Guns / ARs not driving gun crime, but mental health & social media are.

P

Pistoler0

New member
Interesting video, search YouTube for: sO5W9vk55w4
(we cannot post links here).

Watch from 12:40 to 19:10.

The point the author makes is that what has changed since the increase in "active shooter incidents" since 2010 is the widespread reach and use of social media that has exacerbated mental health problems driving gun crime.

He does point out that "correlation does not mean causation", but that "dose-response" is a better indicator for causation; then he shows how "active shooter incidents" increased as youngsters indulged in more and more social media.

Other than those prominent "active shooter incidents" so prevalent in the news, the video shows that gun violence has not changed that much (even decreased) since the 70s, 80s.
 
Last edited:
Mental health and Removing God from schools are driving this. Did we have any mass shootings in schools when The Ten Commandments hung on the walls and were taught?
Jefferson warned that our form of government was only adequate for a moral and religious people.
 
Mental health and Removing God from schools are driving this
Click to expand...

I think the causes are too complex to nail down with a couple of phrases. Particularly ones so broad as to be essentially useless, like "Mental Health".

Religion in schools is a topic for other forums not TFL. Like many other subjects, it is off topic and counter to TFL's mission statement. Lots of other places to discuss the matter.

Trying to keep this firearms related, the AR-15 and several other firearms currently called "assault weapons" have been on the civilian market since the early 1960s.

They weren't tremendously popular then. They were expensive, and in the case of the AR-15 specifically, only came in a cartridge that was inferior to the common deer hunting rounds. They sold well enough to keep a place on the market but that was about it.

OF course, for most of the first 30 years they were available, no one was trying to ban them, either....

the widespread reach and use of social media that has exacerbated mental health problems driving gun crime.
Click to expand...

I might agree to this, if it was more specific than "gun crime". The mass shooting of innocent people is only a tiny part of "gun crime".

I forget which writer it was, but one I read once had a theory that the (then new) Internet would eventually destroy rational discussion and independent thought. Can't say if he will eventually be proven right, or not, but what I have observed in the last couple decades is that our modern communications technology (and yes social media, you're included) has brought us nearly to the point of instantaneous mob rule and I don't see that as a good thing.

Correlation is not causation automatically and inevitably the way some people seem to think it is, it takes a lot more specific kind of relationship to say A causes B with any degree of accuracy.

What we have today is a stew made of many, many different and diverse things. TO say that one or two of the ingredients is responsible for all the result is flawed judgement.
as I see it...
 
What we have today is a stew made of many, many different and diverse things. TO say that one or two of the ingredients is responsible for all the result is flawed judgement.
Click to expand...

Sadly our "leaders" are ill equipped or even motivated to address the numerous issues facing our society. Members of both parties are more interested in being reelected than in making any really improvement while in office. Also, some are motivated by the idea of continuous revolution the idea of tearing down institutions so they can be built back better than before. So, whether motivated by the idea of "doing something", reinventing society or simply getting reelected they see the idea of attacking firearms more beneficial to their cause than addressing the real problems.
 
Trying to keep this firearms related, the AR-15 and several other firearms currently called "assault weapons" have been on the civilian market since the early 1960s.
Click to expand...
That's true--I myself have owned and used these kinds of guns for much of that time, it was a different time back then. The people I shot AR's, AKs, SKSs and HKs with (those were the ones mostly available) were a very small group and none of them ever came up with any notion of using them on other people with the possible exception of home defense--let alone mass shootings. It just wasn't a "thing" on the public conscience, even though it did happen on occasion.
 
I think another factor is violent video games. I expect these games really desensitize "players" to the horror of death and war.

Someone already on the edge mentally could ended up pushed over the edge.

Kid I work with says he's played Call of Duty for over six hours straight, missing meals even. It's nuts. Says he just loses track of time then snaps back to reality.
 
IMO, as a society becomes more stressed, there will be more incidents by those who fail to cope.
People who feel "I have nothing left to lose" ,or "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more" are pretty hard to constrain with rule of law.

The "stew mix" of fear, anger, and desperation ,resentment is fed to some cross section of the population every day.

Whether for the advancement of a political ideology or economic gain,some people advance a strategy of chaos. The name of a very wealthy individual comes to mind, along with Cloward-Piven.

