Mental Health Crisis for Today's Youth

[Uncle Ted]

Raise your kids to stick up for fellow classmates that are getting bullied at school... otherwise they may grow up to be a mass murder and even kill your little brother or sister.

Texas school shooter Salvador Ramos was bullied at school because of the clothes he wore and because his family was poor, former classmate says

• A 'close' friend of Salvador Ramos, 18, said the shooter used to be made fun of for his clothing and because his family was poor
• He said Ramos began showing up to class less and less from the bullying and 'slowly dropped out'
• 'He barely came to school,' the friend, who didn't want to be identified, said
• The friend said the pair kept up with each other occasionally through Xbox messages, but had largely lost contact after Ramos graduated
• However, Ramos - who had purchased two rifles on his 18th birthday just days before the shooting - sent the friend pictures of his guns and magazines
• When asked why he had it, Ramos reportedly replied: 'Don't worry about it'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mily-poor.html

Sad.

[Northwestcoug]

We shouldn't be talking about it in a thread on mental health. It's time we stop letting the gun idiots frame the issue as a mental health problem and not as a gun problem. I own a couple of guns, but I'm at a point where I'm tired of being held hostage by the 2nd amendment and the cold, dead hand crowd. The 2nd amendment has outlived its usefulness.

If gun violence is only a mental health issue, we really need to study how the rest of the developed world deals with their mentally ill. No doubt we could learn a lot from them.

Not about gun control, of course. Just how they treat mental illness to drastically reduce gun violence.

[Moliere]

Raise your kids to stick up for fellow classmates that are getting bullied at school... otherwise they may grow up to be a mass murder and even kill your little brother or sister.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mily-poor.html

Sad.

How did he graduate if he barely came to school?

[Pelado]

How did he graduate if he barely came to school?

Texas.

[smokymountainrain]

How did he graduate if he barely came to school?

you can actually do school online these days. it's nuts.

[Moliere]

you can actually do school online these days. it's nuts.

Maybe we should ban guns from homes that have kids who do remote learning

[BigPiney]

you can actually do school online these days. it's nuts.

And with credit recovery, they do everything they can to get kids to graduate.

[USUC]

I'm sorry, I just don't buy the all too convenient and "agrees with my priors" notion that guns make a person violent. Sure, firearms affect lethality and that is a valid position but this is clearly a cultural and mental health issue. The US is more violent in almost every category compared to other western countries. Prohibition of firearms isn't going make violence across the board dissappear. The USA is a different country with a unique comfort with risk and a screw you attitude. Putting all your eggs in the "it's all about guns so let's not look at other factors" basket is not a serious position to have if you want to tackle the problem.

[falafel]

I'm sorry, I just don't buy the all too convenient and "agrees with my priors" notion that guns make a person violent. Sure, firearms affect lethality and that is a valid position but this is clearly a cultural and mental health issue. The US is more violent in almost every category compared to other western countries. Prohibition of firearms isn't going make violence across the board dissappear. The USA is a different country with a unique comfort with risk and a screw you attitude. Putting all your eggs in the "it's all about guns so let's not look at other factors" basket is not a serious position to have if you want to tackle the problem.

I agree. But maybe reducing the lethality, as you call it, is a good thing to work on.

[smokymountainrain]

I'm sorry, I just don't buy the all too convenient and "agrees with my priors" notion that guns make a person violent. Sure, firearms affect lethality and that is a valid position but this is clearly a cultural and mental health issue. The US is more violent in almost every category compared to other western countries. Prohibition of firearms isn't going make violence across the board dissappear. The USA is a different country with a unique comfort with risk and a screw you attitude. Putting all your eggs in the "it's all about guns so let's not look at other factors" basket is not a serious position to have if you want to tackle the problem.

nobody is saying we shouldn't look at other factors - i think everybody understands mental health is a major factor, but you can't just flip a switch and fix mental health. you can't legislate forcing every kid to have two loving, doting parents. you sorta can flip a switch regarding gun control. though admittedly i have no idea what that would look like. the idea that you can't leave guns in the hands of bad people while taking them away from good people is real - imo, that is the elephant in the room in terms of any strict gun control measures.

[USUC]

I agree. But maybe reducing the lethality, as you call it, is a good thing to work on.

