Mass Shooting & Gun Violence catch-all | Kentucky Sheriff kills KY Judge in courthouse?

[EyeballKid]

Well, this is really the type of cost/benefit our politicians should be considering for all social problems, including Covid. In general, we don't do social policy in that way because of the immense political pressure to solve the problem -- damn the consequences. In California, we kept schools remote for way too long. The initial public health benefit was offset by the long-term learning and emotional damage caused to students. (Most California schools didn't get back to full in-class instruction until Fall 2021).

So, what should schools do to address the risk of school shootings? Ted Cruz argued for single access point entrances with metal detectors for everyone. That seems to be an incredible waste of money and not even especially effective. Maybe that makes sense in certain neighborhoods with high crime rates, but not a logical idea for most schools.

Some have suggested creating bulletproof safe areas in every classroom and automatic closing doors that could quarantine a shooter at touch of a button. These ideas also seem very misguided.

Should there be active shooter drills at every school in America? Or at least every high school? To me, that is a harder question. Arguably, those drills might save some lives -- but that is not clear. And they certainly contribute to anxiety to an already vulnerable population, while taking away valuable instruction time. I think in the overall calculus, those kind of drills are a bad idea. Yet, almost all schools do them because there is political pressure to be prepared in case a shooting does happen.

You’re evading the question.

I don’t give a shit about your opinions of COVID-era restrictions.

I asked what “defensive measures”—to use your phrase—schools should institute. And you’ve given a handful of items which, by your own admission, are by turns “not logical”, “misguided”, and “a bad idea”—again, your words.

So—instead of providing examples of what you view as failed policies, I’ll ask again for you to provide an idea of a workable policy to (a) keep kids in all schools throughout a state safe from gun violence, while (b) not inciting panic among kids and parents, and (c) respecting the rights of right-wing parents who would rebel against any policy that might infringe upon their perception of 2A rights.

 

[Calheel]

You’re evading the question.

I don’t give a shit about your opinions of COVID-era restrictions.

I asked what “defensive measures”—to use your phrase—schools should institute. And you’ve given a handful of items which, by your own admission, are by turns “not logical”, “misguided”, and “a bad idea”—again, your words

You could say that in a nicer way. I have been nothing but respectful to you.

Obviously, you can limit egress and ingress into the school (which almost all schools do today). And you can lock doors (and not prop them open like in Uvalde).

But in general, my opinion is that school defensive actions have greater negative externalities than positive benefits. Schools should focus on teaching. Despite what Foster the People sang in Pumped up Kicks, you aren't outrunning the gun.

Unfortunately, mass shootings are going to be a way of life in this country until the 2nd Amendment is repealed or Heller is overturned by a packed Supreme Court. We can try to pass gun reform, and maybe that will make some small changes at the edges of the problem, but the sad reality is that the problem is not completely solvable under our current legal framework and culture.

I am simply trying to put some perspective on the actual individual risk to any individual board member or his/her child.

 

[EyeballKid]

You could say that in a nicer way. I have been nothing but respectful to you.

In general, my opinion is that the negative externalities of schools doing anything is greater than the positive benefits. Schools should focus on teaching. As Foster the People sang in Pumped up Kicks, you aren't outrunning the gun.

Obviously, you can limit egress and ingress into the school (which almost all schools do today). And you can lock doors (and not prop them open like in Uvalde).

I’m not gonna apologize for holding you accountable for issues that you evade.

Twice you referenced COVID stuff, which is a deflection that has nothing to do with gun violence—and is a particular issue for me, given that I work in public health and communications, and was involved in the periphery of the debate around how to deal with federal messaging that would affect state governmental policy decisions like school ventilation, teacher safety, etc. I’m open to a discussion of how those decisions impacted kids and whether it was worth it—but that’s not what this thread is about, nor does it address the question I asked.

Aside from that, I feel it’s incumbent upon the person criticizing all current efforts to confront school shootings to supply an alternate idea that would better address the concerns.

People forget to lock doors all the time. Hell, I forget to lock my front door when I go to bed at least once a month.

Thats not a valid solution.

 

[Calheel]

I’m not gonna apologize for holding you accountable for issues that you evade.

Twice you referenced COVID stuff, which is a deflection that has nothing to do with gun violence—and is a particular issue for me, given that I work in public health and communications, and was involved in the periphery of the debate around how to deal with federal messaging that would affect state governmental policy decisions like school ventilation, teacher safety, etc.

Aside from that, I feel it’s incumbent upon the person criticizing all current efforts to confront school shootings to supply an alternate idea that would better address the concerns.

People forget to lock doors all the time. Hell, I forget to lock my front door when I go to bed at least once a month.

Thats not a valid solution.

I edited my post above. Basically, my opinion is that the problem is fundamentally not solvable under our current regime. But I think it is important to view the problem in the appropriate risk context.

