Another Fatal Shooting in a movie theater

That's why the PTSD returning soldiers have is so out of control in the US and Canada. Hell up here Harper, our PM, has cut the veterans offices budget to the bare bones over the past few years and demands that he be able to cut even more despite trying to send more people over.
 
From what has been said, do I infer correctly that there are currently no limits on the quantities of ammunition that can be purchased?

Are there limits on the quantities of prescription drugs that can be bought?
 
It's shocking to see how much mental health care is still looked down upon by the culture in America. My girlfriends father is a doctor and he actually believes that any kind of psychiatric care is a huge waste of time.

Mental health is neglected all across the globe unfortunately. There's still a massive stigma attached to it, a lot of people (Ironically professionals in other fields) still see psychology as something akin to astrology.

For a lot of people it's something "they just don't believe in", irrespective of how much evidence or proof there is for certain phenomena. For most laymen it's just something you ignore. Just getting to the point where you can have a conversation about the merits or effects of emotions in someone's life is pretty much impossible. It's an afterthought for most people. Until that entire idea is addressed mental health will continue to be ignored, and trends like shooting sprees will keep on kickin'.
 
Mental health is neglected all across the globe unfortunately. There's still a massive stigma attached to it, a lot of people (Ironically professionals in other fields) still see psychology as something akin to astrology.

For a lot of people it's something "they just don't believe in", irrespective of how much evidence or proof there is for certain phenomena. For most laymen it's just something you ignore. Just getting to the point where you can have a conversation about the merits or effects of emotions in someone's life is pretty much impossible. It's an afterthought for most people. Until that entire idea is addressed mental health will continue to be ignored, and trends like shooting sprees will keep on kickin'.

You're absolutely right. I've dealt with all kinds of **** from people over my mental health troubles over the years. You wouldn't believe the number of people in my life that have told me to just get over it. If we can't stop the crazies from getting guns, we can help the crazies be less crazy.
 
Pragmatically, it should be easier to stop them getting the hardware. I don't mean to belittle the concerns over mental health at all, but even something as commonplace as depression is difficult to treat in the long term, and many people relapse. Other conditions are very difficult to detect, and often people with psychoses are unable to realise they are ill and will not accept help. Removing causes of mental illness is probably impossible: that would require the creation of some kind of utopian society without stress, disappointment, narcotics, bad parenting, insomnia, or any genetic illness at all.

I think the easiest and most effective option is to gradually phase out civilian ownership of guns and ammunition. Restricting the latter seems like a good start.
 
Pragmatically, it should be easier to stop them getting the hardware. I don't mean to belittle the concerns over mental health at all, but even something as commonplace as depression is difficult to treat in the long term, and many people relapse. Other conditions are very difficult to detect, and often people with psychoses are unable to realise they are ill and will not accept help. Removing causes of mental illness is probably impossible: that would require the creation of some kind of utopian society without stress, disappointment, narcotics, bad parenting, insomnia, or any genetic illness at all.

Removal isn't necessary, just learning what tends to correlate with what in a systemic sense will offer enough of a relief to make cognitive therapy more effective. Just the fact that this conversation is going to come across as "airy fairy" is enough of an indication as to how people view anything emotional, mental or psychological - but people understanding their emotional states would go quite far.

It's odd, but everybody thinks that just by virtue of being human beings they somehow understand the nature of human beings, or themselves. Sad fact is, most people don't know why the **** they think or do the things they do, because few people bother with trying to develop any insight into themselves or others. But this isn't something that could be solved in a decade, or in a generation. In regard to the discussion about guns, dealing with the external aspects such as the weapons themselves is really the only way to go about it with the way society is structured at the moment.

Emotional and psychological health is such a peripheral topic. I'll try and find them but I remember coming across some studies that showed the monetary cost for society of different illnesses. Number 1 and 2 were heart disease and cancer respectively, and number 3 was mood disorders. Just in terms of what it costs a society to deal with. Ironic that something would be the third most costly for a community to deal with, but ends up being completely erased from the discussion.
 
You're absolutely right. I've dealt with all kinds of **** from people over my mental health troubles over the years. You wouldn't believe the number of people in my life that have told me to just get over it. If we can't stop the crazies from getting guns, we can help the crazies be less crazy.

It's one of the last remaining prejudices that people actively support. Civil rights? Taken for granted. Gay rights? For sure. Gender equality? Busy progressing as we speak. Mental health discussion and acceptance? **** that.
 
When I hear people claiming that in one of these mass shooting situations they would take out the bad guy easy I laugh. Some people think shooting at a gun range on the weekend makes them prepared to deal with the mass confusion and chaos of these situations.

I'm willing to bet half these John Wayne wannabes would kill more innocent civilians than the shooter do.
Seriously. It won't be like a video game. And when the police/SWAT team DO arrive, how the hell are they going to tell who's the bad guy with a gun and a good guy with a gun?

You're absolutely right. I've dealt with all kinds of **** from people over my mental health troubles over the years. You wouldn't believe the number of people in my life that have told me to just get over it. If we can't stop the crazies from getting guns, we can help the crazies be less crazy.
It's awful, but every time we blame a (white male) terrorist's "mental illness" for his actions, it gets even worse. Being bipolar or depressed doesn't make you a hateful misogynist. Gimme a break.

But I also think that there should psychiatric tests before you're allowed to own a gun. Especially if you have a history of suicidal tendencies, alcoholism (like, if you're been arrested for it), or impulsive, dangerous actions (again, if you've been arrested for it).

