Why Does The U.S. Have More School Shootings Than Everywhere Else?

[DDD]

If you are looking for a method to sweep the schools of the personality disorders that cause these mass shootings then (again) fMRI scans are one way. Just scan them prior to accepting students. How difficult can that be?

Various neural patterns have been known to detect disorders such as: paranoid-schizophrenics, sociopaths, psychopaths, and impulsive murderers. So scan the potential students and check whether neural patterns match and Qe, you could stop mass shootings.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

If you are looking for a method to sweep the schools of the personality disorders that cause these mass shootings then (again) fMRI scans are one way. Just scan them prior to accepting students. How difficult can that be?

Various neural patterns have been known to detect disorders such as: paranoid-schizophrenics, sociopaths, psychopaths, and impulsive murderers. So scan the potential students and check whether neural patterns match and Qe, you could stop mass shootings.

But how do you distinguish the schizophrenics who are going to shoot up any place, from the ones that are functioning people? How do you not infringe on the rights of the majority because of the actions of a few?

 

[DDD]

But how do you distinguish the schizophrenics who are going to shoot up any place, from the ones that are functioning people? How do you not infringe on the rights of the majority because of the actions of a few?

To be clear the "majority" you speak of is among the schizophrenic population to begin with. Schizophrenics are a very small minority in every general population of a country in the world.

Secondly, I am for not providing legal access to weapons to such people. If it is the ill minded that cause mass shootings then they should have it less easy in just picking up arms and start shooting at other students.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

To be clear the "majority" you speak of is among the schizophrenic population to begin with. Schizophrenics are a very small minority in every general population of a country in the world.

Secondly, I am for not providing legal access to weapons to such people. If it is the ill minded that cause mass shootings then they should have it less easy in just picking up arms and start shooting at other students.

How many Schizophrenics are there? Ball park? Do you know? Well I do, it's over 2 million people in the US alone. Now how many of them are actually responsible for school shooting? 5? 6? So you are wanting to take away a fundamental right away from millions of people, based on the actions of a fraction of a fraction of a few? How is that not reacting on emotion? And how is this good policy? How about we just ban all guys from having guns. Everyone of them were men right?

 

[DDD]

How many Schizophrenics are there? Ball park? Do you know? Well I do, it's over 2 million people in the US alone. Now how many of them are actually responsible for school shooting? 5? 6? So you are wanting to take away a fundamental right away from millions of people, based on the actions of a fraction of a fraction of a few? How is that not reacting on emotion? And how is this good policy? How about we just ban all guys from having guns. Everyone of them were men right?

That is another thing. Usually people that conduct these mass shootings are called "mentally ill" which indicates schizophrenics and severe affective disorders. Usually though it is not the mentally ill that conduct acts of murder but it is the people with personality disorders.

Yes I am for gun licenses against these whom are most likely to kill others. They abuse the right of having guns to defend themselves and misuse it to kill innocent civilians instead. Hence going on probability related to personality disorders, those who do not pass the fMRI scans with emphasis on personality disorders should not get a gun license.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

That is another thing. Usually people that conduct these mass shootings are called "mentally ill" which indicates schizophrenics and severe affective disorders. Usually though it is not the mentally ill that conduct acts of murder but it is the people with personality disorders.

Yes I am for gun licenses against these whom are most likely to kill others. They abuse the right of having guns to defend themselves and misuse it to kill innocent civilians instead. Hence going on probability related to personality disorders, those who do not pass the fMRI scans with emphasis on personality disorders should not get a gun license.

Heck if we're banning this based on commonalities of these shooters, how about we ban all white people from having guns? Or maybe just ban all men having gun. It certainly would make the world more interesting if only non-white women could own firearms...

 

[DDD]

Heck if we're banning this based on commonalities of these shooters, how about we ban all white people from having guns? Or maybe just ban all men having gun. It certainly would make the world more interesting if only non-white women could own firearms...

You spoke of "not reacting to emotion" just a few posts back and yet here you are blinded from it and not reading my posts anymore.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

You spoke of "not reacting to emotion" just a few posts back and yet here you are blinded from it and not reading my posts anymore.

