Oops. Americans think mass shootings caused by mental health problems, not loose gun laws by nearly 3 to 1

posted at 6:41 pm on October 26, 2015 by Jazz Shaw

Every time there is another shooting incident and it doesn’t result in a huge raft of new gun laws, liberals are left scratching their heads. What’s wrong with all of you people? Actually, they tend to more often ask what’s wrong with Congress and why they won’t “listen to the people” and pass more gun restrictions so we can put an end to these mass shootings once and for all. To minimize future migraines for them, they may want to check out the latest numbers from the Washington Post and ABC News.

They asked the question… Do you think that mass shootings in this country are more a reflection of problems identifying and treating people with mental health problems or inadequate gun control laws?

Looking at the response, all I can say is that there aren’t as many dumb people in the country as I may have feared.

unnamed

But while many have called for stricter gun laws in their wake, the Post-ABC poll finds far more point to problems treating people with mental health issues. By a more than 2-to-1 margin, more people say mass shootings reflect problems identifying and treating people with mental health problems rather than inadequate gun control laws (63 percent to 23 percent).

There are wide partisan divisions on this issue; 82 percent of Republicans say shootings reflect a failure to identify and treat people with mental health problems, compared with 65 percent of independents and 46 percent of Democrats.

It’s worth noting the wording of not just the question, but the possible answers offered. Respondents were not given a simple binary choice here. They were given the option of taking the easy way out and saying “both” are the cause, but even with that escape hatch offered only ten percent were inclined to even partially blame a lack of gun laws. That makes this a much more definitive sample than simply asking people to choose one from column A or column B.

They also asked another question which has been going around for ages and (by a still very narrow margin) more people feel that it’s important to protect the right to own guns than to pass new gun control laws.

Does this solve some of the mystery for the DNC and Michael Bloomberg and nearly everyone in Hollywood? You aren’t getting new laws passed to stop mass shootings because guns don’t commit mass shootings. Crazy people do. You might want to craft a platform where you actually help communities recognize when people are going off the rails and do something to help them. Find the root cause of the problem, no matter how daunting, and get to work on that instead of blaming everything on a tool. Of course, I will make one exception to that suggestion.

By all means, Hillary Clinton should run on a gun confiscation platform. You go, girl.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

If you’re defenseless without a gun you’re just as defenseless with one.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 7:53 PM

Can you support that statement?

Why, it does you literally no good while substantially endangering your life…

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 8:01 PM

And that one?

Yes, you point out those guns were legally obtained by their owner- which only supports my point, that ‘law abiding’ gun owner helped facilitate mass murder of children.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 8:05 PM

So if someone steals your GM vehicle and kills someone with it, you should be able to sue GM? And if the first person they killed with it was the owner, they should also be able to sue the estate, since the owner “facilitated” the murders by buying the car?

Of course they will because criminals are not some magic class of people. They live in the same society you do. If you have guns you guarantee they will too.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 8:16 PM

You can institute “gun control” worldwide and the criminals will still have guns, you nitwit. If necessary they will create them from scratch. That’s not speculation, that’s history.

That turns your point on its head. The only thing “gun control” EVER accomplishes is to disarm those who do not use those guns to commit crimes. The ones who do will get their weapons, one way or another. Ask any prison guard.

GrumpyOldFart on October 26, 2015 at 11:25 PM

strangely you seemed to leave out this from the same survey:

The survey finds that 46 percent say new laws to reduce gun violence should be a bigger priority, while 47 percent say it’s more important to protect the right to own firearms.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/26/gun-control-americans-overwhelmingly-blame-mental-health-failures-for-mass-shootings/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_fix

FYI “both” got 4% meaning the total % wanting new gun laws adds to 50%.

Kenny Bania on October 26, 2015 at 7:39 PM

More Comedy Gold from Kenny!

F+

FYI, Bania, your Democrat friends with the assistance of the ACLU successfully shut down many mental health facilities decades ago. One of those facilities was a state-run (Blue State) mental hospital called Fairfield Hills.

