Mass shootings are becoming more and more common. Many of us are angry while others of us are disillusioned. And of course there are endless proposed causes and solutions that our politicians and news anchors have been discussing.
But how many of them have stopped to think what these shootings tell us about our society in the first place?
What do you think they tell us about our society? Let us know in the comment section below.
Subscribe To Thought Monkey:
Check Out Everytown: https://everytown.org/
Most mass shootings are not committed by the mentally ill: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/us/politics/fact-check-parkland-gun-violence-mental-illness.html
How easy it is to get an AR-15 in Florida: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/15/us/ar15-mass-shootings-guns.html
30% of mass shootings are inspired by the media: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0117259
Cars kill thousands of people in a day. No one talks about changing laws or roads. Sure "safer" cars are popular but thats about money and advertising too. There are some great examples of everyday killers that are much more deadly than guns but would never be looked at. That bothers me. Makes me feel like there has to be a underlying agenda for things to change.
Would you like to explain the philosophy of spontanious order?
It can be applied to the subject of guns...
In my view, shooters their reasons might be philosophical, since they believe that whoever they shoot has no value or is a burden to them. Moral relativism and nihilism also could play part of this problem as the believing in no morals as well as believing of that nothing has a value plays also an important role.
It's likely caused by a variety of factors, but I believe the two most prominent issues are:
1: There is a very dark set of values that are spreading across America and possibly other countries. I'm not sure what's causing it, but it is definitely reflected in the media that we consume. The theme of "taking matters into your own hands" is a dangerous mentality. American culture seems to socially accept that type of behavior, as evidenced by the themes of movies such as "Death Wish". So yes, social change definitely needs to happen.
2: Having easy access to Something definitely increases the likelihood that a person will decide to use that Something. This applies to many human behaviors, not just the propensity to use a gun. For example, when youre struggling to resist temptations, the best thing you can do is reduce the accessibility you have to that temptation. Alternatively, when you want to start a new habit such as eating healthy, you'll want to make sure you have easy access to healthy food. So yes, the unusually high accessibility of guns in America is definitely contributing to these mass shootings.
Understand that both sides of the arguments here have good points and that we need to work together to solve this difficult but critical issue.
Some facts to consider:
The U.S. has the most guns then any other country; but is 12th for firearm related deaths
A study showed 1,029,615 DGU (Defensive Gun Usage) cases, this means 1,029,615 people had defended themselves using a gun, while only 11,208 deaths by gun violence in 2012.
I would say the pros of guns outweigh the cons by a large margine, this is not to say better background checks should not be out of the picture, but anyone advocating for banning weapons or a certain type of weapon should consider how many lives are saved, and how many Americans are willing to step up and protect our rights, before they do.
Law enforcement needs to do their jobs. FBI needs to do their jobs. 1 lock the doors at schools. 2 arm teachers. 3 teach students Krav Maga.4 make campus police stay in the school. School shooting are only happening in white schools. Watch that fact.
Why hasn't anyone brought up Obama's law that stop law enforcement from stopping the shooting. The law: once law enforcement meets their quota for the month. Law enforcement shouldn't make anymore arrests. There was a law on the books that would have stop Nicholas from killing 17. Law enforcement could have should have confiscate the guns of an individual who is a threat to themselves or others. The they could have should have put him in a psyc ward for treatment. If law enforcement won't up hold laws already on the books. Why do the useless idiots think we need more laws.
I just discovered you and I like your videos so far
I'd like it if you could add your sources to your statistics though. Not only could I believe you more but at least you're not giving us "fake news".
Keep it up!
I think the problem is a social one. We've always had guns in this country and for a time fully automatic weapons were easily available but this was long before mass shootings became common. One thing that was made clear that I agree with is how the media portrays mass shootings and how they lead into other shootings. The fact that the last shooter claimed he wanted to be a "professional school shooter" shows he took inspiration from other school shootings, the worse they are the better remembered they'll be. They are genuinely miserable people who want to spread their misery and they see the reactions everyone gives to these shooting so they are encouraged to commit these shootings. They also target places where they will not be stopped or no one will be able to stop. You certainly never see mass shooters where someone is going to shoot back at them. The problem is the trouble with these individuals is they start early in their development. No one becomes violent overnight, it is a gradual process that gets progressively worse over time. The real trick is to stop these things before they get into the progression stages, not at the moment when they're looking for guns - it gets to the latter point nothing can be done.
Truth is, making behavioral repairs on society is an extremely difficult task. Yes, we need to learn how to prevent these people from developing these dangerous mindsets, but politicians are essentially useless in that job. It's a job for the psychologist and the idols among society. They need to find out what's going wrong and then set behavioral examples. Kids tend to be inspired by the behaviors and oppinions of the people they idolize, but you cant control the behaviors and oppinions of society's idols, so it's an extremely difficult problem. I'd say the best thing we can do is become better parents and try to become the kid's idol, and then set an example. But only after we find out why these kids are so misserable in the first place.
But then you have the problem of getting people to be better parents.. which is a monumental task on its own.
Idk I think we're fucked.
Perhaps the weak and usless minds of the masses are better off enslaved. They're obviously unfit to manage and maintain order amongst themselves. Would you attempt to give a gun to those foolish criminals in prison? The ignorant and violent nature of American society means everyone is undeserving of such liberty. So enslave them, but let them be happy. Give them all the food, facebook, and netflix these slaves want. That's all they want and deserve.
Btw, I dont actually believe what I just wrote because it's obviously dictator talk, but it is something to think about. There is a certain amount of freedom that society needs. Can't have too much freedom, otherwise we'd be living in the Purge. So where should we draw the line?
America has never been able to own up to any problems they have created. We have lived in fear since the beginning. With mass shooting this is no different. In the 80s and 90s America blamed the entertainment industry with rap and action movies making kids aggressive towards other people, which turned out to be false. In the early 2000s it was turned to video games being the cause, which turned out to be false as well. Now it’s the NRA, which is kind of in the right ball park but totally misses the big picture. Yes they are corrupt and have made it easy for people in conservative states to buy guns by paying politicians to make such laws. But we are miss completely, we have no trust anymore. We can’t trust our government because of all the corrupt politicians on Botha sides. A
trust-less government creates a domino affect that makes people even start to trust no one. We are shunning the people with no money and not paying attention to the bad parents that give these kids horrible environments of living. Almost all the shooters were bullied, lived in complete poverty, and had a shitty living environment. We need to start help everyone! I’m not saying going Soviet Union, you get what you work for, but more inclusive laws that make it easier for lower income families to feel included in normal day life and accepted by the community as a whole.
P.S. this is just one mans opinion, I could be wrong on every level. I’m just trying to make sense of the way society is in today’s world.
P.S.S. The constitution is a thing so ya; they all are law of the land.
The NRA doesn't pay politicians to make laws. The NRA is a PAC and simply lobbies for legislation--or the lack thereof. I can't afford to go to Washington and protest every time a national anti-Second Amendment bill comes up, so I pay the NRA to do it for me. It's free speech in support of the Second Amendment.
It's so difficult to fix this problem, but the underlying problem definately is malevolence, and if everybody were to treat their fellow human being well, these things won't happen.
Making weapon laws a little more strict might also work
I know im going to get heat from this as much as I always wanted to dismantal and practice with every gun its not on tbe top of my bucket list. As americans we have the right to bear arms and protect our families etc. But we dont need Ar-15 and high powered guns excluding shotguns.
You don't "need" beef, chicken mcnuggets, a BMW, your own house, a high-paying job, both kidneys, or free speech. That's why it's called the Bill of RIGHTS, not Bill of NEEDS. Furthermore, all guns are "high-powered." If you don't like AR-15's, then don't get one!
heaven roots I totally agree with you. As an Aussie I may not grasp the American patriotism and amendments but I strongly believe that there is no reason for anyone to ever own a military grade weapon for “home defence”. If a pistol can not handle the situation, what is a high-powered rifle going to do (other than make the situation worse)?
I’ve heard some say that it’s to fight back against an oppressive government but how can you fight back against drones and tanks?
I don’t think America will ever be gun free even if all guns are banned out right but you can at least be practical about what people can buy
Thought Monkey yeah but the reason why I wrote it is because gun ownership has increased while gun violence has taken a nose dive. Also other country’s that have given up there gun do sometimes have lower gun crime, but then all other violent crime increases
Miss Amazon But how are we going to do that? I don’t think we should just leave it up to the politicians at this point..I live in West Virginia and right now all of the important politicians that are important to me have just been screwing us over...over and over again
(Irrelevant to the topic discussion comment) Damn I read the title of the video, saw "Monkey" written on the channel's name, clicked it, kept looking at you and thinking "who the hell is this guy?". I thought I was at the Mumkey Jones channel, not yours. lol a video made by him on this same subject would be awesome tho. But hey, great video!
