[split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-06-2016, 07:46 PM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
(17-06-2016 02:33 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-06-2016 10:47 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  No doubt the mental health system is deeply flawed.

As for every single mass killer being mentally ill, I personally leave such diagnoses up to the professionals -- I'm not qualified to make any claim like that.

Look at it from the other perspective: were any of them mentally healthy? Consider

According to diagnoses, most aren't. My expertise, or rather lack thereof, makes my opinion rather meaningless.

I get where you're coming from; I'm inclined to think of anyone who does this sort of thing as mentally ill by definition. But what use is a layman's opinion when experts in the field say otherwise?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2016, 08:04 PM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
(17-06-2016 07:46 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(17-06-2016 02:33 PM)Chas Wrote:  Look at it from the other perspective: were any of them mentally healthy? Consider

According to diagnoses, most aren't. My expertise, or rather lack thereof, makes my opinion rather meaningless.

I get where you're coming from; I'm inclined to think of anyone who does this sort of thing as mentally ill by definition. But what use is a layman's opinion when experts in the field say otherwise?

I don't think experts in the field have said otherwise.

If many of these shooters have not been diagnosed as mentally ill, it's most likely they haven't been diagnosed at all.
I seriously doubt they've actually been examined by a mental health professional; certainly not prior to their crimes.

And our opinions do matter. We influence legislation.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
17-06-2016, 08:20 PM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
(17-06-2016 05:25 PM)JDog554 Wrote:  
(17-06-2016 05:22 PM)Stevil Wrote:  A depressed person that kills their own family and then kills themselves is only a danger to themselves and not to the general public.

A person that goes on a random killing spree, perhaps in a school or a movie theatre is a danger to public.

As a random person in public I am more worried about them, especially since I know there are no guns in my home, hence it is highly unlikely my wife or kids will shoot me.

Either way innocent people die. It's not just about you.
I'm concerned about me, above all else.

If someone offs themselves or even their own babies then it is of little concern to me.

If people are wandering around with loaded weapons in society and some of those people choose to shoot at random strangers, then that concerns me greatly. Makes me want gun control.

In my view it is impossible to allow all the "good" guys to have guns without making guns easier for the "bad" guys to have them. Giving the "good" guys guns, means that you are providing a supply line for the "bad" guys.
Also it doesn't address crimes from first timers, and crimes of passion or depression etc.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2016, 08:24 PM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
(17-06-2016 08:20 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(17-06-2016 05:25 PM)JDog554 Wrote:  Either way innocent people die. It's not just about you.
I'm concerned about me, above all else.

If someone offs themselves or even their own babies then it is of little concern to me.

If people are wandering around with loaded weapons in society and some of those people choose to shoot at random strangers, then that concerns me greatly. Makes me want gun control.

In my view it is impossible to allow all the "good" guys to have guns without making guns easier for the "bad" guys to have them. Giving the "good" guys guns, means that you are providing a supply line for the "bad" guys.
Also it doesn't address crimes from first timers, and crimes of passion or depression etc.

No compassion, no wonder your argument hold no ground.

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2016, 09:28 PM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
Is this how the rest of the world views America and its "obsession" with guns?



Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-06-2016, 12:31 AM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
(17-06-2016 08:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  I don't think experts in the field have said otherwise.

If many of these shooters have not been diagnosed as mentally ill, it's most likely they haven't been diagnosed at all.
I seriously doubt they've actually been examined by a mental health professional; certainly not prior to their crimes.

I think that the truth lies somewhere in the middle here. This study cites a psychiatrist who seems to share your view saying that about 50% of mass murders are perpetrated by mentally-ill people, and that 3-5% of all firearms murder are attributable to them (not the 1% I mentioned earlier -- my apologies for disseminating incorrect information). That 3-5% represents a disporportionately small perpetration rate by the mentally-ill. This indicates to me that while better mental screening of gun-purchasers may well reduce the frequency of mass murderers (at least with legal weapons), it would hardly touch the firearms murder rate.

(17-06-2016 08:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  And our opinions do matter. We influence legislation.

I was speaking specifically of our opinions on the sanity or insanity of a murderer, not our opinions a large about the political issues which drive our voting habits.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-06-2016, 01:04 AM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
(17-06-2016 02:14 PM)JDog554 Wrote:  Problem is there is no definite definition so anyone can add variables to it. [...]

Not so...

