• 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?

Lursa said:
Incorrect. In the language of the times, 'regulated' meant trained.

The citizen militia was also expected to be trained with their firearms. (seems obvious but I still felt the need to write it :( )
Click to expand...

Regulator meant in good working order. Clocks that kept accurate time were called regulators.
 
Lursa said:
Incorrect. In the language of the times, 'regulated' meant trained.

The citizen militia was also expected to be trained with their firearms. (seems obvious but I still felt the need to write it :( )
Click to expand...

Lets look at the 1806 Websters dictionary - the true first Amenerican dictionary of language as used int he USA and closest to the time when the Amendment was written

Regulate, v.t. to adjust by rule, order, direct
Click to expand...

Nothing in there about "trained" as you claim. But it certainly says to adjust by rule, order and direct. That certainly sounds organized and controlled and not a ad hoc group of yahoos with guns going out in the woods and shooting at squirrels and claiming they are well trained .

This is consistent with what the Constitution says about Congress and the militia in Article I: Section 8 - Powers of Congress

15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Click to expand...

It is clear that a well regulated militia at the time of the Constitution and Bill of Rights was one under the control of Congress - a branch of the government and subject to their will , their discipline, their arming and all that goes with arming. And for those officially called into the service of the federal government, the Congress even has the power to govern them with all that implies.

It is dishonest to repeat the NRA line about well trained.
 
Last edited:
Risky Thicket said:
Absolutely.

What the hell do I know, but girls and young women aren't running amok blasting away classmates at random. Boys and young men are. Mass shooters of schools are white boys for the most part.

Are we missing something by not looking at a school shooter profile and digging in to find common factors? Beats me. Maybe no one has. Maybe qualified professionals have or have attempted to conduct serious research. If the government doesn't want to hear it it won't get heard. That much we know. Also, it wouldn't translate well on television news. If it couldn't be condensed and explained in a minute or less the television audience might be lost. Broadcast/cable media probably wouldn't get behind a complex approach. No money in it.

Would a psychosocial approach receive positive public support? I'm doubtful. People seem to want to identify a single cause and find a quick solution to mass shootings. They've decided the single cause must be guns, in part because the media has focused on guns. Thus the quick solution is some kind of gun control; every problem looks like a nail and all that. Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be much genuine public support for anything else.

Unless the public demands it of their elected officials there won't be much if any improvement in accessible mental health. America doesn't want to spend the money.

Hell, the GOP Tax bill cut mental health services and Trump signed the tax cut into law. Ryan is planning to cut/gut "entitlement" safety net programs. Seems to me that even if - by some fluke - the government openly supported research and study of mass shootings from a psychosocial social perspective, among others, the general public would likely prefer funding more war in Afghanistan than funding programs to provide accessible mental health services in America.
Click to expand...

Let's start by encouraging our current law makers to create a law which makes a mandatory mental/physiological assessment necessary for all individuals running for office - well at the very least - state and federal level elected offices.
 
Removable Mind said:
Let's start by encouraging our current law makers to create a law which makes a mandatory mental/physiological assessment necessary for all individuals running for office - well at the very least - state and federal level elected offices.
Click to expand...
Let's not.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
danielpalos said:
Our Second Amendment applies, literally, to well regulated militia, not the unorganized militia.
Click to expand...

No.

That might have been arguable before Scalia wrote Heller and the SCOTUS signed off on it, but now that text is what defines the 2ndA. Heller effectively uncoupled the two halves of the sentence that makes up the 2ndA.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, every local problem (even if not yet confirmed) requires a federal solution - look it up.
Click to expand...

Most crimes in Chicago are committed by guns bought in Indiana.

Most crimes committed by drug lords in Mexico are with guns bought in TX.

This is not a local problem.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
No.

That might have been arguable before Scalia wrote Heller and the SCOTUS signed off on it, but now that text is what defines the 2ndA. Heller effectively uncoupled the two halves of the sentence that makes up the 2ndA.
Click to expand...

