Gunshot wounds--leading cause of death for American children

[SkepticThinker]

In a way we have hung and fileted our journalists, and that is why CNN/Fox/NPR/DemocracyNow/Huffpost etc. is a barrel of monkeys. They don't report. They spin.


I would consider compromise on gun rights for the sake of children. I think it would involve more than gun rights though probably some kind of stop and frisk for all citizens. A state could demand that all freight in and out was inspected for weapons and all autos inspected for weapons. You could actually have people get out and search their vehicles at the borders or scan autos using technology such as high frequency radio. Perhaps all citizens would be stopped and frisked at random when going in and out of establishments, or you could add metal detectors to most businesses. We could reverse free borders between the states and introduce check points. That would eliminate guns.

What is at the heart of the changes in this country that have lead to so many undisciplined students and hence school shootings? Both parents usually have to work, to make enough to live. Children require time, and parents don't have enough time. Women also are shamed for staying at home and are expected to balance career and family. Society is chided for not having more women in the workplace. This benefits corporations and cheapens labor but is having a detrimental impact on children. Divorce has become common. Having two stable parents is becoming legendary. Many things are going wrong, and school shootings are related.

I would say that you can't keep traumatizing entire swaths of populations of people living through mass shootings without paying some consequences for that.

American society is producing large populations of traumatized people who are suffering from PTSD, anxiety disorder, panic disorder, etc. then you offer them no help, and on top of that, you stigmatize mental illness while fetishizing gun ownership, and then turn around and blame these "psychos" for all the shootings and you end up in an endless loop that you can't get out of, where your society is creating them in the first place.
Then you try to blame all the shootings on punk music, or movies or the internet or the breakup of the family, or whatever, when the answer is staring you right in the face.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Not true! Abortion is the leading cause of death for American children by a long shot!

Fetuses aren't "American children."

But thanks for reinforcing the fact that Republicans only seem to care about fetuses, rather than what actually happens to children after they're born.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Handguns/pistols are responsible for more deaths than rifles/long guns.

But most everyone goes after rifles/long guns.

I've been saying for years that any gun control policy that doesn't address handguns isn't dealing with the issue properly.

That being said, the US is so gun-crazy that meaningful restrictions on handguns is a non-starter right now. It makes sense to focus your energy on where you have a meaningful chance of success.

Restricting access to AR-15s and similar weapons won't save as many lives as a handgun ban, but it'll still save way more than futilely trying for a handgun ban and failing.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The issue is that school shootings, while a rare occurance in the US, are EXTREMELY rare absolutely everywhere else in the world.
They are problem very specific to the USA.

It's because of social reasons. Another thing that is often left out of these discussions is that the US is a very drugged up country, perhaps the most drugged up country in the world. A lot of murders are committed by addicts, for example meth heads, who have lost touch with reality and end up committing random, rather brutal murders. This has been a big problem in recent years and it seems to be getting worse. But it's not only illegal drugs that can cause this problem.

Many or maybe even most of these mass shooters have been on some sort of psychiatric drug, especially SSRIs, which are known to cause violent urges and suicidal and homicidal ideation at times, especially among young people. They're really not supposed to prescribe them to minors - or to do so with caution - due to this risk but the doctors continue to dole them out like candy. (They're also not meant for years long use but that's another topic.)

The drug companies who make them were sued a number of times by families whose loved ones were on those drugs and killed themselves and/or killed others. These people generally had no history of violence or suicidal urges. Because of that, there's that infamous black box warning on SSRIs, saying they can cause suicidal and homicidal urges. It does seem to have a correlation as SSRIs became available in the late 1980s (Prozac) and then the mass shooting phenomenon became a trend in the 1990s and picked up steam in the 2000s.

I feel that's a dimension that's often missed. Even I often forget about it. Then you factor in our crumbling society, that families and community have basically fallen apart, as well as easy access to guns (illegally and legally), and it's a recipe for disaster. It's not just one thing causing it.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I would say that you can't keep traumatizing entire swaths of populations of people living through mass shootings without paying some consequences for that.

