Another school shooting (Oregon) - Ho hum

[PseudoSABR]

 

Yeah of course. He has basically taken the "Stuff happens" Jeb Bush approach to this IMO, but at least he gave one idea that could potentially help a little bit.

I credit your finding common ground.  A campaign to move the hearts and minds of gun-lovers is aspirational--it can not be the policy though.  If we pass a law--with all the press that goes a long with it--and that law has no real effect, one could say it would be nothing more than an ad campaign.  So at worse legislation is an ad campaign against gun culture and at best it will make it more difficult for the deranged to arm themselves with the most deadly of weapons. 

[ashbury]

 I think an anti-gun ad campaign would face just as stiff opposition from the NRA than actual legislation.   

We need an organization of like-minded citizens along the same lines as the NRA. Just as muscular. If we can't build up something like that, shame on us.

 

_{^{/ of course I'm going to wait for someone else to start the organization, then just mail in my check from the comfort of my barca-lounger.}}

[DaveW]

We need an organization of like-minded citizens along the same lines as the NRA. Just as muscular. If we can't build up something like that, shame on us.

 

_{^{/ of course I'm going to wait for someone else to start the organization, then just mail in my check from the comfort of my barca-lounger.}}

If it was ever gonna happen, now would be the time. The NRA has the money, but with social media these days that can be overcame.

[TheLeviathan]

 

As long as hearing that prong out doesn't lead to the exclusion of others.  Some ideas serve a hegemonic purpose, that distracts and detracts.   Our society has mastered "looking as if we care to find a solution" without actually caring to find one. 

 

 

Seriously, I said this:

 

Then you supplement with mental health reforms and gun laws, but they wont mean anything unless we change how we think.

 

 

What the hell are you talking about?

[TheLeviathan]

 

It did wonders for Tobacco, I don't agree with everything Lev has said, but I think a nationwide ad campaign would be great, it won't fix the problem right away, but will help as generations grow etc.

 

The fight against tobacco is the model IMO.  We're just several decades removed from smoking not just being accepted, but encouraged and thought of much the same way as guns.  Now you can barely go anywhere with smoking allowed much less accepted.

 

It took time, it took changes in the law, but most importantly it took a reshaping of the way we view smoking.  That fight isn't over yet, but we're seeing true progress.  It's going to take a long time with guns too.  Especially since not one single gun law proposed here would do anything to stop the next massacre.

 

And, to go further, I just read ashbury's excellent post.  Tobacco is still a powerful lobby, but the anti-Tobacco lobby and groups have become a significant public and political force.  That force has helped make more laws be passable but also emboldened the anti-tobacco campaigns.  Right now, anything anti-gun is fought SO hard by the NRA that it never gets off the ground.  That goes for both laws as well as things as simple as public criticism.  The advertising pushback and effort to change our perception will build groups like this that can stand opposed to the NRA.

 

Just passing laws does nothing because the general public doesn't follow that.  But they see the commercials.  They see the change in perception.  They can get behind movements.  The law changes can still happen, but they're just one prong as others have said.  Without the voice of the public and real pushback to our culture of gun violence, they'll do nothing to stop the next 16 year old from raiding their parent's gun cabinet.

 

We need those parents to willingly give up their gun cabinets and that's going to take time, but it's the only way.  We'll NEVER pass a law in this environment that reduces the guns already here and that is the true source of a lot of this violence.

[biggentleben]

 

It won't stop massacres. Like I already said people will just use bombs, so what we really need to be doing is helping people with mental disorders, because banning high capacity magazines will not change the way these people think. By the way, the far right won't get smashed during the next decade, they are the ones with the young, intelligent leaders, so I think it highly unlikely that they do. The problem with liberals is that they are acting like the GOP doesn't care about this issue, or any issue, but they do, they just have other ideas.

 

The GOP is certainly contradicting your two points. It's hard to assist in truly helping those who are mentally ill (disorder? hello, 1930) to receive the services they truly need when the movement is to de-fund those with boots on the ground and overfund pharmaceuticals and institutions. That's where all the "more mental health awareness and help" from the GOP falls so short - actions, not words, ladies and gentlemen.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Seriously, I said this:

 

 

What the hell are you talking about?

You been advocating against gun laws throughout the thread.  I guess I stand corrected, you'll be fine with gun laws 20 years down the road after your ad campaign does its magic.

[TheLeviathan]

You been advocating against gun laws throughout the thread.  I guess I stand corrected, you'll be fine with gun laws 20 years down the road after your ad campaign does its magic.

