According to the sourcelink, when Trump says that perpetrators of mass shootings are “mentally ill monsters” or “wicked” or “twisted” – it’s an “oversimplification” and it “downplays the ease with which Americans can get firearms.”
Arthur Evans, CEO of the American Psychological Association, is clearly irritated with Trump, saying, “Until we begin to have our political leaders speaking more accurately to these issues, it’s up to us to put the facts out there.”
And what are those facts according to Evans and other experts? It’s summed up in the sourcelink as follows:
… mental health experts repeated what they have said after previous mass shootings: Most people with mental illness are not violent, they are far more likely to be victims of violent crime than perpetrators, and access to firearms is a big part of the problem.
And what is the glaring problem with that statement? Well, I’ll tell you. I haven’t seen a single solitary person suggest that most people with mental illness are violent. But what should be obvious to every last person with firing synapses is that ALL mass shooting perpetrators are mentally ill, regardless of whether or not they were ever officially diagnosed.
I understand why Red Flag laws appeal to people, especially now. I totally get it. And if there’s a way to ensure that innocent people are protected from false claims by others, I could maybe be convinced to get on board that train. But is there a way? What’s to stop the same people who doxx others and who swat others and who falsely accuse others of – oh, I don’t know – white supremacy for example, from falsely accusing others of being violent risks to society who can’t be trusted with a firearm? Is that a stretch? I don’t know. Perhaps. I’d like to think it is, but color me skeptical for now. On the other hand, when there were as many flags as there were about the Dayton shooter (rape lists, kill lists, school suspensions, police reports, etc.) that seems like a perfectly cut-and-dried case of someone who should’ve been locked away a long time ago.
Which leads me to the second part of the problem. We have no places to lock these sorts of people away. “See something, Say something” is great in theory, but when seeing and saying amounts to nothing more than someone writing some words on a police report and then putting that report in a file – what are we really accomplishing?
But back to the article at hand. Evans is worried about the stigma surrounding mental illness, and is concerned that using words like “monsters” to describe the shooters would prevent people from seeking treatment.
Whizzah whuzzah? Are people seriously this obtuse? I think most of humanity understands that there are varying degrees of mental illness and varying TYPES of mental illness. The reason we use the word “monsters” to describe someone who has gunned down innocent people is because it’s accurate. Do people like Evans genuinely believe that a guy like the Dayton shooter thought about seeking treatment and then was discouraged because other mass murderers were called monsters? SERIOUSLY? Give me a break.
The entire article has a pretty clear bias against gun ownership, which I won’t bore you with evidence of – except to say that it’s right there for you to read and roll your eyes at.
There are other stats in the article and other quotes from “experts” who insist that not all attackers display symptoms of mental illness, and who insist that people with mental illness are not more likely to commit violence. The fact remains that the only way you can shoot up a bunch of innocent people is if you’re a deranged lunatic. It doesn’t matter what sort of diagnosis you want to assign to that brand of mental illness. You are F*CKED IN THE HEAD if you can plot and actually go through with that.
But according to CBS and other news outlets today, it’s “not the main driver” of mass shootings.