7 ms·

U.S. Mass Shootings On Rise No Matter How You Define Them

57 points by iostream25 4y ago

hatware 4y ago
- kranke155 4y ago
  This is complete nonsense because we know from experience in other countries (UK, Australia) that massively restricting private ownership of firearms is a reliable way to put a stop to mass shootings. In fact it’s the only one found yet. I’m not American and it’s not my fight but you should be at least aware of reality.
  - brink 4y ago
    Not to start a flame war, but it's not like America just recently got guns. We didn't have a mass shooting problem until recently.
    - dragontamer 4y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban > The ban applied only to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment. It expired on September 13, 2004 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Total_Deaths_in_US_Mass_Shootings_1982-2021.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Total_De... All of these mass shootings are using long-guns, because they are more accurate than pistols. Furthermore, when a mass-shooter is using a long-gun, police (see Uvalde) are less willing to engage, because the police know they're outgunned. ------- If we cannot stop the mass shootings, at least we can mitigate their damage and improve the odds of local Policemen of having enough of an advantage against the perpetrator, right? No one needs a long-gun for self defense, its too awkward to carry around. The only people using semiautomatic or automatic long guns are mass shooters. Hunters use simpler reload mechanisms and are fine with it (its no longer a sport if its a 30-ammo magazine in that gun). Who else needs a highly accurate long gun with high-reload capacity (over 5 shots per reload) ??
      - 13of40 4y ago
        During the time that "ban" was in place, you could still walk into any gun shop and buy an AK-47 for a couple hundred dollars. The only difference that actually trickled down was a new one would have a thumbhole stock and no flash suppressor, neither of which would have any relevance to a mass shooting.
      - teakettle42 4y ago
        It was enacted in 1994. There wasn’t a mass shooting epidemic before 1994, either. Also, the police are not outgunned (see Boulder). The police response in Uvalde was an incredible leadership failure and nothing else. > No one needs a long-gun for self defense, its too awkward to carry around. (1) The second amendment is not restricted to defense. (2) For just one example, ranchers rely on long guns to defend their livestock from wildlife, dogs, etc. > The only people using semiautomatic or automatic long guns are mass shooters. I’m a mass shooter? You are demonstrating a fantastic ignorance of the subject at hand and ought to recuse yourself from this debate until you’ve rectified that.
        dragontamer 4y ago
        > There wasn’t a mass shooting epidemic before 1994 Erm... the 1980s? You know, the time period that led to the 1994 ban on guns? Absolutely huge spike in gun violence and homicides. > You are demonstrating a fantastic ignorance and ought to recuse yourself from this debate until you’ve rectified that. There's no point in you having such a weapon. And yes, I'm willing to call you ignorant and backwards for arming yourself with such a powerful weapon. You ain't gonna be walking around town with a long gun. Your only hope for self defense in a typical "on the town" situation is a pistol / side arm. If a mass shooting occurs, you aren't going to run to your car and get the long gun. Why? Because you know just as well as I do that everyone else will shoot the first person they see with a long gun. (See Las Vegas shooting: everyone had guns, no one wanted to take it out because they didn't want to get confused as the mass shooter).
        laverya 4y ago
        > Erm... the 1980s? You know, the time period that led to the 1994 ban on guns? Absolutely huge spike in gun violence and homicides. There is a major difference between "Gun violence and homicides" and "mass shootings", since mass shootings are ~1% of gun homicides, and gun homicides are ~1/3rd of gun violence. (2/3rds are suicide)
    - thematrixturtle 4y ago
      Oh yes you did, the list here stretches back into the 1920s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_... But because there's so many, people barely remember anything before Columbine.
      - brink 4y ago
        I'm not sure it's a fair comparison when we now have more mass shooting events in half-a year than the entire 1920's and 1930's combined.
      - hatware 4y ago
        1776-1920 is how many years?
    - mcluck 4y ago
      Obviously it's not a single factor. The equation isn't `# of guns / X = # of mass shootings`. However, the equation is likely closer to `# of guns * complex social problems / X = # of mass shootings`
    - williamstein 4y ago
      Gun production in the US dramatically increased 10 years ago. https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/6-charts-show-rise-guns-us-people-dying-rcna30537#20220525-child-gun-deaths https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/6-charts-show-rise-gun...
    - delecti 4y ago
      It has absolutely gotten worse, but it's not a new problem. It's been a problem since the 80s, and has been steadily increasing since. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_Deaths_in_US_Mass_Shootings_1982-2021.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_S...
    - throw0101a 4y ago
      > We didn't have a mass shooting problem until recently. Debatable: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_... One should also look at who tends to own guns: general rates can be deceiving. While there are more guns generally, fewer households own them, and certain individuals can have many of them: * https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-dem... Gun ownership appears to be becoming a bit of a minority activity. Most mass shootings appear to be done by white males.
    - pharrington 4y ago
      The US has had a gun violence problem ever since we've had big gun manufacturers. The gun massacre terrorism epidemic is relatively recent.
  - throw0101a 4y ago
    > This is complete nonsense because we know from experience in other countries (UK, Australia) that massively restricting private ownership of firearms is a reliable way to put a stop to mass shootings. In fact it’s the only one found yet. Don't even have to go that far: see Canada. Sixth in per capita firearm ownership: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g... Quite low per capital total firearm-related deaths (below FR, FI, CH, AT): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-r... Notwithstanding recent changes/legal drama, Canada's gun laws are relatively similar to Massachusetts's: * https://www.vox.com/2018/11/13/17658028/massachusetts-gun-control-laws-licenses https://www.vox.com/2018/11/13/17658028/massachusetts-gun-co...
    - sudosysgen 4y ago
      Canada's gun laws are significantly stricter than MA, and we have wayyy less guns than the US. And we still have a mass shooting every year or two.
      - throw0101a 4y ago
        Licensing is the key point: a filter so any rando can't get a firearm by, e.g., just buying an engagement ring wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing: * https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/shotgun-wedding-buy-engagement-ring-free-gun-184529691.html https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/shotgun-wedding-buy-en... * https://www.dallasnews.com/news/texas/2016/10/25/only-in-texas-lubbock-jeweler-offers-free-gun-with-engagement-ring-purchase/ https://www.dallasnews.com/news/texas/2016/10/25/only-in-tex... Just teaching ACTS and PROVE would probably help reduce a lot of needless carnage. Yes. But much higher than most other developed countries. Without a crazy high number of shootings, probably because there are fewer 'Rambos' walking around packin' heat, lighting off: * https://wbznewsradio.iheart.com/content/2022-02-01-watch-video-shows-road-rage-suspect-shooting-through-his-own-windshield/ https://wbznewsradio.iheart.com/content/2022-02-01-watch-vid... The list of massacres and mass shootings for Canada over the course of its entire history fits on one not-very-long page: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Can... Contrast the US: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_... * https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting
  - dionian 4y ago
    I agree. If we give up more of our civil liberties, it's likely that we will be more safe. However, this runs contrary to the American ethos.
  - micahdeath 4y ago
    My fear is that if we remove guns, we will get more IEDs and other Bombs
    - hatware 4y ago
      Then people will have to wait for the police before they are blown up or lose a limb.
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - chitowneats 4y ago
    Everybody knows Americans are just uniquely evil people. That's the explanation. Access to weapons obviously has no bearing on the issue. Edit: /s
    - hbn 4y ago
      I don't think anyone would say that. But many young people were quite recently thrown into a situation where they're feeling like even after they did everything right like they were told to - graduated, went to college, got a degree - they're hopeless slaves to student loan debt for the rest of their lives and have no hope of ever owning a home, being able to afford to raise a child, retire at a reasonable age, or live as worry-free as the past few generations. Meanwhile majority of the mainstream political discourse is banal, pointless arguments over stuff that doesn't matter. So obviously nothing is going to change. I wouldn't be surprised if that contributed to people losing their minds and shooting up parades.
      - chitowneats 4y ago
        Wow. The mental gymnastics required to contort oneself into the position that student loan debt is more a primary driver of mass shootings in America than access to weapons. People all over the world subsist on a few dollars a week. And you expect me to whip out the world's smallest violin for little Johnny who murdered 6 people and wounded 20 others because he had to take out a loan for college?
        jaywalk 4y ago
        Access to weapons in the US is tighter than it ever has been. This stuff wasn't happening in the 50s-70s when mail-order catalogs sold rifles with zero background checks, and kids routinely brought them to school.
        4y ago
- virgil_disgr4ce 4y ago
  Show me one thing that's been built or created with this "tool"
  - HKH2 4y ago
    Can you build a civilization without negative reinforcement?
- frgtpsswrdlame 4y ago
  Why wouldn't you focus on both? What's needed are solutions, in the search for them you should be willing to look anywhere that could yield one.
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    I think reasonable people would be willing to talk if it wasn't so abundantly clear that any concession is taken as a permission to move goalposts even further. Once that conclusion is reached, the basic response is to say no. And it goes for both sides. I can't even discuss abortion in a nuanced way, because I am expected to have opinion A and it cannot deviate an inch from its supporter. But I agree with you in principle, everything should be on the table. That is how normal people deal with issues.
  - hatware 4y ago
    You cannot argue in good faith that both are being focused on. The agenda primarily against guns is quite clear. Look at what happened to mental health during the pandemic. There were very little resources for those that needed them most. Downvote and flag me all you want, but gun control isn't going to stop these from happening in a country with more guns than people. Period. Start focusing on the mental health problem in earnest, the alternative is more of the same.
- mindslight 4y ago
  More specifically, the users' motivations. It seems like they've all got some kind of manifesto or politically motivated target. How are they getting full of such bile? How are they getting the same glamorous "solution" in their head? It feels like a serious mental health crisis, spurred on by media saturation psychosis. Turning the country into the equivalent of a padded room will not address the root problems of why our society is very sick. I expected more from the article when it started framing things statistically. It had the right paradigm to look at many factors, and ponder whether they could be causal. But nope, it was easier to parrot the simplistic party line solution that circles the wagons of one political team while increasing polarization with the other.
  - hatware 4y ago
    Nobody cares about solving the hard problems. Just throw a label on the wrong-doer and advocate for feel-good security theater.
- themitigating 4y ago
  Let's say some significant amount of car accidents are due to driver mistakes. Should we not have airbags?
  - bannedbybros 4y ago
  - hatware 4y ago
    Let's say we can somehow (lol) get all law abiding citizens to turn in their guns in America. Guns are banned now! Only criminals have them! Now, people with declining mental health start using vehicles to commit mass murders. Do we ban cars? Do we ban access to cars? Do you see the problem? Just solve the mental health crisis. Then we don't need to have 9000 prohibitions along the way.
    - dm319 4y ago
      Why do people think that every mental health condition can be treated successfully? Why do people think that every bad thing someone does is due to a mental health condition?
      - hatware 4y ago
        I'd love to hear your argument why mental health isn't involved with the recent uptick of shootings in America.
        dm319 4y ago
        In much the same way not all suicides have a diagnosable underlying mental health disorder, not all acts of aggression have a diagnosable mental health condition. Of those that do, only a proportion will respond to treatment. Perfect mental health care will not make everyone's mental health perfect, in much the same way that perfect health care will not stop people dying.
    - themitigating 4y ago
- light_hue_1 4y ago
  > Keep focusing on the tool, and not the user. It's like the definition of insanity at this point. You mean the insanity of giving anyone that wants one a weapon that can easily murder dozens of people at a whim? Yes. That is insanity. There is no reason whatsoever that anyone needs weapons like.
  - micahdeath 4y ago
    As one who lives in Rural areas, we do use guns to keep critters at bay. Sometimes it's needed to put down a rabid coyote after our livestock and I prefer a rifle to a handgun to decrease accidents. (It's harder to shoot yourself with a rifle.)
  - nathanaldensr 4y ago
    It's neither my fault nor responsibility that you're terrified out of your mind and see evil killers around every corner.
- TimPC 4y ago
  The tool itself is dangerous and provides very small benefit. Cars are also dangerous but are too useful to consider banning or restricting. Guns don’t provide nearly enough benefit to justify the harms they cause. I’d like to see the US get a handle on its gun problem because most gun crimes in Canada are now committed with guns smuggled across the border. So your barbaric policies have real world consequences for my country.
  - philk10 4y ago
    and for Mexico
  - scottLobster 4y ago
    You may be interested in the National Crime Victimization Report, published by the US BJS and DOJ. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/tpfv9318.pdf https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/tpfv9318.pdf "Victims used a firearm to threaten or attack the offender in 2% (166,900) of all nonfatal violent victimizations" That's from 2014 to 2018, so divide by 4 for a yearly number. Either way tens of thousands of people successfully defend themselves with a firearm every year. I'd wager they'd argue our "barbaric" policies have some benefits.
    - throw0101a 4y ago
      Conter-argument: * https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/defensive-gun-ownership-myth-114262/ https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/defensive-gu... And while defensive gun use (DGU) has been recorded as happening, what other things happen when a gun is around? At least one study found you were more likely to be shot if you owned a gun and used it defensively: * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/ And that doesn't count things awful things happening to kids: * https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/child-access-prevention.html https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/child-acce... Having a gun around has a 'cost' that may not be worth the purported benefits.
      - scottLobster 4y ago
- manuelabeledo 4y ago
  Alright, I'll bite. Certain "tools" enable for mass killings, and killing is certainly the only thing they are designed for. Criminals and people with mental issues may get their hands on an AR-15, but it would definitely be harder for them to do so if they are not available to the general public. And we could do both. We could take care of people with mental illnesses, while not allowing them to carry semi-automatic rifles.
  - newaccount2021 4y ago
  - hatware 4y ago
    > but it would definitely be harder for them to do so You think that once we get rid of half a billion guns in America somehow (lol) the criminals won't be able to get them anymore. How do you explain continued criminal access to guns in very restricted parts of the world, like Europe or Australia? If your solution has leaks like that, it's not a solution.
    - manuelabeledo 4y ago
      > You think that once we get rid of half a billion guns in America somehow (lol) the criminals won't be able to get them anymore. It would definitely be _harder_ for them. The latest school shooter bought a rifle from an officially sanctioned store. Others just went to gun conventions and bought them from other individuals. > How do you explain continued criminal access to guns in very restricted parts of the world, like Europe or Australia? I'll explain it by the fact that shootings are extremely rare, and mass shootings are almost unheard of. > If your solution has leaks like that, it's not a solution. This is akin to saying that if a medical treatment doesn't have a 100% efficacy, it shouldn't be considered. Well, it is just not how it works.
  - OminousWeapons 4y ago
    Honestly I don't think we even need to go that far; police should just use the laws that they already have at their disposal. Look at this shooting in Highland Park, here we have a guy who was known to police to be a danger to society to the point where his weapons were stripped in the past. How the hell does this guy pass a background check? Did no one do basic due diligence? Did no one use OSINT to find this guy's social media pages where he was advocating for violence? It seems like the vast majority of shootings feature people who were historically very problematic and yet they were able to pass bg checks. Why is this happening?
- throw0101a 4y ago
  > Keep focusing on the tool, and not the human. Tools and technology are not neutral. Their invention and availability effect and change human behaviour. See Marshal McLuhan: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Understanding_Media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Understanding_Media * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message
- password321 4y ago
  Focus on both. They are both obviously the issue but one is easier to fix than the other at a large scale.
  - hatware 4y ago
    No thanks. We've been focused on guns as the issue, and the problem has only gotten worse. Time to start doing something for the mental health of your fellow humans.
- hyperboreanChad 4y ago
- JohnHaugeland 4y ago
  All evidence says that it's not
seanw444 4y ago
I find it funny that so many people of other countries have something to say on the matter. You don't understand the U.S. culture, and you probably never will. I will not concede on red flag laws that prop up false accusation. That's like having a backdoor in your encryption, willingly. And I know how 95% of the people on this site feel about that. I will not concede on increasing the age to own firearms. There is no other right in our bill of rights that is only given in full well after legal adulthood has been reached. "You're allowed free speech, but only once your mind has developed enough to where you don't say as many stupid things." Sounds terrible to me. I will not concede on banning certain types of firearms, nor firearm accessories, as the primary point of the 2nd Amendment was to be able to overthrow our own government if it became necessary. "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin "That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government (...) it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." ~ Thomas Jefferson "A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies." ~ George Washington The government will not abolish itself. It will go kicking and screaming. Jefferson probably wasn't talking about peacefully abolishing an entire government. You're being disingenuous if you think so. Washington wasn't talking about the Federal army having sole monopoly over the military supply manufactories, otherwise how would a militia function to keep a rogue military and Federal government in check? They wouldn't. There is a problem with violence in America today. I'm not disputing that. The solution is not to ban certain firearms. Or to raise the legal age. Or to ban all firearms. Or to require the government's permission before obtaining a firearm. We need to take unnecessary government spending and put some of it towards training people to be comfortable with firearms, and to respect them. We need to fix society to understand the importance and beauty of life. We need to promote having fathers in the home to teach these kids how to behave. I support fixing the mental health and societal problem. But when it comes to "gun laws", you can "come and take them."
- nixgeek 4y ago
micahdeath 4y ago
I wonder if the data correlates to recessions and/or inflation.
- MSM 4y ago
  Inflation has been at a historical low until very recently, and this stat is comparing 2017-2021 vs other 5 year periods: "There were more mass shootings in the past five years [2017-2021] than in any other half-decade going back to 1966" So no, I don't think it correlates to recessions and/or inflation.
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  just a lil economic anxiety eh https://theintercept.com/2018/09/18/2016-election-race-class-trump/ https://theintercept.com/2018/09/18/2016-election-race-class... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/24/us/politics/trump-economic-anxiety.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/24/us/politics/trump-economi...
- XorNot 4y ago
  Back in 2015 Malcolm Gladwell wrote an article which posited that the issue with mass shootings is perhaps that they're more like the threshold theory of action in a riot[1]: within any large group, there's a smaller group are willing to do something - i.e. say a soccer riot where one group starts throwing stuff. Then there's a group of observers who see "a lot" of people doing this, and decide to join in. And then the people who see those people and think "everyone's doing it" and continue it. Ergo mass shootings are on the rise because there are more mass shootings, and no circuit-breakers to interrupt "the riot". [1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-...
  - thrown321 4y ago
    - bushbaba 4y ago
      I’d assume there were more readily available guns post ww2. If not for guns they’d be making pipe bombs or other weapons.
newaccount2021 4y ago
dionian 4y ago
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - bannedbybros 4y ago
  - colpabar 4y ago
    you could try engaging with an actual argument instead of plugging your ears and shouting
    - wahnfrieden 4y ago
      - colpabar 4y ago
        well, don't be surprised if that never works and the site never changes, because comments like this just make people dig in rather than open their minds. great job!
        wahnfrieden 4y ago
300bps 4y ago
Image you're desperate to feel special. You want to be famous but every crazy thing you've done has gotten no attention. And then you see a mass murderer's face plastered everywhere. Links to their rap songs. Long new stories about their lives. There are several campaigns that argue that this is what is causing the proliferation of mass murders. https://www.dontnamethem.org/ https://www.dontnamethem.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting_contagion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting_contagion
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
  I don't buy it. I mean, it almost certainly isn't helping, but I don't think it is causing people to want to lash out like this.
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  exposure may be a factor but you're willfully ignoring rampant far-right online radicalization
  - seanw444 4y ago
    Jesus. The radicalization is happening everywhere. Cut that out.
    - wahnfrieden 4y ago
      - seanw444 4y ago
        You absolutely obliterated me. Congrats.
    - krapp 4y ago
      But only one side's radicals keeps going on shooting sprees.
stevenjgarner 4y ago
Interesting to see the rise with respect to population. The article shows mass shootings increasing 158% (19) from 12 in 1982 to 31 today. In the same timeframe, US population grew by 46% (105,328,915) from 229,476,354 to 334,805,269. [1] [1] https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/population-growth-rate https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/popu...
sprayk 4y ago
Did I miss something? Title was "What You Need to Know About The Rise in U.S. Mass Shootings," but seemed to only tell me "number of mass shootings go up" and "lack of consensus on what qualifies as a mass shooting." The title I saw on HN, "U.S. Mass Shootings on Rise No Matter How You Define Them", seems way more appropriate for an article that never even tries to get into determining causal factors or solutions.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pristineshatter 4y ago
I think we have a masculinity problem. I think we need males to do traditionally male things and they need to keep doing these things through high school and beyond. Less therapy, more team sports, competition, exploration, adventure, and craftsmanship.
- nathanaldensr 4y ago
  Exactly. Female approaches to male schooling is disastrous and is the primary reason why my wife and I homeschool our two boys. At school, they were saturated by too much feminine energy; at home, we can balance that out between us.
  - pristineshatter 4y ago
    My dad passed away and I was raised by an older sister, mom, and maid. I didn't like watching sports, never caused any trouble, and listened to anything I was told. My mental health was shit. It wasn't till I started playing basketball, pushing around and making shots on 'Jocks' who were bigger and more athletic than me, that I felt my mental health completely cured itself. Basketball is an amazing game because you can go to almost any court in the evening and you will find guys who want to play. I often play with scrawny, pimply faced guys who I don't doubt have had thoughts of violence at one point or another, but on the basketball court they ball hard and earn the respect of everyone on the court through teamwork and hustle. It's totally evident to anyone who has experienced it how one good play can do away with anger, resentment and doubt, do the work of years of therapy.
    - wizofaus 4y ago
      Is there actually any real evidence that males brought up without exposure to that particular vein of masculinity are more likely to suffer mental health issues? It's a testable enough hypothesis, though I'd be pretty surprised if a significant correlation was demonstrated, based on my own observations (including of friends with mental health issues that at least partly stem from toxic relationships with their dads. Curiously, one of them was a basketball player).
Pakdef 4y ago
Do they kill more people then police every year (only including shootings)? Police shoots more then 1000 every year...

57 points by iostream25 4y ago

kranke155 4y ago
This is complete nonsense because we know from experience in other countries (UK, Australia) that massively restricting private ownership of firearms is a reliable way to put a stop to mass shootings. In fact it’s the only one found yet. I’m not American and it’s not my fight but you should be at least aware of reality.
- brink 4y ago
  Not to start a flame war, but it's not like America just recently got guns. We didn't have a mass shooting problem until recently.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban > The ban applied only to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment. It expired on September 13, 2004 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Total_Deaths_in_US_Mass_Shootings_1982-2021.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Total_De... All of these mass shootings are using long-guns, because they are more accurate than pistols. Furthermore, when a mass-shooter is using a long-gun, police (see Uvalde) are less willing to engage, because the police know they're outgunned. ------- If we cannot stop the mass shootings, at least we can mitigate their damage and improve the odds of local Policemen of having enough of an advantage against the perpetrator, right? No one needs a long-gun for self defense, its too awkward to carry around. The only people using semiautomatic or automatic long guns are mass shooters. Hunters use simpler reload mechanisms and are fine with it (its no longer a sport if its a 30-ammo magazine in that gun). Who else needs a highly accurate long gun with high-reload capacity (over 5 shots per reload) ??
    - 13of40 4y ago
      During the time that "ban" was in place, you could still walk into any gun shop and buy an AK-47 for a couple hundred dollars. The only difference that actually trickled down was a new one would have a thumbhole stock and no flash suppressor, neither of which would have any relevance to a mass shooting.
    - teakettle42 4y ago
      It was enacted in 1994. There wasn’t a mass shooting epidemic before 1994, either. Also, the police are not outgunned (see Boulder). The police response in Uvalde was an incredible leadership failure and nothing else. > No one needs a long-gun for self defense, its too awkward to carry around. (1) The second amendment is not restricted to defense. (2) For just one example, ranchers rely on long guns to defend their livestock from wildlife, dogs, etc. > The only people using semiautomatic or automatic long guns are mass shooters. I’m a mass shooter? You are demonstrating a fantastic ignorance of the subject at hand and ought to recuse yourself from this debate until you’ve rectified that.
      - dragontamer 4y ago
        > There wasn’t a mass shooting epidemic before 1994 Erm... the 1980s? You know, the time period that led to the 1994 ban on guns? Absolutely huge spike in gun violence and homicides. > You are demonstrating a fantastic ignorance and ought to recuse yourself from this debate until you’ve rectified that. There's no point in you having such a weapon. And yes, I'm willing to call you ignorant and backwards for arming yourself with such a powerful weapon. You ain't gonna be walking around town with a long gun. Your only hope for self defense in a typical "on the town" situation is a pistol / side arm. If a mass shooting occurs, you aren't going to run to your car and get the long gun. Why? Because you know just as well as I do that everyone else will shoot the first person they see with a long gun. (See Las Vegas shooting: everyone had guns, no one wanted to take it out because they didn't want to get confused as the mass shooter).
        laverya 4y ago
        > Erm... the 1980s? You know, the time period that led to the 1994 ban on guns? Absolutely huge spike in gun violence and homicides. There is a major difference between "Gun violence and homicides" and "mass shootings", since mass shootings are ~1% of gun homicides, and gun homicides are ~1/3rd of gun violence. (2/3rds are suicide)
  - thematrixturtle 4y ago
    Oh yes you did, the list here stretches back into the 1920s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_... But because there's so many, people barely remember anything before Columbine.
    - brink 4y ago
      I'm not sure it's a fair comparison when we now have more mass shooting events in half-a year than the entire 1920's and 1930's combined.
    - hatware 4y ago
      1776-1920 is how many years?
  - mcluck 4y ago
    Obviously it's not a single factor. The equation isn't `# of guns / X = # of mass shootings`. However, the equation is likely closer to `# of guns * complex social problems / X = # of mass shootings`
  - williamstein 4y ago
    Gun production in the US dramatically increased 10 years ago. https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/6-charts-show-rise-guns-us-people-dying-rcna30537#20220525-child-gun-deaths https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/6-charts-show-rise-gun...
  - delecti 4y ago
    It has absolutely gotten worse, but it's not a new problem. It's been a problem since the 80s, and has been steadily increasing since. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_Deaths_in_US_Mass_Shootings_1982-2021.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_S...
  - throw0101a 4y ago
    > We didn't have a mass shooting problem until recently. Debatable: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_... One should also look at who tends to own guns: general rates can be deceiving. While there are more guns generally, fewer households own them, and certain individuals can have many of them: * https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-dem... Gun ownership appears to be becoming a bit of a minority activity. Most mass shootings appear to be done by white males.
  - pharrington 4y ago
    The US has had a gun violence problem ever since we've had big gun manufacturers. The gun massacre terrorism epidemic is relatively recent.
- throw0101a 4y ago
  > This is complete nonsense because we know from experience in other countries (UK, Australia) that massively restricting private ownership of firearms is a reliable way to put a stop to mass shootings. In fact it’s the only one found yet. Don't even have to go that far: see Canada. Sixth in per capita firearm ownership: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g... Quite low per capital total firearm-related deaths (below FR, FI, CH, AT): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-r... Notwithstanding recent changes/legal drama, Canada's gun laws are relatively similar to Massachusetts's: * https://www.vox.com/2018/11/13/17658028/massachusetts-gun-control-laws-licenses https://www.vox.com/2018/11/13/17658028/massachusetts-gun-co...
  - sudosysgen 4y ago
    Canada's gun laws are significantly stricter than MA, and we have wayyy less guns than the US. And we still have a mass shooting every year or two.
    - throw0101a 4y ago
      Licensing is the key point: a filter so any rando can't get a firearm by, e.g., just buying an engagement ring wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing: * https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/shotgun-wedding-buy-engagement-ring-free-gun-184529691.html https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/shotgun-wedding-buy-en... * https://www.dallasnews.com/news/texas/2016/10/25/only-in-texas-lubbock-jeweler-offers-free-gun-with-engagement-ring-purchase/ https://www.dallasnews.com/news/texas/2016/10/25/only-in-tex... Just teaching ACTS and PROVE would probably help reduce a lot of needless carnage. Yes. But much higher than most other developed countries. Without a crazy high number of shootings, probably because there are fewer 'Rambos' walking around packin' heat, lighting off: * https://wbznewsradio.iheart.com/content/2022-02-01-watch-video-shows-road-rage-suspect-shooting-through-his-own-windshield/ https://wbznewsradio.iheart.com/content/2022-02-01-watch-vid... The list of massacres and mass shootings for Canada over the course of its entire history fits on one not-very-long page: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Can... Contrast the US: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_... * https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting
- dionian 4y ago
  I agree. If we give up more of our civil liberties, it's likely that we will be more safe. However, this runs contrary to the American ethos.
- micahdeath 4y ago
  My fear is that if we remove guns, we will get more IEDs and other Bombs
  - hatware 4y ago
    Then people will have to wait for the police before they are blown up or lose a limb.
wahnfrieden 4y ago
[flagged]
- chitowneats 4y ago
  Everybody knows Americans are just uniquely evil people. That's the explanation. Access to weapons obviously has no bearing on the issue. Edit: /s
  - hbn 4y ago
    I don't think anyone would say that. But many young people were quite recently thrown into a situation where they're feeling like even after they did everything right like they were told to - graduated, went to college, got a degree - they're hopeless slaves to student loan debt for the rest of their lives and have no hope of ever owning a home, being able to afford to raise a child, retire at a reasonable age, or live as worry-free as the past few generations. Meanwhile majority of the mainstream political discourse is banal, pointless arguments over stuff that doesn't matter. So obviously nothing is going to change. I wouldn't be surprised if that contributed to people losing their minds and shooting up parades.
    - chitowneats 4y ago
      Wow. The mental gymnastics required to contort oneself into the position that student loan debt is more a primary driver of mass shootings in America than access to weapons. People all over the world subsist on a few dollars a week. And you expect me to whip out the world's smallest violin for little Johnny who murdered 6 people and wounded 20 others because he had to take out a loan for college?
      - jaywalk 4y ago
        Access to weapons in the US is tighter than it ever has been. This stuff wasn't happening in the 50s-70s when mail-order catalogs sold rifles with zero background checks, and kids routinely brought them to school.
      - 4y ago
virgil_disgr4ce 4y ago
Show me one thing that's been built or created with this "tool"
- HKH2 4y ago
  Can you build a civilization without negative reinforcement?
frgtpsswrdlame 4y ago
Why wouldn't you focus on both? What's needed are solutions, in the search for them you should be willing to look anywhere that could yield one.
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  I think reasonable people would be willing to talk if it wasn't so abundantly clear that any concession is taken as a permission to move goalposts even further. Once that conclusion is reached, the basic response is to say no. And it goes for both sides. I can't even discuss abortion in a nuanced way, because I am expected to have opinion A and it cannot deviate an inch from its supporter. But I agree with you in principle, everything should be on the table. That is how normal people deal with issues.
- hatware 4y ago
  You cannot argue in good faith that both are being focused on. The agenda primarily against guns is quite clear. Look at what happened to mental health during the pandemic. There were very little resources for those that needed them most. Downvote and flag me all you want, but gun control isn't going to stop these from happening in a country with more guns than people. Period. Start focusing on the mental health problem in earnest, the alternative is more of the same.
mindslight 4y ago
More specifically, the users' motivations. It seems like they've all got some kind of manifesto or politically motivated target. How are they getting full of such bile? How are they getting the same glamorous "solution" in their head? It feels like a serious mental health crisis, spurred on by media saturation psychosis. Turning the country into the equivalent of a padded room will not address the root problems of why our society is very sick. I expected more from the article when it started framing things statistically. It had the right paradigm to look at many factors, and ponder whether they could be causal. But nope, it was easier to parrot the simplistic party line solution that circles the wagons of one political team while increasing polarization with the other.
- hatware 4y ago
  Nobody cares about solving the hard problems. Just throw a label on the wrong-doer and advocate for feel-good security theater.
themitigating 4y ago
Let's say some significant amount of car accidents are due to driver mistakes. Should we not have airbags?
- bannedbybros 4y ago
- hatware 4y ago
  Let's say we can somehow (lol) get all law abiding citizens to turn in their guns in America. Guns are banned now! Only criminals have them! Now, people with declining mental health start using vehicles to commit mass murders. Do we ban cars? Do we ban access to cars? Do you see the problem? Just solve the mental health crisis. Then we don't need to have 9000 prohibitions along the way.
  - dm319 4y ago
    Why do people think that every mental health condition can be treated successfully? Why do people think that every bad thing someone does is due to a mental health condition?
    - hatware 4y ago
      I'd love to hear your argument why mental health isn't involved with the recent uptick of shootings in America.
      - dm319 4y ago
        In much the same way not all suicides have a diagnosable underlying mental health disorder, not all acts of aggression have a diagnosable mental health condition. Of those that do, only a proportion will respond to treatment. Perfect mental health care will not make everyone's mental health perfect, in much the same way that perfect health care will not stop people dying.
  - themitigating 4y ago
light_hue_1 4y ago
> Keep focusing on the tool, and not the user. It's like the definition of insanity at this point. You mean the insanity of giving anyone that wants one a weapon that can easily murder dozens of people at a whim? Yes. That is insanity. There is no reason whatsoever that anyone needs weapons like.
- micahdeath 4y ago
  As one who lives in Rural areas, we do use guns to keep critters at bay. Sometimes it's needed to put down a rabid coyote after our livestock and I prefer a rifle to a handgun to decrease accidents. (It's harder to shoot yourself with a rifle.)
- nathanaldensr 4y ago
  It's neither my fault nor responsibility that you're terrified out of your mind and see evil killers around every corner.
TimPC 4y ago
The tool itself is dangerous and provides very small benefit. Cars are also dangerous but are too useful to consider banning or restricting. Guns don’t provide nearly enough benefit to justify the harms they cause. I’d like to see the US get a handle on its gun problem because most gun crimes in Canada are now committed with guns smuggled across the border. So your barbaric policies have real world consequences for my country.
- philk10 4y ago
  and for Mexico
- scottLobster 4y ago
  You may be interested in the National Crime Victimization Report, published by the US BJS and DOJ. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/tpfv9318.pdf https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/tpfv9318.pdf "Victims used a firearm to threaten or attack the offender in 2% (166,900) of all nonfatal violent victimizations" That's from 2014 to 2018, so divide by 4 for a yearly number. Either way tens of thousands of people successfully defend themselves with a firearm every year. I'd wager they'd argue our "barbaric" policies have some benefits.
  - throw0101a 4y ago
    Conter-argument: * https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/defensive-gun-ownership-myth-114262/ https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/defensive-gu... And while defensive gun use (DGU) has been recorded as happening, what other things happen when a gun is around? At least one study found you were more likely to be shot if you owned a gun and used it defensively: * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/ And that doesn't count things awful things happening to kids: * https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/child-access-prevention.html https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/child-acce... Having a gun around has a 'cost' that may not be worth the purported benefits.
    - scottLobster 4y ago
manuelabeledo 4y ago
Alright, I'll bite. Certain "tools" enable for mass killings, and killing is certainly the only thing they are designed for. Criminals and people with mental issues may get their hands on an AR-15, but it would definitely be harder for them to do so if they are not available to the general public. And we could do both. We could take care of people with mental illnesses, while not allowing them to carry semi-automatic rifles.
- newaccount2021 4y ago
- hatware 4y ago
  > but it would definitely be harder for them to do so You think that once we get rid of half a billion guns in America somehow (lol) the criminals won't be able to get them anymore. How do you explain continued criminal access to guns in very restricted parts of the world, like Europe or Australia? If your solution has leaks like that, it's not a solution.
  - manuelabeledo 4y ago
    > You think that once we get rid of half a billion guns in America somehow (lol) the criminals won't be able to get them anymore. It would definitely be _harder_ for them. The latest school shooter bought a rifle from an officially sanctioned store. Others just went to gun conventions and bought them from other individuals. > How do you explain continued criminal access to guns in very restricted parts of the world, like Europe or Australia? I'll explain it by the fact that shootings are extremely rare, and mass shootings are almost unheard of. > If your solution has leaks like that, it's not a solution. This is akin to saying that if a medical treatment doesn't have a 100% efficacy, it shouldn't be considered. Well, it is just not how it works.
- OminousWeapons 4y ago
  Honestly I don't think we even need to go that far; police should just use the laws that they already have at their disposal. Look at this shooting in Highland Park, here we have a guy who was known to police to be a danger to society to the point where his weapons were stripped in the past. How the hell does this guy pass a background check? Did no one do basic due diligence? Did no one use OSINT to find this guy's social media pages where he was advocating for violence? It seems like the vast majority of shootings feature people who were historically very problematic and yet they were able to pass bg checks. Why is this happening?
throw0101a 4y ago
> Keep focusing on the tool, and not the human. Tools and technology are not neutral. Their invention and availability effect and change human behaviour. See Marshal McLuhan: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Understanding_Media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Understanding_Media * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message
password321 4y ago
Focus on both. They are both obviously the issue but one is easier to fix than the other at a large scale.
- hatware 4y ago
  No thanks. We've been focused on guns as the issue, and the problem has only gotten worse. Time to start doing something for the mental health of your fellow humans.
hyperboreanChad 4y ago
JohnHaugeland 4y ago
All evidence says that it's not

I find it funny that so many people of other countries have something to say on the matter. You don't understand the U.S. culture, and you probably never will. I will not concede on red flag laws that prop up false accusation. That's like having a backdoor in your encryption, willingly. And I know how 95% of the people on this site feel about that. I will not concede on increasing the age to own firearms. There is no other right in our bill of rights that is only given in full well after legal adulthood has been reached. "You're allowed free speech, but only once your mind has developed enough to where you don't say as many stupid things." Sounds terrible to me. I will not concede on banning certain types of firearms, nor firearm accessories, as the primary point of the 2nd Amendment was to be able to overthrow our own government if it became necessary. "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin "That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government (...) it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." ~ Thomas Jefferson "A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies." ~ George Washington The government will not abolish itself. It will go kicking and screaming. Jefferson probably wasn't talking about peacefully abolishing an entire government. You're being disingenuous if you think so. Washington wasn't talking about the Federal army having sole monopoly over the military supply manufactories, otherwise how would a militia function to keep a rogue military and Federal government in check? They wouldn't. There is a problem with violence in America today. I'm not disputing that. The solution is not to ban certain firearms. Or to raise the legal age. Or to ban all firearms. Or to require the government's permission before obtaining a firearm. We need to take unnecessary government spending and put some of it towards training people to be comfortable with firearms, and to respect them. We need to fix society to understand the importance and beauty of life. We need to promote having fathers in the home to teach these kids how to behave. I support fixing the mental health and societal problem. But when it comes to "gun laws", you can "come and take them."

nixgeek 4y ago

micahdeath 4y ago

I wonder if the data correlates to recessions and/or inflation.

