. What I have heard or read is opinions.

What are the root causes? Why does it happen and continue to happen? We don't really know. Until we know why we are just going to continue to throw mud on the wall and hope some of it sticks.
Click to expand...

I think we must get our minds off of guns and delve deeper into the problem. Try to seek and find the root causes. First a couple of stats. From 1900-1970 there were 28 mass shootings, 17 of them occurred during the gangster era of Al Capone in the 1930's and 40's. This was an era of no gun control, no registration, no nothing. But what sets this era a part is the fact most of these mass shootings were familicides, shootings of people the killer knew, felony shootings. Shootings for money, power, greed. Perhaps one could call it sane reasons was the killer was after something be it power and control and money ala Al Capone. These shootings happened for a reason.

From 1970 to today there has been approximate 150 mass shootings in the era of gun control laws. But these shootings are different. They're not for money, power or what have you. They occur in public places against bystanders the shooter doesn't know. One could call these shootings are done for no other reason, not power, not money, except to kill people.

Perhaps we should ask why and try to find out why this is happening instead of concentrating on guns. The perps of these shootings just want to kill for killing sakes. Whom they kill is irrelevant. Just as long as it is a bunch. Capone, Dillinger, Bonnie and Clyde, the gangster killed for a reason, drug cartels kill for a reason, these kids do not.

Does anyone really believe that these kids who just want to kill for killing sake will stop if there are no guns. I think if the urge hits them, they will find other means. Bombs, arson, perhaps a mixture of chemicals, machetes, who knows? The bottom line is until we find out why these kids kill for the sake of killing, it isn't going to stop with more gun control. Gun control is like having a patient with a deadly brain tumor which caused a fever. We treat the fever with aspirin but that does nothing to the cause of the fever and the deadly brain tumor. That's gun control in my opinion.

Find out why kids, shooters go kill without any reason other than to do so.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Mass shootings are not a national problem because it's prosecuted by the state? That's like saying the opiod crisis is not a national problem since it's only really addressed at the state level.
Click to expand...

Nope, that is like saying that the constituion did not change to add new federal powers. Many (like you?) want to make everything federal because that allows the cost to be spread over more folks and/or simply borrowed from future generations. BTW, the FBI was tipped off twice as to the FL mass shooter's identity (first and last name) and did next to nothing so it would seem unwise to count on them "helping" more in the future.
 
apdst said:
It worked when it was used more frequently.
Click to expand...

No it didn't. Not as a deterrent anyway. There is no proof that the death penalty deters criminals or that it ever has. According to the National Academy of Sciences, "Research on the deterrent effect of capital punishment is uninformative about whether capital punishment increases, decreases, or has no effect on homicide rates."
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, every local problem (even if not yet confirmed) requires a federal solution - look it up.
Click to expand...

Christian terrorists like cruz going on mass shootings is a common problem in the US and one the federal govt should fix.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Most all of us have read, watched and listened to stories about the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida. Media has flogged this story hard. They've interviewed countless people, many of them politicians.

One thing I have yet to hear any member of the media ask is "Why does this continue to happen?" One thing I have yet to hear any politico say is "First we must understand why these mass shootings continue to occur in the United States."

The press isn't asking why it continues to happen. The press is asking "What are you going to do about it?" As a result politicians attempt to answer to "What" question while either not having the balls or the brains to suggest that the question we must first address is "Why".

So here we go again doing the same thing and expecting different results. How is that going to work out? Same as always. We will blame guns, kids, poor security, mental health, etc. and the politicos will offer prayers and promises. Nothing much at all will change between now and the next mass shooting.

You cannot provide a successful solution to a problem you don't fully understand. WHY do mass shootings occur again and again in America?

I have no answers, but I would submit that there are a number of contributing factors. I don't know all the factors or how much each factor contributes to the overall problem. I have no idea if or to what degree each of the contributing factors affect each other. What I have heard or read is opinions.

What are the root causes? Why does it happen and continue to happen? We don't really know. Until we know why we are just going to continue to throw mud on the wall and hope some of it sticks.
Click to expand...

Better Aqueducts, better Roads, and more Well Regulated militia, is always a necessary and proper solution.
 
Black Dog said:
No it didn't. Not as a deterrent anyway. There is no proof that the death penalty deters criminals or that it ever has. According to the National Academy of Sciences, "Research on the deterrent effect of capital punishment is uninformative about whether capital punishment increases, decreases, or has no effect on homicide rates."
Click to expand...

In the 19th Century, when more people were armed and the death penalty was used more often, the murder rate was significantly lower.
 
Waddy said:
In parts of the world with strict gun control the crazy people use bombs, or drive trucks into crowds, or poison gas in the subway, or blow up trains, or hijack airliners. Here it is guns because they are available. I can remember when burning black churches was the thing. I also remember Oklahoma City and Tim McVay. You don't need a gun to kill.

