Do mentally healthy people commit mass murder?

[NiftyNiblick]

Wanting to delete detested individuals from the planet is perfectly normal.

Everybody is not equally adept at discerning the odds of pulling it off without consequence.

The mass murder of strangers isn't perfectly normal, however, for anybody but Americans.
We own the mass shooting massacre. The entire planet recognizes that.
It's normal for us, we do it routinely, and the odds of our stopping aren't even worth calculating.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Assault weapons make mass shootings much more deadly and it appears it may make them more likely.

From 1982-1994 there were 156 people killed in mass shootings. 19 shootings
During the 10 years that the assault weapon ban was in place, 1994-2004 there were 101 people killed in mass shootings. - 16 shootings
In the 18 years since the assault weapons ban expired, 782 people have died in mass shootings. - 94 shootings

Sorry to burst your bubble but there's a lot of dangerous things in the world....mostly caused by stupid leaders leading stupid people to do stupid things.

Yes, I understand the Democratic Party agenda to Helicopter Mother 330M Americans. I disagree with their ideology. Sorry.

Better mental health screening and care is my recommended solution; it preserves freedom and helps those in need.

 

[Rune]

Assault weapons make mass shootings much more deadly and it appears it may make them more likely.

From 1982-1994 there were 156 people killed in mass shootings. 19 shootings
During the 10 years that the assault weapon ban was in place, 1994-2004 there were 101 people killed in mass shootings. - 16 shootings
In the 18 years since the assault weapons ban expired, 782 people have died in mass shootings. - 94 shootings

Sorry but the math fails to average when one shooting alone kills 40 people.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Wanting to delete detested individuals from the planet is perfectly normal.

Everybody is not equally adept at discerning the odds of pulling it off without consequence.

The mass murder of strangers isn't perfectly normal, however, for anybody but Americans.
We own the mass shooting massacre. The entire planet recognizes that.
It's normal for us, we do it routinely, and the odds of our stopping aren't even worth calculating.

For Boston Bluebellies, but not any civilized people.

The gang-bangers are trying to calculate the odds. Same for other criminals, but the "mass shooters" of schools and supermarkets are simply committing suicide and choosing to go out with a literal BANG. If they can't use guns, they'll use bombs or "ramming speed" with their deathmobiles. They're cray-cray.

 

[Life is Golden]

True. Do you see the inequity of banning something from innocent, law-biding American citizens for the actions of a few? Every single one of those mass shooters with an AR was/is a nutjob. Notice that every single one of them is either dead or tried to commit suicide.

No sane person commits mass murder much less have suicide as their final act on Earth. So what is the real problem here? Guns or a nation which doesn't give a shit about mental illness?

Mental illness covers a vast array of conditions. There really is nothing anyone can do.

 

[Bigdog]

My guess is that, like Chicago, it's due to the fact they can't fix their gang-banger problem. There's no gang-bangers around where I live yet the Gun Grabbers still want to apply their One-Size-Fits-All solution to social controls.

And all the major gangs are RACISTS, they define themselves by skin color. I guess that's why white libs support their proliferation.

 

[Bigdog]

The disparity is explained in the description of the data sources. Something you clearly are incapable of understanding.
Your first source only lists mass shootings from 2013- August of 2019. It defines a mass shooting as any one incident in which 4 or more people were killed or injured. The article's title doesn't reflect what the actual data is.
Your second source lists mass murders from guns from 1982-May 2022. It defines a mass shooting as any incident in which 4 or more people were killed. They don't reveal where the data came from and who collected it. (Interesting that the Texas numbers haven't gone up since the shooting of five members of the family in Texas.)

A search of mass shootings from 1982-2022 reveals the data Statista is using is the database compiled by Mother Jones. It can be found here:
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

Well, you're still dead no matter who shoots you, or who decides what is random and what is intentional.

And no matter how you count them, Anti Gun Calif is still number 1 in mass shootings.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Mental illness covers a vast array of conditions. There really is nothing anyone can do.

Yes it does. Disagreed. Just like there are numerous physical ailments, some curable and some treatable, mental illness works the same way.

Also like physical ailments, the sooner it's caught and treated the better regardless if it's fully cured or simply treatable.

Another factor to consider is putting more research into better medications that more specifically target the condition. The best combinations for recovery or treatment is to combine therapy with, if needed, medication. Some conditions are treatable with group sessions. PTSD victims and survivors find better support and recovery in groups than individual therapy.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

And all the major gangs are RACISTS, they define themselves by skin color. I guess that's why white libs support their proliferation.

Ahh, you started off sounding sane then ended with a RW nutjob finish. Sad.

The bottom line is that gangs are a city or a state problem. Trying to pass one-size-fits-all laws that take away the rights of innocent Americans outside of cities is wrong.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Ahh, you started off sounding sane then ended with a RW nutjob finish. Sad.

The bottom line is that gangs are a city or a state problem. Trying to pass one-size-fits-all laws that take away the rights of innocent Americans outside of cities is wrong.

Gangs very often work via international networks....they are thus a national problem and an international problem.

R U Actually this stupid?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Gangs very often work via international networks....they are thus a national problem and an international problem.

R U Actually this stupid?

Underground criminal networks are nothing new. We, the People didn't create the Mafia with Prohibition, but we did give it the financial boost to turn small Italian gangs into a national empire.

