General "mass killings" thread

[henrymidfields]

36 minutes ago, Flee Fleet! said:

No need to go into greater detail, you provided a sufficient answer. As of right now, highest priority is to provide gun control to make accessing guns harder, thus making it more difficult for anyone to commit any terror attack/shooting, right? Then we have to have to prevent people getting radicalized.

...Should be noted however that having gun control/ban on guns does not mean there's a ban on violent movies, games e.t.c. , so such things will continue to be made.

I'm under the assumption that the police are allowed to still carry guns around as part of their duty, being authorised to do so. Which is allowed in Japan and Australia, albeit with heavy restrictions on when to use them. (Are the police in UK allowed as well btw?)

Edited February 28, 2018 by henrymidfields

[Flee Fleet!]

2 hours ago, Johann said:

Yes, both of those things should be our highest priorities to prevent major incidents. There's no way to protect people from everything, of course, but these measures greatly reduce our risk and are far far less costly and difficult to implement as things like extra security features or guards.

Radicalization generally begins with sentiments of disenfranchisement and disdain for groups or the government. ISIS's recruiting strategy, for instance, involves reaching out to outcasts and feeding them damning information (which may be true/false/misleading) about the US, in an attempt to fuel their hatred. They apply this strategy worldwide, mostly on the internet, though not just with hatred towards the US, but pretty much all of the "western" world. Their goal is to provoke a violent response from the US and friends, which in turn creates more people pissed off with the US. Giving into that strategy by using military action to solve our foreign disputes helps them recruit, and then we have a vicious cycle of violence through more terrorism and military action, not to mention spurring misconceived notions about foreigners, Muslims, etc.

Then how would radicalization be stopped? I mean, giving people the support they need could be a solution but is there any other way to prevent them to getting radicalized? Does it all depend on who the person is close with to prevent them from becoming radicalized?

@henrymidfields Police would obviously  be allowed to carry guns. Putting heavy restrictions on when the police can use their guns sounds like a good idea, although I can't really say for sure.

EDIT: Actually, after reading the next post, I guess Police being armed isn't necessary after all...

Edited February 28, 2018 by Flee Fleet!

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, henrymidfields said:

I'm under the assumption that the police are allowed to still carry guns around as part of their duty, being authorised to do so. Which is allowed in Japan and Australia, albeit with heavy restrictions on when to use them. (Are the police in UK allowed as well btw?)

No. Police don't carry guns in the UK. Aside from Northern Ireland which has a history of terrorism. The other countries that don't have armed police forces are Ireland, Norway, New Zealand and, the safest country in the world, Iceland.

[Johann]

25 minutes ago, Flee Fleet! said:

Then how would radicalization be stopped? I mean, giving people the support they need could be a solution but is there any other way to prevent them to getting radicalized? Does it all depend on who the person is close with to prevent them from becoming radicalized?

That's one way, sure. There are a lot of pieces to it, and none of the solutions are particularly fast or easy. Much like helping someone who is at risk for suicide, what can we do? Well, we know giving people emotional/social/psychological support helps. We know we shouldn't glamorize these actions, as they can inspire others (shooters often mention being inspired by past shooters, and suicide rates have a short term spike if a celebrity does it). We know that there are serious negative influences out there that we should work against. Look at what motivates terrorists/shooters, which is certainly hatred, but at who, and why? Racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, etc in some cases, others hate countries, governments, or cultures, and some are just seeking some kind of extreme retribution for social reasons. These are all sentiments we see in people who aren't shooters or terrorists, so part of it is a societal effort to deal with prejudices, flawed systems that fail or exploit people, and other problems that individuals may not have the power to overcome.

I can keep writing in detail on this if you'd like, though I'm going to bed soon so it'd have to wait til tomorrow or whatever.

Edited February 28, 2018 by Johann

[Flee Fleet!]