The reality is, changing gun culture is a long game. This will absolutely not be fixed by highly politicized and emotional political response. The political realities are that bans aren't going to work. Heller established that semi automatic rifles are common use and constitutionally protected. Bans will go no where. So a prohibition aimed at decreasing lethality just isn't viable. My anger at this point is that to admit this and start to focus on the cultural or mental health aspects is a non starter for progressives. It has to be all about the guns.

Continue to put in the work for the long game. I think the change in gun culture is 100% needed. But do some things that are politically feasible in the here and now is also necessary.

[Applejack]

The reality is, changing gun culture is a long game. This will absolutely not be fixed by highly politicized and emotional political response. The political realities are that bans aren't going to work. Heller established that semi automatic rifles are common use and constitutionally protected. Bans will go no where. So a prohibition aimed at decreasing lethality just isn't viable. My anger at this point is that to admit this and start to focus on the cultural or mental health aspects is a non starter for progressives. It has to be all about the guns.

Continue to put in the work for the long game. I think the change in gun culture is 100% needed. But do some things that are politically feasible in the here and now is also necessary.

???? The proliferation of guns is also a problem that the democrats created?? Pretty wacky take, USUC.

Just remove the law protecting gun manufacturers from tort liability. Both "politically feasible" and "necessary." Of course some politicians will lose out on campaign contributions from the NRA, but I doubt that you would have a problem with that.

[USUC]

[QUOTE=Applejack;n2250549]

???? The proliferation of guns is also a problem that the democrats created?? Pretty wacky take, USUC.

/QUOTE]

Where do you get this from the portion you bolded? Are you referring to my post on another thread?

I don't know the specifics of the law you are referencing to comment on it's utility. But i am skeptical of suing and bankrupting companies due to political vendettas. Is this a different situation than suing car manufactures for traffic fatalities? Again, I don't know how the manufacture of arms as tools is different than the manufacturer of other tools, I'm genuinely curious.

[Applejack]

[QUOTE=USUC;n2250550]

???? The proliferation of guns is also a problem that the democrats created?? Pretty wacky take, USUC.

/QUOTE]

Where do you get this from the portion you bolded? Are you referring to my post on another thread?

I don't know the specifics of the law you are referencing to comment on it's utility. But i am skeptical of suing and bankrupting companies due to political vendettas. Is this a different situation than suing car manufactures for traffic fatalities? Again, I don't know how the manufacture of arms as tools is different than the manufacturer of other tools, I'm genuinely curious.

The bolded portion of your comment says that you are angry at democrats (progressives) for not focusing on mental health. That is a wacky thing to be mad about after the umpteenth mass shooting at a school. By a guy that had no history of mental illness.

And who is talking about "bankrupting companies due to political vendettas?" All I am arguing is that we remove the barriers to suing the gun industry for liability; it's not hard. Every other company deals with liability for negligence; were you upset that the tobacco companies went bankrupt? how about the pharmaceutical companies that pushed opioids that they knew were addictive on middle america? Tort law is a GOOD THING! It keeps companies in line.

And to your question of why the manufacture of arms is different than the manufacture of other tools, one answer is that only one type of manufacturer is shielded from civil liability....(wait for it)......the gun people! Why? Because they have an uber-powerful lobby which has half of the senate in their pocket.

[Non Sequitur]

The reality is, changing gun culture is a long game. This will absolutely not be fixed by highly politicized and emotional political response. The political realities are that bans aren't going to work. Heller established that semi automatic rifles are common use and constitutionally protected. Bans will go no where. So a prohibition aimed at decreasing lethality just isn't viable. My anger at this point is that to admit this and start to focus on the cultural or mental health aspects is a non starter for progressives. It has to be all about the guns.

Continue to put in the work for the long game. I think the change in gun culture is 100% needed. But do some things that are politically feasible in the here and now is also necessary.

After we get rid of Roe, let's get rid of Heller next. When you say "This will absolutely not be fixed by highly politicized and emotional political response", that is pure bullshit. Your people have been using that tactic for decades to overturn Roe, and they are now on the cusp of victory, however tragic. Apparently highly politicized, emotional responses work. Effective gun control isn't going to happen in a year or even five, but that doesn't mean we give up and make no effort to push back the pendulum.