Are mass shootings and higher gun deaths an acceptable part of a free society?

[VanceMack]

It is not a catch phrase. We have not had a chronic healthcare system since the early 90's I think it was. We are talking about decreasing the incidence of mass shootings in the future. One means that might have some effect on that is to have a long term mental healthcare system that gets and helps keep people on their meds. Less crazy people out there that would shoot up a movie theater, the less likely is it to happen.

And believe it or not, long term mental health care facilities STILL exist. So again...rather than take in sound bite snippets because you think it might somehow be a problem, Im asking you to identify some real world problems that do not CURRENTLY have a real world solution.

 

[mak2]

Tell me about our long term mental health facilities. Try to focus here, the thread is about mass shootings being the trade off for freedom. Obviously if this country had a better mental healthcare system some future mass shooting would almost certainly be prevented.

And believe it or not, long term mental health care facilities STILL exist. So again...rather than take in sound bite snippets because you think it might somehow be a problem, Im asking you to identify some real world problems that do not CURRENTLY have a real world solution.

 

[VanceMack]

By most definitions, a mass shooting involves four or more victims. Is that fair?

Mass shootings in America: The big picture in charts and graphs - CNN.com

Don't get me wrong- I'm not arguing for trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube. I'm just trying for accuracy here.

Are you choosing to finally enagge the gang problem in this country? Thats AWESOME since that IS where the majority of 'mass shooting' stats come from there. Those mass shootings dont involve assault rifles. They have nothing to do with background checks. They have nothing to do with waiting periods. That means there has to be a real willingness to engage the gang violence in this country.

Do you find it sad...even despicable...that while we are still mourning the loss of the very real tragedy in Orlando from a week and a half ago there isnt a single mention of the 60 people shot in Chicago over the last weekend alone?

There are a lot of other very telling states there. Of the 8 'most deadly shootings, 4 involved handguns. 1 involved a standard hunting rifle. 1 involved an AR style weapon that was obtained by murder. 2 involved AR weapons obtained legally for the intent of committing terrorist attacks. 5/3 and all we talk about is ARs.

People have a greater chance of dying...where? Gun free zones. THATS a pretty relevant fact.

Lots you can take from that data.

 

[VanceMack]

Tell me about our long term mental health facilities. Try to focus here, the thread is about mass shootings being the trade off for freedom. Obviously if this country had a better mental healthcare system some future mass shooting would almost certainly be prevented.

Give me something to work with. In this state, a person identified as a threat to themselves or others are committed for 24-72 hours observation. This is dont on advise by a clinician that signs one side of the order and a medical doctor that signs the actual order. If there is no threat after 72 hours they are released. If there is still concern the facility files a 'white sheet' that requests a further committment of up to 2 weeks...almost always granted. The individual can request to be released by signing a writ, which is reviewed and almost always denied by a judge. If after the now 15 days they are still deemed a threat the facility files for an extension, granted almost always up to 30 days. Beyond that, if they are deemed still at risk the facility files on the patient and the judge orders the patient held against their will at a state facility for an initial stay of 6 months. During this time the person is placed on state assistance due to mental disability. If after that 6 months they are still considered a potential violent offender it is extended by a judge after filing cause.

Anything else you would like to know? What would you like to see changed?

 

[VanceMack]

I did not know that last part. Is that true? It's even higher now than before the ban?

Mindframe

That should give you a feel. Everyones rates are going up...I wouldnt say it was due to the ban (I dont think I implied that and if I did that wasnt my intent). Merely that lethality is not a problem. Australia proves that. Japan proves that. Even in Australia where the number one rate of suicide is by hanging their numbers equal ours (by percentage). Means is just a 'thing'.

 

[mak2]

Are you trying to argue mental health has no effect on gun violence? Cause that is what the anti gunners try to argue, it is the guns.

Give me something to work with. In this state, a person identified as a threat to themselves or others are committed for 24-72 hours observation. This is dont on advise by a clinician that signs one side of the order and a medical doctor that signs the actual order. If there is no threat after 72 hours they are released. If there is still concern the facility files a 'white sheet' that requests a further committment of up to 2 weeks...almost always granted. The individual can request to be released by signing a writ, which is reviewed and almost always denied by a judge. If after the now 15 days they are still deemed a threat the facility files for an extension, granted almost always up to 30 days. Beyond that, if they are deemed still at risk the facility files on the patient and the judge orders the patient held against their will at a state facility for an initial stay of 6 months. During this time the person is placed on state assistance due to mental disability. If after that 6 months they are still considered a potential violent offender it is extended by a judge after filing cause.

Anything else you would like to know? What would you like to see changed?

 

[VanceMack]

Are you trying to argue mental health has no effect on gun violence? Cause that is what the anti gunners try to argue, it is the guns.

