Jump to content

The Increasing Mass Shootings In US Mark Human New Era

Recommended Posts

The Increasing Mass Shootings In US Mark Human New Era

By exegesisme


1 This information shows the deadliest ​12 mass shootings since 1949 in US, half of them happened in recent 10 years, the rate increases from once ten years to more than once two years.

2 What most remarkably happened in recent 10 years? That is the war against terrorism.

3 I believe the model of the war against terrorism causes US inner tension, which would flow and accumulate in the society. The tension decreases the wellbeing of general people in US, and accumulates in special ones.

4 Once other factors gather together, would breakthrough the borderline of the most tolerance of a weak and violent soul, and trigger a mass shooting.

5 I believe it is the time to discuss the model against terrorism, which should not decrease the wellbeing of general people, should not increase the tension of the whole society, and should prevent the weakest links be broken. Considering the rising of ISIS and so many citizens take part in it from western nations, I believe the model now in using is absolutely failed.

6 I study the information again, I find more details of the deadliest mass shootings. Their distribution in time is following: from 1949 to 1983, 2 times with 29 total dead in 34 years; from 1984 to 2006, 4 times with 71 total dead in 22 years; from 2007 to 2015, 6 times with 110 total dead in only 9 years.

7 The increasing tendency is very obvious with the three periods. What is most remarkable for the three periods? Maybe, from 1949 to 1983 is before information era, from 1984 to 2006 is the growth of information era, from 2007 to 2015 and hereafter is post information era.

8 In the post information era, it is much easy to look for information of any thing, and so to do any thing much easy, doing good things, doing bad things, and doing evil things are becoming easier. Everyone are much more powerful than before.

9 Therefore, the wellbeing of everyone, and the morality and ethics of everyone are more important to the whole being than before. The tragedy of one is more likely decreasing the wellbeing of others.

10 The inequality before emerges so obvious and so striking in eyes of everyone, the old answer can not explain the actual and fast naked facts. Therefore, the increased rate of the deadliest mass shootings is only a striking mark for the change of era. Everyone should confront we are in a new era with new traits, we contribute its issues and also are part of its answers. We are condemned to change ourselves, no one can escape.

Edited by Exegesisme
Link to comment
Share on other sites


​The History of Homicide in the U.S.

More information on the above webpage.

1 In a summary, the accountabilities of the government is key to decrease the rate of homicide.

2 The rate of homicide is in tendency of decrease in recent 20 years, although the rate of mass shootings is in tendency of increase. This converse is unusual, and may mean something. Directly, it may mean the condition of general improvement with the condition of some people in minorities is not improved, and even at least relatively worsen. This view is compatible with the opinion in the main post.

Edited by Exegesisme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With due respect mashing all mass killings into one category of statistics and description is misleading.

Certain mass killings are done by what is called border line personality disorder persons. These are people who live one step in reality and barely function day to day and can and could in a moment be triggered to become violent. Such people are about 1-2% of the population and they will use the nearest available weapon of choice so yes if guns are easily accessible they use them, if not rocks, knives, bombs, cars, their hands, a bat, anything really.

Such people can be broken down into a sub category of paranoid types who imagine they are being treated unfairly. Such people are almost always male, live alone, have failed to establish intimate relationships and a support circle of friends or loved ones, go days on end invisible and unnoticed and feel powerless.

We think mostly in this category of the post office employee who goes bezerk.

Then we have border line personality youth, 1-2% of the youth population who fall under the above category only their place to act out their violence will be at home or school since they don't work- they also may collect guns, knives, whatever is accessible. Again these are loners, unable to make intimate connections or friendships, spend days alone on their computers, have dysfunctional family relationships, may self medicate and self harm.

In the above category the pofile is one of a loner, sexually impotent, eating poorly, dirty and has poor hygiene habits including their hair, teath, clothes, odour, doesn't sleep in the night, irritable, shy, non existent or underdeveloped self esteem, depressed, can be obsessive compulsive, often smokes or self medicates and self harms, i.e., picks at their skin, face, pulls out their hair, cuts themselves with knives, anorexic, chews their lip until it bleeds.

In both the above categories if guns are easily accessible they will eventually be used. These are people who may or may not plan their killing, do not necessarily carry their weapons on them-but they keep them close. The actual triggering event that causes them to use the weapons could be something very slight and unrelated and so its what we call spontaneous or unpredictable-the actual moment of the attack is not known but the indicators of an imminent attack may be there if noticed and often they are not. In a room full of youth, a disaffected one is hard to differentiate from a healthy person just as a border line adult is invisible or its impossible to know the difference between a devout Muslim and a radical Muslim terrorist.

In such cases restrictive gun control might help delay an attack from coming but won't stop it from coming, because its hard to screen gun owners with invisible and undetectable and undiagnosed disorders-so unless you have a total ban, such people will buy their weapons.

Then we have the use of guns in domestic violence situations and with those gun control could directly cut down on deaths. Most police deaths come during domestic calls. These are violent deaths with similar profile only their is no collective political statement. Its an individual acting out about individual power over other individuals issue.

