Violence Prevention Research

[The Resister]

No matter the circumstances of an individuals upbringing, there comes a time when that person must make decisions. It is always the responsibility of the person making those decisions as to whether or not their decisions are good or bad. It is an error in judgement to attribute aberrant behavior to a childhood causation. Many of the things that you mention have merit in an ideal world, but the reality is that we aren't.

Nothing is 100 percent. If we take a significant number of violent deaths off the table, especially mass shooters (who are identifiable) without gun control, it makes gun control a harder sell and prevention a method worth pursuing.

Essentially, you are proving my thesis about gun owners. They are reactionaries, not activists. Consequently, those who buy your argument and don't put alternative ideas on the table will lose the fight for gun Rights. Remember this, even if you gave the gun control people EVERYTHING they wanted, people would still be killed by firearms. Nothing is 100 percent. So, you can sit around and complain with each new infringement OR you can do something about it. I've addressed identifying and helping children before they become a problem and I've anticipated those who go on to commit violent acts ending in prison stints and how we can whittle down the numbers of those who will become recidivists. All I hear from the naysayers is how it won't work. Neither will gun control. Doing nothing is not an option unless you've committed to gun control.

 

[Hueco]

The greatest piece of data is that I spent 31 years studying mass shooters. Of ALL the mass shootings in that period, the catalyst was SSRIs OR the actions of a political jihadist. In one case, nobody can rule out that the guy was not on SSRIs either. That would be Stephen Paddock. And, if you believe the radical Muslims, they claim that Paddock was successfully converted to Islam.

It appears to me that if I found one commonality (SSRIs) in conjunction with a set of identifiable markers and can state unequivocally that we pretty much KNOW who is going to commit an act of violence, you should check into that. It doesn't take mountains of evidence. Pick your favorite mass shooter - or pick one at random. Read about him. I identified him above. He is was on SSRIs OR he was a political jihadist. So, why doesn't the system use their own researchers to confirm it? It's because they make their money from the drug trade. No more wholesale drug addicts being produced = less bureaucrats, cops, and government workers. The problem is, many people on SSRIs have legitimate issues. So, we have to separate who has addressable mental issues from those who have extraneous issues (i.e. the "problem" might be the parents or a school official for example) and deal with it early on.

It's perfectly possible to spend years and years doing something incorrectly. You say you have 31 years of *research*. So, show me the hypothesis you started with, show me the method to your madness, show me the data that proves your assertion.

Until then, boasting of your years spent doing anything does not give you or your argument credibility or backing.

 

[oldcorpgunny]

Nothing is 100 percent. If we take a significant number of violent deaths off the table, especially mass shooters (who are identifiable) without gun control, it makes gun control a harder sell and prevention a method worth pursuing.

Essentially, you are proving my thesis about gun owners. They are reactionaries, not activists. Consequently, those who buy your argument and don't put alternative ideas on the table will lose the fight for gun Rights. Remember this, even if you gave the gun control people EVERYTHING they wanted, people would still be killed by firearms. Nothing is 100 percent. So, you can sit around and complain with each new infringement OR you can do something about it. I've addressed identifying and helping children before they become a problem and I've anticipated those who go on to commit violent acts ending in prison stints and how we can whittle down the numbers of those who will become recidivists. All I hear from the naysayers is how it won't work. Neither will gun control. Doing nothing is not an option unless you've committed to gun control.

To label those that disagree with your ridiculous "thesis" is proof that you are young, inexperienced and full of yourself, all the while living with your mom and dad. You are all talk without any real world life experience. I'm now ignoring your posts.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

I did

You say you met some of the markers. Did you threaten people with violence? Kill small animals? Were you expelled / suspended from school? Did you do drugs? A nonviolent marker means nothing without a violent marker. That is why it takes half of the markers to know, for sure, if a person needs help. People do not generate police reports for dressing in black or owning firearms. I was fortunate enough to have an experience unlike yours, so humor me for a couple of minutes.