No I heard. I heard how we were talking about the difference between mental disorders and personality disorders. Still your logic is flawed in one very important way:

You seem to be of the understanding that just because some (not all mind you but certainly more than not) of these mass shooters had a disorder of one kind or another, that we have to ban anyone who has said disorder from one of their rights. The problem with that logic is that not everyone with said disorder turns out to be a mass shooter. There is not one thing that you can point to that is singular cause why these people snapped, and the others 99.9999% don't. If you can, then I'm all for your "mass shooter" scans. Without that ability though, are doing far more good than you could ever do with your mental health screening. Who's to say that a dozen, a hundred of those millions even, don't protect themselves from an attack with a firearm. You would of deprived them of that opportunity, as it is far more likely to be attacked on a walk/ride home, than be involved in a school shooting. Can you tell me that any one of these scans, can absolutely eliminate the possibility of another shooting happening? That is to say that you are counting for no one to fall through your cracks, that your system is perfect. If it isn't, then as I've already discussed before, you are depriving millions of their rights for nothing.

 

[DDD]

No I heard. I heard how we were talking about the difference between mental disorders and personality disorders. Still your logic is flawed in one very important way:

You seem to be of the understanding that just because some (not all mind you but certainly more than not) of these mass shooters had a disorder of one kind or another, that we have to ban anyone who has said disorder from one of their rights. The problem with that logic is that not everyone with said disorder turns out to be a mass shooter. There is not one thing that you can point to that is singular cause why these people snapped, and the others 99.9999% don't. If you can, then I'm all for your "mass shooter" scans. Without that ability though, are doing far more good than you could ever do with your mental health screening. Who's to say that a dozen, a hundred of those millions even, don't protect themselves from an attack with a firearm. You would of deprived them of that opportunity, as it is far more likely to be attacked on a walk/ride home, than be involved in a school shooting. Can you tell me that any one of these scans, can absolutely eliminate the possibility of another shooting happening? That is to say that you are counting for no one to fall through your cracks, that your system is perfect. If it isn't, then as I've already discussed before, you are depriving millions of their rights for nothing.

No system is perfect. I care less of whether psychopaths' or sociopaths' rights to guns as they (as I hope you may know) would not reciprocate the care back on what happens to us.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

No system is perfect. I care less of whether psychopaths' or sociopaths' rights to guns as they (as I hope you may know) would not reciprocate the care back on what happens to us.

I'm trying to look up the medical definition of what a psychopath is but, I'm not finding it in the DMV. And with sociopath, I'm assuming you are referring to Antisocial personality disorder, of which approximately 3 million people suffer from it. Last time I checked, there weren't three million shootings yesterday, then again, I slept in so maybe there was.

Here's what I'll say to this, if you can prove that a person is a threat to others, then I'm fine with going through due process and banning him from having access to a firearm. That way, you have respected his forth ammendmant rights, and deemed him as such. It's same way we deal with felons, we don't want violent criminals to have access to violent weapons. But to do such a large and sweeping ban, that has you cannot back up with science, would be to cause more harm in a system where it isn't needed. It's like taking a jackhammer to a nail.

 

[DDD]

I'm trying to look up the medical definition of what a psychopath is but, I'm not finding it in the DMV. And with sociopath, I'm assuming you are referring to Antisocial personality disorder, of which approximately 3 million people suffer from it. Last time I checked, there weren't three million shootings yesterday, then again, I slept in so maybe there was.

Here's what I'll say to this, if you can prove that a person is a threat to others, then I'm fine with going through due process and banning him from having access to a firearm. That way, you have respected his forth ammendmant rights, and deemed him as such. It's same way we deal with felons, we don't want violent criminals to have access to violent weapons. But to do such a large and sweeping ban, that has you cannot back up with science, would be to cause more harm in a system where it isn't needed. It's like taking a jackhammer to a nail.

Instead of ignoring the statistics of the mental state of your murdering inmates how about you work on preventing future kills by implementing licenses and brain scans?

 

[Hamster Buddha]

Instead of ignoring the statistics of the mental state of your murdering inmates how about you work on preventing future kills by implementing licenses and brain scans?

Even if we implemented such a system, could you guarantee that another school shooting wouldn't happened?

 

[DDD]

Even if we implemented such a system, could you guarantee that another school shooting wouldn't happened?

If you implement it I could guarantee it.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

What about this:

Beslan school hostage crisis - Terrorism
Discovery Middle School Shooting: 14-Year-Old Shot In Head At Madison, Alabama School - Gang Related
October 1, 2010 - Salinas, California - Gang Related
February 12, 2010 - Huntsville, Alabama - Tenure was Denied
December 6, 2010 - Aurora, Colorado - Gang Related
January 10, 2012 - Houston, Texas - Self-Defense from Bullying
October 6, 2012 - Mobile, Alabama - Self Defense (Apparently he ingested chemicals and was shot as he ran naked at a police officer... Okay that one might of been crazy...)

