dont call the police defend your self...a local shariff states...

[Konrad Hartmann]

Your have right to have a weapon to defend yourself and if some scum bag with a jelly vest comes near me or my family I would not think a second to send Scum bag to his or her maker!

Blowfish, sorry, I have to ask- what is a jelly vest? I'm not familiar with the term here. I Googled it but all I get are funny pictures of pug dogs in sweater vests.

 

[Burnt State]

Here it is in a nutshell. How do we restrict people that should not have access to arms from getting them? ... Look to Ireland during the "troubles", and the weapons the IRA got their hands on. They fought the British Army and etc. and do you think they got those weapons legally? Hell no. Ban something and watch the black market spring up .. overnight. Watch the arms dealers, much like the drug dealers get rich beyond belief. I would have thought the American govt. would have learned that from the banning of alcohol during Prohibition or more recently banning "weed".

Decker

Ok, prior to knowing your history I would've read this much differently than before, but you've given me a lot more insight into the relationship America has with guns historically, some personal as well as some law enforcement perspectives on the banning piece and the role of guns. I think exo_doc's comparison to the toaster is starting to open up some other ideas for me about why we see guns differently.

There were two major gun events in my neighborhood growing up as a kid, where the only guns I had were water pistols and that really cool 70's tracer gun. A man was holed up in his house with his family and a loaded gun be summer afternoon (even the phrase 'loaded gun' carries weight for me). The police disarmed him. But a years later another man succeeded in killing and maiming his young family. Then he stepped out into the street and shot out the passenger side window of a city bus. I sat with my friends in the font passenger side of our school bus that went past the house on the same route 15 minutes after he shot the bus. By the time we drove by police were on the scene and he had killed himself in the house. These events along with the time my dad stored a friend's gun in our house for half a year, and what a big deal it was, frame my relationship to guns. We've had two totally different experiences of guns. For me they represent fear, mostly.

Admittedly, whenever a human being wants to inflict harm on others they can become easily creative in finding a means and a method. However, when we look at politicized social movements where $$$ is around, the suppliers seem to fall over each other to provide desired weaponry. I suppose you are suggesting that on the street it's the same thing.

What's it take to get a class three and is that common across the country or do different states have different regs.? I think you're correct about what we outsiders perceive as easy access to those kinds of weapons. From my persective America represents a place where there are way many more guns than I can begin to imagine. You also seem to be a place that has way more mass shootings, and recently by younger killers. In your opinion, as a former law enforcent officer, how do you think America can work to prevent these disturbing trends?

As for prohibition and the legalization of pot: I always questioned why north america choose two much more dangerous drugs in alcohol and nicotine to legalize for the masses, and I say that as someone who appreciates whiskey in all its many wondrous incarnations. Those two have given way to cancer and drunk driving, two other things I despise greatly. Perhaps that's why pot legislation is beginning in your country?

 

[Burnt State]

Burnt State, How do you grow up in Northern Ontario and not own a gun? Growing up in Minnesota I didn't know anyone with out a gun. I often had 3 rifles hanging in the back window of my truck in the school parking lot.

We came to Canada when I was 3 in the early 70's, so being in the bush was something I was adopted into and not something my father had as his own skill set. His idea of an entertaining time in nature was mountain climbing, and I mean hardcore climbing, no matter the elements, height or difficulty level. He learned this as a child. He took me climbing twice as a teenager on two separate visits to Austria. The first was awesome, the second mountain many years later brought me face to face with death multiple times, and while it was also awesome, it scared the hell out of me. I learned to canoe, fish, and camp out in the bush on my own with friends, never a gun in sight - we were all first generation immigrant kids. Cross country skiing was the dominant family activity - going for thirty and forty kilometer loppets through the bush was my childhood fun. I take my kids camping and fishing.

 

[Burnt State]

Well, Burnt State, I'm not saying eliminate all laws. That would, indeed, be a silly position. My opinion is, rather, the tendency to quickly push through more poorly thought out laws at a problem can often do more harm than good. I am, actually, for laws against piracy and murder. I remain skeptical about the mad rush to ban the social evil of the day, be it guns, gambling, drugs, or alcohol. I mention the 'sin' crimes, because they are pertinent. Each of them has helped to build and establish organized crime. Having an entrenched organized crime system in the U.S. means that you create yet another source of revenue for these groups. They already have the transportation network. They already have the chaotic inner cities to use.

I've changed my mind on some positions, specifically around the value of laws to create a non-violent society that already has a lot of guns. I get the comparisons that have been brought up and connections to organized crime. This still does not change the fact that America has an inordinate amount of mass shootings for a first world country.

Somalia has no gov't control, extreme poverty like Jamaica, and so violence is par for the day. Similarly Honduras, like other countries in that region also is working through the crunch of poverty and first world investment. This means that indigenous people will be slaughtered over land claims and so will reporters who try to report on the connections between foreign corporations, gov't and death squads.