It's time we put mentally disturbed people on the Instant Check list to prohibit gun purchases. And that list should include;

People under a doctors care and prescribed an anti-depressant because they suffer from depression. Depressed people should not be buying guns. That would have covered this most recent shooter and the Las Vegas shooter. That would have covered the Columbine shooters. Actually, that alone would cover 95% of these shooters.

People who have PTSD. A person with PTSD has no business possessing or buying a gun.

Therapists should have to report people they are treating whom they believe may be a danger to themselves or others. They should not be buying guns.

Social Security has hundreds of thousands of accounts that have an appointed administrator because the person receiving SS is mentally incapable of managing their own SS check. If you are mentally incapable of handling a SS check you have no business buying a gun.

Anyone convicted of battery should not be allowed to buy a gun.

I know the mental health profession is against these measures but almost all of these shooters have had mental health issues. Those need to go on record to protect the rest of us.

BTW; I am an NRA Life member.
Click to expand...

I don't think the NRA would be comfortable with anything in your post. Personally, I think it goes after the problem better than most proposals I've heard.

Dumb Ideas:
1) Ban guns
2) Harden everything and arm everyone.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
I don't think the NRA would be comfortable with anything in your post. Personally, I think it goes after the problem better than most proposals I've heard.

Dumb Ideas:
1) Ban guns
2) Harden everything and arm everyone.
Click to expand...

Actually, the NRA supports most of what I said. They want mental health records in the Instant Check.
 
Waddy said:
Actually, the NRA supports most of what I said. They want mental health records in the Instant Check.
Click to expand...

I find that surprising. I can't remember the last time I saw the NRA support any law that would restrict access to guns. Not doubting you, but can you provide a link? TIA.
 
apdst said:
In the 19th Century, when more people were armed and the death penalty was used more often, the murder rate was significantly lower.
Click to expand...

I suppose you have the stats to back that up? Because I know that is bull****.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
I find that surprising. I can't remember the last time I saw the NRA support any law that would restrict access to guns. Not doubting you, but can you provide a link? TIA.
Click to expand...

Since 1966, the National Rifle Association has urged the federal government to address the problem of mental illness and violence. As we noted then, “the time is at hand to seek means by which society can identify, treat and temporarily isolate such individuals,” because “elimination of the instrument by which these crimes are committed cannot arrest the ravages of a psychotic murderer.”[1]

More recently, the NRA has supported legislation to ensure that appropriate records of those who have been judged mentally incompetent or involuntarily committed to mental institutions be made available for use in firearms transfer background checks. The NRA will support any reasonable step to fix America’s broken mental health system without intruding on the constitutional rights of Americans.
Click to expand...


https://www.nraila.org/articles/20130124/mental-health-and-firearms

The NRA doesn't totally agree with me about the PTSD ban; they because some with PTSD have personal administrators but aren't mentally incapacitated. They want a court order before such a person is banned.

In January 2008, President George W. Bush signed the bipartisan “NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.”[5] The NRA-supported legislation created incentives for states to upgrade their procedures for timely and accurate reporting of records—including mental health records—to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. All federal firearm licensees are required to check the system (either directly or through a state point of contact) before proceeding with a sale.[6] To accomplish this task, the legislation authorized federal grants to states that improve their record keeping and supply those records to NICS, while also developing procedures under which people who have recovered from mental illness can get their firearms rights restored.

To support state cooperation in providing records, the NRA has worked with lawmakers in many states to pass legislation to implement the federal law. Passage of such legislation, along with other administrative and policy changes at the state level, has allowed states to provide hundreds of thousands of mental health records to NICS since 2008.
Click to expand...
 
99percenter said:
Christian terrorists like cruz going on mass shootings is a common problem in the US and one the federal govt should fix.
Click to expand...

The local Floriduh LEOs had been called to deal with that particular FL HS shooter between 20 and 39 times - that does not make him a federal issue and certainly not cause to divert more federal tax money from Texas or other states to a very rich county in Floriduh to deal with their failure to control local nuts. It is high time that we stop rewarding local and state government failures with federal funds.
 
beancounter said:
Meanwhile, as the Republicans offer empty thoughts and prayers, they are also cutting school safety money.

"Two days before the school shooting in Florida that left 17 dead, the Trump administration proposed cutting millions in federal education programs meant to help prevent crime in schools and assist them in recovery from tragedies."

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/school-safety-cuts-trump-administration-348968
Click to expand...

That's irrelevant, because the Parkland schoolhouse didn't improve security before the funds were cut. So, obviously, cutting the money made no difference.
 