I could provide more, but suffice to say, school shootings don't just happened because of a disturbed individual. And none of your pet scans would of prevented any of them. (Well... maybe the naked guy...)

 

[DDD]

What about this:

Beslan school hostage crisis - Terrorism
Discovery Middle School Shooting: 14-Year-Old Shot In Head At Madison, Alabama School - Gang Related
October 1, 2010 - Salinas, California - Gang Related
February 12, 2010 - Huntsville, Alabama - Tenure was Denied
December 6, 2010 - Aurora, Colorado - Gang Related
January 10, 2012 - Houston, Texas - Self-Defense from Bullying
October 6, 2012 - Mobile, Alabama - Self Defense (Apparently he ingested chemicals and was shot as he ran naked at a police officer... Okay that one might of been crazy...)

I could provide more, but suffice to say, school shootings don't just happened because of a disturbed individual. And none of your pet scans would of prevented any of them. (Well... maybe the naked guy...)

These incidents sadly still occur because you have failed to implement my proposals still.

Terrorists, gangsters, and bullies = antisocial personalities (i.e., psychopaths, sociopaths, etc). These incidents could have been prevented if they were scanned prior to issuing a gun or prior to issuing them the role of a student.

Also, do quote me so as I can know that: a) You are addressing me, and b) I can see you replied at the notification bar.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

These incidents sadly still occur because you have failed to implement my proposals still.

Terrorists, gangsters, and bullies = antisocial personalities (i.e., psychopaths, sociopaths, etc). These incidents could have been prevented if they were scanned prior to issuing a gun or prior to issuing them the role of a student.

Also, do quote me so as I can know that: a) You are addressing me, and b) I can see you replied at the notification bar.

First off, I was wondering why you hadn't responded. That makes a lot more sense, my apologies.

To the original point, not all bullies have anti social personalities. The people they are bullying a lot of times have such tendencies, but not them. Not all gangsters have antisocial tendencies either, some do but again not all. Can't you see you are casting a bigger and bigger net and there is going to be people to fall through the cracks. We're no longer talking about millions, but tens of millions of people potentially, depending on who we define in those categories. No system is perfect, and the cost of implementing this system would be mind boggling. Not to mention the invasion of rights without due process would be unprecedented. I thought this was a jackhammer to a nail, but your solution is like a flamethrower to an ant hill. And what about people who aren't in the school system? Two of those situations involved adults. Are we going to mandate pet scans for everyone in the US to determine if they are fit to have rights?

Sounding a little Orwellian isn't it? Tragic as these instances may be, they cannot condone taking rights away from millions, if not tens of millions of people. Surely you must see that?

 

[DDD]

First off, I was wondering why you hadn't responded. That makes a lot more sense, my apologies.

To the original point, not all bullies have anti social personalities. The people they are bullying a lot of times have such tendencies, but not them. Not all gangsters have antisocial tendencies either, some do but again not all. Can't you see you are casting a bigger and bigger net and there is going to be people to fall through the cracks. We're no longer talking about millions, but tens of millions of people potentially, depending on who we define in those categories. No system is perfect, and the cost of implementing this system would be mind boggling. Not to mention the invasion of rights without due process would be unprecedented. I thought this was a jackhammer to a nail, but your solution is like a flamethrower to an ant hill. And what about people who aren't in the school system? Two of those situations involved adults. Are we going to mandate pet scans for everyone in the US to determine if they are fit to have rights?

Sounding a little Orwellian isn't it? Tragic as these instances may be, they cannot condone taking rights away from millions, if not tens of millions of people. Surely you must see that?

Unless you learn from these ongoing mass shooting mistakes they are bound to be repeated. It is the antisocial personalities that conduct such crimes more frequently. I propose going with probability here and applying scans and licenses so as to prevent them in all settings (e.g., schools, work, etc).

It is not Orwellian to help your gun control maintain itself. Teaching of responsibilities that come with the power of carrying and using fire arms, implementing licenses to the decent right deserving citizens, and keeping legal guns away from indecent right abusing ones should help you with this.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

Unless you learn from these ongoing mass shooting mistakes they are bound to be repeated. It is the antisocial personalities that conduct such crimes more frequently. I propose going with probability here and applying scans and licenses so as to prevent them in all settings (e.g., schools, work, etc).

It is not Orwellian to help your gun control maintain itself. Teaching of responsibilities that come with the power of carrying and using fire arms, implementing licenses to the decent right deserving citizens, and keeping legal guns away from indecent right abusing ones should help you with this.

