How Do We, As Libertarians, Reduce Mass Shootings?
Posted by Antique_Promotion743@reddit | Libertarian | View on Reddit | 299 comments
Discussion
Title. What policies do you support that would significantly reduce mass shootings and gun violence while still being Libertarian and constitutional?
Malagoy@reddit
Encourage more gun ownership, unironically.
absorbd83@reddit
This
69anonymousperson69@reddit
Decriminalizing school truancy would help. If students feel like school isn't worth the risk vs reward...they should have the option to not attend.
BeachBumEnt01@reddit
Look into our mental health crisis.
robertgfthomas@reddit
How would a Libertarian address the mental health crisis?
JoeySadie@reddit
Block social media on kids phones and take them out of public schools
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
You dont.
The cop out is to remove all "barriers" to accessing mental health treatment (drugs), and the free market will meet that need.
A hands-off, non interventionist small government doesn't have the ability to address the individuals mental health needs. They won't even know the individual has them.
The community at large would be responsible for this. With the downside of them having 0 ability to force people to get treatment. There's treatment options for free out there that people refuse today. Can't make people accept help.
Verum14@reddit
> The cop out is to remove all "barriers" to accessing mental health treatment
Not sure if that's really a cop out, though --- it's certainly a factor
When you're at risk of losing your basic human rights for simply seeking help, you're a lot less likely to do so. Even so much as visiting a psych in many states will cause you significant legal issues and require restoration of rights to ever own a firearm, and that's assuming they don't outright confiscate them from you at 3am. Family member died and you spent a single night in a ward cause you wanted help?
As an example, in NJ you're now a prohibited person by default and by law have to turn in or dispose of everything within x days, otherwise you're a felon. The only way forward is an expungement which even after approved by a judge can take years for the state to process. For something even simpler like an adderall Rx in high school, now you very well may have to spend thousands on a psych eval just for them to say your 37 year-prior ADD isn't the same thing as schizophrenia. We talk about how important mental health is and then criminalize anyone who seeks help.
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
It's a cop out because that doesn't actually solve or address the problem at large. It makes the claim if we stop doing X, then Y will resolve itself on its own.
This requires the person suffering from a mental disorder voluntarily seek treatment (uncommon).
It requires someome to voluntarily offer services needed to address the issues. There wouldn't be a regulatory body that sets standards on the treatment and the person suffering from a mental disorder would need to independently research and verify the doctors abilities and track record. No such legal requirement to provide that information would exist.
Allowing people to self medicate isn't effective. People suffering from mental disorders will abuse narcotics and alcohol despite being told by everyone in their care network that these things are harmful. Giving them access to even more potent narcotics isn't going to magically turn our substance abuse crisis into a positive aspect. Many of what people abuse is illegal and yet they still use it. It's not like legalizing fent will help people get off it and start going to therapy to address trauma instead of nodding off because the drug is a temporary and quick solution to a lifelong issue.
It requires the patient to have the funds capable of purchasing the goods/services. Just because the state doesn't regulate it doesn't mean the individual can afford it. Simply saying the state won't tax your goods and services doesn't mean the servant of the Lord (a homeless man) enacting God's judgment (screaming profanity) on the devil (a McDonalds employee) during Armageddon (3:47 pm on a random Tuesday) can get them.
Mental health disorders won't go away, or the people with them wont suddenly all seek treatment just because we reduce the entire federal government down to the size of Wyomaings state government.
It's a copout because the answer doesn't actually fix anything. It just says someone else will do it better under an all volunteer system.
strawhatguy@reddit
It was faith-based charities often that handled these cases. Much of which went away when government took over.
I will say though that less welfare, less zoning, less government in general definitely helps reduce the numbers of new addicted, homeless, being produced.
But yes, the end of government is only the start of libertarianism, not the end.
benaugustine@reddit
I don't doubt this, but do you have causal evidence?
strawhatguy@reddit
One that springs to mind in SF was that guy who tried to build little one room shelters for the homeless. Newsom, while mayor, had them torn down.
There’s various parking space requirements which is why parking is ample most places, but eat up a lot of land. There’s building height restrictions, and single-family only zoning which prevents multi family dwellings being built. It’s a process to divide a parcel into multiple parcels. There’s being too close to the sidewalk, or shade a building throws on the land around it. There’s separate building inspections like fire and electrical that one must schedule and wait for, before building can proceed.
It adds up. It sucks.
Good old Remy made a parody song on it: https://youtu.be/Xo8VYZE8C6U?si=NKWrPoW1-Klfml8q
eliaollie@reddit
This is a well-written response. The topic itself is vast. Delusions can range from what you described in #4 to a parent giving inadequate, neglectful, or straight-up abusive "care" to a child who doesn't know any better while experiencing a low-drip psychosis. It gets really tricky with individuals who have good days and bad days depending on if they take their meds or if their chemistry in general just happens to be right that day. You could be helping someone at some point then oppressing them the next. It will take a big nuanced approach and a lot of patience to get through this crisis, and even then nothing will be done perfectly because there are so many variables and so much potential for things going horribly wrong.
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
Some of my most despised mental health cases were caretakers that would refuse committing their wards to long term care facilities for treatment. If they are committed to a facility, the guardian cannot collect checks on the wards behalf.
Atleast that's the case where I've been.
Issues don't go away overnight. Many require therapy in a safe environment with controlled conditions so the doctors can correctly dose medications. 72 hours under "medical supervision" isn't always adequate. Long term care plans are needed and minors/adults with severe illnesses can't do it alone.
Pedromac@reddit
This was an incredibly well written comment. Especially the #4 showing the thought process of someone experiencing delusion.
clothespinkingpin@reddit
Thank you for saying this. It’s true, we say “seek care” and then give a scarlet letter to anyone who does.
zepplin2225@reddit
foreverNever22@reddit
And a hands on controlling government can't stop them either. It's not a problem government can solve. It's a societal problem.
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
It can not solve, but it is capable of directing resources to address the issues or incentivize an ngo/business to solve it. Governments are capable of funding things that don't seem profitable.
Not all societal issues will resolve themselves. History hasn't been kind to the mentally disturbed.
foreverNever22@reddit
Congrats, you just made a whole bureaucracy filled with people that have cushy six figure jobs, and the problem still exists.
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
That is a very good possibility.
It's also capable of impacting the issue more than just saying everyone else needs to figure it out on their own.
The problem will get figured out. We did it in the past. It just wasn't a good thing for the most vulnerable among us.
luckoftheblirish@reddit
Can you explain why force needs to be involved in the support for mental health needs? It sounds like you're arguing that these services won't exist unless people are forced to provide them.
If most people generally don't care about mental health services, why would they support a government that forces them to pay for such services? If most people do care about mental health services, why do they need to be forced to support it?
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
I have a small inside view of crisis treatment thanks to my career. "Force" is often needed since people experiencing a crisis very frequently refuse to voluntarily accept those services.
I fully acknowledge that isn't a perfect solution and it is capable of being abused. After all it is a man made solution run by other humans.
The original comment I replied to was asking how does a libertarian government address mental health issues. We couldn't. The government has some ability to cause changes because of its authority to force people either to receive help (mandated treatment plans) or to pay for another person to receive that help (taxes).
For the same reason most people don't want to see others suffering but very rarely do anything about it themselves. Get a small enough group of people with strong ties to one another, and you can have a near perfect community willing to sacrifice for one another. Multiply it to 300+ million people and we just don't care enough about eachother.
There isnt any evidence to suggest humans zoomed out to that scale are willing to take away from their family/local group and give to another.
Can't solve a national issue at the local level. Local communities can resolve their own issues, but if the goal was to provide adequate support and services nationally, you'd need a huge network. That's beyond what you and your neighbors can do alone.
luckoftheblirish@reddit
It's baffling to me that you understand human nature enough to say something like:
and:
and:
But you can't apply this same reasoning to your own proposed solution and understand the massive contradiction in your argument.
You're essentually saying that humans generally act in their own self-interest and exhibit a strong in-group bias. Does this somehow not apply to politicians and government bureaucrats? Somehow, they are assumed to act altruistically and use the coercive powers of government for the interests of "the public" rather than for their own self-serving (or in-group serving) interests. Surely, the same person who wrote the above quotes can see the flaw with that argument?
Mental health is a local issue! Why should someone in Manhattan care about (or be forced to support) the mental health services for someone in rural Oklahoma? Or vise versa?
Again, why do you think that it's a safe assumption that a government bureaucracy that exists by means of coercion will be an effective means of providing care to communities that are completely removed from their in-group?
You and your neighbors are much more likely to care about the people that they see and interact with in your community on a daily basis than some bureaucrat in Washington D.C.! This should be beyond obvious to you considering the quotes about human nature above. The fact that this is remotely controversial is ridiculous to me.
You seem to just be repeating popular and status-quo talking points without actually thinking critically about what you're saying. As if the popularity of an idea or the fact that it's in the mainstream means it's necessarily correct. Considering the amount of statist astroturf in this subreddit, I'm not surprised that you're getting upvoted.
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
It does apply to them. I wouldn't call them altruistic, but its alot easier to spend someone else's resources than your own. If you want to be highly critical, just say the politician will feign compassion and vote to spend tax payer funds on people for more votes.
Generally speaking, people are ok with spending "the governments money" to help others. It's harder to write a check for a thousand dollars and hand it over. Much easier if that money is taken from you in every way possible over the course of a year.
The question was how would a libertarian government address a national problem. My answer is they won't.
It's not controversial. Reading that I typed shouldn't assume I claim politicians care more about people in your community than you do. I said they are in a position to direct funds and mandate treatment than a community without enforcement mechanisms.
Its likely because outright right-wing subs get banned, or people with rightof center beliefs are banned on other subs. Libertarian has changed into something people who don't like the conservative label call themselves. Every popular right-wing influencer has called themselves libertarian or said they have libertarian ideals or lean libertarian for the better part of the last decade.
Add on the no true libertarian fallacy with reddit primarily being young white dudes with some college education living in a city and bam. Libertarian can mean whatever you want it to mean. Just look at some of the flair.
I dont claim to be libertarian. I dont think it could work at scale and if I'm being honest I've allowed people here to disaude me from ever considering it a viable option.
foreverNever22@reddit
Okay what's this got to do with mass shootings? The shooter is almost always a person with zero record and zero signs, maybe a couple people around them were concerned.
You're coming into /r/Libertarian and saying we need to forcefully imprison people based on what a couple friends say????
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
Most mass shooters have documented histories of violence. Most mass shootings are gang violence and narcotics distribution/human trafficking related. I assume you're talking about the tiny portion of mass shootings that get emphasized by the news. If I'm wrong, please correct me.
The category of mass shootings I believe you're referring to are almost always people with mental disorders. Diagnosed or undiagnosed.
The 3 main categories are gang related, ideologically driven or mentally disturbed people. Many will argue the third category is also present in the first 2.
Nope. Not what I said or implied. Don't see how you can jump to that in good faith.
foreverNever22@reddit
False.
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
Re-read the entire comment.
mass shooting, as defined by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), an event in which one or more individuals are “actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.
That means almost all assault with a firearm in the US qualifies as a mass shooting.
It's incredibly rare people go from model citizen to shooting at someone outside of a bar. There's almost always a history of interactions with LE.
kkdawg22@reddit
You should look into the Lasik industry. If it's a resource issue and your preference is to add bureaucracy and regulation... well that's rather counter-productive now isn't it?
OfficerBaconBits@reddit
I'm unsure what about lasik you'd like me to look at.
It's not. The comment you replied to was pointing out governments are able to fund things that wouldn't be considered profitable. They don't need a profit motive, and unlike charities, their funds aren't voluntary.
We cant say in an all volunteer system that people would suddenly come together for the greater good. Altruism hasn't been the legacy of humanity.
I wouldn't say our government as is would be the best possible solution. I am saying it's more capable of addressing the problem than if it was just up to every person to figure it out on their own without any enforcement mechanism.
Can't force people to get help. Can't force a person/business to research/provide treatment.
Megatoasty@reddit
Also, a much smaller government means less taxes. Without working a third plus of your life for free you might be a little bit happier.
DirtyOldPanties@reddit
Getting gov't out of education, defunding public news subsidies.
BallsOutKrunked@reddit
on phone but I have a lot of thoughts.
in short, we've turned people in nothing but consumers and producers. social groups are commercialized. civic groups are gone, replaced by the state.
I mean really other than buying shit and entertainment, what exactly is the point of a life in the modern world?
we've stripped people of all meaning.
ArcherStirling@reddit
This is way too accurate.
