Controlling Gun Violence

[ppine]

Last night on the news a military psychologist talked about the only new factor to account for skyrocketing public mass murders- video games and violent movies. There will be a lot of discussion about media in the next year and its possible role in the problem.

 

[ChadTower]

That's not new. Violent movies have always been there and and violent video games have been around for 20+ years. This comes up every single time something happens.

 

[Grandpa]

Ahhh yes, those peaceful Saturday matinee's watching Roy and Gene and Hoppy and Lash LaRue spreading peace and goodwill. Arrows in the back, good guys and bad trampled under the hooves of a thousand stampeding cattle. Zorro snipping the buttoms right off Sgt Gomez's uniforms with his flashing sword. Tranquility at its finest.

 

[ChadTower]

I'm willing to bet none of these 20 year old maniacs have seen any of that. But I am also willing to bet they have all seen movies like Scarface and Dirty Harry in addition to all of today's violent movies.

 

[CozInCowtown]

I am with you ppine to a very limited degree.
When we were kids we played WAR, Cowboys & Indians, full contact football and other violent play so what happened to us???
The answer??
Kids are now forbidden to play like this and never develope the distinction between reality and play.
We have a bunch of plastic and wooden "guns" here on our farm for Foster kids to play with if they so desire. Dirt clods make great grenades!! It amazes some of the kids who come through here they can do that and not be told it is wrong.
I see it being more lack of parental involvement and, in this case, young men being prepared as children by the parents for adulthood.
My daughter is starting to date and I am very upset at what "boys" are today, absolutely no idea on how the world revolves, no morals per se and ethics are just old fassion nonsence.
It is now all "Me! Me! Me!", "Look at Me!!" and "I am special!" which is a bunch of unproductive BS in my world.
Discipline has been replaced by downers and other "pills".
JMO, they say I am nuts,
DC

 

[Grandpa]

Dunno. Phsycologists what got us into this mess in my opinion. In this day and age, I'd be arrested for bringing my kids up the way I did. Those girls were driving tractors and trucks by age 11. Feeding and tending calves at 7 and 8 years old. They were paid for the work too. They all had their own checking accounts by the time they were sixteen and knew how to balance that checkbook too.

Whats more violent, a video game or lopping the head off a chicken at the chopping block. My kids knew the value of a life and they knew the value of hard work. They also learned how to play. It wasn't all work for them.

Rest easy Coz. If you brought her up right she will find a boy with the same values as you gave her. There are a lot of them out there. The good ones just don't make as much noise as the others.

 

[ChadTower]

I think these people do know the value of life. Clearly they are going on rampages to hurt other people. How is the most effective way to hurt a community? Attack the most vulnerable. The fact that they are killing children shows me they understand the value of life by taking that of others. They don't care about the value of life but they seem to understand it. Someone who doesn't understand the value of life will hurt people by burning down their house or something.

Maybe the answer is simple. Maybe the answer is "there is evil in the world and sometimes we can't prevent it".

 

[oldsarge]

I'll have to locate the actual resource and post it later, but studies have show since WWII, that soldiers were not engaging human targets as much as the military thought. If you look at how training was conducted, shooting at a bulls eye, doesn't train people to engage humans. Just before I left the Army, we were shooting at human replicas. This type of training de-sensitizes you. In warfare it's good. Kids playing extremely graphics video games does the same thing and that's bad. Combine that with all the graphic movies today I feel has a great impact on how kids learn to deal with violence. When I was small I grew up with not only my dad, but all my uncles who were WWII combat veterans. I watched the Combat TV show every week. I too played with toy guns. But there were no graphic scenes. When we were out playing and someone got hurt, we all stopped and were concerned. Now a days if you look at you tube videos, people are getting seriously injured at the expense entertainment. I truly feel that there is a direct correlation between what kids see on TV, movies and violent games. I recently saw one of the newer video games and when you engaged a target, you actually aimed through gun sights instead of the older games of just putting a dot on the target. This teaches proper sight picture and alignment. Something that kids should not be taught unless they are being they are supervised by an adult to hunt. I don't know, but it seems like I never heard of a hunters child ever wigging out and going on a killing spree.

 

[ChadTower]

I agree that there is an element of "video game training grounds" going on here. Kids are spending more time engaging in detailed combat simulations than actual soldiers do.

 

[ppine]

Many people today, not just kids are "addicted" to video games. It is what they do in their spare time and little else. They develop personnas, have code names, and travel to foreign lands. They have the power of auto weapons and explosives, nobody can mess with them. Meanwhile they become reclusive and have few friends. They don't go outside much. They don't fit in. The video games become their preferred reality. Some people begin to blur reality with their video games. You get the idea.

When we were kids, we played Army, cops and robbers, cowboys and Indians and "neatest fall." We all wanted to be stuntmen. We thought we were the good guys fighting the Krauts and Japs, bad Indians, and criminals. We knew it was all in fun and we did it together outside in the great outdoors. We were brought up to use guns safely. At first we got one .22 bullet at a time until we could demonstrate our ability to be safe and not threaten other's safety.

Beiing around livestock makes kids appreciate life more because they understand the consequences of death. We built motorbikes and go-carts with no clutch and no brakes.
We camped without adults for a week and learned some responsibility. Now kids live on a short teather and are shuttled around. They don't think for themselves much. No wonder there are so many teenage punks like my nephew. People tell them how wonderful they are and they don't do any physical work. The world is a challenging place to raise kids.

Control guns and the same problem people will use explosives, cars, airplanes and machetes and whatever else they can get their hands on. 9/11 killed thousands of people without firing a shot.