MSM 4y ago
Inflation has been at a historical low until very recently, and this stat is comparing 2017-2021 vs other 5 year periods: "There were more mass shootings in the past five years [2017-2021] than in any other half-decade going back to 1966" So no, I don't think it correlates to recessions and/or inflation.
wahnfrieden 4y ago
just a lil economic anxiety eh https://theintercept.com/2018/09/18/2016-election-race-class-trump/ https://theintercept.com/2018/09/18/2016-election-race-class... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/24/us/politics/trump-economic-anxiety.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/24/us/politics/trump-economi...
XorNot 4y ago
Back in 2015 Malcolm Gladwell wrote an article which posited that the issue with mass shootings is perhaps that they're more like the threshold theory of action in a riot[1]: within any large group, there's a smaller group are willing to do something - i.e. say a soccer riot where one group starts throwing stuff. Then there's a group of observers who see "a lot" of people doing this, and decide to join in. And then the people who see those people and think "everyone's doing it" and continue it. Ergo mass shootings are on the rise because there are more mass shootings, and no circuit-breakers to interrupt "the riot". [1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-...
- thrown321 4y ago
  - bushbaba 4y ago
    I’d assume there were more readily available guns post ww2. If not for guns they’d be making pipe bombs or other weapons.

newaccount2021 4y ago

dionian 4y ago

wahnfrieden 4y ago
[flagged]
- bannedbybros 4y ago
- colpabar 4y ago
  you could try engaging with an actual argument instead of plugging your ears and shouting
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
    - colpabar 4y ago
      well, don't be surprised if that never works and the site never changes, because comments like this just make people dig in rather than open their minds. great job!
      - wahnfrieden 4y ago

300bps 4y ago

Image you're desperate to feel special. You want to be famous but every crazy thing you've done has gotten no attention. And then you see a mass murderer's face plastered everywhere. Links to their rap songs. Long new stories about their lives. There are several campaigns that argue that this is what is causing the proliferation of mass murders. https://www.dontnamethem.org/ https://www.dontnamethem.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting_contagion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting_contagion

AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
I don't buy it. I mean, it almost certainly isn't helping, but I don't think it is causing people to want to lash out like this.
wahnfrieden 4y ago
exposure may be a factor but you're willfully ignoring rampant far-right online radicalization
- seanw444 4y ago
  Jesus. The radicalization is happening everywhere. Cut that out.
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
    - seanw444 4y ago
      You absolutely obliterated me. Congrats.
  - krapp 4y ago
    But only one side's radicals keeps going on shooting sprees.

stevenjgarner 4y ago

Interesting to see the rise with respect to population. The article shows mass shootings increasing 158% (19) from 12 in 1982 to 31 today. In the same timeframe, US population grew by 46% (105,328,915) from 229,476,354 to 334,805,269. [1] [1] https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/population-growth-rate https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/popu...

sprayk 4y ago

Did I miss something? Title was "What You Need to Know About The Rise in U.S. Mass Shootings," but seemed to only tell me "number of mass shootings go up" and "lack of consensus on what qualifies as a mass shooting." The title I saw on HN, "U.S. Mass Shootings on Rise No Matter How You Define Them", seems way more appropriate for an article that never even tries to get into determining causal factors or solutions.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

pristineshatter 4y ago

I think we have a masculinity problem. I think we need males to do traditionally male things and they need to keep doing these things through high school and beyond. Less therapy, more team sports, competition, exploration, adventure, and craftsmanship.

nathanaldensr 4y ago
Exactly. Female approaches to male schooling is disastrous and is the primary reason why my wife and I homeschool our two boys. At school, they were saturated by too much feminine energy; at home, we can balance that out between us.
- pristineshatter 4y ago
  My dad passed away and I was raised by an older sister, mom, and maid. I didn't like watching sports, never caused any trouble, and listened to anything I was told. My mental health was shit. It wasn't till I started playing basketball, pushing around and making shots on 'Jocks' who were bigger and more athletic than me, that I felt my mental health completely cured itself. Basketball is an amazing game because you can go to almost any court in the evening and you will find guys who want to play. I often play with scrawny, pimply faced guys who I don't doubt have had thoughts of violence at one point or another, but on the basketball court they ball hard and earn the respect of everyone on the court through teamwork and hustle. It's totally evident to anyone who has experienced it how one good play can do away with anger, resentment and doubt, do the work of years of therapy.
  - wizofaus 4y ago
    Is there actually any real evidence that males brought up without exposure to that particular vein of masculinity are more likely to suffer mental health issues? It's a testable enough hypothesis, though I'd be pretty surprised if a significant correlation was demonstrated, based on my own observations (including of friends with mental health issues that at least partly stem from toxic relationships with their dads. Curiously, one of them was a basketball player).

Pakdef 4y ago

Do they kill more people then police every year (only including shootings)? Police shoots more then 1000 every year...