YOU brought up the 'mental health' concern. I am asking you to actually express a coherent thought rather than bleat on about some talking point about how the REAL problem is mental health in this country. HOW is it a problem? Its YOUR fricken argument. You made some comment about long term care. I EXPLAINED to you long term care. So...what is your ACTUAL concern other than just saying "mental health is the problem!"

 

[mak2]

thanks, actually I have been reading a couple of articles. You might be correct. the APA studies indicate( Mental Illness, Mass Shootings, and the Politics of American Firearms )gun violence decreases as severe mental illness gets worse over the years. Also, "Swanson and colleagues (2013) studied the effects of this policy change on individuals who would most likely be affected — that is, those who were legally prohibited from possessing firearms due solely to the danger posed by their mental illnesses. They found that the rate of violent crime offending was about half as high among those whose mental illness disqualification was reported to the background system compared with those whose mental illness disqualification was not reported." Gun Violence: Prediction, Prevention, and Policy I think you might be right, don't institutionalize them, simply report to the FBI. I learned something.

YOU brought up the 'mental health' concern. I am asking you to actually express a coherent thought rather than bleat on about some talking point about how the REAL problem is mental health in this country. HOW is it a problem? Its YOUR fricken argument. You made some comment about long term care. I EXPLAINED to you long term care. So...what is your ACTUAL concern other than just saying "mental health is the problem!"

 

[Casper]

YOU brought up the 'mental health' concern. I am asking you to actually express a coherent thought rather than bleat on about some talking point about how the REAL problem is mental health in this country. HOW is it a problem? Its YOUR fricken argument. You made some comment about long term care. I EXPLAINED to you long term care. So...what is your ACTUAL concern other than just saying "mental health is the problem!"

When you are talking about mass shootings the problem almost always comes down to a mental health issue, you do know that, right?

 

[VanceMack]

thanks, actually I have been reading a couple of articles. You might be correct. the APA studies indicate( Mental Illness, Mass Shootings, and the Politics of American Firearms )gun violence decreases as severe mental illness gets worse over the years. Also, "Swanson and colleagues (2013) studied the effects of this policy change on individuals who would most likely be affected — that is, those who were legally prohibited from possessing firearms due solely to the danger posed by their mental illnesses. They found that the rate of violent crime offending was about half as high among those whose mental illness disqualification was reported to the background system compared with those whose mental illness disqualification was not reported." Gun Violence: Prediction, Prevention, and Policy I think you might be right, don't institutionalize them, simply report to the FBI. I learned something.

The Orlando shooter was reported to the FBI. They investigated him. Twice.

See...there is a problem with parroting comments like "what the real problem is in this country is 'mental health care'". Beyond it being a silly talking point, you have to actually follow that up with something relevant.

 

[VanceMack]

When you are talking about mass shootings the problem almost always comes down to a mental health issue, you do know that, right?

What is the 'problem' that needs to be addressed? Lack of care? Lack of available care? Ineffective mind reading capabilities? The 'easy' button doesnt actually work?

 

[Phys251]

They are so long as we ignore the mental heath issue so in need of being addressed. To suggest that the 2nd A should be thrown out or neutered without dealing with the actual cause of the problem is not honest or worth consideration.

If we're going to scapegoat mental health as the underlying cause of mass shootings, then let's actually address it head-on.

 

[Aberration]

We live in a country in which we are guaranteed the right to bear arms in order to defend ourselves and our property. In order to maintain that right we sometimes must deal with mass shootings. Are these shootings a necessary part, or an inevitable side effect of that right?

I dont think they are necessary or inevitable. I do think they are 'acceptable'.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Aberration]

Give me something to work with. In this state, a person identified as a threat to themselves or others are committed for 24-72 hours observation. This is dont on advise by a clinician that signs one side of the order and a medical doctor that signs the actual order. If there is no threat after 72 hours they are released. If there is still concern the facility files a 'white sheet' that requests a further committment of up to 2 weeks...almost always granted. The individual can request to be released by signing a writ, which is reviewed and almost always denied by a judge. If after the now 15 days they are still deemed a threat the facility files for an extension, granted almost always up to 30 days. Beyond that, if they are deemed still at risk the facility files on the patient and the judge orders the patient held against their will at a state facility for an initial stay of 6 months. During this time the person is placed on state assistance due to mental disability. If after that 6 months they are still considered a potential violent offender it is extended by a judge after filing cause.

Anything else you would like to know? What would you like to see changed?

I know you werent speaking to me and my reply might be out of context.

What I would like to see changed is "almost always granted" part of these orders. Sounds to me a whole lot like temporary restraining orders which have no due process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Casper]

What is the 'problem' that needs to be addressed? Lack of care? Lack of available care? Ineffective mind reading capabilities? The 'easy' button doesnt actually work?

Lack of people being aware of the issue, or ability to do a darn thing about it, and that includes most government agencies and institutions. If your nonsense is an example of your capabilities you might want to rethink discussing the topic.

