The school shootings never end … and no one knows how to stop them
I have a special affection for young people. I have raised six of them as family – biological and fostered kids — and mentored many more. For me, being a dad is the best job on earth.
Every mass shooting – every untimely death – saddens me to the core, especially young people. It is impossible to watch the news of these tragic events without welling up. Having lost a young grandson in war, I know the pain at a very personal level.
As a nation, we collectively mourn tragic deaths – especially of the young. Those with happy lives and bright futures. We feel the pain in our gut when looking at the face of the young American hostage so brutally and needlessly murdered in cold blood by Palestinian terrorists.
Now a few days later, we learn of the murder of four more innocent people – two teachers and two 14-year-old children — by a 14-year-old classmate in Winder, Georgia. For most people, it is beyond comprehension.
Each time there is such a tragic event, it is déjà vu all over again. The same calls for prayers and understanding. The same empty language. The same empty search for an explanation. Why does this keep happening in America? Why are we always left with the sad belief that it will most certainly happen again?
Even as we grieve, the most important question is … how can we prevent it from ever happening again? That is the question we have failed to answer time and time again — maybe because there is no answer. Certainly, no easy or quick answer.
Each shooting triggers the same old divisive debate on gun control – and the same old lament from the left. How is it that the majority of Americans want gun control and yet the political leaders – on both sides fail to respond?
The first thing to understand is that while support for “gun control” is wide, it is not very deep. It is rarely seen on the list of the top dozen issues that matter to voters. That is because the term “gun control” is a generalization that lacks specific meaning in most cases.
When it does get specific – such as in the cases of bump stocks and red flag laws – there is a response from the government. In fact, we have seen laws regulating guns evolve over decades. In my youth, there were virtually no restrictions on gun purchasing, ownership or use – not even an age limit (as the 1950s advertisement atop this commentary attests).
One thing that holds back future regulatory laws is the failure of all the past laws to make a difference. There is a growing realization that all the past gun control efforts have failed – so why should future ones succeed?
While people favor gun control generically, they do not agree on the specific issues. The devil is in the details. Most Americans believe – or accept – that private gun ownership is a constitutional right and mostly a good thing. Those who would confiscate guns are in a very small minority. There is no political energy for changing the Constitution on the matter of guns.
Polling shows that banning the so-called assault rifle has less support than the generic gun control question. Sentiment has more support than specific realities.
If more gun control is not achievable or beneficial, what is left?
The first thing we need to address is the difference in the types of mass shootings – where three of more people are either wounded or killed in a single event. For obvious reasons, the most shocking (and most reported) shootings are due to the nature of the victims … the level of the carnage … the perceived safeness of the locations … and the lack of rational explanation or motivation.
In recent years, there has been a shift in focus from the gun to the mind of the shooters. What is causing so many mostly young men to engage in such heinous actions – mostly resulting in their own deaths or long term imprisonment?
Then there are the other mass murder events – shootings and by other means. These tend to be motivated – not for good cause or justification, but motivated. They can be broken down into three categories – gang-related, established personal grievances and political terrorism.
We rely on government agencies, such as the FBI, CIA and Homeland Security to track down the terrorists before they act – and after. Killing based on personal grievances are tougher to prevent, with restraining orders and red flag laws being the main preventative tools.
We fail big time in gang related killings in America’s segregated minority communities – including innocent bystanders. There is an enforcement failure due to longstanding de facto institutional racism. Since most of the weapons in those cases are illegally possessed, we need to get the guns off the streets.
The most difficult mass shootings are like the one we most recently experienced in Winder. The lone wolf with mental issues. There is no practical way of preventing them from obtaining a weapon if they are determined. Not having guns in the home – or keeping them under lock and key has not worked. Where there is a will, there is a way.
In Parkland, Florida … in Oakland, Michigan … in Winder, Georgia and others …, red flag laws failed. People who saw something did not say something – or if they did, the warnings were ignored.
One of the reasons life goes on after a tragic mass shooting is that despite the claims that it can happen anywhere at any time, most folks do not believe it will happen in their community – and statistically, they are correct. That is part of the reason why the calls for gun control ebb without more legislation or political accountability.