When I was in the 8th grade, I had an altercation with the principal's son. He was poking me with a bat and on the third poke, I grabbed the bat and stuck my knee... well let's say you were looking at a map of the U.S. and this guy's head was in California and his feet in Indiana, I put my knee in the outskirts of Omaha. That netted me a 21 day suspension and that meant I was automatically flunked. Not only that, the principal was a turd, so the next year, he put in a special education class. It was where they put the mentally deficient, slow, and retarded kids. After a few weeks, the teacher asked me why I was put in her class. I told her of how the principal was screwing me over (that incident was not the first time) and so the teacher ultimately didn't like the answers she was getting from the principal and the school staff. She went to the Superintendent of Schools. In turn, he got a psychologist to spend three days with me where I underwent an IQ test, aptitude test, numerous one on one interviews in between tests. The psychologist made a recommendation. I was pulled out of special ed and put in the 10th grade. Who knew? I was able to perform above the grade level I was in before they put me in special ed.

So, because I was known as a "problem child," but the problem (sic) was not mine, it took someone objective to intervene. My problem was that I was being bullied. If you read my posts carefully, at every stage, I'm looking to see if the "problem" is actually the child OR some other factor. Had someone not taken an interest in me; had I not had a civil intervention, where would I have ended up? Before that teacher, nobody listened. I would go to school and get bullied repeatedly. AND, the principal wanted me out of school. I ended up in a class for low IQ students because nobody listened. So, the steps I have outlined means that when a child is exhibiting the traits that define a violent person, we jump into action and make sure the parents know. Then, if the parents do not and / or cannot resolve the issue, you take it up a notch each time until you find out where the real problem is and address that. My plan does not focus just on the child, but others around him or her. The objective is to identify the real problem. Then deal with what the real problem is. THAT ultimately reduces a propensity to commit violent acts in later years.

I am not going to go into detail for obvious reasons.

I was a kid, in a gang infested neighborhood, with a violent set of parents, one of whom would fly into psychotic rages. (And was clinically psychotic.) Now in the 90s when you are literally in between 2 gang territories, you did develop some sorts of gang interactions. I got assaulted over the course of 3 years by a cop who liked to inflict pain and use his position as a shield. (never charged with any crime, accused of possession of weapons, drugs, etc.) I liked metal, and punk, read a lot of religious text including occult and satanic ones as well. I did read stuff that very likely would have been looked askew at. I was looking for some sort of answers. But I had numerous police interactions as a teen.

I got reported, due to the timing of Columbine to everybody and their brother in law. Mostly which led to me being treated like a criminal. I dare say most of your points are merely others' perceptions:


1) White males ages 17 to 40 I was.

2) Previously diagnosed with ADD / ADHD I was

3) Parents are divorced / separated (Latch key child) No, but routine violence in the home including mom assaulting dad.

4) Has a fascination with violence (violent video games, drawing violence laden pictures, fascinated by the macabre) There is chaos, violence, dysfunction in the home to the point it has been reported to police (especially mental, sexual, or violence related complaints) Yep

5) Has seen a psychologist and / or psychiatrist for depression or anxiety Nope, family was too cheap and engaged in hiding physical abuse.

6) One or both parents are alcoholics / drug addicts nope.

7) There is a history of violence in the home Broken bones, limbs ripped from socket, check

8) The police are called routinely to report the child (generally for acts of violence including, but not limited to hurting or killing small animals, bullying, fights with siblings, posting violent content on social media, acts of vandalism, altercations with neighbors) I was 17-18 in the columbine era and in a punk band. Karens were still a thing, though we may have referred to them as Tippers. I think the worst thing I was accused of that I had done was play an electric guitar too loud. Now were there things I had done that were not legal or not good, oh yeah. But mercifully I wasn't ever accused of anything I had done by cops. I did generate police reports for dressing in black ironically. Good thing they didn't know I personally owned half a dozen firearms at the time.

9) Expulsions and / or suspensions from school due to violent activity Home schooled, but I definitely got kicked out of the house a few times for fighting my dad to protect my little brother. When this happened I started when I threw myself in between my dad and my 8 year old brother whose arm was out of socket and hewas bleeding.

10) Reported to the police for threats, stalking, inappropriate violent / sexual remarks, invasions of privacy. Reported, for various things I did not do. All someone has to do is lie. I dressed in black listened to death metal and was white post columbine, It happened, or so the harassing cops told me.

11) Illegal drug usage / participation in gangs. Define participation in gangs. I grew up between a couple of them. Was I a member? No, did I have formal protection from 2? Yes. Did I really do much with them. Nope.

