Mass shooting at Naval Yard in Washington DC

[Siby]

Before someone says it is "reactionary" to call for gun control after a tragedy is wrong. Maybe it was reactionary the first few times but the growing empirical evidence for gun violence is overwhelming.

I agree that guns don't kill people, people use guns to kill people. Crazy people are using guns to kill people! Society must come to terms with the fact that there needs to be greater control of guns so people don't do stuff like this.

Guns are designed for a singular purpose...to kill. In modern society it seems like insanity to not regulate such a tool. When people use other tools to mass murder people then we can debate that then but currently guns are at the core of the problem.

A sad day for all.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Before someone says it is "reactionary" to call for gun control after a tragedy is wrong. Maybe it was reactionary the first few times but the growing empirical evidence for gun violence is overwhelming.

I agree that guns don't kill people, people use guns to kill people. Crazy people are using guns to kill people! Society must come to terms with the fact that there needs to be greater control of guns so people don't do stuff like this.

Guns are designed for a singular purpose...to kill. In modern society it seems like insanity to not regulate such a tool. When people use other tools to mass murder people then we can debate that then but currently guns are at the core of the problem.

A sad day for all.

I'd actually say violent behavior is more the root cause than just guns. American society as whole is doing a pretty piss poor job at caring for one another and preventing people from turning to violence as a solution in the first place. Seems like people are still so fixated on the guns but not on the larger societal, economic, and mental problems affecting the population that are causing these violent outbursts.

If you want to believe statistics, gun crime has actually been going down over the past 20 or so years, not up like most are thinking.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/07/nation/la-na-nn-gun-crimes-pew-report-20130507

 

[Xeno]

No, mass shootings are not becoming more common place and definitely not normalized. The media hype and promotion of them however is another story. If there is one thing the news loves, it's a tragedy to exploit and mass fear to propagate and glamorize.

Media hype isn't the problem here. When a large number of people are murdered at once it's going to be a big story because it should be. Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Reading reports that say surveillance video is showing he entered with only a shotgun but ended up taking a handgun and rifle from responding officers he shot.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Media hype sucks and nobody should be running scared because of it but the mass shootings are still a problem. The media overhyping things don't make mass shootings any less of a real issue.

 

[Siby]

I'd actually say violent behavior is more the root cause than just guns. American society as whole is doing a pretty piss poor job at caring for one another and preventing people from turning to violence as a solution in the first place. Seems like people are still so fixated on the guns but not on the larger societal, economic, and mental problems affecting the population that are causing these violent outbursts.

If you want to believe statistics, gun crime has actually been going down over the past 20 or so years, not up like most are thinking.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/07/nation/la-na-nn-gun-crimes-pew-report-20130507

I totally agree on all your points about behavior, mental illness, society, and economics but we can't fix the American psyche overnight. That is a problem 50 years in the making when we closed down our mental illness facilities (but that is another debate).

What we can fix right away and easily is the ability of the mentally ill to create mass carnage. And that is by limiting the types of guns in our society, and a heavily regulated process in owning guns. By removing instruments of mass killing we can control the carnage these people can cause.

There will always be people that kill other people. We can recognize that and take measure to limit their means to killing. It would be a lot harder to have mass killings with a bow, a knife, than is possible with a gun.

 

[Teelie]

Mass shootings are a real issue but the media gorges on it makes them appear more common than they truly are. While there has been a decline in shootings overall there's been an increase in the media reporting of them giving this impression they are more common place and normalizing it.

Report and normalize a behavior long enough and people become indifferent to it, desensitized which ironically the media harps on about in regards to violent video games (you knew that was coming).

What I mean is the news media profits off them in how they report it. And they make it more attractive to those who may be looking for publicity. It gives rise to false impressions which do not help anything and only further divide the public.

I definitely think guns need more reasonable laws and control, starting with a thorough background check and rigorous training in the use of any gun that's being purchased.

 

[regwec]

I don't know why you think weapons training is a solution. As I understand it, the problem is nit unsafe handling, but the fact that people who want to use guns to kill can easily acquire them.