Here is a serious objection. We are told guns are the crisis in order to push other laws through. Blame the guns so we can ignore what has been ruining schooling. The progressive cluster increasingly sees parents as the problem to be solved, and this is reflected in its proffered solution set: hiding information from parents, suspecting parents of bigotry and of abuse, teaching young children about sex including all kinds of sex, not sending home schoolwork, not involving parents.

But lets talk about the guns. Its true if guns didn't exist there couldn't be shootings. Will taking away guns make schools stop sucking? No. They'll still suck, and the students will continue to underperform because of it. Parents will not be informed unless it is convenient for the schools. Grades will continue to lie to parents who the school will not trust with accurate information. The students won't be shot, but their lives will be worse overall; but guns won't exist.

Instead students will be harmed with other weapons such as nude photos of themselves, drugs, sticks, knives and zip guns. Things will continue in an endless loop, though one without guns.

American society is producing large populations of traumatized people who are suffering from PTSD, anxiety disorder, panic disorder, etc. then you offer them no help, and on top of that, you stigmatize mental illness while fetishizing gun ownership, and then turn around and blame these "psychos" for all the shootings and you end up in an endless loop that you can't get out of, where your society is creating them in the first place.
Then you try to blame all the shootings on punk music, or movies or the internet or the breakup of the family, or whatever, when the answer is staring you right in the face.

Yes. American society is producing populations of traumatized people. How? To prevent it becoming permanent we need to know how. What has changed?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Here is a serious objection. We are told guns are the crisis in order to push other laws through. Blame the guns so we can ignore what has been ruining schooling. The progressive cluster increasingly sees parents as the problem to be solved, and this is reflected in its proffered solution set: hiding information from parents, suspecting parents of bigotry and of abuse, teaching young children about sex including all kinds of sex, not sending home schoolwork, not involving parents.

But lets talk about the guns. Its true if guns didn't exist there couldn't be shootings. Will taking away guns make schools stop sucking? No. They'll still suck, and the students will continue to underperform because of it. Parents will not be informed unless it is convenient for the schools. Grades will continue to lie to parents who the school will not trust with accurate information. The students won't be shot, but their lives will be worse overall; but guns won't exist.

Instead students will be harmed with other weapons such as nude photos of themselves, drugs, sticks, knives and zip guns. Things will continue in an endless loop, though one without guns.

I'm not sure what this has to do with anything ... ?

Yes. American society is producing populations of traumatized people. How? To prevent it becoming permanent we need to know how. What has changed?

I thought I just explained that.

 

[Copernicus]

Here is a serious objection. We are told guns are the crisis in order to push other laws through. Blame the guns so we can ignore what has been ruining schooling. The progressive cluster increasingly sees parents as the problem to be solved, and this is reflected in its proffered solution set: hiding information from parents, suspecting parents of bigotry and of abuse, teaching young children about sex including all kinds of sex, not sending home schoolwork, not involving parents.

This would be a serious objection if it were only possible to focus on one problem to the exclusion of all others. Nobody is arguing that guns are the only problem with schools and parenting. Taking measures to reduce the access that children have to lethal weapons does not preclude having sex education classes and teaching children to be tolerant of their differences.

But lets talk about the guns. Its true if guns didn't exist there couldn't be shootings. Will taking away guns make schools stop sucking? No. They'll still suck, and the students will continue to underperform because of it. Parents will not be informed unless it is convenient for the schools. Grades will continue to lie to parents who the school will not trust with accurate information. The students won't be shot, but their lives will be worse overall; but guns won't exist.

Guns will still exist if children don't have access to them and can't bring them into schools. It would be nice to live in a world without guns, but nobody sensible believes that to be a realistic possibility or proposes an absolute ban on guns. Making it more difficult for students to be shot will go a long way to improving the lives of students, even if it won't solve all of their problems. Don't you agree?

Instead students will be harmed with other weapons such as nude photos of themselves, drugs, sticks, knives and zip guns. Things will continue in an endless loop, though one without guns.

How does reducing the danger posed by guns preclude solutions to other problems that students have? I don't understand what your reasoning is here.

