Kids, guns and mass shootings

G

Ghost1958

Moderator
Ok im crossing out the few older lunatics that have committed mass shootings for the time being. Most school shootings are committed by either present students or those who were students no so long before the act.

Part of the problem at least to me is that tons of younger people have grown up used to shooting video game humans. You shoot enough game over and there is a whole new batch to shoot. Point? They have never used a gun to kill anything that was actually alive!! No concept that shooting something and killing it is final. No start overs. The victim doesnt get up and resume their life.

I honestly believe that a lot of these younger shooters are angry at something, and go into these mass shootings with a thought process that stops at the point they shoot the victims. No clear thought on the finality of that act. Just a need for revenge or payback or whatever drives them to do it but no real grip of the final result of what they are about to do.
They never hunted, never changed a living animal into a dead one.
I realize im not a good speaker and my point is probably lost on most. And im not condemning shooter type video games. But I believe that when introducing a kid to firearms or even a kid that is going to be around firearms needs the idea that dead is dead, forever, needs to be taught in some manner that should they ever shoot and kill a person with that firearm that person is dead. Forever. And what that actually means. Thanks for putting up with my ramblings.
 
Video games are no different than playing cops & robbers or cowboys & indians in my day. We'd "shoot" each other and die gloriously over and over again.

The wackos that move from games to killing people are just that, wacko. I don't believe the games had anything to do with it.

I don't know if it's true, but I've heard some of the wackos start out by killing and/or torturing animals before they move on to people. So introducing kids to hunting and such may just speed up the process if they're the wrong kid.
 
Sport as I said im not a good speaker so may not have gotten this across. I dont blame the games as a cause. The torturing animals has more to do with Jeffery Dohmer type serial killers.

What I was trying to get at is that if a kid has never killed anything but a cartoon he has no concept of the finality of killing someone. In other words doesnt think beyond the act of shooting and equating it with snuffing out someones life. Is he a wacko? Of course. But that even makes it worse. A wacko that wants to go on a shooting spree with little to no deep seated idea of the results of what hes about to do. Just my take based on teaching a lot of kids to hunt. Their first kill is exciting for sure. But there is a somber moment that you can see in their face of the realization that they have just killed something and are looking first hand at the result of it.
I played cowboys indians etc too. And your right we died deaths worthy of the movies. But if i shot a buddy with my plastic gun and blood and guts spewed all over the place, which is what happens in the games and again im not blaming the games themselves, cowboys and indians would have taken on an all new dimension.
Just my opinion and worth what you paid for it.
 
Their first kill is exciting for sure. But there is a somber moment that you can see in their face of the realization that they have just killed something and are looking first hand at the result of it.
Click to expand...

For most, yes. A few may get a thrill from it and go on to be mass murderers.

I just don't think taking a kid hunting improves the chance of him turning out to be a good citizen. At least I don't draw that conclusion. Look at all the good citizens that never hunted anything. I've never hunted for game, but I admit I killed countless sparrows, songbirds (even off my mom's feeder), rabbits, lizzards, snakes, etc. in my youth. I don't remember any somber moments of reflection after the act either. On the other hand I've never had the slightest inclination to kill, fight, or hurt anyone (normal youth sibling rivalry aside).

But maybe I still don't understand the point you are trying to make.

BTW, I'm a '60 model so I think we grew up about the same time.
 
I think taking a kid hunting will make them realize that a gun is not a toy, rational ones at least.

The mass murderers, I don't think it would help.
 
I think this might have some effect if the kid is taught the morality issues of taking a life. By this I mean that the rabbit won't get up and run away and have baby bunnies, or the deer won't go about its life and have fawns, etc. That you either eat that animal or it rots or is eaten by other animals or bugs. Teach the reality of killing rather than sensationalism of games and movies.
 
Last edited:
Ricky that is petty much what im trying to get across. Not that hunting makes a good citizen, or that it would prevent a total nut job from shooting a bunch of people. Just that a lot of kids that have access to a gun and bullied or whatever and go shoot up a school dont think beyond the shooting to the final result of the shooting because they have never killed anything but a cartoon.
 
Sport about the same model yep. Im a little rustier I think :D Point is you did kill something. And it didnt get back up and give you some points and let you shoot it again. It was dead and you knew it was dead and that the gun you shot it with could kill it and what kill it actually meant is the rough idea,
 
While I think that taking a kid hunting can be beneficial, I don't think it's for the same reasons that you suggest. Showing a child the power of a gun and what it can do sends a powerful message that a gun is not a toy and should be treated with respect. While not hunting, may dad did something that had the same effect on my siblings and myself when teaching us about guns. He took a gallon milk jug, filled it with water, and let us shoot it with a shotgun to see the effect. After watching the jug explode, he then explained to us that the gun could do the same thing to a person, thus illustrating why they should be treated with respect.

