Nashville School Shooting

[Machinist]

You're a guy. Period. It's what we do.

It's what pisses off the wimmenfolk when they're sobbing about this or that problem and all they want is someone to listen but we're essentially wired to look for a "solution."

All that estrogen.

Talking about unintended consequences... the existence of such a database would be one step closer to a "social credit score", like China has.

We would have "psyche scores" generated from a database that's ran by a government agency.

I can't see that this is a viable path forward. Theoretically, it seems like the most straightforward path, but no one thus far has laid out any plan.

And, as you have pointed out, such procedures would not have red flagged this latest shooter.

[rogue06]

I hear people crying out for some sort of mental health background check, but I haven't seen a clear way it could be implemented. I'm just thinking of solutions this morning with my coffee. Because I'm a solutions guy.

You're a guy. Period. It's what we do.

It's what pisses off the wimmenfolk when they're sobbing about this or that problem and all they want is someone to listen but we're essentially wired to look for a "solution."

[Machinist]

FWICT, the shooter wasn't being treated for anything that would have disqualified her from purchasing a firearm.

An unintended result of that policy might be far fewer people seeking treatment for problems.

I hear people crying out for some sort of mental health background check, but I haven't seen a clear way it could be implemented. I'm just thinking of solutions this morning with my coffee. Because I'm a solutions guy.

[rogue06]

Let's just start taking a quick look into the purchasers mental health background. It shouldn't take more than 5 minutes. A quick look into the mental health history of this last shooter at the Christian school, at least, would have clearly shown she had issues.

It shouldn't take more than a few minutes to add this to the background check, and it should cost no more than a dollar.


(Also, under such rules and regulations, the girl may or may not have carried out an attack anyways, but with another type of weapon, such as a shotgun, knife, etc.)

FWICT, the shooter wasn't being treated for anything that would have disqualified her from purchasing a firearm.

An unintended result of that policy might be far fewer people seeking treatment for problems.

[Machinist]

Let's just start taking a quick look into the purchasers mental health background. It shouldn't take more than 5 minutes. A quick look into the mental health history of this last shooter at the Christian school, at least, would have clearly shown she had issues.

It shouldn't take more than a few minutes to add this to the background check, and it should cost no more than a dollar.


(Also, under such rules and regulations, the girl may or may not have carried out an attack anyways, but with another type of weapon, such as a shotgun, knife, etc.)

[rogue06]

Yeah I think guns are used for suicide more when they want to "punish" the people in their lives for how they were treated. I think most people who just want to kill themselves would want to do it as painlessly and as cleanly as possible both for their own comfort and to not traumatize the people who will find them. Like drug overdose.

Bingo.

I thought about adding that in to my last post in that I've both heard and read that it is sometimes used to punish others.

Of course, properly done, death by firearm can be just about the quickest way to go which is why it is popular, but if you don't know what you're doing or are all emotionally worked up (like when you're trying to kill yourself), it's also easy to mess it up. It can still be fatal, but also very painful.

[Sparko]

Shooting yourself typically makes a bigger mess which can indeed be more traumatic for those who find the body.

Yeah I think guns are used for suicide more when they want to "punish" the people in their lives for how they were treated. I think most people who just want to kill themselves would want to do it as painlessly and as cleanly as possible both for their own comfort and to not traumatize the people who will find them. Like drug overdose.

[rogue06]

WARNING GRAPHIC SUBJECTS DISCUSSED

Perhaps. I can only say how I would likely react, but God forbid I should ever have to find out.

I lived next to a couple who moved in after selling the house their son committed suicide in. He went into the basement, stuck the end of the barrel of a shotgun in his mouth, and pulled the trigger.

It happened while the parents were gone for a number of days and when they found the body...

Apparently the blast covered a cinderblock wall in gore and they said it didn't matter how often they washed it or even painted it the room still smelled of rotting brain matter.



When my father suffered his first heart attack at the same time they brought an attempted suicide who put a pistol against his temple and pulled the trigger. Unfortunately for him he held the pistol too far forward and managed to blow out some of the front of his brains and both eyes.

He survived for about five days.

I would hear the nurses in the ICU/CCU area whispering to each other about how when they changed the bandages bits of brain matter would fall to the floor


Killing yourself with a gun is often very messy.

[Mountain Man]

Shooting yourself typically makes a bigger mess which can indeed be more traumatic for those who find the body.

Perhaps. I can only say how I would likely react, but God forbid I should ever have to find out.

[rogue06]

I respect that this is your personal preference, but the facts clearly show that if someone is intent on harming himself, he will do it whether he has access to a gun or not. Frankly, I can't imagine it would be any less distressing to walk into your son's bedroom to find that he hung himself or slit his wrists versus discovering that he had shot himself.

Shooting yourself typically makes a bigger mess which can indeed be more traumatic for those who find the body.

[rogue06]

I would say he got lucky by being in office at a time when the crime rates were going down everywhere.

