Mental Health, Guns, Mental Health

[lippy 852]

6 hours ago, DFWAJG said:

People kill people. With or without guns.  9/11 showed us you need no guns to kill massive amounts of people. 

So I assume you advocate for a post 9/11, TSA-scale government undertaking to reign in gun violence no?

[jakee 1,314]

37 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Airdvr made a comment, too. He didn't give him a pass. I edited it. Billvon has been editing and hiding stuff too.

I'll lay it out -- let's not make it quite as personal. The shooting in Texas, mental health, lots of things. Let's not discuss the relative ease or lack thereof with people we know.

Of using guns vs anything else? That was the entire point of the OP.

If that’s not ok just lock the thread. If you don’t want anyone to talk about anything related to Billy, what he did or how he did it then there’s nothing relevant to the OP which is postable.

[wmw999 2,289]

Good question, and the OP did address it. I don't want a shit show. The OP was nothing remotely resembling a shit show.

Wendy P.

[jakee 1,314]

9 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Good question, and the OP did address it. I don't want a shit show. The OP was nothing remotely resembling a shit show.

Wendy P.

What is a shit show or moving towards one, apart from whatever it was that Airdvr said?

Edited May 25, 2022 by jakee

[wmw999 2,289]

Don't try to figure out just exactly how far you can go. A shit show is lots of name-calling, expressions of righteous anger. The topic is mental health and gun rights. It's a very rich topic, given the recent history of the US.

Wendy P.

[Rick 67]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

In virtually all of the other situations (e.g. the recent Buffalo massacre, now the Texas one -- get the point?), we're angry at the situation, but we know it doesn't do any good to be personally angry at the perpetrator. We analyze the perp, talk about motivations, ease of acquiring weapons and whether that's OK.

I'm angry at the perpetrator. But it doesn't do any good.

It's hard not to be angry at Billy.

He and his wife liked to go to the range  and enjoyed shooting. I know he got angry in political discussions and traffic pissed him off. But this is so far out there how could anyone see it coming. 

When incidents like this happen and people close to the  shooter say. "I never thought he would do something like this".   Now I understand.

[skybytch 259]

There is currently a movement aimed at reducing suicide among veterans.

https://overwatchproject.org/just-fucking-ask

I'd say it needs to be something that we all do for our families, our friends, our communities.

For Billy and his family.  For JP and his family.

For me. Maybe for you.

[jakee 1,314]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

Don't try to figure out just exactly how far you can go. 

I can’t see anything that’s gone anywhere. I genuinely have no freakin’ clue what you’re talking about.

[gowlerk 2,069]

8 minutes ago, jakee said:

I can’t see anything that’s gone anywhere. I genuinely have no freakin’ clue what you’re talking about.

I think it means we are not supposed to say a bunch of rude things about the Billy because he has ex-friends here who may be upset. I don't think that was ever going to happen, but Wendy seems to think it might. The fact that Billy has always more or less been someone who couldn't control himself well enough to avoid several bans from here over the years and liked to denigrate public figures who he disagreed with is something that we should avoid dwelling on.

[kallend 1,794]

Gun violence has killed more Americans in the past 50 years than were killed in all wars combined since the country was founded.

 

We do not have a bigger mental health problem than other G20 nations.  We have a bigger gun problem.

[Phil1111 1,046]

15 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I think it means we are not supposed to say a bunch of rude things about the Billy because he has ex-friends here who may be upset. I don't think that was ever going to happen, but Wendy seems to think it might. The fact that Billy has always more or less been someone who couldn't control himself well enough to avoid several bans from here over the years and liked to denigrate public figures who he disagreed with is something that we should avoid dwelling on.

You were right.

[billvon 2,675]

34 minutes ago, jakee said:

I can’t see anything that’s gone anywhere. I genuinely have no freakin’ clue what you’re talking about.

For example, "fuck him and fuck anyone who supports him" would be too far.  Forum rules still apply, and will be used to keep from turning this thread into (as Wendy put it) a shitshow.

There have been two pages now of mostly-reasonable non-shit-show comments on this horrific shooting.  So it's doable.  Let's keep it that way.

[Phil1111 1,046]

10 minutes ago, kallend said:

Gun violence has killed more Americans in the past 50 years than were killed in all wars combined since the country was founded.

 

We do not have a bigger mental health problem than other G20 nations.  We have a bigger gun problem.

On this issue I don't think there is hope for America. The outrage over this shooting will die down just like every other one. The cost of living and the cost of gas will dominate midterms.

Gas for the 4x4, guns and a packed SC. I'd call that game, set and match.

[gowlerk 2,069]

6 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

On this issue I don't think there is hope for America. The outrage over this shooting will die down just like every other one. The cost of living and the cost of gas will dominate midterms.

The shooting of innocents will never be enough. Change will only come when the powerful become fearful that they and their own children are at risk. 

[Phil1111 1,046]

3 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

The shooting of innocents will never be enough. Change will only come when the powerful become fearful that they and their own children are at risk. 

Their children live in gated communities. Psychologists expenses covered by expensive private health plans. They have guns but they are mostly used for hunting pheasants on private game preserves in Nebraska.

Any other ideas?

[yoink 321]

This has absolutely solidified my opinion that guns have no place in a residential home. 

