Maryland school shooting leaves 2 students injured, gunman dead

[Andrew NDB]

I was wondering what the left narrative was going to be on this. I guess it's going to be something like this:

[sdp]

The use of child/man depending on the narrative is so annoying when someone is 17.

Originally Posted by TurtleWA

I don’t think it’s a cheap scapegoat at all. I’m wanting to determine if Americans under 21 commit/attempt murder at significantly higher rates than there under 21 global counterparts. My wish would be that America is similar or even lower. I would hope it’s not something like quadruple the global rate.

You can do the research yourself, the numbers are definitely out there.

I don't have numbers either but from my knowledge you would only find similar rates in poor/war torn countries as I stated. You won't find these numbers in developed countries like say most of Europe or even in developing countries like Latin America and various parts of Asia. Latin America/Asia might have some similar numbers in poor localities where there is no education so kids go to crime for food which is not comparable to the situation in the US.


As I stated earlier in the thread or in another school tragedy thread, it's very much a social issue in the US so it'll be extremely difficult to eliminate, but more can be done to be prevented.

The easy access to guns is a huge part, of course you can get illegal guns if you're a criminal but it's extra steps and the average looney isn't going to do that much reasearch or prepare as much and it works in other countries. I can only imagine how violent where I'm living right now would be if guns were readily available.

The problem with the US is they believe the "We're Number 1" propaganda and never venture to what other countries think of the country to give them a fresh perspective.

I deal with foreigners every day from many different countries and they often ask me about what is going in the US, they really can't understand.

[plastroncafe]

I called the kid a kid because he was under the age of 18.
Yes, that's a disservice to teenagers everywhere, but the fact remains that 17 is still under the age of majority.

I will say that it's nice to see people calling this a societal problem, and not merely trying to brush it away by dismissing it as mental illness.

Not that how we treat mental illness isn't also a societal problem, but I think that's a horse of an entirely different color while still being a horse.

So when do we start doing something about this societal problem?
Because this kid in MD thought he had the right to walk into a school and blow away a girl, for reasons that have not yet been released.

And in Texas we have a 20 year old man mailing bombs.
So, when are we going to address the factors that radicalized then young men?

I think the internet is as much to blame as video games, which is to say not at all.
These young men / boys were angry enough to murder, why?
And why did they believe their anger was enough of a justification to take someone else's life?

[TurtleWA]

Originally Posted by plastroncafe

I will say that it's nice to see people calling this a societal problem, and not merely trying to brush it away by dismissing it as mental illness.

Not that how we treat mental illness isn't also a societal problem, but I think that's a horse of an entirely different color while still being a horse.

So when do we start doing something about this societal problem?

I am also interested in the societal aspects. If other countries have a less percent of young people attempting/committing murder. What are these other countries doing to produce such well adjusted young people?

Realistically guns and schools are just the tip of the iceberg. If all guns disappear tomorrow does the desire to murder also disappear? No.

So how has America come to the point that we are creating a higher number of young killers than any other country?

[plastroncafe]

Would mandatory military service for young men help curb this kind of behavior? Normally I'm against the idea of conscription...

[Papenbrook]

Originally Posted by plastroncafe

Would mandatory military service for young men help curb this kind of behavior? Normally I'm against the idea of conscription...

That probably wouldn't help at all.

In fact, that might even incite more violence and, when you consider what kind of incidents occur within the military, more death.

[TurtleWA]

Originally Posted by plastroncafe

Would mandatory military service for young men help curb this kind of behavior? Normally I'm against the idea of conscription...

Some people might think that could work. Take the guessing out of transition from adolescence to adulthood. You know your next stage in life. Be to busy training to think about relationships and shooting peers. However, look at private pyle in full metal jacket. So I’m thinking my current answer is probably no.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by plastroncafe

Would mandatory military service for young men help curb this kind of behavior? Normally I'm against the idea of conscription...

I think that would help IMMENSELY. Though let's make it mandatory for women as well. We don't need to put it under the banner of, "This will stop school shootings!" (but it will) but it's just a great way of teaching value and responsibility. Since that appears to... not be happening as much as it used to.

Originally Posted by Papenbrook

That probably wouldn't help at all.

In fact, that might even incite more violence

The evidence from the countries that have that in place doesn't support that hypothesis remotely.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by plastroncafe

Would mandatory military service for young men help curb this kind of behavior? Normally I'm against the idea of conscription...

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I think that would help IMMENSELY. Though let's make it mandatory for women as well. We don't need to put it under the banner of, "This will stop school shootings!" (but it will) but it's just a great way of teaching value and responsibility. Since that appears to... not be happening as much as it used to.

The evidence from the countries that have that in place doesn't support that hypothesis remotely.

What about conscientious objectors or people who disagree with America's foreign policies?

