Why Are Mass Shooters Always Men?

  
By:  john-russell  •  3 months ago  •  67 comments

Why Are Mass Shooters Always Men?

Over the past number of years there has been a sort of bubbling up consideration of an intriguing concept - what if the world was run by women?  Would it be a better place?  I remember a 60 Minutes segment a few years ago which was about how powerful women are in Icelandic politics and how it made Iceland a much more successful and happier place. Iceland is considered one of the happiest countries in the world. 

It is hard to deny a belief that if women ran the world there would be less violence, less hostility, less extremism, less terrorism, and less hate. 

California governor Gavin Newsom held a meeting yesterday to address mass shootings and how to prevent them

"These shootings overwhelmingly — almost exclusively — are males, boys, men. I do think that is missing in the national conversation," Newsom said, according to Politico. "I think that goes deep to the issue of how we raise our boys to be men, goes deeply to values that we tend to hold dear — power, dominance, aggression, over empathy, care and collaboration."

We don't see young women involved in mass shootings. I can't remember even one that made national news, although I'm sure there are women who kill someone with a gun. Years ago there was a female serial killer Aileen Wuornos, who was messed up in the head and killed a string of men, usually by shooting them. It was considered unusual though , so unusual that a Hollywood movie about it , Monster, became a sensation and the actress who played her, Charlize Theron, won an academy award. We don't picture women as killers. 

Boys we do. 

We all know there are biological imperatives that create aggression in males, the need to provide for the family was why the man was fighting the prehistoric beast outside as the woman was huddled in the cave cradling the offspring. There were defined roles based on physical strength and aggressiveness. 

But the world doesnt often require physical strength to succeed anymore. It doesnt necessarily require physical aggressiveness. Young men (these mass shooters) get frustrated by how they are treated , not only by women but by the world in general, and they lash out in a burst of primeval violence. 

The Dayton killer was a member of a band which performed songs about raping and killing women. As much as there may be radical feminists who fantasize mass violence against men, it doesnt happen much at all in real life. Women have some quality that keeps them more grounded. We need as a society for that groundedness to transfer to the young men. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
JohnRussell
1  author  JohnRussell    3 months ago

Men have bees screwing up the world for thousands of years. Give the ladies more of a chance. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
2  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh    3 months ago

We have a large group of Incels ages 18-75 that cannot get a date nor even get laid in a brothel. They want to connect with women but women don't want them.

It's very sad.

They often can be identified online with their obsessions with women and constant harassing them and making inappropriate sexual advances and comments. The rejection turns to anger and then leads to violence. Identifying these Incels is paramount to public safety.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @2    3 months ago

Why are there no women mass shooters?   

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
2.1.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    3 months ago

Tashfeen Malik - San Bernardino Shooter, 14 Killed

Jennifer San Marco - Goleta Post Office Shooting, 6 Killed

Brenda Spencer - Cleveland Elementary School Shooting, 2 Killed

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
2.1.2  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    3 months ago

Because Incels are men that grow angry over their inability to find and connect with women. Their loneliness turns to anger, misogyny and violence. These individuals are very easy to identify on the internet.

They often ignore women and continue to harass them even though they are married or have rejected them on numerous occasions. They demonize the women and then blame all of society for their personal short comings. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @2.1.2    3 months ago
They demonize the women and then blame all of society for their personal short comings. 

But you said the Dayton shooter was motivated by left/right politics.  You associate the killer with antifa. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
2.1.4  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.3    3 months ago

Incels can be liberal, conservative etc John. Google Incel and read about them. Many studies have been done. WAPO, and several others have published articles on Incels.

Not being able to connect with the opposite sex is not unique to a political affiliation. There are lonely conservative and liberal jerk offs on the internet.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.5  author  JohnRussell  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @2.1.4    3 months ago

Then the Dayton killer was not motivated by politics. OK. We agree. 

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
2.1.6  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    3 months ago

You asked why the shooter is male, clear answer.  We have a large number of incels on the internet. Do some research, you are missing the message here.

It's more about their inability to get a date or find companionship than politics. Most mass shooters are in fact Incels.

Plenty of warning signs on these chronic jerk offs.

It's time for a national data base for these creeps, the Incel database.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @2.1.6    3 months ago

Other than a national data base (which smacks of Big Brother), what else can we do?

