Mass Shooting

[rmgill]

https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2016/08/media-contagion?fbclid=IwAR2i5yqmPMAhjvjD1_vQpsIcAHNIwThcG2jH-hZSX-PdXeXdp5YFM9NoeYE


“Unfortunately, we find that a cross-cutting trait among many profiles of mass shooters is desire for fame,” she said. This quest for fame among mass shooters skyrocketed since the mid-1990s “in correspondence to the emergence of widespread 24-hour news coverage on cable news programs, and the rise of the internet during the same period.”

She cited several media contagion models, most notably one proposed by Towers et al. (2015), which found the rate of mass shootings has escalated to an average of one every 12.5 days, and one school shooting on average every 31.6 days, compared to a pre-2000 level of about three events per year. “A possibility is that news of shooting is spread through social media in addition to mass media,” she said.

Edited August 5, 2019 by rmgill

[urbanoid]

 

 

Were such things happening so often 30, 40, 50 years ago? If not, what has changed? That's the problem that needs to be addressed, not guns.

Maybe because back then there was winners and losers. Now everyone gets a participation medal and they are unable to cope.

I posted here years ago that a study done of Palestinian Terrorists in prison were shown to almost exclusively have issues with their father, either from active abuse or passive neglect. I was mocked here for it by the usual suspects and labeled a terrorist sympathizer.

 

The issue still stands, and I would wager players a role in these men's actions.

 

 

Ah, no proper father figure. We're getting closer, aren't we? Now WHY does it occur more often than in the past?

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

Id argue first and foremost for competence in Government. That has happened in the past, and whilst the past 20 years has been a bit of an up and down, I remain optimistic after Brexit a lot of very incompetent MP are going to be exposed for the charlatans they are. Well, im an optimist.

 

You have to separate Government from functions of Government. I might despise most of what goes on in Whitehall, but I do respect the Military, and I do respect the police. Its not the fault of either that they have no budget to fulfill the functions they have traditionally been tasked with.

Looking at various scandals in the UK, I'm not sure that you're any better off with the career bureaucrats than you are with your MPs Stuart.

 

Here is the problem. You Americans trust INDIVIDUALS to solve problems. What you cant square is that Government is also made up of individuals.

That's just it. We CAN square that. But the individuals get judged for how well they do or how well they don't do. When you have politicians/officials who are judging based on identity and not merit, then yeah, we judge them badly.

 

We have a natural suspicion of how they're going to do things. I think we trust them less than you trust yours but at the same time we expect more out of them and are less satisfied when they fail.

 

 

If they cant solve big problems, why do you think joe blow is going to be any better equipped to deal witht he problems of dealing with domestic terrorism? And he isn't. Even Wyatt Earp went into OK Corral with a team.

The fractious nature of our law enforcement helps that. It's compartmentalized instead of one big top down organization run by the home office.

 

 

 

 

 

I support individualism, and I dont think we do enough of it as we should in this country. I just dont see it as a panacea for all problems is all. If it was, we wouldn't have armies.

Like anything you need enough of it. Not enough B12 and you're going to be weak.

 

 

 

Im not talking about the police bureaucracy. Im talking about the rank and file who actually do the beat, and those they train to operate firearms. Like it or not, at London Bridge the system worked.

 

Besides, we dont have one monolithic police service directed remotely by the Home office. As we have stated before, some are a lot better than others. We even copied your police commissioners, which variable success.

[rmgill]

Im not talking about the police bureaucracy. Im talking about the rank and file who actually do the beat, and those they train to operate firearms. Like it or not, at London Bridge the system worked.

You should be because they're also good and bad. If some of them are going to be making the appraisal for who can exercise a freedom it'll have problems. You can look at examples of how guns are not allowed to folks over here in States Like New York and they're as corrupt as shit. Permits were allowed based on connections and bribes and disallowed based on racism and petty dislike of an applicant. There was no appeal. Any such system needs to be shall issue.

[rmgill]

See Paul....it's a general problem. Not just one of conservative leaning types.

 

[BansheeOne]

Things will certainly not change while people keep whatabouting the splinter in their brother's eye while neglecting the log in their own.

 

The phrase of "not all Muslims are terrorist, but etc." that was popular a couple years ago wasn't actually factually correct, but pointing out the past Religion-related terrorism of the IRA didn't help anything to address the very real issue of Islamist terrorism either. Now that there is an emerging trend of internet-radicalized xenophobes shooting up places of worship and public venues, complaining about past leftist attacks isn't going to help either.

[Stuart Galbraith]

I think for Americans, internet censorship is going to be a FAR easier sell to the public than any of the other options. Maybe even a ban on violent computer games, under the illusory belief its going to stop violent attacks.