Certify certain teachers and train them with psyc evaluations every 6 months or more frequently even,as well as starting school drills that don’t make you sit in one place and wait to be shot but help kill or maime the shooter
I think the best way we can solve the problem of mass shootings is by getting better background checks.
It's easier for an individual to get gun in America then to get a driver's license. And I don't believe that it should be the case.
The Gentlemen Network Not necessarily because these background checks are Federal ones that are extremely stringent. Plus firearms, ammunition, and maintenance are expensive and require extensive training to use properly.
Economic equality is the best first step. It is not the solution, but because it is so pervasive in everyone's lives, getting a handle on it will cascade the bandaging effect downward to every person. The real solution, as you already said, is to cure the sickness. Society, and people in general are sick. Depression, suicide, crime and so many other bad acts are a direct result of our inability to foster and support the human condition. Learn what the human condition is. Some good places to start are loving families and communities, a place to contribute and a sense of purpose.
Lee Xiong Well put. Can't say I agree too much with what you said because im not exactly sure what you are suggesting by economic equality, but regardless, society is pretty sick. We have really polarized groups that can't seem to solve anything and resentment between classes. The thing is also that you see that people shame loving and conventional families nowadays.
prohibition never works, period we know this. more laws will not stop an extremely evil person from going to kill random people. It is clearly a societal problem. It is the only thing that has changed over the decades. Guns have been around even before modern schools.
Eternal Carnage. Oh you don't know a damn thing if you think people don't need permits to hunt or fish. We have back ground checks. Nicholas Cruz's cousin said he inherited the guns. He didn't have money.
Venguin. You don't understand what happened. The sheriffs department was called 36 time to Nicholas house. They could have taken his guns and put him in a psyc ward and got him treatment. They didn't. You live in the UK stay there. We Americans will keep our guns. We Americans will keep our rights. We don't need you.
Venguin. No the UK has muslim rape gangs. Muslims run down joggers in vans! So do we legalize vans when that happens here in America??How about a compromise. Law enforcement goes and picks a kid threaten to do a mass shooting. Problem solved.
Literally just went and searched "what defines a mass shooting" and it says four or more people, not three like in the video. Also, its important to remember that other countries measure mass shootings in different amounts of victims.
I just read my original comment back, I didn't mean for it to come off as rude since it kind of seems that way. But yeah, the federal government states four. You should check out Louder with Crowder's new "Change My Mind" video, its filled with a lot of stats and facts on this topic.
Laine Riley The whole purpose of a firearm is to kill someone. Now some people will use this power to commit evil towards other human beings and others will use it to defend themselves from such evil. I don't know about you but I certainly don't want to make it harder for the good person to defend themselves from the bad person.
Attempting to ban or reduce gun availability is not the solution to the root of the problem, it is instead a bandage to it. The first step to making way to the true root of the solution is to ask why such an individual would want a gun.
The beginning is always in school, I’ve been working on a personal project at my middle school where I sent out a survey to see what students think about school. There were many, many negative responses when it came to the environment at school. Kids hate it. And the world around us isn’t making us feel any better. There’s also a big problem when it comes to mental health and teens. We always know when something is wrong. Doesn’t mean we are going to tell anyone. But one last thing, we are missing something. None of the answers you provided would work that well, maybe a small improvement but they won’t do much. There is something we are over looking I can feel it in my gut...we need to keep brainstorming instead of just looking at the ideas politicians are putting out....
The Founding Father’s were Progressive Humanist Revolutionaries operating under Enlightenment principles...the Conservatives were the ones who didn’t want a Revolution...as always, they are Status Quo...I cant help you if you don’t know this.
Ken, I don't know "RIGHTESTS," but I assume you mean conservatives, but probably not libertarians. I'm sure you know it was wild freedom-loving tea-partier types that created the USA. It was the minority that decided to rebel against the British, not the majority. The majority were satisfied with the subjugation they were getting from the king of England. If you don't see that the left is destroying this country by balkanization, open borders, encouraging the destruction of the family, crony capitalism, and encouraging every kind of deviancy imaginable, I can't help you.
Notice I didn't break it down to democrats and republicans. Democrats are, for the most part, leftists and the party of death. Republicans are, for the most part, the party of stupid and cowardice. I believe in personal liberty and rights and enshrined by the Bill of Rights. If you have a problem with the Bill of Rights, well, get in line with the other leftists.
