[SlickyBoy]

(05-21-2018 04:22 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

There are multiple reasons for the school shooter phenomenon:

+ diet - thousands of percent more sugar and caffeine (there are school which treat so-called ADHD kids just by healthy diet alone)
+ drugs - the creator of ADHD admitted before his death that the illness of ADHD was made up - check it out! Boys are drugged since early on
+ autism and Aspergers - early 1980s the cases were 1 in 10.000. Now it approaches 1 in 75 in the US. And no - it's not due to better diagnosis! You can ask old school teachers and doctors - there is a ton more of them, a ton!
+ copy-cat syndrome - the more school shooters there are, the more people will do it, when they feel desperate
+ atomized sexual market - there used to be rejects and "losers" too in the past, but they got a beating and that was the end of it
+ diversity is not our strength - when there are more kids who look like you and are similar to you, then the more in common you will find with them - that is simply a fact across all cultures
+ social media exacerbates the teenage angst due to hyper-reality of the internet - for example - even sane Manosphere blokes have online beef while if they ever met, then they would never have it - the internet is a form of hyper-reality
+ video games - yes - they are fun and many countries with zero school shooters like Japan are playing even more games, but fact is - the US governments support those games because they lower the killing threshold - for a teenager who is already on drugs, has borderline Aspergers, has no hope of getting a girl in the atomized sexual market, feels alienated by the world and his country - then for a guy like him the first-person shooter is the last straw that breaks the camel's back. Then he snaps. I would not ban video games - it's easier to deal with the drugging of kids, diet and feminism.

Solid analysis. SSRI drugs and other psychiatric medication on the mother as well as the child cannot be ignored and there is statistical evidence of a direct correlation between the two.

I do not believe video games cause violent outbursts on their own, but coupled with someone mentally unhinged and it could be a catalyst. The Sandy Hook shooter was a basement dwelling 'sperg on pills who played first person shooters nonstop. The Vegas shooter was a video poker player six days a week with few friends and a very limited social life. What that kind of focus on a screen does to an already unbalanced individual - especially one on drugs - is a reasonable question to ask.

A few questions:

A) I have to wonder how old the mom was when she cranked him out. And what she was taking/drinking.
B) Have they picked a spokes-lesbian and near-queer to march over this yet? Or is there a contract dispute with the two from FL?
C) A boring shotgun and revolver - two items unlikely to ever get banned in the USA. Anyone else notice the lack of gun-grabber enthusiasm?

[Simeon_Strangelight]

< Obviously the points are highly different in terms of adding to the phenomenon.

SSRIs and some anti-depressants having "murderous rage" as a side-effect means that you absolutely cannot prescribe those drugs to impressionable teenager. Teenagers are highly volatile and emotionally unstable. Many don't realize that even their social pariah state will only last 1-2 years before they never have to see those people again. Many commit suicide thinking that they will be "losers" for life, while in reality they only would have needed to persevere for a few months.

You are giving me flak for video games because you are not taking the long view. I grew up on those games too. The only difference is that I read military assessments and they were financed and promoted as a tool to lower the threshold of their future soldiers. Hunting or other activities do so too, but games are sometimes even more effective. That psychology is well-researched. For this reason they also blast tank units with martial music when they go into combat - it feels more like a game then.

So obviously I am not advocating for the banning or even Gamergate-style-limitation of video games or a ban on Snickers bars.

We are also never going to stamp out bullying (most of it is psychological anyway and done often by women in high schools), we cannot ban social media and of course not limit games.

However what we can do is to roll back feminism, strengthen stable families with a father in the house, we can ban fast-food vending machines and unhealthy foods from schools (the FDA and their corruption is a separate issue). And of course we should ban this anti-male pattern of prescribing active boys drugs, or giving SSRIs to teenage boys who are clearly not schizophrenic of have other severe mental issues. I could go into the autism/Asperger issue, but that is a problem across the world and countries like Korea have even higher numbers of those - and no school shooters.

And of course I would leave guns alone, because guns have been around longer.

I would like to find out how many of the recent shooters were on some kind of legal drugs? Would not surprise me if the number was 100%.

So while all those things may contribute, we may have some things which add 95% while the others are part of the changing nature of our times (social media, video games etc.). So we should focus on the main points instead of going into minor aspects of the problem.

[RIslander]

(05-22-2018 03:59 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

The "we talked about it" solution is being applied across the world:



Makes sense.



Essentially it's all part of gynocentric thinking. In addition you have the point that "if you don't talk about it, then it does not exist". That is broadly applied when non-PC solutions need to be taken.

This doesn't apply broadly to women... Only liberal women. I think sometimes on this forum we tend to associate all women with female liberal nutjobs.

If my mother, grandmother or any of my aunts and the majority of the women I know in life were to see this their reactions would range anywhere from "that's a retarded idea to round all their asses up and deport them or kill them".

Granted, I work in an entirely male dominated profession. But I live in a very blue state. Maybe it's because I spend most my time around women from small towns and while in the city it's FOB Asian or South American girls.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

< It does not matter - most young women will follow the mainstream/Hollywood/academia/social media trend. That is why our generalizations are correct. If women ruled, then we would be living in the caves.