[Harold Jones]

I think for Americans, internet censorship is going to be a FAR easier sell to the public than any of the other options. Maybe even a ban on violent computer games, under the illusory belief its going to stop violent attacks.

Banning violent games has come up a lot over the years, when passed it usually gets shot down in the courts via 1st amendment claims.

[sunday]

Things will certainly not change while people keep whatabouting the splinter in their brother's eye while neglecting the log in their own.

 

The phrase of "not all Muslims are terrorist, but etc." that was popular a couple years ago wasn't actually factually correct, but pointing out the past Religion-related terrorism of the IRA didn't help anything to address the very real issue of Islamist terrorism either. Now that there is an emerging trend of internet-radicalized xenophobes shooting up places of worship and public venues, complaining about past leftist attacks isn't going to help either.

 

The only religion practiced by IRA members is Marxism-Leninism with a touch of Maoism.

[Burncycle360]

 

I think for Americans, internet censorship is going to be a FAR easier sell to the public than any of the other options. Maybe even a ban on violent computer games, under the illusory belief its going to stop violent attacks.

Banning violent games has come up a lot over the years, when passed it usually gets shot down in the courts via 1st amendment claims.

 

 

Well don't you know? We live in these trying times, those amendments just need to be flexible. What-about-ism, after all you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre so it's not like the 1st amendment rights are absolute, so sky's the limit. It's gender fluid, if you will, and sometimes those limitations we set for ourselves as a society just have to go for the greater good!

 

Sarcasm aside, do I think they'll ban violent video games? Honestly, no of course not. But the key here is the administration needs to appear as if they're solving the problem, which they can't really do, so they have to go through the motions and do something for security theater. The bar as to what's fair game and what will be sacrificed to appease the masses is constantly adjusted

 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

Things will certainly not change while people keep whatabouting the splinter in their brother's eye while neglecting the log in their own.

 

The phrase of "not all Muslims are terrorist, but etc." that was popular a couple years ago wasn't actually factually correct, but pointing out the past Religion-related terrorism of the IRA didn't help anything to address the very real issue of Islamist terrorism either. Now that there is an emerging trend of internet-radicalized xenophobes shooting up places of worship and public venues, complaining about past leftist attacks isn't going to help either.

 

The only religion practiced by IRA members is Marxism-Leninism with a touch of Maoism.

 

 

Well Martin McGuinness was a Catholic, so that certainly not true.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/21/martin-mcguinness-obituary

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

I think for Americans, internet censorship is going to be a FAR easier sell to the public than any of the other options. Maybe even a ban on violent computer games, under the illusory belief its going to stop violent attacks.

Banning violent games has come up a lot over the years, when passed it usually gets shot down in the courts via 1st amendment claims.

 

 

I hope it will continue to do so, because any effort to touch that is going to impact everything from GTA to flight simulations.

[Brian Kennedy]

 

 

 

 

Were such things happening so often 30, 40, 50 years ago? If not, what has changed? That's the problem that needs to be addressed, not guns.

Maybe because back then there was winners and losers. Now everyone gets a participation medal and they are unable to cope.

I posted here years ago that a study done of Palestinian Terrorists in prison were shown to almost exclusively have issues with their father, either from active abuse or passive neglect. I was mocked here for it by the usual suspects and labeled a terrorist sympathizer.

 

The issue still stands, and I would wager players a role in these men's actions.

Ah, no proper father figure. We're getting closer, aren't we? Now WHY does it occur more often than in the past?

To be honest I think its the Internet.

[Brian Kennedy]

Pretty interesting read about the Cloudflare decision on 8chan. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/05/technology/8chan-cloudflare-el-paso.html

[Paul G.]

 

 

 

 

Were such things happening so often 30, 40, 50 years ago? If not, what has changed? That's the problem that needs to be addressed, not guns.

Maybe because back then there was winners and losers. Now everyone gets a participation medal and they are unable to cope.

I posted here years ago that a study done of Palestinian Terrorists in prison were shown to almost exclusively have issues with their father, either from active abuse or passive neglect. I was mocked here for it by the usual suspects and labeled a terrorist sympathizer.

 

The issue still stands, and I would wager players a role in these men's actions.

Ah, no proper father figure. We're getting closer, aren't we? Now WHY does it occur more often than in the past?

My post above answered your question already.

[Paul G.]

 

 

 

 

 

Were such things happening so often 30, 40, 50 years ago? If not, what has changed? That's the problem that needs to be addressed, not guns.

Maybe because back then there was winners and losers. Now everyone gets a participation medal and they are unable to cope.