15 minutes ago, Johann said:

That's one way, sure. There are a lot of pieces to it, and none of the solutions are particularly fast or easy. Much like helping someone who is at risk for suicide, what can we do? Well, we know giving people emotional/social/psychological support helps. We know we shouldn't glamorize these actions, as they can inspire others (shooters often mention being inspired by past shooters, and suicide rates have a short term spike if a celebrity does it). We know that there are serious negative influences out there that we should work against. Look at what motivates terrorists/shooters, which is certainly hatred, but at who, and why? Racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, etc in some cases, others hate countries, governments, or cultures, and some are just seeking some kind of extreme retribution for social reasons. These are all sentiments we see in people who aren't shooters or terrorists, so part of it is a societal effort to deal with prejudices, flawed systems that fail or exploit people, and other problems that individuals may not have the power to overcome.

I can keep writing in detail on this if you'd like, though I'm going to bed soon so it'd have to wait til tomorrow or whatever.

Again, no need to go into further detail, you've provided a sufficient answer.  I now understand better of what can be done to stop radicalization and shootings, so thank you for the info you've provided. 

It is unfortunate though that stopping radicalization seems to be a more difficult task compared to making the accessing of guns more difficult, but as long as the solutions are successful no matter how much time they take, then it should be fine for the most part.

Edited February 28, 2018 by Flee Fleet!

[Johann]

7 minutes ago, Flee Fleet! said:

Again, no need to go into further detail, you've provided a sufficient answer.  I now understand better of what can be done to stop radicalization and shootings, so thank you for the info you've provided. 

It is unfortunate that stopping radicalization seems to be a more difficult task compared to making the accessing of guns more difficult, but as long as the solutions are successful no matter how much time they take, then it should be fine for the most part.

Yeah, and the other side of it is that there are multiple significant benefits to fighting misconceptions, prejudices, etc as well, particularly that there's less hostility within our own country. These kinds of measures also improve the US's "soft power", which describes our passive influence we have over the world, as opposed to "hard power" like militaristic or economic sway.

[Jotari]

I reckon making psychiatry cheaper could help things. A lot of people that really need help just can't reasonably pay for it.

[Flee Fleet!]

36 minutes ago, Johann said:

Yeah, and the other side of it is that there are multiple significant benefits to fighting misconceptions, prejudices, etc as well, particularly that there's less hostility within our own country. These kinds of measures also improve the US's "soft power", which describes our passive influence we have over the world, as opposed to "hard power" like militaristic or economic sway.

Fighting against misconceptions and prejudices e.t.c. is quite hard (well, at least that's how it is on Youtube lol), but you're right about there being significant benefits. Increasing the US's "soft power" is definitely good so that it won't be seen as a "militaristic state" (hopefully these are the correct words), otherwise it would be difficult to prevent people from disliking/hating the US for "abusing" its powers (or something like that).

[eclipse]

46 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I reckon making psychiatry cheaper could help things. A lot of people that really need help just can't reasonably pay for it.

So would reducing the stigma regarding therapy in general.  Teenagers are at the whims of their parents, and if said parents think it's all in their head, they can't get the help they need.

[Jotari]

2 minutes ago, eclipse said:

So would reducing the stigma regarding therapy in general.  Teenagers are at the whims of their parents, and if said parents think it's all in their head, they can't get the help they need.

I was going to mention the stigma, but then I didn't want to reinforce that it's even a thing.

[Excellen Browning]

Surely, this will go well.

[Water Mage]

1 hour ago, Excellen Browning said:

Surely, this will go well.

Speaking of which:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/968899764908642306?s=13

Yes, arming teachers is a great idea.

[Jotari]

35 minutes ago, Water Mage said:

Speaking of which:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/968899764908642306?s=13

Yes, arming teachers is a great idea.

Maybe the teacher got so pissed with the way things are going, he barricaded himself in a class room and shot a round just to make a stand. Almost feel like I'd do the same if it meant preventing them from arming teachers, even if it's mean the end if my career and a criminal record.

[Water Mage]

Even if he is making a stand, this proves how easy it is for a teacher to end killing students. Or how easy it is to get a gun and invade a school.

[Jotari]

21 minutes ago, Water Mage said:

Even if he is making a stand, this proves how easy it is for a teacher to end killing students. Or how easy it is to get a gun and invade a school.

