School shooting in Florida

Somehow the media coverage is consistently disastrous. They continue to play up the scandal, the thrill and danger, the “bad guy” and his message.

Just after the Robin Williams suicide, the suicide rates increased 10% in the next few months. Copycat behavior is a real phenomenon, and the media has adopted industry-wide policies about how and what to report for suicides, to limit magnification of the tragedy onto others. Why can’t they follow similar guidelines for mass-shootings?

Report on the perpetrator forensically and with dispassionate language. Avoid terms like “lone wolf” and “school shooter,” which may carry cachet with young men aspiring to attack. Instead use language such as “perpetrator,” “lone act of terrorism,” and “act of mass murder.”
Minimize use of the perpetrator’s name. When it isn’t necessary to repeat it, don’t. And don’t include middle names gratuitously, a common practice for distinguishing criminal suspects from others of the same name, but which can otherwise lend a false sense of their importance.
Keep the perpetrator’s name out of headlines. Rarely, if ever, will a generic reference to him in a headline be any less practical.
Minimize use of images of the perpetrator. This is especially important both in terms of aspiring copycats’ desire for fame, and the psychology of individuals who may be vulnerable to identifying with mass shooters.
Avoid using “pseudocommando” or other posed photos of the perpetrator. Such self-styled images are the ones they hope will get publicity. These should be avoided especially after the images are outdated, such as showing the Aurora killer again with his “Joker” hair during his trial three years later, when he was heavier and wore glasses and a beard.
Avoid publishing the perpetrators’ videos or manifestos except when clearly valuable to the reporting. Instead, paraphrase, cite sparingly, and provide analysis. The guiding question here may be: Is this evidence already easily accessible online? If so, is there a genuine reason to reproduce it in full and spread it, other than to generate page views?

Some other suggestions I have seen include:
Don’t present injury and death counts like a scoreboard. Presenting scary numbers and comparing them to other tragedies sets a target for the next guy to try and surpass. There is strong evidence in the clippings and papers of several mass-shooters that they kept track of other killings’ body counts and knew how many they wanted to kill to be the worst ever.
Don’t focus on the raw grief and emotions of the bereaved friends and relatives. Sometimes seeing that pain is part of the motivation and what they crave, to spread their hurt around. Instead share brief remembrances of those who were lost, the good things they were doing and how they made the world better and were loved.

A couple thousand years ago, some asshole who I won’t name burned down the famous temple of Ephesus. They asked why he did it. He said he wanted to be famous. So naturally they passed a law that nobody was ever to say his name again on pain of death. Apparently humanity has gotten a lot dumber over the millenia since then.

Not dumber, greedier. Profits > all.

If his name was Trump, someone dang well should have chiseled that story inside one of the pyramids as a warning.

Because ratings and ad dollars.

Yeah, this is what I think is far more significant in the increase in school shootings than the weapons (and I’m not a fan of assault weapons/automatic weapons being readily available.) When I was in high school (when dinosaurs roamed the earth, and the only media was the newspapers, radio, and the 3 networks with one news program each night) there was a school shooting in New York state, I believe. A kid with a rifle killed three people and wounded 10 or 11 others (again, IIRC.) What kept it from being worse was school was out when he showed up.

That was a story that night on the 3 networks, and was in the local newspapers the next day. There might have been one follow up story on the networks but I don’t recall it. But that was it. The kid didn’t become famous and I suspect 90% of high school kids in the country didn’t even hear about it.

Today that shooting would have been on the internet live (he held people off for a couple of hours) and all the networks, then there would have been non-stop coverage on all the channels for a week, an analysis of the kid, interviews with all his friends,

After Columbine, this has become the way for a kid who feels ignored, abused, unseen, etc. to become world famous. He knows, tomorrow all those people who made fun of me, or ignored me, and everyone else in the world, will be talking about me. This is the way for a kid who feels invisible to become world famous.

And I don’t think there’s any way we can put that genie back in the bottle.

And again The Onion reposts their same copy pasta article

I suspect this is true, I also suspect the mental make up of the shooter just isn’t quite right. The gun is a tool making for a higher count, but at this point it isn’t the reason for the killings.

Hannity last night kept saying schools needed retired cops or ex-military with guns on school campuses. I guess he didn’t know this school had one of those. Hannity is such an ass.

Well, I think we can take for granted that anyone who does something like this is not “quite right.” And a tool that facilitates such an action is a legitimate subject for debate. I doubt anyone is saying guns cause people to kill. The question is, is the availability of weapons a factor in allowing people to kill, and in the severity of their actions. It’s simply so much easier to do harm with a firearm than with, say, a knife. There’s really no debate about that.