What these examples demonstrate is that there are specific cultural and histrical factors that make societies violent. For example there's been posting on this thread that supports a violent response over a peacemaking approach, and I see this as a cultural response. I grew up believing in non-violence from a very early age - probably because of how I dealt with seeing violence in family spaces.

You brought up the cohesive nature of Norway as a society- an excellent point. It's the same with other countries in Europe who do have a lot of guns but limited violence comparatively, except Finland. They also have issues of poverty at play and a lot of guns. So it seems to me that the type of violence that occurs in a country appears to be tied to a wide array of cultural factors, including poverty, mental instability and gun availability. And, I've come to the basic conclusion, from this thread, that laws will not reshape your culture overnight, nor will they work given your context as guns are, as I now understand, mostly a tool for a great number of responsible gun owners.

Now, mental instability is often unpredictable, and so like a recent mass stabbing here in Canada, the individual's actions seemed entirely incompatible with his character. If he had access to a gun, his rampage would have much more lethal.

So for me the question remains: how do we stop mass shootings? Inner city violence is about poverty and organized crime and solving those issues have their own long term solutions. What I find troubling is that the 'mass killing' seems to be becoming a part of American culture - where do you go with that? Do you need to work on social cohesion and is that even possible in a country divided politically and with a history of dustrust in gov't. I'm really fascinated by exo_doc's love of country but total distrust of those who lead the country. That strikes me as a really complicated space to be in.

 

[exo_doc]

I'm really fascinated by exo_doc's love of country but total distrust of those who lead the country. That strikes me as a really complicated space to be in.

It's not that complicated Burnt. Power corrupts. The greater the power, the greater the potential and actuality of corruption. If our political leaders are not answerable to anyone (which they are not btw, scapegoats for them are always found) they can pretty much do as they please with impunity. The US's system of checks and balances is a joke. It's been circumvented by 200+ years of emasculating legislation.
The US gov serves itself, and anything it does is to serve itself in some way.
The country of USA on the other hand is a collection of individuals who struggle every day for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. For the most part, they beleive in the ideals of what our coutry stands for.....freedom of speech, freedom of press, right to peaceably assemble and demand redress of grievances, the right to bear arms, the right to vote in a fair voting process, and on and on. Basic human rights.
Americans come together during crisises and help each other out. We may have our differences politically, but I think we are one big family (for the most part).

I'll get off my soapbox now.

BTW Burnt, I like your dialogue style and can appreciate your hunt for a solution. Discussions like this might lead to a solution. Who knows?

 

[Burnt State]

It's not that complicated Burnt. Power corrupts. The greater the power, the greater the potential and actuality of corruption. If our political leaders are not answerable to anyone (which they are not btw, scapegoats for them are always found) they can pretty much do as they please with impunity. The US's system of checks and balances is a joke. It's been circumvented by 200+ years of emasculating legislation.
The US gov serves itself, and anything it does is to serve itself in some way.
The country of USA on the other hand is a collection of individuals who struggle every day for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. For the most part, they beleive in the ideals of what our coutry stands for.....freedom of speech, freedom of press, right to peaceably assemble and demand redress of grievances, the right to bear arms, the right to vote in a fair voting process, and on and on. Basic human rights.
Americans come together during crisises and help each other out. We may have our differences politically, but I think we are one big family (for the most part).

I'll get off my soapbox now.

BTW Burnt, I like your dialogue style and can appreciate your hunt for a solution. Discussions like this might lead to a solution. Who knows?

Not a soapbox at all - you are giving me better insights into the superpower that lives beneath me. My name, Burnt State is a literal translation of my last name, Brandstetter. I believe that political leaders try to do their best according to their political philosophy, though I usually find it greatly contradicts mine and my version of human rights. Comparatively, they scorch the earth with their decisions, dragging the populous into wars, and working against human rights and the dignity of the individual, so I share a lot in what you say. I see them burning the state all the time.

But you are also a very polarized society politically, as Canada is becomig, and perhaps it is our electoral systems that need reform so that we can get the type of proportional representation we need to make our love of country be more in synch with political leadership. It always seems to me that in a crisis our true selves come out to help each other and build community. The problem as I see it though is that big gov't operates in big strokes and can not match individual or regional needs hence the tension between state and Feds.

BTW I feel more embarrassed about my earlier comments and sarcasm at the start of this thread. I keep reminding myself of Prophet of Occam's analagoy of how people on forums get away with a lot more loud attitudes than if they were in a bar together. So, this thread brought me back to my more authentic nature and I learned a lot from you and Decker about things I really knew nothing about. So thanks.

 

[Kieran]

Every country has their gun crime and "anyone" at any time can be a victim of it. But the fact is when you have less guns in circulation, gun crime incidents, tend to be restricted to those high crime areas.