And I think the Covid analogy is directly relevant. Because it is another example of a cost/benefit public safety issue that involves negative externalities. There is a legitimate debate about when the benefit of social isolation outweighed the cost. Likewise, there is a legitimate debate whether spending trillions of dollars hardening schools is the best use of public resources or whether active shooter drills provide a sufficient benefit to outweigh the harm caused to students' psyches.

 

[Awinisawin]

This sounds awfully close to an “ignore the problem and it’ll go away” situation.

I haven’t looked at the data closely, but I can’t think of a state that hasn’t had a shooting attempt or successful shooting incident in a public school.

I’m sure you’d agree that the state has a duty to protect children from such incidents.

Since they can’t change gun laws or make changes to public school security without significant budget increases fraught with political pressure and/or public voting, I’m curious what “defensive measures” you suggest schools take.

Maybe a nice flyer to inform student and parents of potential consequences of gun violence?

I for one certainly appreciate the tax cost of hardening schools so the NRA cult can play around with their aresenals of ARs in public.

 

[Awinisawin]

I edited my post above. Basically, my opinion is that the problem is fundamentally not solvable under our current regime. But I think it is important to view the problem in the appropriate risk context.

And I think the Covid analogy is directly relevant. Because it is another example of a cost/benefit public safety issue that involves negative externalities. There is a legitimate debate about when the benefit of social isolation outweighed the cost. Likewise, there is a legitimate debate whether spending trillions of dollars hardening schools is the best use of public resources or whether active shooter drills provide a sufficient benefit to outweigh the harm caused to students' psyches.

One can’t propone a concern for the children’s psyche all the while supporting an any gun at all cost acceptance. The two are diametrically opposed. And the cheaper and more mentally healthier benefit for all is to have much much more rigorous gun control. Without that everything becomes an expensive bandaid.

One doesn’t plug an oil pan leak by pouring more oil in the car every few miles. Eventually the engine breaks down.

 

[Calheel]

One can’t propone a concern for the children’s psyche all the while supporting an any gun at all cost acceptance. The two are diametrically opposed. And the cheaper and more mentally healthier benefit for all is to have much much more rigorous gun control. Without that everything becomes an expensive bandaid.

One doesn’t plug an oil pan leak by pouring more oil in the car every few miles. Eventually the engine breaks down.

Man, the reading comprehension on this board is worse than the old ZZL.

I don't support guns. My preference would be to repeal the second amendment and confiscate every last gun in this country. But realistically, that isn't happening. Gun control is the next best option but: (1) it is near impossible to get it passed, and (2) what can be passed is mostly feel-good pablum that won't solve the problem, and (3) has a 50/50 chance of being thrown out by the courts anyway.

This thread has been around in some version for 3-4 years now. And after every large mass shooting, we have the exact same comments. Nothing changes. The only way to meaningfully solve the problem at this point is to pack the Supreme Court and reverse Heller and progeny. Until that happens, we will be leaking oil on the highway for the rest of our lives.

 

[nycfan]

 

[TarHeelGrad]

Man, the reading comprehension on this board is worse than the old ZZL.

I don't support guns. My preference would be to repeal the second amendment and confiscate every last gun in this country. But realistically, that isn't happening. Gun control is the next best option but: (1) it is near impossible to get it passed, and (2) what can be passed is mostly feel-good pablum that won't solve the problem, and (3) has a 50/50 chance of being thrown out by the courts anyway.

This thread has been around in some version for 3-4 years now. And after every large mass shooting, we have the exact same comments. Nothing changes. The only way to meaningfully solve the problem at this point is to pack the Supreme Court and reverse Heller and progeny. Until that happens, we will be leaking oil on the highway for the rest of our lives.

IMO, the problem here is:
a) you acknowledge that the proliferation of guns is the root issue, and, from a practical point of view, necessary gun restrictions won't occur any time soon
b) attempted to correlate the closing of schools during a pandemic to gun violence at school
c) downplayed any type of drills that attempt to mitigate an active shooter on campus, while also noting that virtually any other proposed solution (single entrance/exit, etc.) is not really feasible, and probably prohibitively expensive.

Active shooter drills are, unfortunately, a way of life right now, as we have apparently deemed the 2nd amendment more important than the lives of our children, all in the name of freedom.

 

[lawtig02]

Still way too early to jump to conclusions but this is sure looking like a case where there should be some MAJOR parental accountability. Not sure that will happen in Georgia though.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

To reiterate HeelingAg’s point about connecting the dots:

Why do you think some AA artists from poor backgrounds write songs that might glorify violence? Could it be because they are surrounded by violence, and so they write songs about what they know and see around them?

Why do you think some AA youths from poor backgrounds might gravitate toward such music/misicians? Could it be because they, also, are surrounded by violence and gravitate toward music they can relate to?

Sure, which is why interrupting that cycle is so important.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

Y’all do know you’re arguing with “ItsBoTime,” right?

When you have no reasonable retort, attack the messenger. Some things never change. I do find it humorous that I repeat something that other posters have said and I am immediately attacked while those posters are not. Triggered, maybe?