I have no desire to sacrifice my children on the altar of the American military-industrial complex simply in the hopes that other children are getting their $hit together at boot camp and in some third world country's sand hills.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

What about conscientious objectors or people who disagree with America's foreign policies?

I have no desire to sacrifice my children on the altar of the American military-industrial complex simply in the hopes that other children are getting their $hit together at boot camp and in some third world country's sand hills.

When I think, "kids should do mandatory time in the military" I'm not necessarily thinking they would need to be deployable in the field during this time -- whatever "this time" is, if it's a year, two years. Just train, learn responsibility, learn to work as a team in unison with others on a base and on expeditions, learn about guns, how to fire, how to take them apart, etc.. The equivalent of doing time in a sort of light National Guard.

Then if they want to fully enlist when it's over, give them incentives.

[TurtleWA]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

What about conscientious objectors or people who disagree with America's foreign policies?

I have no desire to sacrifice my children on the altar of the American military-industrial complex simply in the hopes that other children are getting their $hit together at boot camp and in some third world country's sand hills.

I’d guess not all jobs in military are combat or even go to other countries.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by TurtleWA

I’d guess not all jobs in military are combat or even go to other countries.

Yeah, my dad was a radio tech in the Army way back and never saw the field at all.

[Papenbrook]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

When I think, "kids should do mandatory time in the military" I'm not necessarily thinking they would need to be deployable in the field during this time -- whatever "this time" is, if it's a year, two years. Just train, learn responsibility, learn to work as a team in unison with others on a base and on expeditions, learn about guns, how to fire, how to take them apart, etc.. The equivalent of doing time in a sort of light National Guard.

The U.S. rarely enacts those sort of requirements for the police force.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

When I think, "kids should do mandatory time in the military" I'm not necessarily thinking they would need to be deployable in the field during this time -- whatever "this time" is, if it's a year, two years. Just train, learn responsibility, learn to work as a team in unison with others on a base and on expeditions, learn about guns, how to fire, how to take them apart, etc.. The equivalent of doing time in a sort of light National Guard.

Then if they want to fully enlist when it's over, give them incentives.

Originally Posted by TurtleWA

I’d guess not all jobs in military are combat or even go to other countries.

Ah, okay. The only country that comes to mind for "everybody serves" is Israel. I've always assumed that meant combat.

[plastroncafe]

Originally Posted by TurtleWA

Some people might think that could work. Take the guessing out of transition from adolescence to adulthood. You know your next stage in life. Be to busy training to think about relationships and shooting peers. However, look at private pyle in full metal jacket. So I’m thinking my current answer is probably no.

There's something to that.
There's a zoologist named Desmond Morris who's done work on humans, studying us the way he would study animals. They made a documentary series on his work. One episode specifically focused on Rites of Passage, and how in Westernized Countries there really isn't one for boys.

Girls get training bras and their period, but guys...are kind of SOL.
For the most part in our culture a boy isn't a Man until he's had sex, which...can easily leads to problems.
Like, say for instance, a guy believing he's entitled to the affections of a gal, because she's what stands in the way of his ascending to adulthood.

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

What about conscientious objectors or people who disagree with America's foreign policies?

I have no desire to sacrifice my children on the altar of the American military-industrial complex simply in the hopes that other children are getting their $hit together at boot camp and in some third world country's sand hills.

Dunno.
I'll be honest, I'm not a huge fan of the military industrial complex my own self, and I'm against selective service in general, but...something's got to be done.

Where are those MRAs when you actually need them?

[Papenbrook]

Even if all assault rifles (or guns in general) were banned from the public, wouldn't more individuals just apply for jobs within the military/ police force? Those jobs would generally require the usage of guns, tasers, and such.

With all the corruption that goes on within those specific sectors, that wouldn't really be a good thing.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Papenbrook

Even if all assault rifles (or guns in general) were banned from the public, wouldn't more individuals just apply for jobs within the military/ police force?

Assault rifles are already banned. And no, probably not.

[Barkworm]

This discussion is sickening but I agree with one thing: The US have become so ****ed up that armed schools are the most simple and thus sadly the best solution to the problem of school shootings.

[Mayhem]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I was wondering what the left narrative was going to be on this. I guess it's going to be something like this:

Both points are important, as I made a comment elsewhere that while the good guys with guns recently have had some wins, the next solution needed is to reach a circumstance where they are needed less. And certainly if people are carrying out these atrocities where armed others are present, it isn't much of a deterrent, is it? People still commit murders in states with the death penalty, so is that a genuine deterrent either? The problem definitely is multi faceted.

[Papenbrook]

Originally Posted by Barkworm

This discussion is sickening but I agree with one thing: The US have become so ****ed up that armed schools are the most simple and thus sadly the best solution to the problem of school shootings.

I'm sorry if I've brought offense. I would never try to purposefully upset anyone.