 

[joG]

We live in a country in which we are guaranteed the right to bear arms in order to defend ourselves and our property. In order to maintain that right we sometimes must deal with mass shootings. Are these shootings a necessary part, or an inevitable side effect of that right?

Amok runners are a cultural thing. In some cultures they are frequent and in others they hardly ever occur. As far as I know, they didn't occur very often in the US but have accelerated in the last decades.

 

[Casper]

If we're going to scapegoat mental health as the underlying cause of mass shootings, then let's actually address it head-on.

It is not scapegoating mental health when it is Obvious to anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together knows that the vast majority of mass shootings are caused by those that are certifiably nuts and most were already known to be nuts. But yes, we do need to address the mental health issues the people of this Nation are facing. Do you agree or would you rather blame a religion or tool instead?

 

[Cephus]

When you are talking about mass shootings the problem almost always comes down to a mental health issue, you do know that, right?

Only because "crazy" is often an excuse for things that people don't want to accept. Nobody could ever commit these horrific acts, hence they have to be crazy! There are no other explanations. Religion never gets blamed, it's just a crazy person who just so happens to be religious.

 

[Phys251]

It is not scapegoating mental health when it is Obvious to anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together knows that the vast majority of mass shootings are caused by those that are certifiably nuts and most were already known to be nuts. But yes, we do need to address the mental health issues the people of this Nation are facing. Do you agree or would you rather blame a religion or tool instead?

Go watch the video. Oliver specifically addresses this misconception.

 

[joG]

There are ways to make them occur less often, but I don't think we will ever stomp them out completely. A good mental health system would be a start.

I suspect that it is more a cultural thing than primarily a health one. So maybe we could prevent mass shootings with doctors, if we could identify the shooters in time and we invest in enough new psychiatrists. But I suspect we might be well advised to examine the cultural changes we have made that might have created the conditions that lead to the mass shooting phenomenon.

 

[mak2]

There is a lot of interesting studies on mental health and guns, the problem is they are usually for gun control, soooo... Even the suggestion Pediatricians asking kids about guns in the home sets the RWers hair on fire.

I suspect that it is more a cultural thing than primarily a health one. So maybe we could prevent mass shootings with doctors, if we could identify the shooters in time and we invest in enough new psychiatrists. But I suspect we might be well advised to examine the cultural changes we have made that might have created the conditions that lead to the mass shooting phenomenon.

 

[Casper]

Only because "crazy" is often an excuse for things that people don't want to accept. Nobody could ever commit these horrific acts, hence they have to be crazy! There are no other explanations. Religion never gets blamed, it's just a crazy person who just so happens to be religious.

Many mass shooting have ZERO to do with religion and those that do are not aligned with one religion. They are not ALL nuts, but most are, and most had already been identified as having "issues" so claim what you want the facts are there for all to see.

 

[Cephus]

Many mass shooting have ZERO to do with religion and those that do are not aligned with one religion. They are not ALL nuts, but most are, and most had already been identified as having "issues" so claim what you want the facts are there for all to see.

And many have everything to do with religion and the first thing the religious do is try to distance themselves from that fact and because religion is the culturally dominant delusion, people don't want to place the blame where it actually belongs. It isn't just one thing to blame. There are lots of things that cause violence.

 

[joG]

There is a lot of interesting studies on mental health and guns, the problem is they are usually for gun control, soooo... Even the suggestion Pediatricians asking kids about guns in the home sets the RWers hair on fire.

I hadn't noticed studies of mental health and guns and am not sure, what aspects they would concentrate on. If you have time to post an example or two, I would be happy to read them. On the other hand I have looked at the numbers of guns in societies and the number of homicides. There are differing conclusions draw, but I was not able to see a significant correlation.

 

[mak2]

Here is one public health NIH article and an APA study. I am going to have to read more of them too. You get caught up in these debates and forget to further your education about the facts.

thanks, actually I have been reading a couple of articles. You might be correct. the APA studies indicate( Mental Illness, Mass Shootings, and the Politics of American Firearms )gun violence decreases as severe mental illness gets worse over the years. Also, "Swanson and colleagues (2013) studied the effects of this policy change on individuals who would most likely be affected — that is, those who were legally prohibited from possessing firearms due solely to the danger posed by their mental illnesses. They found that the rate of violent crime offending was about half as high among those whose mental illness disqualification was reported to the background system compared with those whose mental illness disqualification was not reported." Gun Violence: Prediction, Prevention, and Policy I think you might be right, don't institutionalize them, simply report to the FBI. I learned something.

I hadn't noticed studies of mental health and guns and am not sure, what aspects they would concentrate on. If you have time to post an example or two, I would be happy to read them. On the other hand I have looked at the numbers of guns in societies and the number of homicides. There are differing conclusions draw, but I was not able to see a significant correlation.