My point is that there are a lot of people with anti-social behavior that are decent right deserving citizens. Like I said before, about 3% of the population exhibit has antisocial personality disorder. That's 8 million people. Not all of them (in fact 99.9999%) are going to go out tomorrow and buy a gun to go shoot up some place. And instead of taking a laser scalpel and boosting public awareness so we can reach out to the extremes in these groups, you want to deprives over 8 million people their basic rights of due process and to carry a firearm. What's best, is you want the government to be deciding who is a psychopath and get's their rights taken away. How is that not Orwellian?

 

[DDD]

My point is that there are a lot of people with anti-social behavior that are decent right deserving citizens. Like I said before, about 3% of the population exhibit has antisocial personality disorder. That's 8 million people. Not all of them (in fact 99.9999%) are going to go out tomorrow and buy a gun to go shoot up some place. And instead of taking a laser scalpel and boosting public awareness so we can reach out to the extremes in these groups, you want to deprives over 8 million people their basic rights of due process and to carry a firearm.

Did you just say "reach out" to the extremes in people with antisocial personality? As in influencing them to become more social? Do you know what are the odds of that happening?

Starting to suspect your credibility. State the resources that only 99.99% of people with antisocial personality commit murder.

What's best, is you want the government to be deciding who is a psychopath and get's their rights taken away. How is that not Orwellian?

Because it is not the government that would do that, that is why it is not Orwellian. Neuroscientists will determine what is the neural pattern that defines one with antisocial personality and one without it.

 

[joG]

Instead of ignoring the statistics of the mental state of your murdering inmates how about you work on preventing future kills by implementing licenses and brain scans?

Chains work better. All those sophisticated tool are too complicated.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

Did you just say "reach out" to the extremes in people with antisocial personality? As in influencing them to become more social? Do you know what are the odds of that happening?

Starting to suspect your credibility. State the resources that only 99.99% of people with antisocial personality commit murder.

I never said murder. My assertion was that you don't see mass shootings happening every day before you 8 million people out there with antisocial personality disorder. I don't really have to cite that do I? Could I just give you a newspaper instead?

Or better yet, let me give you some scholarly quotes on the issue:

- "Although studies suggest a link between mental illnesses and violence, the contribution of people with mental illnesses to overall rates of violence is small, and further, the magnitude of the relationship is greatly exaggerated in the minds of the general population (Institute of Medicine, 2006)."

- "…the vast majority of people who are violent do not suffer from mental illnesses (American Psychiatric Association, 1994)."

- "The absolute risk of violence among the mentally ill as a group is very small. . . only a small proportion of the violence in our society can be attributed to persons who are mentally ill (Mulvey, 1994)."

-"People with psychiatric disabilities are far more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violent crime (Appleby, et al., 2001). People with severe mental illnesses, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or psychosis, are 2 ½ times more likely to be attacked, raped or mugged than the general population (Hiday, et al.,1999)."

Because it is not the government that would do that, that is why it is not Orwellian. Neuroscientists will determine what is the neural pattern that defines one with antisocial personality and one without it.

Neuroscientists wouldn't be the one coming to your door demanding you submit to a pet scan though. For that, you are going to need some muscle because some (justifiably so) would refuse.

 

[Wiseone]

The problem is the 'free availability'.. it simply doesn't exist.

Yes, yes it does, I know people get upset at the laws but its pretty damn easy for any American to get any kind of gun he wants for the most part in the States.

But it makes you feel better than just substitute the phrase "the current level of availability we have in the US" for the phrase "free availability" and then feel free to respond to the post.

 

[Kobie]

Nonsense. I don't subscribe to any spaghetti monster in the sky worshiping, nor do I need to to have a good moral center. Name for us one 'moral' thing that religion 'gives' people that others simply can not have if they are not knee bent worshipers of some sort. I'd argue that a lot of religious 'morals' are utter nonsense and BS that allows a lot of intolerance to continue to exist.

When I not only agree with but fully endorse an Arbo post, we might be on to something.

 

[ksu_aviator]

Bad Parents.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

Nonsense. I don't subscribe to any spaghetti monster in the sky worshiping, nor do I need to to have a good moral center. Name for us one 'moral' thing that religion 'gives' people that others simply can not have if they are not knee bent worshipers of some sort. I'd argue that a lot of religious 'morals' are utter nonsense and BS that allows a lot of intolerance to continue to exist.

When I not only agree with but fully endorse an Arbo post, we might be on to something.