You go and kill someone because you saw him stealing your stereo or tv from your home. You have committed a murder because you did not like the guy stealing from you. Having a gun in you're home puts you at risk of revenge and doing something you normally would not do.

Most Americans are not at at risk of death 24/7 were you need this gun to feel safe. I think most Americans sleep well at night and have no worries about been murdered whilst they sleep.

Its almost unheard of here in Europe, kids killing other kids with machine guns while their at school, at the cinema. Obviously something is inherently wrong with Americans who say more gun controls are a bad thing. More guns on the streets the more gun crime their is involving the public.

 

[Konrad Hartmann]

So for me the question remains: how do we stop mass shootings? Inner city violence is about poverty and organized crime and solving those issues have their own long term solutions. What I find troubling is that the 'mass killing' seems to be becoming a part of American culture - where do you go with that? Do you need to work on social cohesion and is that even possible in a country divided politically and with a history of dustrust in gov't. I'm really fascinated by exo_doc's love of country but total distrust of those who lead the country. That strikes me as a really complicated space to be in.

While I don't have a perfect solution for stopping mass shootings, I would suggest that an initial step would be to gather data. There are a number of things I feel would be relevant to discuss about these shooters, but the public discussion tends to avoid or ignore them. Here is what I would like to have answered:
1. Do a number of these shooters not place somewhere along the autism spectrum of disorders? I understand that autism does not generally correlate with violence, but can we look at these men as exhibiting an atypical form of autism spectrum disorder, or at least a disorder that superficially resembles ASD? Are people who pursue this question being bullied into silence?
2. What medications tend to appear in the usage history of these shooters? Do any of these meds bear the potential for violent behavior? Were meds prescribed responsibly for these individuals? Does the pharmaceutical industry or mental health services establishment have any responsibility for these events?
3. What was the medication history for the mothers of these men, most importantly while they were pregnant. Studies have indicated that SSRIs double the risk of autism.
Antidepressant use in pregnancy may raise autism risk - CNN.com
Is it possible that any of these chemicals may otherwise impact the psychological functioning of children? Prozac hit the market in, what, 1988? Men born to women who were taking SSRIs during pregnancy would now be age 25 or younger. I am hoping that this line of my thinking is simply empty speculation and paranoia, but what if we are going to see an increase in the number of mass murderers, partially caused by teratogenic effects of the medications? I understand that there have been a number of mass murders in the past, and that this hypothesis fails to explain all events. But I'm wondering if it may be a contributing factor.

 

[Burnt State]

1. Do a number of these shooters not place somewhere along the autism spectrum of disorders? ...
2. What medications tend to appear in the usage history of these shooters? Do any of these meds bear the potential for violent behavior? Were meds prescribed responsibly for these individuals? Does the pharmaceutical industry or mental health services establishment have any responsibility for these events?
3. What was the medication history for the mothers of these men, most importantly while they were pregnant. Studies have indicated that SSRIs double the risk of autism....
Is it possible that any of these chemicals may otherwise impact the psychological functioning of children? Prozac hit the market in, what, 1988? Men born to women who were taking SSRIs during pregnancy would now be age 25 or younger. I am hoping that this line of my thinking is simply empty speculation and paranoia, but what if we are going to see an increase in the number of mass murderers, partially caused by teratogenic effects of the medications? I understand that there have been a number of mass murders in the past, and that this hypothesis fails to explain all events. But I'm wondering if it may be a contributing factor.

I can speak anecdotally and from a research perspective to these pieces as an educator: we know that incidents of pharmacation of youth in relation to Attention Defecit Disorded is extremely heavy on the eastern seaboard, starts to fade as you go west and us almost gone entirely when you hit the west coast so there is obviously something fishy going on here. An entertaining/sobering look at this can be found here In this great animation from RSA.org where a leading educational theorist outlines other impacts on youth that might be causing them to be socially inappropriate.

I also know that the average levels of anxiety among youth today are at a level right now that would've put kids in the 50's in a mental health environment. I believe technology and the changing nuclear family dynamic, consumerism etc. all play roles in this modern illness.

The common practice in the emergency ward us to treat high anxiety panic attack suicidal youth with heavy duty adult drugs indiscriminately. This often results in worse symptoms and kids without safety nets or supportive family structures get messed up severely as a consequence. But their tendency is more towards self-harm than outward violence. Most popular cases around pharmacation and violence tend to be with adults in the home taking their family out. I also see this pattern as a defect of patriarchy, not that women don't kill their kids, but men tend to do it with guns and they take out the whole family including themselves.