One of the major religions of the world recognizes the entities of The Creator, The Preserver, and the Destroyer. Its the Destroyer that brings all change. To remodel the kitchen you first demolish the kitchen.

Another element in the stew is dehumanization. IMO, as Humans, we have a natural abhorrence to killing each other.....
Unless,of course, we can identify a group as "other" . Not quite as human as we are.

Another race,another religion, another tribe ,another gang ,another party , or another socio-economic group will do.

At the very top of our political system, from the White House to Congress, The Parties,Dem and GOP, the Press Corps, and the 24/7 News cycle, We are divided between "Us " and "Them". Boxed and labeled.

We do have some choice about what we add to our own stew.

I try to add some "Grateful" . Even if its Grateful for whatever bad stuff that did not happen today.

Its not about guns. Its about the stew.
 
IMO, as a society becomes more stressed, there will be more incidents by those who fail to cope.
People who feel "I have nothing left to lose" ,or "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more" are pretty hard to constrain with rule of law.

The "stew mix" of fear, anger, and desperation ,resentment is fed to some cross section of the population every day.

Whether for the advancement of a political ideology or economic gain,some people advance a strategy of chaos. The name of a very wealthy individual comes to mind, along with Cloward-Piven.

One of the major religions of the world recognizes the entities of The Creator, The Preserver, and the Destroyer. Its the Destroyer that brings all change. To remodel the kitchen you first demolish the kitchen.

Another element in the stew is dehumanization. IMO, as Humans, we have a natural abhorrence to killing each other.....
Unless,of course, we can identify a group as "other" . Not quite as human as we are.

Another race,another religion, another tribe ,another gang ,another party , or another socio-economic group will do.

At the very top of our political system, from the White House to Congress, The Parties,Dem and GOP, the Press Corps, and the 24/7 News cycle, We are divided between "Us " and "Them". Boxed and labeled.

We do have some choice about what we add to our own stew.

I try to add some "Grateful" . Even if its Grateful for whatever bad stuff that did not happen today.

Its not about guns. Its about the stew.
Click to expand...
The most cogent comment I have EVER seen anywhere on the issue of gun violence in America today. If there were a "bullseye" award for commentary excellence this would be a winner.
 
stagpanther said:
That's true--I myself have owned and used these kinds of guns for much of that time, it was a different time back then. The people I shot AR's, AKs, SKSs and HKs with (those were the ones mostly available) were a very small group and none of them ever came up with any notion of using them on other people with the possible exception of home defense--let alone mass shootings. It just wasn't a "thing" on the public conscience, even though it did happen on occasion.
Click to expand...
There has also been a morality during most of the time period you mentioned. Our nation no longer has a morality. Postmodern philosophy dominates our thinking. There is no right, no wrong. Truth is determined by each. Right and wrong are relative in a man's own eyes. When man no longer knows what is right and no longer has a moral compass pointing him to right, all is left is a legal system which is woefully inadequate to deter evil action in its current form. Liberty requires morality to be enjoyed. In a vacuum of morality, totalitarianism becomes essential to preserve any measure of safety.
 
He does point out that "correlation does not mean causation", but that "dose-response" is a better indicator for causation; then he shows how "active shooter incidents" increased as youngsters indulged in more and more social media.
Click to expand...

That is still nothing more than correlation explained another way. I am looking at the same data he is showing and he claims that things really took off after 2009-2010 and what is clear on the graph is just that it is a continuously upward trend. There is not a sharp increase in the slope after 2009-2010. It only looks that way because he is keying on the spike in 2010 which is an anomaly that differs markedly from the years before and after it.
 
There is a definite correlation between A.D.D. meds and mass shootings.
Click to expand...

If you set your parameters wide enough there is a definite correlation between everything that happens, everywhere.

TO be a bit more specific, its not just A.D.D. meds its other drugs as well, both legal and illegal. Mind altering substances, whether prescribed by someone with a medical license or illicit DO what they are made to do, alter a person's perceptions and reasoning capacity.

Just not in uniform and always predictable ways.

Prozac, for just one, was very helpful for many people, it helped make them more stable. HOWEVER, there was a percentage (up to 10% according to the literature) who could have just the opposite reaction and go into violent rage episodes. Nothing works on everyone the same way 100% of the time.
 