No. Are you?

 

[Bigdog]

Ahh, you started off sounding sane then ended with a RW nutjob finish. Sad.

The bottom line is that gangs are a city or a state problem. Trying to pass one-size-fits-all laws that take away the rights of innocent Americans outside of cities is wrong.

MS13 is flooding across our Southern border thanks to white libs. Racist gangs flourish in Dem run cities, thanks to white libs.

The White lib argument for gun confiscation from law abiding citizens, especially Blacks, is that other States supply the guns to the Dems in the cities.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

MS13 is flooding across our Southern border thanks to white libs. Racist gangs flourish in Dem run cities, thanks to white libs.

The White lib argument for gun confiscation from law abiding citizens, especially Blacks, is that other States supply the guns to the Dems in the cities.

Your hyperbole is emotionally based, not logically based. It makes you look no better than the LW wackadoodles.

They're pissing up a rope if they believe they can reinstate Clinton's gun ban. There's a reason 70% of American voters refuse to join the Democratic Party.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

 

[Bigdog]

Your hyperbole is emotionally based, not logically based. It makes you look no better than the LW wackadoodles.

They're pissing up a rope if they believe they can reinstate Clinton's gun ban. There's a reason 70% of American voters refuse to join the Democratic Party.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

Cracka pleez

The white lib Dems have been anti gun for decades and now hold the WH, and both chambers of congress. Wake up!

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The mentally stable ones become serial killers...

 

[Lightbringer]

Do mentally healthy people commit mass murder?

I guess that depends on how far they're pushed.

 

[gemini104104]

All welcome except LurchAddams.

Well if that be the case and by all indications, it was and is the grotesque influence of tRump, the NRA and brazenly seditious repukes who enhanced the tendences of domestic terrorists to engage in crimes against humanity as their combined conspiracy to destroy democracy from within and anything else of a civilized nature on Earth. It is what it is.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

.....but the "mass shooters" of schools and supermarkets are simply committing suicide and choosing to go out with a literal BANG. If they can't use guns, they'll use bombs or "ramming speed" with their deathmobiles. They're cray-cray.

I agree with this part. Guns just make it easier, but should normal people be restricted to contain the crazy ones? I don't think so.

Still, I know all too much about M16s (AR-15s to civilians).
They were never meant for civilian use. I own several sporting arms and none are similar to M-16s.

For one thing, the bullet itself is too small to be a humane deer rifle--you know that--
and the magazine is too big for the rifle not to be anything but an obvious OFFENSIVE weapon.

The real problem comes in the forms of past catastrophic mistakes.
There are so many out there now that what can you do?

We'll doubtlessly disagree, but I've no problem with confiscating them--ONLY if actually true monetary value is given by the government.
As a taxpayer, I'd be willing to foot that bill.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I agree with this part. Guns just make it easier, but should normal people be restricted to contain the crazy ones? I don't think so.

Still, I know all too much about M16s (AR-15s to civilians).
They were never meant for civilian use. I own several sporting arms and none are similar to M-16s.

For one thing, the bullet itself is too small to be a humane deer rifle--you know that--
and the magazine is too big for the rifle not to be anything but an obvious OFFENSIVE weapon.

The real problem comes in the forms of past catastrophic mistakes.
There are so many out there now that what can you do?

We'll doubtlessly disagree, but I've no problem with confiscating them--ONLY if actually true monetary value is given by the government.
As a taxpayer, I'd be willing to foot that bill.

An AR-15 is not an M-16. I wish it was but it ain't.

While that used to be true about the 5.56mm, modern loads and bullets have made it an effective deer hunting rifle. Still, I prefer .30 or larger for hunting.

Sorry, Nib, but your argument is like complaining that Twitter is too fast because of all the hate it spreads. You'd be blaming Twitter instead of the asshole sending the Tweets.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

An AR-15 is not an M-16. I wish it was but it ain't.

While that used to be true about the 5.56mm, modern loads and bullets have made it an effective deer hunting rifle. Still, I prefer .30 or larger for hunting.

Sorry, Nib, but your argument is like complaining that Twitter is too fast because of all the hate it spreads. You'd be blaming Twitter instead of the asshole sending the Tweets.

The three-shot burst feature, if I remember correctly? No big deal. Not a good gun according to what I like, and also a jammer.

5.56 mm is fully jacketed and thus illegal for deer hunting.
I was talking about the .223 Remington civilian round.
If I hunted deer, which, since I won't eat it, I'm certainly not going to hent it, I wouldn't even dream of using a .223 in any rifle.

My least fancy gun--I still have it but haven't fired it in many years-- is a Ruger .44 magnum carbine. Despite being chambered in a revolver caliber, it would have been a great short range brush gun for deer.
I used it for expensive plinking, however.
It was also a lethal home defense weapon if I were thinking in those terms, which I never was.
No heart or head shot required. Any hit will do.

AR15s are the maniac's dream. Light. Not much recoil. Huge capacity. Few one shot kills, but maniacs don't care.
I'm good with banning them, even while protecting general gun rights, but it just isn't among my major priority issues.
Plus there are too many out there already. Even if paid fairly, people won't give them up.
Most urban liberals refuse to understand this.

As for the libertarian concerns, that's just conflicting personal values. I'm a socialist, not a libertarian. You're the opposite.