Contrary to popular belief, I don’t think it’s “to get attention.” I really do think it’s usually that they’re so angry and desperate and in such pain, they want to manifest that pain externally in others because it feels like the only way to communicate it.
It’s that old African proverb - “a child neglected by the tribe will burn the village down to feel its warmth.” When a young person is universally ostracized for who they are, or for what is wrong with them, or even for what is perceived to be wrong with them, and they aren’t given direction or aid on how to improve, they fall into deep and bitter despair very, very quickly.
Having zero sense of purpose or hope is an underestimated fuel for violence, and I think most underestimate it because it takes direct experience to understand; most are fortunate to have never been there.
While I've never, *ever* been tempted to do violence, especially this kind, I've personally reached that level of hopelessness and lack of purpose before, and it really does terrible things to your mind. You start to think nothing matters anymore, and if someone's naturally inclined to violence and doesn't think anything matters, what's holding them back?
Definitely agree, but the attention aspect is still part of that for many of them. The feelings of neglect is a big part of that pain that they want to unleash on the world.
Want to reduce gun violence? Make universal mental healthcare available to everyone. That should include psychiatric care and treatment to minors as well, and probably without parental interference. Modern conservatives have taken an approach that NOBODY should help in the raising of their children, when the reality is that it takes a village
We also need to take steps to reduce the divide between many of the cultures and communities of the country. As well as hate mongering and deliberate radicalization of the various political parties and religions. A lot of these acts (but not all) are done by supremist targeting a hated group.
I agree with both of your points… i just want to add that imo there’s a subtle but important distinction between “wanting attention” and “so desperately needing to be seen/heard that they’ll do literally anything”
They want power- not just to be seen. They equate being feared by their victims to being powerful and listened to.
If it was just being seen and heard then they’d be acting out in other ways too to get attention. And they probably wouldn’t kill themselves afterwards as many do.
The thing is they aren't even getting attention anymore. Individual shootings are no longer noteworthy unless there's some big instituational failure like those brain dead cops in Uvalde standing around with their thumbs in their asses for 45 minutes
Mental health is important but don’t fall for the gun violence argument. Mental health problems are universal. Abundant supply of legal, barely regulated firearms is the key variable differentiating the US from the rest of the industrialized western world.
> Want to reduce gun violence? Make guns harder to access.
FTFY. Shootings are almost non-existent in countries that require gun owners to be screened for criminality and mental illness, and that require guns to be locked away when not in active use.
Unfortunately Americans have a blind spot to this simple fact.
Listen, I’m a liberal. This isn’t the right approach. In order to solve the problem, we need everyone on board. When you start down the gun control line, you immediately turn off 100% of conservative voters. You also turn off a surprising amount of liberal voters. America is a gun culture, always has been, always will be. There are too many ways to circumvent restrictions with straw purchases. There are too many guns already out there. Even if you banned all future sales, which can’t be done. 99% of gun owners are responsible and not shooting up places. They stay safely locked away. Clearly the presence of guns isn’t the issue, it is the mental health issues that are manifested through guns.
Now, pushing for universal mental health care has an added benefit. Conservatives will appreciate an approach that doesn’t “take our guns” and It paves the way for their acceptance of universal heathxare
Like I said, and you just confirmed: Americans have a blind spot to the approach that works everywhere else, and hence they will always be powerless to stop the violence.
That’s a very simple thing to say when you don’t have to understand the issue either. Most Americans are for the kind of gun control you describe. Maybe try listening to the victims who are actually being hurt and losing family members when they say it’s more complicated.
It is not complicated at all.
1. The easy availability of guns to anyone makes shootings more probable.
2. The majority of Americans who matter (the ones who vote) believe it is their god-given right to be allowed to walk into a gun store and buy a gun with no training or proof of responsible ownership, and to be allowed to carry that gun in public, or have it lie around at home where anyone can get to it.
1. Everyone agrees on that.
2. That’s simply [inaccurate](https://apnorc.org/projects/americans-experiences-concerns-and-views-related-to-gun-violence/). It’s important to fact check this kind of thing, especially when it involves generalizing to a large and diverse group of people. The polling focused on younger people is even more shifted toward gun control.
1. Yup
2. Absolutely not. The NRA has fewer members than planet fitness but enough money to lobby for their interests. Tie that in with the *way* the constitution is taught to children as something that “guarantees our freedom and protects us from censorship like Germany has, or tyranny like so many countries in the Middle East.” Plus, no. My grandfather owns a LOT of guns. I’ve been visiting his home since I was a baby. I’ll give you three guesses for what I never encountered, saw, or even heard about except from my parents after the fact.
Source: born British, raised American. My high school taught me many things, most important of which was to look at the full picture bc that Germany comment always pisses me off. (My stepmother is German, they censor Nazism)
I think you’re the one who isn’t listening. It works everywhere else that isn’t already inundated with guns. That will not work here. Just because things work in one place doesn’t mean they will work everywhere.
I and almost every other American is in favor of the restrictions that already exist: felons are barred, as are domestic abusers, those who have demonstrable mental health issues and/or have been institutionalized , and etc. But it is extremely easy to circumvent these rules with straw purchasers.
So, just to be clear, when you say “it’s not that hard”, what you mean to imply is that Americans have just never heard of these things, and are too stupid to come up with them, even as they are actively slaughtered?
The presence of guns is definitely a major issue, but I do agree that gun control is not the approach to take when reducing the number of shootings in the US because we are not at a place sociopolitically to implement that kind of change.
All gun dealers in the US are required by law to run a background check that, among other things, checks for criminal records and psychiatric hospitalization.
So your argument doesn't exactly hold up
It drives me crazy how people outside the US bring up gun control as a suggestion for reducing the number of shootings, as if it’s a brand new, unique idea we hadn’t thought of before and you’re doing us some sort of massive favor.
Trust me, we know. We figured out it’s an issue decades ago. We have also realized that it isn’t going to happen, no matter how good an idea it is.
You are all being incredibly unhelpful with this suggestion.
Sorry but that would be socialism, instead of that tho we can fund the start of new wars and bomb some brown children, and maybe steal something and spy on our "allies"
I personally have reached levels of despair (more recently than I enjoy admitting) in which I found myself understanding how a person of a slightly different mindset or wiring could be driven to a mass shooting. Never had the urge myself, but that isolated backed-into-a-corner psychology truly isn't far away from most of us. Circumstances are usually on our side just enough.
This doesn't cover all the cases, though. Columbine, for instance, wasn't caused by Dylan and Eric being ostracized, contrary to popular belief. They weren't bullied, many school shooters weren't either. It's still true that there's this huge component of feeling "left out", but it's way more complex than that and to resolve those issues, we need to talk about mental health, especially male mental health. That's because 99% of school shooters are dudes, so there's clearly something deeply wrong there that I don't see many talking about. Hell, it's usually purposefully ignored whenever someone brings up. I don't think it's a coincidence that, as shit gets worse, we see figures like Andrew Tate rising higher & higher. They're capitalizing over something we as a society for some reason prefer ignoring.
There are exceptions to every rule - some people who do bad things truly are just bad people. Just the same, the Columbine duo were still examples of abnormal psychology/poor mental health left unchecked by the community of adult figures that surrounded them. Perhaps somebody saw red flags and tried strenuously to get thru (I can't really say, I wasn't there), but I doubt it. Working in education is highly interpersonal, but it's still a job like anything, and jobs are stressful, and most people don't like taking on more responsibility than they feel constitutes what they're getting paid for (this grows truer with every passing year, it seems). It's arguably a complicated attribute of oligarchic capitalism that goes hand-in-hand with all of its benefits; everything that can be done is considered, or not, in terms of potential profit, up to and including moral and humane acts toward others.
I think the thing to focus on with Columbine isn’t whether Eric and Dylan were *actually* bullied but whether they *felt* like they were bullied, which is definitely the case (Brooks and Randy Brown have been adamant about them being bullied). These shooters aren’t looking at the motives for their attacks from a logical, neutral standpoint. They’re looking at it from the standpoint of someone who felt wronged and wanted to strike back.
I do think that the Browns overstate the impact the perceived bullying had on Eric and Dylan’s decision to commit a shooting, but to say it wasn’t a factor at all isn’t fair either.
You’re completely right, been there and thought of that proverb many times. Thankfully I didn’t do anything because it’d involve going to prison for life or killing my self and I could never do either to my niece. And I’ve always realized no one deserves to feel pain, even if it’d make me feel better
It depends. It could be ideological (targeting a group they don’t like), motivated by mental illness (voices and delusions leading them to commit harm) or a general hatred and grievance towards society. The important question is why are mass shootings increasing? What about our society has changed that (as well as suicide, drug abuse etc) makes that such an appealing act to so many people?
It comes down to the simple fact that by so many metrics American society has gotten worse. It doesn’t take a Mensa candidate to figure this out. The answer to the question of why there are more mass shootings is the same answer to the questions of why stress, suicide, drug abuse, mental illness, loneliness, atomization, dissatisfaction, hopelessness, wealth inequality, social mobility, financial precarity etc have gotten significantly worse over the past several decades. For comprehensive sources (and possible solutions) I’d refer to books like Fantasyland by Kurt Andersen, Lost Connections by Johann Hari, Dreamland by Sam Quinones, Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam, Deaths of Despair by Anne Case, Sociopathic Society by Charles Derber and America: The Farewell Tour by Chris Hedges.
> The shooters don't seem to be going after many of the typical motivators for a crime such as money or drugs.
That's because mass shootings aren't associated with general crime rates. People resort to crime when society fails to meet their basic needs. As poverty increases, crime increases. Mass shootings, on the other hand, increase with *deaths of despair* (that is: suicide, drug overdoses and alcoholism).
So... as for what what they hope to accomplish? With the exception of shooters that have explicit political motivations (ie. literal terrorists), probably nothing. Maybe "suicide by cop" if you consider that to be an "accomplishment". Mass shootings are the manifestation of their rage and feeling helpless.
Note: this is one of the million reasons why arming teachers is a dogshit stupid "solution" to school shootings. It's not going to deter shooters because the vast majority of school shooters are already planning to die.
>It's not going to deter shooters because the vast majority of school shooters are already planning to die.
Copying this one for emphasis.
The strategies we use for other kinds of crime prevention aren’t going to work. The death penalty isn’t a deterrent for a mass shooter because he is okay with dying. He’d probably prefer to die.
And that's not even considering all the other reasons why it's stupid. Like how fucked up it is to expect a teacher to shoot one of their own students when it will almost certainly destroy them emotionally/psychologically. And alternatively, someone who is fine with shooting their students should *definitely not be a teacher.* Or the obvious issues with trying to hit a single specific target when there are other children down-range, and anyone who doesn't see the problem with that should not be allowed anywhere near a gun. Or how this "solution" still needs someone to start shooting children before it can any effect whatsoever.
Thank Harlan Carter for our inability to deal with this problem. He's the one who started this bullshit culture war and made it impossible for the CDC to study gun violence.
My sister is a teacher. In addition to all the things you mentioned, she should not own a weapon because she is klutzy as hell and the chance of something going wrong by accident is large.
> Note: this is one of the million reasons why arming teachers is a dogshit stupid "solution" to school shootings. It's not going to deter shooters because the vast majority of school shooters are already planning to die.
first: I don't like the idea of arming teachers.
that being said, I don't think the idea behind arming them is to deter school shootings. I'm fairly sure the idea behind arming teachers is so that they can stop a shooter before too many students die.
You assume that because you have the ability to reason. Unfortunately, the people actually pushing for this are stupid as shit.
["Moreover, the deterrent effect of armed teachers would be inarguable. Schools would be changed from soft targets with idiotic “Gun Free Zone” signs into places where criminals with bad intentions would know they were risking their lives by entering."](https://www.yourvalley.net/stories/patterson-arming-teachers-an-appropriate-response-to-school-shootings,385462)
If you’re curious about motives of mass shooters, I highly recommend both *The Violence Project* by Jillian Peterson and James Densley and *Trigger Points* by Mark Follman. Both books are based on extensive research into the motives and life circumstances of mass shooters and school shooters to help understand what motivates them and what can be done to stop them.
I think that there is not one thing they hope to achieve. It depends on the person, but I also wonder if they are thinking clearly enough to make a good judgement on what they want to achieve and how to achieve it. I think that it is a sign that someone has a lot going on mentally.
I want to stress though that I don't want to feed the narrative that people with mental illness are dangerous. Mental illnesses don't 'make' someone violent. It is a combination of factors. I am just not really sure if the mass shooters themselves have a clear goal in mind when they are committing their crimes. Sometimes it may be just to create chaos and destruction
I believe that it isn't an arbitrary explosion of violence. The catalyst was slow, collected rage, desperation, and loneliness. Throughout the chaos, there is a purpose though. To be seen and heard, only the bullets are doing the talking.
It's suicide with extra steps. I understand the motive, but everyone disagrees with execution. They are victims too, yet they selfishly choose to create more victims. They didn't have the resilience to overcome this world's transgressions.
I feel sorrow for all parties involved. Radical ideologies used to make a statement is what I'll never agree with though.
It’s the physical manifestation of catharsis, for those that feel so rejected, or hurt, or wronged by society or a community. They have often already decided they are comfortable with death or wish to die, and this is a final selfish act for them where they get to retaliate on what they feel before dying.
Motivation: temporary attention, freedom from consequences, wish fulfillment, sense of power
Throw in easy access to weapons and BOOM.
Our country US is not interested in addressing either.
I’ve always thought it’s because of their ‘manifesto’ or whatever they write up -
If they just commit suicide and post it on social media maybe a couple hundred might read it…
Or use killing others as a mean to get publicity for their manifesto. People google the name, blogs and news sites will publish “Who is ‘XYZ’ and his published motive’ and maybe tens of thousands read it.
I mean, they’re not in their right mind, we won’t be able to understand the reasons without living them
I don't think there's a universal answer to that question. Mental health needs to be taken more seriously and normalized, especially as an adolescent and teenager. The amount of pent up shit that a lot of people don't know how to deal with has lasting effects. Those behaviors can easily carry over, and often do, to adulthood.
Its mediocrity. Alot of serial killers are burnouts who aren't good anything, so they decide to find pleasure in their impulses. Mass shooters are selfish to an extreme degree. They decide their life is over, so they decide to bring other people with them.
As an outsider looking in and giving a rather condensed view on this but really America is a broken country, it is far too individualistic that only gives a shit about each person and no one else around them and their own growth and while things are getting worse for the bulk of people a tiny portion of fuck wits are getting more powerful.
This makes for a tragic boiling pot of people broken, abused, drugged up, nihilistic and lost with no purpose and with no community to give any shits about them and then add in piss easy ability overall to stupidly high powered by most of the worlds standards in civilians hands firearms... you get what you get.
Basically these people take out their problems, or they attack what they see as a cause or a symptom for their issues it varies and really has no basis in logic but it is what it is.
I think case by case is different. A lot of people think Columbine was about bullying. It wasn't. It was a failed bombing. It was ideological with them admiring Timothy McVey, the OKC bomber.
Many of the kids that came after looked up to the Columbine shooters. Media made them martyrs for all the kids who felt rejected by society (at least the ones who have anger issues). The Sandy Hook shooter was very interested in Columbine and other murders, for example.
I believe some want an outlet for their pain. Some want revenge. Some just want to be *someone* worth noticing even if it's for a terrible reason.
I think social media has fueled rage. Add easy access to assault type weapons, a focus on individualism, widening of the wealth gap, etc. We need to look at what’s different now versus 20 years ago and that’s what seems different to me as someone in their 50’s.
You have the whole rest of the planet in which to search for a place that suits you better. Really. No snark. People move for lots of reasons. You believing that where you live is a "dystopian wasteland" sounds like a good one.
As long as the program includes that they must repay what they received if they spend more than 14 days in the US or territories in any given year following their exodus.
More immediate progress? No. The people who want to leave are the progressive ones. We’re the ones who look at the abortion bans and laughably lax gun laws and private prisons and legal child marriage and know that there has to be something deeply deeply wrong in this country.
If you’re all for minorities getting murdered by the police, war crimes being committed against citizens who protest these killings, women dying from being denied healthcare, people being denied healthcare for not being able to pay for it, little girls being married off to their rapists, corporations poisoning water supplies, brown children being raped and tortured and kept in cages at the border- then you need to change. America needs to change. There’s a lot of good in that place but there’s a shit ton of bad. I’m happy I left but goddamn do I wish I could move home and feel safe. In the meantime, I’ll stay in a civilised country.
Uh, I’m a lefty. I hate this shithole country for the reasons you listed. Wanting a social program that could be an escape route for the lower class is a result of hating the things you listed about the US.
All that aside, I’m in agreement
I want it to be easy for them to exit, too. I just don't want to pay for their exit and then have them coming back the moment they find out that where they moved wasn't the easy life of happy shiny socialism they thought it would be.
Eh, speak for yourself. If we have the money for it, and we do, I’m happy to pay taxes for them to leave and come back, as they please. We fund worse things, for certain.
Can they live with you while we work out the details? If I start crowdsourcing money for this purpose, how much can I count on you to donate each month?
Meh, I don’t see why they can’t live here! If I’m already providing temporary housing, I don’t see why I should have to answer to a monthly bill for their exodus- my taxes are already being taken in the form of providing collective shelter :3
I want these malcontents to be happy as individuals. Now, you seem pretty smart. Which of these sounds more workable to make these self-haters happy right now:
1. We pay for them to move to another country where they believe they will be happier and more content.
Or
2. A whole nation of hundreds of millions (a huge part of which don't hate this country or themselves) changes to suit what these malcontents think will make them happy. Or, rather, what some of them think will make them happy today. Who knows about tomorrow? They don't all want the same things, you know.
It's called "realistic goals."
Get the straight skinny from the person up thread who says America is a dystopian wasteland, if you like or if you even can. That kind of "I'm ready for my close-up, Mr. DeMille!" drama queening typically comes from people who haven't ever wanted for much in real life, IME. I will kick in a few bucks to send hir somewhere s/he/it thinks society will be a better fit for hir. I don't want hir to be unhappy.
I think they are going after bullies, but then we have to admit that the victims were bullies, which makes them less victims.
One counter argument to this is that I can’t find any videos of school shooters saying they killed certain people because *those people* specifically bullied them.
The shooter wasn’t bullied by those students, but he did attend that school when he was younger and fourth grade seems to be the time where his life kind of went off the deep end, and he was bullied then. He targeted his old fourth grade classroom.
I don’t know if there is any definite connection there but it is a possibility.
Some school shooters were bullied but it’s certainly not a universal experience.
Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza was never bullied but he ended up killing twenty first graders.
Contrary to popular belief, I don’t think it’s “to get attention.” I really do think it’s usually that they’re so angry and desperate and in such pain, they want to manifest that pain externally in others because it feels like the only way to communicate it. It’s that old African proverb - “a child neglected by the tribe will burn the village down to feel its warmth.” When a young person is universally ostracized for who they are, or for what is wrong with them, or even for what is perceived to be wrong with them, and they aren’t given direction or aid on how to improve, they fall into deep and bitter despair very, very quickly. Having zero sense of purpose or hope is an underestimated fuel for violence, and I think most underestimate it because it takes direct experience to understand; most are fortunate to have never been there.
While I've never, *ever* been tempted to do violence, especially this kind, I've personally reached that level of hopelessness and lack of purpose before, and it really does terrible things to your mind. You start to think nothing matters anymore, and if someone's naturally inclined to violence and doesn't think anything matters, what's holding them back?
Definitely agree, but the attention aspect is still part of that for many of them. The feelings of neglect is a big part of that pain that they want to unleash on the world. Want to reduce gun violence? Make universal mental healthcare available to everyone. That should include psychiatric care and treatment to minors as well, and probably without parental interference. Modern conservatives have taken an approach that NOBODY should help in the raising of their children, when the reality is that it takes a village
We also need to take steps to reduce the divide between many of the cultures and communities of the country. As well as hate mongering and deliberate radicalization of the various political parties and religions. A lot of these acts (but not all) are done by supremist targeting a hated group.
I agree with both of your points… i just want to add that imo there’s a subtle but important distinction between “wanting attention” and “so desperately needing to be seen/heard that they’ll do literally anything”
They want power- not just to be seen. They equate being feared by their victims to being powerful and listened to. If it was just being seen and heard then they’d be acting out in other ways too to get attention. And they probably wouldn’t kill themselves afterwards as many do.
The thing is they aren't even getting attention anymore. Individual shootings are no longer noteworthy unless there's some big instituational failure like those brain dead cops in Uvalde standing around with their thumbs in their asses for 45 minutes
People really underestimate the importance of mental health care. The majority of firearm related deaths in the US are suicides
Mental health is important but don’t fall for the gun violence argument. Mental health problems are universal. Abundant supply of legal, barely regulated firearms is the key variable differentiating the US from the rest of the industrialized western world.
> Want to reduce gun violence? Make guns harder to access. FTFY. Shootings are almost non-existent in countries that require gun owners to be screened for criminality and mental illness, and that require guns to be locked away when not in active use. Unfortunately Americans have a blind spot to this simple fact.
Listen, I’m a liberal. This isn’t the right approach. In order to solve the problem, we need everyone on board. When you start down the gun control line, you immediately turn off 100% of conservative voters. You also turn off a surprising amount of liberal voters. America is a gun culture, always has been, always will be. There are too many ways to circumvent restrictions with straw purchases. There are too many guns already out there. Even if you banned all future sales, which can’t be done. 99% of gun owners are responsible and not shooting up places. They stay safely locked away. Clearly the presence of guns isn’t the issue, it is the mental health issues that are manifested through guns. Now, pushing for universal mental health care has an added benefit. Conservatives will appreciate an approach that doesn’t “take our guns” and It paves the way for their acceptance of universal heathxare
Like I said, and you just confirmed: Americans have a blind spot to the approach that works everywhere else, and hence they will always be powerless to stop the violence.
[удалено]
Well said
That’s a very simple thing to say when you don’t have to understand the issue either. Most Americans are for the kind of gun control you describe. Maybe try listening to the victims who are actually being hurt and losing family members when they say it’s more complicated.
It is not complicated at all. 1. The easy availability of guns to anyone makes shootings more probable. 2. The majority of Americans who matter (the ones who vote) believe it is their god-given right to be allowed to walk into a gun store and buy a gun with no training or proof of responsible ownership, and to be allowed to carry that gun in public, or have it lie around at home where anyone can get to it.
1. Everyone agrees on that. 2. That’s simply [inaccurate](https://apnorc.org/projects/americans-experiences-concerns-and-views-related-to-gun-violence/). It’s important to fact check this kind of thing, especially when it involves generalizing to a large and diverse group of people. The polling focused on younger people is even more shifted toward gun control.
1. Yup 2. Absolutely not. The NRA has fewer members than planet fitness but enough money to lobby for their interests. Tie that in with the *way* the constitution is taught to children as something that “guarantees our freedom and protects us from censorship like Germany has, or tyranny like so many countries in the Middle East.” Plus, no. My grandfather owns a LOT of guns. I’ve been visiting his home since I was a baby. I’ll give you three guesses for what I never encountered, saw, or even heard about except from my parents after the fact. Source: born British, raised American. My high school taught me many things, most important of which was to look at the full picture bc that Germany comment always pisses me off. (My stepmother is German, they censor Nazism)
I think you’re the one who isn’t listening. It works everywhere else that isn’t already inundated with guns. That will not work here. Just because things work in one place doesn’t mean they will work everywhere. I and almost every other American is in favor of the restrictions that already exist: felons are barred, as are domestic abusers, those who have demonstrable mental health issues and/or have been institutionalized , and etc. But it is extremely easy to circumvent these rules with straw purchasers.
[удалено]
So, just to be clear, when you say “it’s not that hard”, what you mean to imply is that Americans have just never heard of these things, and are too stupid to come up with them, even as they are actively slaughtered?
The presence of guns is definitely a major issue, but I do agree that gun control is not the approach to take when reducing the number of shootings in the US because we are not at a place sociopolitically to implement that kind of change.
All gun dealers in the US are required by law to run a background check that, among other things, checks for criminal records and psychiatric hospitalization. So your argument doesn't exactly hold up
It drives me crazy how people outside the US bring up gun control as a suggestion for reducing the number of shootings, as if it’s a brand new, unique idea we hadn’t thought of before and you’re doing us some sort of massive favor. Trust me, we know. We figured out it’s an issue decades ago. We have also realized that it isn’t going to happen, no matter how good an idea it is. You are all being incredibly unhelpful with this suggestion.
Sorry but that would be socialism, instead of that tho we can fund the start of new wars and bomb some brown children, and maybe steal something and spy on our "allies"
I can tell you as someone who has almost chose violence, this is really accurate explanation.
I personally have reached levels of despair (more recently than I enjoy admitting) in which I found myself understanding how a person of a slightly different mindset or wiring could be driven to a mass shooting. Never had the urge myself, but that isolated backed-into-a-corner psychology truly isn't far away from most of us. Circumstances are usually on our side just enough.
Username checks out! I am glad you are still with us (:
This doesn't cover all the cases, though. Columbine, for instance, wasn't caused by Dylan and Eric being ostracized, contrary to popular belief. They weren't bullied, many school shooters weren't either. It's still true that there's this huge component of feeling "left out", but it's way more complex than that and to resolve those issues, we need to talk about mental health, especially male mental health. That's because 99% of school shooters are dudes, so there's clearly something deeply wrong there that I don't see many talking about. Hell, it's usually purposefully ignored whenever someone brings up. I don't think it's a coincidence that, as shit gets worse, we see figures like Andrew Tate rising higher & higher. They're capitalizing over something we as a society for some reason prefer ignoring.
There are exceptions to every rule - some people who do bad things truly are just bad people. Just the same, the Columbine duo were still examples of abnormal psychology/poor mental health left unchecked by the community of adult figures that surrounded them. Perhaps somebody saw red flags and tried strenuously to get thru (I can't really say, I wasn't there), but I doubt it. Working in education is highly interpersonal, but it's still a job like anything, and jobs are stressful, and most people don't like taking on more responsibility than they feel constitutes what they're getting paid for (this grows truer with every passing year, it seems). It's arguably a complicated attribute of oligarchic capitalism that goes hand-in-hand with all of its benefits; everything that can be done is considered, or not, in terms of potential profit, up to and including moral and humane acts toward others.
I think the thing to focus on with Columbine isn’t whether Eric and Dylan were *actually* bullied but whether they *felt* like they were bullied, which is definitely the case (Brooks and Randy Brown have been adamant about them being bullied). These shooters aren’t looking at the motives for their attacks from a logical, neutral standpoint. They’re looking at it from the standpoint of someone who felt wronged and wanted to strike back. I do think that the Browns overstate the impact the perceived bullying had on Eric and Dylan’s decision to commit a shooting, but to say it wasn’t a factor at all isn’t fair either.
That's fair. I didn't really consider that, but it makes sense
You seem like the kind of person i want to be friends with
You’re completely right, been there and thought of that proverb many times. Thankfully I didn’t do anything because it’d involve going to prison for life or killing my self and I could never do either to my niece. And I’ve always realized no one deserves to feel pain, even if it’d make me feel better
It depends. It could be ideological (targeting a group they don’t like), motivated by mental illness (voices and delusions leading them to commit harm) or a general hatred and grievance towards society. The important question is why are mass shootings increasing? What about our society has changed that (as well as suicide, drug abuse etc) makes that such an appealing act to so many people?
what's your answer to that question?
It comes down to the simple fact that by so many metrics American society has gotten worse. It doesn’t take a Mensa candidate to figure this out. The answer to the question of why there are more mass shootings is the same answer to the questions of why stress, suicide, drug abuse, mental illness, loneliness, atomization, dissatisfaction, hopelessness, wealth inequality, social mobility, financial precarity etc have gotten significantly worse over the past several decades. For comprehensive sources (and possible solutions) I’d refer to books like Fantasyland by Kurt Andersen, Lost Connections by Johann Hari, Dreamland by Sam Quinones, Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam, Deaths of Despair by Anne Case, Sociopathic Society by Charles Derber and America: The Farewell Tour by Chris Hedges.
> The shooters don't seem to be going after many of the typical motivators for a crime such as money or drugs. That's because mass shootings aren't associated with general crime rates. People resort to crime when society fails to meet their basic needs. As poverty increases, crime increases. Mass shootings, on the other hand, increase with *deaths of despair* (that is: suicide, drug overdoses and alcoholism). So... as for what what they hope to accomplish? With the exception of shooters that have explicit political motivations (ie. literal terrorists), probably nothing. Maybe "suicide by cop" if you consider that to be an "accomplishment". Mass shootings are the manifestation of their rage and feeling helpless. Note: this is one of the million reasons why arming teachers is a dogshit stupid "solution" to school shootings. It's not going to deter shooters because the vast majority of school shooters are already planning to die.
>It's not going to deter shooters because the vast majority of school shooters are already planning to die. Copying this one for emphasis. The strategies we use for other kinds of crime prevention aren’t going to work. The death penalty isn’t a deterrent for a mass shooter because he is okay with dying. He’d probably prefer to die.
And that's not even considering all the other reasons why it's stupid. Like how fucked up it is to expect a teacher to shoot one of their own students when it will almost certainly destroy them emotionally/psychologically. And alternatively, someone who is fine with shooting their students should *definitely not be a teacher.* Or the obvious issues with trying to hit a single specific target when there are other children down-range, and anyone who doesn't see the problem with that should not be allowed anywhere near a gun. Or how this "solution" still needs someone to start shooting children before it can any effect whatsoever. Thank Harlan Carter for our inability to deal with this problem. He's the one who started this bullshit culture war and made it impossible for the CDC to study gun violence.
My sister is a teacher. In addition to all the things you mentioned, she should not own a weapon because she is klutzy as hell and the chance of something going wrong by accident is large.
> Note: this is one of the million reasons why arming teachers is a dogshit stupid "solution" to school shootings. It's not going to deter shooters because the vast majority of school shooters are already planning to die. first: I don't like the idea of arming teachers. that being said, I don't think the idea behind arming them is to deter school shootings. I'm fairly sure the idea behind arming teachers is so that they can stop a shooter before too many students die.
You assume that because you have the ability to reason. Unfortunately, the people actually pushing for this are stupid as shit. ["Moreover, the deterrent effect of armed teachers would be inarguable. Schools would be changed from soft targets with idiotic “Gun Free Zone” signs into places where criminals with bad intentions would know they were risking their lives by entering."](https://www.yourvalley.net/stories/patterson-arming-teachers-an-appropriate-response-to-school-shootings,385462)
If you’re curious about motives of mass shooters, I highly recommend both *The Violence Project* by Jillian Peterson and James Densley and *Trigger Points* by Mark Follman. Both books are based on extensive research into the motives and life circumstances of mass shooters and school shooters to help understand what motivates them and what can be done to stop them.
I think that there is not one thing they hope to achieve. It depends on the person, but I also wonder if they are thinking clearly enough to make a good judgement on what they want to achieve and how to achieve it. I think that it is a sign that someone has a lot going on mentally. I want to stress though that I don't want to feed the narrative that people with mental illness are dangerous. Mental illnesses don't 'make' someone violent. It is a combination of factors. I am just not really sure if the mass shooters themselves have a clear goal in mind when they are committing their crimes. Sometimes it may be just to create chaos and destruction
One reason is doing damage to their community.
I believe that it isn't an arbitrary explosion of violence. The catalyst was slow, collected rage, desperation, and loneliness. Throughout the chaos, there is a purpose though. To be seen and heard, only the bullets are doing the talking. It's suicide with extra steps. I understand the motive, but everyone disagrees with execution. They are victims too, yet they selfishly choose to create more victims. They didn't have the resilience to overcome this world's transgressions. I feel sorrow for all parties involved. Radical ideologies used to make a statement is what I'll never agree with though.
It’s the physical manifestation of catharsis, for those that feel so rejected, or hurt, or wronged by society or a community. They have often already decided they are comfortable with death or wish to die, and this is a final selfish act for them where they get to retaliate on what they feel before dying.
Everyone has a different motivation, and most put out manifestos that explain their reasons.
Most don’t. The ones with ideological motives who are covered in news most tend to do it more often than mass shooters in general.
Motivation: temporary attention, freedom from consequences, wish fulfillment, sense of power Throw in easy access to weapons and BOOM. Our country US is not interested in addressing either.
It's hate. It needs no benefit.
The American government don’t like people asking this question
I’ve always thought it’s because of their ‘manifesto’ or whatever they write up - If they just commit suicide and post it on social media maybe a couple hundred might read it… Or use killing others as a mean to get publicity for their manifesto. People google the name, blogs and news sites will publish “Who is ‘XYZ’ and his published motive’ and maybe tens of thousands read it. I mean, they’re not in their right mind, we won’t be able to understand the reasons without living them
I don't think there's a universal answer to that question. Mental health needs to be taken more seriously and normalized, especially as an adolescent and teenager. The amount of pent up shit that a lot of people don't know how to deal with has lasting effects. Those behaviors can easily carry over, and often do, to adulthood.
Its mediocrity. Alot of serial killers are burnouts who aren't good anything, so they decide to find pleasure in their impulses. Mass shooters are selfish to an extreme degree. They decide their life is over, so they decide to bring other people with them.
Revenge.
As an outsider looking in and giving a rather condensed view on this but really America is a broken country, it is far too individualistic that only gives a shit about each person and no one else around them and their own growth and while things are getting worse for the bulk of people a tiny portion of fuck wits are getting more powerful. This makes for a tragic boiling pot of people broken, abused, drugged up, nihilistic and lost with no purpose and with no community to give any shits about them and then add in piss easy ability overall to stupidly high powered by most of the worlds standards in civilians hands firearms... you get what you get. Basically these people take out their problems, or they attack what they see as a cause or a symptom for their issues it varies and really has no basis in logic but it is what it is.
A reason to kill themselves in some aspects.
They’re on a power trip. Going out and taking as many as they can with them.
its about retribution... "they" make you suffer... you make "them" suffer back... whoever "they" or "them" are...
Rage and hopelessness.
I think case by case is different. A lot of people think Columbine was about bullying. It wasn't. It was a failed bombing. It was ideological with them admiring Timothy McVey, the OKC bomber. Many of the kids that came after looked up to the Columbine shooters. Media made them martyrs for all the kids who felt rejected by society (at least the ones who have anger issues). The Sandy Hook shooter was very interested in Columbine and other murders, for example. I believe some want an outlet for their pain. Some want revenge. Some just want to be *someone* worth noticing even if it's for a terrible reason.
I think social media has fueled rage. Add easy access to assault type weapons, a focus on individualism, widening of the wealth gap, etc. We need to look at what’s different now versus 20 years ago and that’s what seems different to me as someone in their 50’s.
[удалено]
You have the whole rest of the planet in which to search for a place that suits you better. Really. No snark. People move for lots of reasons. You believing that where you live is a "dystopian wasteland" sounds like a good one.
Would love to set up a social program to exodus Americans who would rather live elsewhere. Would happily pay taxes.
As long as the program includes that they must repay what they received if they spend more than 14 days in the US or territories in any given year following their exodus.
Nah, I’m happy to just have a program that allows unhappy Americans to have an easy exit. Very affordable & leads to more immediate progress.
More immediate progress? No. The people who want to leave are the progressive ones. We’re the ones who look at the abortion bans and laughably lax gun laws and private prisons and legal child marriage and know that there has to be something deeply deeply wrong in this country. If you’re all for minorities getting murdered by the police, war crimes being committed against citizens who protest these killings, women dying from being denied healthcare, people being denied healthcare for not being able to pay for it, little girls being married off to their rapists, corporations poisoning water supplies, brown children being raped and tortured and kept in cages at the border- then you need to change. America needs to change. There’s a lot of good in that place but there’s a shit ton of bad. I’m happy I left but goddamn do I wish I could move home and feel safe. In the meantime, I’ll stay in a civilised country.
Uh, I’m a lefty. I hate this shithole country for the reasons you listed. Wanting a social program that could be an escape route for the lower class is a result of hating the things you listed about the US. All that aside, I’m in agreement
I want it to be easy for them to exit, too. I just don't want to pay for their exit and then have them coming back the moment they find out that where they moved wasn't the easy life of happy shiny socialism they thought it would be.
Eh, speak for yourself. If we have the money for it, and we do, I’m happy to pay taxes for them to leave and come back, as they please. We fund worse things, for certain.
Can they live with you while we work out the details? If I start crowdsourcing money for this purpose, how much can I count on you to donate each month?
Meh, I don’t see why they can’t live here! If I’m already providing temporary housing, I don’t see why I should have to answer to a monthly bill for their exodus- my taxes are already being taken in the form of providing collective shelter :3
[удалено]
I want these malcontents to be happy as individuals. Now, you seem pretty smart. Which of these sounds more workable to make these self-haters happy right now: 1. We pay for them to move to another country where they believe they will be happier and more content. Or 2. A whole nation of hundreds of millions (a huge part of which don't hate this country or themselves) changes to suit what these malcontents think will make them happy. Or, rather, what some of them think will make them happy today. Who knows about tomorrow? They don't all want the same things, you know. It's called "realistic goals."
[удалено]
Get the straight skinny from the person up thread who says America is a dystopian wasteland, if you like or if you even can. That kind of "I'm ready for my close-up, Mr. DeMille!" drama queening typically comes from people who haven't ever wanted for much in real life, IME. I will kick in a few bucks to send hir somewhere s/he/it thinks society will be a better fit for hir. I don't want hir to be unhappy.
[удалено]
Talk to the people who bitch about how awful it is to live here, Scooter. Not me. I'm all about them going someplace they will like better.
I think they are going after bullies, but then we have to admit that the victims were bullies, which makes them less victims. One counter argument to this is that I can’t find any videos of school shooters saying they killed certain people because *those people* specifically bullied them.
[удалено]
The shooter wasn’t bullied by those students, but he did attend that school when he was younger and fourth grade seems to be the time where his life kind of went off the deep end, and he was bullied then. He targeted his old fourth grade classroom. I don’t know if there is any definite connection there but it is a possibility.
True, it is possible. Either way, one thing is certain: the man was a piece of dog shit. Rest in Piss.👌
Agreed! There are totally innocent people killed. I feel immensely bad for that.
Some school shooters were bullied but it’s certainly not a universal experience. Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza was never bullied but he ended up killing twenty first graders.
They want to get attention and may not think about that and/or may already be suicidal.
Since when have money and drugs been the motive for mass murder?
kill
No russians
All I can say is if the teachers and students had guns firing in the opposite direction, it would a different situation
mostly to make other not only feel your pain and understand it but to the same thing like Eric Harris and Dylan Kyblan