• PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    244
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 个月前

    “It’s NOT a gun control issue, it’s a mental health issue!”

    “Then we’re expanding access to mental healthcare?”

    “Fuck no, that’s SOCIALISM and psychiatry is bullshit anyway!”

    • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      80
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 个月前

      It’s frustrating because I believe it’s a mental health issue primarily. But god forbid we actually help people deal with their trauma and pain.

      • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        60
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 个月前

        It can be both! And a problem with bullying in schools. And lack of ways to escape poverty. But having any changes that affect any of those things is verboten to the places where land gets more of a vote than people in cities do.

        • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          3 个月前

          Don’t get me wrong, I’m for gun control. I just believe that if we lived in some utopia with zero mental health issues, it wouldn’t be an issue regardless.

          • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            28
            ·
            3 个月前

            Therapy and meds can’t fix poverty perpetrated by the ruling class.

            But I generally agree.

            And did you know utopia means “place that cannot exist” while eutopia means “a perfect place”. Not correcting you, I just think it’s funny that euphemistic drift has flopped it fucky.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 个月前

        It’s not even a mental health issue either, ultimately! The traumas that result in mental health issues themselves have a cause, which tends to boil down to systemic inequity of some form or another. And our rulers not only have fuck-all interest in fixing that, but also a vested interest in actively perpetuating it.

      • metaStatic@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 个月前

        I definitely feel some kind of way about this because dead children seems to be the primary issue from an outside perspective and ending easy access to weapons would be the single most effective way to fix that.

        but without proper mental healthcare these people will then just have a knife party and take slightly less people with them … so there’s also that.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 个月前

          Or a car or a bomb…guns are just the tool being used currently.

          The systematic issues our society faces are the root cause and until we resolve those, this will continue to happen.

          • Blooper@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 个月前

            This thread seems to be downplaying the effectiveness of guns. Obviously, given the cancerous gun culture being what it is, there’s no way I’ll be able to convince anyone who’s already decided that guns aren’t a problem.

            Just for the rest of the world, I’m just going to point out that there are sane folks here in the US who fully recognize that guns are definitely the problem and aren’t going to point to the ludicrous notion of “a car or a bomb” as the next obvious substitute for firearms mowing down children in classrooms across the country.

            • SupraMario@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 个月前

              You must be blind if you think that other weapons aren’t used. Our society needs to be fixed, Pandoras box is opened, you can’t fix an issue if you don’t focus on the underlying issues that are the true cause.

    • Rakonat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      3 个月前

      Fuck those people. Universal healthcare to include complete mental health support and well being as a primary focus

    • Stupidmanager@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 个月前

      “Fuck no, that’s SOCIALISM and psychiatry is bullshit anyway!”

      I’m sure I’m not alone in thinking that people who think/say this, have mental health issues. We are lost.

      • Alex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 个月前

        Education is everything, that’s why they love to go after it. They don’t want free thinkers but indoctrinated clones of themselves.

        • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 个月前

          Don’t make the mistake of thinking the people pushing this are doing so on ideological grounds - they don’t give a single fuck about any of this - it’s just an issue they can exploit to rally the common clay, salt of the earth folk.

    • shplane@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 个月前

      They just say in order to solve the mental health issue, people just need more jebus.

  • JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 个月前

    For those who haven’t heard, yes, there was another school shooting, this time a highschool in Georgia (United States, obviously). 2 students and 2 teachers were killed, nine people injured, and the suspect is in custody. (How they’re not dead is beyond me)

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      80
      ·
      3 个月前

      I’ve gotten so used to school shootings that I see one like that and think “hooray, only four deaths!”

      • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 个月前

        Unfortunately it did work out better than others, and yet two teachers and two 14 year old children were killed.

        The FBI had been out to see the 14yr old who murdered classmates and teachers. Spoken with his parents, and him. He denied everything, no probable cause, so they put the schools on alert, and that made for a quicker response.

        Which means this went really well by comparison to other school shootings, and yet it clearly wasn’t good enough - two 14 year old students and two teachera died.

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 个月前

          The FBI had been out to see the 14yr old who murdered classmates and teachers. Spoken with his parents, and him. He denied everything, no probable cause, so they put the schools on alert, and that made for a quicker response.

          Oh, so we knew this kid was a problem but we didn’t actually do anything but tell the school to be ready to get shot up.