Yamaha234@reddit
Unfortunately the answer to this is antithetical to the anarchist approach some Libertarians take. But it’s going the RFK Jr route of enforcing stricter trial regulations on pharma companies (especially for vaccines), enforcing stricter regulations on food manufacturing, and overall promoting better health habits opposed to prescription drugs.
As much as I like de-regulations, this is the best solution to the mental health crisis and is the least imposing on personal freedoms (just maybe more imposing on corporation regulations)
deskburrito@reddit
First- destroy the government propaganda apparatus. Boom- solve a good portion of it right there.
robertgfthomas@reddit
How would you go about getting it destroyed?
xuptokny@reddit
Social change: Go to church, OR go to a group that serves something besides yourself. Be involved in your child's life.
Legislature change: Major tax incentives to two parent households. Tax payer funder vasectomies.
robertgfthomas@reddit
What is currently stopping or discouraging anyone from going to church, serving, or being involved with their children? How would a Libertarian government increase their use?
xuptokny@reddit
"What is stopping us or discouraging us from going to church"
I would say a root cause of a lot of these issues is the ease in which we have access to addictions, which I would include not just drugs or alcohol, but also media. For this answer, I would say that church has been villified moreso than it deserves, which overtime erodes that church/community relationship it's supposed to have.
"...being involved with their children?"
I would point to addictions again, but also generational addictions. Example: if parents find more enjoyment, or even subconsciously want a dopamine hit from tv, or phone usage, bad food choice, etc, the child is less likely to have that positive role model.
Behavior/Culture is gained from influences, and over time, we culturally are less outside, and more inside. I would even tie in us being less physical as part of the problem, in which case I would legislatively bring back higher physical standards in P.E.
Of course I'm linking all of this to depression, and poor familial influences.
Statistically, having two parents is the best thing that can happen to you.
"Does any religious center qualify"
It's less about the religion, and more about building a relationship with other people, and serving a greater purpose. The purpose could be a God or Gods, but it could be serving the community. Volunteer work, or being selfless unto others.
I bring up selflessness because statistically people who are more self serving are less happy on average.
"If the government funded vasectomies, should the government also fund the pill?
Yes. The idea is people who want to live promiscuously can do so without burdening themselves or future generations.
"How would this government intervention square with maintaining a free market?"
It would be a volunteer program (except the the funding part, but I couldn't imagine them costing more than roads. Maybe I'm wrong!)
I appreciate the questions, and I'm by no means an expert on any of this. Thank you for taking the time to ask, and read my answers!
ilovefakegrass@reddit
This is the only correct answer.
lizardflix@reddit
Focus on SSRIs. Large majority of these shooters are on them.
BrentMacGregor@reddit
I tend to agree. VA put me on them and they messed me up. Stopped them and feel much better.
nonnewtonianfluids@reddit
Ketamine did more for me than any SSRI ever did.
claybine@reddit
It goes so far beyond that, though.
The left could just respond to that point by arguing for universal background checks. Which practically already exist.
DillyDinkle@reddit
Glad I didn’t have to look for this obvious answer!
odinsbois@reddit
100
megalodongolus@reddit
Also the economy.
NotADogIzswear2020@reddit
ShitOfPeace@reddit
Shoot back before they get to a second person.
Ixlyth@reddit
Mandatory gun ownership?
naked-and-famous@reddit
If the problem you're trying to solve is "gun violence" then it'll sure look like guns are the problem. The issue is violence, not the tool used to do it, as you see from the 35 killed by car ramming and 8 by stabbing in China in the last week. Try to solve the problem of violence looks a lot different than trying to solve "gun violence"
WEASELexe@reddit
This is the real answer
crackrhead@reddit
Not an answer at all tho
TigerRaiders@reddit
I don’t think that’s a good example. There is no constitutional right to drive a car but there is a constitutional right to own a weapon.
TigerRaiders@reddit
I don’t think that’s a good example. There is no constitutional right to drive a car but there is a constitutional right to own a weapon.
Ihate_reddit_app@reddit
Yep, focusing on a symptom does not solve the problem.
Society as a whole is grim for a large percentage of the population. It's hard for the poor and middle class to survive. Stuff is too expensive for a large subset of the population and this creates a sense of hopelessness and abandonment.
We attribute a lot of gun violence to "gang violence", but it's hugely a cultural and economic problem. The people committing these crimes are lost in society and stop participating in it because they see it not working for them.
We need to empower people and give them opportunities to succeed without creating the current victim complex. Current society is only built for the rich to squeeze the poor.
TigerRaiders@reddit
If their specific right to own and operate a gun ends the life of my loved one, is that not an infringement on my loved one’s ability to live in a safe community? When do certain rights infringe and step on the safety and well-being of others? What’s the line and who decides?
I’m not arguing either way.
Imaginary-Media-2570@reddit
It's only "grim" b/c ppl have ridiculous expectations (which is cultural, as you say). Middle class Americans in the 1950s lived worse than the poor today. We wouldn't survive a month as middle class of 1850. Marxism/socialism plays to those wrongheaded expectations. "From each according to ability, to each according to need" is dog-whistle for "you get everything you want and don't have to work hard". Marxism always includes the "you are a victim of others" mantra, then leads to the necessity for violent pogroms. The two equations that they ignore are (1) you can only consume what is produced, and that we produce "stuff" by working, and (2) no one is motivated to work when their work-product is taken away [part of Laffer's thesis].
You say, "Stuff is too expensive for a large subset of the population" . Iow they can't make enough "stuff" (labor, work product) to trade for the "stuff" they want. That's some combination of poor work skills and/or excessive expectations.
Wrt work skills - I largely blame public schools & teachers unions. The drop-out rates are staggering and the under-performance is shocking, and the unions are an obstruction to any sort of reform. No one would willingly pay for the sorts of public schools we usually see in inner cities, but we collectively are forced to by taxation. It costs \~$16k per student-year in primary & secondary EDU and 19% of HS GRADUATES are functionally illiterate! Even good students graduate HS with no useful/practical skills.
In every aspect of life, competition is the source of improvement, but unions (of the Western sort) wield monopoly power of employment, and prevent competition. Teachers union even decry standardized tests b/c they don't want to be measured. No wonder public education is so dismal.
I'm not sure exactly what "empower people" and "give opportunities" means. It sounds like political blather to me. Yes, we have a heavy handed government which sometimes usurps proper power, like teachers unions acting against the public interest by buying politicians. But ppl have the power to vote them out already. Ppl need to seek out and often create their own opportunities. Aside from DEI, there isn't much institutional exclusion from opportunity.
The "victim complex" is very real, but it's not created by our relative wealth or poverty. It's a direct creation of political demagogues who frequently incite envy, fear and anger to manipulate and keep power.
Im-a-bench-AMA@reddit
Honestly one of the first takes in a while on this sub and about violent crime in general from any political perspectivethat didnt spike my blood pressure, thank you for posting this, its nice seeing people actually take time to be empathetic and think about the how and what of these problems
forloss@reddit
Can you provide an answer to your new framing of the question?
Drew1231@reddit
It mostly has to do with poverty.
Increase access to opportunity and the problem will get better.
lookoutcomrade@reddit
The problem is men without fathers.
TheAzureMage@reddit
The vast majority of "gun violence" is suicide.
The most popular measure advocated to reduce gun violence is magazine limitations.
I have never seen a suicide where having more than ten rounds made a difference.
The goal is, and always has been, your disarmament and subjugation.
I_HopeThat_WasFart@reddit
Mental health, allow more people to be armed and reduce regulations around it
IcyBigPoe@reddit
Hug your kids and say I love you
TigerRaiders@reddit
That’s a nice sentiment but it’s not really a proper answer to a complex question.
When do certain right impede the rights of others? When does individual freedoms prevent others from living a life without the risk of the worst possible outcomes? When does my specific right step on your ability to live a free life?
I’m not arguing one way or the other, it’s not a simple black and white conversation, there’s tons of nuance in between.
IcyBigPoe@reddit
There so much nuance that I cannot even begin to navigate it. So I just love my children, participate in their lives, and do my best to make them feel wanted. And I encourage everyone else to do the same.
It's not a proper answer but it is what I, personally, am able to contribute to making the world a better place
Specialist_Ad_8069@reddit
Love this and love this post along with the discussion. Openly speaking practicality with honest discourse seems like a good step to me. Have a great day Big Poe!
IcyBigPoe@reddit
Thanks! You too
TigerRaiders@reddit
It’s the age old question; when do others rights infringe of the rights of others?
Our courts battle over this all the time. It’s something the legal scholars have to tackle time and time again. I might be perfectly responsible enough to own a gun but are my peers? What about a peer that has a criminal history? Are his rights to own a weapon infringe on the ability of others to live a free, peaceful life if he abuses the right to own a firearm? When does the government step in and take that right away.
This is why I’m a cafeteria libertarian. There are things that I like about being a libertarian but I also understand that government polices and taxes are just part of a function society. The lines and grey between are extremely tough to navigate. That’s why lawyers get paid $450 - 1000 an hour for their services. It’s not so cut and dry and you need to be able to argue in depth to get the right answer for each circumstance. It’s not an all or nothing game, there’s compromise that is necessary to protect citizen so they live a free life absent of others using their freedoms to limit others freedoms.
AggravatingPay7601@reddit
Defund the CIA, FBI, NSA.
EnemyUtopia@reddit
Id say put Vets (who pass very through checks) in the front, and one way in, and one way out all day. As others stated, identifying the problem in regards to mental health would help alot, but i think you fight fire with fire on this one.
TheWest_Is_TheBest@reddit
Mental Health youth outreach and Gun Responsibility from an early age
Okami_no_Lobo_1@reddit
In a libertarian society lil Timmy grew up with guns, has a strong sense of community and duty to protect. Timmy don't take no shit from a kid who was thrust into the world told they were racist and gay before being hung out to dry and bullied. Timmy ain't gonna stand for the bullshit the ruling class has force upon the common man. He gonna paint the side walk with the useless remains of someone who has always had the makings of a cowardly killer, some one a good society could have made into a productive member.
Humanity has always had the capacity for gross violence, but the identifiable community from which the sense of in-group and out-group has been shrunk to almost an individual level. Outside of fringe cases most people have no identity outside of their identified group this leads to the in-group being the self which if continually pushed or even inconvenienced may start to preceive others as a malicious out group. This blanket look leads to blanket retaliation and thus the indiscriminate nature of mass shootings, in the past it may have been just one offending individual, buy the loss of community means that these people don't really pick targets. Their goal is just to hurt the out-group as much as possible.
The type of people who would come to such conclusions are stupid tbh. Though a society should seek to make happy and useful any sort of idiot I can't imagine a world in which we would want people capable of waging such violence in opposed. There is no honor there is no point, its just stupidity and cowardice.
Put short the real solution is to reel back community. Atomize groups into smaller ones defund public schools as they only catylize youth violence. Focus on the nuclear family, and and friends as an extension of community. The a social structure of cities is non-existent, extremely small communities are the only fix.
walesjoseyoutlaw@reddit
stop glorifying it on the news
golsol@reddit
None. Violence is a risk of a free society whether with a gun or otherwise. Human nature doesn't stop by banning the guns. Private citizens and organizations should make their homes, persons, and business hard targets if they are concerned about violence.
No one would dare rob a gun range for instance.
Long_Employer1955@reddit
The correct way to phrase it is, how do we as human beings, reduce mass shootings? You can't do much as a Libertarian, Libertarians don't do anything because they're never elected.
Chooch-bot@reddit
Promote a ‘Don’t get caught lackin’ culture
Jager-GS@reddit
We could start by getting rid of, or at least modifying, the gun-free zone BS. I'm a 10 year veteran of the military and a former firearms instructor, but am not allowed to carry at my daughter's kindergarten, even concealed, without risking a felony. We just pulled her out of school, in part because of this, among other libertarian reasons.
I hear the comments about mental health and solving the violence problem, but until that gets fixed, a good guy with a gun is still your most immediate and effective solution to an in-progress mass shooting.
I am starting to see private armed security being hired to supplement law enforcement school resource officers, but they take vacations and get sick, and are usually just one person that is easily identified.
Finding a happy medium that allows vetted parents and teachers to carry seems like the best solution to me. Parents are generally willing to put themselves at great risk for the safety of their children, and are therefore the most motivated to intervene (Uvalde). Teachers are probably second in line. They both just need to be trained a little and properly equipped. I'd personally be willing to provide training to either category that attend my kid's school free of charge, just to increase general safety at my local schools. And I have no doubt that there are veterans, retirees, etc. that were military or law enforcement willing to volunteer to do the same, scattered all over the Country.