Rigth out of the bad we started with an incorrect data, well mid incorrect, yes the "mass shooting" is as long as it is with 3 or more victims *and* whenever a shot is fired in a gun restricted area. If you were to accidentally shoot a gun in a school parking lot even if it didnt hurt anyone or caused any harm it's listed as a mass shooting since the changes made by the obama admistration back in 2012.
Another fact to take in is the distinction that every goverment has to label something as a "mass shooting", while in the US, as stated earlier, shooting to nothing in a parking lot can be and is labeled a mass shooting in my own country México a mass shooting is label under the premise that it's done with a number of victims by the hundreds being that the last real stated labeled mass shooting was the tlatelolco massacre back in the 60's but in states like Chihuahua and guerrero people daily cause shootings to civilians and criminals alike and it is not considered a mass shooting, last week a guy had a grudge with a person that lived two streets ahead of my house until this first man came by and shot 2 filled magazines on the house killing him and 3 other friends, it wasnt even covered by the media and they still had another crude killing on front page as usual, i knew because i happened to be awake whilen it happened around 4 am and a patrol was stationed on front of my house to watch the area so i could hear their radio, that's a daily occurance in my city alone and we have a very restrictive gun control law so we know for a fact that restricting guns only removes guns from those who respect the law.
No Thanks actually 99.9% of young people who own guns don’t go killing other people. Mass shootings are usually planned by the FBI, CIA etc and even KGB back in the day (now FSB and still do). And if there are any actual lone shooters, they probably stole the weapons 50% of the time (and it’s not always their weapon of choice) were on drugs, or worshipped Satan.
Not to mention drugs and alcohol kill way more people overtime than the ‘get hit by lightning’ chances of a mass shooting, which normally occur in Gun-free zones.
K27R yes but alcohol doesn’t let someone kill 17 people as horribly as a gun can. It is also illegal for that 19 year old to buy alcohol (in America at least) but he can buy a high-powered gun legally and go shoot up a bunch of children and teachers in what should be a safe space. How is this not as bad as alcohol?
Ajudithh Depends on what you mean on "environment". I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just curious what you mean by that because the gun problem (in the US at least) is a multivariant problem that had many factors to include.
Just a few points:
I think it all starts in the home and works outwardly into the community and even schools and the groups we associate with as we carry on about our business on a daily basis. // Even though societal dynamics have shifted within the last 20 years or so away from the nuclear family or that parents (both singular and plural) are working in order to meet the demands of their homes, we must find a way to see what works for those homes--how their families work, how they communicate with their children/family members about the rights and wrongs in the world, what kinds of things to do in emergency situations... // Not everyone will be "covered" by the education we either provide now or will implement in the future.
The kids was reported many times to the police, they did nothing. He was reported to the FBI twice, they ignored it. There were four police officers on campus during the shooting and they did nothing. Cruz had already broken so many laws that were designed to prevent this and the law failed. So thinking that one more layer of legality will solve this problem is delusional. This is more of a community, parental and cultural problem not a legal one.
Ezra I don’t know about that so much... I grew up without my dad around for many, many years, he grew up with his mom and dad basically never beginning around. But I had others to surround me and love me, so did he. It doesn’t matter who the parents/Guardians are so much as it does who surrounds them and loves them, I had my grandparents and my mother (sometimes) and he had his grandmother. This kid didn’t have a CONSTANT something to make them not feel completely lost, no compass to point him in the right direction. People say no one understands them because in that moment they don’t understand themselves. But most of us have someone we can go to when we figure it out...who did he have?
Ajudithh Yeah, that plus the kid is one of the many mass shooters that grew up without his biological father. I can't imagine how this kid felt like going through the situation. Kids need their parents and loved ones and this tragedy is one example of this.
Estryus Flemming In this case it was a teen who felt misunderstood, he had a hard life jumping from place to place and eventually getting expelled from his school, and I do think that it does have to do with mental health of students/citizen. I don’t mean they have to be crazy or depressed but having a life where you can’t talk to anyone..where the system has failed you, that’s where “all of these angry people” get their crazy ideas to hurt others. I think part of it is revenge, part of it is making others feel their pain, but then the other part is bringing attention to the fact the system has failed them and so many others.
Jane - I don't think women were ever not allowed to work as individuals. I think this is where the left goes wrong, it puts the individuals before the majority. I'm not saying ignore minorities, but you don't prioritize their needs. Obviously there are also going to be women that don't like men, and gay men that don't like women, and obviously there will be women who are so brilliant we all want them to work and find a cure for cancer or whatever.