Here is something else Scalia said in his Heller opinion:

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
-Justice Antonin Scalia
Click to expand...
 
Lursa said:
Sorry, havent read the entire thread yet but: it's not hard to focus on the clear demographic committing mass shootings. (Not sprees, not serial...active/mass shooters)

Angry mostly white (including Latino and Middle Eastern) males. Why are these boys and men unable to control themselves and seek to blame others for (???).

We know that in some cases, like the school shooters, they are looking for notoriety as well as whatever else has created in them their inadequacies.

And for workplace and other mass shooters? Some of their inadequacies can be traced to past failures...but what makes them so unable to deal with them?

Guns have always been prevalent in American homes...guns are nothing new. This type of shooting is (20 yrs or so?). We need to focus on what's causing this in the shooters.
Click to expand...

Indeed. In the words of the late great Muddy Waters, "Something wrong somewhere." But what? Damned if I know but I'd be willing to bet that the answer to the problem is not simply "guns".

For a number of reasons living in the United States is probably more stressful than daily life in many other countries. That's perhaps a topic for another thread, but I think the stress here is palpable. You often notice it as soon as you walk through TSA and/or customs. In Europe it is a procedure that is for the most part handled in a courteous manner. In the US we are greeted with screaming and stern looks as we stand in the queue.

Work, money, possession, the appearance of having the money to acquire things here is greater than it is in many western nations. America puts more people in jail than any other nation on earth.

Those are examples. My point is that at a quick glance there are obvious differences between the US and other nations, many of the difference are positive but not all of them. I can imagine it is most difficult for kids growing up in the these days. There's a lot of pressure. And too there is no right of passage for young men. That may further confuse and frustrate those boys who don't have strong support systems.
 
Removable Mind said:
Let's start by encouraging our current law makers to create a law which makes a mandatory mental/physiological assessment necessary for all individuals running for office - well at the very least - state and federal level elected offices.
Click to expand...

Oh hell yeah! I'd support that in a heartbeat, RM. :thumbs:
 
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...

The solution to these mass killings has more to do with the majority of people willing to have an attitude change towards the cultural acceptance of violence in our entertainment and News coverage. Look at these video games, TV shows and movies that glorify blood, guts and gore. There's no respect for life anymore and a permissive social standard towards today's youth.

Realistically, we'll never confiscate all the guns or find and treat all the mentally ill. But we can gradually try to change our society by promoting a higher standard of human values for compassion, peace and love of life.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
No.

That might have been arguable before Scalia wrote Heller and the SCOTUS signed off on it, but now that text is what defines the 2ndA. Heller effectively uncoupled the two halves of the sentence that makes up the 2ndA.
Click to expand...

Judicial activism? In any case, that ruling seemed to be a exercise in the waste of public monies. Paragraph (2) supports my contention and not that of gun lovers.
 
lefty louie said:
Bring back a moral code, 2 parent families where one parent stays home, family dinners, less medication for kids, how about none, more play time for kids, they need exercise not video games, parents need to stop being their kids friend and be a parent. Make it OK again to slap your kid when he/she needs it. Start giving trophies to the winners and a pat on the back for the losers again, not everyone deserves a medal.

Make it OK again for kids to point out that the weird kid in the class is weird, not to be a bully but to express the truth. I'm tired of this all inclusive crap, I have to like you, you have to like me, if I ask you to dance you can't say no. Life is a bowl full of hurt feelings, eat em up, cause it's what we're having for dinner.
Click to expand...

So does every other first world country have better families and a less violent culture then the US? Because every other first world country has far less gun violence then the US. So either these countries do not have these cultural elements you are complaining about or its the guns. So which is it? Is the US really the greatest country in the world, if other first world countries would have better, less violent cultures? Because that is the only conclusion your logic leads to.
 
Lursa said:
For shootings? Yes. Otherwise, it's not the solution.

Because as people have written...this is about the motivations of males that cant handle life.

And they arent going away no matter what you do with guns. They will find another murderous way to act out....and create mass casualties. It will just be the next cool challenge :(

Because you will only be removing the means, not the motive.
Click to expand...