That's essentially what I meant.

[Water Mage]

31 minutes ago, Jotari said:

That's essentially what I meant.

Sorry, guess I didn’t read it right.

 But I was thinking, you know what’s even worse? That while is great thing that no one died, it also means that this incident will barely get any attention. Which is a really bad thing. 

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, Water Mage said:

Sorry, guess I didn’t read it right.

 But I was thinking, you know what’s even worse? That while is great thing that no one died, it also means that this incident will barely get any attention. Which is a really bad thing. 

Yep. Just becomes another number that keeps the average at one school shooting incident every three freaking days.

Edited February 28, 2018 by Jotari

[Water Mage]

23 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Yep. Just becomes another number that keeps the average at one schiol shooting incident every three freaking days.

I wonder where those people who posted here that teachers should be armed are now?

 

[Sias]

On 26.2.2018 at 3:00 PM, blah the Prussian said:

Well, yeah, but none of those are cases belli for rebellion, at least not in my book. That's another thing I'd like to see gun nuts answer, incidentally: how do we define government tyranny? I'm just saying, regimes installed by violent revolution have just about the worst track record in history as far as respecting human rights goes.

Easy! Every single law you dislike is government tyranny.

On another note, a lot of business chains have either cut their ties to the NRA or implemented stricter gun control by themselves, making themselves really unpopular amongst Republican politicians and voters alike. I'm surprised, but happy. (Source)

[Jotari]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=721585144623141&id=322114971236829 

Three year old comedy act echoes pretty much all the opinions made here.

[Water Mage]

Yet another shooting, this in a Michigan University. Two are confirmed dead. But most details are scarce. This is going beyond tragic going straight into ridiculous. Which feels really wrong.

And @eclipse, do you think you could pin this? With this third one, I have this horrid feeling that school shootings will be a “thing” this year.

[blah the Prussian]

Somewhat related: one of my friends is now leaning away from going to the US for university partially because of this(he's also black, so that's a factor too). I wasn't going to go anyway because the UK lets me focus on history right away, but this certainly doesn't help matters.

[eclipse]

On 3/2/2018 at 6:31 AM, Water Mage said:

Yet another shooting, this in a Michigan University. Two are confirmed dead. But most details are scarce. This is going beyond tragic going straight into ridiculous. Which feels really wrong.

And @eclipse, do you think you could pin this? With this third one, I have this horrid feeling that school shootings will be a “thing” this year.

If it's as bad as you think it is, I don't think a pin will be necessary.

[Integrity]

On 3/2/2018 at 11:31 AM, Water Mage said:

Yet another shooting, this in a Michigan University

i'm gonna be 'the guy' here - this wasn't a mass shooting. a sick fuck killed his parents in cold blood, and it happened to be in his dorm on campus, but it was not a mass shooting.

a completely lamentable loss of life attributable to this administration's inability to deal with gun control, but not a mass shooting, which is the thread's divine purpose.

Edited March 3, 2018 by Integrity

[Water Mage]

1 hour ago, Integrity said:

i'm gonna be 'the guy' here - this wasn't a mass shooting. a sick fuck killed his parents in cold blood, and it happened to be in his dorm on campus, but it was not a mass shooting.

a completely lamentable loss of life attributable to this administration's inability to deal with gun control, but not a mass shooting, which is the thread's divine purpose.

I never said it was a mass shooting, but still was a murder in a campus. It shouldn’t happen, and should have gotten more attention than it did. But because few people died, people aren’t paying enough attention. Which is wrong. Really, really wrong.

2 hours ago, eclipse said:

If it's as bad as you think it is, I don't think a pin will be necessary.

I’m really sorry if I sounded pushy, but it’s just that I feared that people are becoming used to it, and thus will not talk about things like this when it happens. 

To be honest, when I wrote that I was just disturbed that people were barely talking about it and that because it was a smaller scale incident, people weren’t nearly as interesting in it. Like I said before, people are getting used to this sort of thing, which wrong and incredibly disturbing. I wrote that without thinking, so again, I apologize for being pushy. I really shouldn’t have asked to pin this thread.