I love this article. I'd prefer not to debate the shootings themselves, but perhaps it would be interesting to discuss our reactions to them as a culture and from a psychological angle... Confirmation bias, etc.

 

Read the short article below. Do you agree with its thrust and tone? Or alternatively, is YOUR hypothesis about the cause the REAL reason we have these problems?

 

 

http://mindhacks.com/2013/09/21/this-complex-and-tragic-event-supports-my-own-view/

 

Only a few days have passed since this terrible tragedy and I want to start by paying lip service to the need for respectful remembrance and careful evidence-gathering before launching into my half-cocked ideas.

 

The cause was simple. <continue reading>

I fully recommend not just reading this article, but reading it aloud to someone who is seated and has nothing in their mouth they could choke on.

 

This is the basis for modern (post 24/7 news) journalism, imo. This template is guaranteed to keep readers reading and viewers viewing, because you're either adamantly agreeing or violently disagreeing with the POV. Very similar to the "How does this agonizingly horrific tragedy make you feel ?" interview question. Why can't we change the channel until the victim tells us he feels terrible?

 

Great find, iNow. This should be a great discussion. As long as everyone agrees with me, of course.

 

 

This should be a great discussion. As long as everyone agrees with me, of course.

 

I do. But I presume it is because you actually agree with me. If you do not, I disagree. Also I love random scatter plots through which I can draw arbitrary lines.

There is, of course, a problem with the page cited.

It should say "mass killings" otherwise it's not general enough.

I do. But I presume it is because you actually agree with me. If you do not, I disagree. Also I love random scatter plots through which I can draw arbitrary lines.

So long as it agrees with me it's not an arbitrary line, it's a best fit line. But if your line doesn't agree with my line it IS arbitrary.

Detailed statistical analysis is required to test whether the regression coefficient is high enough to indicate a significant result- unless the data agree with my personal beliefs.

Detailed statistical analysis is required to test whether the regression coefficient is high enough to indicate a significant result- unless the data agree with my personal beliefs.

 

That's not the way I see it, and it's so typical of you to trot out a bunch of fancy words to counter my coherent, reasonable and highly personally intuitive arguments.

 

That's not the way I see it, and it's so typical of you to trot out a bunch of fancy words to counter my coherent, reasonable and highly personally intuitive arguments.

You seem to have overlooked my set of substantially irrelevant credentials, and, as a result, you are an example of this well documented phenomenon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

I'm not going to take you seriously until you have read, and commented in detail, on a whole bunch of websites that seem to me to back up my point via the use of logical fallacies.

http://www.iempowerself.com/84_pyramid_power.html

http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt1.html

http://fengshui.about.com/

http://www.horoscope.com/

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread971348/pg1

Video games, has to be video games.. Elizabeth Hasselbeck says so... and she is on Fox News...

I'm not going to take you seriously until you have read, and commented in detail, on a whole bunch of websites that seem to me to back up my point via the use of logical fallacies.

 

http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt1.html

 

OMG, you take free energy seriously?! Typical Scorpio....

All jokes aside (and since someone mentioned statistics), the one and only thing that all gunmen in the mass shootings had in common is that they had a gun and ammunition.

While I understand your point, it's not entirely true. They had other things in common. They were all human. They all required food and water to survive, lived on Earth, that sort of thing. They were all born from parents, they were all infants at one point, and had to learn about guns as they were raised. They all lived in a society that prioritized the freedom to access guns over the freedom not to be murdered by one. They had other things in common beyond just each having guns and ammunition available.

I hate to harp on the media (not true at all), but I think this kind of uninformed judgement-gathering has come to replace the evening news in the US. We don't really have journalists we can trust anymore so much as pundits we happen to side with. As long as they keep confirming our biases, we'll keep making them more popular.

 

Wizard's First Rule: "People are stupid. They can be made to believe any lie because either they want to believe it's true or because they are afraid it's true." -- Terry Goodkind

Yeah, we have to take away all the guns... and pressure cookers, barrels, fertilizer, diesel fuel... If you get my gun chances are you are superman... let's see, one more batshitcrazy idea... oh yeah, make people take a test to prove they are not batshit crazy before they buy a gun... Nah, too crazy, it would never work...

All jokes aside (and since someone mentioned statistics), the one and only thing that all gunmen in the mass shootings had in common is that they had a gun and ammunition.

That's why I said it should be about mass killings.

I fear everyone except those who are batshitcrazy, and believe only people who are batshitcrazy should be allowed to buy a gun. Anyone who is crazy about batshit, will spend all their time examining fecal matter, and will not care about murdering masses.