6 ms·

It's just a complete waste of time to think about these kinds of things. Some humans malfunction and do this kind of thing. It happens quite rarely, and there

It's just a complete waste of time to think about these kinds of things. Some humans malfunction and do this kind of thing. It happens quite rarely, and there is nothing that can be done to stop it. One's probability of being harmed by the occasional insane murderer (or terrorism for that matter) is microscopic compared to so many other things that we can actually do something about.

drx 14y ago
No it isn't. If a remediable cause can be found (for example, depression and society's attitude towards it), the problem can go away. And the problem is far from microscopic; not all murder-suicides are flashy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder%E2%80%93suicide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder%E2%80%93suicide
- grandalf 14y ago
  I don't disagree that society's attitude toward depression and mental illness in general is far from enlightened. However when you consider how unexpectedly schizophrenia can creep up on people, or how unexpectedly PTSD symptoms can go from mild to severe (just two examples) even with significantly improved treatment we'd still have it happening now and then. And even if it happened only 10% as often, it would still represent a minuscule risk for most people, perhaps slightly closer to lethal asteroid impact than to lethal food poisoning from Sushi on the risk scale.
jberryman 14y ago
I understand what you're saying, but really "there is nothi that can be done to stop it"? What about outlawing firearms for civilian use, or even just not letting the assault weapons ban lapse? And don't tell me every angry/depressed yuppie kid who was going to go on a rampage when guns were easier to get than a drivers license is going to negotiate some black market underworld he knows nothing about to get his guns.
- grandalf 14y ago
  Guns aren't necessary to wreak havoc. He could have brought in explosives, poison gas, knives, etc.
  - vacri 14y ago
    Explosives are much harder to obtain and use effectively, poison gas is much less lethal than people think (blame movies - even the Nazi purpose-designed gas chambers took 20 minutes to kill people), and knives aren't anywhere near as effective as guns - for example, police don't use them to control suspects, and soldiers don't use bayonets anymore. If you get into a knife-fight with someone, you are going to fuck them up... but you are at high risk of also being fucked up yourself due to poor stopping power and close quarters. Now repeat for each of the 12 deaths and 58 maimings seen in this event. The Tueller drill says that it is dangerous to have an opponent within 21 feet even when you have a firearm, because they can cover that distance and be on you in 1.5 seconds, a short time even if you're ready and aware of their location and their intention. Now consider that all knife fights happen inside that distance. Seriously, it's not a valid comparison http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill
    - grandalf 14y ago
      Those are good points, but if someone is crazy enough to want to harm lots of people in a theater it's unlikely that the difficulty of surviving unscathed will be a deterrent. And if the attack were not simply someone being insane (if for example it was terrorism intended to strike fear into people) then the success criterion is even lower b/c much fear would still be caused even if the only injuries were 5 people with smoke inhalation, and both "sides" in the issue benefit from amplifying the perceived severity. My point is that the specific munitions used does not significantly alter the strategic aspect of this (if there is any).
- jsz0 14y ago
  negotiate some black market underworld he knows nothing about to get his guns Why not? Many people do it to obtain illegal drugs.
tomjen3 14y ago
We could do more to screen for mental health issues, but you are right. Fundamentally some humanoids just malfunction.
japhyr 14y ago
I hate the trite response, "We must do whatever it takes to make sure this kind of thing happens again." These things are going to happen again, as they have happened throughout history. We can, however, do many things to try to minimize the number of incidents like this. Unfortunately for the paranoid gun rights lobby, some form of gun control is a necessary but not sufficient part of the answer to this issue.
- csense 14y ago
  I don't see how being in favor of the Constitutionally protected right to bear arms automatically makes someone "paranoid." I hope you're wrong about gun control being a necessary part of the answer to this issue, because as far as I can tell, it's simply not a practical possibility in the USA.
  - japhyr 14y ago
    gun control != ban on guns
    - jeffdavis 14y ago
      Did you properly fill out your government-mandated speaking request form 18764(a), and sign it under penalty of perjury, before submitting that comment? Of course, your speech isn't banned. These forms are just necessary to make sure we know who you are before you speak, and to force you to testify that you haven't committed other unrelated crimes. The only time we actually would ban your speech is if you fill out the form improperly, because that's a felony, and felons don't get to speak. So read it carefully.
      - noonespecial 14y ago
        Don't forget to include you check for the registration and recording fees plus the permit issuance fee so that we can make sure that you are sufficiently wealthy to be granted the right to speak.
moron 14y ago
I agree, but people don't want to hear that. Something must be done, think of the children. Political positions must be advanced, panicked news segments must be filmed, panel discussions must be held, Bill Maher has to run his mouth about conservatives, Rush Limbaugh has to run his mouth about liberals, opportunists must seize the moment, narratives must be created. Shit, man, there's too much gold in this tragedy to just throw it away! Nobody likes hearing that the universe is uncaring and unpredictable. That's just a fucking bummer.
mikeash 14y ago
I think this attitude is just as useless as the opposing view that we must do anything and everything conceivable to prevent an event like this from ever happening again. This kind of thing cannot be completely eliminated. But its incidence can be reduced. It's useful to put a bit of thought into how and why this happened and what could be done, not to prevent it from ever happening again, but to reduce the odds. No, this isn't a particularly big problem, but it certainly merits a bit of thought.
- grandalf 14y ago
  While we're at it we should also be doing something to prevent asteroid impacts, tsunamis, and rare genetic diseases.
  - mikeash 14y ago
    Yes, indeed. I assume you're being sarcastic, which is odd, given that there is a fair bit of effort put in place to search for near-Earth asteroids that could potentially collide with the planet, with an eye toward eventually being able to deflect them, there are a lot of systems put in place to mitigate the effects of tsunamis, and quite a bit of research into rare genetic diseases.
    - grandalf 14y ago
      asteroids: that's military tech in disguise, not humanity-saving foresight. tsunamis: detection only, not prevention. rare diseases: some are rare enough that virtually no substantive research is done.

drx 14y ago

No it isn't. If a remediable cause can be found (for example, depression and society's attitude towards it), the problem can go away. And the problem is far from microscopic; not all murder-suicides are flashy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder%E2%80%93suicide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder%E2%80%93suicide

grandalf 14y ago
I don't disagree that society's attitude toward depression and mental illness in general is far from enlightened. However when you consider how unexpectedly schizophrenia can creep up on people, or how unexpectedly PTSD symptoms can go from mild to severe (just two examples) even with significantly improved treatment we'd still have it happening now and then. And even if it happened only 10% as often, it would still represent a minuscule risk for most people, perhaps slightly closer to lethal asteroid impact than to lethal food poisoning from Sushi on the risk scale.

jberryman 14y ago

I understand what you're saying, but really "there is nothi that can be done to stop it"? What about outlawing firearms for civilian use, or even just not letting the assault weapons ban lapse? And don't tell me every angry/depressed yuppie kid who was going to go on a rampage when guns were easier to get than a drivers license is going to negotiate some black market underworld he knows nothing about to get his guns.

grandalf 14y ago
Guns aren't necessary to wreak havoc. He could have brought in explosives, poison gas, knives, etc.
- vacri 14y ago
  Explosives are much harder to obtain and use effectively, poison gas is much less lethal than people think (blame movies - even the Nazi purpose-designed gas chambers took 20 minutes to kill people), and knives aren't anywhere near as effective as guns - for example, police don't use them to control suspects, and soldiers don't use bayonets anymore. If you get into a knife-fight with someone, you are going to fuck them up... but you are at high risk of also being fucked up yourself due to poor stopping power and close quarters. Now repeat for each of the 12 deaths and 58 maimings seen in this event. The Tueller drill says that it is dangerous to have an opponent within 21 feet even when you have a firearm, because they can cover that distance and be on you in 1.5 seconds, a short time even if you're ready and aware of their location and their intention. Now consider that all knife fights happen inside that distance. Seriously, it's not a valid comparison http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill
  - grandalf 14y ago
    Those are good points, but if someone is crazy enough to want to harm lots of people in a theater it's unlikely that the difficulty of surviving unscathed will be a deterrent. And if the attack were not simply someone being insane (if for example it was terrorism intended to strike fear into people) then the success criterion is even lower b/c much fear would still be caused even if the only injuries were 5 people with smoke inhalation, and both "sides" in the issue benefit from amplifying the perceived severity. My point is that the specific munitions used does not significantly alter the strategic aspect of this (if there is any).
jsz0 14y ago
negotiate some black market underworld he knows nothing about to get his guns Why not? Many people do it to obtain illegal drugs.

tomjen3 14y ago

We could do more to screen for mental health issues, but you are right. Fundamentally some humanoids just malfunction.

japhyr 14y ago

I hate the trite response, "We must do whatever it takes to make sure this kind of thing happens again." These things are going to happen again, as they have happened throughout history. We can, however, do many things to try to minimize the number of incidents like this. Unfortunately for the paranoid gun rights lobby, some form of gun control is a necessary but not sufficient part of the answer to this issue.

csense 14y ago
I don't see how being in favor of the Constitutionally protected right to bear arms automatically makes someone "paranoid." I hope you're wrong about gun control being a necessary part of the answer to this issue, because as far as I can tell, it's simply not a practical possibility in the USA.
- japhyr 14y ago
  gun control != ban on guns
  - jeffdavis 14y ago
    Did you properly fill out your government-mandated speaking request form 18764(a), and sign it under penalty of perjury, before submitting that comment? Of course, your speech isn't banned. These forms are just necessary to make sure we know who you are before you speak, and to force you to testify that you haven't committed other unrelated crimes. The only time we actually would ban your speech is if you fill out the form improperly, because that's a felony, and felons don't get to speak. So read it carefully.
    - noonespecial 14y ago
      Don't forget to include you check for the registration and recording fees plus the permit issuance fee so that we can make sure that you are sufficiently wealthy to be granted the right to speak.

moron 14y ago

I agree, but people don't want to hear that. Something must be done, think of the children. Political positions must be advanced, panicked news segments must be filmed, panel discussions must be held, Bill Maher has to run his mouth about conservatives, Rush Limbaugh has to run his mouth about liberals, opportunists must seize the moment, narratives must be created. Shit, man, there's too much gold in this tragedy to just throw it away! Nobody likes hearing that the universe is uncaring and unpredictable. That's just a fucking bummer.

mikeash 14y ago

I think this attitude is just as useless as the opposing view that we must do anything and everything conceivable to prevent an event like this from ever happening again. This kind of thing cannot be completely eliminated. But its incidence can be reduced. It's useful to put a bit of thought into how and why this happened and what could be done, not to prevent it from ever happening again, but to reduce the odds. No, this isn't a particularly big problem, but it certainly merits a bit of thought.

grandalf 14y ago
While we're at it we should also be doing something to prevent asteroid impacts, tsunamis, and rare genetic diseases.
- mikeash 14y ago
  Yes, indeed. I assume you're being sarcastic, which is odd, given that there is a fair bit of effort put in place to search for near-Earth asteroids that could potentially collide with the planet, with an eye toward eventually being able to deflect them, there are a lot of systems put in place to mitigate the effects of tsunamis, and quite a bit of research into rare genetic diseases.
  - grandalf 14y ago
    asteroids: that's military tech in disguise, not humanity-saving foresight. tsunamis: detection only, not prevention. rare diseases: some are rare enough that virtually no substantive research is done.