I have a friend who has had depression all of her life, and I would not want her to have a gun. Not because she'd be a danger to others - she wouldn't hurt a fly. But because when she feels awful and like an utter failure late at night (which is pretty often, like, once every 2 weeks...at least this is when she texts me saying she might as well kill herself, so she might actually think it to herself even more often), she might reach for that gun instead of getting some sleep to feel better and more coherent in the morning.

Indeed, people who own guns are 3x more likely to commit suicide.
 
Rick Perry is saying that if other peopl in the theater had had guns this wouldnt have happened and that more people should be carrying guns to theaters.*smh*

Im sure more people shooting a gun in a crowded dark room would have saved everyone.:o
 
Only a complete idiot would claim everyone having a gun would result in less gun violence. Rick Perry is proof of that.

That plus as Anita said, how would the police know which gun-toting maniac is the one who pulled their gun first and opened fire?
 
I will admit I don't have the perfect solution and I too am afraid of everyone carrying (because I hate guns), but shooters don't usually target areas where people are packing heat (schools, malls, theaters). They choose those areas for a reason. So, people having guns in theaters is probably not ideal, but it would likely deter...so he's partially right.
 
Shooters are not stupid, they meticulously plan as you said. They know spots where people are more, for lack of a better term, liberal and not likely to be packing. They won't go to say, the hood or to a biker bar where they know a few guys probably have heat.
 
Shooters are not stupid, they meticulously plan as you said. They know spots where people are more, for lack of a better term, liberal and not likely to be packing. They won't go to say, the hood or to a biker bar where they know a few guys probably have heat.
I don't think it's merely because of the presence of guns, but also because they're not angry at those people. This guy hated women, so he went to a place where he knew there would be a lot of women.
 
Shooters are not stupid, they meticulously plan as you said. They know spots where people are more, for lack of a better term, liberal and not likely to be packing. They won't go to say, the hood or to a biker bar where they know a few guys probably have heat.

Yeah, but the shooters usually tend to kill themselves once they do enough damage and/or know they're able to get caught/hurt/killed. These people are basically suicide bombers, they're not afraid to die, they just want to take as many random innocent people with them. So everyone has a gun, shooter starts shooting, kills or injuries at least a few people before the "good guys" start firing back. I'm betting the "good guys" hurt or kill a few more innocents as well before getting what he wants, death.
 
The idea of sitting in a darkened cinema, surrounded by excitable morons with guns, troubles me.
 
So the solution is people who are poorly, if at all, trained should carry a gun around in the off chance someone might decide to shoot up the place they are in? And everyone else with a gun will know just which person with the gun drawn to shoot, right?
 
So the solution is people who are poorly, if at all, trained should carry a gun around in the off chance someone might decide to shoot up the place they are in? And everyone else with a gun will know just which person with the gun drawn to shoot, right?

Perry's armed Lord and Savior will guide their hands and make their aim true.:o
 
"Shoot them all, let God sort them out" isn't the kind of answer we need.
 
So the solution is people who are poorly, if at all, trained should carry a gun around in the off chance someone might decide to shoot up the place they are in? And everyone else with a gun will know just which person with the gun drawn to shoot, right?
I'd bet a significant amount of money that even highly-trained military would rather NOT use their weapons in a panicked crowd of people. :o

Yes, knowing that anyone (or most people) might be packing MIGHT be a deterrent for some would-be mass shooters, but they have different goals than the civilian population. Some, like amazingfantasy15 mentioned, are essentially on suicide missions, so they don't care if they die in the process. People around them having guns wouldn't deter them, and then that would result in the mess that we're now discussing.

For the civilian population, our goal is to minimize as many innocent casualties as possible. Having a bunch of people carry loaded guns everywhere they go, and trust them to magically become sharpshooters who can identify the bad guys when people are running and screaming, just doesn't make sense.
 
Are you saying that the lightgun games in the arcade lied to me? The innocent people aren't running crouched over towards me and the bad guys don't stand there in plain view with sunglasses and take a minute aiming at you before firing? :o
 
Didn't some towns even in the mythic Wild West require folks to leave their shootin' irons at the gate?

I suppose that would be a "liberal fascist" idea, nowadays.
 
It's awful, but every time we blame a (white male) terrorist's "mental illness" for his actions, it gets even worse. Being bipolar or depressed doesn't make you a hateful misogynist. Gimme a break.

But I also think that there should psychiatric tests before you're allowed to own a gun. Especially if you have a history of suicidal tendencies, alcoholism (like, if you're been arrested for it), or impulsive, dangerous actions (again, if you've been arrested for it).

I have a friend who has had depression all of her life, and I would not want her to have a gun. Not because she'd be a danger to others - she wouldn't hurt a fly. But because when she feels awful and like an utter failure late at night (which is pretty often, like, once every 2 weeks...at least this is when she texts me saying she might as well kill herself, so she might actually think it to herself even more often), she might reach for that gun instead of getting some sleep to feel better and more coherent in the morning.

Indeed, people who own guns are 3x more likely to commit suicide.

In this instance I agree that labeling this dude mentally ill because he was hateful is wrong. Same with the South Carolina shootings. But James Holmes is absolutely mentally insane. I have no doubts there.
 
Didn't some towns even in the mythic Wild West require folks to leave their shootin' irons at the gate?

I suppose that would be a "liberal fascist" idea, nowadays.

Yeah even the Western territories and towns werent this devoid of common sense.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"