Growing up, my brothers and I played with plenty of toy guns and shoot-em-up video games and watched our share of action movies, but we understood the difference between fantasy and reality. Someone who is driven to violence because of what they saw in a movie or video game likely already has very deep mental and/or emotional problems that the media is not a cause of.

More to the point, however, most mass murderers do not do what they do because they don't understand the difference between fantasy and reality or life and death. Instead, these people cause pain, suffering, and death because they want to. These people crave attention and they simply do not care who they have to hurt to get it. The media does bear some responsibility in this not because of violent games and films, but because of the huge amounts of attention that they give to deranged, attention-craving murderers. These people are angry and full of pain and want the world to know it. By continuously parading the victims and pictures of the shooter across the television screen for days, if not weeks, on end, the news media is giving the murderer exactly what he wanted and encouraging the next deranged lunatic.
 
+1 Webley.

If you have to let a child shoot an animal to teach them about life and death, there's something already wrong in the equation. I would reach and say it's irresponsible to let a child go hunting that doesn't already grasp such things. Sure that first kill will definitely bring the message home, but the foundation should already be well in place by then IMO. A child can be taught the do's and don't's of firearms without killing something.

More to the point, however, most mass murderers do not do what they do because they don't understand the difference between fantasy and reality or life and death.
Click to expand...

Again, +1 all over that.
 
I completely agree with rickrick. When I was a young boy I pointed my bb gun at my sister. I expected a few go rounds with the belt. Instead dad took my favorite rabbit from the hutch. We proceeded to drive about five miles from the house. Dad took the rabbit out, turned him loose and put the little guy down. We walked up to the little guy, and that was the first thing I had seen killed. Dad asked me if that's what I wanted ti do to my sister because that's what happens when you point guns at people. I never did again. That's my two cents anyway.
 
Ghost1958, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understood your original post to mean, when they get angry and think about revenge or shooting someone, that's it. That's as far as their thought process goes. They don't think it through completely. They don't think "Ok, I got my revenge or I shot them, now what?" I dont think the problem is that they don't understand their actions, I think its more of they just didnt think that far ahead. They wanted to get even with someone, or prove a point, so bad that they never thought beyond that. They get so focused on their "goal" that they never stop to think "What if I achieve my goal?". Some people get so caught up in what they're doing that they do things that they know they shouldn't but do it anyways because there emotions take over. Sometimes when that happens rational thinking goes out the window. The wackos are the ones that think it through, are aware of their actions and the outcome their actions will create, and go ahead and do it anyways.
Emotions don't make people crazy, it makes them human but how they deal with those emotions defines them.
 
Most...not all...of the recent mass shooters have clearly been mentally ill. Schizophrenia and similar mental disorders tend to break through and make their presence known from the late teens through the mid-20s. Many of these people were perfectly normal before the onset of their disease. IMO this is why we see the shooters' demographic mostly males in their late teens to early twenties.

Now, the mentally ill have always been around and so have guns, so why do we see the spike in shootings? I think it is several things. One, I think society used to be better at just sequestering these people away from society; now they are "mainstreamed" and the goal is to get them to live independently. Two, the publicity. Once the cat was out of the bag and the tactic became more common, I think they're just more aware that this is an option for them to go out and do. Look at the recent copycatting already after CT.

There is something inherent in modern American society allowing this to happen. I don't know what the answer is...it's certainly not more gun control...but my wife and I agreed that if one of our kids were exhibiting any symptoms of being unbalanced, the guns would not be locked up they would be stored out of the house where they could not gain access. You just can't trust the mentally ill.
 
So, I daylight as a psychologist (but not that kind of psychologist...), and have talked with colleagues about the issue regarding these shooters. First, many of these are pretty seriously mentally ill (to state the obvious). Diseases such as schizophrenia often manifest in the early 20s, and things can go down hill pretty quickly. Several of the recent shooters are probably solidly in this camp.

While early life experiences and parenting have some effect, individuals with schizophrenia can come from very supportive and positive environments as well as unstable and negative ones.

When things go down hill for these kids, paranoia and delusions are a pretty common symptom and here, they can be influenced by lots of cues around them. Many of them get very wrapped up in conspiracy theories, and a general feeling of threat surrounding them.