If you are expecting me to close with an answer – with an agenda of actions – you will be disappointed. I do not know what we can do to remove these insane mass shootings from our culture. But I do believe that engaging in the traditional fight over gun control will not lead to an answer.
If there is an answer to be found, it will be in the cultural forces that produce these deranged killers. Pointing to the gun as the primary cause only distracts us from exploring the real causes – whatever they might be.
So, there ‘tis.
I have met a number of Republicans who think old. I don’t mean curmudgeon, I don’t mean demented. I mean yearning for the joys of yesteryear. They dream of going back to a Mayberry that never existed. They dream of living with the Founders. They look backwards more than they look forwards for safety as they forget hunger, disease, and poverty in forging our nation. As I reach my 70’s, I am getting there at times too. I used to dress like a hippie, then grunge, now I am offended by rude apparel. I want to turn the hands back on TV and movies. I miss saying he and she. Go figure, all I can say is life is a funny duck.
Once I met and listened to Timothy Leary who struck me as having the wisdom of man and the inquisitive innocence of youth. Later he was behind me at a showing of The Magical Mystery Tour giggling as if it was the first showing for him. I try to keep that spark of youth, but probably fail miserably and face it, wisdom is not my strong suit. But I endeavor to persevere.
While no one can never read the mind of Horist, and apparently what he shares is not the mind of Horist or can only be misinterpreted, I will say it SEEMS he not only thinks old, but he has done this since he was young. It’s OK, IMO, might even be right sometimes, but often — it’s just old. You can’t go back on some things. Factories are not coming back. There will be no second coming of coal. And oil is gone, we just don’t know it yet. Likewise, the days of the revolution are gone, the plucky minutemen have smart backpack weapons and drones. You can’t just pack up and head west to the lawless frontier. We are over 330 million people attempting to live our lives, together, as one country.
“I have a special affection for young people,” is probably not a great way to say this great thing in the modern era. Ask the Catholic church…. I respect what Horist does with family, even more so that they all are not of his blood. That’s amazing. But Horist, really…. a special affection…..in 2024? Sounds a little old and out of place to boot.
“Every mass shooting – every untimely death – saddens me to the core, especially young people. It is impossible to watch the news of these tragic events without welling up. “ “Each shooting triggers the same old divisive debate on gun control – and the same old lament from the left.” After welling up and doing absolutely nothing except write an article that admits it has no recommendations, the left is blamed for divisiveness for suggesting controls. Old.
Horist is talking school shootings but triggers the same old divisive debate about all the different types of murders, mass murders, and mass shootings. Old. At least he only alludes to Democrats but leaves the name unsaid.
Again, not that there’s anything wrong with this thinking; it just appears to me to be old.
Horist himself DOES have a number of great gun control recommendations he has apparently forgot. Old? I might say perhaps not germane to school shootings, but hey — he talks about every type of shooting you could imagine, so what’s up with dropping his, IMO, solid recommendations?
Like Horist, I ask myself: why the same old thing every time there’s one more shooting? My current thinking is most certainly not old and stems perhaps from the anti-vax devotion to the concept of herd immunity. If enough of us catch it, and enough survive, perhaps we can gain immunity. Today I apply this to guns. It’s not my recommendation but I am pretty sure it’s the path we have put ourselves on.
This is harsh, very harsh, but perhaps the best solution is to do nothing. Let’s just shoot our way out of here because if we just keep shooting, keep killing, perhaps at some point we will do more than just well up admitting defeat before compromise, words instead of actions, even forgetting potential solutions. Perhaps, if enough kids die, we will finally rise up, work together, and stop having kids kill kids, adults using guns to solve problems. We just seem to feel we need more kids dead before we get to that place.
I know that’s cruel, inhuman, and nasty, but isn’t that where we are heading? Doesn’t Horist putting his hands in the air giving up confirm that? Going to hell in a handbasket and not even enjoying the ride? So, go full Leary and next time this happens, smile, laugh, and turn to your neighbor with a big smile and say: “gosh, I am welling up; we should do something about this.” And maybe, just maybe, if we kill enough kids with guns, someday we will.
