What the FBI needs to do to stop Mass Shootings

[Michael Noire]

I was reading a recent article in what I think was Esquire, and it talked about FBI programs to detect and intervene in potential mass shootings. My brief analysis of their techniques reminds me of certain science fiction movies depicting people being arrested for thought crime. This tells me in the long run, any mechanism designed to predict and interfere through traditional law enforcement tactics (taser, weapon confiscation, grappling them to the ground and dragging them away, attack dogs, SWAT raids, prison, guantanamo, thorazine & therapy, mental hospitals, etc.) will only enhance paranoia and improve the next wave of mass shooters, in the same way serial killers and kidnappers learn the law enforcement tactics and adjust their own techniques to avoid detection.

I instead came to the conclusion from examination of the article what really needs to take place. On hands infiltration coupled with rehabilitation. This uses the same "21 jump street" spy techniques used by anti drug and gang departments, but applies in a therapy / big brother/sister mind set. This is obviously a drastic change from anything anyone has tried before, but I think the method may be the most effective with respect to mass shooters.

Mass shooters tend to be victims of societal excess that runs unchecked. They are like a part in an expensive watch that is broken - but the reason it is broken is from the wear and tear of other gears and parts it interacts with. Ergo, society produces its crazies, almost always. Their symptoms are almost universally similar. They lack genuine friendships powerful enough to persuade them away from mass murder. They blend in academically or politically or religiously in some manner, but something creates the downward spiral, such as an uncaring academic administration, glares from trendies, or excessive bullying. Something about society or a group within society seems so large a manifestation of injustice that these people are capable of resolving the conflict of mass murder and "good".

Seldom do the mass murderers have a break with reality so severe that they believe they are both evil and justified in killing a bunch of people. Those people exist though too, and are largely a consequence of a disconnect somewhere in the thought process of right and wrong.

Government agencies have a long history of infiltrating groups and attempting to set them up for possession of some illegal material or object, but that is not the direction they need to go. Rather it would be more effective if these agents could build a rapport with the suspects, and cultivate a friendship or mentorship with the purpose of turning the suspects away from destructive trends. I am not saying a program like this will catch all mass shooters.

I do believe a program like this can be very effective in reducing the overall number of mass shootings, and also likely reduce the number of suicides, particularly among the student populations. If a friendship no matter how well cultivated proves to be an impossible deterrent for what obviously looks like a mass shooting, the system of observation and possibly swapping out their ammunition with dummy rounds or similar tactics may be implemented.

I think society needs to produce these "professional mentor" relationships as a stop gap measure for what society unwittingly creates through neglect - mass murderers.

[Michael Noire]

Mister George Kapland

Or we could make it really easy, everytime somebody gets their hands on a gun they're not supposed to have access too. Both them and the person who allowed their gun to be so easily accessed are charged.

One with murder, one with accessory. Guarantee guns will be under extreme lock n key.

that thought process only produces more Ted Bundys. Come to think of it, you may actually produce a bunch of additional mass shooters by telling fence sitters that not only is society as shitty as they think it is, but demonstrate that it is getting worse beginning by targeting them personally in an attempt to strip what few rights they still have and rob of them of expensive property they have paid for.

[Reidmarr von Brugge]

Michael Noire

I was reading a recent article in what I think was Esquire, and it talked about FBI programs to detect and intervene in potential mass shootings. My brief analysis of their techniques reminds me of certain science fiction movies depicting people being arrested for thought crime. This tells me in the long run, any mechanism designed to predict and interfere through traditional law enforcement tactics (taser, weapon confiscation, grappling them to the ground and dragging them away, attack dogs, SWAT raids, prison, guantanamo, thorazine & therapy, mental hospitals, etc.) will only enhance paranoia and improve the next wave of mass shooters, in the same way serial killers and kidnappers learn the law enforcement tactics and adjust their own techniques to avoid detection.

I instead came to the conclusion from examination of the article what really needs to take place. On hands infiltration coupled with rehabilitation. This uses the same "21 jump street" spy techniques used by anti drug and gang departments, but applies in a therapy / big brother/sister mind set. This is obviously a drastic change from anything anyone has tried before, but I think the method may be the most effective with respect to mass shooters.

Mass shooters tend to be victims of societal excess that runs unchecked. They are like a part in an expensive watch that is broken - but the reason it is broken is from the wear and tear of other gears and parts it interacts with. Ergo, society produces its crazies, almost always. Their symptoms are almost universally similar. They lack genuine friendships powerful enough to persuade them away from mass murder. They blend in academically or politically or religiously in some manner, but something creates the downward spiral, such as an uncaring academic administration, glares from trendies, or excessive bullying. Something about society or a group within society seems so large a manifestation of injustice that these people are capable of resolving the conflict of mass murder and "good".

Seldom do the mass murderers have a break with reality so severe that they believe they are both evil and justified in killing a bunch of people. Those people exist though too, and are largely a consequence of a disconnect somewhere in the thought process of right and wrong.

Government agencies have a long history of infiltrating groups and attempting to set them up for possession of some illegal material or object, but that is not the direction they need to go. Rather it would be more effective if these agents could build a rapport with the suspects, and cultivate a friendship or mentorship with the purpose of turning the suspects away from destructive trends. I am not saying a program like this will catch all mass shooters.

I do believe a program like this can be very effective in reducing the overall number of mass shootings, and also likely reduce the number of suicides, particularly among the student populations. If a friendship no matter how well cultivated proves to be an impossible deterrent for what obviously looks like a mass shooting, the system of observation and possibly swapping out their ammunition with dummy rounds or similar tactics may be implemented.

I think society needs to produce these "professional mentor" relationships as a stop gap measure for what society unwittingly creates through neglect - mass murderers.

You have my feigned support. When I clicked on the thread link, I was thinking "Just another "Remove guns and killing will stop" thread. Never thought for one second anyone here on Gaia knew a damn thing about social engineering.

[Michael Noire]

Mister George Kapland

Michael Noire

Mister George Kapland

Or we could make it really easy, everytime somebody gets their hands on a gun they're not supposed to have access too. Both them and the person who allowed their gun to be so easily accessed are charged.

One with murder, one with accessory. Guarantee guns will be under extreme lock n key.

that thought process only produces more Ted Bundys. Come to think of it, you may actually produce a bunch of additional mass shooters by telling fence sitters that not only is society as shitty as they think it is, but demonstrate that it is getting worse beginning by targeting them personally in an attempt to strip what few rights they still have and rob of them of expensive property they have paid for.

It's not really robbing them of anything.

If I let somebody borrow my car and they're not on my inusrance and they hit another car, am I not liable?
In Florida, for example they have the “Dangerous Instrumentality Doctrine.” law, which means in the case of the road, the car is the instrument and its use can be labeled as dangerous depending on what happens. This doctrine makes the owner of the vehicle liable for any negligent use by the permissive user. This means that you are liable if you give someone permission to drive your car and they cause an accident. If your vehicle is stolen, then the owner of the car is not responsible.
[x]

Basically, you let your ******** of a kid use your gun. You train him how to use your gun, you give him permission to use your gun. He uses your gun and kills 6 classmates, you're liable because you let him.

However, if he just stole it and used it, you wouldn't be.

i misread your post. sorry about that. It had occurred to me to lay blame on whoever provided or sold the guns to the mass murderers, but in retrospect, from a dealer perspective, it didn't seem entirely fair, especially since competence can be feigned and even if real, a nervous breakdown can invalidate competence.

When the military recruited the guy who shot the world famous sniper, they thought he was competent. When he got out, he was no longer competent. Chris kyle thought he could be restored to competence by taking him out shooting. Bad move on Kyle's part but i don't think he intended to get himself blown away at a charity event.

Now thinking on that, Kyle had killed far more people than serial killers or mas shooters. I think it was something like 160+ kills. so how is it that a guy who can kill over a hundred people can walk around legally and with competence, and then some guy who has probably hardly killed anybody is a psychopath and kills himself and some other guy?

I think we need to step away from tools, and look more at the root causes of thought processes, and see if we can find the outliers of divergent thought. In my system, it could have just as easily been an FBI agent undercover at that shooting range working on the system of rehabilitation, but also perhaps looking for telltale signs that such a person shouldn't be around loaded guns in the first place.

That's the hard part though, because its easy to just try to force weapons away from people, but the determined ones will make weapons out of anything. With mass shootings though, I think it's a more drawn out mental process, taking many days or weeks to build up. Mass shootings are premeditated events because the logistics make them impossible with a regular firearm and the NAFTA firearms that can pull it off tend to have enormous waiting periods. Even the few handguns and rifles that could effect mass murder have typically high prices, hard to find ammo, or are becoming rare as hens teeth. PMR 30s have long waiting lists. AR15s cost about $1000 or more. FiveSevens only exist at random gun shops, cost over $1000 and have ammo that costs up to $50 a box. Handguns often have waiting periods. Giant magazine extensions take weeks to arrive. My point is, except for the rare "son of the private arsenal owner" scenario, it takes a long time to gear up for a mass shooting. That time is preceded by whatever motivated them in the first place. If you have people in place to look for early warning signs of serious social problems, and then look for other signs like recreational shooting or peculiar books and things, then you have an opportunity as a government agency to attempt to pull in the person and steer them in a less cataclysmic direction, without utterly pre-empting the majority of their rights.

This system would work best if the people helped by it had no clue those people helping them were agents. For a lot of people, it can really boil down to a few words or a friendly face in an otherwise callous world. Most people need just two things - to know someone else can see their world view and frustrations, and someone to show them an alternative way to direct all that energy generated from what seems like gross injustice. People need to know they are not alone, and they are not unique in their perception of social wrongs. If shooting guns or playing zombie video games and death metal is a solution to release that kind of energy, then so be it, but better to shoot paper targets and pixels than people.

[I AM R U]

Mister George Kapland

Michael Noire

Mister George Kapland

Michael Noire

Mister George Kapland

Or we could make it really easy, everytime somebody gets their hands on a gun they're not supposed to have access too. Both them and the person who allowed their gun to be so easily accessed are charged.

One with murder, one with accessory. Guarantee guns will be under extreme lock n key.

that thought process only produces more Ted Bundys. Come to think of it, you may actually produce a bunch of additional mass shooters by telling fence sitters that not only is society as shitty as they think it is, but demonstrate that it is getting worse beginning by targeting them personally in an attempt to strip what few rights they still have and rob of them of expensive property they have paid for.

It's not really robbing them of anything.

If I let somebody borrow my car and they're not on my inusrance and they hit another car, am I not liable?
In Florida, for example they have the “Dangerous Instrumentality Doctrine.” law, which means in the case of the road, the car is the instrument and its use can be labeled as dangerous depending on what happens. This doctrine makes the owner of the vehicle liable for any negligent use by the permissive user. This means that you are liable if you give someone permission to drive your car and they cause an accident. If your vehicle is stolen, then the owner of the car is not responsible.
[x]

Basically, you let your ******** of a kid use your gun. You train him how to use your gun, you give him permission to use your gun. He uses your gun and kills 6 classmates, you're liable because you let him.

However, if he just stole it and used it, you wouldn't be.

i misread your post. sorry about that. It had occurred to me to lay blame on whoever provided or sold the guns to the mass murderers, but in retrospect, from a dealer perspective, it didn't seem entirely fair, especially since competence can be feigned and even if real, a nervous breakdown can invalidate competence.

When the military recruited the guy who shot the world famous sniper, they thought he was competent. When he got out, he was no longer competent. Chris kyle thought he could be restored to competence by taking him out shooting. Bad move on Kyle's part but i don't think he intended to get himself blown away at a charity event.

Now thinking on that, Kyle had killed far more people than serial killers or mas shooters. I think it was something like 160+ kills. so how is it that a guy who can kill over a hundred people can walk around legally and with competence, and then some guy who has probably hardly killed anybody is a psychopath and kills himself and some other guy?

I think we need to step away from tools, and look more at the root causes of thought processes, and see if we can find the outliers of divergent thought. In my system, it could have just as easily been an FBI agent undercover at that shooting range working on the system of rehabilitation, but also perhaps looking for telltale signs that such a person shouldn't be around loaded guns in the first place.

That's the hard part though, because its easy to just try to force weapons away from people, but the determined ones will make weapons out of anything. With mass shootings though, I think it's a more drawn out mental process, taking many days or weeks to build up. Mass shootings are premeditated events because the logistics make them impossible with a regular firearm and the NAFTA firearms that can pull it off tend to have enormous waiting periods. Even the few handguns and rifles that could effect mass murder have typically high prices, hard to find ammo, or are becoming rare as hens teeth. PMR 30s have long waiting lists. AR15s cost about $1000 or more. FiveSevens only exist at random gun shops, cost over $1000 and have ammo that costs up to $50 a box. Handguns often have waiting periods. Giant magazine extensions take weeks to arrive. My point is, except for the rare "son of the private arsenal owner" scenario, it takes a long time to gear up for a mass shooting. That time is preceded by whatever motivated them in the first place. If you have people in place to look for early warning signs of serious social problems, and then look for other signs like recreational shooting or peculiar books and things, then you have an opportunity as a government agency to attempt to pull in the person and steer them in a less cataclysmic direction, without utterly pre-empting the majority of their rights.

This system would work best if the people helped by it had no clue those people helping them were agents. For a lot of people, it can really boil down to a few words or a friendly face in an otherwise callous world. Most people need just two things - to know someone else can see their world view and frustrations, and someone to show them an alternative way to direct all that energy generated from what seems like gross injustice. People need to know they are not alone, and they are not unique in their perception of social wrongs. If shooting guns or playing zombie video games and death metal is a solution to release that kind of energy, then so be it, but better to shoot paper targets and pixels than people.

Well, I'm not precisely talking about the dealers. If I loan you my car, and you smash into a guy in Florida. It's my fault for loaning you the car. If I loan you my gun, and you shoot 3 people, I should share some of the blame for loaning you my gun. After all, if I hadn't, you wouldn't have been able to shoot a guy, y'know?


And Personally, I'm all for background checks that include mental awareness checks when purchasing a firearm. Take for instance Ohio, my home state. We do this thing, Felons aren't allowed to own or buy guns. But, they can go into a gun shop and (not legally) hold or fire a gun in the range. If they go to a gun show, they can buy it from anybody. If I buy a gun as a known felon, and the guy didn't check up on my history and I kill a guy, if it can be traced he should have a charge too.

I find I'm in agreement - waiting periods and background checks should be across the board, and only licensed gun shops should be able to buy/sell guns to people over the age of [not sure what, 18 say?] who are licensed to own and operate a gun. Yet apparently that's...unreasonable? According to many...

[God Emperor Baldur]

The best way to stop mass shootings is to implement universal healthcare.

[Michael Noire]

God Emperor Baldur

The best way to stop mass shootings is to implement universal healthcare.

i dont see how that could work.

As to background checks, mass shootings cannot be prevented by background checks, only regular shootings can.

see, a background check is an attempt to determine if someone has a criminal history or a psychological history that would indicate a problem, and prevent sudden radical decision making. Mass shootings, however, are a lot more like serial killing that takes months or years to plan out. Therefore, a mass shooting can factor in taking psychology courses and acquiring all the bells and whistles of good citizenship just to facilitate a much larger plot to wipe out a dozen or more people.

background checks also can't help someone who has gone off the deep end after already going through the hoops of good citizen. Mental health would never catch this kind of person.


Infiltration however, is much more effective. By putting agents in plain clothes and having them assume the mind set of a sympathetic or even a neutral party, they have the capacity to see what a psychological test or background check never would. Through debate and dialog they can get inside someone's head, and see if something really is off, or if the person is merely one of another 200 million disgruntled people who has no actual plans to do anything but is not so oblivious (as children and senile or mentally deranged or affluent might be) as to think everything is hunky dory.

If anything, people thinking everything is ok when it isn't is a sign of something seriously wrong, because those types of people seem more fragile to me - like, what if miss happy bubble sunshine suddenly realizes everything is NOT ok? eek

[Exoth XIII]

That is an excellent idea in theory.

Which is why it's already done. In theory.

It's supposed to be one of the reasons why we have guidance councilors, and other supplementary programs.

The problem is finding them in the first place.

[Hehekea]

Better mental health care could definitely help.
More strenuous gun laws probably wont stop anyone, if they're set on killing people they're going to find a way, not that more strenuous gun laws are completely useless.
Definitely need to look at the statistics of mass murders though, oddly enough they're almost all male and the majority is white or white passing. People need to start talking about that and figure out what's wrong with white boys.

[I AM R U]

Michael Noire

God Emperor Baldur

The best way to stop mass shootings is to implement universal healthcare.

i dont see how that could work.

As to background checks, mass shootings cannot be prevented by background checks, only regular shootings can.

see, a background check is an attempt to determine if someone has a criminal history or a psychological history that would indicate a problem, and prevent sudden radical decision making. Mass shootings, however, are a lot more like serial killing that takes months or years to plan out. Therefore, a mass shooting can factor in taking psychology courses and acquiring all the bells and whistles of good citizenship just to facilitate a much larger plot to wipe out a dozen or more people.

background checks also can't help someone who has gone off the deep end after already going through the hoops of good citizen. Mental health would never catch this kind of person.


Infiltration however, is much more effective. By putting agents in plain clothes and having them assume the mind set of a sympathetic or even a neutral party, they have the capacity to see what a psychological test or background check never would. Through debate and dialog they can get inside someone's head, and see if something really is off, or if the person is merely one of another 200 million disgruntled people who has no actual plans to do anything but is not so oblivious (as children and senile or mentally deranged or affluent might be) as to think everything is hunky dory.

If anything, people thinking everything is ok when it isn't is a sign of something seriously wrong, because those types of people seem more fragile to me - like, what if miss happy bubble sunshine suddenly realizes everything is NOT ok? eek

I think they mean that having better and more easily available mental healthcare could prevent people from doing committing such crimes. America has a high rate of mass murders and mass shootings - there is a reason for this, and it may not just be the proliferation of guns.

[This Asscheek]

Amecha

Better mental health care could definitely help.
More strenuous gun laws probably wont stop anyone, if they're set on killing people they're going to find a way, not that more strenuous gun laws are completely useless.
Definitely need to look at the statistics of mass murders though, oddly enough they're almost all male and the majority is white or white passing. People need to start talking about that and figure out what's wrong with white boys.

Agreed, but when it comes down to it: It's all of that good old-fashioned hicktown-styled inbreeding, that's what's wrong with white boys.

jk

But better mental health care? Please, according to a lot of Americans they seem more dead-set on funding missiles to attack children with their taxpayer money than actually take care of their own people instead. Because ******** logic

Mental health care is expensive as hell too, sadly.