It's a dynamic, shitty problem. But approaching it with broad black and white laws produces predictably flawed results. Unfortunately, we are depending on compromised, self-serving principals and superintendents to work on a solution to the problem, so...not holding my breath. In the meantime, we are going to home school our daughter, vote to end the DOE, and wait to apply to carry on school grounds should some sensible program be implemented.
Last minute thought: I also see solving this problem as a huge argument for putting schools back in the free market. Imagine: you can choose a school that takes armed protection seriously at some additional price, or have another that depends on existing law enforcement infrastructure for security, and you get to choose which meets your needs. Mind-blowing, right?
moreton91@reddit
Borrow some ideas from the Swiss system.
All gunowners have to be part of an organized militia group. That local militia is responsible for training and ensuring that firearm owners are educated in same firearm usage and storage. This accomplishes two things which the US system doesn't:
Gunowners are vetted, and ensures that gunowners are using and storing their weapons safely.
That gunowners are ready and organized in case of a tyrannical ruler, or foreign invader.
welliamwallace@reddit
I'll give one random thought, that makes me a bit uncomfortable but is an important thing to think about.
Mass shootings are horrible and gruesome, and emotionally shocking. But deaths from mass shootings are hundreds of times lower than other common causes of death, most importantly car accidents. Yet we tolerate the number of car accident deaths, without banning cars, or putting speed limiting devices in our cars, or banning engines over 2 Liters, or banning cars over 3500 lbs... all sorts of other things that could reduce deaths.
Why? Because society thinks the trade-off is worth it. Maybe this society also deems that the value of the personal freedom to own broomsticks is worth the side effect that the east access allows some small percentage of crazy people to kill innocents.
denzien@reddit
Single victim, single murders statistics (about 50% of homicides) show that the murder rate for all demographics (except one) is actually right in line with European countries once you've normalized to the size of the relevant population.
Imaginary-Media-2570@reddit
I think you mean "ethnicity". When I reviewed the FBI stats a few years ago, males committed homicides at \~8x more then females. The male population between 16yo-35yo was a great majority of cases. That's a very clearly violent demographic.
harrreth@reddit
Well also there are less motor vehicle fatalities per year then firearm fatalities in the US, not by a lot but yeah
uhhhhhhnothankyou@reddit
fatalities=!murder
Brother_Esau_76@reddit
That’s only if you include gun suicides. They account for more than half of firearm deaths. We definitely should not be taking those into account.
spaztick1@reddit
Why not? Suicide is suicide. There are several countries where the suicide rate is much higher than the US rate and guns are severely regulated.
2lbmetricLemon@reddit
It would be like trying to ban jackets because people are hanging themselves with jackets.
Im-a-bench-AMA@reddit
Thats because people that want to kill themselves are going to find a way regardless. You’d need to ban tylenol, closed garages big enough to fit a car, ropes and stools, and tall buildings if you wanted to tackle that. All a gun ban would do to suicide stats is bump up the numbers of other methods
spaztick1@reddit
Why not? Suicide is suicide. There are several countries where the suicide rate is much higher than the US rate and guns are severely regulated.
foreverNever22@reddit
Because while tragic, suicide is a person's personal decision that deals with their own body.
stache1313@reddit
And the majority at the firearm fatalities are from suicide. And there are more fatalities from suicide than there are from firearms. Yet there's more activism to restrict firearms than to promote proper mental health or address the causes of suicide.
spaztick1@reddit
Thanks for this stat. I didn't believe you at first. I had to check.
Roctopuss@reddit
Now remove suicides...
jaybobert@reddit
We are including suicides in this, right?
Hentai_Yoshi@reddit
Yeah, and everyone freaks out about school shootings, acting like all kids should be terrified to go to school. But they are really fucking rare
barrett316@reddit
this is the correct answer. if you look strictly at the empirical data you’ll find that, under the assumption people are talking about rifles since that’s the connotation of “mass shooting” for most people, they account for a very small number of deaths. 2019 was 364 homicides by rifle, compared to fists, hands or feet that was 600.
in reality, while tragic, the number of rifle related homicides is very low compared to other things that claim lives.
HeatherAnne1975@reddit
Get to the root cause of the problem. Mass shootings were not common at all 30, 40, 50 years ago. This is a very recent phenomenon. What has changed? It’s not accessibility of guns. In fact, guns are much more restricted now than in the past. Social media, increased mental health issues are to me the biggest things. There’s been a huge cultural shift. Someone else made the comment that some things you simply can’t legislate and I agree. But there is definitely some cultural rot happening, and guns are an easy scapegoat. A quick fix and easy target without getting to the root of the problem.
Imaginary-Media-2570@reddit
Do you think it's related to the sense of entitlement prevalent these days ?
CrucifixAbortion@reddit
Nuance? In MY political shitshow?
Morpheous94@reddit
Since you asked, I can at least tell you my view on the issues. I have a little brother that I care for deeply, so I've thought on this extensively, as well as potential ways forward.
Firstly, we need to understand the demographics that commit these mass shooting events (at least in America).
Young boys. Typically from the lower/ middle class. Much of the statistics referencing "mass shooting events" also include gang violence, which is a separate cultural issue entirely, which would require an entirely different conversation. For this discussion, we'll keep it limited to school shootings. In short, it's typically young boys. Why? A whole multitude of reasons. Allow me to list a few.
- Demonization of males in the current culture in a manner akin to the concept of "Original Sin". You're born broken and hateful, and denying it only affirms it to your detractors. Couple this with a lack of positive male role models, and you have a population ripe for improperly applied aggression. As the old proverb goes, "A boy shunned by the village will burn it down to feel it's warmth".
- The public schooling system is almost entirely geared toward catering to young girls. Women are psychologically wired to learn more effectively via verbal instruction (lecture). Men learn most effectively via physical instruction (practical). Hence, we used to have apprenticeships for boys to learn relevant skills. The curriculum has dismantled all of the things that used to be lifelines to young boys, especially those that aren't interested in sports. Recess? Gone. Shop class? Gone. Unless you're going to play for the school to get more funding, sit down, shut up, and listen to your teacher. Don't get up unless you ask permission first. Make sure you do your mountain of homework, that doesn't interest you at all, or you're a failure. The girls have no issue, why do you? You're just a dysfunctional little girl. Which brings us to our next issue.
- ADD/ ADHD is massively over-diagnosed. Our children (especially boys) are being prescribed street-legal meth so they can "focus" on trivial bullshit that doesn't interest them and "be a good citizen". These "medications" have been shown to lead to heightened levels of aggression (no shit, they're basically low strength meth). This MIGHT have something to do with the rampages that these boys have been going on. Just throwing that out there. Maybe, instead of treating people like they're dysfunctional and need to be fixed with a meth prescription so they can "focus", maybe just give them something they find interesting to focus on. Reduce the availability of video games temporarily (which offer an easy stream of dopamine), give them an assignment to look into something that interests them, and see what actually makes them passionate. Not everyone is interested in the Pythagorean Theorem and how the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell. That doesn't mean they're dysfunctional. The fact that the schools refuse to acknowledge that fact means that the educational system is dysfunctional.
- To that point, evolution plays a huge part here as well, regarding energy levels during adolescence. Boys have much more hyperactivity, in adolescence, than girls. If you think about how our societies developed (hunter-gatherers), this makes a lot of sense. It's NATURAL. They needed that energy, back in the day, to keep up with the other hunters, who often had longer legs and would leave behind the boys that couldn't keep up if it meant they captured the animal they were chasing for the village. They needed to run around and play with sticks, pretending to be warriors. They were taught, practically, to contribute to the tribe by hunting and fighting. Girls didn't need that much energy in their youth. They stayed home, with the other women in the village, and were taught via verbal instruction how to do things like identify poisonous berries, weave blankets, and raise children. There were much fewer overtly physical requirements. Hence, the massive disparity. As men, our bodies are still kicking our metabolism into overdrive during our developmental years to compensate for the heightened energy requirements from thousands of years ago (hence why you gain weight when your metabolism slows down as you get older). Evolution takes time. So, they're flooded with energy via their heightened metabolism and then forced to sit still, without recess or anything else to get that energy out, and then punished when they fail to focus. Then, they're told they're inherently broken and are tossed on pills that make them miserable, disrupt their appetites, and make them prone to violent outbursts. Stellar.
- Finally, we constantly discourage young boys about their future prospects by saying that the future holds no promise for them. Economic struggles, no jobs, no family, no purpose. We neglect to give them a solid reason to try, other than "it's your responsibility". With modern day feminism, social media, and dating apps, we have shown young men that they are more likely to be shunned by the fairer sex than given a fair chance. The guys that used to be able to pull the ladies with his personality and sense of humor are now relegated to the "swipe left" crowd and falling down the "Looksmaxxing" rabbit hole, slowly losing any hope of having a genuine relationship. Divorce rates are ludicrous with the FOMO that comes from the constant stream of new prospects that folks are inundated with via dating apps like "Tinder". What's the point of trying to get a "good job" if you have no family to spend your money on? Money for the sake of money? There's a reason most of the dudes that go that route turn to drugs or alcohol.
Morpheous94@reddit
(Cont.)
If you give men no tangible prospects for love, acceptance, and future financial security, how surprising is it that some lose hope and choose to leave? And sadly, when they leave, some decide to take others out with them, as a final act of defiance against a "village" that has made them feel thoroughly isolated?
It's like a wounded animal, lashing out in it's death throes, unable to understand the source of it's anguish, simply wanting to make others feel as much pain as they feel before they commit "suicide by cop". And the government is not coming to save you from that rot. In summary, here is a list of proposals that I would have for society, at the ground level, if they genuinely want to see an end, instead of a gradual escalation, of this violence.
Rebuild the community and abolish the "female focused" education system until they stop seeing boys as "dysfunctional girls" and recognize that they need to learn in a different fashion.
Emphasize appreciation for positive male role models that exude "Healthy Masculinity", focused on providing for and protecting their family and their community.
Stop allowing Big Pharma to give your boys street legal meth so they can focus on shit that doesn't matter. Reduce their video game/ doom scrolling time to a minimum so they actually have to give effort to seek out their dopamine. Let them be bored for a bit. Boredom is a natural motivator that lets you know when you're not using your time effectively, much like hunger. Then, ask them to find some things that genuinely interest them and watch them thrive as their "diagnosis" disappears.
Encourage them to get out and volunteer their time to things that will allow them to be social outside of the house (martial arts/ community activities/ charities). This is where people can build genuine relationships (friends and romantic interests). That sense of community and belonging goes a long way towards giving them a reason to hope for the future. If they already have a solid support network, make sure that they're spending time with them in person. Digital is fun, but physical presence is a completely different beast.
As much as I would have like to make this significantly more concise, this is a complex topic and deserves an in-depth explanation on the potential ways forward, at least according to my opinion. If you bothered to read it in it's entirety, I thank you for your patience and hope you have a wonderful day!
Mr_Dude12@reddit
We need to take mental health seriously. If a mental health exam was done on an annual basis like an eye, and dental exam countless suicides could be prevented. Treating mental health will improve productivity as fighting a mental battle leaves little bandwidth to work. By catching people struggling we would prevent mass shootings
Gabbz737@reddit
I agree. Make mental health check ups at least yearly. And if we could get rid of our over inflated healthcare system it could actually be affordable.
Mr_Dude12@reddit
Ironically, decreasing coverage and promoting shopping by price may be the only real solution.
Gabbz737@reddit
The whole health insurance industry is a crock of bull. If I wasn't living paycheck to paycheck (due to the fact our government can't manage it's money properly) I'd be able to set aside a health savings account for myself. Why pay a company that can deny me for any and no reason at all when i could just put that money aside myself?
PaulTheMartian@reddit
1) most of the individuals carrying out mass shootings are on psychotropic drugs 2) mass shootings happen almost entirely in gun-free zones. The best solutions would be getting rid of gun-free zones, encouraging law-abiding citizens to exercise their 2A right, and severely reducing the Big pHARMa-sponsored drugging of people, especially children.
Gabbz737@reddit
Yeah for real.
I just heard my friend tell me the doctors put her grand daughter on prozac. This kid is like 10. Really no one under 16 should take that shit and even then it should be rare. That stuff will make you nutters! Like I remembered how much it fucked me up as a kid. Now that poor little girl is losing her mind in the lune-pen.