          What a fucking stupid country.

          • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            3 个月前

            They also went to the kids house and investigated, but they didn’t have proof of anything that would meet any criteria for arrest, yeah.

            So they discussed with the parents, discussed with the school, discussed with the police, etc. I can’t say I blame the FBI here for what they were able to do based on anonymous reports about comments made online. I wouldn’t feel comfortable with giving any federal agency just free reign to arrest on anonymous reports alone, that’s just opening a new form of swatting to me.

            But clearly, its not enough, and that’s the issue. For example, restricting the access to guns would have been good. Restricting access on a larger scale would be better.

            Instead… We have two teachers and two 14yr old kids dead.

            • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 个月前

              The school could have suspended him after hearing he was investigated by the FBI. I wonder if the school even told any of the parents about this. I’d be furious if the school knew this kid was a threat and did nothing to keep him away from other students.

              I gotta stop talking about this and find some funny memes because my kid is currently at a high school now, and could be the next victim, and not having any power or knowledge about someone shooting them fills me with rage and frustration.

              • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                3 个月前

                Not really - same problem, no proof it was him that posted. The kid having access to guns after being seen as a person who might do this, that’s the problem.

                The parents doing functionally nothing is a problem.

                The total lack of any change from this is also a problem.

                My kids are younger, but unfortunately that just means more years of worry at this point, because nothing is changing.

                • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 个月前

                  The problem is that the administrators are too busy following the rules to deal with anything, from bullying to shootings. I bet they’d let a baby die in a hot car because it’s against the rules to break the window.

      • ouRKaoS@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        3 个月前

        4 victims is the minimum for it to count as a “mass shooting” by the FBI, which seems like both too many and not enough at the same time.

      • jaybone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 个月前

        Yeah I was watching something on TV and they cut to a special news report to cover this. I was shocked. Isn’t there a school shooting pretty much every day now? Why did this warrant cutting into valuable day time TV programming? So I’m watching this breaking news wondering what’s so special about this particular shooting that can’t wait until the nightly news at 10:00, and the local police chief is giving a press conference breaking down in tears about how he never thought he would have to handle a school shooting and I’m like has your dimbass been paying attention to anything that’s been going on in this country for the last few decades? I would expect you to have a manual on your desk with procedures on how to handle this. Instead this yokel is rambling on about good and evil. I just smh.

      • wabafee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 个月前

        Once people think it’s normal then that becomes a culture. That is even harder to remove.

  • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 个月前

    My opinion is that these shootings are a greater failure in this country than simply gun control. There is a LOT we need to work on to decrease mass shootings. While I admit, I am more on the personal responsibility side of the gun control debate, I am not against well thought through legislation. I don’t think that most of the proposals for gun control are rational, detailed, and written with an even cursory understanding of firearms.

    To start to address mass shootings, I believe that we need to expand our healthcare in this country. Both physical and mental healthcare. If people are physically well, and can get treatment that doesn’t threaten to bankrupt them, then they will have more opportunities to develop better coping mechanisms. They will be able to seek healthcare options and not feel like they are left to fend for themselves. The isolation from a society that doesn’t care or help them is detrimental, and while I have no studies to back it up, I would think that a society with a healthcare system thats prerogative is the patient instead of profit would help.

    I think the aspect of mental healthcare speaks for itself. So people don’t lash out and can seek other means of dealing with issues. I also believe that the stigma of seeking mental healthcare and it’s ability to impact people’s rights and job prospects is a hindrance. We should not make it so that if someone seems help, that they are punished for it.

    I believe we have a big culture shift that needs to occur. Too much do we use rhetoric that reinforces that firearms and gun violence is the ultimate solution to a disagreement. “Fuck around and find out” when used in the context of firearms is terrible. Firearms should be considered the last resort to protect life. Not property and not your feelings.

    Firearms are not conflict resolution! We need to work to give people better ways of solving and deescalating conflicts.

    We need to work on our wealth disparity. We should be elevating our poorest so that they don’t have to resort to violence or crime. As most firearm crimes are not mass shootings, we need to address the other parts of firearm use.

    We need to work on our community involvement. Bring people together, break down the walls between us, and get past the cliques.

    There is a lot we need to do, but gun control is only a small piece of solving gun violence.

    • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      3 个月前

      universal healthcare and basic income, paid with increase in the top 1%'s marginal tax rate, would solve a LOT of Americans problems.

      • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 个月前

        Fear of losing basic income is a great crime deterrent.

        Are you going to steal from that gas station if you could lose your basic monthly check for 20+ years?

        You think kids would drive drunk if you told them that if they were caught, they would lose their basic income for life? Most think it’s a slap on the wrist, maybe some community service, IF they get caught.

          • Clent@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 个月前

            Losing it for life is too drastic and isn’t what any behavior specialist would suggest.

            There needs to be a path to earn it back. For example, hours of community service based on the offense and that increase with each offense.

            It would also want to incentivize future legislatures excluding people by targeting groups. The drug war and its imbalance towards treatment of minorities as an example.

            • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 个月前

              If I murder someone and lose basic income for say five years does it go up to ten years if I murder another person or could it be served concurrently?

              • Clent@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 个月前

                I would expect you’d be in prison for at least five years so are you suggesting you’ve killed someone while in prison or that basic income is the only punishment?

                In any case, I am not suggesting anything concrete here, just going forward with the thought experiment. Basic income first, then we can work on how to use it as a deterrence.

          • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 个月前

            Y’all realize what you’re describing is just a poor tax, right? Anyone with significantly higher income over base income would…just break the law anyway.

            If we’re talking using money to deter crimes, it needs to be a sliding scale. You’re a millionaire and got a speeding ticket? That’ll be $50,000.

      • Doxatek@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 个月前

        That’s along the lines of what I was thinking. Making care more available is good but still having to get financially destroyed for it potentially isn’t a great incentive to use services

    • wieson@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 个月前

      Addition:

      Stop the 24 hour news cycle and please please please stop naming criminals by name and showing their faces. Delete the “claim to fame” angle that comes with horrible crimes.

      For community involvement, what comes to mind for me is: walkable neighbourhoods, libraries even in small towns and local sports clubs.

      But there must be a minimum of gun laws: Buying, owning, operating only under license, storage at home in a safe and ammunition in a separate safe. That’s really the bare minimum.

      • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 个月前

        Regarding the news cycle. Yes! Stop the 24 hour, constant fear being fed to the populace.

        You are remarkably safe in your own home. Get rid of the fear mongering!

        Stop making national news of local issues. The constant national attention to some random horrible things that doesn’t affect 99.99% of the viewership doesn’t need to be highlighted.

        I’m not against gun laws, but I’m going to disagree with your minimums. Anything regarding storage is essentially unenforceable until after a tragedy has occurred. It can’t be used to preempt a shooting but only to punish the owners afterwards. Those sort of things need to be community driven. The gun community should be talking about storage more and shaming those that don’t follow it.

        It also implies that everyone’s situation at home allows them 1) to purchase two safes and 2) to have room for two safes and 3) limits their ownership of either guns or ammo to the size of that safe. It also doesn’t make much sense to have two safes if the person doing the shooting is the one that is buying the ammo and guns in the first place. It also places undue burdens on those that do not have children and do not have children that come into their home.

        As much as it is laughed at in California, but when you buy a gun you either need to bring a lock or buy a lock with it. They are the cheapest things, but it’s at least a minimum safety that isn’t onerous. Even if no one uses them once they get the gun home.

        As for operating under a license, what would that do beyond the existing restrictions for procuring firearms? Do they expire and what would happen then?

        We need comprehensive laws grounded in addressing specific issues, not something to create an idealistic and narrow view of what gun ownership is or should be.

        I think we should have federal programs on gun information and educational programs. We can teach people and build a culture on gun safety and storage. Maybe programs to subsidize the purchasing of safes and reimburse or reward owners that make safe choices.

        • wieson@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 个月前

          Anything regarding storage is essentially unenforceable until after a tragedy has occurred.

          One could require a receipt or proof of purchase for a safe or a lock when buying a gun.

          It also implies that everyone’s situation at home allows them 1) to purchase two safes and 2) to have room for two safes and 3) limits their ownership of either guns or ammo to the size of that safe.

          That’s intentional.

          It also doesn’t make much sense to have two safes if the person doing the shooting is the one that is buying the ammo and guns in the first place.

          We need comprehensive laws grounded in addressing specific issues

          I was specifically addressing teenagers access to their parents guns, specifically to prevent school shootings.