FYI: on a more positive note. There is a change on this shooting. A new game may be afoot. The parents in the Georgia shooting are charged with murder. Really fast. There are other trials out there like the one in Michigan. For two decades, my lament has been the tragedy of calling a child shooting a tragedy and moving on. It’s a mental health issue. No need to charge the parents, they have been though a lot. BULLSHIT: if the law locks a few of these assholes up for a long time, if we keep doing it, do it a lot, as some point even a Trumplicant might figure out keeping the fucking gun on the coffee table is a bad idea. We may not notice it, but that will help. Young thinking, hold the parents accountable, take their wealth, take their freedom, set an example, make an example, and maybe, just maybe, a few of these shootings won’t happen in the present because we are living in the past. This ain’t the wild West anymore, you are not a minuteman protecting our democracy, so let’s leave the mil-spec equipment in the armory where it belongs, not on the coffee table.
Frank Stetosn…. I get a kick out of your “old man/old thinking” narrative theme. Especially from a guy who spends so much time on PBP telling the world about his past adventures. While I know it means nothing to you, but for the record I will tell you that my family and friends would laugh at your old man theory. For the most part, they consider me a very young old man. You may not believe that, but it does not matter since what they think matters to me… and what you invent does not. Like Tom, you cannot stop the personal attacks.
Now that I have vented, some facts.
First tome will just discuss definitions, the first reason we can’t have a decent discussion. And a bit on the NRA effect on data.
Horist, your definition of mass shooting is correct and incorrect at the same time. Some history. I have been researching this since about 2008 but stopped a few years in as I uncovered the verbatims on many child shootings, kids killing kids. To your point, I just got sick at the lack of action. By 2013, when better data became available, I could take it no more. My recommendations to my elected officials, the NRA, and many others went unanswered. Marching was ineffective. I gave up and surrendered on this one. The NRA is really good at what it does.
I agree with Horist that nothing will be done based on recent shootings. But now I smile, turn to my neighbor, smile and say: “gosh, I am welling up; we should do something about this” knowing that only more mass shootings may spur us to actual actions.
Before 2013, there was only mass murder, by FBI definition, 4 dead, single location, single shooter. There was no mass shooting definition and three dead — not mass. Many dead in many locations – not counted. More than one shooter, not counted. The entire FBI database targeted mass murder at 4 or more dead in a single location. Sure, you could pull all homicides from the database, but with mass, the only prepared database was to the FBI’s definition.
Around 2013, some government rule/law whatever moved it to 3 dead but I am not sure any database was constructed for that.
But in 2013, the Gun Violence Archive opened up and the world changed. Power to the People, dude. The internet rules. They started counting Mass Shootings as including wounded but not dead. They created the Mass Shooting definition of 4, wounded or dead, single location, single shooter, but databased anything that moved, or stopped moving. Here’s the cool part, they used crowd-sourcing adding incidences that could be documented back to multiple legitimate sources. People responded. And they database blew up larger, so much larger, than what the FBI database covered. Exponentially larger. After a few years, the world’s view had changed and mass shootings were the thing, mass murders less so. And the numbers skyrocketed over the previous FBI definitional world. The world of gun death changed in America. Not to mention opening the kimono ok kid deaths, kid killings, and who was not being charged. It was a real mind bender and I am proud to be a real load on the system…. Heh, heh.
Then the FBI moved off Mass Murder to Active Shooter which is a soft definition covering all types of shootings. Hard to figure out what they are counting, but it sure sounds cool. I can’t even find an FBI Mass Murder database anymore. I wish I better knew the history of all this, but I know I am close.
Bottom line: in the modern world of today, we have many definitions in our tower of Babel, and that makes the data results ridiculous in that no two definitions produce the same data.
Here’s the current definitions Horist. And yes, it’s a major problem that favors those trying to hide the magnitude of the problem. If you have a bad definitional foundation, then you have mud in the results.
*https://everytownresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2023/03/Mass-Shooting-Report-Methodology.pdf*
Above is a pretty good compendium of definitions.
*https://usafacts.org/articles/what-is-considered-a-mass-shooting/*
This is USAfacts, Steve Balmer’s new fact base, pretty cool and adds the FBI definition. This, like AI, might not be totally correct.
*file:///C:/Users/james/Downloads/active-shooter-incidents-in-the-us-2022-042623%20(1).pdf*
FBI active shooter report showing how as bad as the Mass Murder static definition is, that the FBI can indeed make it more confusing to the point of being MUD. I honestly can’t figure out what they are trying to count.
One reason we yell at each other is that there is very little quantitative analysis of guns in America. Sure, we count guns, deaths, but we don’t have very many, current, large, expensive, multi-variant quantitative studies to see what’s happening scientifically.
So, I say loose gun states have higher gun deaths and you say: Vermont. Anomaly. Almost every gun fact has anomalies and given 50 States of differing gun laws, the data needs a supercomputer just to count, much less analyze. So, we talk correlations, associations, but not quantitative statistical analysis of a multi-variant variety. IOW — we don’t know WHY Vermont is an anomaly.
The one organization with the scope and money to pull this off is the Federal Government and the NRA has them stopped cold. The CDC will not study our leading cause of death: the gun. PERIOD. They will count, but they will not assess WHY. It is what it is.
So, a plethora of foundational definitions, few large-scale quantitative scientific analyses, lots of anomalies, and a divisive population even, issues like background checks, where the population generally agrees, we can’t take action to make them universal, safe and secure.
Without a solid definitional foundation, all we have is the Tower of Babel as we continue to struggle through the shootings looking for a solution, any solution, that will help.
And now the actual gun control situation. Rather than my spin, here’s PEW’s assessment. Of course it’s not a scientific quantitative peer-reviewed study, but I think many can see some correlations, most of which disagree with the Horstian assessments.
*https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/*
I have simple guiding principles learned from my early research and battle-hardened with gunnies I believe to be true:
1. If you have more guns, you have more gun deaths. PERIOD. (see the South)
2. Even in a tough gun control geography, you will have more gun deaths IF surrounded by loose gun states given our porous State borders. PERIOD. (see Chicago)
3. The gun, the tool, is the most efficient and effective killing machine. No other personal tool of the weapon category is equivalent. Poisons fail more than guns. Bombs are hard to get materials for and build without blowing yourself up. Knives require close proximity. The lethality index shows this scientificially. PERIOD.
4. Gun controls, including red flag laws, reduce gun death. PERIOD (see New Jersey)
It’s pretty obvious, with anomalies, that tough gun states have less per capita gun deaths than loose gun states. You can see it in the PEW map charts. I think Horist is wrong on his conclusion. Yet, Vermont is an anomaly with loose gun laws, little gun death. And DC rolls the other way with tough gun laws and lots of gun death. Always anomalies. I can offer explanations like DC is an island surrounded by loose gun statutes, but really —- no one knows scientifically what’s happening.
Second, suicide is a big part of this and there are studies showing that if the gun is removed from the equation, suicides go down. Again, not sure any are statistically valid but sure looks like they would be, if we came up with the will and resources to do said quantitative analysis into our number one cause of premature death – the gun. While people many times try suicide again, many times they are saved. The gun reduces that because it works better than other forms of death.
80% of all murders and similar for suicides are include the tool the gun. We keep saying guns don’t kill people kill, but that’s bullshit. If guns magically disappeared, then murders and suicides would fall, if by the more frequent failure of alternative tools over guns alone, not less attempts. It’s like saying the death of trees from the tool, the chainsaw, is the fault of man. And if we took away the chain saw, the same number of trees would fall. Not without a hell of a lot more men…… No, the chainsaw, the tool, is A cause of the mass number of trees we kill today. No gun tool, less death. PERIOD. No chain saws, less trees cut, at least by the same number of men.
You got the PEW map, you can see where it’s bad, and you can guess about tough gun laws but pretty sure you will get the picture. NJ is a tough place to own a gun, our gun deaths are very low, and we have Camden, Trenton, New Brunswick, Newark, and East Orange. Go figure. Most of our crime guns come from Florida and the Southeast up the Iron Pipeline. Our best way to continue to lower gun deaths is for Florida to keep its guns to itself and quit exporting them.
You got the PEW international view. Like Trump’s covid response, the US sucks with its gun use response. You have a better chance of being shot in America than almost any developed nation in the world that’s not at war. We lost more people to guns than we lost people in Afghanistan. We mourn the 13 yet we lose more than 13 everyday to the gun.
And you got the PEW mass shooting chart showing the first spike with the advent of Trump that skyrockets during and after covid, on Trump’s watch and then handed to Biden. Wanna bet it’s down by 2024?
While there are anomalies, there seems to be a very strong correlation with gun control laws and gun deaths. You can claim it’s man, not the tool, but that makes me wonder why we have so many laws on so many other tools that danger man. I mean, cars don’t kill people, people driving cars kill people, so why the seat belts to ban my rights to freedom of movement? If it’s the man, not the gun, and if mental health is the solution, is the US crazier than almost every other developed nation on the Earth to have this many more deaths by gun? No, the gun may be a tool, but it’s also the leading cause of death in America and I really doubt that was the founder’s intention.
And the close, I know, thank God. Closing in on MASS SHOOTINGS.
From seven years ago in The Guardian: “In all, 22% of American adults are gun owners, according to a new survey of gun ownership produced by researchers from Harvard and Northeastern universities.
In the new survey, conducted in 2015, about half of all gun owners own a single gun, maybe two.
Another third of American gun owners own between three and seven guns.
That top 14% of gun owners – a group of 7.7m people, or 3% of American adults – own between about eight and 140 guns each. The average is 17.”
I learned this near the end of my study and it shows the effect of the 2A. Most people avoid guns. This number of 78% don’t own guns is probably much lower today, but I am guessing the ratio of gun owners, multi-gun owners and out n out gun freaks has risen. I know my gun counts and equities have…. Heh, heh. And I used Horist’s picture to buy….. not really, but same company for the equities. They do chlorine to, so banner equity for the times of Trump and covid. Back on point. Gun ownership is low in America, but guns per owner is fairly high.
Two points: gun controls actually only affect a sliver of America.
And this sliver has an arsenal.
I don’t know what the magic number of allowed guns should be, and I am a liberal and to the high side of average, but we owners like our guns and I doubt we will give them up for buyback or for law. When you look at this being an 80/20 issue where we cater to the 20, that’s phenomenal. And when the 20 is causing all this mayhem in our schools and other unprotected areas, it’s weird that we can’t figure out any way to minimize the deaths. Horist cannot even fathom a single recommendation. I can.
OK —– here goes.
Mass murder, mass shootings, even with our current surge, have very low numbers for incidents and deaths. The numbers are so low that you would need years of data to do a statistical analysis. IMO, as Horist notes, there’s not much to do and, worse yet, the numbers are so low that you couldn’t determine success or failure even if you tried. Not for years.
Now the effect of mass shootings on the national psyche is HUGE, but who’s gonna measure and fix that? And really, the only fix is less mass murder. Less school shootings.
BUT —- if we restricted clip and magazine capacities to a magic number, I don’t care — 10, 12, 15; I am pretty sure we would lower death, but perhaps not occurrences. I favor ten but would accept anything better than unrestricted. Many a mass shooter is defeated during a clip exchange. By cops or good guys, sometimes without guns.
And while we don’t have the stats on bump stocks and mass shootings, I am sure we will in a year or two as they become used more often for mass attacks.
If we vigorously pursued all parental liabilities after every killing by kid and publicly perp-walked, and broadcast the trial results and punishments, I am pretty sure we would find less guns left in the hands of children. IF people know that if they fuck up in this manner, they will get totally fucked, they might lock the gun up.
All gun sale and background checks —- universal across the land. In about 30 states, you can obtain a gun without a background check or through a licensed dealer, or both. How stupid are we? How has States Rights failed us on background checks and dealer sales.
Again, even if you did all of that, you would never know your success or failure no matter how much you measured. At least not for a number of years of data. Numbers are just too small. I think we would see less mass shootings, less school attacks, if we took these actions. It’s not great, but I think the best we can do.
IF you also want to affect gun homicides, accidental gun deaths, kid shooters and shootings, and gun suicides ——- you will need more actions. This just focuses on Mass.