What to do about things like this, though, yeah, that’s the tough part. I’m pretty fed up with the knee-jerk response of the NRA and 2nd Amendment fanatics, but I’m also deeply frustrated with the mantra of “gun control!” from the other side of the spectrum. “Gun control” doesn’t even mean anything. Control what? The 300 million plus weapons already in circulation? Good luck with that. Repeal the 2nd Amendment/ Good luck with that. Add a bunch of laws that would not prevent a lot of killings anyhow, even if they were enforced? Enforce existing laws (not a bad idea, but hardly a panacea)?

The key is mental, I agree there. It’s not just that we have more people with mental issues, though. I think Silhouette and JeffL have part of it–publicity and sensationalism have to stop. There’s more, though, I think. I suspect that our well-meaning and often necessary support systems for K-12 students are having unintended consequences. Much like parents who, in their zeal to protect their kids, are sanitizing their physical environment to the extent that some are arguing they are compromising the development of young immune systems, parents, teachers, administrators, and the government may well be inadvertently creating an environment where young people don’t just feel that bullying and abuse and mistreatment are wrong (they are), but that they have a right to never be exposed to such treatment (debatable, if perhaps a laudable goal in some ways), and that if they are subject to anything bad, that it’s the direct fault of someone who has to be brought to account. Moreover, it seems for many of these young people, when bad things happen to them–and I’m talking bad in the context of junior or senior high school, not like being in Somalia or something–they react with shock and anger, and have no tools to deal with the situation. There are times in your life you simply have to endure crap and recognize that these things too shall pass. Instead, we have a generation now that can’t accept that. They don’t seem to be able to separate bad things happening to them from their own self-image and sense of self-worth. If a bad thing happens, it makes them feel that they are somehow being diminished or degraded, and their response is to lash out.

This isn’t just about young kids, though. We see adults like this too–the ones who get fired and go back and kill everyone in the office, the guy who gets dumped and goes and kills his ex’es family, that sort of thing. Our whole society seems to be build on outrage, fueled by the media sometimes, fueled by a social system (such as it is) that simultaneously emphasizes our uniqueness and supposed value but also makes us incredibly fragile and dependent. Couple all this with the easy availability of weapons, a culture that glorifies violence and revenge, and a popular mediascape that thrives on dehumanizing anyone who disagrees with you, well, you see what we get.

I don’t own guns, I have shot them, but only at beer cans. And I think the NRA does nobody any good by blindly screaming that limitations will lead to elimination. But I think the idea that guns could be removed from our society at this point is about as naive a thought as anyone could have.

We need more mental health programs. Maybe we need schools to start disciplining kids earlier in life so that they learn, a part from their parents, that actions do have consequences.

I have read stories here about how hard it is now to actually remove a kid from a school, how hard it is to suspend someone. Teachers complain about kids disrupting classes with no consequences.

But in the end…I really don’t know how you stop crazy people from doing crazy things.

You repeal the second amendment and take away their guns.

Yup, I’m naive.

Pretty much.

This is a reddit post my SO sent me. It challenges the “it’s crazy people” narrative and points out the problem is fundamentally American culture.

Summary

What if the reason we have a culture of violence is not because people can’t see a therapist, but because from the moment they enter school, Lesson One in U.S. History is:

“Okay, kids, here’s what you gotta know about America. Number one: You’re free to say and believe what you want. Number two: Someone, someday, will be out to get you, and you and all your buddies will need guns to kill them. And the people you will need to shoot might be in this very room or in the house next door.”

I’m sure everyone is rushing to bring up mental health, but you know what is really disturbing about our conversations about mental health?

Not only are the conversations themselves opportunist (we only talk about it after a shooting), we also bend over backwards to talk about it in the method that most cleanly absolves us of our own responsibility in crafting the uniquely American culture of violence.

We act like mental illness is just this disease that you can “catch” for no reason at all. Like there are just Mental Illness Spores floating around out there and one day you just breathe it in and whoop, you’re crazy! You’ve been cursed and there’s nothing we can do except hope you don’t find a gun before you get a chance to see the Therapy Wizard!

Sure, depression can be totally arbitrary sometimes. Sometimes it’s just senseless and pervasive, and people become depressed even without any good reasons, or sometimes your brain gets twisted because some enzyme made it somewhere it shouldn’t have been.

But you know what? A lot of time time, mental health problems happen as a direct response to the values and pressures placed upon people by the society that surrounds them.

When waves of overworked Japanese salarymen commit suicide, we don’t just say to ourselves “Oh man, if only Japan had more therapists! If only they had access to better mental health care!” No, we recognize the presence of certain kinds of toxicity in foreign cultures when we see it. We say dude, that culture needs to start rethinking their whole shit.

If a woman forced to stay in the home and wear a burka against her will, suddenly committed suicide, I wouldn’t just blame the vague specter of “mental illness” and wish she’d gotten to talk to someone about her mother.