Well, I really don't care what people playing psychologist on the internet have to say about motives, so I didn't read those people's speculations. I'll note this much: in the countries that have literally removed the means, they don't have anywhere near our rate of shootings or mass shootings, and that's true whether or not one includes suicides. They still have them, yes, but the vast majority of items are impossible to completely keep out of peoples' hands thanks to black markets.

As I concluded:

Mr Person said:
It's generally an utterly moot issue, however, because nobody is going to be repealing the 2nd. Amd. Very little can actually be done now. Some things can be done, but if the subject is "how do we stop this", well, it's probably far too late.

I'd certainly support reasonable measures aimed at keeping guns out of dangerous hands, but we shouldn't kid ourselves. That'll make a dent maybe, but only a dent.
Click to expand...


In my ideal world, the 2nd would've been severely curtailed if not repealed some decades after the civil war, or perhaps would never have existed in the first place. But that's impossible, so I'm not here to really argue about what would and wouldn't work other than to note yea it kind of IS the guns, it's just that they aren't going anywhere.
 
danielpalos said:
Judicial activism? In any case, that ruling seemed to be a exercise in the waste of public monies. Paragraph (2) supports my contention and not that of gun lovers.
Click to expand...

Yes, activism. The text seems plain. It's a very interesting opinion to read, as is Stevens' dissent.
 
grip said:
The solution to these mass killings has more to do with the majority of people willing to have an attitude change towards the cultural acceptance of violence in our entertainment and News coverage. Look at these video games, TV shows and movies that glorify blood, guts and gore. There's no respect for life anymore and a permissive social standard towards today's youth.

Realistically, we'll never confiscate all the guns or find and treat all the mentally ill. But we can gradually try to change our society by promoting a higher standard of human values for compassion, peace and love of life.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.
 
Risky Thicket said:
I completely agree.
Click to expand...

As long as there's free will and ignorance, there will always be *some* tragedies but we need a better attempt at mitigating it. And people have to be willing to accept that our current culture is not realistic.

Though I've found the masses generally are not interested in the truth.
 
grip said:
As long as there's free will and ignorance, there will always be *some* tragedies but we need a better attempt at mitigating it. And people have to be willing to accept that our current culture is not realistic.

Though I've found the masses generally are not interested in the truth.
Click to expand...

Especially if they must find it and/or validate it themselves.
 
Lursa said:
So you would prefer that people who owned guns were not able to afford to learn to use them properly?
Click to expand...

Do you feel that gun enthusiasts have any obligation to deal with increased inconvenience if it means the successful reduction of the 9000 deaths per year as the result of firearm-related murders?
 
Risky Thicket said:
Especially if they must find it and/or validate it themselves.
Click to expand...

There's really only one truth. That any decision that benefits the greater good of all is the right one, which comes from love your own life and others equally. The rest is subjective deception of the intellect and a learning curve to find the truth.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Quote Originally Posted by grip View Post

As long as there's free will and ignorance, there will always be *some* tragedies but we need a better attempt at mitigating it. And people have to be willing to accept that our current culture is not realistic.

Though I've found the masses generally are not interested in the truth.
Click to expand...

Especially if they must find it and/or validate it themselves.
Click to expand...

Especially if there is a very active, well funded, and systematic campaign of misinformation designed to propogate paranoia and misinformation among them.
 
haymarket said:
Lets look at the 1806 Websters dictionary - the true first Amenerican dictionary of language as used int he USA and closest to the time when the Amendment was written



Nothing in there about "trained" as you claim. But it certainly says to adjust by rule, order and direct. That certainly sounds organized and controlled and not a ad hoc group of yahoos with guns going out in the woods and shooting at squirrels and claiming they are well trained .

This is consistent with what the Constitution says about Congress and the militia in Article I: Section 8 - Powers of Congress



It is clear that a well regulated militia at the time of the Constitution and Bill of Rights was one under the control of Congress - a branch of the government and subject to their will , their discipline, their arming and all that goes with arming. And for those officially called into the service of the federal government, the Congress even has the power to govern them with all that implies.