I think a subset of these kids that are likely to take violent action are facilitated by ready access to firearms. Being in a home with firearms provides both access and the suggestion that these might be 'useful', and the difficulty of tracking these kids at the very early stages of the disease means that they can acquire weapons without tripping on any of the fairly lenient restrictions that we have in place. I'm not blaming the parents necessarily. But, I think we all have a responsibility to try our utmost to prevent our weapons from being used in such a terrible way and it is very easy for us to become complacent about those we live with (and ourselves). Statistically speaking (meaning over the entire population, which includes lots of knuckleheads, in addition to all of us, the reasonable, responsible, and always vigilant and level headed individuals), a gun in the house is more likely to be used against someone in the house, than in self defense.

I think one answer is awareness. If you have kids, be aware that some kids can start sending out very early signals of either depression, or erratic behavior, and you might need to consider if you have sufficient control of the guns in the house.

If my nephew (who is 22) started behaving a bit oddly (not even aggressively) but I also found out that he had recently purchased a gun and a large amount of ammunition, I'd be concerned. If this co-occured with alot of interest in conspiracies and such. I'd be very concerned. It isn't just other people's kids and we need to be collectively better at detecting these troubled kids.
 
dspieler;
My i quote you? Ok, Thanks ;)
I'd be concerned. If this co-occured with alot of interest in conspiracies and such. I'd be very concerned.
Click to expand...
I believe their lies a very big part of the problem. Yes we are all concerned but WHAT is being or, what can be done? 190 million concerned is what we have right now.
Now Spaniel is making a statment that sounds prommising, but will he or anyone else really do what he claimes he would, and forgive me if you are doing just what you say and wish to remain under radar.
but my wife and I agreed that if one of our kids were exhibiting any symptoms of being unbalanced, the guns would not be locked up they would be stored out of the house where they could not gain access.
Click to expand...
This Link is not for all, but it is something that i believe hits the point.
http://www.rzim.org/rzim-news/tragedy-at-newtown/
 
In cops and robbers, cowboys and indians, and bugs bunny you don't have tons of blood spraying gloriously across the screen and humans going down in groaning deaths and spasms.

Kids and adults are conditioning themselves for gory mass violence by watching some movies and video games.

I liked Pierre's example of a video game easily found on the internet called something like "Kindergarten killer"

Ask yourself a question next time you buy a gun. Is it because of the performance or is it because you saw it on "Call of Duty"
 
The professional literature has not proven a strong predictive role for violent games.

Meaning that children without serious problems will not be pushed over the edge by them.

Can they contribute to those who have serious disorders and help them model horrors - perhaps.

So the issue is controlling access for the vast majority of people who wont' go over the edge for the small number who will. The greater problem is the lack of diagnosis and treatment for those who are ill and will be evil.

There are cases of rampages and incitement to violence from reading the Bible. Let's ban religion? That is a not a serious question but speaks to what we ban.
 
I recently lived in a country where there are no mentally ill people. At least not visibly. They are all incarcerated, sterilized, and medicated into near a near coma state. Many countries do not incarcerate, but they monitor and force medication/treatment.

When you have people with SEVERE mental illness walking the streets without any treatment or supervision they are going to do insane things. They can get the ideas from books, movies, games, or simply their imagination. Many of these insane people are very intelligent.

The Aurora shooter could have come up with several methods would have been FAR more deadly given his educational background.

IMO, the issue that needs to be looked at is the mental health side of things. That is every bit as slippery a slope as the firearms issue, but we are at the very top of the slope. There is little to no restrictions on what those who have been found mentally ill can do(effectively). Banning guns will not stop them from occassionally wreaking destruction.

One must also consider the true numbers here.
How many kindergarteners died in car crashes on their way to school that day?
How many died in fires b/c no smoke detectors in the house?
How many were killed by abusive parents?
When the numbers are all tallied less than 30 a year is low on the cause of death chart. There must be hundreds of causes that garner more tragedy with preventative measures much cheaper than anything we are talking about. By no stretch of the imagination one might imagine a fireman in each school would reduce fire related deaths of children more than a policeman would firearms deaths and you would add an onsite EMS in most cases.
 
Charles Whitman didn't play video games obviously, but he had recently been a student. And a Marine. Personally the best guess as to "why" I've seen is the sudden crash from the protected life of a teenager under mom and dad's roof, and making your own way in the world in college or life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top