Mass shooting in the middle school Vladislav Ribnikar in Belgrade

[The Grand Nudger]

It's an intuitive conclusion. That's why it's politically useful. You generally don't have to do any work to convince people that terrorists or mass shooters are mentally unwell. You can just use it as an indepedantly premanufactured product. Honestly, again, if we separated domestic terrorism as it's own thing from mass shootings it probably would hold more weight. Become true. If we filter out all the mass shooters who commit their crimes with intent and presence of mind seeking racist action in the world..we probably would be left with little in the set of mass shooters -other- than people who actually are mentally unwell.

The moneyshot here, is that ethnonationalism compells completely sane people to do shit only crazy people would do, otherwise.

[FlatAssembler]

After a fair bit of poking about online, I withdraw my contention that mental illness is a predictor of mass shooting. I wasn’t just wrong, I was really, REALLY wrong. 

I happily concede that mental health researchers at Columbia and Cambridge know more about this than I do/did.

Boru

So, we now agree that taking away guns from people with a diagnozed mental illness is a very misled policy, right? That it is taking guns (a means of self-defence) away from the people who are significantly more likely to be victims of violent crimes, but are not significantly more likely to be violent criminals.

Maybe taking away guns from drug users would save more people than it would kill. Drug users are indeed way more likely to be violent criminals, like they are way more likely to be a victim of a violent crime. Taking away guns from mentally ill people would almost certainly kill more people than it would save.

[The Grand Nudger]

Its not a bad policy, it will reduce incidence of accidental death and suicide. By far the largest number in US gun death (entirely on the latter). It just wont and couldn't touch what terrorists do. Are we correctly diagnosing this or is that the one thing you absolutely refuse to talk about?

[The Architect Of Fate]

Its not a bad policy, it will reduce incidence of accidental death and suicide.  By far the largest number in US gun death (entirely on the latter).   It just wont and couldn't touch what terrorists do.  Are we correctly diagnosing this or is that the one thing you absolutely refuse to talk about?

You are assuming he is having this discussion in good faith and is not just digging for an ideological win.

[HappySkeptic]

...
The moneyshot here, is that ethnonationalism compells completely sane people to do shit only crazy people would do, otherwise.

There are some who claim that things like school shootings are a form of social contagion.  You want to say "F U" to the world and go out in a blaze of glory?  A school shooting is the way to go.  It will be talked about on the news for a few days, until the next one, including your posts on social media and why you think the world is messed up.

I often go to Niagara Falls, and sometimes people kill themselves there.  It never gets even local coverage, as they don't want to make it a "thing".  I don't know if the social contagion prevention actually works - I'd love to see studies.

[The Grand Nudger]

Those people are also wrong. Mass shooting is not "social contagion" ala I want to say fu to the world. They....are...terrorists.....

This drives me insane, obviously. We've done some pretty horrid things on the slightest whiff of Terrorist! all over the world, but we want to call it anything other than what it is when it happens here. Propose any number of fucking outlandish ideas as explanations for the manifestly obvious. No. They're terrorists. I wanna say fu to the world and be remembered for a thousand generations too. Just not by shooting up kids and bystanders in a race war.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

After a fair bit of poking about online, I withdraw my contention that mental illness is a predictor of mass shooting. I wasn’t just wrong, I was really, REALLY wrong. 

I happily concede that mental health researchers at Columbia and Cambridge know more about this than I do/did.

Boru

So, we now agree that taking away guns from people with a diagnozed mental illness is a very misled policy, right? That it is taking guns (a means of self-defence) away from the people who are significantly more likely to be victims of violent crimes, but are not significantly more likely to be violent criminals.

Maybe taking away guns from drug users would save more people than it would kill. Drug users are indeed way more likely to be violent criminals, like they are way more likely to be a victim of a violent crime. Taking away guns from mentally ill people would almost certainly kill more people than it would save.

I think the specific mental illness involved should be a factor in determining in whether to allow an individual to own a gun. As Nudger obliquely pointed out, suicidally depressed people may not make ideal gun owners.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

The trouble is that they're exceedingly -unlikely- to commit violent crimes with guns, and gun control as it is in the us seeks to reduce violent crime, but not suicides. Honestly, I have no interest in litigating that issue. I know exactly why a person who wants to commit suicide wants a gun. They're not ideal gun owners if -we- think they should live when they think they should die. That's actually a pretty complicated issue. Legally and morally.

Preventing terrorists from building an arsenal..is not. Additionally...taking guns away from mentally ill people will not kill more people than it saves..that shit is fucking ludicrous. The only reason we even have a rough estimate of how many mentally ill people have guns is that they keep killing themselves with them......

Flat. Stop it. Was your mass shooter, the point of your op, an ethno-terrorist?

[The Architect Of Fate]

But...But...Gleck

[Irreligious Atheist]

Personally, I support looser gun regulation in the US and anywhere else, whether it makes the country "safer" or not. Rights and freedoms come at a price and I can accept the current price.

Since it's not your loved ones being gunned down, I don't think anyone here gives a single fuck what price you're willing to let other's pay.

AWTY brought up anecdotal evidence, on a forum where what's expected or us is more than simply anecdotes.

Now she's going around posting about how no one should feel unsafe at a mall. Well, guess what bud? They are safe at the mall. Safe as all fuck. Black men are more likely to get struck by lightning than killed by police, and you are probably more likely to get struck by lightning twice than get shot in a mall shooting. So, that tells you how much AWTY's anecdote is worth. As much as I paid for it. Now, let's keep our priorities straight here. NONE of us are dying in mall shootings. It's not happening.

But, some of us may die, driving on the road. And Helios refused to answer my thought experiment for a reason (where prohibition of alcohol is assured to be successful in an alt universe). Because he wouldn't want to ban alcohol, but at the same time, Helios is too embarrassed to tell the forum that he'd choose alcohol over thousands of innocent lives.