It is dishonest to repeat the NRA line about well trained.
Click to expand...

Yes...prepared. And a large part of that is training. There are regular and irregular troops. The citizen militia was irregular, but the expectation of 'well-regulated' meant they were prepared (trained) and provided their own firearms and often, horses.

Nothing dishonest, apologies if not complete.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Indeed. In the words of the late great Muddy Waters, "Something wrong somewhere." But what? Damned if I know but I'd be willing to bet that the answer to the problem is not simply "guns".

For a number of reasons living in the United States is probably more stressful than daily life in many other countries. That's perhaps a topic for another thread, but I think the stress here is palpable. You often notice it as soon as you walk through TSA and/or customs. In Europe it is a procedure that is for the most part handled in a courteous manner. In the US we are greeted with screaming and stern looks as we stand in the queue.

Work, money, possession, the appearance of having the money to acquire things here is greater than it is in many western nations. America puts more people in jail than any other nation on earth.

Those are examples. My point is that at a quick glance there are obvious differences between the US and other nations, many of the difference are positive but not all of them. I can imagine it is most difficult for kids growing up in the these days. There's a lot of pressure. And too there is no right of passage for young men. That may further confuse and frustrate those boys who don't have strong support systems.
Click to expand...

I wrote this in another thread:

There have been a few Arab/Middle Eastern active shooters (Cascade Mall here, Ft Hood), Asian (VT), and Native American (Marysville HS, WA), but when examined, all were really acting out on the same things as the angry 'white' males. They are losers blaming everyone else for their problems. They feel disenfranchised by society for things that generally are their own shortcomings.*

But there can be 'angry males' of any ethnicity....to be honest,*since we seem to discriminate against non-whites more (socially if not legally), you'd think there would be more non-white active shooters.

Why then, are ethnically and racially white males the great majority?
 
grip said:
The solution to these mass killings has more to do with the majority of people willing to have an attitude change towards the cultural acceptance of violence in our entertainment and News coverage. Look at these video games, TV shows and movies that glorify blood, guts and gore. There's no respect for life anymore and a permissive social standard towards today's youth.

Realistically, we'll never confiscate all the guns or find and treat all the mentally ill. But we can gradually try to change our society by promoting a higher standard of human values for compassion, peace and love of life.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying definitely. But if we are asking the generation(s) of 'video gamers' to buy into that as the cause and to give them up...I'd say that's as big a loser as trying to ban guns.

And thus far, it's difficult if not impossible to find studies that directly correlate violence with the violent video games. I find that hard to believe but I cant argue it if there is no evidence to support it except how it appears to me.

I believe we are on our 2nd generation of video gamers now too.
 
Lursa said:
Yes...prepared. And a large part of that is training. There are regular and irregular troops. The citizen militia was irregular, but the expectation of 'well-regulated' meant they were prepared (trained) and provided their own firearms and often, horses.

Nothing dishonest, apologies if not complete.
Click to expand...

You are leaving out the part about being ordered, ruled and even governed as constituting well regulated. It involves far more than just being able to march together.
 
Mr Person said:
Well, I really don't care what people playing psychologist on the internet have to say about motives, so I didn't read those people's speculations. I'll note this much: in the countries that have literally removed the means, they don't have anywhere near our rate of shootings or mass shootings, and that's true whether or not one includes suicides. They still have them, yes, but the vast majority of items are impossible to completely keep out of peoples' hands thanks to black markets.
Click to expand...

OK. But here's a couple of facts: without motives, there would be no violence, period. Weapon wouldnt matter at all. So denying its relevance is foolish IMO. And changing the motivation behind such acts would benefit society and those individuals far more in more ways than just focusing on tools.

And other countries dont have our culture. Culture, socio-economics, is what, again, contributes to that motive. What is it about our culture that is conducive to violence in males? A fascination with guns is one that is more unique to the US. But that is not the main motivator....because again: we have always had guns. Lots of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom