In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

[jackstraw94086]

well just imagine if french peasants had access to message boards.

[saranater]

Genuinely honest question: Do you believe in souls?

I'm not leading you with that question. I'm honestly trying to figure out what you're talking about without making assumptions.

No. I believe in science and nothing hokey pokey.

[xuclarockerx]

Help me here, I value others' perspectives. Is there really a whole segment of the population unable to think in any terms other than glib soundbites? I mean, do we have a subnation of Neighborhood Creeps, whose reasoning ability and debating skills are more akin to a middle school playground than anything resembling thoughtful dialogue? Do these people never question their own assumptions, think through a full set of facts, attempt to understand the role of the subconscious? Is this how propaganda works? Is this why Republicans keep voting to cut education funding?

You do realize there's propaganda on all sides, and people who can and cannot "think" all along the spectrum?

[saranater]

Yeah.. but its way worse on the right. I believe there has been research to show more liberal and tolerant views are associated with higher intelligence.

[jackstraw94086]

Yeah.. but its way worse on the right. I believe there has been research to show more liberal and tolerant views are associated with higher intelligence.

This is partially true. There have been studies that tend to correlate it but it's probably more complex than liberal = smarter. There are parts of the brain associated with empathy and others that regulate emotions like disgust. Lower tolerance for disgust is highly correlated with conservativism. Your brain has something analogous to a tolerance for physical pain. Those with a higher tolerance (read: ability to overcome baser emotions and instincts) tend towards liberalism. This says nothing about other types of intelligence though. Everyone knows men have way more of that stuff. Like a mountain more.

But there's debate as to how much it's hard wired and how pliable it is. Individuals are spread along a continuum, but sociobiologists have shown that empathy benchmark has been hurtling to the left in recent history. Peter Singer explains it well in The Expanding Circle. And Steven Pinker talks about it in Better Angels of Our Nature (too long, don't read), and The Blank Slate (fantastic book, must read). Killing used to be accepted in ancient cultures. Now it just hangs on in some smaller honor based cultures. Slavery used to be perfectly acceptable, now it's pretty much universally abhorred. the list goes on.


But back on the topic of the metaphysical: you say you don't believe in souls. That would suggest that all actions are based in physical phenomena (chemicals, to dumb it down). So what is it that makes a "normal" person commit atrocities for their own sake? How do you explain a "normal" mind, free of mental or emotional deficiencies committing murder (and before the definition of "murder" comes into stupid debate again, please note that killing to preserve personal safety or national duty is excluded)

[saranater]

But back on the topic of the metaphysical: you say you don't believe in souls. That would suggest that all actions are based in physical phenomena (chemicals, to dumb it down). So what is it that makes a "normal" person commit atrocities for their own sake? How do you explain a "normal" mind, free of mental or emotional deficiencies committing murder (and before the definition of "murder" comes into stupid debate again, please note that killing to preserve personal safety or national duty is excluded)

I'm reluctant to respond to your question with any level of effort due to your tendency to dismiss others contributions and more or less "troll", but here goes...

So you've defined normal as a mind free of mental and emotional deficiencies. My argument lies in the fact that simply having some mental and/or emotional "deficiencies" does not mean a person has a mental illness. A person without a diagnosable mental illness could commit murder because they have extreme feelings of anger, social alienation, rumination on violent revenge, a desire for notoriety... Are those characteristics of a perfectly emotionally and psychologically healthy human being? Obviously not. But no such person exists. Every person will have some mental or emotional deficiencies, but we don't label every person as having a mental illness or being mentally ill because of their deficiencies. In order to be classified as having any particular mental illness, a person needs to be assessed on a number of symptoms occurring within a specific period of time and having a significant impact on functioning.

So while I completely understand the notion that this person must be not quite right because his actions fell so far out of social norms, this alone does not necessitate a psychiatric diagnosis.

So my argument is that the statement that any person who could do something like this has a mental illness is inaccurate. This is an argument that is supported in the scientific literature (shoot me your email and I'll send you some journal articles). I believe that believing that something like this could happen entirely due to undiagnosed or untreated mental illness ignores issues that may be more central to these events. Further, it perpetuates a stigma that mentally ill people are violent, and that only mentally ill people do terrible things. And this just isnt the case. There is no "mass murder" symptom listed in the DSM for any of the mental illnesses.

This behaviour, in and of itself, is simply not enough to diagnose a mental illness.

[jackstraw94086]

You're the troll!

OK so at this point you will not back away from the current text book diagnoses for traditional mental illnesses. Fine. I'll drop that word. My point was that a person who is capable of behaving this way is a danger to society, and as such he is not "normal". The more appropriate word in this context is probably sociopath anyway. Will you accept the use of that word? Sociopathy is by definition abnormal.

You softened up to "not quite right because of his actions", but then you get questionable again with "out of social norms". That's putting it too lightly. Mass murder is FAR FAR out of social norms. It's not even in the normal ballpark, it's entirely abnormal. I can safely say this because if even a very small portion of society behaved this way society probably could not develop. What makes humans unique is the ability to perceive the wants and needs of others and experience them as if they were their own. Without this we could not live together, even if a very small portion the population didn't possess this capacity.

If you agree with that then it's just a matter of semantics over "mental illness", but if you deny that every mass murder must necessarily have "something severely wrong with his head" then I think something's wrong with yours.

You seem to be worried about some sort of stigma against the "mentally ill" by being associated with mass murderers. Again I think that stems from your narrow usage of the term and creating a distinct border between people with "mental illness" and those without. IMO everybody exist along a mental health continuum regardless of what your text book says.

[RotationSlimWang]

Holy shit, cut to a day later and Jack has clearly been trying to back up the fucking retarded statement that he made about people having to be mentally ill in order to be capable of murder. Dude, you used to at least start smart arguments, this thread you've been throwing out some seriously dumb bait.

[saranater]

My concern about stigma and improper use of the term mental illness comes from the fact that I work at a mental health organization as a mental health worker helping people with mental illness. If you want to call it semantics, fine. It is more than that, though. its about accuracy... when we are inaccurate with the term, we are stigmatizing mental illness in an unfair way.

Having a defect, a deficiency, whatever you want to call it, is not the same as having a mental illness. I believe it is important not to blur these boundaries. Yes, everyone exists along a mental health continuum (I believe I made that point when I stated that we all have some emotional or psychological deficiencies). No, at present that is no formal psychological diagnosis for anyone who commits mass murder. There is no "mass murderer personality disorder." Even "sociopathy" (or antisocial personality disorder, or psychopathy, or whatever you want to call it), can not completely explain away every instance of mass murder.

[TomAz]

Insane... or inspired???

[bmack86]

In case anyone who wants to use the Second Amendment as an argument for either side would like to educate themselves on the contentious developments in interpretation of that poorly written amendment, here's a very interesting law review comment reviewing the Heller case.

If you spout about the 2nd amendment and want to be able to actually argue your point with some degree of coherence, I expect that you'll at least be aware of these thorny issues.

[hippityhip]

Didn't read through all of this but being in the military I can say that being able to own an M4 as a civilian is probably not the best option. That weapon is accurate and it's used to kill. It sucks that it was one of the weapons used.

[faxman75]

Civilians shouldn't own guns that are accurate and used to kill? *scratches head* WAT?!

[hippityhip]

Wuh? not at M4 level is what I'm saying. No other reason to own that weapon other than to kill.

[faxman75]

Hmm maybe try explaining that a few more times?

[Mugwog]

I went to a range the other day and shot a gun with no issues, just signed in, paid for the range fee/target deposit, then started shooting my friends AK47 with him. Never showed any ID at all. Very accurate and fun weapon to shoot - Oh I should note: I'm also a felon. I have a problem with the easy access to a range. I also have a problem with my felony charge (failed drug war on pot).

Thankfully I'm not that insane to the point of where I would lose my shit, but the internet is proof that you can drive someone insane with just a quick paragraph and a link or two citing how they fail at life. Unfortunately as a nation, I just can't vouch for its intelligence, we're some angry mother fuckers who get off on violence and sex for entertainment, if not that then something distinguishing a character as different from the norm of society.

Yes there are always going to be logical folks who own guns, but its too easy to get a gun in this country. I used to load a gun everyday at a pot shop I worked at, it didn't help when we had a robbery and I had 3 guns to my head, I left that fucking gun out of sight, I was not going to risk my life or my employee's life. I'm all for guns for certain reasons, but the accessibility and the glamour they hold in multimedia is frightening. When you look at people like they are points in a video game rather than a life that has grown and evolved up to a point where you decide its ok to end it, guns are a huge fuck up.

ALSO LOOK AT HOW PEOPLE USE GUNS INCORRECTLY: Watch the season finale of Dexter. Fuckin Deb, you retard.

[Mugwog]

Wuh? not at M4 level is what I'm saying. No other reason to own that weapon other than to kill.

What if you wanted to rob someone?

[jackstraw94086]

Holy shit, cut to a day later and Jack has clearly been trying to back up the fucking retarded statement that he made about people having to be mentally ill in order to be capable of murder. Dude, you used to at least start smart arguments, this thread you've been throwing out some seriously dumb bait.

Please aspire to post something less useless.

[hippityhip]

Hmm maybe try explaining that a few more times?

The military picked that weapon for it's accuracy. It's used in war. I've used it and trained with it for the sole purpose of killing. Am I not being clear? (not trying to be an asshole)

[faxman75]

I support the right of citizens to bear inaccurate arms that do not kill.

For the record i'm not trying to sound like an asshole either, this is how what you are saying reads to me.

[Miroir Noir]

A poorly sighted-in bb gun.

[jackstraw94086]

My concern about stigma and improper use of the term mental illness comes from the fact that I work at a mental health organization as a mental health worker helping people with mental illness. If you want to call it semantics, fine. It is more than that, though. its about accuracy... when we are inaccurate with the term, we are stigmatizing mental illness in an unfair way.

Having a defect, a deficiency, whatever you want to call it, is not the same as having a mental illness. I believe it is important not to blur these boundaries. Yes, everyone exists along a mental health continuum (I believe I made that point when I stated that we all have some emotional or psychological deficiencies). No, at present that is no formal psychological diagnosis for anyone who commits mass murder. There is no "mass murderer personality disorder." Even "sociopathy" (or antisocial personality disorder, or psychopathy, or whatever you want to call it), can not completely explain away every instance of mass murder.

The notions of "mental health exists along a continuum" and your strict boundaries for "mental illness" are pretty much incompatible.
Your last sentence is once again nonsensical. It's a useless statement in opposition to a argument that was never made. How is "sociopathy" ever supposed to be a complete explanation of anything? nobody ever said that. You just refuse to admit that mass murder is the product of an abnormal mind. There's something wrong with yours.

We're done. peace be with you.

[hippityhip]

^ I get it but I guess what I'm trying to say is what others have probably already said; the availability and easy access of weapons that are known for specifically killing people in mass numbers quickly should not be the norm in our country.

[Mugwog]

Anyone wanna play MW4?

[jackstraw94086]

Civilians shouldn't own guns that are accurate and used to kill? *scratches head* WAT?!

You do realize there are guns specifically designed to kill humans in combat situations vs ones that are designed to hunt animals right?

to peg him for his "accurate" remark is to willfully ignore the obvious context.

[bmack86]

Yeah Mark, you're off the mark here. Forest for the trees and all that.

[chairmenmeow47]

A poorly sighted-in bb gun.

but you'll shoot your eye out

[TomAz]

[marooko]

Yay! It's Christmas again.

[Devin the Dude]

/thread