Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There have been two recent tragedies in last five or so weeks, the school shooting in Parkland, and the string of bombings in Austin. There were obvious differences but the similarities are striking. Both people were effectively at the "end of their rope." They found no solace from human relationships and felt the entire world was arrayed against them. Then, basically, they exploded (pun not intended). And that's a very important common thread. And only four years in age separated them.
There is one difference which I don't think is major; one involved guns, the other did not. I think Austin, basically, is the Florida massacre without guns. The Austin killer dictated a 25 minute rant into his phone before he died. While Nikolas Cruz did not put together anything so comprehensive, talks with his relatives and colleagues gave hints that the same factors were at work.
Moral of the story; this was not the fault of guns, this was the result of poor mental health and people ignoring the signs. We need to focus on mental health and warning signals, not guns. Guns are easy to rail against. Mental illness, not so much.
It's not poor mental health as much as it is anger. Mass killers typically have two things in common. They are prone to violence and cannot control their anger or rage. Actually, with Paddock and Conditt, I'm not sure they fit into any one category.
In fact, everyone seems to be looking for one thing that causes these guys to go off -- violent video games or movies, poor mental health, easy access to guns -- among other things. And I'm telling you it's not that easy. It's not one thing. I know you folks want to say it's not guns (Conditt notwithstanding) but the access they have to guns, whether legal or not, has to be part of it. The kid in Virginia used a gun from a family member. Cruz was able to buy 10 guns in a short period of time.
Sensible gun control wuld seem to include charges against the person whose gun the guy in Virginia used. Do you agree?
Given that most red states are not overspending on Social Services and have less restrictive gun laws, I think it's safe to say that the preponderance of shootings and bombings will happen within their borders.
In a way our society is the problem. We didn't mean to do it but we have set incredibly high standards for young people. There are so many TV shows that promote good looking people living a good life and they seldom show the work that goes into getting that life. We have young actors, singers, rappers, sports stars that make millions and the young have not been taught that not everyone gets to win like that. We have others that slog through school and amount huge debt for college and emerge to earn $35,000 a year which is barely enough to live on never mind having a fast car and a slick apartment in the city.
Our society has created a lot of angry and disappointed kids that don't know how to deal with it because they were never taught about lifes ups and downs.
The girls usually take it out on themselves with eating disorders, cutting, excessive drinking, drugs, sleeping around while the boys strike out against the world in a all or nothing moment and the weapon of choice is a gun.
It is a mental health problem and society is partly to blame.
The sad thing is we are moving towards a rewrite of the Second amendment which will affect millions of legal law abiding gun owners that hold their guns responsibly. We don't ban cars because drunk and distracted drivers kill people everyday in this country but something needs to be done because we have plenty of lost angry boys that are ready to lash out.
Both killers were angry, highly disturbed young men. The difference is their weapon of choice. Seventeen children in Florida were killed with a semi-automatic. Two people were killed in Austin with package bombs. As it stands right now, it's as easy to get your hands on a semi-automatic complete with all the rounds of ammo your black little heart could desire as it is to go down to the corner store for a pack of cigarettes.
I am a single woman living in the rural West. I am also a gun owner. I inherited my Dad's Officer's Colt and his shotgun. I have a rifle for elk season. I don't need anything else for protection and for big game hunting. I have never felt the need to invest in a semi-automatic and I feel they should be banned outright. At the very least, the regulations surrounding bump stocks, semi-automatics and magazines of ammo need to be completely revamped.
This hysteria over the second amendment is just that - hysteria.
1) A citizen's militia would be quickly decimented by our highly trained military with its state of the art weaponry. No one in their right mind believes that a citizen's militia (even one armed with semi-automatics) will come out the winner over a military armed with tactical land radars, inertial navigation systems and avionics systems; manned and unmanned military aircraft and weapons technology, including missile, surveillance and reconnaissance systems - to name but a few.
2) If you fear a home invasion, a shotgun is a great weapon for a fight at relatively close quarters. I got rid of a stalker merely by sitting in wait for him on my living room couch. When he walked thru my door, I smiled at him and aimed by Dad's Colt at his chest. I never was bothered by that piece of human scum again. No assault weapon required. (and yes, this is a true story)
3) You're worried about tyranny? What could be more tyrannical than the NRA with its insistence that semi-automatics be available to crazy people who use them to commit mass murders - especially the murder of our innocent children. Your "right" to own a semi-automatic means that school children will continue to be murdered in mass killings all over the country. Your "right" to own a semi-automatic means that 6 and 7 year-olds will be afraid to go to school. What could be more tyrannical that subjecting school children to mass killing and terror? They can't (and shouldn't) own semi-automatics of their own. Talk about subjecting an unarmed populace to crazed shooters with very lethal weapons! If that's not tyranny, I don't know what is.
It's not poor mental health as much as it is anger. Mass killers typically have two things in common. They are prone to violence and cannot control their anger or rage. Actually, with Paddock and Conditt, I'm not sure they fit into any one category.
In fact, everyone seems to be looking for one thing that causes these guys to go off -- violent video games or movies, poor mental health, easy access to guns -- among other things. And I'm telling you it's not that easy. It's not one thing. I know you folks want to say it's not guns (Conditt notwithstanding) but the access they have to guns, whether legal or not, has to be part of it. The kid in Virginia used a gun from a family member. Cruz was able to buy 10 guns in a short period of time.
Sensible gun control wuld seem to include charges against the person whose gun the guy in Virginia used. Do you agree?
Do you mean Maryland?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