 

[Teelie]

Handling weapons is actually important when you consider it this way:
If you have to learn how to handle the weapon, you're less likely to accidently shoot someone, the wrong person, or to shoot yourself or accidently fire off your gun.
It also means that if you must shoot someone you're more likely to hit your target.
Having to learn how to use a gun will also thin out those who just want to own a gun but never use it or use it properly. How many homeowners get shot with their own weapon? A weapon they probably can't use, don't know how to handle and are afraid to fire in self defense?

That goes hand in hand with the background check for mental health. Someone who has violent tendencies or a history of dangerous behavior would be excluded from owning a weapon, leaving those mentally capable and properly trained to possess a weapon.

There is no one solution. You can't make guns illegal. It will never happen. You can't expect everyone to own a weapon and properly use it either. You just end up with a lot of untrained, dangerously armed people running around popping off shots wildly hitting who knows who.

Mutli-step solutions which make compromises on all sides are the only way this can be addressed.

 

[Spider-X]

I would argue that the media does not pick and choose about giving mass shootings attention...if a mass shooting happens, no matter where in the US is, it makes the news because it's a freaking mass shooting.

I believe that media over sensationalism is an actual problem in many instances, but when it comes to major events like this, you can bet your ass they will cover it, as they should.

And gun violence should get a ton of coverage...it's a major problem that seems to be avoidable in many instances, but our politicians don't seem to have the balls or the moral fiber to do something widespread and meaningful enough about it.

 

[TheDreamMaster]

Media hype isn't the problem here. When a large number of people are murdered at once it's going to be a big story because it should be. Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.

Initial media hype is ok. They need to get the story out there. But until new developments come up, give it until tonight and they'll move to the factors that influenced this. Then they'll move to the mental health issue. Finally they'll end on guns and we'll be debating stricter gun laws and eventually there won't be any coverage on the victims and whatnot until new info comes to life. Then they'll paste the gunman and his accomplices all over and give them all the attention they want.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Most mass shootings are the result of changes in someones anti-depressant dosage.

So I wouldn't say easy gun access is the direct cause.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I don't want to know what the shooters name was or what he or she looks like.

But I do want to know what belief, medication, or mental illness spurred the attack.

 

[Teelie]

I would argue that the media does not pick and choose about giving mass shootings attention...if a mass shooting happens, no matter where in the US is, it makes the news because it's a freaking mass shooting.

I believe that media over sensationalism is an actual problem in many instances, but when it comes to major events like this, you can bet your ass they will cover it, as they should.

And gun violence should get a ton of coverage...it's a major problem that seems to be avoidable in many instances, but our politicians don't seem to have the balls or the moral fiber to do something widespread and meaningful enough about it.

What happens is a shooting occurs. Then the media jumps all over it. They report on it incessantly. They speculate wildly, give out inaccurate, false or just plain made up lies by people who want their 5 minutes on television further diluting the actual incident. Innocent people get blamed, people who died are said to be alive, people who are alive are said to be dead. The whole thing is just a hairball of poor reporting.

Then you cannot avoid talk of it. It becomes so overwhelming it turns some people indifferent to them or tired of hearing about it. You get comments like "yet another mass shooting" like these things happen every week and those who keep obsessing over it keep talking while those who no longer want to know about it keep getting frustrated and angry at those who can't stop talking. And that talk is 99% unproductive. It does nothing but counterproduction. Opinions become intrenched and those who want to see change invariably push too far one way or another.

When that happens the impact is lessened and when it is lessened people care less about them and when people care less, nothing is done.

So no, I don't jump on a bandwagon of ban all guns and I don't jump on a bandwagon of keep all guns legal and easily accessible. You cannot have either end of this argument but those on either side refuse to budge because both sides see it as an attack on them, and the media is all too happy to keep reporting both sides of it in as sensational and hyperbolic a manner as possible.

Take out the sensationalism, the knee-jerk reactions, the unreasonable demands and what you have left is a middle ground where both sides can find a solution.

One thing that this will not change however is if someone goes on a mass shooting. For what reason they do it, they will always be able to get access to a weapon. Banning guns will not do it. Every "war on whatever" should plainly prove that one's impossible. At the same time a bunch of armed people is more likely to confuse the other armed people as the shooter and make even more bodies on the ground.