Yes. American society is producing populations of traumatized people. How? To prevent it becoming permanent we need to know how. What has changed?

I don't know why you think America is the only country that has produced traumatized people. There is one big difference between America and other countries, however. It isn't exposure to violent films or videogames, because those are all over the world. Can you guess what it is?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes. American society is producing populations of traumatized people. How? To prevent it becoming permanent we need to know how. What has changed?

A lot of it still comes back to guns.

As of 2009, 5% of American kids had witnessed a shooting in the previous year. I'm sure that percentage is higher now.

 

[Colt]

Fetuses aren't "American children."

But thanks for reinforcing the fact that Republicans only seem to care about fetuses, rather than what actually happens to children after they're born.

In America a fetus becomes a child. Millions have been killed by abortion.

 

[Copernicus]

In America a fetus becomes a child. Millions have been killed by abortion.

Do you serve scrambled eggs and tell people they are getting chicken dinners? One has to wonder what you think fetuses become in other countries.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

of it is indeed

*or if it is indeed , I meant.
My grammar is kinda sloppy, I miss or don't type words a lot.. a weird brain to paper issue

 

[amorphous_constellation]

. It would be nice to live in a world without guns, but nobody sensible believes that to be a realistic possibility or proposes an absolute ban on guns.

Well consider this: the president will have control of nuclear weapons. And since the president comes from greater society initially, where in american society people are supposed to have enough responsibility to have control of their guns, then it seems logical that new presidents will not be wholly unfamiliar with aspects of their new power, though it is in greater proportion, since in their former civilian capacity people had a share of responsibility of like kind

 

[David Young]

I don't understand how anyone could "tolerate" the mass killing of children on a fairly regular basis.

Just because you don't understand something, it does not mean that there isn't an explanation for it.

 

[Copernicus]

Well consider this: the president will have control of nuclear weapons. And since the president comes from greater society initially, where in american society people are supposed to have enough responsibility to have control of their guns, then it seems logical that new presidents will not be wholly unfamiliar with aspects of their new power, though it is in greater proportion, since in their former civilian capacity people had a share of responsibility of like kind

Er...what?

Just because you don't understand something, it does not mean that there isn't an explanation for it.

But it could mean that the explanation makes no sense.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Er...what?



But it could mean that the explanation makes no sense.

All I mean is, if our leaders come to wield great power, which they will, shouldn't they come from a nation where the public is able show good 2nd amendment responsibility? Because our leaders come from the same public, and gain great power

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm just saying what I know. Guns are not THE leading cause of death of kids in the US.

Even if it was only in the top 10, it would be absolutely mindblowingly alarming. So I don't really get this deflection.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I know and I think that is terrible, terrible, terrible. Horrible. And I believe we are awash with guns and I don't really know what to do about it. But enforcing the laws on the books and enforcing a law that requires ALL gun sales to be checked beforehand with a waiting period would be a great start.

How about the obvious?

How about not selling military grade guns to civilians, full stop?

 

[Kathryn]

How about the obvious?

How about not selling military grade guns to civilians, full stop?

How about what I recommended?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How about what I recommended?

It wouldn't change much, if anything.

People's homes would still be filled with weapons. Military grade weapons among them.
Kids and idiots living in those houses would still have access to them.

I don't think the 14-year old who goes on a rampage in their school with an AR15 obtained the weapon by buying it themselves in a gunshop.
Or the 5-year old who accidently shoots his toddler brother with daddy's gun that he found in the night stand.

 

[Kathryn]

It wouldn't change much, if anything.

People's homes would still be filled with weapons. Military grade weapons among them.
Kids and idiots living in those houses would still have access to them.

I don't think the 14-year old who goes on a rampage in their school with an AR15 obtained the weapon by buying it themselves in a gunshop.
Or the 5-year old who accidently shoots his toddler brother with daddy's gun that he found in the night stand.

The five year old probably found a handgun, and the 14 year old probably got the gun from his dad. I mean, my stupid parents gave an AR15 to my brother when he was 13 or so. I was furious.