[Only One Man]

Out of all the mass shootings that have happened in the US in the past 30 years or so, not a single one has been done with a full automatic / machine gun. I'm curious as to why that is.

[polar]

^ if it's a serious question:

A law passed in 1986 prohibits the sale of full automatic-capable firearms to civilians. Previously-owned full auto weapons are grandfathered in, but cost as much as a nice new car to purchase, not to mention lots of paperwork, additional background checks, etc. In comparison, semi auto firearms do 90% of the job for a fraction of the cost.

[Only One Man]

It would seem that fully automatic machine guns are the most effective at killing large numbers of people in a short period of time. The closest thing to it was the Vegas shooting, with the bump stock to mimic full automatic, and that was the deadliest in US history.

And yet none of these mass shooters have used a machine gun. Maybe all the expense and strict regulation involved keeps these guns out of the hands of impulsive psychopaths.

[Bluey]

(05-22-2018 02:46 PM)Only One Man Wrote:  

It would seem that fully automatic machine guns are the most effective at killing large numbers of people in a short period of time. The closest thing to it was the Vegas shooting, with the bump stock to mimic full automatic, and that was the deadliest in US history.

And yet none of these mass shooters have used a machine gun. Maybe all the expense and strict regulation involved keeps these guns out of the hands of impulsive psychopaths.

I doubt it. It's easier to make an automatic than semi auto. Here in Australia there was a bloke busted making sub machine guns in his garage a few years ago. Especially with all the computer controlled stuff and 3d printing any sort of gun control is pretty much a pointless endeavor.

[sterling_archer]

Supposedly there is a very small machining involved in converting Glock 17 to basically Glock 18 (automatic handgun). Now, put a stock on it and double capacity magazine and you have an SMG.

[nola]

(05-23-2018 01:00 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

Supposedly there is a very small machining involved in converting Glock 17 to basically Glock 18 (automatic handgun). Now, put a stock on it and double capacity magazine and you have an SMG.

It's just a sear conversion to do this, requires no machining, the conversions can be purchased. That said it's not very practical. A person well trained on their side arm as a semi auto will still have the advantage over a well trained guy with Glock 18 selected to auto. Automatic fire in general is for fire suppression within best practices.

[Malone]

There's also an AR-15 modification to make it full auto, is there not?

[nola]

(05-23-2018 05:15 AM)Malone Wrote:  

There's also an AR-15 modification to make it full auto, is there not?

Converting an AR-15 would actually require some machining to change out the sear due to the way the receivers are manufactured you'll need to mill it out and if you don't know what you're doing it might not end well.

Also I would not want to be on the other side of the law getting caught with a illegally modified AR-15. My cousin was friends with a guy that modified a AR-15 to select fire. A game warden pulled him over on the way home from hunting to check his tags and saw the AR-15 in the back seat. He got 5 years in federal prison with no existing criminal history.

[Leonard D Neubache]

He should've taken it to the supreme court.

From what I hear you guys have got some kind of a Bill of Rights thingo.

Could've been cleared up easy.

[SlickyBoy]

(05-23-2018 10:22 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

He should've taken it to the supreme court.

From what I hear you guys have got some kind of a Bill of Rights thingo.

Could've been cleared up easy.

I'm not so sure that'd have helped much. If he were dumb enough to have an AR15 in plain view in the back seat while he was hunting, especially if he was anywhere near a likely hunting area, a game warden would be within his power to inspect that item during his check for fish and game violations. If during the course of that inspection the game warden noticed an illegally installed giggle switch, he's pretty much fucked.

I am a bit surprised it resulted in five years jail time for a first offense, even given the severity of the laws involved.

Really, if you're going to risk five years in prison do it for something potentially more rewarding than a way to waste ammo. Hell, in actual military training full auto on the M4 is rarely used anyway.

[nola]

(05-24-2018 07:34 AM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  

(05-23-2018 10:22 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

He should've taken it to the supreme court.

From what I hear you guys have got some kind of a Bill of Rights thingo.

Could've been cleared up easy.

I'm not so sure that'd have helped much. If he were dumb enough to have an AR15 in plain view in the back seat while he was hunting, especially if he was anywhere near a likely hunting area, a game warden would be within his power to inspect that item during his check for fish and game violations. If during the course of that inspection the game warden noticed an illegally installed giggle switch, he's pretty much fucked.

I am a bit surprised it resulted in five years jail time for a first offense, even given the severity of the laws involved.

Really, if you're going to risk five years in prison do it for something potentially more rewarding than a way to waste ammo. Hell, in actual military training full auto on the M4 is rarely used anyway.

Correct, and getting something to the supreme court cost a lot of money and is not exactly easy. If I remember correctly I think the 5 years was not just a result of the mod AR-15. I believe it prompted an additional search warrant of his home which from what I understood resulted in the seizure of several additional illegally modified firearms. It's a detail I guess I should not have left out.