There is a definite correlation between A.D.D. meds and mass shootings.
Click to expand...

Okay, so there is a correlation. Is it spurious or real?

Correlations, in these cases, are just numbers. It is amazing how many spurious correlations you can find, such as the divorce rate in the state of Maine and the per capita consumption of margarine which has a 99.26% correlation, so high that you might think there was causation, but there isn't any causation known. There is a 99.79% correlation between US spending on space, science, and technology and suicides by hanging, strangulation, and suffocation.

However, it is interesting that you say there is a definite correlation between A.D.D. and mass shootings when Ollie North said the problem was the Ritalin used in the treatment of A.D.H.D. https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/21/health/ritalin-school-shootings-oliver-north-bn/index.html So is it the A.D.D. or the drug used to treat the similar condition of A.D.H.D.

The OP is finding that social media is the problem.

This study links 2/3 of mass shootings to domestic violence. https://efsgv.org/press/study-two-thirds-of-mass-shootings-linked-to-domestic-violence/
https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

I bet if they looked hard enough, they would find that eating bread, drinking tap water, watching TV, etc. are all correlated with people involved in such shootings.

Other studies have suggested fatherless households to be at the root of the issues.

Of course, anti-gun people believe it is access to guns.

The real question is that when you find correlations, are they actually helpful to understanding the problem or the muddying-up the waters of understanding.
 
I agree that mental health is a major issue with firearms-related deaths, but not gun violence. I suppose you could lump suicides in with violent crimes, but that just muddies the water. Suicides are a mental health issue. 2/3 or firearms-related deaths are suicides. It makes the numbers of firearms deaths look really big, like some politician should get worked up about it, but it is misleading at best as an indicator of firearms violence. It's a mental health issue.

The next 25% of firearms-related deaths are the ones we should realistically be concerned about, gang- or crime-related deaths. There is a HUGE drug gangs issue in major cities that should be addressed, but politicians are backing away from those because a large portion of gang members are minority members, and because gangs shoot back. This issue is a lack of leadership and accountability.

The "justifiable shootings by police and citizens" category of firearms-related deaths is likely related to the previous issue, but these are numbers seen as justifiable or unavoidable. 10% of all firearms-related deaths are in this category. Police shoot criminals, private citizens shoot criminals, it's not going to sell very much pity (although thee is some).

The last category the FBI reports on is unrelated murders, about 3% of all firearms-related deaths, and this is the one politicians say they are trying to solve by passing restrictive laws. These are the spur of the moment killings by people who have no known gang or drug connections.

So, my opinion, work on solving the biggest problems first. Emphasize the mental health aspect, go after the gangs and drug distributors. You'll never eliminate all those deaths but if you manage to reduce them by 10% it's a huge number! Much larger than eliminating 10% of the last category!
 
The real question is that when you find correlations, are they actually helpful to understanding the problem or the muddying-up the waters of understanding.
Click to expand...

One way, out of many, to look at different correlations is to look at how long they have been around vs how long the act has been around. Eating bread, drinking tap water, etc have been around a long long time while school shootings were not common for much of history. On the other hand, doping kids up to get a certain behavior out of them, and it is usually the boys who are the ones being doped up and committing the shootings, is a fairly recent "cure". In all the comments I have been reading the one question I have not seen for those in charge looking for answers is what has changed in our schools and in the life of our children. In the meantime, while answers are being sought, one item I am certain of, we need to do away with gun free zones. A parent who goes to school to pick up their kid is not a threat in my opinion, and not near the problem of say 18 police officers standing around while kids are being shot up.
 
Double Naught Spy said:
Okay, so there is a correlation. Is it spurious or real?

Correlations, in these cases, are just numbers. It is amazing how many spurious correlations you can find, such as the divorce rate in the state of Maine and the per capita consumption of margarine which has a 99.26% correlation, so high that you might think there was causation, but there isn't any causation known. There is a 99.79% correlation between US spending on space, science, and technology and suicides by hanging, strangulation, and suffocation.

However, it is interesting that you say there is a definite correlation between A.D.D. and mass shootings when Ollie North said the problem was the Ritalin used in the treatment of A.D.H.D. https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/21/health/ritalin-school-shootings-oliver-north-bn/index.html So is it the A.D.D. or the drug used to treat the similar condition of A.D.H.D.