If they are just talking smack on an internet website, there's not much that can be done unless you want to infringe on someone's First Amendment rights

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
2.1.8  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.7    3 months ago

It's more than that, they have creep forums for the younger Incels and there have been several studies on the male mass shooters. They all share this loneliness and inability to connect to women. It's very sad Trout and you are right, we cannot infringe on rights.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @2.1.8    3 months ago

I'm not up on the millenial lingo these days. What's a "creep forum"?

I wonder if these incels have fathers in the home?

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
2.1.10  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.9    3 months ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel

Take a moment, read about them.....

After reading about them think about this, these types have probably been encountered online by all of us. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
2.1.11  Mark in Wyoming  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    3 months ago

John I don't think that there aren't any , I just think they choose different methods to achieve the same results. I also think in the male-centric world , a lot of those murders committed by women , were written off to different things over the years .  And we today are viewing them through how we see things today.

Last assault I saw involving strictly women was 2 weeks ago , and at all places the grocery store in the parking lot , not in a bar where it would usually be expected to see. I heard it before I saw it , and could tell even though deaf the fight was over 3 things in no particular order , booze being drank , drugs , and a man, I say that is because of the loud verbal exchange before things went really south.

What ensued was better than any MMA fight I ever saw  and wilder than any bar cat fight when I bartended , the one girl hit the other so hard that the one literally did a backflip out of her flipflops and landed literally on her head, and then proceeded to be waffle stomped while down, whole thing lasted less than a mike Tyson knock out and it was over .

Thing is , around here its usually the group of women in certain age groups that I do see doing this , the mid 20s to mid 30s , I see it on average now about once a month , the women are getting more aggressive , and not fighting like the women of my generation would be thought to have done .

 
 
 
Kathleen
3  Kathleen    3 months ago

Its sort of like in school.

If two boys did not like each other, a physical fight will break out. If two girls don’t like each other, they will gossip about you or exclude you from a group.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Kathleen @3    3 months ago
If two girls don’t like each other, they will gossip about you or exclude you from a group.

Hi Kathleen...  you've never seen a real down and dirty girl on girl cat fight?

When they get into a physical fight, they make the guys pale in comparison.  

 
 
 
Kathleen
3.1.1  Kathleen  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1    3 months ago

Yes! I saw fake fingernails flying all over the place. It was at a amusement park. Women can be vicious that’s for sure.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Kathleen @3.1.1    3 months ago
I saw fake fingernails flying all over the place.

I saw the real nails, working like claws and ripping open faces, arms, any piece of unprotected flesh that could be had.  Oh, and the hair with little bits of scalp attached go flying.

In real street fights, guys are kind compared to girls.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Kathleen @3.1.1    3 months ago
'Women can be vicious that’s for sure.'

Ain't that the truth?

 
 
 
Kathleen
3.1.4  Kathleen  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.3    3 months ago

Yep, a proven fact.

 
 
 
Kathleen
3.1.5  Kathleen  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1.2    3 months ago

Oh god!  That’s pretty bad...

 
 
 
†hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh
3.1.6  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.3    3 months ago
'Women can be vicious that’s for sure.'

If you tame the kitty, they are a joy to be around all the time.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh @3.1.6    3 months ago

Whatever that means.  

 
 
 
Sunshine
4  Sunshine    3 months ago

In general men commit more violence than women.  It isn't surprising that most of them are the shooters.

Lack of fathers in the home maybe one reason, or fathers who ignore their sons.  No role models for them.

Who knows, lot of males have the worst home environment and still don't go on killing sprees.  

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Sunshine @4    3 months ago
Lack of fathers in the home maybe one reason, or fathers who ignore their sons.  No role models for them.

There was a PhD on I THINK it was Tucker Carlson last night that has actually written a book about just that problem.   Unfortunately, I neglected to write the name of the book AND author down....   DDDOOOOOHHHHHH.

Anyway, here's another link you might find interesting.  The chart on the first page is telling, for boys and girls.

https://www.fatherhood.org/fatherhood-data-statistics

 
 
 
Sunshine
4.1.1  Sunshine  replied to  XDm9mm @4.1    3 months ago

Thanks XD.  I was astonished that it was this bad....

In America, 23.6% of children lived in father-absent homes in 2014. Consequently, there is a “father factor” in nearly all of the societal issues facing America today. We must realize there is a father absence crisis in America and begin to raise more involved, responsible, and committed fathers.
 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Sunshine @4.1.1    3 months ago

No problem.