          As for operating under a license, what would that do beyond the existing restrictions for procuring firearms? Do they expire and what would happen then?

          Like a car license. You may not be checked all the time, but every once in a while and it’s a crime to not have it if you’re driving.

        • AWildMimicAppears@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 个月前

          Other countries have random gun inspections for licenced gun holders, to make sure they are stored safely. like you said, a cultural shift is needed; that would be part of it.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 个月前

      So we just need to solve all depressive disorders, schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, etc., across the entire country. Only then can we solve gun violence.

      In the vast majority of instances, having a gun in the home is more dangerous for those living in the house than for any potential threat. Its irresponsible at best and at worst it will cause the deaths of those closest to you.

      And before you say it, I do believe some people need guns, but you should be required to have a valid reason to own one, and it should be appropriate amount of firepower for that reason.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 个月前

      Can you imagine nukes being considered a conflict resolution?

      Technically, they are.

    • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 个月前

      So much more people die from cancer than school shootings! Why focus so much on taking away my guns? Fix the cancer instead!

      /s

      • Redruth@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 个月前

        Omg, this! Plus, if the cancer threatens to take over, we gonna need them guns to fight the cancer. #FlawlessLogic

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 个月前

    If it was a mental issue, the ruzzians would have a psychiatrist glued to the top of their murder tanks. And no, we don’t want a steel tent around each kid to provide them safety. Just don’t sell guns to regular stupid people. Wanna own one? Get educated in it’s use first. Understand what it’s for and keep it safely locked away from kids. The way kids get guns is thru failures in all these safety nets. I frankly don’t trust other parents. If a gun was something that only affected you the owner personally, I wouldn’t give a hoot. If it sometimes affected others, well then you need a license and insurance. But I mean, if live next door or upstairs, you can have an accident and I end up dead. So I would think 🤔 hmm this needs heavy regulation. To fucking fly a drone you need a license! WTF!

    • kautau@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 个月前

      You do know this line is about mass shootings in general and not just school shootings, and that

      A vast majority of guns used in 19 recent mass shootings were bought legally and with a federal background check. At least nine gunmen had criminal histories or documented mental health problems that did not prevent them from obtaining their weapons.

      https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html

      And that article is from 2018 and the shootings have only become more frequent

        • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 个月前

          This makes it seem like most of the shooters are mentally ill. This is not true. The large majority are not, and most of those who are, have general depression. When looking over the online communications, writings, and discussing the factors with the surviving shooters, one thing becomes clear. They are terrorists. They are ideologically driven, their intent is to create terror, in a reaction to the things they are ideologically against.

          Here are just a couple of links on the subject:

          https://www.columbiapsychiatry.org/news/mass-shootings-and-mental-illness

          https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2021-13575-001

            • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              3 个月前

              As I’ve grown older and have had friends and family face various traumatic and life altering events I think I have come to realize that normal isn’t necessarily a thing and even if I concede that I understand what is meant by normal, all of us are a lot closer to not being normal than we would like to admit and crossing that line is often outside of an individuals control, no matter how much easier it is to dismiss and vilify.

            • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 个月前

              No, they are killing people they believe are an enemy. They do not believe these people are innocent. They are doing this for a cause, one they believe in deeply. If you claim that killing, and dying, for something you believe in, means you are mentally ill, then all soldiers are as well. People want for these people to have some sort of pathology to explain their behavior, because they don’t want to believe that humans, without a mental pathology, can do heinous things. Especially when they do not agree with what the terrorist believes. However, they are people who believe in their cause, and believe that they are at an impasse with progressing their beliefs about society via diplomatic, and the system provided framework, to affect that change. So they turn to violence.

                • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 个月前

                  It depends on the indiscriminate type mass shooter. Most of them have some political/ideological axiom they are deeply in. It differs from person to person though. However there are some themes that thread through most of these. Misogyny, hard right social, and political, standards, racism, and most have recently had a major loss that is traditionally seen as a measure of their masculinity.

                  That makes up most of these people. When it is specifically kids shooting up their school, it is often that they view the people in the school as their enemy, for a variety reasons. These are generally mentally ill. However, the comment thread I replied to was discussing the broader range of indiscriminate type mass murderers.

  • ruk_n_rul@monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    3 个月前

    We know we’ve been through this a lot because the meme had also went through a lot of reposts.