 

[finesse]

I'll be damned if I know why but sometime in the 70s, guns became toys instead of tools. We weren't free of gun violence before as Charles Whitman showed but when guns became more about how fast you can shoot instead of how well and how safe things got seriously worse.

It's easy to say it's the glorification of violence in the media but that seems simplistic to me. I suspect that's part of it but so is the post Vietnam angst among those who went and among those who avoided it and feel lacking in a way. No small part was the anti hunting movement. I grew up on a subsistence farm and we had many meals obtained by a rod or gun. That became somewhat frowned on by antigun and animal rights types. I feel as if that took out the middle and left two extremes shouting over a chasm of misunderstanding at each other.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

Maybe from watching GOP politicians fetishize their guns.

I don’t think low income Black kids are spending much time watching GOP politicians. Just like contrarily to Jussie Smollet’s claim, Chicago is not “MAGA country”.

 

[EyeballKid]

Sure, which is why interrupting that cycle is so important.

So then you acknowledge poverty—not race—as a root cause for violence.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

That is just the odds of attending a school where there is a shooting -- any kind of shooting ranging from an incident in the parking lot to an Uvalde massacre. As I also wrote, the odds of being killed in a school shooting is far, far lower -- roughly .0000004% a year. Of course, as others have pointed out, just being present at a school in which a shooting occurs can be a very traumatic event -- depending on the type of shooting and how close to the violence. And it also doesn't count the almost 100% chance that a school will have a lockdown at some point during the child's attendance due to the possibility of some violent risk.

This whole thread has been a bit of a Rorschach test that intersects psychology, sociology and politics.

On the one hand, people have rightly pointed out that in a better society, kids should never even need to think about school shootings -- like most school children around the world. And there has been rightful outrage that the gun lobby has effectively stymied even modest gun reform laws -- regardless of whether such reforms would stop all or even most school shootings.

Another thing about school shootings -- above almost any other mass tragedy event -- is the natural emotional reaction to the death of children. People, especially parents, have an instinctual desire to protect children. And when a group of children are hurt, it results in a very visceral reaction for most psychologically healthy adults.

But none of those valid emotional and political view points can undercut the fact that mass school shootings like today are incredibly rare. And there are negative externalities to treating these kind of events as "realistic" or worth worrying about when you send your kids to school -- just like there were negative externalities to having kids hide under their desks for nuclear bomb threats in the 1950s and 1960s. When @aGDevil2k worries about his/her child surviving the next 7.75 years of school, that is an unfortunate byproduct of the media coverage of these shootings. It is much, much more likely that the child will die in the car on the way to school or the way back. And that is not an asinine observation. So many risks are taken in a car every day (speeding, maintenance, cell phone use, distracted driving, etc. etc.) and most of us use virtually no mental energy worrying about these very real risks. Instead, we worry about the risks of something that has virtually no chance of affecting our lives or the lives of our loved ones.

None of what I write is intended to discount the problem of school shootings. It is an especially American problem, which means that there are things we can do to make it better. But we don't need to engage in statistical malpractice to elevate the risk of school shootings to members of this board. As a general rule, our lives would be better if we aligned our reptilian brain to the risks we actually face on a daily basis.

We’ll see how many people jump down your throat for posting essentially the same thing that I have posted over the past few pages.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

So then you acknowledge poverty—not race—as a root cause for violence.

I have never thought that race is the root cause for violence. Poverty and cultural norms, sure. Both can be addressed. Someone isn’t born inherently violent (or not) because of the color of their skin. But you put that person in an environment where 1) they have limited economic opportunities and 2) the people they are around and that they idolize push gun violence as an easy way to solve problems and you have a recipe for disaster.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guns_Guns_Guns/s/HGChEpRqoz

This is more than simple poverty.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

Who is telling kids this? No one has to tell them this for them to be anxious about it. They are anxious because it keeps happening.

Society is telling kids this when people say things like “man I hope my kids can go through high school without being murdered”. Would be just like telling your kids “I hope our plane doesn’t fall out of the sky today” on your way to the airport for vacation.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

When school shootings don’t happen anywhere else in the developed world, I could not care less how statistically small the chance of a child getting killed at school is in the USA.

It’s not zero percent and that’s all that matters. It is fucking embarrassing that this happens here and we as a society do absolutely nothing to stop it no matter how many times it happens.

It isn’t zero percent anywhere. They have happened recently across the EU as well.

 

[EyeballKid]

I have never thought that race is the root cause for violence. Poverty and cultural norms, sure. Both can be addressed. Someone isn’t born inherently violent (or not) because of the color of their skin. But you put that person in an environment where 1) they have limited economic opportunities and 2) the people they are around and that they idolize push gun violence as an easy way to solve problems and you have a recipe for disaster.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guns_Guns_Guns/s/HGChEpRqoz

This is more than simple poverty.

Blaming “cultural influences” is the same as blaming race.

As noted in several other posts, poverty is the single biggest indicator/predictor of violence around the world, regardless of race—or, as you put it, “cultural influences.”