You of course might say that, but his "broken windows" policies are largely credited with the sharp reduction in crime rates that took place back then. And crime continued to fall as long as they were still in place, but then it stalled when they were abandoned and of course crime started to inch back up.

Now, with leftwing DAs that allow criminals to go free with no bail, and who either just dismiss or greatly reduce charges (Bragg for instance has lessened nearly 60% of felony charges to misdemeanors since taking office), has greatly embolden the criminal element and resulted in the skyrocketing rate they are now experiencing.

Gotta call BS on that. The crime rates went up over covid even in areas the left had no control over.

But nothing like what the areas where Soros-backed DAs are now in charge.

Further, repeatedly hearing about how criminals are now ignored in many areas by law enforcement when they shoplift and the like is going to have an effect elsewhere. Crooks are rarely masterminds and are typically not the brightest among us, and many don't stop to think just because they are allowed to get away with it places like San Francisco, Chicago, Washington D.C. etc., doesn't mean it'll be tolerated where they live.

The rioters who recently came to Atlanta discovered that the hard way. They expected to be treated like they have been in most of the cities they riot in -- to either be given a free hand (shades of the Baltimore mayor who whined that rioters need to be given "space to destroy") or if on the off chance the police ignore orders to stand down and look the other way and actually make an arrest, expect it to be reduced to something like trespassing and either dismissed or have to pay a nominal fine.

Here they are still cooling their heels in jail awaiting their trial date for domestic terrorism.


yesss.jpg

My favorite podcast is NYC based and the hosts roll their eyes at the idea that Giuliani was the cause of lowered crime in NYC, just as they roll their eyes at conservatives who think NYC is a crime-ridden hellhole today.

Again, I'm not at all surprised that the sources you pay attention to whisper in your ear the things you want to believe regardless of the facts. We see the result of that time and time again when you seek to pontificate on things your understanding of could fit on one side of an index card. I mean is this the same source which "informed" you that Republicans control New York? smiley snicker.gif

There are in excess of 8.5 million people living in NYC (as opposed to just over 5 million in your entire country). Of course that means there will be a significant number of fools and idiots there. Folks who spout all sorts of things like your favorite podcast does.

The fact is that today 76% of those living in the city are "very concerned" or at least "somewhat concerned" that they'll be targeted amid the city's ongoing crime wave and 74% say it is a "very serious problem." That's an awful lot of people with first-hand experience of what is happening there.Basically, New Yorkers who are upset about rising crime (over three-quarters) aren't being misled by dodgy data as some leftist politicians maintain, but rather they are reacting to the evidence they can see with their own eyes.

A reminder that the crime rates that are "taking off for the stratosphere" are still lower than they were after St Giuliani had "fixed" the problem of crime. They have got up a bit from a very low base and hence are still very low.

Major crimes increased 22% last year. And that cannot be laid at the feet of Covid since the pandemic was pretty much over by then.

[Mountain Man]

It's not either/or. It's both.



Again - you do not listen!!! Now I pulled that last line just because I figured you would screw up the point because you are reading with some of the most biased eyes I think I've seen from you yet. And in fact you did - yet again!!! That ETA at the bottom was saying trying to prevent suicides is NOT something I would put on the list of reasons for government to restrict access to guns.

Can you read it correctly this time? Did you notice I used the phrase 'for government' as a qualifier. Do you understand why?

Calm down, dude, I simply misread what you wrote, and, no, it's not because I have some sort of malevolent bias against you. That's just your victim complex getting in the way of a rational discussion.

[oxmixmudd]

Um, read the thread?



But you did.

No I did not. IT came up answering Sparko's question regarding why I would not want to have a gun in my home. That is the context of the topic as I used it.

Now, in the process of dealing with challenges to my recognition that guns are particularly lethal in suicides I did reference an article that was using that as a reason to restrict guns. But my use of the artical was only to support the lethality of Guns when used for suicide. Again, you need to read with less biased eyes. Your biases are making you add a huge amount to my words that I'm not actually saying.

[oxmixmudd]

Personally, I would be less concerned about the tool used to do the deed than with how I could have missed the signs that he wished to kill himself.

It's not either/or. It's both.

As for your point that the government should ban guns in order to reduce suicides, again, the facts don't support you here. Sure, banning guns can reduce firearm suicides rates, but overall rates tend to stay the same.

Again - you do not listen!!! Now I pulled that last line just because I figured you would screw up the point because you are reading with some of the most biased eyes I think I've seen from you yet. And in fact you did - yet again!!! That ETA at the bottom was saying trying to prevent suicides is NOT something I would put on the list of reasons for government to restrict access to guns.

Can you read it correctly this time? Did you notice I used the phrase 'for government' as a qualifier. Do you understand why?

[Gondwanaland]

Source, timeframe.

Um, read the thread?

"the suicide argument". Like I said - you are not listening. I brought suicide in as a factor that influenced my personal decision not to have a gun in my home. I did not want to ever be on the other end looking at someone that used my gun to kill themself. I did not bring it into the debate as a reason to restrict access to guns in general.

But you did.