Generally, there are three terms one sees to describe a perpetrator of this type of gun violence: mass murderer, spree killer, or serial killer. An FBI crime classification report from 2005 identifies an individual as a mass murderer if he kills four or more people in a single incident (not including himself), typically in a single location. The baseline of the four fatalities criteria are:

• The attack must have occurred essentially in a single incident, in a public place;

• The exclusion of crimes of armed robbery, gang violence, or domestic violence in a home;

• Focusses on cases in which the motive appeared to be indiscriminate mass murder;

• The killer, in accordance with the FBI criterion, had to have taken the lives of at least four other people.

http://www.motherjones.com

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-06-2016, 05:29 AM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
In America, more preschoolers are shot dead each year (82 in 2013) than police officers are in the line of duty (27 in 2013), according to figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the FBI.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation tracks the deaths of law enforcement officers, whether they serve in the smallest sheriff’s department or a large federal agency.

The definition used by the U.S. Education Department includes every child from a newborn to 4-years-old, and includes gun deaths under all circumstances.

New York Times; Nicholas Kristof; 3 Oct 15

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-06-2016, 05:37 AM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
(18-06-2016 01:04 AM)SYZ Wrote:  
(17-06-2016 02:14 PM)JDog554 Wrote:  Problem is there is no definite definition so anyone can add variables to it. [...]

Not so...

Generally, there are three terms one sees to describe a perpetrator of this type of gun violence: mass murderer, spree killer, or serial killer. An FBI crime classification report from 2005 identifies an individual as a mass murderer if he kills four or more people in a single incident (not including himself), typically in a single location. The baseline of the four fatalities criteria are:

• The attack must have occurred essentially in a single incident, in a public place;

• The exclusion of crimes of armed robbery, gang violence, or domestic violence in a home;

• Focusses on cases in which the motive appeared to be indiscriminate mass murder;

• The killer, in accordance with the FBI criterion, had to have taken the lives of at least four other people.

http://www.motherjones.com

"Part of the difficulty in creating any such rankings is that there is no universally agreed-upon definition of what constitutes a "mass shooting." From a law enforcement standpoint, in 2008 the FBI began classifying as mass shootings only events in which one or more individuals "kills four or more people in a single incident (not including the shooter), typically in a single location."

http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/17/worst-m...s-history/

"A mass shooting is defined by the FBI as “four or more shot and/or killed in a single incident”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...85571.html

"The FBI, by contrast, doesn’t have an official definition of “mass shooting” on the books, but in 2014 defined a “mass killing” as one with three or more fatalities in a report about active shooters—“an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area,” like at Columbine or Newtown. Using the three-fatality threshold, the Oregon shooting is the 54th mass killing of 2015. But in July, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) defined a mass shooting as a homicide in which four or more people are killed with firearms—a definition based on the FBI’s definition of a “mass murder” as opposed to a “mass shooting.”

https://newrepublic.com/article/123027/h...-shootings


"Broadly speaking, the term refers to an incident involving multiple victims of gun violence. But there is no official set of criteria or definition for a mass shooting, according to criminology experts and FBI officials who have spoken with Mother Jones."

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/...s-shooting

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-06-2016, 05:46 AM
RE: [split] Gun Control (Orlando Mass Shooting)
(18-06-2016 12:31 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(17-06-2016 08:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  I don't think experts in the field have said otherwise.

If many of these shooters have not been diagnosed as mentally ill, it's most likely they haven't been diagnosed at all.
I seriously doubt they've actually been examined by a mental health professional; certainly not prior to their crimes.

I think that the truth lies somewhere in the middle here. This study cites a psychiatrist who seems to share your view saying that about 50% of mass murders are perpetrated by mentally-ill people, and that 3-5% of all firearms murder are attributable to them (not the 1% I mentioned earlier -- my apologies for disseminating incorrect information). That 3-5% represents a disporportionately small perpetration rate by the mentally-ill. This indicates to me that while better mental screening of gun-purchasers may well reduce the frequency of mass murderers (at least with legal weapons), it would hardly touch the firearms murder rate.

(17-06-2016 08:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  And our opinions do matter. We influence legislation.

I was speaking specifically of our opinions on the sanity or insanity of a murderer, not our opinions a large about the political issues which drive our voting habits.

The study says 60% exhibited symptoms prior to the killings. That is, however, retrospective testimony by unidentified people and should be looked at skeptically.

My point was that a mass murderer is by definition mentally ill.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: