questioning parents during times of tragedy

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-18-2006
questioning parents during times of tragedy
64
Mon, 07-23-2012 - 6:44pm

Sorry, I have to just go on a little bit of a rant here.

I'm sure by now everyone has heard about the tragedy that befell Aurora, Colorado at the movie theatre. Sad, sickening, revolting. Yet you know what I keep reading online? People questioning the judgement of the parents for taking little kids and babies to a late showing movie. Really?

I was incensed that people would look at this tragedy and begin pointing fingers at anyone but the shooter. What good does it do to question the parenting practices of those in the theater – the victims? It is akin to wondering why a rape victim was dressed scantily at a bar. It is disgusting.

There are people out there who abuse, neglect, and torture children. We're really taking THIS time of tragedy to pass judgement on something so benign? Really?? Like this couldn't have happened just as easily during the day?

How about the millions of other questions we should be asking? About gun control, security in public places, mental health evaluations, etc?

This just makes me very angry. I feel HEARTBROKEN for anyone who lost someone there, regardless of age. It's tragedies like this that makes me wish I hadn't brought kids into this messed up world to begin with!

Awhile back, I posted an article about a local, teenaged girl who was killed by her ex boyfriend. Her father is someone I've known for a long time. Basically, they had sex under a local bridge and that's when he killed her. His reasoning was because "she was doing drugs and I didn't like the changes in her". There have been comments in the local paper along the lines of "where were this girl's parents? She was doing drugs and having sex under bridges?" And let me tell you....she had wonderful, loving, parents who simply adored her. She was a bit wild, perhaps, but it's nothing that her parents did wrong.

Man, things like this just make me so damn angry!

Angie

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Fri, 07-27-2012 - 7:35pm

What the.... Your posts are so difficult to debate, LoL!

Then don't debate them. I seldom know what you are talking about anyway ...LoL :smileywink:

LOL ... you're telling me what you've already discussed and I certainly wasn't commenting on anything you discussed.

It's another thing all together to assume that changing laws won't make a difference or that people will still kill. There is no contradiction.

Actually Jams, there is a contradiction in telling someone you can't  defend laws based on predictions, but then ask me to predict a possible outcome of a situation under different circumstances.

LOL ... now you saying you can't assume a law won't make a difference, but in a previous post, and I quote, you say:Killings will never just stop and I never suggested otherwise, But gun laws should be examined and I do think there's room for change.

Seriously, and you think I am hard to follow? lol ... maybe this is why? I have no clue why you saying anything to me, I have no cue the correlation you are trying to make between my statements and your previous posts, which I wasn't even addressing.

Mental illness is a pretty complex issue and it's a tough defense too.

WHo cares if it's a tough defense ... lol ... who said anything about it being a defense?? LOL You won't solve a problem if you just fix a piece of the puzzle. So, if you, or anyone else, wants to compare crime stats of the U.S. and other counties .. yeah, you have to look at the whole picture ... LOL ... so, funny, no one even mentioned mental illness as a defense ... where do you come up with this stuff?

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Fri, 07-27-2012 - 7:24pm

I have to wonder, if someone is to serious ill, they actually go on a shooting spree, what do you think will happen if guns are no longer available to them?

Wish I could find a more recent study online, but here it goes:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5111202/ns/health-mental_health/t/global-study-finds-mental-illness-widespread/

Mental illnesses including anxiety disorders and depression are common and under-treated in many developed and developing countries, with the highest rate found in the United States, according to a study of 14 countries.

Based on face-to-face diagnostic surveys in the homes of 60,463 adults, the study found that mental ailments affect more than 10 percent of people queried in more than half the countries surveyed.

Rates ranged from 26.4 percent of people in the United States to 8.2 percent of people in Italy.

http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/15/depression-world-rate-forbeslife-cx_avd_0216depressed.html

Picture the countries battling the highest rates of depression, and you probably think of those that are developing or poor.

Think again.

The U.S. tops the list, with 9.6% of the population experiencing bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder or chronic minor depression over the course of a year. That's compared with a .8% rate documented in Nigeria. The findings are part of a 2004 study of 14 countries by researchers from the World Health Organization (WHO) and Harvard Medical School.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/05/030507080958.htm

ScienceDaily (May 7, 2003) — BOSTON, MA -- The United States has a higher prevalence and lower treatment rate of serious mental illness than a number of other developed countries, according to a study published in a special edition on international health care in the May/June issue of the policy journal Health Affairs.

http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2012/7/24/massacre_opens_door_to_discussions_of.htm

While last week's massacre in Colorado has stirred a national debate about gun control, local law enforcement officials say the horrific tragedy highlights the need for mental health awareness.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/understanding-mind-aurora-mass-killer-article-1.1119651

In some respects, the alleged mass murderer in Aurora, Colo. fits a profile of the typical mass killer that my colleague James Alan Fox and I developed some 30 years ago.

In all likelihood, the Colorado killer was depressed and socially isolated, having no place to turn when he got into trouble. In addition, he likely blamed everybody but himself for his personal problems and had access to and training in the use of semi-automatic firearms.

The schizophrenic diagnosis would explain a number of characteristics that depart from the profile of a typical mass killer.

http://sanitariumletters.blogspot.com/2012/07/colorado-movie-massacre-discussion.html

How come we never seem to talk about the mental health crisis in this country when a massacre like the one here in Colorado occurs? We always talk about gun control, which I support, but we guarantee more of these incidents by ignoring the mental health crisis.

The media is supposed to inform but they always fail to inform people about mental illness. Their own self-induced ignorance on the matter keeps rearing its ugly head in the form of journalists showing surprise that the shooter in this massacre was "intelligent." As if everyone who is mentally disturbed or ill is a stark-raving madman who has the I.Q. of a two year old. If they bothered to check the statistics or talk with a psychiatrist they'd quickly learn that the mentally ill are often so intelligent as to be smarter than the general population. That's partly why psychopaths, like the shooter in Colorado, remain undetected for years.

But, instead, we'll talk about gun control and in a few weeks the media will get bored and the discussion will die down. Allowing people, yet again, to remain safely secure in their snow globe of ignorance and naivety. Meanwhile, the mental health crisis remains allowing the isolated and deranged to boil in their madness until it reaches another dangerous point. We ignore this sad reality at our peril. It's beyond time to have a national dialogue about mental health because it is one of the only ways that we can reduce this kind of violence. Gun control is part of the answer, but they'll still find a way to get a weapon if you don't treat the source of the dysfunction (mental illness).

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-22-2007

>>Personally, I think killings would go down to levels that countries with more limited access to guns have. IOW, the number of killings in the US would go down by huge percentages.<<

Here in Australia, we have limited access to guns.  Automatic and semi automatic weapons are strictly outlawed, as are pump action shotguns.   The last massacre we had was 16 years ago.    After that, our gun laws changed and we haven't had a massacre since.    People haven't turned to bombs or other methods of mass destruction.  

Yes, there are still guns around - and we hear of gang related shootings.   But never a mass death toll of innocent bystanders.  

Someone mentioned that the shooter in this story could still have done a lot of damage with a bat in that theatre.   While I concede that the people standing near to him would have been at great risk, the relative slowness of a bat wielding madman would allow for a mass exodus out the fire escape doors.  

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Fri, 07-27-2012 - 4:47pm

Considering mental illness in the U.S. is also pretty high...

I am pretty sure that the rates of serious mental illness such as schizoprhenia are consistent universally

.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Fri, 07-27-2012 - 4:45pm

Seriously, do you think killings would stop if people didn't have access to guns?

Personally, I think killings would go down to levels that countries with more limited access to guns have. IOW, the number of killings in the US would go down by huge percentages.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001

What the.... Your posts are so difficult to debate, LoL!

And actually, Past crimes are a reason why laws should change, Look at laws that are named after children and people b/c of events that ALREADY happened; It's another thing all together to assume that changing laws won't make a difference or that people will still kill.  There is no contradiction.

I certainly do think other things should be looked at, Mental illness is a pretty complex issue and it's a tough defense too.

edited to clarify.

 


 


iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Fri, 07-27-2012 - 8:31am

Killings will never just stop and I never suggested otherwise, But gun laws should be examined and I do think there's room for change.

I never said otherwise Jams. Once again, the correlation between what I said and your comments is very unclear to me. You can't really oppose what someone said, when that isn't what they said ... lol

Do you think that crime could have been prevented?

Ok, so, in one paragraph you are saying,"Don't defend laws with predictions of what criminals will do instead" in conclusion, you are asking me, "Do you think that crime could have been prevented?"

For starters, lol, there's nothing in what I said that defends any laws and two, telling people they cannot ponder on future events, but then asking them to ponder past events, with predictions of how to avoid such events in the future, makes little sense and is a contradiction. The mere fact you are suggesting stricter guns laws means you are predicting the outcome of that change.

As I stated, there are many factors to consider when examining stats. I don't believe people want to kill simply due to the fact they have access to guns .... is that what you are suggesting? Remove the guns and suddenly, all violence, anger, mental illness .... all this goes away?

Do you really think violent crime will end simply by taking guns out of peoples hands?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
I happen to believe that changing laws can make a difference, And I've already addressed what was wrong with this story like him being allowed to buy a a rifle/sniper weapon (please offer up what these are even designed for), the rounds of ammunition and the number of guns he got access to in like, two months.... Mitt Romney spoke about gun control in an interview last night and gasp, I disagree with him on this issue, Don't defend laws with predictions of what criminals will do instead (Romney used what Timothy McVeigh did with fertilizer as an example).

Killings will never just stop and I never suggested otherwise, But gun laws should be examined and I do think there's room for change.

Do you think that crime could have been prevented?

 


 


iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Thu, 07-26-2012 - 6:59pm

That's interesting, all the stats show is people prefer gun use, lol ... so, sure, what is to stop them from using, say explosives, if guns were not available or stop them from purchasing illegal weapons? Or a hatchet, axe, sword ... if someone wants 12 people dead in low lit theatre, seems there many options available to them.

Oh, we would also have to look at the penalties in other countries, as well as the rate of mental illness, among other things. Considering mental illness in the U.S. is also pretty high, how would that affect the outcomes of comparing these statistics. 

And I don't see a real ah-ha moment here. Your stats, are showing 60/40? Not really that impressive, considering 40% still choose another method. What would be interesting is to see is how many of that 60% would still end up with a gun and how many would choose another deadly method.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Thu, 07-26-2012 - 6:48pm

Not really surprising firearms would the #1 choice. Seriously, do you think killings would stop if people didn't have access to guns? Seems to me they would either choose another weapon or, oh yeah, obtain guns illegally.

Other countries also have stiffer penalties then U.S. I wonder what the correlation there would be?