The war against individual freedoms

[_Amore]

How is “serious mental illness” compared to joking or inconsequential mental illness?

Darling Kevin,
I never suggested any specific solutions - only known common problems in regard to the shooters. I realize that schools and other parts of the community can play a role - but it’s not helpful to ignore the greatest influence - a child’s parents. I cannot force the solution of fathers sticking around, but I can promote fatherhood as something important rather than pretend they don’t really matter, as many feminists and homosexual fanatics do.

As for the mental illness, I believe critical thinking - including understanding cognitive distortions & logical fallacies - should be taught in schools. Not suggesting that’s a cure all, but it’s a start.

[_Kevin Graham]

Darling Kevin,
I never suggested any specific solutions - only known common problems in regard to the shooters. I realize that schools and other parts of the community can play a role - but it’s not helpful to ignore the greatest influence - a child’s parents. I cannot force the solution of fathers sticking around, but I can promote fatherhood as something important rather than pretend they don’t really matter, as many feminists and homosexual fanatics do.

I know you didn't offer any solutions, which is why I asked. I don't understand how you can say it isn't helpful to ignore something if it has nothing to do with forming a solution. If it has nothing to do with a solution, why focus on it? Not all mass shooters act out because of their Dad leaving them. In the recent shooting, the shooter (Nikolas Cruz) was adopted at age 3 and his father died when he was 6 years old. His mother died recently of the flu. What evidence do you have to suggest having a father through his teens would have circumvented the outcome?

Because when 24 year old James Holmes murdered two dozen people in Aurora, no one could say it was because he came from a broken home:

“His parents are really nice people, very personable,” she said. “That’s kind of what has everyone floored. You’d never think it would happen to a family like that.” Both his mother and father have excelled in the sciences. Arlene Rosemary Holmes is a registered nurse; Robert M. Holmes Sr. is a senior scientist in the San Diego office of FICO.

[_EAllusion]

How is “serious mental illness” compared to joking or inconsequential mental illness?

Serious mental illness refers to particular kinds of diagnoses or impact on global functioning. It's meant to distinguish between schizophrenics and something like adjustment disorder.

I linked research that clearly defined what I meant by the term. Being mentally ill is not a large contributor to gun violence like gun availability or alcohol is. Not that treating mental illness isn't a laudable goal, but doing so doesn't do a ton to solve gun crime.

What you may be doing is thinking heinous crimes are the result of a "sick mind" by their very nature.

[_Some Schmo]

...as many feminists and homosexual fanatics do.

I'm curious... what do you mean by "homosexual fanatics?" You mean those guys who really like Barbara Streisand?

[_Kevin Graham]

...as many feminists and homosexual fanatics do.

I'm curious... what do you mean by "homosexual fanatics?" You mean those guys who really like Barbara Streisand?

Maybe she meant flaming homosexuals. Flaming. Like Subs' hair.

[_subgenius]

The stats on gun ownership and suicide are staggering. And frankly it is a bigger and better reason to consider restricting access to guns than mass shootings, if for no other reason than just the sheer number of lives lost.

while I appreciate your research, it was a well constructed argument for a different question. Notwithstanding your not, admittedly, being able to provide an unbias source you also did not support the claim specific to depression.

More lives are lost by texting while driving, why no car ban?

[_canpakes]

The stats on gun ownership and suicide are staggering. And frankly it is a bigger and better reason to consider restricting access to guns than mass shootings, if for no other reason than just the sheer number of lives lost.

while I appreciate your research, it was a well constructed argument for a different question. Notwithstanding your not, admittedly, being able to provide an unbias source you also did not support the claim specific to depression.

More lives are lost by texting while driving, why no car ban?

Text Messaging ban: 47 states, D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands ban text messaging for all drivers.
Missouri prohibits text messaging by novice or teen drivers.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/transporta ... -laws.aspx

[_Xenophon]

while I appreciate your research, it was a well constructed argument for a different question. Notwithstanding your not, admittedly, being able to provide an unbias source you also did not support the claim specific to depression.

More lives are lost by texting while driving, why no car ban?

Lets go back to the original CFR to see if I'm following you here:

when there are more guns around, a depressed person is more likely to kill himself. This is a statistical fact.

Notwithstanding the hilarity found in the term "statistical fact" - CFR on this whole assertion.

So, accounting for the part I bolded in your first quote. Your CFR was not really about guns and how they increase suicide rates but instead was dealing with depressed people and suicide? Help me understand, are you questioning that depressed people commit suicide sometimes or that the suicides in the cases linked to guns magically don't also involve depression? Or is it really just that you didn't think there was data to back up a link between guns and suicides and are now floundering in any way you can to deconstruct the sources given to you (this one is my bet, by the way)?

I also note that you ignored Kevin's reply to your CFR with a direct link to the studies about it, getting around your inability to get over mine's bias. I didn't link directly to the studies but instead shared the well put together Brady doc because I figured it would be easier to digest for you, apparently you lost the forest for the trees anyway.

And a final thing, comparing gun deaths and car deaths is a pretty specious argument for gun rights activists. Using a vehicle is a heavily regulated activity that involves multiple levels of regulation both for the driver and the vehicle, it's also an activity that requires insurance. And the kicker is, if you don't follow these laws we will, at a minimum fine you for your infraction and if it gets bad enough (or you are too poor to pay your fines) you will be jailed. Unless you favor those kinds of things for gun ownership, I probably wouldn't try to lump the two together.

[_DoubtingThomas]

More lives are lost by texting while driving, why no car ban?

Our country really needs to ban all cars and replace them with self-driving cars. Every year thousands of lives are going to be saved.

So good point subgenius, but people and politicians are too stupid.

[_DoubtingThomas]

Text Messaging ban: 47 states, D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands ban text messaging for all drivers.

subgenius did make a good point about cars. The solution to end our problem is to replace all (or most) cars with self-driving cars

At some point, this technology will become so advanced that lawmakers will be forced to debate whether or not to outlaw manual driving, according to Tesla CEO Elon Musk. There's an argument for it: Deaths and injuries from auto accidents are bad. They would decrease drastically if human error were to cease to be a liability. Plus, you can't drive drunk if you can't actually drive

http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/googles-se ... ously-safe