Location?

NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT.

F-#1.

Speaking of guns having no use except killing, here’s a simple question for a simple person.

You Democrats are so big on overpopulation and family planning and birth control; your methods include aborting (the liberal word for “turning off life support”) as well as pre-emption (birth control methods).

How come you’re not as serious about overpopulation and/or family planning and birth control for wild animals like deer and mooses? After all, you clueless Democrats are all certified tree huggers.

Here in NH, we have a 10 day or so Moose hunting season to reduce the population. Since some of the Mooses shot are female, that is Birth Control right there.

That Moose Hunt is solely because there are too many of them, and they walk into roads at night into cars and kill people. Using your “logic”, we should ban Mooses too.

The Moose Hunt process is strictly controlled; the select few lucky hunters are selected by a lottery.

F-#2.

We also have a Deer hunting season, which is just ramping up. This is also solely to control the population and prevent them from producing too many offspring, as Deer are a major traffic hazard even more than the Mooses are. I personally know 5 or 6 people who have narrowly escaped death after having a deer wander into the road in front of their vehicles. They lived; their vehicles did not. Let’s ban Deers also!

F-#3.

And a final Deer Story: Here in NH we have a pricey bridged island with many million dollar plus waterfront properties called Long Island. About 20 years ago it was overrun by deer who walked across the bridge and decimated the foliage.

The Democrats from out of state who own 80% of the real estate out there demanded action, but only using methods they would approve of.

Since it’s basically impossible to track Deer in the wild, that’s a non starter.

They considered setting out poisoned baits, but that was a no-brainer to the Democrats as well.

They waited a couple of years, and the Deer continued to defoliate the entire island.

Final Solution?

The Democrat land owners let the town hire a Professional Hunter to track down and SHOOT the overpopulated Deer herd. Said Sniper came from the Blue State of Connecticut, too!

Last time I was out there, the island’s forests had totally recovered, yet more proof that Algore is a Sham.

F-#4.

So tell us, Skippy. How would you prevent overpopulation of Mooses and Deers and other pesky animals that run into the roads and cause cars and trucks to crash? I actually know someone who was driving home at night and a huge porcupine ran out in front of his car, and he totalled his front tires.

F-#5.

Del Dolemonte on October 27, 2015 at 1:36 AM

[Bit of a cross-post here.]

If asked for which to blame for mass shootings, and given the choice of “mental health failures” or “gun laws” that are “inadequate,” I’d say it’s the gun laws.

You take your average mental health failure, arm him, and place the whack job in a crowd of armed people, the headline won’t be “mass shooting.” Well, I suppose it could, depending on the direction of fire.

“Mass shooting” headline No. 1:
Whackjob kills umpteen in gun free zone; NRA pilloried

“Mass shooting” headline No. 2:
Whackjob killed by umpteen in gun-free zone; Survivors jailed

Lolo on October 27, 2015 at 2:39 AM

We’ll see. The problem for you is while I can point at millions of people with standing to claim damages by guns you can’t point to anyone with standing to claim damages by elective abortions.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 7:51 PM

Yo, brain dead libtard.

There are many women who have been seriously injured and even killed by “elective abortions.” Many abortion doctors have been sued out of business based on such negligence. Your old, tired canard about “safe and legal” is easily proven false. Google is your friend, you ghoul!

I was an RN in Chicago for ten years, and I personally took care of about a dozen women who were hospitalized with pelvic inflammatory disease, which they acquired as the result of botched abortions. Pelvic inflammatory disease affects the uterus and often the Fallopian tubes, and often results in infertility. I suppose you don’t consider that “damages?”

Your abject, willful ignorance is showing.

JannyMae on October 27, 2015 at 4:39 AM

The problem for you is while I can point at millions of people with standing to claim damages by guns you can’t point to anyone with standing to claim damages by elective abortions.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 7:51 PM

The babies have no standing because they are dead.

So you’re going to sue on behalf of tissue? Good luck with that.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 8:02 PM

I also won’t be suing when you are turned into “tissue.”

Younggod on October 27, 2015 at 5:09 AM

I’am pleased to see that the public realizes that the saying – “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

MSGTAS on October 27, 2015 at 7:15 AM

I think that if the driver of the Oklahoma State massacre is found mentally unstable as her atty states, it proves the point this story is trying to make. I, personally, have long felt that closing the mental hospitals was a poor decision. Allowing mentally ill people to walk among the general population is only asking for trouble. How many innocent people have to die before the gov’t liberals change their minds?

Boats48 on October 27, 2015 at 7:29 AM

I’am pleased to see that the public realizes that the saying – “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

MSGTAS on October 27, 2015 at 7:15 AM

Airborne all the way!

Old eagle on October 27, 2015 at 7:32 AM

We’ll see. The problem for you is while I can point at millions of people with standing to claim damages by guns you can’t point to anyone with standing to claim damages by elective abortions.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 7:51 PM

Because those human beings are all dead, you see…

bmmg39 on October 27, 2015 at 7:51 AM

Just because someone supports new laws to reduce gun violence doesn’t mean that they automatically support gun control.

There could be methods of reducing gun violence that would be more effective than the draconian gun control laws that Progressives want to see implemented.
.
lineholder on October 26, 2015 at 7:43 PM

.
Folks (I’m talkin’ to all of us who are FOR private ownership/possession of firearms), we’ve really got to stop using the word “violence” when we mean crime, lawlessness, or anarchy.

If you think I’m being too nit-picky, then can you please tell me what gun non-violence is?

The dominant culture of journalism has in the last 20-25 years corrupted the common meaning of the word “violence,” and now it’s always used to imply ‘something BAD, that shouldn’t have happened, or be happening.’

This abuse of the word “violence” needs to come to a screeching halt, like yesterday.
Otherwise, we’re going to lose control of the language, and EVERYTHING that we consider ‘violent’ by the common meaning of the word, will be up for abolition, as well.

The God of the Bible is not anti-violence … but, He is anti-lawlessness and anti-anarchy.

listens2glenn on October 27, 2015 at 8:33 AM

Either is okay, why do you want to screw it up?
.
BlaxPac on October 26, 2015 at 7:51 PM

.
I have no idea why you consider a school shooting every week to be good. I’d be only too happy to ‘screw’ that up.
.
Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 7:56 PM

.
School shootings don’t happen because some bad guy had access to guns … they happen because the adult personnel of the school didn’t have guns, and stop the shooter(s).

listens2glenn on October 27, 2015 at 8:46 AM

If you think I’m being too nit-picky, then can you please tell me what gun non-violence is?

listens2glenn on October 27, 2015 at 8:33 AM

Playing slap happy with a tipsy chick who can almost remember your first name?

Am I close?

HonestLib on October 27, 2015 at 8:48 AM

If you’re defenseless without a gun you’re just as defenseless with one.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 7:53 PM

Dems want women to be defenseless, and don’t care if they are murdered. Political power is all they care about.

faraway on October 27, 2015 at 9:14 AM

And leftists and Republican enablers are bound and determined to bring back 70s level crime with the reworking of mandatory minimums.

NotCoach on October 27, 2015 at 9:15 AM

Ah polls. Perfectly reliable when they confirm conservative ideology, fraudulent when they don’t.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 9:33 AM

Dems are the party of death and slavery

faraway on October 27, 2015 at 9:38 AM

Ah polls. Perfectly reliable when they confirm conservative ideology, fraudulent when they don’t.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 9:33 AM

Fine, ignore the poll, and just answer the questions brought forth by its presence.

Does “tougher gun laws” cut access to guns by criminals as much or more than it does by those who obey laws, or does it disproportionally disarm only the potential victims?

GrumpyOldFart on October 27, 2015 at 9:41 AM

All of this only highlights the importance of making sure the government subjects you to stringent background checks before you kill your own mother, break into her safe and steal her guns.

If you’re defenseless without a gun you’re just as defenseless with one.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 7:53 PM

Can you support that statement?

GrumpyOldFart on October 26, 2015 at 11:25 PM

Never stopped him before. I’m practically drowning in examples.

Ah polls. Perfectly reliable when they confirm conservative ideology, fraudulent when they don’t.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 9:33 AM

If you have an issue with the source, or the sample size/composition, or the phrasing of the questions to elicit a particular response, please feel free to make those known.

The Schaef on October 27, 2015 at 9:43 AM

Does “tougher gun laws” cut access to guns by criminals as much or more than it does by those who obey laws, or does it disproportionally disarm only the potential victims?

GrumpyOldFart on October 27, 2015 at 9:41 AM

Since we have the Australian example, why is this question even being asked. And please, do not post an article showing 1, 3, or even 10 gun shootings in Australia. That’s anectdotal. What matters is the murder and gun violence *rate.* On any objective measure Australia is safer than the United States since they did their gun grab.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

Since we have the Australian example, why is this question even being asked. And please, do not post an article showing 1, 3, or even 10 gun shootings in Australia. That’s anectdotal. What matters is the murder and gun violence *rate.* On any objective measure Australia is safer than the United States since they did their gun grab.
 
libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

 
Are you referring to Australia reducing their gun violence rate by 50% since they did their gun grab?

rogerb on October 27, 2015 at 10:37 AM

Since we have the Australian example, why is this question even being asked. And please, do not post an article showing 1, 3, or even 10 gun shootings in Australia. That’s anectdotal. What matters is the murder and gun violence *rate.* On any objective measure Australia is safer than the United States since they did their gun grab.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

No, that isn’t what matters. What matters is the violence rate regardless of weapon used guns. The compulsory confiscation did nothing to reduce violence, and in fact here is strong evidence to suggest increased violence. Furthermore the compulsory confiscation was only successful in capturing less than 50% of the firearms in circulation. So the Australian model fails completely in empirical terms. But since you now seem to want to adopt the Australian model I assume you are also advocating for civil war in the US?

NotCoach on October 27, 2015 at 10:52 AM

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

And since you won’t get back to us the following is also something else you can continue to ignore as well:

Here’s a simple question for you. Which of the founding fathers did not subscribe to the communitarian ethos Calhoun deploys to rationalize slavery? *sets sundial*

libfreeordie on August 21, 2013 at 9:30 AM

None. They weren’t nascent Commies like John C. Calhoun, and full blown Commies like you. Don’t you think you need to provide some proof for such a ridiculous smear there Mr. Calhoun? You’re a history perfesser, right?

NotCoach on August 21, 2013 at 9:36 AM

Oh dear God….hold on, give me 10 minutes.

libfreeordie on August 21, 2013 at 9:45 AM

NotCoach on October 27, 2015 at 10:54 AM

On any objective measure Australia is safer than the United States since they did their gun grab.
libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

Gun violence was already falling before the confiscation and continued to fall at the exact rate afterwards. Surprisingly, during this period gun violence has been falling in the US at pretty much the same rate. This is especially true when you remove suicides from the picture as these have no correlation to the availability of firearms.

tommyboy on October 27, 2015 at 10:54 AM

NotCoach on October 27, 2015 at 10:54 AM

.
That never gets old … : )

listens2glenn on October 27, 2015 at 11:18 AM

What matters is the murder and gun violence *rate.* On any objective measure Australia is safer than the United States since they did their gun grab.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

That’s purely anecdotal – so it doesn’t count.
Try again.

dentarthurdent on October 27, 2015 at 11:26 AM

I’m surprised that the poll results were so reasonable, but it leads directly to the question of what to do about it? Do we just let crazies continue to shoot up places from time to time? How do we allow better treatment of the mentally unstable without removing all their rights? How do we prevent people from being unjustly accused (like veterans)? Life here is not perfect, but I do think we need to do something to limit mass shootings.

livefreeordie76 on October 27, 2015 at 12:26 PM

Life here is not perfect, but I do think we need to do something to limit mass shootings.

livefreeordie76 on October 27, 2015 at 12:26 PM

Eliminate gun free zones.

dentarthurdent on October 27, 2015 at 12:40 PM

On any objective measure Australia is safer than the United States since they did their gun grab.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

Even though violent crime rose in Australia, while in America gun deaths have gone down by half in the last generation?

The Schaef on October 27, 2015 at 1:16 PM

On any objective measure Australia is safer than the United States since they did their gun grab.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

Was Australia as safe as/less safe than the US before they did their gun grab?

The Schaef on October 27, 2015 at 1:18 PM

Europeans now going the other way on gun rights and buying more guns because of the muslim invasion and expectation of more violence.
http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/islamic-invasion-pulls-trigger-europeans-scramble-for-guns/

dentarthurdent on October 27, 2015 at 1:35 PM

On any objective measure Australia is safer than the United States since they did their gun grab.

libfreeordie on October 27, 2015 at 10:00 AM

Well, the criminals are safer.
You leftist morons always try to ignore the fact that the criminals didn’t give up their guns.

In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

Assault up 50%, rape up 30%, robbery up 6%, overall violent crime up 42%
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

dentarthurdent on October 27, 2015 at 1:47 PM

Europeans now wishing they had an American style 2nd Amendment.

http://bearingarms.com/islamic-invasion-europeans-lamenting-lack-right-bear-arms/

dentarthurdent on October 27, 2015 at 2:00 PM

mass shootings caused by mental health problems

Many of my liberal friends share that view, but I disagree with them. I think it is unfair to call being a gun owner “a mental health problem”.

Time Lord on October 27, 2015 at 2:07 PM

I think it is unfair to call being a gun owner “a mental health problem”.

Time Lord on October 27, 2015 at 2:07 PM

So true – but I think it IS a mental health problem for anyone to think they can stop a violent criminal by peeing on themselves.

dentarthurdent on October 27, 2015 at 2:23 PM

Thanks to you guys every one of the latter is likely to have a great many of the former.

Tlaloc on October 26, 2015 at 7:43 PM

Based on reporting of mass shootings and investigations into the shooters, we can conclude that nearly all of the shooters were leftists with screws loose. Shall we enact laws to restrict leftists since they are the most likely to devolve into mass murderers?

Say, you’re a leftist…

dominigan on October 27, 2015 at 2:58 PM

Obama is about to talk gun control while Chicago is a bloodbath.

sorrowen on October 27, 2015 at 3:00 PM

Here in NH, we have a 10 day or so Moose hunting season to reduce the population. Since some of the Mooses shot are female, that is Birth Control right there.

That Moose Hunt is solely because there are too many of them, and they walk into roads at night into cars and kill people. Using your “logic”, we should ban Mooses too.

The Moose Hunt process is strictly controlled; the select few lucky hunters are selected by a lottery.

Del Dolemonte on October 27, 2015 at 1:36 AM

Update for Bania about the NH Moose Hunt, which just ended 48 hours ago.

Just over 100 2015 Moose licenses were issued (winners chosen by lottery). But the success rate was only around 75%.

Del Dolemonte on October 27, 2015 at 6:06 PM

mass shootings caused by mental health problems

 
Many of my liberal friends share that view, but I disagree with them. I think it is unfair to call being a gun owner “a mental health problem”.
 
Time Lord on October 27, 2015 at 2:07 PM

 
Very clever. Now, clever boy:
 
Off the top of your head, how many people do you think have been injured and died as a result of mass shootings since ~1980?

rogerb on October 27, 2015 at 6:52 PM

From the results of that survey, I deduce that 23% of the respondents suffer from mental health problems.

YMMV.

wagnert in atlanta on October 31, 2015 at 10:55 PM