"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.
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.

Good thing theres already a lawsuit about depression (military home sick).

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

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

===========
I seem to notice a lot of cops in the news here who needed red flags

===========
I seem to notice a lot of cops in the news here who needed red flags

I would venture as far as to say that some cops would be denied permits to acquire if they were regular civilians like us.

My opinion, of course.

I would venture as far as to say that some cops would be denied permits to acquire if they were regular civilians like us.

My opinion, of course.

Cops get a pass on most gun laws, including:

State and county law enforcement officers who are not convicted of an offense involving abuse
of a family or household member under 709-906 can own and possess

- Silencers and
- Machine Guns and
- Short Barreled Shotguns (SBS) and
- Short Barreled Rifles (SBR).

https://www.guntrustlawyer.com/hawaii-hi-what-nfa-firearms-ca/

Cops get a pass on most gun laws, including:https://www.guntrustlawyer.com/hawaii-hi-what-nfa-firearms-ca/

==============
hmmm, strange-----
I know/knew a LOT of cops here and nobody had a machine gun or silencer.
And those guys I knew would LOVE to have them.

==============
hmmm, strange-----
I know/knew a LOT of cops here and nobody had a machine gun or silencer.
And those guys I knew would LOVE to have them.

That's from a 3rd party site -- may or may not be accurate.

I do know a LGS received a shipment of suppressors for military and LE use.  They were worried the shipment would not arrive in time for training on another island.

Cops can have standard capacity pistol mags, so obviously they are granted exceptions over the general public.

That's from a 3rd party site -- may or may not be accurate.

I do know a LGS received a shipment of suppressors for military and LE use.  They were worried the shipment would not arrive in time for training on another island.

Cops can have standard capacity pistol mags, so obviously they are granted exceptions over the general public.

But are ffl's in HI under HI law exempt?



Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

But are ffl's in HI under HI law exempt?

If they are transferring ownership to an exempt person, they are covered for "possession".  FFLs taking ownership personally, probably not.

Better to ask an FFL dealer directly.

I have a C&R FFL, and I am exempt from a number of HI laws, including shipping restrictions and permitting requirements for acquisition of handguns.

there are different types of FFLs
some can obtain NFA items for sale or rent...

But are ffl's in HI under HI law exempt?



Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I will admit you lost me at the url "msn.com" so I didn't reference the article. From what I have read in the replies, I question how does anyone who thinks "guns are cool, so i think i'll go shoot and kill a bunch of people in a school then have the cops kill me." not considered someone with serious mental issues. Whether they think gun violence is cool or repulsive is irrelevant. The fact they in their minds they believe it is ok to kill a bunch of people before killing themselves is the problem. 

I will admit you lost me at the url "msn.com" so I didn't reference the article. From what I have read in the replies, I question how does anyone who thinks "guns are cool, so i think i'll go shoot and kill a bunch of people in a school then have the cops kill me." not considered someone with serious mental issues. Whether they think gun violence is cool or repulsive is irrelevant. The fact they in their minds they believe it is ok to kill a bunch of people before killing themselves is the problem.

Some people believe what they are told even when common sense should tell them otherwise.

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

I respect people and I obey the law.....but

See, I have the same reasoning as the anti 2A folks.

Most of the mass shootings if not all involve people with mental illness issues.  Maybe if we eliminate the CIA and FBI, mass shootings might decrease or be eliminated as they have been known to exploit the mentally ill in the past and may still be doing so.

The cause of mass shootings (or even crime in general) is difficult to analyze, because there are so many approaches (phys/psy/sociological). When I look at mass shootings, I look at it as a theory of victimization, because I have found that it is the most consistent in diagnosing its pathology. On a side note, theories of victimization are often attacked as "victim shaming" which is not the case. All victim shaming are theories of victimization, whereas not all theories of victimization are victim shaming.

Mass shootings tend to occur in three categories, random, pseudo-random, and targeted. Random is when the victims have virtually no association with each other (e.g. Mandalay Bay). Pseudo-random is when the victims have a loose association with one another (i.e. gang shootings, school shootings). Targeted is when the victims closely know each other (e.g. Tree of Life synagogue). Mental illnesses could be a factor in all three, but the range and intensity of the illness can vary in each case, whereas the setting and victims can better describe the impetus of the shooting. Also, there was recent research that described mass shootings in which the shooter commits suicide is likely closer to a "murder suicide" than any type of shooting. Violent videogames, rock music, and even jazz music, have been used to explain crime before--AFAIK, all of those theories were proven false.