And yes "gun free" zones are bs. Somebody with malicious intent doesn't give a damn about your sign or your rules. Best thing we can do is train and arm the staff. People are less likely to try some dumb shit in a building full of "armed guards"
PaulTheMartian@reddit
That’s insane. These days, kids are being prescribed drugs as if it’s candy.
tombombcrongadil@reddit
Bring back at fault divorce. A lot of these mass shooters are from single parent homes. Don’t incentivize abandoning your family by removing consequence. You want to abandon your family? Go ahead but your wife gets everything and you get fuck all. Honestly I think abandoning your family violates the NAP.
People will say no fault is to help women get out of abusive relationships. It’s always an argument to the extreme. The reality is most divorces are simple “irreconcilable differences” because mom or dad decided they liked somebody new.
Incentivizing parents staying together. Or rather punishing the one who breaks their vows or gives up on their kids, will keep more families together. More families together, less single parenting, less mental health issues, less gun violence.
wokedreamers@reddit
Wut?? That's completely opposite of what a "Libertarian" thinks! How are you going to punish someone for exiting a contract that should have never been a legal contract? Make it make sense
Inaise@reddit
Yes, get the government more involved in personal relationships. That will definitely help.
swedishfish007@reddit
Good luck litigating “who broke their vows first”.
bodhiseppuku@reddit
I could be way off, but it seems social media bullying added to in school bullying leads to some incredibly stressed kids. When life is hell, what are your options?
School policies, strictly enforced, against bullying age cyber-bullying might be the easiest mitigation.
TheGheyzAreGhey69@reddit
Feds gonna fed
vitaminD_junkie@reddit
I recommend John Lott’s work, “More Guns, Less Crime” people don’t commit armed robberies in areas where there’s a high likelihood the victim will be armed. Same principle would limit mass shootings, or if the goal was actually suicide by cop there will be fewer casualties in a scenario where more people are armed and aren’t waiting for law enforcement to arrive.
bongobutt@reddit
A) The "shootings" problem in the US is actually a drug war problem. If you into the data, the overwhelming majority of incidents or this category of crime is either black market created or actually just suicides that get counted in a statistic that people think means murder.
B) 2nd amendment. Support open and concealed carry. Would-be crazies with a gun get stopped real quick by a sane and trained person with a gun.
SPedigrees@reddit
Stop prescribing stimulants for school kids who can't sit still because they are getting no physical exercise.
Legalize all other drugs and drug crime will end.
Defund the police, because cops are responsible for the majority of shootings deaths and injuries.
Frankenbri4@reddit
Secure our schools so they don't stand a chance to even get on the property. Metal detectors, bullet proof glass in office, coded entrances, gates/fencing, etc. This should be small government problems funded by big government money.
DravenTor@reddit
That graph from the other day showing how far the far left have gone... yeah, we'd have to reign that in. The way society is trending atm it would take a BIG shift.
The left is trying to tear down barriers that they don't even comprehend. Male and female roles are built into us at a genetic and primal level. You can't just start telling little boys they can be girls and vice versa. It fucks a kid's mind up. That, I strongly believe, is what is furthering this mass shooter epidemic.
DapperDame89@reddit
Encourage gun safety, advocate for lock up mechanism for everyone, not just those with small children, advocate for mental health screenings and increased visibility of mental health conditions. If people feel ashamed, alone, desperate, or boxed in they are less likely to seek help and support. Encourage politicians to advocate for under funded programs (can be given to on a personal basis as a charity not necessarily taxation). Promote businesses that offer gun safety, mental health services, safe gun storage options etc.
Main-Strike-7392@reddit
Let them hire armed security and/or allow teachers to arm themselves.
The simple act of ensuring their targets aren't as soft will deter some shooters.
itsauser667@reddit
How many school shooters figure they're going to make it out alive do you think?
djhazmatt503@reddit
Decriminalize and/or destigmatize fatherhood and male friendships.
I am in no way part of the manoswamp or alpha gym guy sphere, but for some reason the concept of "dad gone, kids hurt" seems to be some sort of fringe concept embraced only by the hyper religious and/or red pill youtuber circle.
Dads good. Raised by the state bad.
rolandofghent@reddit
Most “Mass Shootings” are gang (I.e. drug) related. End the war on Drugs and you only have a handful of nut cases.
End the government control of healthcare and see the cost of mental health treatment drop.
Studdabaker@reddit
There is currently over 330 million Americans. Mass shooters make up .00001. We can do nothing.
TheRealDarkPatriot@reddit
Step one is looking into the mental health crisis in this country, step two is re-integrating the healthy visibility of firearms in our society. Montana is the most populous/state in the union. And gun crimes are incredibly low there because the criminals live in perpetual fear of getting their brains blown out by somebody else concealed or open carrying. Society when people do not fear the consequences of their actions or know that there will be minimal consequences for their actions. They may choose to make a more reckless decision that has adverse effects on other people. Fear is a powerful weapon and it is the right of any American citizen to implore that weapon in order to further prevail in the war for self-defense.
Novice_Trucker@reddit
Outlaw gun free zones in government buildings.
Put the District attorneys and ADA’s scores up quarterly. Plea deals vs trial and conviction. Same for judges and bail amounts.
Take mental health seriously. Let people get help without the risk of having their rights being taken away. I’ve had depression with suicidal ideations since I was a child. In case things go bad politically, I will never go seek help for it. Don’t want a medical record of it.
That covers the gun portion. You will never stop someone who wants to do others harm. OKC was a fertilizer explosive. Knives, blunt objects, automobiles are all ways to end lives.
republicson@reddit
Amend the constitution to modify the 2nd amendment to explicitly limit gun rights.
sorry, wrong forum
Disastrous-Year-4545@reddit
You’d have to do what the left will never be willing to do in the feminist era…..you’d have to once again, give men authority over their homes and children. Family law, no fault divorce, child support would have to be changed so it’s not simple to just leave the natural leader and disciplinarian of the children, take his money, and let mom do mom. Children need loving yet stern rearing to know the sheer disgrace and shameful nature of being a looser such as a school shooter. When strong husbands and dads are removed from the home, a school shooter is the epitome of what can result psychologically in the young.
That’s honestly what it boils down to despite the eloquent, thoughtful and well founded brainstorms that comprise the aforementioned comments.
mrunderhill17@reddit
You don't, because libertarians are allergic to power & actual solutions.
LOSTmyMoney2wice@reddit
Who causes mass shootings?
Gangs and the mentally ill
Deal with those problems and what causes that circumstances then you end up dealing with mass shootings as a byproduct
MrDeacle@reddit
Cooperatively.
Blanket fixing it on a national scale through some wave of a pen or a magic wand is impossible without mass weapon confiscation (which wouldn't actually work very well and of course I'm also against). That's just erasing a symptom rather than treating the sickness. The sickness would still fester, suicides would steadily increase, and they'd keep pushing harder for happy pills. You need to repair communities individually, repair individual people individually, and not by jamming pills down their throats.
Join and help organize community events, get to know your neighbors. Encourage others to follow suit (share such a joyous task). Check up on your connections, and listen for what's happening in your community. Get to know your neighbors well enough that you're trusted to check on their kids too. Too many kids end up isolated these days, seeking guidance from strangers in extremist corners of the internet, because pictures of missing kids on milk cartons scared their parents so shitless that they gave up on exposing them to actual human beings in the real world. Too busy tweeting about what laws need to be passed to fix all the shootings, meanwhile little Timmy's scrolling through rekt threads on 4chan and getting weird ideas because that's what he thinks it takes to become a real man, hardened. His father hasn't spent quality time with him in months.
I'm of the admittedly distasteful opinion that, if you knew the shooter or their family, you are partially at fault for not paying closer attention and not doing more to help your community. Partially at fault for each casualty. Of course you have your own struggles in life, only so much energy to spare, and I can't expect you to spare more. But spare whatever you can. People will return that energy back to you, it's well worth the investment.
Have empathy, and have patience for people who aren't always easy to work with, aren't always easy to understand the motivations and morals of. There's always circumstantial reasons for people's behavior. Your patience might help repair what was amounting to one of the worst days of their life, ready to go over the edge. But you helped level their head. Someone may return the same favor to you when it's needed.
I'd love to have a president who encourages this kind of sincere, compassionate unity as something important for the nation to pursue. Rather than one who insults and denounces half the country and barely recognizes them as human. It'd be really fucking nice to have a leader with actual fucking leadership capabilities.
skribsbb@reddit
Most mass shootings happen in target-rich environments where the victims and their protectors are disarmed. The reason the right to bear arms is in the constitution is to prevent people from being forced into victimhood.
The problem is that when you have laws that restrict or prohibit guns, then only the bad guys will have guns. Give a bad guy a gun in a building full of unarmed people and he's going to kill a lot of them. Give a bad guy a gun in a building full of people that may or may not be armed and he may not even try. If he does, he's going to get lit up.
LostActionFigure@reddit
That’s a lot of assumptions: 1. Everyone who owns a gun has received training on how to not only safely operate their gun but how to use in a live fire situation. 2. People’s training does not break down when bullets fly their way. 3. Everyone is locked and loaded at all times. How many times have you forgotten to bring your lunch to work? 4. People know who the shooter is and won’t mistakenly identify other people reacting in self defense as the aggressor. 5. Shooters are not geared up to stop small caliber bullets.
Increasing the number of armed citizens will inevitably lead to additional accidental deaths, particularly young children and increase availability for people looking to commit suicide.
CTMalum@reddit
4 is the biggest issue. Someone in a crowd opens fire. 50 people draw weapons. What now?
skribsbb@reddit
I think the vast majority of people are capable of telling the difference between the guy who's shooting at everyone and the guys looking for the gunfire.
CTMalum@reddit
What it actually looks like: https://youtu.be/k5pw84Fq3ak?si=WUrnbqX1oy5z2OHP
Now imagine a bunch of those people are armed and all draw at the same time.
I’m not advocating for disarming anyone, but this is a practical problem that bypasses the philosophy of arming the populace. I think we’re smart enough to keep guns while also not making your favorite parade the Wild West, but it involves concessions from everyone, no matter what ideology they believe in.
skribsbb@reddit
This potential problem doesn't happen in reality where mall shootings are thwarted by armed gunmen.
You're theorycrafting for something we have real world examples. The theory is flawed.
Ragtime07@reddit
CNN Link
Check the link. This happened not long ago. An armed citizen took down a gunmen firing on the food court in a mall. This isn’t some hypothetical theory.
drugdug@reddit
In a school situation specifically it’s going to likely be very obvious and the armed defenders overwhelmingly know each other. At the mall. Well the person mag dumping is likely the shooter. Same in most public non-school shootings. There is no perfect solution but your take is as right as you can be. More likely a cop dusts the wrong person arriving on the scene of a call then the nightmare circular firing squad logic people put forth as a reason to disarm everyone. Ya let’s make mass shooters perfectly safe except for a narrow authorized protection force. Also not the solution. The thought that anyone may have a gun is a serious deterrent.
skribsbb@reddit
There are situations where people have mag dumped someone at the mall and they didn't get shot by another bystander.
It's certainly worth looking at the possibility of this happening, but the fear-mongering is ignorant of history and reality.
divinecomedian3@reddit
There are already cases of murderers being stopped by good guys with guns and it never results in a free-for-all
TerminallyUnique31@reddit
why are you assuming 50 people drawing weapons? if 50 people feel that their lives are threatened then they should draw… but if you can’t actively identify a threat you are going to get the heck outta dodge as soon as possible, not just start randomly shooting into a crowd
PangolinConfident584@reddit
Someone will die.
TheAzureMage@reddit
> People know who the shooter is and won’t mistakenly identify other people reacting in self defense as the aggressor.
A common anti-gun fantasy.
Cops appear to routinely say "oh, I thought so and so was the bad guy." Nobody else does. It's literally not a thing.
RepresentativeAspect@reddit
I disagree with each of your points, including the last. None of these are assumptions, or even required.
TerminallyUnique31@reddit
correct, no one is running through a checklist when their life is on the line… my tiny 70 year old mother in law has a hand cannon next to her bed not because she has specialized training, but because she has a God given right to protect herself
cplog991@reddit
This needs to be realized
cplog991@reddit
You dont know that
rendrag099@reddit
It's not really that many assumptions. Statistically, CCW holders commit even fewer shootings than police do, so it's not inherently more dangerous. The purpose is to put doubt in a potential shooters mind that they're not walking into a target gallery.
aztracker1@reddit
Even then... I've seen more crimes stopped by a good guy with a gun than the police that show up half an hour later.
cc4295@reddit
Ditto to ur assumption
NiftyMoth723@reddit
Either way, it's your civil duty to own a gun and keep it well. Accidental injuries are the fault of the owner.