I posted here years ago that a study done of Palestinian Terrorists in prison were shown to almost exclusively have issues with their father, either from active abuse or passive neglect. I was mocked here for it by the usual suspects and labeled a terrorist sympathizer.

 

The issue still stands, and I would wager players a role in these men's actions.

Ah, no proper father figure. We're getting closer, aren't we? Now WHY does it occur more often than in the past?

To be honest I think its the Internet.

That is the third factor.

[bojan]

Are the guns bigger issue than a drunk driving in producing larger number of casualties? No. Is alcohol as heavily regulated as guns? No. There is your answer what should be done to reduce "gun violence". Nothing about guns, all about society.

[Paul G.]

 

It doesn't take significant mental health indicators to get us to a mass shooting.

 

1. A feeling of despair or hopelessness. Can be environmentally or physiologically induced.

 

2. A lack of coping methods, or support relationships. Isolation is a key factor.

 

2. Blame for ones hopelessness on others, leading to hate, fueled and shaped by validating information. Typically in the form of online propaganda and rhetoric.

What sort of online propaganda? Would the idea that some on the opposite political aisle are subhuman meet that test?

 

 

These are as valid valid for the recent spat of Ethno Nationalist perps as with "muslim" extremists. The factors are the same...replace "infidels" with "immigrants".

Or conservatives? Who's rhetoric was it that said that Trump is inhuman?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting

Yes if that propaganda is aimed at scapegoating a group of people as the cause of their malady, and worthy of their hate.

[Paul G.]

See Paul....it's a general problem. Not just one of conservative leaning types.

 

I never said it was...its not about "conservative" or "liberal", as you aparently do (you use the word 'just'). Its about hate.

[sunday]

 

 

Things will certainly not change while people keep whatabouting the splinter in their brother's eye while neglecting the log in their own.

 

The phrase of "not all Muslims are terrorist, but etc." that was popular a couple years ago wasn't actually factually correct, but pointing out the past Religion-related terrorism of the IRA didn't help anything to address the very real issue of Islamist terrorism either. Now that there is an emerging trend of internet-radicalized xenophobes shooting up places of worship and public venues, complaining about past leftist attacks isn't going to help either.

 

The only religion practiced by IRA members is Marxism-Leninism with a touch of Maoism.

 

 

Well Martin McGuinness was a Catholic, so that certainly not true.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/21/martin-mcguinness-obituary

 

 

Yeah, he is on his way to be Canonized too.

 

Really, Stuart...

Edited August 5, 2019 by sunday

[Jeff]

one of americas favourite pasttimes it seems:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2019-mass-shootings-there-have-been-more-mass-shootings-than-days-this-year/

 

 

"251 mass shootings"

 

Figures don't lie but liars figure. If pookie shoots 2 rival gang members, that's not the same thing as some nut going postal in a mall. It's just like all of the school shootings until you look at the data and they count any gun crime within 1500 feet of a school. Liars.

[rmgill]

Ah, no proper father figure. We're getting closer, aren't we? Now WHY does it occur more often than in the past?

See http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=44095&page=8&do=findComment&comment=1442248

[rmgill]

 

 

I think for Americans, internet censorship is going to be a FAR easier sell to the public than any of the other options. Maybe even a ban on violent computer games, under the illusory belief its going to stop violent attacks.

Banning violent games has come up a lot over the years, when passed it usually gets shot down in the courts via 1st amendment claims.

 

I hope it will continue to do so, because any effort to touch that is going to impact everything from GTA to flight simulations.

 

There's also the fact that there's no solid evidence that they're related.

 

[rmgill]

 

one of americas favourite pasttimes it seems:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2019-mass-shootings-there-have-been-more-mass-shootings-than-days-this-year/

 

"251 mass shootings"

 

Figures don't lie but liars figure. If pookie shoots 2 rival gang members, that's not the same thing as some nut going postal in a mall. It's just like all of the school shootings until you look at the data and they count any gun crime within 1500 feet of a school. Liars.

 

I rather like Sargon's "You dirty, dirty, smear merchants."

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

 

 

I think for Americans, internet censorship is going to be a FAR easier sell to the public than any of the other options. Maybe even a ban on violent computer games, under the illusory belief its going to stop violent attacks.

Banning violent games has come up a lot over the years, when passed it usually gets shot down in the courts via 1st amendment claims.

I hope it will continue to do so, because any effort to touch that is going to impact everything from GTA to flight simulations.

There's also the fact that there's no solid evidence that they're related.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSR55br-mas

 

Well I've been playing violent computer games for high on 40 years, and I've killed virtually nobody.