The media loves to cover mass shootings because of the sensationalistic sheer volume of victims; decry goes the public, politicians with slacktivist legislation, and scholars follow the grant money. However, it's my opinion (and it's not shared by all) that analyzing mass shootings by number of victims as a descriptive statistic is not the correct approach.

The cause of mass shootings (or even crime in general) is difficult to analyze, because there are so many approaches (phys/psy/sociological). When I look at mass shootings, I look at it as a theory of victimization, because I have found that it is the most consistent in diagnosing its pathology. On a side note, theories of victimization are often attacked as "victim shaming" which is not the case. All victim shaming are theories of victimization, whereas not all theories of victimization are victim shaming.

Mass shootings tend to occur in three categories, random, pseudo-random, and targeted. Random is when the victims have virtually no association with each other (e.g. Mandalay Bay). Pseudo-random is when the victims have a loose association with one another (i.e. gang shootings, school shootings). Targeted is when the victims closely know each other (e.g. Tree of Life synagogue). Mental illnesses could be a factor in all three, but the range and intensity of the illness can vary in each case, whereas the setting and victims can better describe the impetus of the shooting. Also, there was recent research that described mass shootings in which the shooter commits suicide is likely closer to a "murder suicide" than any type of shooting. Violent videogames, rock music, and even jazz music, have been used to explain crime before--AFAIK, all of those theories were proven false.

The media loves to cover mass shootings because of the sensationalistic sheer volume of victims; decry goes the public, politicians with slacktivist legislation, and scholars follow the grant money. However, it's my opinion (and it's not shared by all) that analyzing mass shootings by number of victims as a descriptive statistic is not the correct approach.

Since you're one to look up the details, look up how many active (no mass) shooters were/are on anti depressants.

Since you're one to look up the details, look up how many active (no mass) shooters were/are on anti depressants.

Also, sociopathy is a real.  Clinically, it is diagnosed as "antisocial personality disorder."

It's not considered a true mental illness, because it is not inborn and immutable the way psychopathy is defined.

"Sociopaths are individuals whose callous, deceitful behavior is shaped primarily by environmental factors,
such as child abuse or exposure to expedient behavior in others."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/sociopathy

Basically, sociopaths don't follow the rules of society which may or may not include criminal violence.  Ted Bundy exhibited these symptoms among others.

"The defining characteristic of the sociopath is a profound lack of conscience—a flaw in the moral compass
that typically steers people away from breaking common rules and toward treating others decently. This
disconnect, however, may be hidden by a charming demeanor. There is both art and science to spotting
sociopathy."

Most people use the terms Sociopath and Psychopath interchangeably, yet they are not the same.
"Sociopathy refers to a pattern of antisocial behaviors and attitudes, including manipulation, deceit,
aggression, and a lack of empathy for others."

Lack of empathy applies to sociopaths and psychopaths alike.  In fact, it's the one trait all psychopathic murderers share.

I think many of the school mass shootings involved sociopathy as an underlying cause.  It's illegal to possess the guns and ammo on campus, illegal to fire guns at anyone unless in self defense, and illegal to commit murder.  Obviously, they either do not know what they are doing is morally wrong (bad upbringing, insane, etc.), or they don't think the rules apply to them (Sociopaths). 

We can academically discuss these topics forever (we already have to an extent), but unless this somehow leads to a high degree of success in identifying these types of people BEFORE they kill, it's just that -- academic.

, and a lack of empathy for others."

Lack of empathy applies to sociopaths and psychopaths alike.  In fact, it's the one trait all psychopathic murderers share.

I saw a YT vid comparing Nick Cruz (MSD shooter) and how he was trying to act crazy vs a real crazy dude who murdered someone.  In the vid, you see Cruz sitting alone in the interrogation room and making the gun to the head gesture, biting his wrist (but no blood coming out), etc...

The psychologist said if he really was nutz, he would have drawn blood when biting his wrist. So he was faking this cause he knew the cameras are on.