I don't want them passed in 20 years, I just don't think we will see real benefits for that long. Limiting new sales does nothing to reduce the enormous proliferation that already exists. I'm irritated that people seem to think tougher gun laws will stop the next one. The CT massacre stands as stark evidence to the contrary. I think they can help in the long term but they are woefully insufficient in the short term.

 

And that assumes we even can pass the laws now in an environment where that still seems like a long shot without more galvanized opposition to the NRA and those it has pocketed in government.

 

In our society now a hashtag is going to have more power than a bill proposal. That may be the best place to start.

[ashbury]

In our society now a hashtag is going to have more power than a bill proposal.

The 4.5 million member NRA manages to send an emissary to each and every non-hostile politician's office anytime something having any effect is proposed, to remind them of their heft. Republicans congresspeople soft on gun rights can be primaried, for example. I don't see how grass-roots grumbling will replace the threat of losing one's elected seat. The hashtags will have to come to mean something similarly direct and threatening to any politician who ignores them. Probably concentrated effort on a half-dozen vulnerable politicians, and making sure to get results, would be the way to go. But expect concentrated effort in return by the NRA.

[TheLeviathan]

 

The 4.5 million member NRA manages to send an emissary to each and every non-hostile politician's office anytime something having any effect is proposed, to remind them of their heft. Republicans congresspeople soft on gun rights can be primaried, for example. I don't see how grass-roots grumbling will replace the threat of losing one's elected seat. The hashtags will have to come to mean something similarly direct and threatening to any politician who ignores them. Probably concentrated effort on a half-dozen vulnerable politicians, and making sure to get results, would be the way to go. But expect concentrated effort in return by the NRA.

 

Oh, it'll also be a very long-term project.  The NRA is ridiculously powerful.  But we didn't turn the tables on the tobacco industry for decades, but the only way you're going to build a true challenger to the NRA is to start to galvanize support and funding.  To create as much risk in opposing gun laws as supporting them.  Right now that doesn't exist and won't exist until there is a more comprehensive effort to unify behind the concept.

 

I don't think, given the factors involved in this issue, that there is a short-term fix that we can count on.  But a combination of things now will help over time.  I think the one most likely to impact first is galvanized opposition to the NRA and real pressure on politicians.  Hell, I'm not convinced the gun laws everyone thinks are the silver bullet are even possible until that happens.

[Mike Sixel]

What is the right's answer to gun violence? More privately funded prisons who are incented to keep people in jail? What is their answer? Reducing funding for poor? Reducing education spending? Fighting against laws that say mental health coverage should be mandated? What, exactly, is the right's answer?

[TheLeviathan]

 

What is the right's answer to gun violence? More privately funded prisons who are incented to keep people in jail? What is their answer? Reducing funding for poor? Reducing education spending? Fighting against laws that say mental health coverage should be mandated? What, exactly, is the right's answer?

 

I have heard some very muted talk of mental health reforms, but I think largely they are too busy defending guns to offer solutions.  But there are a few on the right pointing this out, just not nearly enough and none with much influence.  

[DaveW]

http://morningafter.gawker.com/john-oliver-on-americas-treatment-of-mental-health-no-1734668427

[Mike Sixel]

from that article:

 

"fewer than 5 percent of the 120,000 gun-related killings ... were perpetrated by people diagnosed with mental illness,” according to a February article in the American Journal of Public Health. "

 

So, ya, it's not all about that.....

[Craig Arko]

 

from that article:

"fewer than 5 percent of the 120,000 gun-related killings ... were perpetrated by people diagnosed with mental illness,” according to a February article in the American Journal of Public Health. "

So, ya, it's not all about that.....

To be sure, these mass shootings are just a small number in the total number of gun related homicides in America. Probably behind 'kid found parents' gun and accidentally shot himself.'

[TheLeviathan]

 

from that article:

"fewer than 5 percent of the 120,000 gun-related killings ... were perpetrated by people diagnosed with mental illness,” according to a February article in the American Journal of Public Health. "

So, ya, it's not all about that.....

 

I think this speaks to my point about proliferation.  We try to find all sorts of things to hide behind, but the real issue is the massive amount of guns already owned in this country.  And I'm really not sure how we reduce that number.  (It's been tried but with little positive results)

 

We can try and stem the influx, that can be a good thing, but the benefits won't be seen for a long, long time.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Instead of adding new laws, and what I think Republicans can get on board with, is rolling back the ridiculous laws we already have. Lawmakers need to show some spine and demand that these excess regulations are stricken from the books. It's a long road, multi-pronged approach, for sure.