To those of you who do own guns and keep them around for personal protection, I'd ask you to honestly answer this question to yourself. What's more likely to happen to you at some point in your life - that you get attacked in your own home and need a gun to resolve the situation, or that you suffer a single bout of depression?

Look at the statistics - this isn't an uncommon situation. It CAN happen to you.

Studies have shown that suicidal impulses are (generally) fleeting. People who don't succeed mostly don't re-attempt, but when you use a gun you almost never get a do-over.

.Jakee hit the nail on the head - Billy owned a gun for protection and killed himself and his family with it. That's the tragic bottom line.

Edited May 25, 2022 by yoink

[wmw999 2,289]

It's very much a "let them eat cake" approach. The money they spend willingly on security and better education for their children is proof that they know things aren't particularly even. I'd rather invest in a world where more children are safe, than in the safety of my own child. That doens't mean I didn't invest in his safety and education -- but they were generally for individual reasons, rather than that I thought what the infrastructure provided wasn't enough. And yes, I did live in a neighborhood picked in large part for the excellence of their schools. It's what parents do when they can.

What a shame that so many can't.

Wendy P.

[Stumpy 280]

Just now, yoink said:

Jakee hit the nail on the head - Billy owned a gun for protection and killed himself and his family with it. That's the tragic bottom line.

Even setting Billy aside for a minute - this has already been researched and well proven to be far more likely than any valid defensive use will ever be, but the pro gun lobby will always choose (tragically) to ignore this.

[yoink 321]

Just now, Stumpy said:

Even setting Billy aside for a minute - this has already been researched and well proven to be far more likely than any valid defensive use will ever be, but the pro gun lobby will always choose (tragically) to ignore this.

Yup. As is having a gun taken off you and used against you. 

[gowlerk 2,069]

13 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Their children live in gated communities. Psychologists expenses covered by expensive private health plans. They have guns but they are mostly used for hunting pheasants on private game preserves in Nebraska.

Any other ideas?

You are correct. In order for those people to feel threatened it would take a state of revolution. Or, "SHTF" times 10. 

[Stumpy 280]

4 minutes ago, yoink said:

Yup. As is having a gun taken off you and used against you. 

sorry yes - was including that as well.

[skybytch 259]

43 minutes ago, yoink said:

To those of you who do own guns and keep them around for personal protection, I'd ask you to honestly answer this question to yourself. What's more likely to happen to you at some point in your life - that you get attacked in your own home and need a gun to resolve the situation, or that you suffer a single bout of depression?

I've dealt with a several serious bouts of depression. Last time I went through it, I asked my husband to change the combination on the safe - and he already had done so.

It's more likely that I have to use one of my guns to resolve a situation with a wild animal than with a human. But I'd be stupid to not be prepared for either one.

Do I need an AR or an AK with a 30 round magazine to protect myself? Nope. Totally okay with a ban on military style weapons and definitely a fan of nationwide mandatory registration. Do I need a semi-auto non-assault rifle or handgun with 10 rounds in the magazine (or 6 in a double action revolver - technically semi-auto)? When the closest cop is up to 30 minutes away and I'm alone on my property... yes. Yes I do. 

[billvon 2,675]

6 minutes ago, skybytch said:

Do I need a semi-auto non-assault rifle  . . . .yes. Yes I do. 

Do you want a gun?  Yes, you do, and I support your right to have it.

But NEED it?

During the early days of rec.skydiving I got into a discussion with a few people who felt they needed to carry on their parachutes on domestic flights, so in case of an in-flight emergency they could bail out.  They either felt better having their parachutes with them or just wanted everyone to see that they had a parachute.  One argued that he was safer overall now that he had a parachute.

If you start skydiving and buy a parachute, it will absolutely increase your odds of serious injury or death - because it enables you to skydive, and that means you are more likely to be killed skydiving.  I, of course, fully support anyone who wants to do it, and tens of thousands of people have a lot of fun doing it.  But they have to understand that it is a dangerous sport that can (and has) killed people, and that no one has to skydive unless they really want to.  I give that in a speech when I teach the first jump course.

Same thing applies to guns.  They will absolutely increase your odds of serious injury or death, no matter how much you rationalize that you are different from the average bear.  No homeowner needs one for safety.  Many homeowners WANT one, and that's fine - as long as they understand the significant increase in risk they accept by having one in their home.

[SkyDekker 1,268]

11 hours ago, DFWAJG said:

People kill people. With or without guns.  9/11 showed us you need no guns to kill massive amounts of people. 

If it isn't the easy  availability of guns and the culture of dragging them everywhere with you, then it must be that Americans are more mentally defective than other Western nationalities.

I have a hard time believing that is true.

I feel so, so sorry for Billy's kids.

[skybytch 259]

22 minutes ago, billvon said:

No homeowner needs one for safety. 

In suburbia, sure. But we don't live in suburbia. We don't have (human) neighbors right next door. Our cell phones don't work when we're in the upper clearing. One person's definition of need can be very different from another's.

Risk is increased by having guns in the home. Risk is increased by jumping out of airplanes. We chose to live where we did, we accepted the risks involved in protecting ourselves. We chose to skydive, we accepted the risks involved in enjoying ourselves.

Should skydiving be banned because it's risky?

Edited May 25, 2022 by skybytch