The OP is finding that social media is the problem.

This study links 2/3 of mass shootings to domestic violence. https://efsgv.org/press/study-two-thirds-of-mass-shootings-linked-to-domestic-violence/
https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

I bet if they looked hard enough, they would find that eating bread, drinking tap water, watching TV, etc. are all correlated with people involved in such shootings.

Other studies have suggested fatherless households to be at the root of the issues.

Of course, anti-gun people believe it is access to guns.

The real question is that when you find correlations, are they actually helpful to understanding the problem or the muddying-up the waters of understanding.
Click to expand...
As a criminal investigator, I looked for correlation. Had I dismissed it, I would have solved very little crime. Only a small percentage of ADD kids are treated. The mass shootings are not done by untreated kids, they are done by treated kids. I have observed ADD and ADHD closely over the years because si many in my family have it. I have noticed the same pattern happen over and over. Untreated kids struggle until middle school. When they go into puberty, the begin to have less and less problems. By high school, they are fine and above average students. The treated kids do well until high school. They then begin to struggle, have anger issues, withdraw, and become not well adjusted.
My son's former best friend has ADHD. He was a cool kid. Wild as crap, but a good hearted nice kid. Teachers talked the parents into medicating him. His grades immediately went up and the rest of his life just as soon went to crap. He now goes to anger management counseling. I won't let him around my kids anymore. He tried to choke my youngest kid to death for no reason. My youngest is halfway his age and size. Had my oldest and another kid not been there, I have no idea what would have happened. That kid will be a convict! No doubt about it. It would in no way surprise me if he pulled off a mass shooting one day. From sweetest kid on earth to psychotic nutt case in just a year of ADD meds.
 
reynolds357 said:
As a criminal investigator, I looked for correlation. Had I dismissed it, I would have solved very little crime. Only a small percentage of ADD kids are treated. The mass shootings are not done by untreated kids, they are done by treated kids. I have observed ADD and ADHD closely over the years because si many in my family have it. I have noticed the same pattern happen over and over. Untreated kids struggle until middle school. When they go into puberty, the begin to have less and less problems. By high school, they are fine and above average students. The treated kids do well until high school. They then begin to struggle, have anger issues, withdraw, and become not well adjusted.
My son's former best friend has ADHD. He was a cool kid. Wild as crap, but a good hearted nice kid. Teachers talked the parents into medicating him. His grades immediately went up and the rest of his life just as soon went to crap. He now goes to anger management counseling. I won't let him around my kids anymore. He tried to choke my youngest kid to death for no reason. My youngest is halfway his age and size. Had my oldest and another kid not been there, I have no idea what would have happened. That kid will be a convict! No doubt about it. It would in no way surprise me if he pulled off a mass shooting one day. From sweetest kid on earth to psychotic nutt case in just a year of ADD meds.
Click to expand...
I hope everyone in congress reads and understands what you just wrote. As of now they are looking in the wrong direction.
 
s3779m said:
I hope everyone in congress reads and understands what you just wrote. As of now they are looking in the wrong direction.
Click to expand...
Congress is always looking in the wrong direction. Honestly, the red flag laws will most definitely evolve to include anyone under 21 who is medicated for any mental condition. Medicated ADD will get flagged. The slippery slope is never good.
 
It's my understanding that "treated" kids are now disqualified from becoming military officers. If true. it seems unfair to me, and also its only a small step to disqualifying them from other options in life, all because they got APPROVED MEDICAL TREATMENT....

Sorry Timmy, you can't hold this job because when you were 11 your parents made you take a certain pill.....

Not right, not right at all...
 
44 AMP said:
It's my understanding that "treated" kids are now disqualified from becoming military officers. If true. it seems unfair to me, and also its only a small step to disqualifying them from other options in life, all because they got APPROVED MEDICAL TREATMENT....

Sorry Timmy, you can't hold this job because when you were 11 your parents made you take a certain pill.....

Not right, not right at all...
Click to expand...
I don't know it that is true. If it is then the military knows something the general public does not. Studies I saw over 20 years ago when I was in college showed that the meds alter the way the brain structurally develops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top