Also when I was in the service we only switched to auto for fire suppression upon preparing for an exfil, falling back or covering forward movements to simply keep the enemy taking cover. Otherwise the weapon always selected to semi.

I'd bet on a well trained marksman with a med cal semi auto pistol against an untrained idiot with an automatic rifle any day of the week. Which is why I never understood the "assault" rifle debate. A 300 win mag used for hunting is a much more accurate and effective weapon than a AR-15, even a shotgun is a better option. They just don't look as cool I guess.

[kuqezi]

Another case today https://www.cbsnews.com/news/indiana-sch...e-updates/

Looks like the shooter was tackled by a teacher that pinned him to the ground. No fatalities thank god!

[Samseau]

Something to consider is that "bullying" is a unusual phenomena that did not exist for well over 90% of human history.

Schools have typically only been for the rich. Most of the time, being a group with peers of your own age was not too common. Generally people lived in farms, or in the military, or at some other kind of job (on a ship, some kind of civil service, some kind of apprenticeship, etc), which all involved being in a mixed age group.

When ages are mixed, bullying almost never happens. Generally bullying is something kids do in order to establish status over one another.

Bully has only become a massive problem with the advent of mass schooling. And when you think about it, schools are completely unnatural. Humans never evolved to be surrounded by the exact same group of peers day after day. Social activity typically oriented around family life, and talking to strangers for jobs or trading.

So while it may be possible to have schools without mass shootings, I doubt it is possible to have schools without bullying. All school environments are doomed to create bullies as the natural social instincts of social competition kick in that kind of environment.

I think schooling is a waste of childhood, so my solution would be just let bullied kids, and other social outcasts, have the option of leaving school. They would be far happier doing their own pursuits and could actually learn marketable skills that way.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

< You could create schools in the future with naturally designed social groups where the students find themselves in like-minded bands and interact then mostly with them.

But this is science fiction talk - school is designed to uniform and indoctrinate the people into good workers/consumers/soldiers/now good comrades. Good educators could come up with more natural kinder systems that still gets the internal male competition going. It would also likely be gender separated with only meetups in the brakes with the girls.

My experiences are anecdotal, but I found strangely enough the all-male schools to produce far more balanced and more happy male students. Do you think that anyone of those school shooters would have shot up an all-male school?

If you worry about lack of interaction - then just have the all-male and the all-female schools lined up next to each other with common sports arenas. There is zero reason to have them all mixed together with the girls and their social advantage during their teens start up shit - sometimes even unconsciously by their presence.

[Kona]

^^^ Good point.

Is there any all boys school shooting we know of?

Aloha!

[Leonard D Neubache]

This whole issue has shown that the best way to defeat the left is not to fight them head on but to toss a grenade behind their front line and make them turn around to face each other.

#schoolshooting #bulliesgettingwrecked

Dirty but probably effective.

[Yatagan]

(05-22-2018 12:36 PM)Only One Man Wrote:  

Out of all the mass shootings that have happened in the US in the past 30 years or so, not a single one has been done with a full automatic / machine gun. I'm curious as to why that is.

It's more curious that there hasn't been a mass shooting with a box mag fed semi-auto shotgun like a Saiga-12 or this:

[nola]

(05-27-2018 03:10 AM)Yatagan Wrote:  

(05-22-2018 12:36 PM)Only One Man Wrote:  

Out of all the mass shootings that have happened in the US in the past 30 years or so, not a single one has been done with a full automatic / machine gun. I'm curious as to why that is.

It's more curious that there hasn't been a mass shooting with a box mag fed semi-auto shotgun like a Saiga-12 or this:

Goddamn, imagine that 30 round drum loaded with Slugs..... I wonder if the bore is rifled or not. Would be cool to see a 10 gauge version of this. I've shot the full auto AA12 shoulder was dogshit despite the reduced recoil.

Joe Biden did say the only gun anyone needs is a shotgun back when he was doing his anti assault rifle campaign.

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(05-26-2018 06:10 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

My experiences are anecdotal, but I found strangely enough the all-male schools to produce far more balanced and more happy male students. Do you think that anyone of those school shooters would have shot up an all-male school?

My last two years of high school I was in an all male military school. My experience supports what you stated above. I was a total fuck-up in public school.

Most of our teachers were men (retired military)
There was not even a hint of PC
The jokes that the teachers told to lighten up the mood would get a teacher fired instantly in any co-ed public school.
The only "shooting" was done on paper targets in the on campus indoor rifle range.

After 1 year there, my SAT scores went up by such a degree that I was warned I would likely be investigated for cheating.

[Leonard D Neubache]

I don't think I could ever trust a semi/full auto shotgun with a suppressor on it.

Shot and wadding threading through suppressor baffles at high rates?

Gives me the heebie jeebies.

[sterling_archer]

That is probably specially constructed suppressor, at least I hope so. I see what you mean but maybe it really doesn't hurt it as pellets expand only when they exit the barrel.

Btw, there is something interesting that I heard regarding classification of this weapon by the NFA, but I don't know the details. Something like a hole in the law or whatever, anybody know what I mean?