It should be the same thing here at home. When we hear about the mental health crisis in poor urban black communities, it’s not because they’re short on ink blot tests and reclining couches, it’s because they need grocery stores, and decent jobs, and cops who don’t act like they’re enforcing martial law.

When we hear about Puerto Rico having a sudden epidemic in mental health problems after a hurricane, I don’t think “Gosh, I really hope those folks get their Xanax shipment soon!” I think “Fuck, of course. They’re losing their loved ones to preventable diseases, they don’t have power or clean food or medical care, or even the comforting illusion that the rest of the nation considers them full citizens.”

No, when a society suffers a mental health crisis, they’ve usually earned it, and the nature of the crisis usually reflects the values of the society that brought it about. Systems and processes and care facilities can help you identify, quarantine, or heal the crazy. But culture is what synthesizes the crazy in the first place.

And the United States has earned every bit of the epidemic we suffer now. Whether it’s radical white terrorism, disaffected schoolkids, or just nutsos with guns, we’ve earned every one of these shootings, and it can’t just be because these people didn’t make it to a therapist on time.

It’s our values, stupid. It’s because we indoctrinate our citizens into thinking that they are deficientif they can’t scrape together a successful life out of this crucible of capitalist indifference. We fill the minds of the have-nots with shame and guilt beyond anyone’s ability to fully cope with, and we fill the minds of the haves with supremacist fantasies that convince them that it’s okay to treat others like dirt, or they deserve to get away with anything if they’re rich. We tell foreign children studying their asses off that they haven’t earned the right to live in the one place they’ve known as home, and we tell native-born Americans that their entire way of life is under attack.

By kids.

But most of all, we worship the fantasy of the gun. Not just the guns. It’s the narrative that guns represent.

We’ve all heard the saying, right? “To a man who has a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.” Well, what happens to a nation founded upon the idea that one day, there will necessarily arise a problem that can only be solved if everyone has guns?

If you enshrine that idea into your country’s constitution, what will you get, except a society that’s always looking for the fabled “nail” that justifies the ownership of this horrifically dangerous hammer that they’ve just got sitting there?

I mean, if that royal tyrant that our founding fathers told us to fear just…never appears, we’re all kinda just left with our dicks in our hands, right?

Come on, we didn’t need the 2nd amendment so we could own a shotgun and protect ourselves from thieves in the night. We could’ve found some way to allow people to protect themselves without an amendment. No, we have an amendment because our founding fathers, for better or worse, believed in the secular version of an apocalypse prophecy.

And a political apocalypse prophecy needs an enemy, so we make up the enemies instead. But in order for this to work, the imaginary enemy has to be domestic and covert (otherwise, the military or police should be able to handle it). So what do you get?

There could be Muslims in your community, I say! Muslims! Or it’ll probably be those thieving blacks! Mexican rapists! Or the G-men in the suits! Or Hillary Clinton and the Pizza-Pedos! I don’t know who yet, but dammit, there’s gotta be someone out there that I bought this gun to protect myself from! Or else why would I have it? Why would George Washington warn me that I’d need a gun, if there weren’t dangerous people lurking out there?

You can’t escape the filter of paranoia that re-colors our political discourse. How could you? It’s built into our constitution, and placed pretty high up on the priority list, right behind free speech. Is it so crazy so suggest that that paranoid perspective has integrated itself into our conversations about poverty? About race? About labor? About war? About justice?

I’m not saying all our problems would go away if we get rid of guns. All I’m saying is that we might be suffering from the same issue that you would see in a suicidal Japanese salaryman whose sensibilities are so woven in with the cultural norms that push him to that brink, that he can’t step back and see that there are entirely different ways for a civilization to be organized. The words “Why not just go home after 8 hours?” don’t make sense when you’re living in the problem.

America seems like it’s suffering from a similar kind of myopia.

It’s like we’ve simply never posited the question: “What if there isn’t as much to fear as we thought? And even if there is that much to fear, what if the sources of those fears are only strengthened when we tell a society that they need to be ready to kill what they’re afraid of?”

We’re all psychologically (if not literally) locked and loaded but with nowhere to go. We’ve built a cultural identity around it.

So now we’re more afraid of that question, than we would’ve been afraid of the imaginary threat. And we’re more dangerous to ourselves than that threat ever could’ve been.

I know. It’s a Twitter thread. It sucks to read, etc.

This one is quite good.

https://twitter.com/RespectableLaw/status/964187511017869316

And here is a bit of coffee to wake people up.

You don’t figure there are a lot of white nationalists named Nikolas Cruz.

On the other hand, in all of history there were few better Muslim-killers and Jew-excluders than Renaissance-era Spaniards…

He was adopted.