12) Completely introverted and a social outcast that has been rejected for dates. Yep. Not knowing how to correctly interact after a long period of abuse left me very alone. However I watched, and learned

13) History of rejection. Try being assaulted and having your testicles repeatedly crushed by a cop and then being stupid enough to report it. Welcome to rejection from family, girls, friends.

14) The custodial parent has had run ins with local law enforcement more than twice. Yep. Largely ridiculous, being as there was a crap ton wrong and nobody called for anything that made sense.

15) A child has reported to school officials, a teacher or law enforcement that the individual has done something threatening, demeaning, or suggestive. I honestly don't know what kids said. But judging by what happened post reporting being assaulted by a cop... lots of things were said. And I had not done any of them.

16) The child has a fascination with satanic subject matter; dresses the part. I definitely had this going on as well. Or at least people thought I did. few people look what paganism/luciferianism actually looks like. Satanism refers to two groups which are very close to complete ideological opposites. However, true versions of both groups look normal.

Now I will point out, evidence based practice can't agree on much for causes of violence other than history of violence as prediction of future violence. Most professional psychiatrists predictions were over 70% wrong in a recent study. And your statements about how many will lead to violence are patently false. I look like the pillar of society now. I am well read, trained as a nurse and a minister. And I never chose violence. And I past your 8 a good long time ago.

 

[The Resister]

It's perfectly possible to spend years and years doing something incorrectly. You say you have 31 years of *research*. So, show me the hypothesis you started with, show me the method to your madness, show me the data that proves your assertion.

Until then, boasting of your years spent doing anything does not give you or your argument credibility or backing.

This is a discussion board, not a think tank. Do you realize that I have literally thousands upon thousands of pages of documentation? If this were something you wanted to believe, a few lines from the MSM would be enough.

I did not start with any hypothesis except to track what was making people commit mass shootings. I had no preconceived opinions, not a clue as to what I was looking for, and then it took many painstaking hours to begin finding correlations. The greatest credibility I can offer you is to take the challenge. There are three exceptions over a three decade period. Mass shooters are political jihadists OR they fit the profile I described. Prove it wrong.

 

[The Resister]

I did

I am not going to go into detail for obvious reasons.

I was a kid, in a gang infested neighborhood, with a violent set of parents, one of whom would fly into psychotic rages. (And was clinically psychotic.) Now in the 90s when you are literally in between 2 gang territories, you did develop some sorts of gang interactions. I got assaulted over the course of 3 years by a cop who liked to inflict pain and use his position as a shield. (never charged with any crime, accused of possession of weapons, drugs, etc.) I liked metal, and punk, read a lot of religious text including occult and satanic ones as well. I did read stuff that very likely would have been looked askew at. I was looking for some sort of answers. But I had numerous police interactions as a teen.

I got reported, due to the timing of Columbine to everybody and their brother in law. Mostly which led to me being treated like a criminal. I dare say most of your points are merely others' perceptions:


1) White males ages 17 to 40 I was.

2) Previously diagnosed with ADD / ADHD I was

3) Parents are divorced / separated (Latch key child) No, but routine violence in the home including mom assaulting dad.

4) Has a fascination with violence (violent video games, drawing violence laden pictures, fascinated by the macabre) There is chaos, violence, dysfunction in the home to the point it has been reported to police (especially mental, sexual, or violence related complaints) Yep

5) Has seen a psychologist and / or psychiatrist for depression or anxiety Nope, family was too cheap and engaged in hiding physical abuse.

6) One or both parents are alcoholics / drug addicts nope.

7) There is a history of violence in the home Broken bones, limbs ripped from socket, check

8) The police are called routinely to report the child (generally for acts of violence including, but not limited to hurting or killing small animals, bullying, fights with siblings, posting violent content on social media, acts of vandalism, altercations with neighbors) I was 17-18 in the columbine era and in a punk band. Karens were still a thing, though we may have referred to them as Tippers. I think the worst thing I was accused of that I had done was play an electric guitar too loud. Now were there things I had done that were not legal or not good, oh yeah. But mercifully I wasn't ever accused of anything I had done by cops. I did generate police reports for dressing in black ironically. Good thing they didn't know I personally owned half a dozen firearms at the time.