I'm not suggesting that we force this social order on the population. That would be no better than what the Left is doing today. I'm just saying that our current society that seems to persuade young girls that the right thing for them to do is to enter a combative society with men, one that is entirely destructive for both men and women, and that is crazy wrong.
I mean, who wants to live in a world where young women are told by respected politicians, that Hell is a place for women that don't look out for other women (and not men), and presumably (we assume) Hell is also for men that don't look after other men (and not women). And this is put on TV and proudly announced by female leaders.
Is that a world you want to live in?
TheToledoTrumpton but I have to say that I have to disagree fundamentally with what you said in your last paragraph. Women should be allowed the choice to work, because even though the gender's have their own priorities, so do individuals of that gender. Not every woman is cut out for a life where their husband is the only one who makes the money. I don't know how I can help you understand motivations for why women want to work, but i hope you can understand that not every woman shares the same priorities
TheToledoTrumpton not a bad point you have there, however I don't think pursuing equality necessarily means that we are trying to become uniform across the genders. But then again, my views of equality are probably different from a conventional feminist. My question to you is by what standards are you talking about equality? Are you talking about the feminist brand of "equality" or are you talking about basic equality?
Jane - I would suggest that we first have to acknowledge that we live in an unequal world and the genders have different priorities, wants and needs.
Equality is nothing but a moral ideal. There is no evidence put forward that equality improves anything, and plenty of evidence that it doesn't. An army unit without a leader and everyone equal will not perform well. Enemy soldiers even try to kill officers to create this situation.
The male psyche requires work, inequality and competition. This may not be true for women, I really can't say, but even equality between the genders seems a bad idea to me. Men and women have different strengths and weaknesses, why are we not maximizing gender strengths and minimizing weaknesses instead of pursuing equality?
Men need to work. They are good at it. It makes them good people. I really don't understand the reason why women want to go to work, destroy men, and share the world with a large number of psychopathic killers, instead of just letting men do the work. It seems ridiculous to me.
Kyle Jackson fun story when I saw the notification on my phone that 13 people died from a mass shooting I was in my math class, I glanced at it an read it and didn’t think about until I started hearing about the next day
Arming students and teachers would work. Learn them too how to handle armed enemies and how to minimize casualties.
If it's inevitable to have casualties, you can still minimize it.
Shooting the shooter is preventive
DemonGrenade274 good, then you oppose an utilitarian principle.
In the first place, why would prohibition or gun control work?
And in the second place, how would you prevent a shooter from shooting without a gun or a less lethal weapon?
This is the dumbest thing I've heard in awhile. "Learn them"? Really?
Arming students? Yeah like its a good idea to arm hormonal teenagers who barely know anything about anything. Do you remember high school? Do you remember that the vast majority of students are emotional morons?
Arming Teachers? Teaching them how to "handle enemies and how to minimize casualties"? They're not fucking soldiers goddamnit. It's not their job to engage CHILDREN with firearms. They've got enough stress as it is and don't get paid nearly enough to warrant going through military training. And yes, the training required would be similar to military or police training because simple target shooting does not prepare people for ENDING LIVES. Especially not teachers.
And "shooting the shooter" is NOT preventive. You did not prevent a shooter from appearing. You REACTED to their presence and then acted to neutralize them. Nothing about that is preventive, its reactive
Santiago I don’t think there is no good use for a gun, in fact I am completely for American citizens having guns, they do have good uses. I now better understand the self defense argument thanks to your feedback on my comments. But I do think that more guns or what I read as even more lax rules then we already have could be very dangerous. I also think that keeping the laws as the same as they are now isn’t the best idea...again it keeps resulting in death over and over again, and I know the media covers every single case of it because the internet wants I keep us engaged not informed, but having tighter rules could benefit. Not completely outlawing they, just a couple more laws.
Ajudithh The US has the most armed populace on the planet but overall violent gun crime had been decreasing in the last decade. I get where you're coming from though. But you have to understand that criminals are more likely to fire upon a crowd in a gun free zone than one where one person in the crowd has a firearm as well and can retaliate.
Community pharmacists are the health professionals most accessible to the public. They supply medicines in accordance with a prescription or, when legally permitted, sell them without a prescription. In addition to ensuring an accurate supply of appropriate products, their professional activities also cover counselling of patients at the time of dispensing of prescription and non-prescription drugs, drug information to health professionals, patients and the general public, and participation in health-promotion programmes. They maintain links with other health professionals in primary health care.