I think that’s hard to say.

I think that’s hard to say.
by WilfordBrimley (2018-02-14 21:13:27)
Edited on 2018-02-14 21:16:03

In reply to: Gun culture really the same in the 1960s? * posted by squid

A larger segment of the population owned weapons back then, but you didn’t have suburban dads with their Yeti coolers and such buying 15 AR’s because they’re cool.

I will say, though, I don’t think those types are the proximate problem. I would worry more about the person completely dissociated from society with delusions and so forth. I certainly think it’s worth exploring why he (always a he) commits spree shootings at a rate that is far, far higher than it was thirty or fifty years ago when access to weapons and the functional capacity of them is essentially unchanged.

Now, whether the suburban dad with 15 ARs’s is the ultimate problem in that he enables a system that provides extraordinarily easy access to weapons is a different question. Maybe, but it’s tough to determine how different that is from what we were like sixty years ago.

I’ve long questioned why the rise has been post-Columbine for spree shooters whereas we were basically in line with the rest of the developed world before that. What changed?

I think media, the internet, and the fracturing and atomization of American culture obviously played a factor, but I wonder if the dying off of WW2 vets played a role as well. Those men had seen extraordinarily violence in their lifetimes and perpetuated a certain kind of culture. Obviously, they abrogated any sort of responsibility towards the impoverished sectors of our nation after the 1960’s, but I don’t think it’s outlandish to think they played a role in keeping social norms intact in mainstream middle class America.

Static gun ownership, decreasing gun crime, but increasing

mass/school shootings by young men with apparent social issues or mental illness.

I don’t know what the solution is. Is it medication-related?

Edit: Does media coverage make these events more likely? I don’t know but can’t dismiss the possibility.

I'm guessing the tail of gun ownership has changed.

Fewer people have a couple of hunting rifles. But more people have a small armory in order to demonstrate something about themselves. It's signaling.

I have no idea.

I don’t think there’s any question that the link between access to firearms and overall gun violence is strong, but the question of spree shootings in particular just baffles me.

Looking at the larger picture of gun violence over the last generation or so, if I remember correctly, suicides are way up, drug and general urban violence is way down, domestic violence is relatively similar or maybe a slight drop, and spree shootings are up like 500%. I have no idea why.

ETA: I do think there’s something to the idea that fifty years ago, virtually all of these guys would have been institutionalized. I don’t know how you get around that mountain without severely curtailing civil rights.