9) Expulsions and / or suspensions from school due to violent activity Home schooled, but I definitely got kicked out of the house a few times for fighting my dad to protect my little brother. When this happened I started when I threw myself in between my dad and my 8 year old brother whose arm was out of socket and hewas bleeding.

10) Reported to the police for threats, stalking, inappropriate violent / sexual remarks, invasions of privacy. Reported, for various things I did not do. All someone has to do is lie. I dressed in black listened to death metal and was white post columbine, It happened, or so the harassing cops told me.

11) Illegal drug usage / participation in gangs. Define participation in gangs. I grew up between a couple of them. Was I a member? No, did I have formal protection from 2? Yes. Did I really do much with them. Nope.

12) Completely introverted and a social outcast that has been rejected for dates. Yep. Not knowing how to correctly interact after a long period of abuse left me very alone. However I watched, and learned

13) History of rejection. Try being assaulted and having your testicles repeatedly crushed by a cop and then being stupid enough to report it. Welcome to rejection from family, girls, friends.

14) The custodial parent has had run ins with local law enforcement more than twice. Yep. Largely ridiculous, being as there was a crap ton wrong and nobody called for anything that made sense.

15) A child has reported to school officials, a teacher or law enforcement that the individual has done something threatening, demeaning, or suggestive. I honestly don't know what kids said. But judging by what happened post reporting being assaulted by a cop... lots of things were said. And I had not done any of them.

16) The child has a fascination with satanic subject matter; dresses the part. I definitely had this going on as well. Or at least people thought I did. few people look what paganism/luciferianism actually looks like. Satanism refers to two groups which are very close to complete ideological opposites. However, true versions of both groups look normal.

Now I will point out, evidence based practice can't agree on much for causes of violence other than history of violence as prediction of future violence. Most professional psychiatrists predictions were over 70% wrong in a recent study. And your statements about how many will lead to violence are patently false. I look like the pillar of society now. I am well read, trained as a nurse and a minister. And I never chose violence. And I past your 8 a good long time ago.

And yet you admitted that you WERE involved in acts of violence. Your exact words: "I definitely got kicked out of the house a few times for fighting my dad to protect my little brother." It does not matter who started what. You proved my point. A civil intervention might have prevented the violence you were a part of. Bear in mind, I NEVER said you'd kill anyone; I said if you met the requisite markers, you would commit an act of violence.

Consider yourself damn lucky. I grew up in the most violent atmosphere you can imagine. I live in one now. The only people who know more about violence than me served in combat. A very small percentage of people who are exposed to as much dysfunction as you claim were able to over-come it and become functional.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

This is a discussion board, not a think tank. Do you realize that I have literally thousands upon thousands of pages of documentation? If this were something you wanted to believe, a few lines from the MSM would be enough.

I did not start with any hypothesis except to track what was making people commit mass shootings. I had no preconceived opinions, not a clue as to what I was looking for, and then it took many painstaking hours to begin finding correlations. The greatest credibility I can offer you is to take the challenge. There are three exceptions over a three decade period. Mass shooters are political jihadists OR they fit the profile I described. Prove it wrong.

I might point out that even in my career which in a general sense has it in for guns and gun owners. (I work in psychiatric nursing) there are quite a few things which we can't go by because of people's bias that they are better at predicting things then they actually are.

I do find this a little suspect as the actual evidence base in predicting violence is extremely flimsy. at least according to psychiatrists. (I had to sit on an hour long training about that Thursday.)

I see in your response to Hueco, where you imprecate him for asking your evidence you are most definitely not being excellent to others.

Reading this in general, there are many things I have spent countless hours on. However, your patronizing comments look like you do not bring much to the table because other than stating your methods, how many kids fit your criteria who did not become mass shooters, etc, (which you can't know because there is not accurate data out there for numerous reasons) this looks like the sort of thing that was the mainstream media post Columbine. This looks very ad-hoc and pretty low quality as far as quality of research, because quite frankly, one needs to scare Karen and be a loner to be flagged in your system.

Your categories are overbroad to not be useful except in retrospect.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

And yet you admitted that you WERE involved in acts of violence. Your exact words: "I definitely got kicked out of the house a few times for fighting my dad to protect my little brother." It does not matter who started what. You proved my point. A civil intervention might have prevented the violence you were a part of. Bear in mind, I NEVER said you'd kill anyone; I said if you met the requisite markers, you would commit an act of violence.

Consider yourself damn lucky. I grew up in the most violent atmosphere you can imagine. I live in one now. The only people who know more about violence than me served in combat. A very small percentage of people who are exposed to as much dysfunction as you claim were able to over-come it and become functional.

Damn lucky. That's one of the sillier things I have ever heard. I should be so lucky as to have a 3 year debacle of being repeatedly assaulted by a cop. I should be so lucky as to have my mom break my arm. Are you hearing what you are saying, because it is ludicrous. I don't presume your history of how you grew up. And I do not consider defense of life violence. Never have. And every human commits some form of violence in their life. Every last one. I doubt your upbringing would shock me. Mostly because I have set across the table from mass shooters and serial killers and a few others in my job. It is part of my career's ethos to be rather unshockable. Because we hear everything. Have I talked to someone who per police records was rescued from being sacrificed on an altar? Yep. So I am a wee bit hard to shock.

Civil interventions in my observation with kids seldom do good, frequently irreparable harm. I have watched it as someone who worked later in life getting kids out of gangs. Oh, & I think I still have permanent lifetime protections from a few street gangs. I won't tell you how I ended up with those because well, I do have secrets and in reality the threads of how I got them read like a conspiracy theory. I can barely follow the logic and I am the beneficiary of them.

Fighting my dad was mostly involved in taking a mangled lump of broken brother from him and yelling at him while I got pummeled. I got kicked out, largely because my older brother pulled my dad off of me. and my methodology was seen as disrespectful. I was unconscious at the end. My dad had no marks on him. I was stronger. You do the math. My actions pulled the wounded away, and used my body as a shield. Good on your predictions. In my case, they are gloriously unrepentantly wrong. You know far less than you think. I don't know what you have been through. And you sure don't know what I went through. I might mention that post seminary I spent time in Watts working with gang kids and it was cake compared to my childhood, up until the day my skull got cracked.

When I fought my dad it was a battle of will and control. I kept my arms locked behind me the whole time because there had been run ins with the cops on my part previously. See, being assaulted by a local cop, I knew I was on a short leash legally and the law did not have my interests at heart. It was a cruel lesson to learn early, but one I had to learn. I mocked my dad for being such a big man as to need to hurt an 8 year old while I let him pound me. I knew enough to know that that would aim all fury at me. It did not work out so well. That would be why I woke up in a garage unconscious with my last memory of having been choked out.

By your standards, standing in someones way as they assault another is a strange standard of violence and so overly broad as to be USELESS. I would dare say that prevention of getting your little brother get beat to a bloody pulp by being a human shield who lets his dad pound on him to protect his brother, and then fighting to peel fingers off my throat after it became apparent you had to get him off of you before you died, and then waking up choked out anyway is a pretty silly standard of luck. (Thankfully I had an older brother who was more violent than I.) Did I mention I got stabbed and got hit in the foot by a stray bullet. If that's luck, its rotten luck.

I see someone who is proud of research they did, but is largely an arm-chair quarterback as they are unwilling to admit what their hypothesis' are or where you are wrong. All humans have biases and hypothesis, and if you don't know what yours are, then you should realize by now your confirmation bias you are showing even now. You are so very wrong and missing the point. What was your control variable?

What I see is someone who thinks they know so much more than everyone else but you have yet to show more than empty assertions and insults.

There are a lot of people like me. Seriously I know some kids who grew up in the same hell I did, with parents in the same cult and frankly, we are mostly functional. But I know ho was who then and have kept in touch with a few. I know the kids we got out of gangs. I know a lot of folks who were in worse shape than me and a lot of them are okay now.

 

[bbbass]

It is a well-know fact that anecdotal evidence is very unreliable. Therefore, any conclusions based on anecdotal evidence are predictably unreliable. Foolishly ignore this at your own peril.

 

[The Resister]

I might point out that even in my career which in a general sense has it in for guns and gun owners. (I work in psychiatric nursing) there are quite a few things which we can't go by because of people's bias that they are better at predicting things then they actually are.

I do find this a little suspect as the actual evidence base in predicting violence is extremely flimsy. at least according to psychiatrists. (I had to sit on an hour long training about that Thursday.)

I see in your response to Hueco, where you imprecate him for asking your evidence you are most definitely not being excellent to others.

Reading this in general, there are many things I have spent countless hours on. However, your patronizing comments look like you do not bring much to the table because other than stating your methods, how many kids fit your criteria who did not become mass shooters, etc, (which you can't know because there is not accurate data out there for numerous reasons) this looks like the sort of thing that was the mainstream media post Columbine. This looks very ad-hoc and pretty low quality as far as quality of research, because quite frankly, one needs to scare Karen and be a loner to be flagged in your system.

Your categories are overbroad to not be useful except in retrospect.

I'm sorry but the way your sentences are constructed, what you said does not make sense. Let me repeat what I said in the past. I stated that if a child meets those markers, there is a 100 percent chance that they would commit an act of violence in their life time. So far, by the response I got I was proven right.

What I did not say, and it seems like you are trying to imply it, is that if you meet the markers, you will become a shooter. I'm sorry, but I didn't say that. If a person is generating reportable offenses to the police and / or school officials or some other agency that reports suspect activity (like the the Department of Family and Children Services) they system has the power and the responsibility to ACT on those concerns. Currently, they do not.

In the aftermath of a shooting, the people who knew the shooter are always saying words to the effect that "we knew something like this was going to happen." You seem to want to advocate we do nothing. Do you want officials to continue to sit on their butts and not even address the issue? Nicholas Cruz generated no less than 25 police reports and as many as 45 known personal interactions over his aberrant behavior. At some point in the process you do something besides generate reports.

 

[bbbass]

You seem to want to advocate we do nothing.

It's been said enough times, in enough places, that we need to cure society. That is the only thing that will work. Think long term instead of short term interventions. But nobody in charge wants to hear it and start to act on it because we are a hedonistic society. We like the things we like, and stay away from the things we don't like, and if killings every once in awhile are the result, we cry and complain and blame it on something or somebody else.

Humans can be evil. Can have evil in their hearts. Can be greedy, irresponsible, full of hatred, etc. Period. We, as a society, can move towards graciousness, but there will always be bad actors among us.

 

[The Resister]

Damn lucky. That's one of the sillier things I have ever heard. I should be so lucky as to have a 3 year debacle of being repeatedly assaulted by a cop. I should be so lucky as to have my mom break my arm. Are you hearing what you are saying, because it is ludicrous. I don't presume your history of how you grew up. And I do not consider defense of life violence. Never have. And every human commits some form of violence in their life. Every last one. I doubt your upbringing would shock me. Mostly because I have set across the table from mass shooters and serial killers and a few others in my job. It is part of my career's ethos to be rather unshockable. Because we hear everything. Have I talked to someone who per police records was rescued from being sacrificed on an altar? Yep. So I am a wee bit hard to shock.

Civil interventions in my observation with kids seldom do good, frequently irreparable harm. I have watched it as someone who worked later in life getting kids out of gangs. Oh, & I think I still have permanent lifetime protections from a few street gangs. I won't tell you how I ended up with those because well, I do have secrets and in reality the threads of how I got them read like a conspiracy theory. I can barely follow the logic and I am the beneficiary of them.

Fighting my dad was mostly involved in taking a mangled lump of broken brother from him and yelling at him while I got pummeled. I got kicked out, largely because my older brother pulled my dad off of me. and my methodology was seen as disrespectful. I was unconscious at the end. My dad had no marks on him. I was stronger. You do the math. My actions pulled the wounded away, and used my body as a shield. Good on your predictions. In my case, they are gloriously unrepentantly wrong. You know far less than you think. I don't know what you have been through. And you sure don't know what I went through. I might mention that post seminary I spent time in Watts working with gang kids and it was cake compared to my childhood, up until the day my skull got cracked.

When I fought my dad it was a battle of will and control. I kept my arms locked behind me the whole time because there had been run ins with the cops on my part previously. See, being assaulted by a local cop, I knew I was on a short leash legally and the law did not have my interests at heart. It was a cruel lesson to learn early, but one I had to learn. I mocked my dad for being such a big man as to need to hurt an 8 year old while I let him pound me. I knew enough to know that that would aim all fury at me. It did not work out so well. That would be why I woke up in a garage unconscious with my last memory of having been choked out.

By your standards, standing in someones way as they assault another is a strange standard of violence and so overly broad as to be USELESS. I would dare say that prevention of getting your little brother get beat to a bloody pulp by being a human shield who lets his dad pound on him to protect his brother, and then fighting to peel fingers off my throat after it became apparent you had to get him off of you before you died, and then waking up choked out anyway is a pretty silly standard of luck. (Thankfully I had an older brother who was more violent than I.) Did I mention I got stabbed and got hit in the foot by a stray bullet. If that's luck, its rotten luck.

I see someone who is proud of research they did, but is largely an arm-chair quarterback as they are unwilling to admit what their hypothesis' are or where you are wrong. All humans have biases and hypothesis, and if you don't know what yours are, then you should realize by now your confirmation bias you are showing even now. You are so very wrong and missing the point. What was your control variable?

What I see is someone who thinks they know so much more than everyone else but you have yet to show more than empty assertions and insults.

There are a lot of people like me. Seriously I know some kids who grew up in the same hell I did, with parents in the same cult and frankly, we are mostly functional. But I know ho was who then and have kept in touch with a few. I know the kids we got out of gangs. I know a lot of folks who were in worse shape than me and a lot of them are okay now.

In saying what you did, you are admitting YOUR biases. Now, let's get a few things straight and get on a level playing field. Okay.

While I have worked IN the system, I do not believe in it. What I said initially is that gun owners are basically lazy. They are reactionaries (much like what you're displaying here) and they certainly are not activists (which is why they attack me before asking a single question). Furthermore, people presume to question my research when they have absolutely NONE of their own NOR DO THEY KNOW WHAT QUANTATITIVE OR QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS I'VE SUBJECTED MY FINDINGS TO. Additionally, nobody criticizing me has ever been a part of any think tank to disqualify my findings AND if they had been activists we would not have the laws we have on the books where we have to work within those parameters just to "legally" (by government standards) exercise our unalienable Rights. This is a discussion board, NOT a think tank where we evaluate a method that 99 percent of the people here have no experience with - and definitely NOT any critic I have as they would know what questions to ask (even if off topic and beyond the understanding of the average reader).

As strange as it may seem to you, I agree with you that in growing up we deal with violent situations. It's as natural as sitting on the toilet and taking a dump. But, the reality is, gun owners sat on their butts when they didn't have to take a dump and the liberal / left wing / democratic / socialist / communist combine passed over 40,000 statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, Executive Orders, edicts, court rulings, etc. governing the ownership of firearms. As a result, much of what will be described by my critics is now a crime and could cost you your gun Rights.

I have to edit this to respond to your first criticism of me. What that other poster described is illegal today. Had someone called the police where I live and they responded to that family altercation, the police would have written up a report, arrested everyone involved and the prosecutors would prosecute it. The state would conjure up their own "version of events" and ultimately all would be found guilty of a domestic misdemeanor thereby losing their Second Amendment Rights under the Lautenberg Amendment.

 

[The Resister]

It is a well-know fact that anecdotal evidence is very unreliable. Therefore, any conclusions based on anecdotal evidence are predictably unreliable. Foolishly ignore this at your own peril.

Being able to cite every case over 31 years is hardly anecdotal evidence. Better check your dictionary.

 

[The Resister]

It's been said enough times, in enough places, that we need to cure society. That is the only thing that will work. Think long term instead of short term interventions. But nobody in charge wants to hear it and start to act on it because we are a hedonistic society. We like the things we like, and stay away from the things we don't like, and if killings every once in awhile are the result, we cry and complain and blame it on something or somebody else.

Humans can be evil. Can have evil in their hearts. Can be greedy, irresponsible, full of hatred, etc. Period. We, as a society, can move towards graciousness, but there will always be bad actors among us.

You never will see me advocate a short term intervention. As a matter of fact, my plan calls for a long term intervention with overlapping oversight so that it's not just bureaucrats selling you more left wing swill. What you are not asking is how can we make the system represent OUR views? Face it. Psychologists and psychiatrists are, to a man, anti-gun. They are the ones who supported the myriad of laws on the books. Now, you make them prove their methods have any credibility. Don't attack mine.

 

[bbbass]

Being able to cite every case over 31 years is hardly anecdotal evidence. Better check your dictionary.

The very definition of anecdotal.

Sigh.

Oh, I'm not saying you didn't research, I'm saying your research is based on looking at cases without interviewing the people or families involved. Therefore, IMO, it is of limited value due to conclusions based on an outsiders viewpoint.

 

[bbbass]

You never will see me advocate a short term intervention. As a matter of fact, my plan calls for a long term intervention with overlapping oversight so that it's not just bureaucrats selling you more left wing swill. What you are not asking is how can we make the system represent OUR views? Face it. Psychologists and psychiatrists are, to a man, anti-gun. They are the ones who supported the myriad of laws on the books. Now, you make them prove their methods have any credibility. Don't attack mine.

I'm looking farther than "the system".

You seem to be very reactionary to people trying to give you feedback. It would seem you are here to argue. What is it that you want here?????

 

[The Resister]

The very definition of anecdotal.

Sigh.

Oh, I'm not saying you didn't research, I'm saying your research is based on looking at cases without interviewing the people or families involved. Therefore, IMO, it is of limited value due to conclusions based on an outsiders viewpoint.

OMG. Tell me you're kidding. You don't need to interview every family member. You read the police reports and examine the record. When the cops show up at a person's home 20, 30, 40 times and all they do is generate reports, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that something is wrong and you need a civil intervention.

Then we have to deal with the fact that the current system is, in the military vernacular, a clusterphxxxk. The people that are working in the system work with no oversight and they are about as effective as a eunuch in a brothel. Social Services is not subject to any scrutiny; their methods are never examined. Most of the time they are defended (as my critics end up inadvertently doing in these kinds of threads). We have no way to measure their effectiveness (and yet we know that these people are totally ineffective - in virtually every state).

 

[bbbass]

OMG. Tell me you're kidding. You don't need to interview every family member. You read the police reports and examine the record. When the cops show up at a person's home 20, 30, 40 times and all they do is generate reports, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that something is wrong and you need a civil intervention.

Then we have to deal with the fact that the current system is, in the military vernacular, a clusterphxxxk. The people that are working in the system work with no oversight and they are about as effective as a eunuch in a brothel. Social Services is not subject to any scrutiny; their methods are never examined. Most of the time they are defended (as my critics end up inadvertently doing in these kinds of threads). We have no way to measure their effectiveness (and yet we know that these people are totally ineffective - in virtually every state).

If one wants to do detailed research that comes up with valid conclusions regarding the "causes of violence", one does indeed need to know as much as possible about all the conditions the perp lived with.

IMO your research, while lengthy, is shallow.

Again, what do you want here? What is your purpose???

 

[The Resister]

I'm looking farther than "the system".

You seem to be very reactionary to people trying to give you feedback. It would seem you are here to argue. What is it that you want here?????

What is it you want? If my position is attacked rather than questioned, I'm going to become defensive. You would too. What do I want?

I want people to look into what I said and then demand their county and state legislators act on the evidence and DO something. Of course they won't but, at the end of the day if we are actively offering an alternative to the ineffectiveness of the system, you stop gun control. Every time the anti-gunners scream gun control, you come back with the counter-argument of prevention.

Will Congress pass this into law? I doubt they would pass it regardless of how many ways my thesis is proven. So, why bother? If you have an alternative to gun control every time the liberals propose it, their bills die. Why? You offer to pass their bill if they pass your proposals. Offer them a quid pro quo. They won't take it. Their bill stalls because they are unreasonable. All we're doing here is to put tools in place to facilitate making the left's ideas work. The left is not going to do it. They won't really work to reduce gun violence because it is their meal ticket.

 

[The Resister]

If one wants to do detailed research that comes up with valid conclusions regarding the "causes of violence", one does indeed need to know as much as possible about all the conditions the perp lived with.

IMO your research, while lengthy, is shallow.

Again, what do you want here? What is your purpose???

LMAO You are very funny. Yeah, like I produced the methodology of research on a discussion board. ROTF. LMAO.