Thanks for sharing this Orathaic

Liked it.

To be fair, gang violence, which is overwhelmingly black on black, is not considered terrorism. Nor is drug violence.

Also fairly sure that statistic is untrue when considering gang violence, which is often ignored.

*statistic in the instagram link.

@KC, considering the definition of mass shooting... that is a question of how you measure things for your statistics. So you may be right there.

But i think there is a special category for going into a public place and shooting people with no plans to survive. (or likewise suicide bombings in Iraq) And they are rightly considered terrorism.

This is unlike gang/drug violence, where you are protecting your territory from a foe, and entirely planning to survive/make money; because there would be no point in that kind of fighting if you didn't...

Now i'm not saying one is worse than the other. Both are terrible; and the response to both should be let's do whatever we can, and whatever we know works. (which is a different thing in either case; but that is a question of details)

But i do think that you are in the right position to be comparing violence to violence (instead of changing the subject and talking about mental health)

That said, the other statistic in the link is 'Mentally ill people are more likely to suffer from violence, than commit it'.

Which i think speaks volumes regarding the issue.

Ora, I believe the FBI's definition of a mass shooting is a shooting when 3 or more people are killed. I agree that this is a loose definition when considering the more public shootings.

Either way, there is a disproportionate amount of attention paid to the "public place" definition that you are using. We generally see school shootings, such as Sandy Hook or the most recent one in Seattle, as abhorrent. Which is entirely right. But at the same time, we ignore the inner city shootings of gangs and cartels. Are the lives of college or kindergarten students in a school more worthy than those of (mostly) black children and adults out on the streets? No. Frankly, gang violence is a much bigger problem than your stereotypical "mass shootings" that get the news coverage. Do both need to be solved? Absolutely. Are they both terrible? Yes. Do they have different solutions? Definitely. But when was the last time you saw a news article (or thread title) of "2 Children and an Adult Shot Dead in Chicago Ghetto?"

@KC, i entirely agree with you. But I see one issue as a problem of poverty; which is much harder to tackle.

Well poverty and education i guess.

The situation, or at least as i understand it, is that humans will compete with each other no matter what. Most relatively wealthy (white) citizens will compete in schools, whether by ritualised violence (sports) or mental skills (academic competition) - and beyond that their performance in these competitions will have real world impacts - in terms of status, career options, and money.

As adults they may continue to compete, professionally.

If, however, you grow up in a culture which doesn't see education as a route to these real world status positions (because, say, you will always be black no matter what; or your parents never needed education, so why should you... whatever the experience you have) then you will compete via violence; the only outlet left which makes sense to you based on your experience.

Now i'm not saying that it is 'Ok', in any sense; i am merely saying that to prevent this kind of violence you need a cultural change, not a mere surface policing change. And this is really hard.

Sure some examples are great - like you could be a successful basketball player, or a successful (half)black president...

But those are not the majority, it is a statistical lie to sell children that everyone can grow up to be president... Actually that is true of most of the American Dream if you ask me. (but don't ask me, ask Howard Zimm, he did a much better job dissecting the american dream...)

(half)black president
(half black
(half)
half
ha

you will always be black no matter what
you will always be black no matter what
you will always be black no matter what

you could be a successful basketball player, or a successful (half)black president...
you could be a successful basketball player, or a successful (half)black president...
you could be a successful basketball player, or a successful (half)black president...

I'm Tiger Woods
I am Tiger Woods
I, Woody Tigger
TiggaWoo

fiedler, are you stuck?

Yeh i think it's the keyboard

I think you have to consider motives when analysing this stuff.

A terrorist is trying to achieve a political end (e.g. Anders Brevik), gang members have financial objectives (if I understood The Wire correctly), some individuals want revenge (e.g. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/11/mass-shooting-florida-1000th-sandy-hook) whilst others seem to want some kind of elaborate suicide. Expectations of survival vary, (most) suicide bombers are a subset of terrorists, not all "revengers" take their own life. I would argue that all are mentally ill to some extent and I do not see that as an excuse, except (perhaps) in very severe cases.

What to do? Of course, the mentally ill need treatment and support (the point that John Oliver is making). Gang violence is trickier but has to involve better alternatives: jobs, education, etc. Terrorism is much more complex, in part depending upon whether the underlying issue is in some way legitimate ("Independence for Wherever" stuff) or not (Brevik again).

Some white male 'revenge' style people want to attack people for political reasons.

Feeling like society has let them down, or blaming women ( for rejecting them, in at least one case ) and deciding to go out in a shower of bullets, proving to society that they do exist. I will admit that this is a psychological problem. (Not entirely an economic/tribal one, like the drug/gang violence discussed)

It is a sign of a societal health issue, not merely a mental health issue. (The World Health Organisation, WHO, defines health as being composed of 8 parts: Physical, Emotional, Mental, Social, Sexual, Spiritual, Societal, and Environmental) maybe as a society we need to value well being, and learn skills to attain that. Whether that be meditation or merely looking after your emotional/&mental health - but also bein part f a community which supports its members (whether that be religious or a secular group like gamers/scouting - to name but two groups i am a part of)

We need to train everyone in these basic skills, and let people (particularily young boys) how&when to look for help - not having a mass killing be the cry for help.

This is all a lot to ask; it also requires looking a thingsfrom a different perspective than your average economist, it will not necessarily increase GDP. But it will add value to society as a whole by improving societal health.

Meanwhile economic problems of drug/gang violence is an unrelated but similar problem.

@Orathaic, you are right that motives are even more complex than I suggested. Your point about societal health is a good one too.

In the UK at least, the taboo around mental illness is lessening, a positive thing, so I am hopeful that in future people will find it easier to ask for, and receive, help.

I want to add that labelling someone as a terrorist based upon the colour of their skin is at best lazy journalism and at worst something very sinister. I grew up with the constant reminders of Irish terrorists, Timothy McVeigh is a terrorist, Vester Flanagan was not.

'McVeigh sought revenge against the federal government for its handling of the Waco Siege...McVeigh hoped to inspire a revolt against what he considered to be a tyrannical federal government.'

Or was he a revolutionary hero? I guess the failure of his side o the story to become history answers that question.

Irish terrorists were not a thing where i was growing up (in the south east of ireland) and the IRA were always considered the 'baddies' (with some confusion over when they became be baddies, because the older IRA were clearly the goodies when talking about 1916...)

But i also didn't grow up knowing that for 100s of year the Irish were considered 'the blacks of europe'...

'McVeigh hoped to inspire a revolt against what he considered to be a tyrannical federal government.'

Sounds like a political objective to me so following the dictionary definition McVeigh is a terrorist.