Waddy said:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20130124/mental-health-and-firearms

The NRA doesn't totally agree with me about the PTSD ban; they because some with PTSD have personal administrators but aren't mentally incapacitated. They want a court order before such a person is banned.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

On quick note: The NRA in 1966 was a completely different organization than the NRA of today. I think the change happened in 1977. I was a member as a kid. It was no more controversial or political than being a cub scout in the 60's.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...4cf65c3ad15_story.html?utm_term=.554a4d215c2f
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The local Floriduh LEOs had been called to deal with that particular FL HS shooter between 20 and 39 times - that does not make him a federal issue and certainly not cause to divert more federal tax money from Texas or other states to a very rich county in Floriduh to deal with their failure to control local nuts. It is high time that we stop rewarding local and state government failures with federal funds.
Click to expand...

I had a neighbor once (this was in VA) who we had to call LE on numerous times. Mostly for disturbing the peace or intimidating visitors. He was a schizophrenic who lived with his mom. The state did not have the resources to hospitalize him and neither did his mom. After we moved I found out he got busted brandishing a firearm and being in possession of a small amount of pot. The gun was confiscated, he was put in a hospital for observation for a week, and then sent home with an ankle bracelet.

When we put our house on the market there we were really worried he'd scare off buyers, but we lucked out.

Point being that I don't think state governments budget much for taking care of the mentally ill. Some just become "the homeless" while others do something that lands them in prison.
 
apdst said:
That's irrelevant, because the Parkland schoolhouse didn't improve security before the funds were cut. So, obviously, cutting the money made no difference.
Click to expand...

It is relevant because they will be cutting funding for all schools. With the increase in massage shootings, schools need more funding, not less.
 
beancounter said:
It is relevant because they will be cutting funding for all schools. With the increase in massage shootings, schools need more funding, not less.
Click to expand...

This school didn't use the funding available.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
I had a neighbor once (this was in VA) who we had to call LE on numerous times. Mostly for disturbing the peace or intimidating visitors. He was a schizophrenic who lived with his mom. The state did not have the resources to hospitalize him and neither did his mom. After we moved I found out he got busted brandishing a firearm and being in possession of a small amount of pot. The gun was confiscated, he was put in a hospital for observation for a week, and then sent home with an ankle bracelet.

When we put our house on the market there we were really worried he'd scare off buyers, but we lucked out.

Point being that I don't think state governments budget much for taking care of the mentally ill. Some just become "the homeless" while others do something that lands them in prison.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) is, no doubt, true but is not in any way a valid reason for making (transforming?) that into a federal responsibility. If cities, counties and states would rather let nuts roam free (to save money?) and hope for the best that is their right but to try to blame "the nation" for their refusal to deal with reality is insane.

I find it telling that the Governor of FL now wants to shift blame to the FBI who had 2 (maybe 3) reports of "weirdness" on their latest school shooter but sees little (no?) state/local fault in the 20 (to 39) local LEO calls not resulting in any criminal charges or forced mental evaluations. It would seem that actions deemed serious enough to expell someone multiple (3?) times from school just might warrant placing a flag in the NICS BGC database no matter what that local cost might be.

It is simply not a federal government responsibility to deal with each and every local nut case using the "logic" that sufficient (more?) federal resources exist to deal with these local problem folks so it should no longer be a state/local responsibility. BTW, did you report your nutty and intimidating neighbor to the FBI?
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Thanks.

On quick note: The NRA in 1966 was a completely different organization than the NRA of today. I think the change happened in 1977. I was a member as a kid. It was no more controversial or political than being a cub scout in the 60's.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...4cf65c3ad15_story.html?utm_term=.554a4d215c2f
Click to expand...

As I posted previously, the NRA used to be willing to compromise, but found there was no end to the restrictions sought by anti-gun groups. The anti-gun groups thru their legislators would say this one new law is all they want, but next legislative session would have a new list of demands. So gun freedoms were being lost one "compromise" at a time. The NRA membership got politically active and elected a more hard line governing board who drew a line in the sand. Today there are restrictions the NRA favors, like putting mentally ill people on the gun ban list, but the current leadership is very critical of most new gun restriction proposals. They have recently said that "bump stops" needed to be investigated, and possibly banned.

I might also add that technology keeps getting ahead of possible legislation. One company is now selling a "double action" trigger which is a drop in replacement and fires on the trigger pull AND also when the trigger is released. It makes any rifle virtually full auto and is perfectly legal; right now. Another company is selling a straight rifled gun using a finned projectile so it is neither a rifle nor a shotgun under current BATF rules, and so can be sold with a barrel shorter than 18 inches. This gun falls through the gap in BATF regulations.
 
Last edited:
99percenter said:
Christian terrorists like cruz going on mass shootings is a common problem in the US and one the federal govt should fix.
Click to expand...

Since the local LEOs made 20 to 39 separate visits to this "terrorist" then why did they not act? Simply because the state/local LEOs refuse to act does not make this into a federal problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom