Barry starts a conversation about mass shootings, inviting believers to think through narrowing the topic, developing parameters for response, and seeking clear-headed and soft-hearted means for conversing about challenging topics facing our culture.
Articles:
As many might add to this complicated issue, and I have no hard and fast statistics to share at present, that a large percent of these shootings could more implicate mental illness as a huge factor in these shootings. Texas is dead last in terms of mental healthcare in the US.
The following excerpt is taken from the article:
“The Worst States For Mental Health Care, Ranked”
Les Masterson Forbes Advisor May 23, 2023.
“Texas tops the list of worst states for mental health care, while Vermont is the best state for mental health care.
Seven of the 10 worst states for mental health care are located in the South, including Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina and Tennessee.”
This, coupled with scriptural warnings about the “Last Days” and the condition of he heart of mankind being “deceitful wicked”, it should come as no surprise. Still, if more attention were paid to the mental health care system by politicians, to name just one group, we might see a reduction coupled with a more comprehensive gun ownership screening.
Always grateful for you, Anita. And your comment is on point. Of course, as I know you know, the irony is in politicians responding to mass shootings by saying it’s about mental health, not firearms, but then doing nothing about either. Maddening.
And, as I know you are also aware, addressing firearm access (exactly as you mention in the last phrase of your comment) and addressing mental health are not mutually exclusive options. May we do something–and then learn and improve from what we do–instead of continuing to do nothing. Blessings on you and yours.
It would seem that an appeal to “common sense” would require that we consider the growing data, because these many mass shootings have given us a base of information. I have never heard those who want “common sense” changes to explain the likelyhood of the changes they want to actually change the outcome of some reasonable percentage of actual shootings.
The one thing that often comes up is to put restrictions on a specific type of firearm(semi auto rifle). There is a really strong argument that another type of firmarm (semi auto pistol) is about 95% as “effective” as the semi auto rifle, and about no one wants to put restrictions on the pistols.
Thank you for the comment, Jay. Your points are fair and reasonable. “Common sense” is partially bound by what the public is willing to tolerate as a reasonable solution (hence, the lack of discussion about limiting semi auto pistols–as you mention, and as I did in either this episode or the next). In the current climate, “common sense” also might admit that doing something to prevent some harm is better than doing nothing at all. At some point, requests for statistically justified, data-driven decisions should probably move from being a barrier to any activity to being part of a process of implementing restrictions, measuring the effects, and then improving the implementation or adjusting the restrictions. I don’t know exactly what form that should take. I just wish we could have more reasonable discussions about it, and eventually admit that by all appearances, we are not doing enough right now.