4 ms·

Yep. We don’t fear things under our control. Do I fear driving my car? No, because I can control my safety (to an extent, anyway). I can drive defensively. I ca

Yep. We don’t fear things under our control. Do I fear driving my car? No, because I can control my safety (to an extent, anyway). I can drive defensively. I can stay focused. I can avoid dangerous intersections. I wear a seat belt and have a big safe SUV. Mass shootings are terrifying because there’s no sense of control. Animals are scary (spiders, snakes) because we can’t control them. Disease is scary when we can’t control it (cancer); less scary when we can cure it, even something like appendicitis seems tame because most hospitals can get it under control. It’s also why COVID is less scary to the general public, as it gets more under control (via vaccines and treatments and prior infection immunity).

chasd00 4y ago
> We don’t fear things under our control yeah, this is it. This is why people will drive through a blizzard in the middle of the night but will have a panic attack trying to board an airplane. In their car they feel in control but in an airplane they feel helpless and at completely dependent on the pilot/crew/airplane.
- thehappypm 4y ago
  A relative of this feeling is knowledge. I have thousands of miles of snow driving experience in my car. I have no fucking clue how airplanes work and how they handle turbulence.
kelnos 4y ago
> No, because I can control my safety (to an extent, anyway). Part of the problem is that this control is much more of an illusion than most people realize. In any car crash where there's at least two vehicles involved, often one driver is at fault, and the other is (or others are) more or less an innocent bystander, who may have been exercising all the care and attentiveness in the world. That person was certainly not able to control their safety in that situation. And even when not involved in a crash, I don't think it's reasonable to say that one's safe outcome was caused even mostly due to their control over their vehicle. Much of it can be attributable to luck, traffic conditions, and the imperfect, but often sufficient, control that others were exercising over their vehicles. But I do agree with you that the perceived threat/seriousness of these various bad things does have a lot to do with the perception of individual control, whether or not individuals actually do have much control over them. I know a surprising number of people who get anxious flying on a plane, but don't think twice about getting in a car, despite there being a higher probability of injury or death from a car trip. Something I just realized: I feel like passengers in a car are also similarly not that concerned about the possibility of crashes, even though they are not actually in control of the vehicle. My first thought would be that they presumably know and trust the person who is driving, but that doesn't explain why people feel safe in taxis. I guess maybe people do feel less safe in taxis, though.
mwint 4y ago
> Mass shootings are terrifying because there’s no sense of control. For anyone here concerned about this, it doesn’t take very much money in HN-terms to become reasonably well trained. You can: 1) Carry your own weapon, following your state’s laws in all but a few. 2) Learn to use that weapon very well, but more importantly: 3) Learn to use cover and move defensively or offensively 4) Learn to administer basic medical attention to yourself and others 5) Learn to read people and know when something might be about to happen. After enough training, you will at least probably not freeze in an active shooter scenario. Even if you’re not into carrying your own weapon, doing some training will teach you how insanely hard it is to hit any moving target (or anything at all when the adrenaline is going). Re. 5), many people in my state carry and I never used to notice them. Now I can pick out who is and isn’t, and usually how long they’ve been doing it (newbies will subtly check their weapon is secure every time they move). The Secret Service is trained the same way; someone not used to carrying who is about to do something bad will send off all kinds of weird body language signals. —— No, you don’t need to learn this because shootings are exceedingly rare. But if you’re nervous, learning these things will give you a sense of understanding about the threat, and the basic tools to do something to keep your loved ones safe in that one-in-a-hundred-thousand-lifetimes event.
- clairity 4y ago
  no, if you want to survive a mass shooting, you don’t need to do anything, especially not buy a gun, and your likelihood of not dying by mass shooting stays the same, basically zero. your chances of dying by gun increase much more simply by having one than you could ever hope to reduce the risk of dying by mass shooting by having one. if you were in the exceedingly unlikely scenario of a mass shooting, brandishing a gun increases your likelihood of dying in that situation several-fold, rather than materially increasing your chances of stopping the mass shooter or even saving your own life.
  - mwint 4y ago
    Never brandish a gun. Proper training means going from deep concealment to shots on target in a few seconds, maximum. Your cited statistic is one reason open carry is a Bad Idea; it puts you first in line to be eliminated. Concealment, all the way.

chasd00 4y ago

> We don’t fear things under our control yeah, this is it. This is why people will drive through a blizzard in the middle of the night but will have a panic attack trying to board an airplane. In their car they feel in control but in an airplane they feel helpless and at completely dependent on the pilot/crew/airplane.

thehappypm 4y ago
A relative of this feeling is knowledge. I have thousands of miles of snow driving experience in my car. I have no fucking clue how airplanes work and how they handle turbulence.

kelnos 4y ago

> No, because I can control my safety (to an extent, anyway). Part of the problem is that this control is much more of an illusion than most people realize. In any car crash where there's at least two vehicles involved, often one driver is at fault, and the other is (or others are) more or less an innocent bystander, who may have been exercising all the care and attentiveness in the world. That person was certainly not able to control their safety in that situation. And even when not involved in a crash, I don't think it's reasonable to say that one's safe outcome was caused even mostly due to their control over their vehicle. Much of it can be attributable to luck, traffic conditions, and the imperfect, but often sufficient, control that others were exercising over their vehicles. But I do agree with you that the perceived threat/seriousness of these various bad things does have a lot to do with the perception of individual control, whether or not individuals actually do have much control over them. I know a surprising number of people who get anxious flying on a plane, but don't think twice about getting in a car, despite there being a higher probability of injury or death from a car trip. Something I just realized: I feel like passengers in a car are also similarly not that concerned about the possibility of crashes, even though they are not actually in control of the vehicle. My first thought would be that they presumably know and trust the person who is driving, but that doesn't explain why people feel safe in taxis. I guess maybe people do feel less safe in taxis, though.

mwint 4y ago

> Mass shootings are terrifying because there’s no sense of control. For anyone here concerned about this, it doesn’t take very much money in HN-terms to become reasonably well trained. You can: 1) Carry your own weapon, following your state’s laws in all but a few. 2) Learn to use that weapon very well, but more importantly: 3) Learn to use cover and move defensively or offensively 4) Learn to administer basic medical attention to yourself and others 5) Learn to read people and know when something might be about to happen. After enough training, you will at least probably not freeze in an active shooter scenario. Even if you’re not into carrying your own weapon, doing some training will teach you how insanely hard it is to hit any moving target (or anything at all when the adrenaline is going). Re. 5), many people in my state carry and I never used to notice them. Now I can pick out who is and isn’t, and usually how long they’ve been doing it (newbies will subtly check their weapon is secure every time they move). The Secret Service is trained the same way; someone not used to carrying who is about to do something bad will send off all kinds of weird body language signals. —— No, you don’t need to learn this because shootings are exceedingly rare. But if you’re nervous, learning these things will give you a sense of understanding about the threat, and the basic tools to do something to keep your loved ones safe in that one-in-a-hundred-thousand-lifetimes event.

clairity 4y ago
no, if you want to survive a mass shooting, you don’t need to do anything, especially not buy a gun, and your likelihood of not dying by mass shooting stays the same, basically zero. your chances of dying by gun increase much more simply by having one than you could ever hope to reduce the risk of dying by mass shooting by having one. if you were in the exceedingly unlikely scenario of a mass shooting, brandishing a gun increases your likelihood of dying in that situation several-fold, rather than materially increasing your chances of stopping the mass shooter or even saving your own life.
- mwint 4y ago
  Never brandish a gun. Proper training means going from deep concealment to shots on target in a few seconds, maximum. Your cited statistic is one reason open carry is a Bad Idea; it puts you first in line to be eliminated. Concealment, all the way.