I agree with you that big pharma has a lot to answer for as they continue to experiment on the human masses to 'alter' our moods without care for future consequences - we'll just make another drug for that. It's a much more nightmarish version of what Philip K. Dick outlined in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep; it feels more like social breakdowns in THX1138. I think that movie better outlines how social control systems like drugs & religion, and in our age, consumerism, really mess with the thing we used to call being natural. A lot of kids I encounter who suffer from these 'modern diseases' are jittery & make me worried.

 

[Konrad Hartmann]

I can speak anecdotally and from a research perspective to these pieces as an educator: we know that incidents of pharmacation of youth in relation to Attention Defecit Disorded is extremely heavy on the eastern seaboard, starts to fade as you go west and us almost gone entirely when you hit the west coast so there is obviously something fishy going on here. An entertaining/sobering look at this can be found here In this great animation from RSA.org where a leading educational theorist outlines other impacts on youth that might be causing them to be socially inappropriate.

I also know that the average levels of anxiety among youth today are at a level right now that would've put kids in the 50's in a mental health environment. I believe technology and the changing nuclear family dynamic, consumerism etc. all play roles in this modern illness.

The common practice in the emergency ward us to treat high anxiety panic attack suicidal youth with heavy duty adult drugs indiscriminately. This often results in worse symptoms and kids without safety nets or supportive family structures get messed up severely as a consequence. But their tendency is more towards self-harm than outward violence. Most popular cases around pharmacation and violence tend to be with adults in the home taking their family out. I also see this pattern as a defect of patriarchy, not that women don't kill their kids, but men tend to do it with guns and they take out the whole family including themselves.

I agree with you that big pharma has a lot to answer for as they continue to experiment on the human masses to 'alter' our moods without care for future consequences - we'll just make another drug for that. It's a much more nightmarish version of what Philip K. Dick outlined in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep; it feels more like social breakdowns in THX1138. I think that movie better outlines how social control systems like drugs & religion, and in our age, consumerism, really mess with the thing we used to call being natural. A lot of kids I encounter who suffer from these 'modern diseases' are jittery & make me worried.

What a great video. Is that really true regarding the east coast/west coast difference? That is truly amazing. I had assumed the ADHD revolution to be taking place across the country. Has it taken root in Canada? Perhaps what has happened here on the east coast is that these meds have become normalized. I know at least one adult person who is prescribed one of the various amphetamine salt meds ostensibly for ADD, but who enjoys the stimulant effect of the drug. Obviously, if it's acting as a stimulant, than you don't have ADD. My understanding is that, after marijuana and alcohol, unprescribed amphetamine salt drugs are the most commonly abused drugs on college campuses. So many people seem to have prescriptions, and some students have stopped taking their own prescriptions in order to sell the pills. It seems to have become part of our culture. It's the new normal.

I fear that, the more complex a problem is, the less likely we are to ever set about fixing it. The danger of many medications, in my opinion, seems to be that they help to mask life problems and prevent us from changing them. At least since the 1950s, suicide rates in the U.S. seem to hover around 12 or 13 per 100K. New meds don't really seem to change these overall rates. I wonder if, as the human environment increasingly diverges from natural needs and structures, we will see increasingly abnormal behavior. Once upon a time, Americans used to criticize the Soviets because their children all went to daycare while both parents worked. Now, most of us have little choice but to put our kids in daycare.

By the way, I am not saying that psych meds don't have a time and place. If you need them, you need them. But when we see them prescribed at a rate far above the actual incidence rate of a given disease, we have a problem. Often sadness and anxiety are warning signs, useful for our survival. They usually mean we need to change our situation, if possible. It's like if you touch a hot oven, it hurts, and you pull away from it to prevent further injury.

One thing that I feel is especially pertinent to the U.S. is a lack of identity and cultural grounding. We don't really know who we are. We latch onto superficial consumer products in order to gain a sense of shared identity with each other. And when someone grows up with a mental illness in this rootless culture, there doesn't seem to be any mechanism to prevent them form self-destructing or destroying others. Europeans I've known seem to be baffled by the heavy illegal drug use patterns of many people here, not to mention teen pregnancies and STDs. I didn't grow up in the ghetto, but a number of classmates and locals in my age group have died from overdoses or extended abuse before hitting age 40. There's a pervasive nihilism in the soil, and I don't know how it can be removed.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

Anyway lets not forget those folks who stand watch! : night and day for peace, liberty and freedom (yes we still have it) in the Western World,
Former Navy SEAL Chris Kyle fatally shot at Texas shooting range | Fox News

 

[Konrad Hartmann]

Anyway lets not forget those folks who stand watch! : night and day for peace, liberty and freedom (yes we still have it) in the Western World,
Former Navy SEAL Chris Kyle fatally shot at Texas shooting range | Fox News

Wow. I didn't know the story behind this until now. So apparently he and his friend took a vet with PTSD to the range with them, trying to help him get through his situation.

Does the military track what becomes of their PTSD vets? What the long-term outcomes are?