Then we have sociopaths, i.e., serial killers, sexual predators, but such people who kill en masse do so slowly and often hate guns. They might just as much use their hands, rope, wire, poison, a hammer, a chain saw. No amount of gun control makes them disappear.

Then we have terrorists, people whose description is based on spontaneous bursts of violence to perceived slights or accumulated rage reaction to feeling powerless but whose motivation comes from ideology.

Terrorists are deliberate people who believe their ideology (religious, political, spiritual) taught to them by others, justifies their expressing and imposing their opinions/values/beliefs on others by violence, death and terror.

Terrorists are not for the most part mentally ill. They are in fact a product of group psychology phenomena-their behavior has been shaped by a group they joined and its leaders/ They don't act alone and their pathology is fueled by the group and its leaders. The support and conditioning from their group operates the exact same way alcohol does to lower the inhibitions of a violent man before he goes on a rampage. Group peer pressure numbs the frontal lobe no different than booze.

So terrorists act based on pre-meditated, carefully rehearsed concepts of behavior imparted on them through rehearsal, prayers, chanting and exercises designed to put them into a state of frenzy to then go out and do what they do.

They believe what they do will save the world and they are messiah agents sent to save, cleanse, liberate, rescue. They live in a world of extremes where there is or there is not. There is no possibility of compromise.

You can sometimes talk down a border line person, you probably can't do that with a terrorist unless the terrorist has not spent enough time being indoctrinated or conditioned.

So massing all these categories into one set of statistics can be misleading.

No terrorist can be prevented from getting weapons. For that matter no true criminal can either. It can help reduce opportunity of a crime happening by making guns less accessible to border line people.

So the best you can do with gun control is make gunless accessible to the public in the hope it makes it less likely for a person with border line issues to use a weapon or an otherwise normal person reach for a gun during a situation of domestic violence.

For that reason I support gun control but also caution gun control offers an illusion of protection. It just will not stop criminals, sociopaths and terrorists from getting them.

Me personally I believe no one should have a hand gun, no one unless its limited to being used and stored on a gun range.

I believe rifles are a necessity for rural Canadians who hunt for their food or live in rural areas where they are needed for protection from wildlife. Their rifle is a necessity for life. To say they should not have one is just not realistic.

Do I think people in cities should carry weapons of any kind, no.

Hell I hate recreational hunters but good luck trying to criminalize that and a true true hunter kills only out of necessity to eat so if a recreational hunter follows those rules and respects nature, I respect them. There's a huge difference between them and idiots from the city who get drunk, drive up North and shoot and leave a mess behind.

That's me. I don't like guns and believe they endanger police. But I respect true hunters. They do not glorify their weapons any more then they do a hammer, a chain saw. My problem is me and people like me who live in cities. Why do we need a gun? You really concerned about safety? Take self defense courses.

That said, I make no bones in saying gun control will not prevent a terrorist from terrorizing or a mentally ill person from lashing out or a criminal from doing what they do. It might delay what they do slow it down in terms of rates, but it won't prevent it. Its not a cure, its a contraceptive,a preventative measure that is not fool proof.

The evil or sickness in humans, comes out no matter how we try control it. The classic point is children. Parents mean well and tell their children, no you can't play with guns. Those same children will go outside and use sticks as guns and swords.

It is an inherent quality in humans to kill indiscriminately and we learn to repress it. If our repression is worn away or weakened by prevailing religious or moral values, no gun control will stop it.

Its as simple as this-grow up with a gun in your face and told killing is righteous-no gun control will stop that kind of conditioning in your mind from taking place that life is expendable.

Some of you need to ask, do you think gun control is what is needed? Really? Or is what you really need thought control not gun control?. The only way you can guarantee someone's behavior is to control it. So which ones of you who wants gun control wants to explain how you that will control religious beliefs that teach violence is acceptable and a road to martyrdom hmmmm?

You think restricting weapons purchases will prevent someone from buying a weapon and going terrorist if they are a terrorist? Really?

You think gun control stops terrorists?

That's a belief that comes from people who have never lived with terrorism and conflict and want it to go away and are looking for a quick cure to make it go away.

It aint gonna happen that way.

Terrorism is no longer something those damn Zionists brought on themselves or those savage brown skinned people do to each other.

Its now in your neighbourhood. Serious questions on restricting your freedoms not just your right to own a gun are going to be challenged in days to come.

Guns for some are a symbol of individual rights that they feel are about to be taken away. All of us even those of us who hate guns will find more and more individual rights under attack as a result of terrorism not just guns.

Edited by Rue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My expression "the condition of some people in minorities" include all your three categories. I am thinking about a designed civilization to cover all of them and other issues such as suicide and accidents. ​



The rate of suicide in USA decreased from 13.2 in 1950 to 10.4 in 2000, and then increased again to 12.6 (per 100 000 population) in 2013, the period of increase is overlapping with the war against terrorism, which now we know the effect of the war globally is zero.

The rate of homicide in USA is in process of decreasing, but still is much higher than other advanced nations, new approach may be needed for making the decreasing process continuously.

The gun control as you mentioned, is a way to prevent things worsen, but may hardly make any meaningful contribution to improve the relevant conditions.

Edited by Exegesisme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...