Then when asked how Cruz felt, he replied.  Compare this to real nuts guy when asked how he felt after he killed the person, he didn't understand the question. There was a pause and like he's thinking hard.  Prior to being asked this, he answered all questions in detail and quickly. See below example:

1) Why did you kill her.
       She stepped on my foot.
2) How did you kill her
       With a knife
3) When did you kill her
     X day, Y hour
4) How did you feel after
       um........huh?
5) Yes, how did you feel after you killed her
       ummmm......I don't understand the question

This was just 1 indicator to evaluate a truly crazy person vs someone who's trying to get the insanity plea.  Also they stated that if a non nuts person was able to get the insanity plea, the mental hospital isn't much better than prison. In fact, you might just come out turning nuts.  Basically what you stated above, lack of empathy, no remorse, basically no feeling that this was wrong.

I mean sure, mental illness doesn't cause violence, that is technically correct but it lacks any nuance. No one goes any does this for any single reason but a compilation of reasons and mental illness can definitely be on part of the greater picture.

Also, sociopathy is a real.  Clinically, it is diagnosed as "antisocial personality disorder."

It's not considered a true mental illness, because it is not inborn and immutable the way psychopathy is defined.

"Sociopaths are individuals whose callous, deceitful behavior is shaped primarily by environmental factors,
such as child abuse or exposure to expedient behavior in others."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/sociopathy

Basically, sociopaths don't follow the rules of society which may or may not include criminal violence.  Ted Bundy exhibited these symptoms among others.

"The defining characteristic of the sociopath is a profound lack of conscience—a flaw in the moral compass
that typically steers people away from breaking common rules and toward treating others decently. This
disconnect, however, may be hidden by a charming demeanor. There is both art and science to spotting
sociopathy."

Most people use the terms Sociopath and Psychopath interchangeably, yet they are not the same.
"Sociopathy refers to a pattern of antisocial behaviors and attitudes, including manipulation, deceit,
aggression, and a lack of empathy for others."

Lack of empathy applies to sociopaths and psychopaths alike.  In fact, it's the one trait all psychopathic murderers share.

I think many of the school mass shootings involved sociopathy as an underlying cause.  It's illegal to possess the guns and ammo on campus, illegal to fire guns at anyone unless in self defense, and illegal to commit murder.  Obviously, they either do not know what they are doing is morally wrong (bad upbringing, insane, etc.), or they don't think the rules apply to them (Sociopaths). 

We can academically discuss these topics forever (we already have to an extent), but unless this somehow leads to a high degree of success in identifying these types of people BEFORE they kill, it's just that -- academic.

"We can academically discuss these topics forever (we already have to an extent), but unless this somehow leads to a high degree of success in identifying these types of people BEFORE they kill, it's just that -- academic."
It is all about control.
It is easy to identify people that are "off", by how much they need to control other things. People like Police, Politicians, bureaucrats, administrators, company mid level managers, are good examples of legal nut cases.
Where to worry is the less visible insecure nutcases. Those we know about but can't do anything about.  I know people, I won't sell guns to, because they're nuts.
We used to live in a free society and the price of that is, someone will sell or allow that nutcase to get a gun. So it isn't academic, it is a fact of life.
Arm yourselves accordingly.
 

"We can academically discuss these topics forever (we already have to an extent), but unless this somehow leads to a high degree of success in identifying these types of people BEFORE they kill, it's just that -- academic."
It is all about control.
It is easy to identify people that are "off", by how much they need to control other things. People like Police, Politicians, bureaucrats, administrators, company mid level managers, are good examples of legal nut cases.
Where to worry is the less visible insecure nutcases. Those we know about but can't do anything about.  I know people, I won't sell guns to, because they're nuts.
We used to live in a free society and the price of that is, someone will sell or allow that nutcase to get a gun. So it isn't academic, it is a fact of life.
Arm yourselves accordingly.
 

"Arm yourselves accordingly."

That's been my main "solution" for mental illness in thread after thread.

If we can't identify the nut-jobs before they commit violence, then there's no way anyone --government, healthcare workers, professional therapists, etc. -- can ever ensure our safety.  Not even saying "guarantee safety," just the garden variety 'able to ensure safety to a reasonable degree."

When prevention fails, the only remedy left is to meet violence with violence.  It's that simple.  Being less than prepared than you ought to be puts you in a great disadvantage when the voices tell the guy sitting next to you on the bus to kill....