Ed_Radley@reddit
1) make proof of training a requirement for purchasing new guns 2) start or use existing gun clubs as a means of regular practice. Practicing on a regular basis turns training into muscle memory. Do you need to think about every action you take behind the wheel of a car or is it second nature? Do you think if everyone spent 20 minutes a day conducting target practice they would break down under pressure? 3) how often have each and every single one of your coworkers forgotten their lunch on the same day? Do you think enough people would remember that it wouldn’t matter? 4) shootings are already a rare occurrence. We perceive them as more frequent because they garner attention that other things do not, but pound for pound cars are responsible for more carnage every year than guns. Allowing law abiding citizens to arm themselves would still reduce the number of incidents because the possibility of being met with resistance deters people. Only the ones who have lost their humanity entirely and are looking for suicide by cop will still attempt it. 5) armor is a double-edged sword. The more protected you are against incoming projectiles, the harder it is to blend in to a crowd and have freedom of movement or vision depending on which parts of your body are covered and how. Even with Kevlar being shot is an incredible amount of force and trauma for your body to undergo. All it takes is a handful of shots to hit their target to incapacitate an active shooter.
Gun violence has never been an armament issue, it’s an economy economic, interpersonal relationship, and mental health issue. Well adjusted adults with appropriate coping mechanisms who have their basic needs met don’t shoot up schools or concerts or hospitals. People holding a grudge or who perceive themselves as being under great amounts of stress or pain with a feeling of having nothing to lose do. If everyone could feed themselves reliably, knew how to regulate their nervous systems, or could rely on their support systems in times of crisis, there would be no reason for this discussion.
skribsbb@reddit
It does not make assumptions 1-3. It makes the assumption that the chance of someone concealed carrying is enough deterrent, and that there will be enough armed people present to stop the shooter. In many places it could be less than 1% or even 0.1% are armed and capable and it will be enough.
Assumption 4 can be seen to be true in situations where there have been armed people stopping the shooting. Is there a risk of it going the way you fear? Yes. But that risk is demonstrably low.
Assumption 5 is a rare scenario. Even rarer that they're geared up enough that their entire body is protected. It's also moving the goalposts.
Rrichthe3@reddit
Depends on what you're looking at. Gang violence, schools, or overall? I think bottom line for everything is mental health though.
SoyInfinito@reddit
Mental health 💯
legitSTINKYPINKY@reddit
No one likes to hear this but per capita it really isn’t a problem. Mass shootings are such a small part of the deaths in this country. They just get so much media. The deaths are in the hundreds per year out of 400 million people. I think even if we halved that number people would still be just as upset. All gun deaths only come out to like 30k. Half those are suicides!
Flash728@reddit
Personally, I think removing the limitations on teachers/administrators to be able to keep/carry guns in school. Aside from the occasional crazy with a death wish, I think it would dissuade most if not all "kill for fame" shooters if they believe they won't survive or be able to kill as many students.
sargenthp@reddit
Stop with the "fish in a barrel" zones.
Infinite-Ad5743@reddit
Don’t shoot people who don’t need to be shot.
claybine@reddit
I've had multiple people provide me anecdotes of gun culture in the 80's and 90's.
You could literally drive your truck to school with a shotgun in the back of it.
It's about controlling property, government incompetence, culture, and notoriety.
Gun Free Zones restrict students, faculty, and staff from deferring active shooter situations.
Too many shootings have had examples of law enforcement waiting too long. Get rid of SEO's at this point.
We have a culture of bullying and, with social media added into the mix, cyber bullying.
The media provides full names, and an entire biography of shooters. Yes, absolutely notoriety.
garbagedumpster37@reddit
Stop giving people SSRI meds
bakermonitor1932@reddit
Returning fire has proven to be quite effective.
FragCook@reddit
Schools should have officers present anytime children are present. I know we have the funding because I see it going to other countries. Shooters name and face also shouldn't be so sensationalized to reduce attempts at being infamous. Offenders should be in lifetime solitary confinement and subjected to medical experiments.
terran_cell@reddit
Okay sorry but what the fuck is the end of that last sentence?
Sad_Thought_3001@reddit
terran_cell@reddit
Thank you for being considerate of the library’s noise rules!
DevilsAdvocate168@reddit
Dismantling the three letter agencies would be a good start.
terran_cell@reddit
That’s a good idea if we all want to start speaking Chinese. Not that I’m in love with those agencies, but we will fall behind competitively and help authoritarian nations get more global influence if we refuse to have an agency for foreign intelligence gathering.
Honeydew-2523@reddit
Deterrence.
Around a decade ago, Boston, MA, was seeing a rise in violent cases. Boston Justice system reacted by passing a bill to be vigilant in communities where a lot of violence was taking place.
The number of cases went. However, some contracts were not renewed, and the methods were not tried on a national scale.
they did work, but the movement died.
we renew that movement, and mass shootings will be a thing of the past
usr_pls@reddit
rule 1. Every law abiding american can get a gun
suggestion 2. probably get 2 guns...?
wtfcowisown@reddit
Be better parents and neighbors.
Squeezycakes17@reddit
before anything, understand that the hyper-capitalistic economy we live in, in which social protections for most poor/average people are eroded and denigrated, is a system that continually loads INSANE amounts of pressure on many many individuals, and you that the inevitable result is that many individuals will CRACK and/or EXPLODE under that pressure
it's self-evident to most people that there needs to be some curtailing of the power of capital, and that it serves everyone in society to chip in a bit of their wealth/income regularly in taxation to provide and maintain a good social safety net that prevents unemployment/sickness/injury/bad luck from randomly destroying people's lives and forcing them into destitution
freedom goes hand in hand with responsibility...if you want to say FUCK YOU to the rest of society, and reject any kind of social responsibility to anyone else, you can't be shocked when someone snaps when the economy crushes them, or when you catch a stray when they start shooting in their despair
Morpheous94@reddit
The solution is not policies. It's societal/ cultural change. "Policies" implies that the government can do anything about this issue. They offer no real solutions. This change has to happen in the home, not in the halls of government.
Guns aren't the issue, they're just the tool used to sound the alarm of a deeper issue. They're an easy scapegoat to blame (which the government is always ready to do, because "never waste a tragedy") but they're not the root cause of the issue. They act as the rash that indicates you've brushed up against some poison ivy. True, the rash is the current visible issue. But if you want to avoid getting a rash again, it wouldn't help to not recognize that the poison ivy was the true culprit. You'd just keep bumping into this weird plant, blow all your money on more anti-itch cream to treat it, and then wondering why you keep breaking out in a rash. Kinda silly, no?
Morpheous94@reddit
I have a little brother that I care for deeply, so I've thought on this extensively, as well as potential ways forward. If you're reading this, please let me know if it speaks to you or if you think I might have missed something. Strap in, it's a long read.
Firstly, we need to understand the demographics that commit these mass shooting events (at least in America).
Young boys. Typically from the lower/ middle class. Much of the statistics referencing "mass shooting events" also include gang violence, which is a separate cultural issue entirely, which would require an entirely different conversation. For this discussion, we'll keep it limited to school shootings. In short, it's typically young boys. Why? A whole multitude of reasons. Allow me to list a few.
- Demonization of males in the current culture in a manner akin to the concept of "Original Sin". You're born broken and hateful, and denying it only affirms it to your detractors. Couple this with a lack of positive male role models, and you have a population ripe for improperly applied aggression. As the old proverb goes, "A boy shunned by the village will burn it down to feel it's warmth".
- The public schooling system is almost entirely geared toward catering to young girls. Women are psychologically wired to learn more effectively via verbal instruction (lecture). Men learn most effectively via physical instruction (practical). Hence, we used to have apprenticeships for boys to learn relevant skills. The curriculum has dismantled all of the things that used to be lifelines to young boys, especially those that aren't interested in sports. Recess? Gone. Shop class? Gone. Unless you're going to play for the school to get more funding, sit down, shut up, and listen to your teacher. Don't get up unless you ask permission first. Make sure you do your mountain of homework, that doesn't interest you at all, or you're a failure. The girls have no issue, why do you? You're just a dysfunctional little girl. Which brings us to our next issue.
- ADD/ ADHD is massively over-diagnosed. Our children (especially boys) are being prescribed street-legal meth so they can "focus" on trivial bullshit that doesn't interest them and "be a good citizen". These "medications" have been shown to lead to heightened levels of aggression (no shit, they're basically low strength meth). This MIGHT have something to do with the rampages that these boys have been going on. Just throwing that out there. Maybe, instead of treating people like they're dysfunctional and need to be fixed with a meth prescription so they can "focus", maybe just give them something they find interesting to focus on. Reduce the availability of video games temporarily (which offer an easy stream of dopamine), give them an assignment to look into something that interests them, and see what actually makes them passionate. Not everyone is interested in the Pythagorean Theorem and how the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell. That doesn't mean they're dysfunctional. The fact that the schools refuse to acknowledge that fact means that the educational system is dysfunctional.
- To that point, evolution plays a huge part here as well, regarding energy levels during adolescence. Boys have much more hyperactivity, in adolescence, than girls. If you think about how our societies developed (hunter-gatherers), this makes a lot of sense. It's NATURAL. They needed that energy, back in the day, to keep up with the other hunters, who often had longer legs and would leave behind the boys that couldn't keep up if it meant they captured the animal they were chasing for the village. They needed to run around and play with sticks, pretending to be warriors. They were taught, practically, to contribute to the tribe by hunting and fighting. Girls didn't need that much energy in their youth. They stayed home, with the other women in the village, and were taught via verbal instruction how to do things like identify poisonous berries, weave blankets, and raise children. There were much fewer overtly physical requirements. Hence, the massive disparity. As men, our bodies are still kicking our metabolism into overdrive during our developmental years to compensate for the heightened energy requirements from thousands of years ago (hence why you gain weight when your metabolism slows down as you get older). Evolution takes time. So, they're flooded with energy via their heightened metabolism and then forced to sit still, without recess or anything else to get that energy out, and then punished when they fail to focus. Then, they're told they're inherently broken and are tossed on pills that make them miserable, disrupt their appetites, and make them prone to violent outbursts. Stellar.
- Finally, we constantly discourage young boys about their future prospects by saying that the future holds no promise for them. Economic struggles, no jobs, no family, no purpose. We neglect to give them a solid reason to try, other than "it's your responsibility". With modern day feminism, social media, and dating apps, we have shown young men that they are more likely to be shunned by the fairer sex than given a fair chance. The guys that used to be able to pull the ladies with his personality and sense of humor are now relegated to the "swipe left" crowd and falling down the "Looksmaxxing" rabbit hole, slowly losing any hope of having a genuine relationship. Divorce rates are ludicrous with the FOMO that comes from the constant stream of new prospects that folks are inundated with via dating apps like "Tinder". What's the point of trying to get a "good job" if you have no family to spend your money on? Money for the sake of money? There's a reason most of the dudes that go that route turn to drugs or alcohol. Family is what gives men their long-term answer to their "why".
Morpheous94@reddit
(Cont.)
If you give men no tangible prospects for love, acceptance, and future financial security, how surprising is it that some lose hope and choose to leave? And sadly, when they leave, some decide to take others out with them, as a final act of defiance against a "village" that has made them feel thoroughly isolated?
It's like a wounded animal, lashing out in it's death throes, unable to understand the source of it's anguish, simply wanting to make others feel as much pain as they feel before they commit "suicide by cop". And the government is not coming to save you from that rot. In summary, here is a list of proposals that I would have for society, at the ground level, if they genuinely want to see an end, instead of a gradual escalation, of this violence.
Rebuild the community and abolish the "female focused" education system until they stop seeing boys as "dysfunctional girls" and recognize that they need to learn in a different fashion.
Emphasize appreciation for positive male role models that exude "Healthy Masculinity", focused on providing for and protecting their family and their community.
Stop allowing Big Pharma to give your boys street legal meth so they can focus on shit that doesn't matter. Reduce their video game/ doom scrolling time to a minimum so they actually have to give effort to seek out their dopamine. Let them be bored for a bit. Boredom is a natural motivator that lets you know when you're not using your time effectively, much like hunger. Then, ask them to find some things that genuinely interest them and watch them thrive as their "diagnosis" disappears.
Encourage them to get out and volunteer their time to things that will allow them to be social outside of the house (martial arts/ community activities/ charities). This is where people can build genuine relationships (friends and romantic interests). That sense of community and belonging goes a long way towards giving them a reason to hope for the future. If they already have a solid support network, make sure that they're spending time with them in person. Digital is fun, but physical presence is a completely different beast.