So instead of proudly yelling how your be-all-end-all solution is the right one, it's not. It's not a simple fix and it never will be.

 

[Quasimod0]

Oh man. My prayers go out to the families of those killed.

 

[Quasimod0]

What happens is a shooting occurs. Then the media jumps all over it. They report on it incessantly. They speculate wildly, give out inaccurate, false or just plain made up lies by people who want their 5 minutes on television further diluting the actual incident. Innocent people get blamed, people who died are said to be alive, people who are alive are said to be dead. The whole thing is just a hairball of poor reporting.

Then you cannot avoid talk of it. It becomes so overwhelming it turns some people indifferent to them or tired of hearing about it. You get comments like "yet another mass shooting" like these things happen every week and those who keep obsessing over it keep talking while those who no longer want to know about it keep getting frustrated and angry at those who can't stop talking. And that talk is 99% unproductive. It does nothing but counterproduction. Opinions become intrenched and those who want to see change invariably push too far one way or another.

When that happens the impact is lessened and when it is lessened people care less about them and when people care less, nothing is done.

So no, I don't jump on a bandwagon of ban all guns and I don't jump on a bandwagon of keep all guns legal and easily accessible. You cannot have either end of this argument but those on either side refuse to budge because both sides see it as an attack on them, and the media is all too happy to keep reporting both sides of it in as sensational and hyperbolic a manner as possible.

Take out the sensationalism, the knee-jerk reactions, the unreasonable demands and what you have left is a middle ground where both sides can find a solution.

One thing that this will not change however is if someone goes on a mass shooting. For what reason they do it, they will always be able to get access to a weapon. Banning guns will not do it. Every "war on whatever" should plainly prove that one's impossible. At the same time a bunch of armed people is more likely to confuse the other armed people as the shooter and make even more bodies on the ground.

So instead of proudly yelling how your be-all-end-all solution is the right one, it's not. It's not a simple fix and it never will be.

That was a good post. Well said.

 

[Cosmic]

Alexis was arrested in Seattle in 2004 for shooting someone's tires? But nothing came of it because the paperwork got lost? This is what I'm reading. Maybe if the person in charge of that case would've done their job correctly, then it could've become a topic for consideration when he later tried to enlist in the Navy, and later still, when he tried to purchase a gun.

I'm guessing here, but he probably went to Captain's Mast and got handed a Non-Judicial Punishment in 2010 after getting arrested for accidentally firing his pistol while cleaning it in his apartment. Did he get forced out of the service at that point? Denied reenlistment? Other-than-honorable discharge?

Maybe if someone would've paid a little closer attention to this guy, then they could've raised a red flag, resulting in him being led to a different outcome.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Has it been confirmed there was only one shooter?

I thought there was talk of 2 or 3 shooters.

 

[Cosmic]

They're looking for another possible suspect, but there isn't much information. They might want to avoid starting a manhunt for someone who doesn't exist, or for someone who is innocent.

 

[Teelie]

There may be a second shooter or a third or no others at all. It appears there are two shooters. A third person was suspected but later cleared of any involvement whatsoever.

Part of my problem with the instant reporting. We get unconfirmed news that only confuses the public and makes the situation all the more demanding on those responders who are already there trying to do their jobs without being pressured to do it even faster.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2422616/Aaron-Alexis-identified-DC-Navy-Yard-shooter.html

 

[tzarinna]

No other suspects, thankfully. It was pretty surreal going to work this afternoon.

I've been a contractor and did some electrical work and I had my sons 2nd b-day party at the Naval Museum on that base. It's a pretty chill place, now it's tainted.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

Ptsd

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Ptsd

Was that confirmed?

What terrible things could he have seen as an electrician on a Navy ship?

 

[Tanin]

Was that confirmed?

What terrible things could he have seen as an electrician on a Navy ship?

From the Mail article:
The same documents from his 2004 arrest in Seattle show that Alexis said he had 'been present' during the September 11th attacks.

'Those events disturbed him,' the police documents said and his father told police that his son had experienced rage issues and blamed his experience of 9/11 for causing his post traumatic stress disorder.