Part of what the Dr. noted was that apparently, the 'father' was essentially the alpha and gave direction AND punishment when necessary to the child (primarily the male as 'dad' deferred to the female partner to 'punish' the female child).

The 'alpha' also was in the physical position to stop any unwanted and unnecessary aggressive behaviors that the 'young male' showed that the female partner was unable to stop due to physical limitations allowing the male to become more and more aggressive.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5  Nerm_L    3 months ago

Ah, the search for easy answers.  And the desire to politicize those easy answers.

Perhaps the question that should be asked is why are men considered expendable in modern society?  Why are men overlooked in modern society?  Even the news coverage of mass shootings focus attention on women, children, and the elderly.  The only men that receive any attention are the shooters.

How many women run toward danger?  How many women were among the first responders on 9/11?  Why were men charged with cowardice for not running into Parkland School and engaging the shooter in combat?  Why weren't any women expected to sacrifice themselves at Parkland?

Why does modern society expect men to make the sacrifices while castigating and denigrating men?  Women are heroes for huddling in closets.  Men are heroes for charging into a hail of bullets.

Modern society expects men to kill or be killed.  Men are expected to go into danger willing to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others, particularly women, children, and the elderly.  Men are expected to go into the collapsed buildings and the raging fires to save others; anything less is cowardice.  Women only need be victims to receive far more attention than men.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Nerm_L @5    3 months ago
How many women run toward danger? 

Those that have accepted employment and the training to do so, do so.  Plus, have you never seen a protective mother run to danger?

How many women were among the first responders on 9/11? 

A large number.  NYC had and has many female firefighters and police officers.

Why were men charged with cowardice for not running into Parkland School and engaging the shooter in combat? 

Really easy one.  It was the TRAINED LEO on location that hid.  He failed in his training and he failed those he was sworn to protect.

Why weren't any women expected to sacrifice themselves at Parkland?

How do you know that?  Were you there?   Do you know if there were any women teachers or aides that were willing to sacrifice themselves to protect the kids?  Does it disturb you that no adult female died?

I'm a male, and I'll say it right now.  Your entire diatribe is an embarrassment to any other male.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1    3 months ago
How do you know that?  Were you there?   Do you know if there were any women teachers or aides that were willing to sacrifice themselves to protect the kids?  Does it disturb you that no adult female died?

What disturbs me is the societal expectation for men to be heroes while not treating men as heroes.  We expect men to go into dangerous occupations as a matter of course; that's just the way things are.  Women who pursue those dangerous occupations are lauded as exceptional; men not so much.

The trained LEO at Parkland was charged with cowardice because he did not do what he was trained to do.  But that training was to go into a dangerous situation at great risk to himself; that was his job and it's nothing other than just a job.  Men facing danger is just a job and we expect men to do their job.

How men are treated in society today isn't any different than how men returning from Vietnam were treated.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Nerm_L @5.1.1    3 months ago
What disturbs me is the societal expectation for men to be heroes while not treating men as heroes.

If you need to be lauded as a hero, that's on you.   No one other than my loved ones welcomed me home from my deployments to the shitholes in the middle east, and I never looked for any parades.  I did what I did for my love of country and to protect my home land and family to ensure what happened on 9/11 never happened again.  Oh, and I was with quite a few women that were where I was doing their jobs for the very same reason.  And they too, when necessary wore body armor and carried weapons.

How men are treated in society today isn't any different than how men returning from Vietnam were treated.

Again, I wholeheartedly disagree.   Today, many men AND women returning from military deployments to war zones are welcomed as heroes.  I've yet to hear of or see ANY being denigrated or spit on when they got home.  Maybe you have, but I sure as hell haven't.

 
 
 
Sunshine
5.1.3  Sunshine  replied to  Nerm_L @5.1.1    3 months ago

Nerm, I think men are very important.  They are heroes to me and many others.  

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.4  XDm9mm  replied to  Sunshine @5.1.3    3 months ago
Nerm, I think men are very important.

Now now Sunshine.....   you'll make Nerm blush!!  jrSmiley_85_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sunshine
5.1.5  Sunshine  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.4    3 months ago

jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

I do understand where he is coming from a little.  We do expect men to be the aggressor when we need it, although women are starting to be part of that role more often.  

I don't care for this line though...

Women only need be victims to receive far more attention than men.

I don't know if it was meant to be a degrading statement, but it is.  A woman just died shielding her baby. Women are protectors and they don't play victims.  

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5.1.6  Nerm_L  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.2    3 months ago
If you need to be lauded as a hero, that's on you.   No one other than my loved ones welcomed me home from my deployments to the shitholes in the middle east, and I never looked for any parades.  I did what I did for my love of country and to protect my home land and family to ensure what happened on 9/11 never happened again.  Oh, and I was with quite a few women that were where I was doing their jobs for the very same reason.  And they too, when necessary wore body armor and carried weapons.

It's not about ticker tape parades.  That's just a participation award.  That's just a good conduct medal.

It's about respect.

Why is it necessary to highlight women doing the same things and facing the same dangers as men as though that is exceptional?  Shouldn't it really be about respecting those who do what must be done?  Our modern society has replaced respect with expect.

Mass shooters aren't trying to earn a ticker tape parade or a good conduct medal or a thank you line.  When we have identified a motive for mass shootings they often revolve around feelings of being disrespected, being neglected, and being treated unfairly.    

 
 
 
Nerm_L
5.1.7  Nerm_L  replied to  Sunshine @5.1.5    3 months ago
I don't know if it was meant to be a degrading statement, but it is.  A woman just died shielding her baby. Women are protectors and they don't play victims.  

Men are expected to confront the danger, tooth and claw, to kill or be killed.  Bring home their shields or on them.  But that expectation isn't respected.

The MeToo movement is all about portraying women as victims.  Men are expected to prevent such abuses but are not respected for having done so.  There aren't stories about men stopping a sexual predator; that's just what men are supposed to do.  If anything a story about a man's intervention in such a situation would focus on violence rather than respect for having done what needed done.

Men are expected to sacrifice themselves.  IMO that is partly intrinsic human behavior arising from evolution and partly a learned behavior imposed by societal expectations.  But in the past men received respect for that expectation of sacrifice.  I don't believe that is happening in today's society; it's more expect without respect.

 
 
 
Sunshine
5.1.8  Sunshine  replied to  Nerm_L @5.1.7    3 months ago
The MeToo movement is all about portraying women as victims. 

Because they where the victims in most cases.  Some have hi-jacked the movement and used it for their own political or social gain, but that is not the fault of the true victims.  

I think most of us do our best, men and women, and perhaps these shooters can't live up to the societal norms but still no reason to become the monsters they are.  These men have very very deep problems, perhaps they where born without empathy for others or developed over time.  

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
6  Dean Moriarty    3 months ago

Several factors contribute to males being the more aggressive gender. Behavioral conditioning and genetics are major contributing factors. The male has a genetic advantage when it comes to combat with a much more muscular build and better hormone balance for combat situations. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/homo-aggressivus/201409/male-aggression

Same reasons you don't see any female NFL players. The male is the better hunter and the female the better gatherer. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
7  TᵢG    3 months ago
But the world doesnt often require physical strength to succeed anymore. 

It is still in our genes and will remain for a very long time.

Thing is, genes do not determine behavior, they are a factor in behavior.   Environment (especially growing up) is a critical factor.    Brain chemistry is a local, short-term factor.

Bottom line, those who are genetically pre-disposed to aggression will not necessarily be aggressive.   But if the right factors are in place, that genetic aggression will manifest.

In short, men are still genetically more aggressive (potentially) than woman and thus are more likely to act out aggression when the right mix of other factors is present.   

 
 
 
It Is ME
8  It Is ME    3 months ago

"Why Are Mass Shooters Always Men? "

Men have more "mental" issues and don't know how to deal with them ….. Because it isn't manly to cry ?

The nut balls need to embrace their feminine side more often ! jrSmiley_99_smiley_image.jpg

I hear being "Pansexual" is a reliever, and makes for a super-duper happy camper type person.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
8.1  Mark in Wyoming  replied to  It Is ME @8    3 months ago

I think you have actually hit on something here.

Look at the average age of mass shooters lately and what was being said about masculinity during their formative years . if they could be asked , I bet you would get some pretty wild and differing definitions of what they though was being masculine or being a man, or what they thought society was expecting of them.

 The definitions are fine , but with no actual or physical role models that they can relate to,  too emulate , they could end up confused and lost, and maybe even choose the wrong things to emulate.

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.1    3 months ago
The definitions are fine , but with no actual or physical role models that they can relate to,  too emulate , they could end up confused and lost, and maybe even choose the wrong things to emulate.

OR

They were just nutz in the first place.

273 + or - mass murders since 2017 out of MILLIONS and MILLIONS of gun owners.....and we have enough of a serious issue to Ban guns because of those 273 retarded thinking folks ?

If it only takes 273 folks to get a law "Made" to "BAN" guns, what about those 32 grand worth of people that are killed while car owners drive drunk every year.

Ban the fucking cars. They're far worse, and a detriment to society "Life" !

I didn't have a Dad for 8 years, but I sure as hell ain't looking to go out and SHOOT someone over it !

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1.2  r.t..b...  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.1    3 months ago
The definitions are fine

The 'boys will be boys' excuse needs to go away and is a good starting point in raising our sons to be empathetic. Doing so does not diminish their 'manhood' in any way. Doing so makes them more of a man. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1.3  r.t..b...  replied to  It Is ME @8.1.1    3 months ago
273 + or - mass murders since 2017

And that is somehow acceptable? 

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.4  It Is ME  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.3    3 months ago

And over 30 grand a year DEAD by Drunk Drivers is ?

"Grand' means Thousand" ya know..... 30 of them thousand . jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @8.1.4    3 months ago

There's no comparisons between the two.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @8.1.1    3 months ago

No one is talking about banning guns.

They're talking about keeping them out of the hands of those accused of domestic violence, mental illness where they might harm themselves or others, etc., NOT BANNING GUNS

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.7  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @8.1.6    3 months ago
They're talking about keeping them out of the hands of those accused of domestic violence, mental illness where they might harm themselves or others

Not in the "Liberal Presidential" caucus run they ain't. Trump is the one that was talking about "Mental Illness", and the Liberals running for President condemned him for not blaming "THE GUN". jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1.8  r.t..b...  replied to  It Is ME @8.1.4    3 months ago
And over 30 grand a year DEAD by Drunk Drivers is ?

A tragedy...not to be confused, but so often done so as an obvious deflection, with the issue at hand. In your mind, what is the acceptable number of mass murders committed with an AK-47 type weapon? What is the acceptable number of murders committed with an AK-47 type weapon? Can you tell me why anyone's rights to own and bear arms are constricted if we were to ban this singular AK-47 type weapon, given the results of incidents too long to enumerate? Keep your pistols, rifles, and shotguns...this AK-47 type weapon is a scourge. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  It Is ME @8.1.7    3 months ago

He is the one who is mentally ill and that really has nothing to do with gun violence.  

I had a piece about that exact issue posted but had to delete it due to excessive trolling.  

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.10  It Is ME  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.8    3 months ago

Do you even know what an "Assault Weapon" is ?

Did you know that an AR15 is just a Super cool looking "Plastic" covered Ruger Mini 14 type gun ?

They both shoot the same ammo, but the Mini 14 is a wood stocked or composite covered rifle when you buy it. It's pretty, simple, and NOT on the "We need to ban" list. Does the same thing, but that Gewgawed AR15 just looks menacing, because of the neat Gewgaws around it.

To date....haven't seen the news reporting on your ridicules AK-47 comparison as the weapon of choice by the "Few" NUTZ that choose to MURDER !

Oh …. by the by ..... Did you know that "MURDER" has been against the "Law" in this country …. since it's inception ?

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.11  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @8.1.5    3 months ago
There's no comparisons between the two.  

"Clue" isn't just a board game.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1.12  r.t..b...  replied to  It Is ME @8.1.10    3 months ago
Do you even know what an "Assault Weapon" is ?

Yup, killed over thirty and injured scores more just this past weekend. Spend your time deflecting on stale talking points as to the definition of the weapon used as you feel compelled, all while ignoring the rather simple questions posed. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.13  It Is ME  replied to  Tessylo @8.1.9    3 months ago
He is the one who is mentally ill and that really has nothing to do with gun violence. 

I agree....Trump has NOTHING to do with "Nutty Murderers" !

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.14  It Is ME  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.12    3 months ago
Yup, killed over thirty and injured scores more just this past weekend.

So the "Person" is the "Assault Weapon" ?

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
8.1.15  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Tessylo @8.1.6    3 months ago
No one is talking about banning guns.

Well, we already have many banned guns. Without special permits you can't own most military weapons and explosives. Most States even have bans on switchblade or butterfly knives, nunchucks and certain extension batons. We also had an assault rifle ban for 10 years and there was no slippery slope into banning all guns as many unreasonable gun advocates claim. A Republican led 108th congress with the Republican pedophile Dennis Hastert as house speaker chose to let the Brady Bill expire in 2004 and we're still experiencing the effects of such a horrible decision today with the vast majority of mass shooters using AK's or AR-15's, guns designed for maximum human carnage without being fully automatic, guns that would have required a special permit under the Brady bill.

So no one worth listening to is talking about banning all guns (there are some fringe nutter's who have expressed such a ridiculous sentiment), that is the red herring thrown about by the right.

I find the Gallup poll question on whether Americans would be fine with an assault weapons ban is telling. In 2000, before 9/11, 57% of Americans favored an assault weapons ban. Today that number has flipped with 57% against it. In fact, by 2004 it had dropped to 50% support as more Americans were mentally preparing for war after 9/11 and that trend, especially among right wing religious conservatives, has only escalated since.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
8.1.16  Mark in Wyoming  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.2    3 months ago
The 'boys will be boys' excuse needs to go away and is a good starting point in raising our sons to be empathetic. Doing so does not diminish their 'manhood' in any way. Doing so makes them more of a man. 

And I didn't make that excuse , I don't think any one did.

 I will admit , things are a lot different today than when I was being raised and was being influenced on what "being a man " was. When I was raised , a certain amount of "Machismo" was acceptable , more emphasis was stressed on being a "gentleman " but still being "manly. Today its called toxic masculinity or chauvinism .

 At my age , I wont change , I will still stand when introduced to a woman or anyone for that matter , hold a door open for any woman , will when walking down a sidewalk  walk on the traffic side  of the walk when walking with a woman, still use ms or ma'am . and most importantly say please and thank you .

I will still give a certain amount of respect  as a curtesy, until that respect is proven to be misplaced, will definitely treat a woman as a lady , even after they have proven they are NOT one. 

I will always live by treat others as you wish to be treated , but the treatment one eventually gets from me is directly related to the treatment they give me.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1.17  r.t..b...  replied to  It Is ME @8.1.14    3 months ago
So the "Person" is the "Assault Weapon" ?

If they had only a hammer.

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.18  It Is ME  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.17    3 months ago

So IT IS the person .

Got it ! jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sunshine
8.1.19  Sunshine  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.12    3 months ago
all while ignoring the rather simple questions posed. 

What are your suggestions to stop the mass shootings?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1.20  r.t..b...  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.1.16    3 months ago
And I didn't make that excuse , I don't think any one did.

No disrespect directed toward you, Mark, and apologies if my response led you to believe otherwise. It was more an observation that we somehow accept the more brutish behavior our gender tends to exhibit. Too often, in our warped sense of masculinity (whomever defines such a thing), we give a wink and a nod in excuse rather than condemn and chastise. The times are changing for the better. And yes, it will always be appropriate in my mind to stand for a woman and hold a door. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1.21  r.t..b...  replied to  Sunshine @8.1.19    3 months ago
What are your suggestions to stop the mass shootings?

Thank you for asking. Sadly, in our inculcated gun culture they are an unfortunate aspect of our lives. To hopefully mitigate the results; mandatory background checks with a commensurate waiting period, closing of the gun-show loophole and internet sales, mandatory initial safety-training with the purchase of any firearm, banning the after-market modification to any firearm, and (forgive the nomenclature, but you know exactly what I mean) banning the manufacture of semi-automatic 'style' weapons. If you own one now, you can keep it. You'll notice your right to bear arms are left totally intact but for one 'style' weapon. Respectfully submitted.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
8.1.22  Mark in Wyoming  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @8.1.15    3 months ago

Couple things I would like to correct  DP .assault "rifle"  definition pre existed before the brady bill and the Assault Weapon Ban from 94-04.  , the important part of the  definition of what an assault rifle was and still is  that it must be and have the capability for select fire , meaning both semi auto and full auto capabilities built into the weapon.

The reason assault "weapon " came into being is because the firearms that was desired to be banned lacked that very vital part of the assault rifle definition of having select fire capability.  and instead of defining what an assault weapon was based on its function, though it does specify it has to be semi automatic , the definition was based on strictly cosmetic features ( how it looked) that actually did not affect the over all function of the fire arm. and to qualify as an assault weapon , it had to have a certain number of those "cosmetic features, if they didn't , then the firearm was not affected by the ban. some claim that was circumventing the intent of the law .  that's not even bringing up the fact that the ban grandfathered most of the things it banned , so it was still legal to have them, and they could be resold , only thing the ban really did was ban the new manufacture in the configuration that it would fall under the definition of what an assault weapon was . so companies stopped offering off the shelf firearms with bayonet lugs , collapsible/telescoping stocks , flash hiders/supressors / defusers, and that's where the afternmarket took off but even using aftermarket items the weapon would fall under the ban if not a grandfathered item.

All the ban really did was increase the price that could be gotten in resale  for certain acsessories , and in some cases the firearms themselves because they were simply made before a certain date.

 After the 10 year period expired for review , it was found that the law actually had little to no effect at the time on gun crimes . and that was the main reason it was allowed to bipartisanly "sunset" and expire.

 True assault rifles aren't even banned , they are highly regulated and taxed, anyone that wants to go through the BGC required , and has the money can purchase one following existing regulations. As for military weapons there have only been 2, that have never been for sale through the civilian marksmanship program, and they both have select fire capability , the M-14 and the M-16 and any of its military variants. the CMP has never sold to my knowledge full auto military weapons. that would be the governments area.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
8.1.23  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @8.1.16    3 months ago
I will still stand when introduced to a woman or anyone for that matter , hold a door open for any woman , will when walking down a sidewalk  walk on the traffic side  of the walk when walking with a woman, still use ms or ma'am . and most importantly say please and thank you

None of that would defined as "toxic masculinity", you're just saying you would be polite, courteous and chivalrous.

"The concept of toxic masculinity is used in psychology and media discussions of masculinity to refer to certain cultural norms that are associated with harm to society and to men themselves. Traditional stereotypes of men as socially dominant , along with related traits such as misogyny and homophobia , can be considered "toxic" due in part to their promotion of violence , including sexual assault and domestic violence . The socialization of boys often normalizes violence, such as in the saying "boys will be boys" with regard to bullying and aggression."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity

So chivalry isn't the problem, not many women will complain about men opening the door for them or saying please and thank you instead of just ordering them around. What needs to end is the sad belief that men are some how superior to women and thus should always be put in charge or should be paid more for the same job. What needs to end is the belief that its okay for a husband to physically "correct" his wife if she talks back to him or doesn't show respect.

So keep up being chivalrous, few are ever going to have a problem with that. But true "toxic masculinity" needs to expire, it's useless and bigoted.

 
 
 
Sunshine
8.1.24  Sunshine  replied to  r.t..b... @8.1.21    3 months ago
Respectfully submitted.

Although those are all good suggestions, I doubt it would stop anyone who was determined to kill.  Perhaps your suggestions would stop accidental shootings, but mass shootings that are usually well planned out ahead, doubtful. 

I don't think any of us knows what to do about the mass killings.  And no one likes that feeling.  

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1.25  r.t..b...  replied to  Sunshine @8.1.24    3 months ago
Perhaps your suggestions would stop accidental shootings

Then so be it.

Sadly, there are too many that do not share your willingness to concede to the simplest of measures for any number of reasons, and therein lies the fundamental problem. Thanks for your consideration.

 
 
 
Tacos!
9  Tacos!    3 months ago

I think everyone already understands that men are generally hard-wired to be more aggressive and violent than women. However, being male (like being female) is a spectrum. There's no one kind of male behavior. The men who commit these crimes, are at the extreme fringe of what it is to be male. So, while 80% of criminals are men, 97% of men are not criminals.* 

Obviously (or perhaps it needs to be pointed out) the number of men who commit acts of mass murder is very tiny indeed. Of course, it doesn't take a lot to have a dramatic impact.

*My impulse was to say 99%, but I looked it up and the number of convicted felons in the United States is so high that something like 3% of the male population actually has a felony conviction. In Europe, by comparison, the percentage is minuscule - something like a tenth of one percent.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

FLYNAVY1


39 visitors