Headline...
Mental illness is not the cause of mass school shootings, study finds
"Mental illness is not the cause of mass shootings in academic settings, a new study out of Columbia University says."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/mental-illness-is-not-the-cause-of-mass-school-shootings-study-finds/ar-AA13GZ1s?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=51327b2a4cfd4a39a28ba37ef69eef91

=====================
So therefore, common sense tells me that if the murderers are not mentally ill, then the inanimate objects like guns and knives must be coming to life and doing murder and mayhem all by themselves.
Because sane people don't murder people, it has to be the weapon committing these crimes.

 

The last paragraph of this article seems to accentuate what the researchers are suggesting is the reason for these mass shootings.

Instead of mental illness it is the cultural, social, and the romanticization of guns and firearms.  Namely social media outlets, computer games, and gun ads.

One can see where this is going.

The last paragraph of this article seems to accentuate what the researchers are suggesting is the reason for these mass shootings.

Instead of mental illness it is the cultural, social, and the romanticization of guns and firearms.  Namely social media outlets, computer games, and gun ads.

One can see where this is going.

=============
yeah I saw that, but their conundrum is that if they claim that movies, tv, games are the problem, then to fix it would involve an infringement on 1A rights.
Those academic scholars would NEVER agree to that!
 

The real problem is the attitude some people have toward guns. They are ignorant, don't respect guns,

=================
nope
The real problem is the attitude some people have toward people. ....they don't respect people.

=================
nope
The real problem is the attitude some people have toward people. ....they don't respect people.

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

============
Today is NATIONAL COMMON-SENSE DAY
 

=============
yeah I saw that, but their conundrum is that if they claim that movies, tv, games are the problem, then to fix it would involve an infringement on 1A rights.
Those academic scholars would NEVER agree to that!
 

The actual article says absolutely nothing about gun violence being related to movies, tv, games or the romanticization of gun violence.

The MSN article says

“To prevent future mass school shootings, we need to begin to focus on the cultural and social drivers of these types of events, such as the romanticization of guns and gun violence, rather than on individual predictors,” said Girgis. 

I don't know where they got that quote from but it is NOT in the actual Journal article.     I have access to the full article and it actually states the following.

In summary, our data suggest several important differences between
mass murders involving academic settings and mass murders
in general: (1) psychotic symptoms, and psychiatric symptoms more
broadly, are present in a minority of mass school murderers but are
more common in such cases than among mass murderers in general
[1]; (2) perpetrators of shootings in academic settings, in particular,
take their own lives almost half the time, a higher rate than seen
than among mass murderers in general [1];and (3) semi-and/
or fully automatic weapons are more frequently used by mass shooters in
academic settings than by mass shooters in general. Taken together,
these data suggest that mass shooters in academic settings may
not be trying to evade capture but may view their attack as a final
act driven by a variety of motives.

And this is the actual point of the article.  It makes absolutely no claims about the romanticization of guns and gun violence.  Rather it suggests that their analysis of the data could be using to help law enforcement when engaging an active shooter.

These findings may have important implications for policymakers and influence law enforcement responses to active shooter incidents involving school, college, and university settings.

The MSN article says
Quote
“To prevent future mass school shootings, we need to begin to focus on the cultural and social drivers of these types of events, such as the romanticization of guns and gun violence, rather than on individual predictors,” said Girgis.

I don't know where they got that quote from but it is NOT in the actual Journal article.   
=============
Girgiis is one of the authors of the actual article.
===========
In summary, our data suggest several important differences between
mass murders involving academic settings and mass murders
in general: (1) psychotic symptoms, and psychiatric symptoms more
broadly, are present in a minority of mass school murderers but are
more common in such cases than among mass murderers in general
[1]; (2) perpetrators of shootings in academic settings, in particular,
take their own lives almost half the time, a higher rate than seen
than among mass murderers in general
===================

Interesting that you have access to the actual research paper which is behind a pay wall.
Regardless, going back to the original intent of this post, the author of the article is clearly trying to persuade the casual reader that mass shooters are NOT mental cases.
Your own quote indicates suicide in half the cases.
That sounds pretty mental to me.
Today is national common-sense day.

To prevent mass shootings, let law abiding people be armed.  Active shootings happen majority of the time in gun free zones.

To prevent mass shootings, let law abiding people be armed.  Active shootings happen majority of the time in gun free zones.

Today is national common-sense day.

But the power okoles don't get it!

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Today is national common-sense day.

But the power okoles don't get it!

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

All 100% okole.  With no common sense.  When informed of National Common-Sense Day, they ask: "What Dat?"

The real problem is the attitude some people have toward guns. They are ignorant, don't respect guns, are not trained to use them, don't understand their value as a tool or their danger. The problem is when people want guns because it makes them more powerful or cool. Why do some people think they need to pose with a firearm? In the military they issue weapons before they teach muzzle discipline and that can be scary.

You were in the military?

Because weapons are not issued to everyone to keep.  Most rifles are stored in an armory and temporarily checked out for training classes.  The Navy doesn't do much live fire, and the Coast Guard does none.

In Navy Recruit Training, recruits fire a computerized simulator of the M-16 rifle. This simulator
is almost like firing the real thing (the computerized rifle even kicks and makes a loud noise).
The Coast Guard is the only branch that does not fire the M-16 rifle during basic training.

https://www.liveabout.com/military-weapons-3357161

I was an Air Force Officer.  In ROTC field training, I qualified "Expert" in small arms, but we were never issued a personal weapon.  Same applies to active duty, only if you are an SP or deployed to a hostile area will you be issued a weapon to keep.  Even then, most US bases only let SPs keep their side arms.  Long guns are stored in the armory and checked out when starting the duty day.

Your entire comment is BS.  I think you're projecting your own ignorance onto everyone else.

The REAL PROBLEM is people like you who think they already know everything and are unwilling/unable to learn new things.

To prevent mass shootings, let law abiding people be armed.  Active shootings happen majority of the time in gun free zones.

It's impossible to prevent mass murder.  Having armed students and faculty can mitigate the carnage by stopping the attack in progress, but it's hard to be at the right place and time to stop him/her before the first injury is inflicted.

According to the article, only 63.2% -- or less than 2/3 -- of mass murders at schools, colleges and universities involved firearms.  That means those who are quick to blame guns are ignoring all the other means used to kill.  Why is that?

I notice rhayder was super-quick to focus on guns and the attitudes of gun owners.   

The MSN article says
Quote
“To prevent future mass school shootings, we need to begin to focus on the cultural and social drivers of these types of events, such as the romanticization of guns and gun violence, rather than on individual predictors,” said Girgis.

I don't know where they got that quote from but it is NOT in the actual Journal article.   
=============
Girgiis is one of the authors of the actual article.
===========
In summary, our data suggest several important differences between
mass murders involving academic settings and mass murders
in general: (1) psychotic symptoms, and psychiatric symptoms more
broadly, are present in a minority of mass school murderers but are
more common in such cases than among mass murderers in general
[1]; (2) perpetrators of shootings in academic settings, in particular,
take their own lives almost half the time, a higher rate than seen
than among mass murderers in general
===================

Interesting that you have access to the actual research paper which is behind a pay wall.
Regardless, going back to the original intent of this post, the author of the article is clearly trying to persuade the casual reader that mass shooters are NOT mental cases.
Your own quote indicates suicide in half the cases.
That sounds pretty mental to me.
Today is national common-sense day.

Why would I lie about having access to the article ?  I have access because I work at UH.  I can send you a copy if you are interested.   I realize Girgiis is one of the authors but the journal article never says anything like the quote.  They might have interviewed him but they don't say that so it implies that was the conclusion of the journal article which it was NOT.

When you say "Your own quote indicates suicide in half the cases....." I feel like you think I was defending the article or the Journal entry.  I was not.  I was just pointing out the the MSN reporter misrepresented the journal article.   I personally feel that saying someone that commits mass murder and then commits suicide is NOT mentally disturbed is complete hogwash.   You have to be a considerably off your rocker to do either of those two things.  Sane people don't commit mass murder and suicide is at the very least a sign of depression unless the individual is sick, painful or near death in which case it's somewhat different.

=============
yeah I saw that, but their conundrum is that if they claim that movies, tv, games are the problem, then to fix it would involve an infringement on 1A rights.
Those academic scholars would NEVER agree to that!
 

Started listing the anti-gun actors, actresses and directors who do films using or with firearms but gave up listing the  200+ conspirators. 

=================
nope
The real problem is the attitude some people have toward people. ....they don't respect people.

BINGO!
I despise Democrats, Moslems, and others,  but they are people and have rights, I respect that.
I would not commit an act of violence against them just because of their beliefs, race, creed, religion et al.
That doesn't mean I'd interfere with someone that is doing me a favor.
 

"Mental illness" is broad, vague and can encompass pretty much everyone at some point in their lives.

Someone suffering from depression over a loss is technically experiencing mental illness.

Mental illnesses are health conditions involving changes in emotion, thinking or behavior
(or a combination of these). Mental illnesses are associated with distress and/or problems
functioning in social, work or family activities.

- Nearly one in five (19%) U.S. adults experience some form of mental illness.
- One in 24 (4.1%) has a serious mental illness*.
- One in 12 (8.5%) has a diagnosable substance use disorder.

Mental illness is treatable. The vast majority of individuals with mental illness continue to
function in their daily lives.

https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/what-is-mental-illness

I think the article is focusing too much on the word "illness" as if mass murderers who have no history or diagnosis of mental illness makes them normal.

As we all learned, criminals often plead "not guilty by reason of temporary insanity" to avoid a life sentence or the death penalty.  By definition, mental illness can be temporary ("is treatable") and can therefore be a one-off reaction to some event.  Still rises to "mental illness".

As for school shootings, without prior diagnoses or therapy and/or evidence of mental illness from family and friends, it's kind of hard to diagnose them after they are DEAD.

Rational, healthy-minded people do not commit suicide unless you want to count the exception of assisted suicide.  Unless these school killers are terminally ill, it's impossible to include assisted suicides in this discussion.

Too many students have committed suicide for the same reasons the killers give for murder -- bullying, failed romances, being "weird" and having no friends, etc.  The difference is the killer took a few students with him on the way.

Too many people in academia like to excuse aberrant psychological behavior because they know it's impossible to identify and treat everyone that commits violence BEFORE they do it.  Denying they were mentally ill at all absolves them and their profession of doing what they often say they can -- diagnose and treat people with mental illness before it causes someone to get hurt.  So much easier to say the killers are mentally okay making them undiagnosable.

here in Hawaii, if you see a psychologist or psychiatrist, that opens the door for HPD to deny you your 2A rights

here in Hawaii, if you see a psychologist or psychiatrist, that opens the door for HPD to deny you your 2A rights

Unless you are no longer affected by whatever it is you really were never affected by....and you have a doctor's note to prove it.   

Unless you are no longer affected by whatever it is you really were never affected by....and you have a doctor's note to prove it.   

true, but what a hassle that is
especially when HPD can deny you for any reason they feel like.  they don't have to justify the reason for the red flag.  you could be seeing a psychologist for biting your nails or having nightmares, or getting below a 3.0 GPA over 30 years ago in high school.  if HPD feels like red flagging you, then you are red flagged