What are the primary causes of school shootings in the US is it lax gun laws mental illness or a combination of factors?
Amazing Beliefs:That the ready availability of guns today, with only a few government forms, waiting periods, checks, infringements, ID, and fingerprinting, is responsible for all the school shootings, compared to the lack of school shootings in the 1950's and 1960's, which was caused by the awkward availability of guns at any hardware store, gas station, and by mail order.MichaelZWilliamson.com“Lax gun laws” is clearly out as a cause of this problem. If that truly was a factor then we should have seen far more school shootings in the past than we see in the present.Now that that's out of the way…The problem with trying to find “the causes of mass shootings” is that there is no common thread between mass shootings.There's really only one thing that mass shootings (mass killings in general, really) have in common, and that's extensive preparation and planning on the part of the killer(s). In every single case the killer spent lots of time planning out and preparing for the big day, gathering supplies, planning out his route, choosing their location, etc. But that doesn't tell us anything other than the fact that mass murder requires heavy planning. (The killers that don't plan tend to run into a cop or an armed citizen pretty quickly and get killed themselves.)Apart from that, they really don't have much in common. Their motivations for instance are widely varied. Some of them have been apparently motivated by revenge (against society, their school, whatever). Some have been motivated by political extremism. Some others by religious extremism. And yes, SOME mass shooters have been mentally ill, but not all.I think we're making a mistake by trying to address all mass shootings together, as though they were all part of the same problem.If one man burns down his own business to get the insurance money and another man burns down a Synagogue because he hates Jews, does it make any sense to pretend both these crimes are the same simply because both men used fire?
To other American students (high school or younger), what are your thoughts on gun control in relation to school shootings?
Honestly, I don’t have an opinion.I’d like to, but the debate is just so loaded, if you’ll excuse the pun, and it’s an issue that gives me a headache to think about. People on both sides of the issue seem to love name calling and vitriol to the other side.I used to be all for banning certain kinds of guns and restricting others, and then I kinda flipped sides towards no bans, although with maybe a few more restrictions.Now… I don’t know.Gun education would be great. I know I would have an easier time forming opinions if I didn’t feel worried about being called stupid, pretentious, or ignorant for asking certain questions or having certain misconceptions. However, pure education that isn’t charged with any opinions is probably never going to happen. My city is very liberal, but we’re still basically taught that a single touch of marijuana will ruin your life. I don’t think learning about controversial issues will ever happen without someone trying to have you form a certain view, which is unfortunate.Although I am interested in getting more gun experience, they’re unlikely to ever be a big part of my life. I don’t see them as necessary to me, but I do have some friends that enjoy shooting. Maybe because I don’t have a lot of investment in either side, I don’t feel as motivated to pick one.So I’ll just say this- In an ideal world, no one would need or use guns except for fun. It’s not an ideal world. I’d like to believe that better mental health care would solve everything, because even if I were sure that arming teachers would work, I know that basically none of mine would chose to carry a gun at school. And I wish everyone could be taught enough about guns to form a solid opinion.And that’s all of the opinion on guns I’ve worked out so far.
How different do you think you'd be if you had the same upbringing that your father had?
My father was adopted at age two because he was being abused. When they found him he was covered in bruises and locked in a closet. He was adopted by an alcoholic military man that didn’t treat him any better. He would beat my father everyday at 4pm because “he was sure he’d probably done something wrong.” His mother left his dad and hasn’t spoken to my dad since. My dad has a tough upbringing and now he is an alcoholic. He’s been drinking since the age of sixteen. He has quite a few mental illnesses. He’s never been a good father to his own daughters. He had a bad childhood but instead of turning his life around and doing something good, he turned into his father. Being abused is no excuse to turn around and abuse your own children but parents do need to realize that their decisions do effect their children. Trauma has lasting effects if not dealt with. So to answer your question, I had a similar upbringing as my father. I was raised by two alcoholics. My dad was sometimes physically abusive and my mom was mentally and emotionally abusive. (She had a bad childhoood as well.) I can tell you that when I had my daughter I knew I would never treat her the way I was treated. I’m not a perfect parent by any means but I chose to be better. I chose to do the opposite of what my parents did.I’d like to apologize in advance for any grammatical errors, I’ve never been good at writing.
Is there such a thing as a pro-gun Democrat anymore?
No. There are Democrats who own guns, and there are Democrats who support your right to own a gun. There are Democrats who would like to see reasonable gun control regulations, and Democrats who understand that easy access to the most lethal firearms is a public safety issue, and would like to see gun ownership treated more responsibly. There are Democrats who believe all of the above.For example, I have owned a gun, and have considered buying guns in the past. I have friends and family who own guns. Some of them hunt, some of them just shoot. The difference is that none of them treat guns as holy relics, like so many “pro-gun” supporters seem to do.“Pro-gun” is an absurd concept. It is practically a defiant boast of contempt that its supporters fling at their political rivals, reducing complicated policy issues to ludicrous, simpleminded maxims — if you are “pro-gun” then you are “pro-Second Amendment”, so you are pro-liberty and are a real American versus anyone who doesn’t fit into that equation.“Pro-gun” in this definition has distorted the meaning of the Second Amendment to justify fascism and treason in the name of resisting “tyranny”. No one can tell us what that means, or how that would come about in the United States given the federal system and a government of checks and balances, but the concept seemed to get thrown around quite a lot when we had an African American President. What a coincidence.Surprisingly, the Founding Fathers would have no idea what any of this was about, as they intended the Second Amendment to provide for formal, legally-defined militia under the authority of the states. They assumed that you would own a gun if you were in the militia. They certainly didn’t intend that individuals would use their guns to resist the federal government. That would be treason. We know that’s what they thought, because they said so in the Constitution.So no, there are no “pro-gun” Democrats. That is a term that the far-right fringe can keep for itself.