US soldiers have killed thousands of children in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last 10 years by accident with rockets, mortars and bullets. It doesn't hit home until it happens in our own back yard.

edit- My apologies to all military personnel and their families. In wartime collateral damage is an unintended consequence. The modern use of drones and remote controlled munitions is not as surgically precise as old style warfare. It is one of the reasons I have been against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan from the start.

 

[ChadTower]

The difference with 9/11, though, is that it killed thousands of other people. People from another land, in another place, people you don't know and don't have to meet. These shooting rampages are happening where the killer lives. They are killing their own people, face to face, and in this case even his own mother.

 

[Grandpa]

I'll have to locate the actual resource and post it later, but studies have show since WWII, that soldiers were not engaging human targets as much as the military thought. If you look at how training was conducted, shooting at a bulls eye, doesn't train people to engage humans. Just before I left the Army, we were shooting at human replicas. This type of training de-sensitizes you. In warfare it's good. Kids playing extremely graphics video games does the same thing and that's bad.

I saw those studies too Sarge. They determined that less than 50 % of the infantry even aimed at a target IF they even shot. That was during WWII and Korea. By Nam, they had it up to 60 % through desensitizing us to killing.

 

[oldsarge]

Collateral damage has been a part of warfare since explosives were invented. I'm not saying that it's a good thing. It's not just US soldiers, it's the armies of any nation on this planet. The US has spent more time and money reducing collateral damage by perfecting more accurate munitions. Our troops go through more training than any other nations troops when it comes to humanitarian aid. The Marines have a saying that goes, "US Marines, no better friend, no worst enemy". What goes on during a war has nothing to do with what happened in Connecticut, two totally different incidents.

 

[CozInCowtown]

US soldiers have killed thousands of children in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last 10 years by accident with rockets, mortars and bullets. It doesn't hit home until it happens in our own back yard.

Actually sir I beg to differ. I have witnessed friends die because they were trying to protect innocents over there.
I was there, I witnessed this with my own eyes.
I gurantee you every American soldier overseas will allways willingly place himself between a child and a bullet every time without hesitation.

 

[mccallum]

If they are properly trained this won't be an issue. Training consist of not only learning to fire a gun but all the other aspects of dealing with hostile situations. Just because a person is a janitor, or cafeteria worker doesn't mean they're not intelligent enough to take on more responsibilities. I'm not saying that as soon as they hear gun fire run towards the sound ready to engage. They need to secure the kids and stand fast ready to react. They need to learn how to think in a situation like this and react properly.

My issue is I maybe I am on one to many forums where the attitude seem to be "shoot first". If the training was say 6 to 8 times a year; realistic to a active shooter situation; I would be OK with that.
I guess I have been in Fire service and EMS and think there is nothing like having to deal with living breathing moving humans as opposed to paper and dummies. Humans on both sides of the ball do things that are off script; I can not remember a disater drill that some how Mr. Murphy did not show his face and for the good in the long run.
We learned that X tool did not do what we had been told it did; We learned that we need more hose to reach from "point a" the water source to "point b" where the water was need. We learned that getting a pt out of a possible scene was going to require either more personel to do the hand offs required or for us fire guys to cut some holes.
In the shooter situation it maybe that the way you had planned to get prople out in a walk through is not the greatest idea. It maybe that the clear shoot you think you have should not be taken because there is someting that it will hit that one would rather it not hit.
I do not think this is every training day but two to three out of the six or 8 training days.
The Israeli model is a good model place trained people in the schools armed with 9mm pistols; these are parents, grandparents and other civilians.

 

[mccallum]

Grandpa
could the source you are thinking of be; Lt Col Dave Grossman;On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society or Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against TV, Movie and Video Game Violence

 

[Lorax]

I'm willing to bet none of these 20 year old maniacs have seen any of that. But I am also willing to bet they have all seen movies like Scarface and Dirty Harry in addition to all of today's violent movies.

Could part of the problem be that we used to root for the good guy with the gun on TV and in movies? It seems like the trend has been the last decade or so ago to make the villain the more compelling and glorified character.

Another thought.....

Is anyone familiar with paintball and Airsoft? I was checking this out, as I would bet that many parents just buy these "toys" without teaching proper firearms rules of safety. I would also bet that a lot of parents don't know these rules themselves. Now, my dad would never allow us something that shoots a projectile at anyone. I've was taught firearm saftey at 5 years old with a .22

Let's look at these "toys"...
Decent Paintball guns shoot at 320fps+, Airsoft Starts here and goes easily to 500fps+, both with high rates of fire.
The standard Daisy lever BB gun (Red Ryder) that kids should move UP to after playing with toys is only 280fps......very interesting.
The "toys" are sold with the intent on "shooting" other people. They are often handed out by parents who do not really understand what the "toy" is and why the rules of safe handling are just as important.
"Here kid, take this and get out of my hair. Go shoot some of your friends."

A possible problem is the lack of education and understanding of these types of "toys" and how they should be treated with more respect. Perhaps they should be used as tools to teach properly and never be used to fire at someone else. I believe I have crossed into the "de-sensitizing of violence" issue, but go check out the models of Airsoft available. I does make one wonder.

 

[wvbreamfisherman]

Col. Grossman's reoprts are pased in part on SLA Marshall's "Men Against Fire". A lot of his (Marshall's) methods and conclusions have come under seruious scrutiny.

Here's a link where they discuss this. SLA Marshall's "Men Against Fire" - Has Dave Grossman Gotten This All Wrong?

 

[mccallum]

Hell, people think I'm borderline nuts, because I'm raising kids in a house with no cable TV.

Anybody else see chad's next gun purchase taking a VERY, VERY, VERY LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG TIME?

 

[wvbreamfisherman]

Anybody else see chad's next gun purchase taking a VERY, VERY, VERY LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG TIME?

Nahh- don't you know it's easier to buy an automatic weapon in the US than it is a cup of coffee? Just ask any gun control proponent.