As much as I would have like to make this significantly more concise, this is a complex topic and deserves an in-depth explanation on the potential ways forward, at least according to my opinion. If you bothered to read it in it's entirety, I thank you for your patience and hope you have a wonderful day!
Morpheous94@reddit
I have a little brother that I care for deeply, so I've thought on this extensively, as well as potential ways forward. If you're reading this please let me know if it speaks to you or if you thing I might have missed something. Strap in, it's a long read.
Firstly, we need to understand the demographics that commit these mass shooting events (at least in America).
Young boys. Typically from the lower/ middle class. Much of the statistics referencing "mass shooting events" also include gang violence, which is a separate cultural issue entirely, which would require an entirely different conversation. For this discussion, we'll keep it limited to school shootings. In short, it's typically young boys. Why? A whole multitude of reasons. Allow me to list a few.
- Demonization of males in the current culture in a manner akin to the concept of "Original Sin". You're born broken and hateful, and denying it only affirms it to your detractors. Couple this with a lack of positive male role models, and you have a population ripe for improperly applied aggression. As the old proverb goes, "A boy shunned by the village will burn it down to feel it's warmth".
- The public schooling system is almost entirely geared toward catering to young girls. Women are psychologically wired to learn more effectively via verbal instruction (lecture). Men learn most effectively via physical instruction (practical). Hence, we used to have apprenticeships for boys to learn relevant skills. The curriculum has dismantled all of the things that used to be lifelines to young boys, especially those that aren't interested in sports. Recess? Gone. Shop class? Gone. Unless you're going to play for the school to get more funding, sit down, shut up, and listen to your teacher. Don't get up unless you ask permission first. Make sure you do your mountain of homework, that doesn't interest you at all, or you're a failure. The girls have no issue, why do you? You're just a dysfunctional little girl. Which brings us to our next issue.
- ADD/ ADHD is massively over-diagnosed. Our children (especially boys) are being prescribed street-legal meth so they can "focus" on trivial bullshit that doesn't interest them and "be a good citizen". These "medications" have been shown to lead to heightened levels of aggression (no shit, they're basically low strength meth). This MIGHT have something to do with the rampages that these boys have been going on. Just throwing that out there. Maybe, instead of treating people like they're dysfunctional and need to be fixed with a meth prescription so they can "focus", maybe just give them something they find interesting to focus on. Reduce the availability of video games temporarily (which offer an easy stream of dopamine), give them an assignment to look into something that interests them, and see what actually makes them passionate. Not everyone is interested in the Pythagorean Theorem and how the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell. That doesn't mean they're dysfunctional. The fact that the schools refuse to acknowledge that fact means that the educational system is dysfunctional.
- To that point, evolution plays a huge part here as well, regarding energy levels during adolescence. Boys have much more hyperactivity, in adolescence, than girls. If you think about how our societies developed (hunter-gatherers), this makes a lot of sense. It's NATURAL. They needed that energy, back in the day, to keep up with the other hunters, who often had longer legs and would leave behind the boys that couldn't keep up if it meant they captured the animal they were chasing for the village. They needed to run around and play with sticks, pretending to be warriors. They were taught, practically, to contribute to the tribe by hunting and fighting. Girls didn't need that much energy in their youth. They stayed home, with the other women in the village, and were taught via verbal instruction how to do things like identify poisonous berries, weave blankets, and raise children. There were much fewer overtly physical requirements. Hence, the massive disparity. As men, our bodies are still kicking our metabolism into overdrive during our developmental years to compensate for the heightened energy requirements from thousands of years ago (hence why you gain weight when your metabolism slows down as you get older). Evolution takes time. So, they're flooded with energy via their heightened metabolism and then forced to sit still, without recess or anything else to get that energy out, and then punished when they fail to focus. Then, they're told they're inherently broken and are tossed on pills that make them miserable, disrupt their appetites, and make them prone to violent outbursts. Stellar.
- Finally, we constantly discourage young boys about their future prospects by saying that the future holds no promise for them. Economic struggles, no jobs, no family, no purpose. We neglect to give them a solid reason to try, other than "it's your responsibility". With modern day feminism, social media, and dating apps, we have shown young men that they are more likely to be shunned by the fairer sex than given a fair chance. The guys that used to be able to pull the ladies with his personality and sense of humor are now relegated to the "swipe left" crowd and falling down the "Looksmaxxing" rabbit hole, slowly losing any hope of having a genuine relationship. Divorce rates are ludicrous with the FOMO that comes from the constant stream of new prospects that folks are inundated with via dating apps like "Tinder". What's the point of trying to get a "good job" if you have no family to spend your money on? Money for the sake of money? There's a reason most of the dudes that go that route turn to drugs or alcohol. Family is what gives men their long-term answer to their "why".
Morpheous94@reddit
(Cont.)
If you give men no tangible prospects for love, acceptance, and future financial security, how surprising is it that some lose hope and choose to leave? And sadly, when they leave, some decide to take others out with them, as a final act of defiance against a "village" that has made them feel thoroughly isolated?
It's like a wounded animal, lashing out in it's death throes, unable to understand the source of it's anguish, simply wanting to make others feel as much pain as they feel before they commit "suicide by cop". And the government is not coming to save you from that rot. In summary, here is a list of proposals that I would have for society, at the ground level, if they genuinely want to see an end, instead of a gradual escalation, of this violence.
Rebuild the community and abolish the "female focused" education system until they stop seeing boys as "dysfunctional girls" and recognize that they need to learn in a different fashion.
Emphasize appreciation for positive male role models that exude "Healthy Masculinity", focused on providing for and protecting their family and their community.
Stop allowing Big Pharma to give your boys street legal meth so they can focus on shit that doesn't matter. Reduce their video game/ doom scrolling time to a minimum so they actually have to give effort to seek out their dopamine. Let them be bored for a bit. Boredom is a natural motivator that lets you know when you're not using your time effectively, much like hunger. Then, ask them to find some things that genuinely interest them and watch them thrive as their "diagnosis" disappears.
Encourage them to get out and volunteer their time to things that will allow them to be social outside of the house (martial arts/ community activities/ charities). This is where people can build genuine relationships (friends and romantic interests). That sense of community and belonging goes a long way towards giving them a reason to hope for the future. If they already have a solid support network, make sure that they're spending time with them in person. Digital is fun, but physical presence is a completely different beast.
As much as I would have like to make this significantly more concise, this is a complex topic and deserves an in-depth explanation on the potential ways forward, at least according to my opinion. If you bothered to read it in it's entirety, I thank you for your patience and hope you have a wonderful day!
Rippedlotus@reddit
Mental health support and gun control. They are the only ways but I assume as a libertarian, neither will be supported.
Diddydiditfirst@reddit
That's why we never see shootings in countries like Australia or, oh oh wait. We do!
Get out of here, clown
Rippedlotus@reddit
The old whataboutism. Please provide me with data that supports the number of mass shootings in Australia that are even close to comparable of what happens in America. As predicted, you wouldn't like the answer.
I'd be open to hearing what your take is. Please educate this clown
Diddydiditfirst@reddit
No.
Gun Control is a violation of Right to Property and Self and thus does not belong in this conversation. The fact you submitted it as a response to OP shows either you lack reading comprehension or you act in bad faith. Either way, I refuse to entertain you.
Rippedlotus@reddit
A question was asked and I stated an answer with the cavet that you won't like it. I wasn't wrong! I'll wait for you answer though, because we both know you don't have one! Cheers mate!
Rippedlotus@reddit
I'll help you just in case you can't find. Clowns doing clown work!
https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Frockinst.org%2Fblog%2Fpublic-mass-shootings-around-the-world-prevalence-context-and-prevention%2F&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4
fostertheatom@reddit
1) Focus on mental health because the issue isn't "Gun Violence", it is "Violence". People are so angry and neglected that they are starting to think that it might be a better path to just take as many of the people who "hurt" you (even if innocents get mixed in) with you before you die than just to continue suffering on.
2) Train as many people as possible with proper firearm use and safety (and arm them) because the mindset of a downtrodden individual changes when the thought process shifts from "I'm just gonna go in there and mow down as many people as possible before I get taken down" to "Yeah I'm about to get into a gunfight with 30 people and hope I kill a few people". There is an old saying that "An armed population is a polite population" that I think has some real merit to it.
robinson217@reddit
I think you hold people responsible for providing guns to mentally unstable kids. How many school shooter's have been known problems and they show up with dad's gun? Answer: too many.
Have whatever guns you want. Lock them up and be ready to answer for it if your shit head kid shoots up his school.
This doesn't solve the problem, but it's low hanging fruit.
14bees@reddit
Actually enforce our gun laws. I support every Americans right to carry but if someone goes and says they’re gonna shoot someone they shouldn’t have a gun anymore. Half the time when I see these school shootings the kid preciously threatened to commit some sort of violent crime. Stop letting people who say they’re going to use guns to kill people have guns. I support your right to carry whatever gun you want as long as you promise not to act like a threat to society.
B1G_Fan@reddit
In the short term, put parents on the hook for raising their child poorly. If your child kills someone, the family of the person killed should be able to sue the parents.
In the long term, cut taxes so that families can get by on one income. And cut spending so that parents actually have rely on families to take care of them in their old age. That way, the parents actually have enough time in their life to actually raise their kids with a work ethic and a semblance of self-control.
Yes, I sound like a cranky boomer. But, I’m really somewhere in the middle of the millennial generation. Get off my lawn.
IDrinkMyBreakfast@reddit
I found this pretty interesting
-Doc_Holiday_@reddit
Stop reporting gang shootings involving 2+ people as “mass shootings” would be a good start
denzien@reddit
Funny how journalists decided to use a lower threshold than the FBI
DarthFluttershy_@reddit
It's almost like they are pushing a predetermined narrative instead of simply reporting relevant and accurate news. But that's crazy. I heard on the news that the news is totally legit and everything else is misinformation.
RocksCanOnlyWait@reddit
Same with domestic murder-suicides.
Ok-Affect-3852@reddit
We wouldn’t create artificial environments that are conducive to mass shootings. Areas where law abiding citizens are disarmed tend to be the area where mass shooters target. There also seems to be some collusion between government and big-pharma; this keeps competition with alternative medicine and natural medicine from being on a level playing field. With more competition in healthcare, we might be more likely to move away from psych meds (ssri’s) as the go-to-drug.
Roctopuss@reddit
Eliminate the big pharma incentives to over prescribe medicines, in this case SSRIs.
Ragtime07@reddit
This. I want to see data on how many mass shooters are on psychiatric medication. I’m willing to bet it’s over 50%. I could be wrong but I doubt it.
ptriz@reddit
It's not really accurate to vilify medication when a vast majority of people on SSRIs have positive benefits, especially in a sub that is quick to say a majority of gun owners are not mass shooters.
The alternate, maybe more accurate way to spin what you said is 50% of mass shooters have a mental health condition requiring medication.
Ragtime07@reddit
I would simply like to see the data. I’m not vilifying. My guess is that number is much higher.
Roctopuss@reddit
Especially if we narrow it down to real mass shootings and not gang shit. I'd bet it's easily over 70%.
Ragtime07@reddit
Maybe higher. However as a libertarian, this can be tricky. This conversation leads to banning guns for individuals on psychiatric medication. It could be justified but I don’t like it.
wyoung556@reddit
There is the argument the shooters are almost always already mentally ill. Also in the rare cases where SSRIs make younger people suicidal, they are rarely if ever homicidal.
Ginger-TakeOver@reddit
Some of us are old enough to remember when you could go to a school parking lot and see plenty of trucks with full gun racks in them. Don’t recall any school shootings then. So maybe do away with gun free zones.
cplog991@reddit
Still like that where i live
Ginger-TakeOver@reddit
Here in Missouri I haven’t seen a gun rack in a truck in a very long time. Where abouts you located?
Kilted-Brewer@reddit
My neighbor used to ride the bus to school with his shotgun, then walk home, hunting for grouse and squirrels on the way.
Ginger-TakeOver@reddit
Sounds like a great time to me. I love me some squirrel hunting. Squirrel and rabbit are the only things I hunt
cplog991@reddit
Rural north dakota
natedagr8333@reddit
The immediate and obvious answer is improve security tech at schools. Guns don’t show up in courtrooms for a reason.
Q_dawgg@reddit
Not really a libertarian but I’ve done a ton of research on things we can do to help prevent and reduce mass shootings without gun control
First of all is an increase in observation for warning signs, a majority of juvenile mass shooters exhibited some forms of warning signs and red flags before committing a mass shooting, they posted online, told another individual about their plan, demonstrated violent and concerning tendencies. The past 20-30 years are full of examples of greater society and law enforcement ignoring these red flags, and as a result, tragedy ensues
Most juvenile mass shooters use weapons stolen from their parents or family. One would typically advocate for safe storage laws but I don’t trust our legislative bodies to enforce that effectively.
A greater awareness campaign to help parents identify these signs and store guns safely on their own would be beneficial imo
There are other things we can do but this would help prevent a larger amount of potential mass shootings
denzien@reddit
Any place that declares itself a gun-free zone should be held liable for shootings on-site if they don’t implement real prevention measures. If you're going to disarm people, you’re responsible for protecting them.
We should reschedule and increase research into psychedelics. They show promise in treating mental health issues tied to violence, and individuals should have the freedom to explore these options. Stop giving mass shooters the media attention they seek—it only inspires copycats.
--
Ultimately though, mass shootings are a small fraction (\~1–2%) of homicides. If the goal is to protect schools, let’s do that directly. If it’s to reduce overall homicides, the first focus should be on gang violence - around 13% of all U.S. homicides. Much of it is fueled by the illegal drug trade.
Ending the drug war would strip gangs and cartels of their primary revenue source. Let individuals produce, sell, and buy recreational substances freely. Allow voluntary, private purity testing (like USDA egg grading) so people know what they’re getting. This wouldn’t erase cartel or gang power overnight, but it would weaken their grip and reduce gang violence significantly. A freer market is the key to safer communities.
Hell, it may even turn those gangs into legitimate businesses. I'd wager we would see a lot less violence from them.
r2tincan@reddit
Parent our children better
dbudlov@reddit
Allow people to keep more wealth and to the degree they care about mental health allocate more wealth to helping those in need of help
Stop banning weapons and supporting fun control so armed populations are more common and defensive action can be taken, almost all mass shootings happen in areas where guns are banned or fun control laws are more numerous
Helpful_Finger_4854@reddit
More armed security guards. Fight fire with fire.
Train armed guards how to practice better discretion before firing their weapons, and require extensive psychiatric evaluation, along with an affidavit that they fully understand the laws whenever they're certified to be armed guards.
Kilted-Brewer@reddit
I wouldn’t.
If the goal is to save lives, then mass shootings, which are exceedingly rare, are not where I would focus my efforts. You would realize much greater success by spending those efforts and resources in almost any other area that causes preventable deaths.
For example, which do you think saves more lives: ATF agents investigating discrepancies on Form 4473s? Or the same number of police officers enforcing texting & driving/distracted driving laws?
beagleherder@reddit
I mean well when you break down the statistics and look at their methodology, the issue is not as significant as so many others.
Emceesam@reddit
Insurance requirements for gun owners. Let the market decide the rate, but require insurance policies for use and misuse of firearms. Things like gun safes and locks being owned and used could reduce your monthly payment. Things like multiple users or unlocked firearms could increase your monthly payment.
beagleherder@reddit
So….make the government force you to pay a company money at gun point….check.
LostMyGunInACardGame@reddit
Oh, and let’s charge the poor and minorities more for insurance since they commit more violent crimes.
dontwasteink@reddit
The depressing thing is, it's all trade offs, there is no ideal solution.
But for Libertarians, lack of access to guerrilla worth arms is an existential crisis. It's also considered a very heavy deterrent from government overreach, and any law or amendment to curtail that would act as a canary in a coal mine (need to act now or it will be too late).
bugabooreddit@reddit
First, if you think mass shootings are a problem, you need to get your news from somewhere other than the propaganda machine. They over-report "gun violence" and under report guns saving lives.
Libertarians believe everyone has the right to protect themselves. So everyone should have a gun in their person.
Stop welfare. Too much money going into bad neighborhoods. People need a reason to work. Working keeps them busy.
Stop race baiting propaganda by Democrats. That is their main source of income so it's a hard one.
In other words. All libertarian policies will help.
Mountain_Man_88@reddit
Cultivate a culture of firearms safety and education and allow anyone who wants to responsibly carry a concealed weapon to carry one. There's a reason that these mass shootings are never at police stations or gun stores. They're at schools, concerts, and other "gun free zones"
I'm not saying that every 4th grader needs to be going to class with body armor and an AR-15, but you have teachers and school staff that are willing and capable to carry on their person. As long as the gun is on their person and not in some ridiculous "break glass in case of shooting" case, there's no way that a student will get it. Students shouldn't even know which teachers are armed.
cplog991@reddit
If inwere a teacher in a high risk area, i would CC anyway.
Mountain_Man_88@reddit
Better tried by twelve than carried by six.
ronpaulclone@reddit
Abolish government education.
Question why they are all on SSRIs.
Carry a gun.
SomeBlueChicken@reddit
Let schools defend themselves and then most of what what’s left is gang violence so… cops, lots of them, until the neighborhoods get to the point when they are not crime ridden shitholes and the property values start to go up along with investment and job opportunities from businesses that want to move in because of low rent but are scared to due to crime… why would you open a store in a place where shoplifting is not punished.
I don’t think there is a regulation free way to deal with the mental health crisis considering a lot of that relies on addiction and from where I stand you can’t “free market” your way out of predatory social media companies optimizing their algorithms to the point that it is draining the life out of society.
2lbmetricLemon@reddit
By abolishing the FBI
faircloth9513@reddit
Specifically for schools, it took one terrorist attack to lock down the airports. Why is it, we have not locked down the schools?
drugdug@reddit
Many schools are basically prisons. There has been a lot of lockdown. To the point now where everyone hates school. Staff and student alike. By me anyway that’s how it is. I worked tech in schools for a long time so in and out and all around the buildings. Spend more time unlocking doors and swiping cards then fixing technology the last couple years of it. The safety process is quickly becoming an unsustainable burden.
faircloth9513@reddit
Im sure it was for the airport to, but still, Safety is paramount.
drugdug@reddit
Need to address society. Schools from first hand experience is getting dragged down by safety concerns. From parking lot to tech office was up to taking me five security measures to sit at my desk.
Christ_MD@reddit
It’s not a gun problem. It’s a mental health problem.
We need to re-open mental asylums and sanatoriums.
America has closed most of these down and we have been letting the demented and insane to just walk around with the general public waiting for a crime to be committed.
I have never been one for thought policing, but there’s usually a history of known issues. Seems like all of the unhinged people have a manifesto these days. So much for the Patriot Act, just letting these people fall through the cracks, if not actually encouraging them. Many of these people have a history of mental illness or at least have long histories with a therapist of some sort.
There once was a time we would diagnose mental instability and lock them up for treatment. Now we just force feed medications to everyone including those that don’t need it. Everyone seems to be taking some sort of antidepressant or other drugs. This lack of ability to actually face the true world without using some kind of coping mechanism is doing far more harm than good. When these people have their made up fantasy world challenged they fly off the handle and show their insanity.
We need to stop dulling people’s senses and realities, and make them live in the true reality. If they can’t cope with reality, they don’t need to be in society.
lestempsfonces@reddit
The world is not safe, no matter where you live or what system of government you support. The call to prevent gun violence is a ploy to disarm the population.
whathellsthis@reddit
It’s not a gun problem is a purpose problem. We are hollow with no purpose. Our morals and roles are warped. We need to address our mental health.
ttandam@reddit
This will be controversial but more lax gun laws are needed. Give more good guys guns, and training, and don’t restrict where they can go with them. There’s a reason most shootings occur in areas where guns are banned.
89LSC@reddit
Post up outside of schools and talk to people who look weird
RobertNevill@reddit
As if libertarian made the “laws”? Mutual combat with whatever is agreed on is immediately legalized, and punishments for gun violence outside of that situation becomes extreme extending to your parents if you are a minor or considered incompetent. And I mean extreme
IsAlwaysVeryWrong@reddit
Libertarians aren't interested in societal problems, just whatever is good for them personally.
SexMachineMMA@reddit
I think a major problem is the media’s obsession with violence. While I support the free media part of me thinks that there should be a law preventing news outlets from releasing the names, photos, and manifestos of murderers. There is little value to the public of knowing every little detail about the perpetrators of these crimes and only serves a morbid curiosity we have. We know one of the reasons these mass murderers continue to perpetrate such violent acts is the knowledge that they will be immortalized in the public consciousness via the media’s obsession with violence.
Mojeaux18@reddit
More guns, tax credits for training and safes, mental health care, and on-site guards for schools. Did I cover all bases?
PangolinConfident584@reddit
Regulate gun
Comfortable-Trip-277@reddit
That would be as unconstitutional as literacy tests in order to vote.
Incorrect. The People have the right to keep and bear arms.
This is a common misconception so I can understand the confusion around it.
You're referencing the prefatory clause (A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State), which is merely a stated reason and is not actionable.
The operative clause, on the other hand, is the actionable part of the amendment (the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed).
Well regulated does NOT mean government oversight. You must look at the definition at the time of ratification.
The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:
1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."
1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."
1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."
1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."
1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."
1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."
The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.
This is confirmed by the Supreme Court.
That is as unconstitutional as vetting people before they can exercise free speech.
PangolinConfident584@reddit
Damn I need more people like you who give a proper respond with fact and reasoning. Than just “it’s my right!”
Thank you for your respond. I give you upvote.
How do you think should address mass shooting?
Comfortable-Trip-277@reddit
Several others have pointed out solutions that go to the root of the problem. Those solutions include socioeconomic and mental health focused approaches.
I think those will work well, but will take a good bit of time and significant effort to see the effects.
Personally, I want to see gun free zones that have no historical tradition of being sensitive places abolished.
The reason why these shooters choose the locations they do is because they are guaranteed disarmed victims. It allows the greatest amount of time to inflict as much damage as possible before someone returns fire. Typically once someone fires back, they usually run off or end up taking their own life.
The goal is to decrease the time and increase the odds that they face an armed defender. Abolishing gun free zones significantly increased those chances. You've got to think why mass shootings don't occur at police stations or shooting ranges. That's because they would be almost immediately put down once they start shooting.
It's not like gun free zones do anything to prevent an attack. It's about as effective as putting a "no stealing zone" sign next to a big bag of unguarded cash in the hood.
Nacho_Chungus_Dude@reddit
The fallacy in your question is the assumption that all life’s problems can be solved with legislation.
In my ideal world, there are no public schools or gun-free zones for shootings to happen at.
But this isn’t my ideal world, so realistically, right now, if you wanted to stop school shootings tomorrow—you would allow teachers with a CCP to carry, that would be an effective overnight solution.
Then, if you were being non-libertarian, but still trying to fix the problem, you would appoint a police officer to monitor and defend every school and gun-free zone, and this summer you would install metal detectors, security doors, and emergency exits in schools. And in the long term you would probably fund some sort of mental-health research to find out why mass shootings are happening
nocommentacct@reddit
Step 1 become a teacher Step 2 carry a gun Step 3 STFU about it and only pull it out if you need to
cplog991@reddit
This would be me
JamesMattDillon@reddit
Get rid of the Gun free zones, for starters. Hite armed guards, which would create more jobs.
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
Actually enforce the laws we have.
How many of these mass shooters committed crimes like making credible terrorist threats, or assault and battery, animal cruelty, etc?
The Buffalo shooter was driving around with severed cat heads and talking about how he killed them. Why was he not arrested for animal cruelty and in jail/under watch?
New laws won't solve anything when we don't enforce the laws we already have.
Doc-I-am-pagliacci@reddit
This is the most educated comment thread I’ve ever seen on what to do about gun violence.
nazaguerrero@reddit
well most countries in the world don't have mass shootings since they are unable to use weapons being civilians or is heavily restricted that even if you defend yourself you will face judgment by law
now in the states this is a total different discussion since you have the 2nd amendment
Lakerdog1970@reddit
A biggie would just to encourage a more prosperous society where more dudes are having good careers, having a good romantic relationship with the woman they love and raising kids.
If you look at who these shooters tend to be, they usually have no job or a shitty job. No GF and no kids.
Heck.....when I see some of the shooters on the news with all their tactical gear, I'm not sure I could even accumulate the gear because my wife would question why I'm buying so much tactical gear. I'd get home and she'd be like, "Sorry.....I opened your Amazon box by mistake. Why are you ordering body armor? And how many AR15 magazines do you need? Don't you have some already? Don't spend too much because Christmas is coming up....."
Basically, the best way to eliminate violence in society is to have things be prosperous so that guys have too much to lose to even get into a bar fight.
cplog991@reddit
Stop raising little fuckers. Introduce humanity and empathy into parenting.
