IGX

Eliminating celebrityhood for mass shooters is the right call.

Laws, culture, and money all work to make changes. Maybe a campaign needs to be done to boycott media outlets that report certain details on mass shooters.

Bram wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 8:33 pm Eliminating celebrityhood for mass shooters is the right call.

With the Internet, he not be talked about in mass media (he isn’t) and yet be a rock star in the subculture on some corner of the internet. Literally celebrated.

This is a great read on the subject.

https://www.center4research.org/copy-cats-kill/

"Dr. Adam Lankford of the University of Alabama has conducted several key studies of the media coverage of mass shootings and the motivations of the shooters. For example, he found that between 2010 and 2017, some mass shooters got more media attention in the month following the attack than the most famous celebrities, such as Brad Pitt.[7] In the months following a shooting, the shooters continued to get more attention than professional athletes and only slightly less than film and TV stars.[7] Other researchers have found that the more people who are killed in mass shootings, the more media coverage of the shooters and the event, in terms of front-page coverage, photos and information about the shooters, size of the photos of the shooters, and number and length of the articles about the shootings.[14, 15]

"Lankford also studied 24 mass shooters who openly admitted they wanted fame or contacted the media directly to get it.[7] Studies of mass shooters that are based on available documentation and interviews found that many had narcissistic personalities that crave fame and attention;[16] narcissistic personality disorder is often not considered a mental illness."

Here's a study on the increased risk of copy-cats after a mass shooting:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26135941/

Here is one organization combating it:

https://www.dontnamethem.org/

And another:

https://nonotoriety.com/

Here's a study that shows state and federal assault weapons bans decrease mass shootings:

"It was found that both state and federal assault weapons bans have statistically significant and negative effects on mass shooting fatalities but that only the federal assault weapons ban had a negative effect on mass shooting injuries"

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _shootings

nafod wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 4:29 pm

Gene wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 3:07 pm Making anti-heroes out of mass shooters inspires other losers to get a little fame. A few are bullied - as if Prison is less bullying than highschool?

Pretty sure the majority end up dead, but their own hand or death by cop. Prison not an issue.

A lot of them are kids that the anti-woke crowd wants to make sure they are still shunned, harassed, and bullied like the good old days. But give them a black rifle and some seal team six togs and they can be somebody, going out in a blaze of something.

I think we're both speculating, based upon our own life experiences. Both of us have achieved things in life by delaying gratification, discipline and getting tasks accomplished. I think that's true of everyone who comes here.

I think that it's a power trip, without consideration to the consequences.

Bram wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 4:36 am
"In looking at current research -- which the NRA stifled in America between 1996 and 2018 with the Dickey amendment -- the results seem to show that a country with less guns has less gun problems. And a country with more sweeping gun laws or gun reform has less gun problems, This seems like a self-evident truth.

Prohibition and the War on (some) Drugs showed that banning things that people want and consider harmless causes them to ignore the law. The more harmless or acceptable the item, the more that people ignore the law banning it. That's my street level analysis of it.

People have been using alcohol and marijuana for thousands of years. Most people can handle it. Banning them for the sake of morality? Failed. Banning other stuff, like heroin or automatic firearms? A lot easier. Nobody is buying full auto firearms at the gun store for this reason.

The US is a Republic with routine elections. Guns have been part of our culture for generations. The primary instrument of gun violence in the US are handguns. They are also very popular with gun owners. These will be tough to ban.

Most gun owners figure that they're not bothering anyone. The gun sits in storage. They don't connect the acts of random idiots. They resent being treated like anti-social people. Every time one of these damn events come up I figure here's some more Two Minute Hate.

Australia had a rural culture of gun ownership but it was not as prevalent in the US. Banning guns was much easier there. The Australian gun registry helped them a lot. Australia also has British style medical services that might treat mentally ill better than in the US. A lot of mentally ill in the US are poor, unable to hold down work and afford insurance. Australian medical services might remove that impediment. Mental health treatment that is more affordable might prevent mass shootings.

The Dickey Amendment was softened, not eliminated. This article was written by a former staff attorney for the Brady Center. He goes into detail about this amendment.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5993413/

The CDC is already on the case....

Firearm mortality lumps in suicides and accidental deaths...

Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island have the best death rate.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosm ... irearm.htm


If you examine the homicide mortality by State, things change....

Of the top five safest States four get failing grades from the Giffords Center.

New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Idaho and Massachusetts.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosm ... micide.htm


You cited Guis's studies here. A meta study by the Rand Corp states that

"Using a data set similar to that used in Gius (2015c), Luca, Malhotra, and Poliquin (2016) found uncertain effects of state assault weapon bans on the annual incidence of mass shootings. And Blau, Gorry, and Wade (2016) found that the bans significantly reduced the annual incidence of mass shootings. Considering our assessment of these findings and the relative strengths of these studies, we find inconclusive evidence for the effect of assault weapon bans on mass shootings."

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-polic ... tings.html


I think that as surveillance and AI become cheaper that we will find it easier to detect violent crime, to catch the people doing it, and to make court cases more certain. We will need firearms less and less. Certainty of punishment will discourage people from doing crime as a business decision.

Detecting mass shooters could also be easier. Gait analysis, social media posts, long distance scans for firearms. When all three pop up, the Police go to interview someone.

Whether this technology will be abused by Control Freaks who want to run everyone else's lives? I don't know.

Gene wrote: ↑Fri Jun 10, 2022 10:44 pm Guns have been part of our culture for generations. The primary instrument of gun violence in the US are handguns.

The gun culture thing, the basing of your identity of Who You Are on if you are “pro 2nd amendment” is a more recent thing. This idea of gun owning and patriotism being tightly coupled. The “gun lifestyle”.

Before, they were tools. Now they’re totems. The gun manufacturers are selling more than guns.

Bram wrote: ↑Fri Jun 10, 2022 2:15 pm Here's a study that shows state and federal assault weapons bans decrease mass shootings:

"It was found that both state and federal assault weapons bans have statistically significant and negative effects on mass shooting fatalities but that only the federal assault weapons ban had a negative effect on mass shooting injuries"

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _shootings

One of the issues with this study is still the definition it uses of mass shootings.

I. Introduction
According to a recent report prepared by the Congressional Research Service (Bjelopera et al., 2013), a public mass shooting has four distinct attributes:
(1) Occurred in a relatively public place.
(2) Involved four or more deaths – not including
the shooter.
(3) Victims were selected randomly.
(4) Shooting was not a means to a criminal end,
such as robbery or terrorism

nafod wrote: ↑Sat Jun 11, 2022 12:42 am

Gene wrote: ↑Fri Jun 10, 2022 10:44 pm Guns have been part of our culture for generations. The primary instrument of gun violence in the US are handguns.

The gun culture thing, the basing of your identity of Who You Are on if you are “pro 2nd amendment” is a more recent thing. This idea of gun owning and patriotism being tightly coupled. The “gun lifestyle”.

....because of gun control, especially on a Federal Level.

Before Wickard vs Filburn the US Congress had no direct control over guns. The Congress restricted some firearms in the NFA of 1934 through a special tax. Some of FDR's people want to add semi-automatics and handguns to the NFA roster but the votes were not there.

Depriving people of gun rights was normally a State thing. Often it was racist. The Turner Rebellion of 1848 inspired some States to ban the possession of any weapon by any black person, free or slave, punishable by immediate death. Other laws made gatherings of anyone black, free or slave, illegal unless a "white pastor" was running the gathering. A few legislatures made teaching slaves to read and write a crime.

The first cheap gun bans were in Georgia in the late 1800s, meant to disarm poor whites and blacks. The Sullivan Act was meant to disarm Italian immigrants who were shooting Irish Tammany Hall thugs. Gun control was to control "other people".

Ronald Reagan signed California gun laws in response to Black Panthers conducting armed patrols of their own neighborhoods and walking around with firearms. The waiting periods, the bans on public display, all were meant to keep "them" in line.

Things changed in 1968. By 1976 the NRA ILA was started. Carter started his low level ATF campaign against gun dealers. Abner Mikva and Amitai Etzioni drove it. The result of these abuses was Ronald Reagan and the FOPA of 1986.

If people are radical, it's because their opponents were radical and are radical.

""We'll take one step at a time, and the first is necessarily -given the political realities - very modest. We'll have to start working again to strengthen the law, and then again to strengthen the next law and again and again. Our ultimate goal, total control of hand guns, is going to take time. The first problem is to slow down production and sales. Next is to get registration. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and ammunition (with a few exceptions) totally illegal.""

Pete Shields, who along with CIA analysis Edwin O Welles, founded Handgun Control Inc.

nafod wrote: ↑Sat Jun 11, 2022 12:42 am

Gene wrote: ↑Fri Jun 10, 2022 10:44 pm Guns have been part of our culture for generations. The primary instrument of gun violence in the US are handguns.

Before, they were tools. Now they’re totems. The gun manufacturers are selling more than guns.

They were selling more than guns a century ago, Nafod.

More old ads that sold lifestyle/security/whatever....

Nafod is correct about some of his observations..... I suspect that Elitists created this idea of gun as totem... in order to create an "other" that needs disarmed. The idea that most or all people just viewed them as tools is false. If that were true then advertisements would compare the merits of the item, not the benefits.

Advertisements from long ago.... before Josh Sugarmann made the AR15 notorious it was just another rifle. At $189.50 per copy, I figure that this was a very long time ago. The AR15 was first sold in the mid 1960s.
Home security and safety.
Even ladies should use them....

Well of course advertisers were selling them by selling an attitude, you ever see the calendars for tools? Buy this wrench and maybe Miss November will not turn away when she sees you, you greasy handed slob.

None of those old ads were quite going full seal team six cosplay, or the old days variant of that.

Good posts, Gene

Sorry for not engaging in the last few responses, and appreciate you guys taking the time.

On vacation and am focusing on fitness/enjoy life stuff, will dive back in next week. But, a relative shared this story from her children's school today — and I thought it belonged here. She and her kids are very shaken up, but everyone did what they should have, took a threat seriously, and stopped a tragedy:

https://www.kirklandwa.gov/Whats-Happen ... &fs=e&s=cl

Bram wrote: ↑Tue Jun 14, 2022 5:06 am Sorry for not engaging in the last few responses, and appreciate you guys taking the time.

I was bereft. How, I asked myself between sobs, can this thread continue without Bram?

Maybe we should have more mass murders, or at least attempts. Bear with me on this. Suppose we were to have a day designated in advance for people to take their, can't help it folks, best shot. People could sack up and go for it, knowing that everyone would be waiting. Then we would give those folks the fame they crave, publish their manifesto, even give them a book deal with all royalties going to the victims or their families. Weak ass bitches who go for soft targets, or on other days, would get nothing but quiet contempt. Allow Twitch to live stream the rampages. Maybe have a dress code, like the guys who put on a red bandana to run amok.

It's like training animals. If you give them a place and time to do x behavior they'll be less antsy to do it the rest of the time.

Here's another idea. I was going to say it's more politically viable but considering the influence of the big media companies it's probably less likely: Ban coverage of mass murders and acts of terrorism. Allow a crawl at the bottom of the screen with the basics and that's all. It's not a First Amendment issue as I see it -- broadcasters in the U.S. are required to act in the public interest. They're already not allowed to show some things. Add coverage of mass murder and acts of terror to the list.

motherjuggs&speed wrote: ↑Tue Jun 14, 2022 8:40 am Here's another idea. I was going to say it's more politically viable but considering the influence of the big media companies it's probably less likely: Ban coverage of mass murders and acts of terrorism. Allow a crawl at the bottom of the screen with the basics and that's all. It's not a First Amendment issue as I see it -- broadcasters in the U.S. are required to act in the public interest. They're already not allowed to show some things. Add coverage of mass murder and acts of terror to the list.

You’d have to ban 4-Chan, 8-Chan, and all the other Chans and subreddits where the birds of a feather flock, and where such folk are celebrated.

nafod wrote: ↑Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:23 pm Well of course advertisers were selling them by selling an attitude, you ever see the calendars for tools? Buy this wrench and maybe Miss November will not turn away when she sees you, you greasy handed slob.

Advertising exists to convince someone to buy, based upon market surveys, customer letters and asking dealers what customers talk about. "Market Research" I think it's called.

All of these advertisements targeted what was considered legitimate needs - reliability, accuracy and self defense.


The tool calendars are a crude attempt to associate the thrill of looking at a partially clad woman with a trade mark. Maybe it's to soften the blow when the wrench monger's bill comes in.

nafod wrote: ↑Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:23 pm None of those old ads were quite going full seal team six cosplay, or the old days variant of that.

Well, there is that cowboy with the Tommy gun.... Really macho isn't it? Blasting away from the front porch..... standing and delivering fire from the hip. Master of his house, defending it from "marauders".

In reality, if he can hit anything.... at 1,500 rounds per minute that is two seconds of continuous fire on that fifty round drum. The firearm will climb and partially torque as he maintains fire. I don't see any extra drums. I don't see any tracer. I don't see any cover. The whole scene looks contrived to me, and pointless.

If he stuck to short bursts, from prone or kneeling, and was using his pointer finger on the front pistol grip to point at them. Might believe it.

Camper using a black plastic firearm... Gasoline lantern, commercial ammunition, low capacity magazine. Available from any registered Colt Dealer. Aside the people who consider hunting "blood sport" there isn't much of anything forbidden here. Still isn't for most people.

Bram wrote: ↑Tue Jun 14, 2022 5:06 am Sorry for not engaging in the last few responses, and appreciate you guys taking the time.

On vacation and am focusing on fitness/enjoy life stuff, will dive back in next week. But, a relative shared this story from her children's school today — and I thought it belonged here. She and her kids are very shaken up, but everyone did what they should have, took a threat seriously, and stopped a tragedy:

https://www.kirklandwa.gov/Whats-Happen ... &fs=e&s=cl

We hope so. I do anyhow.

I do hope that it was him. Sounds to me like a great way to jack someone up is to put such "threats" onto someone else's Instagram account, yes?

Was a Red Flag necessary? Sounds to me like Junior needed some quality time with a Mental Health professional.

One problem with gun control vs 2A discussions is people often use too many terms interchangeably. Definitions are important.

The FBI tracks Active Shooter or Active Killing events - not mass shootings.
Data for 2021 is https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/act ... 2.pdf/view
The FBI defines an active shooter as "one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area."
These are the highly publicized incidents:
* Schools like VA Tech, Oxford, Newtown, Parkland, Uvalde
* Churches like Sutherland Springs
* Businesses like the Pulse NightClub
* Events like the Las Vegas shooter.

Other organizations use their own methods and definitions for tracking other definitions of types of shootings:
* Mass Shooting - normally 4 or more people shot at one incident
* Mass Killing - 4 ore more people killed at one incident.
Mother Jones tracks mass shootings - https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... full-data/

Education Week tracks "school shootings". https://www.edweek.org/leadership/schoo ... re/2021/03
Their "school shootings" include things like:
* Four teens get into a fight in a parking lot outside of a nighttime basketball game - Now a school shooting.
* Stray bullet from two cars shooting at each other as they drive past a school injures student - school shooting
* Student shot and injured another after gun sale goes wrong
* Gunfire from abandoned house near school injures someone playing basketball in the parking lot.
* Adult man shot in a parking lot during high school basketball game.
* Plenty of other reports of exchanged gunfire in parking lots during football / basketball games.
* School employee shoots resource officer in scuffle
* Woman shoots son-in-law in a school parking lot
* Student being handcuffed by police in school bathroom has gun accidently discharge and police shoot him - school shooting
* Domestic shooting incident outside early learning center
* Police accidently shoot 8 year old girl outside a football game while responding to two teens shooting at each other

Most are not active killing events, at the scale of Uvalde, Parkland, Newtown, etc.

With all this said - Many but not all FBI Active shooter incidents are Mass Shootings. Only a small percentage of mass shootings are Active Shooter Incidents.

People need to decide what it is they actually want to stop, before throwing out ideas of what laws they want to enact.

Most Mass Shootings, well over half, are gang/drug/criminal activity related. The second highest number of mass shootings are domestic incidents.

Most mass shootings (over 60%) are done by a handgun.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/476 ... ypes-used/
Most firearm homicides are done with a handgun. According to the FBI, of 10,258 firearm deaths in 2019, 364 were from rifles.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/20 ... able-8.xls

It turns out that historically, most active shooter incidents also used handguns: VA-Tech, Oxford, are some notable ones. However, there is a rise in the use of what people call "assault weapons". Still, the majority are still done by handguns.

So after something as horrific as Uvalde happens, and all the Gun Control groups come out and say we should ban AR15's to stop mass shootings, that's like saying we should stop drunk driving by banning just Scotch; the majority of drunk drivers probably got drunk on something else. I mean, I believe more people die from auto-erotic asphyxiation per year than from being shot by an AR15.

Now let's talk Active Shooter Incidents like the FBI tracks.
The number of events in schools is actually pretty constant

* 2021 - 2
* 2020 - 0
* 2019 - 3
* 2018 - 5
* 2016 & 2017 - 7
* 2014-2015 - 6

Most active shootings occur at businesses, and that is primarily where the growth in the number of active shooter events has taken place.
2021 had 28 active shooter events in businesses open to the public while the average from 2014-2019 was 7.16/year. This may be an indicator for those that choose to legally carry, to do so when out and about.

Interestingly - active shooter incidents in churches is actually lower than schools - of course many churches have an armed security team. I know my church does.
* 2021 - 1
*2020 - 0
* 2019 - 2
* 2018 - 1
* 2016&2017 - 2
* 2014&2015 - 2

So:
Want to stop active shootings at schools (like Parkland and Uvalde)?
We already know how to. Literally two weeks after Uvalde, a school resource officer shot and killed someone trying to break into the school when kids were there. https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/09/us/alaba ... index.html
You have to have security procedures, and they have to be followed. If that were the case, the shooter may not have gotten into Uvalde.
Like churches, which have been successful with armed volunteer security, allow those teachers/admin/custodians/coaches that want to carry, and get some training, do so.

Want to stop school shootings? Like all the ones listed by Ed Week in the link earlier.
Cancel all sports. The majority of shootings occur at, near, or during some sporting event.
Get rid of all crack houses that are within 1/2 mile of schools.

Want to stop active shooters in churches?
It's in progress. In the last five years since Sutherland Springs, a whole cottage industry has been created for training and forming church security teams.

Want to stop other active shooter incidents?
I'm not sure you can. They are done by people going crazy, and you can't legislate when someone will just snap and go off the reservation.

Want to stop mass shootings?
Most are drug/crime/gang related. Fix that problem.
Second, provide help for people in domestic situations.

Want to reduce deaths by firearms?
Start with mental health. Still over 60% of firearm deaths are suicide. Mental health reform may help those contemplating suicide, or doing something drastic to their family, or snapping and going on an active shooter binge. The suburban Karen's from Moms Demand will carry a sign saying to ban AR15's, but not a sign saying we need mental health reform. If they were really about saving the most lives, they'd start there.

Banning AR15's makes no sense. It's a double edged sword. That which makes it an easy tool to use in an active shooting, is the exact same thing that makes it easy for someone like my spouse to use. She doesn't shoot often, and doesn't like guns much, but she can put a 10 round group into the size of my hand at the length of my yard. And if she had to defend herself, I would want her to use the tool that is easier for her to handle, manage, and shoot accurately. That's just responsible gun ownership.

nafod wrote: ↑Fri Jun 10, 2022 10:54 am Banning AR15's makes no sense.

There are some 80,000+ elementary schools in the US with over 25,000,000 kids in them.

Probably all of them practice active shooter drills, with kids hiding under desks, running to closets, practicing sneaking out the windows while someone invariably with an AR15 hunts them down. They all wonder if today is their day to be unlucky.

25,000,000 children

It’s not just the body count

Fear is the desired outcome, for shooters and the government both. It's a sinister bargain between the media, the government, and their (usually) unaffiliated stooges who think they're acting out. I mean they are, but in a way the PIC want.

Fear is a great outcome, but death is better. Seems like fear is powerful either way.

motherjuggs&speed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 18, 2022 8:52 am Fear is the desired outcome…It's a sinister bargain between the media, the government, and their (usually) unaffiliated stooges…

Follow the money.

Fear sells guns, which creates more fear, which sells more guns.

Who benefits financially from that spiral the most?

nafod wrote: ↑Fri Jun 17, 2022 7:18 pm
There are some 80,000+ elementary schools in the US with over 25,000,000 kids in them.

Probably all of them practice active shooter drills, with kids hiding under desks, running to closets, practicing sneaking out the windows while someone invariably with an AR15 hunts them down. They all wonder if today is their day to be unlucky.

25,000,000 children

It’s not just the body count

This brings up an important point - I think we can make a case that active shooter drills in young grades are borderline evil on what it does to many of them in the long run.

Even gun control groups like Moms Demand Action are coming out and saying the drills may cause more damage than any good they do.
https://momsdemandaction.org/new-study- ... or-months/

You said it yourself, there are 80,000+ elementary schools with 25,000,000 kids. The chances of being injured or killed during an active shooter event, while in school, is very very very small. More kids die each year on the way to or from school than from an active shooter at school.

I personally know people that tell me their kids are scared of an "intruder" at home because of the drills they do at school. If a kid is scared at home because of active shooter drills at school, that's a failure on the school and the parents.
I think making thousands or even millions of kids anxious, and fueling that anxiety and depression over the years only helps to create depressed, potentially suicidal kids. It may even help create the next wave of future school shooters; who are trained and know exactly what the school will do during an active shooter event.

Yeah, good point, I am sure it wigs kids out to have to do them. I remember our duck and cover drills in elementary school, the rooms to go to for fallout shelters, etc. It looms.

But the drills worked in Uvalde and in other shootings. While the one room was turned into a charnel house for children, the kids and teachers in other rooms did things right and likely saved a lot of lives. The shooter did not run out of ammo. Even in the shooter’s room, the kids knew to play dead and to try to tell 911 where the shooter was. The training worked.