 

For example, what mike said upthread about laws prohibiting federal agencies from collecting data on gun violence specifically. And then the family in Colorado who lost their daughter in the theater shooting and is now on the hook for $200,000 in legal bills to the ammo seller. Loser pay laws specifically to protect this industry. That's embarrassing. There are probably many other laws that very few people know about. Get rid of them.

[glunn]

 

We need an organization of like-minded citizens along the same lines as the NRA. Just as muscular. If we can't build up something like that, shame on us.

 

_{^{/ of course I'm going to wait for someone else to start the organization, then just mail in my check from the comfort of my barca-lounger.}}

 

You can send a check here:

 

http://www.bradycampaign.org/jim-and-sarah-brady

[biggentleben]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGY6DqB1HX8

 

John Oliver discussed mental health on his show last evening, and he highlighted the exact thing I do - ACT teams. However, the thing that bugs me is the perfectly predictable quotes from the Republican presidential candidates shown.

[Craig Arko]

You can send a check here:

 

http://www.bradycampaign.org/jim-and-sarah-brady

Or here:

 

http://americansforresponsiblesolutions.org

[Craig Arko]

Message from the front lines...

 

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/02/an_oregon_teachers_letter_to_lawmakers_we_dont_need_your_prayers_we_need_your_courage/

[TheLeviathan]

An interesting read:

 

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/guns-congress-and-murphys-law-090049362.html

[Willihammer]

According to this link, 41 of the 78 mass shootings dating back to 1983 ended in shooter suicide. A further 10 were killed by police. Some of those could have been suicide by cop. Its possible to describe half or more of these mass shootings as flamboyant suicides.

 

According to the yahoo link above, "And it’s worth noting that 2646 could have a real impact on suicidal patients, too, who account for the vast majority of gun-related tragedies in America."

 

There must be something that differentiates the suicidal from the ones who want to take out a bunch of people with them. I think before we do away with patient-doctor confidentiality, we should pinpoint what exactly that factor(s) is.

[TheLeviathan]

 

There must be something that differentiates the suicidal from the ones who want to take out a bunch of people with them. I think before we do away with patient-doctor confidentiality, we should pinpoint what exactly that factor(s) is.

 

I agree, the proposed step of reducing the hard line of doctor confidentiality is a scary one.  But I'm also not sure how to work around confidentiality and still notify those around the individual of the risks.  That's one of many sticky wickets in fixing this problem.

[Willihammer]

 

I agree, the proposed step of reducing the hard line of doctor confidentiality is a scary one.  But I'm also not sure how to work around confidentiality and still notify those around the individual of the risks.  That's one of many sticky wickets in fixing this problem.

I would also like to have read a fact about how many shooters actually sought help and were in the system in the first place. I'm reluctant to say the system even needs to be fixed until that's established.

 

There is a frustrating lack of facts in the entire discussion IMO.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I would also like to have read a fact about how many shooters actually sought help and were in the system in the first place. I'm reluctant to say the system even needs to be fixed until that's established.

 

There is a frustrating lack of facts in the entire discussion IMO.

 

I agree, you look at most of the facets of these killers and the circumstances hardly fit a common narrative.  But the responses we see in the aftermath try to paint that there is.  

 

That's part of why I think the roots of this run really, really deep and won't be "fixed" with most of the proposals out there.  It may take a lot longer than any of us want to imagine to address these horrifying acts.  We have to get started, but we have to have our eyes wide open on the scope of it too.

[Willihammer]

The scope of the cause should be explored but we shouldnt' lose sight of the scope of the problem either. Truth is that while tragic, death by mass shooting is still fairly rare and the casualties count is dwarfed by other things. Creating laws that change patient-doctor confidentiality or remove individual liberties would be about as wise as going to war over a single terrorist act IMO. Better to make thoughtful, precise changes that address specific problems that we have a firm grasp of.

[Vanimal46]

Another one this morning...... UGH. What.The.Hell.

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/officials-1-dead-3-wounded-in-university-shooting-in-ariz/ar-AAfhelw?li=BBieTUX?ocid=ansmsnnews11

[Mike Sixel]

That student having a gun, so he could protect himself, that worked out well.....

 

I am willing to concede that guns don't kill people, people do. Are you willing to concede that we should regulate peoples' rights and access to guns? Because I'm not trying to regulate guns, I'm trying to regulate people.

[TheLeviathan]

Not that it's any better or worse, but the details so far indicate a different kind of shooting.  

 

But yeah, there are too many guns already out there.  I wish there was a way to fix that.