Avilola@reddit
Before I get started, I’ll point out that I’m a liberal, 2a-supporting gun owner with a ccw.
If we want to stop the mass shootings most people are worried about (I’m only talking about situations where a shooter shows up to a public place and targets innocents, not other things that get lumped in with the stat like gang violence and family annihilations), the answer is better mental health care. Maybe stronger red flag laws and more extensive background checks.
With our second amendment and the amount of guns in the country, making guns illegal and expecting them all to be returned is just not feasible. Plus, it’s just not fair to punish the responsible individuals who make up 95+ percent of the gun owning population over the actions of criminals.
The best thing we can do is prevent people from getting into these dark mental places that lead them to want to hurt others. The second best thing we can do is prevent people in those dark places from obtaining weapons. I know a lot of people are saying to better arm the good guys, but if it gets to the point where we need a good guy with a gun, that means we’ve already failed to prevent a tragedy at multiple steps. I’d rather nip it in the bud—an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
On another note… Democrats say it’s a gun issue, republicans say it’s a mental health issue. However, democrats also say we need better healthcare in our country in general, including mental healthcare. If everyone agrees that poor mental healthcare is causing our country problems, why aren’t we jumping on that yesterday?
Comfortable-Trip-277@reddit
That would be a 2A, 4A, and 5A violation.
What do you mean by extensive? There are very few conditions where someone can be constitutionally denied and gun and the current system already covers them.
Avilola@reddit
No, no it wouldn’t.
Comfortable-Trip-277@reddit
2A: There was no rich historical tradition of removing arms from someone based on unconfirmed allegations and without going through due process.
4A: Property is being seized without a warrant issued with probable cause.
5A: Liberty and property were stripped without due process being fulfilled. You need to be able to face your accuser before due process can be fulfilled.
stebe-bob@reddit
Remove regulations and incentives that act as barriers to a lower cost of living and an expanded middle class. Almost all violence comes from the lowest economic segment of the population. While wealthy people also suffer from mental health issues, and these are in no way diminished by making comparisons, economic hardship magnifies even acute issues.
Winterwolf78@reddit
Violence, guns or not, is a societal problem. It's up to society to fix. That means charitable resources, donations to foundations and putting your money where your mouth is.
it means raising children with proper coping mechanisms and morals. It means banding together to care for the weak, disabled, and bullied on your own without government telling you to.
It also mean proper defense of places like schools, and the second all the "gun free zones" disappear, so will half of mass shootings.
smolt_funnel@reddit
Just want to say that I'm quite happy to see intelligent discussion here, including disagreement, instead of just downvotes like most of the other subs on reddit.
TheAzureMage@reddit
We end the gun free zone policies that started them.
Remember, they preceded Columbine, they weren't a reaction to it. They were part of the war on drugs, which also didn't work. The elder Bush was looking to crack down on drug dealers, and those dealing on or near schools were a politically popular target. Extra charges for catching them with a gun? Politically a slam dunk.
It just didn't work, and now kids are dead because of it.
TerminallyUnique31@reddit
policy wise, my opinion is to get rid of “gun free” zones in public that aren’t protected by armed law enforcement… the data shows that most of these areas are where mass shootings occur (>60% workplace/school)… ive seen a couple of studies “debunking” this theory but those used suicide numbers in their statistics
from a philosophical and sociological standpoint, we need to promote independence on self and loved ones to learn and grow as individuals, and less promotion of dependence on government… when 95%+ of mass shootings are committed by males, that indicates to me there are a lot of young men that don’t have other good men surrounding them
as a person who has been a young man with mental health issues, the best thing for me was to surround myself with good men who could help keep me accountable for my actions, take the fears i had and turn them into constructive motivation… the worst thing would have been for me to assume i could depend solely on government social programs that have failed me time and again… i can’t imagine having to go through what i did 15 years ago during lockdowns
libertarianmainecoon@reddit
A shooting on Halloween this year seriously bumped getting my concealed carry to the top of my to do list. I’m sick of this shit especially in a liberal state where all of the strict gun laws are “in theory” supposed to help…
Comfortable-Trip-277@reddit
Return fire.
Redduster38@reddit
Support mental health , promote community.
Promote ways to deal with issues and personal responsibility. Humans are too flawed to build a utopian society. We can only strive to mske tools available to people and for people to learn how to interact and deal with it.
SlowSeas@reddit
As a lib larper, my take:
Education - Gun safety as early as elementary school and throughout grade school. Marksmanship used to be a common elective in yesteryears. Bring it back. General education as well so budding adults have the capacity to understand the impact of their choices.
Diet - Americans eat like shit, further reducing their capacity for critical thinking. I don't know if it was solely Texas back in the 2000s but they switched a lot of cafeteria "home made" style options to "healthy" cardboard. A total overhaul of diet education is needed to reflect modern findings. None of this food pyramid shit with carbs as the base.
Pharmaceuticals - Kids by and large don't belong on prescription drugs that ultimately create a lifelong habit of reliance on daily intake of substances that alter brain chemistry. Lazy parenting of millennials has led to functionally useless adults that were legally drugged in their youth. Get big pharma the hell out of schools.
Culture - Americans as a whole need to reject degenerate media and should shelter their children until they are whole of mind to understand entertainment isn't a blueprint for ones ideals.
Media - Promote, create and consume wholesome content for all ages. Hollywood and the music industry used to be largely intellectual, thought provoking and wholesome. Modernity has bastardized the vaulted corridors of art.
Family - County and city level programs to help keep families together. Help mom and dad find jobs. Have opt in resources for those who truly seek betterment for themselves and their family. Well vetted community aids for living room talks focused on guidance, not policing growth.
Crime - Zero tolerance policies across the board for violent crimes. Any violent crime with a firearm sees people in labor camps indefinitely with appeal available to only those that did not kill after 20 years. No death penalties, make them work to repay society of robbing them of a life.
TLDR; Mostly personal and not really libertarian take. Healthy minds, bodies and a prosperous middle class lead to a strong and free society.
CigaretteTrees@reddit
I’d start by making firearm safety a requirement for graduation, nothing crazy but a basic class where an instructor covers all of the basics of firearms safety, how to safely store a firearm, what to do if you encounter a firearm, etc and top it off with an extremely basic marksmanship test using a pellet rifle. This will hopefully create a new generation of safe gun owners without the need for safe storage laws or any other government intervention.
Allow more schools to open marksmanship clubs/teams, allow students to compete against each other in a safe environment, make students respect firearms, become proficient with their safe use and remove the stigma of firearm ownership.
Remove so called “zero tolerance” bullying policies in schools, a student who is constantly ridiculed should not be punished for fighting back, I think those policies drive victimized students to much more violent acts instead of resolving their problems with a simple fight. We shouldn’t be resolving our issues with fights to begin with but I’d rather that than punish the victim for standing up for themselves, it sends the wrong message to the student and only encourages a more violent response.
Allow teachers and administrators to carry firearms on campus, this wouldn’t prevent school shootings but it might help end them early.
Make sentences for crimes involving the use of a firearm much stricter, let’s say carjacking will get you 5 years in prison but if you use a firearm you’ll get 15 years, I don’t think that’s unreasonable. This wouldn’t do much to stop a mentally ill school shooter but it would go a long ways to preventing drug related shootings on school campuses, students involved in gangs frequently carry firearms on campus and they should be swiftly and severely punished for doing so.
On the topic of drug related school shootings ending the war on drugs would go a long ways towards ending the shootings, legalize the sale of these illegal drugs so drug users can get their fix from the safety of an actual business rather than a shady street corner.
Removing blanket immunity and intellectual property (not a real thing) protections from big pharma I think would also help ensure the drugs put on the market are actually safe and effective, there is still lots of debate about whether or not SSRIs are actually helping or harming these mentally ill people. There are other things that could be done in regard to mental health and how it’s currently treated but I don’t believe the government has a role in that.
redm00n99@reddit
We don't. There's no ethical way to fix it. And it is pretty insignificant compared to other issues
Thencewasit@reddit
You probably need to define mass shootings and gun violence before you can determine the policy to pursue.
Like most “gun violence” is suicide or gang related. How do you define mass shooting? Number of victims, number of shots fired, location?
mostlikelynotasnail@reddit
Make guns part of society and education.
We always get accused of having a gun "culture" but the truth is less than half of people own guns and many are afraid of them. It's used to be that being around guns was more common because they were tools.
Now there's a novelty and opportunity for obsession which allows those who want to play on fear
TheBigGuy1978@reddit
When I engage in these conversations we usually wind up back at supporting policies that encourage the family unit. That may sound silly, but Parents, especially good ones, can do the most good to fix this particular problem. The USA has always been gun crazy, that's not a new phenomenon. What has changed is we've lost our sense of right and wrong. And to me, the only way that gets solved is in the home.
Unfortunately, you need people to meet in the middle to talk about this, and our top notch 2 party system will never allow that to happen.
A colleague made an interesting point about banning guns entirely. There are a estimated 500 million firearms in the US, even if the 2 parties could agree that was the right solution, the US government is neither capable, organized, or logistically savy enough to confiscate 500 million of anything.
HereForaRefund@reddit
Proliferation
Mountain_Air1544@reddit
Reducing the number of easy targets, gun free zones are usually the first target for mass shooters because they know that they won't be met with much resistance and can take out a large number of victims
trustedbyamillion@reddit
This video looking at gun ownership in Switzerland is really interesting
jgn77@reddit
Ban gun free zones and they will plummet. My brother is a teacher and wishes he could keep in gun in his classroom to protect his students.
Professional_Swim673@reddit
As a product of living in the hood (haven't shot anyone yet), there needs to be respectable men in the local communities that serve as role models and act as a positive force. It's that simple.
jtunzi@reddit
Mental health checks and restrictions on reporting of mass shooters would help, but I think these policies may be authoritarian and unconstitutional.
Legalization of drugs and prostitution would help reduce gun violence in general since that's primarily what's funding the gangs and cartels.
SCB024@reddit
Crack down on inner city gangs and violent drug dealers.
Promote father's being fathers: end the welfare state
samplemax@reddit
Venn diagram OO hope this helps
UnoriginalUse@reddit
End the war on drugs, end gang shootings over turf. Most 'mass shootings' are just gang violence.
Ragtime07@reddit
Mental health.
LibretarianGuy80085@reddit
You either arm everyone, so the mass shooter gets dead real quick, or you don’t reduce it.
groshreez@reddit
Anyone who's taken a CCW class knows one of the first rules in self-defense is "don't be a hero." I'm only putting my life on the line to protect my family. You never know if a shooter has an accomplice waiting.
Sea_Journalist_3615@reddit
"Im all for more responsible gun ownership, but anyone who's taken a CCW class knows one of the first rules in self-defense is "don't be a hero.""
You were trained by fudds who don't think you are capable of being a hero is all. That's all that means. That is not a rule of concealed carry. That is the cowards rule.
"I'm only putting my life on the line to protect my family."
That is your choice.
"You never know if a shooter has an accomplice waiting."
That's what training is for. Scan your environment, watch for body language and accomplices.
groshreez@reddit
I'm also not opening myself up to civil or criminal charges and being the only person standing with a gun when the trigger happy cops show up to execute the first person they see.
Potato_Memelord_420@reddit
I don’t think it’s cowardly at all. As a single young healthy adult I personally would step up and stop the threat. But If I had a spouse and children or was pushing a baby stroller my first response would be to get everyone else to safety first before choosing to fire back.
Sea_Journalist_3615@reddit
That is your choice. As I stated earlier. I will not stand by while others are murdered.
groshreez@reddit
That's not very Libertarian of you.
Sea_Journalist_3615@reddit
Defending the innocent is not libertarian? I think you are confused.
patriotmd@reddit
And as soon as you draw someone else might mistake you for a bad guy.
Sea_Journalist_3615@reddit
"And as soon as you draw someone else might mistake you for a bad guy."
I accept that as a possibility. I have been attacked walking down the street multiple times in my life. One time I was mistaken for a perp. Being mistaken for the bad guy is possible but not a reason not to stop someone from hurting or killing other people.
ExplorerEnjoyer@reddit
Get rid of the FBI
ponderayidaho@reddit
Dismantle the welfare state and cut taxes for working class people to reduce the financial hardship that contributes to our mental health crisis.
MoistBase@reddit
Allow developers to build walkable cities to reduce mental illness.
joeh4384@reddit
Making drugs legal would take the criminal element away that drives most mass shootings which are gangs shooting at each other.
AutoModerator@reddit
New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more? Be sure to check out the sub Frequently Asked Questions and the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.