Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

How Many of the "Spree Shooters" Came from Broken Homes?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How Many of the "Spree Shooters" Came from Broken Homes?

    I'm just curious... has there been an extensive study on what's "common" in the shooters?

    I remember reading that [whatever] percentage came from broken homes - don't remember the number, but it was very high.

    I don't know if that's a factor or not, I know it is in some of the cases.

    So, what are the almost universally common factors in the backgrounds of the shooters?

    I'd like a serious discussion, so I'm going to ask that JimL not post here, and no sniping.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

  • #2
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

    Comment


    • #3
      I would guess the universal common factors are: 1. Having a gun, 2. Being male.

      A couple of year ago I read a few scientific review articles that summarized the current state of research on child-outcomes. The findings indicate there would be a strong correlation between mass shooters and fatherless homes, but not for the reasons you might expect.

      Thousands, or even tens of thousands of studies have been performed and published around the world in the area of child-outcomes and how they relate to family structure. The strong and consistent findings of such studies have been that children need:
      - Love (both toward them and between their caregivers)
      - Stability (lack of major changes including moving house/schools or changes as to who are their caregivers)
      - Safety (physical and emotional safety - no domestic abuse, a healthy home (not filled with mold) etc)
      - Sufficient financial support (caregivers can afford decent clothing, food, decent standard of living for the children)

      But above and beyond those, the studies have consistently found that other variables don't matter - it doesn't matter who the caregivers are (biological parents vs adopted), it doesn't matter if there is only a single caregiver versus 2 caregivers (there are some benefits though if there is a non-parental adult in the home such as an extended-family member). Single mothers who raise the child from birth by themselves and who are financially well-off do just as well at raising kids successfully as married-for-life financially well-off biological parents do. This can be observed across every behavioral or emotional outcome any researcher has ever cared to measure (educational success, grades, subsequent criminal histories, self-reported happiness, parental reports, teacher reports, future job salaries, etc). The findings thus indicate that there is no innate psychological need for boys to have a 'father-figure' (or that if there is such a need, having an actual father in the home makes zero difference and the boys are perfectly capable of seeing father figures modeled by their teachers or preachers or coaches or movie heroes or politicians etc).

      BUT, if a child is being raised by a single mother as opposed to a couple, the chances are much higher that there might:
      - be financial insecurity (one parent is likely to earn less than 2 combined)
      - have been instability (the child may have had to endure a divorce process and related changes in who the child's caregivers were and moving house and schools as a result)
      - have been a lack of love in the home (the caregivers pre-divorce may have been fighting, there may have even been domestic abuse)
      - have been a lack of safety (the father's alcoholism or drug-addiction or violence toward the wife or child may have led to the divorce)

      All those things have negative effects on children and their behavior / life outcomes / criminality / happiness etc. So caregivers going through a divorce process hugely impacts the children negatively. But, of course, not divorcing and staying together isn't better for the child if there is a lack of love in the home, or constant fights between the caregivers, or violence in the home. (So banning divorce isn't a good solution in terms of child outcomes.) But if the divorce process had occurred prior to the child being old enough to remember it, then single parenting is just as good as both parents being there, aside from possible financial issues.

      When considering the issue of what makes people prone to committing a specific criminal behavior (e.g. mass shootings), the standard risk factors for criminal behavior would apply. We would thus expect these shooters to have mostly had childhoods characterized by a lack of love, lack of financial support, lack of emotional and physical safety, and a lack of stability. It does, in fact, from what I can see with regard to some of the recent mass shooters, look like these factors were fairly common in their lives.
      Last edited by Starlight; 02-22-2018, 07:51 PM.
      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        . The findings thus indicate that there is no innate psychological need for boys to have a 'father-figure' (or that if there is such a need, having an actual father in the home makes zero difference
        Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          I'm just curious... has there been an extensive study on what's "common" in the shooters?

          I remember reading that [whatever] percentage came from broken homes - don't remember the number, but it was very high.

          I don't know if that's a factor or not, I know it is in some of the cases.

          So, what are the almost universally common factors in the backgrounds of the shooters?

          I'd like a serious discussion, so I'm going to ask that JimL not post here, and no sniping.
          From what demi heard

          1) Broken home
          2) mental problems
          3) relationship problems
          Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            I'm just curious... has there been an extensive study on what's "common" in the shooters?

            I remember reading that [whatever] percentage came from broken homes - don't remember the number, but it was very high.

            I don't know if that's a factor or not, I know it is in some of the cases.

            So, what are the almost universally common factors in the backgrounds of the shooters?

            I'd like a serious discussion, so I'm going to ask that JimL not post here, and no sniping.
            Define 'spree shooter'. Are we counting drive by revenge shootings related to gangs? Why or why not? Off campus killings or only on campus?

            The problem is teens killing others as a solution to their perceived problems - the mode of killing is incidental to the causality.

            And the killing is the end stage of something else.

            Once that stage is reached, the availability of weapons is an issue - one that only a elimination of the existence of guns altogether could eliminate (yes, I know this is impossible but no guns at all equals no shootings at all) but which reasonable gun control can play a role. Federal guidelines for replacing the current hodge podge being a start.

            But it would be far better if we as a society started dealing with the myriad of social ills that got us to this point.
            "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

            "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

            My Personal Blog

            My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

            Quill Sword

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
              Define 'spree shooter'.
              Any of the shooters involved in the mass shootings - could have made that more clear, but this was from a related subject where somebody (don't remember who) referred to the school shooters (and others) as "spree shooters".
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                Define 'spree shooter'.
                Also in need of a definition is 'broken home'. Are adoptive parents a broken home, or a single mother raising the child from birth? Or does the child need to have experienced violence in the home, or experienced a parental divorce for it to be a 'broken home'?

                Obviously the average person doesn't commit crime or violent crime. But if a lot of bad things have happened to the person throughout their life, especially in their childhood, the more likely they are to commit a serious violent crime like a shooting spree. So if, by 'broken home', what is meant is "the home situation is... not good" (neglect, violence, drugs, divorces, alcoholism, poverty, malnutrition etc) then of course such negative factors will predispose a person to criminal behavior such as mass shootings or other violent crime.
                "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                Comment


                • #9
                  Another common factor seems to be the student being rejected, mocked, or bullied by their peers.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Still interested in any actual studies on the backgrounds of the shooters.

                    And the premise that I referenced in the OP - that a major percentage of these kids come from broken homes - attempts to point to the failure of the social engineering of the last couple dozen decades.

                    I don't want to assume, though -- it just seems prudent that somebody would have had a "let's see what the common factors are" so we can identify future potential shooters. Kinda like a "profiling" in the technical sense.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      I'm just curious... has there been an extensive study on what's "common" in the shooters?

                      I remember reading that [whatever] percentage came from broken homes - don't remember the number, but it was very high.

                      I don't know if that's a factor or not, I know it is in some of the cases.

                      So, what are the almost universally common factors in the backgrounds of the shooters?

                      I'd like a serious discussion, so I'm going to ask that JimL not post here, and no sniping.
                      Another interesting question should be is how many of these shooters had been kept doped up by the schools on Ritalin and the like. This is an angle that is studiously avoided by both sides.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Why don't we just get rid of all males. That would solve the problem once and for all.


                        Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                          Why don't we just get rid of all males. That would solve the problem once and for all.
                          Not really - when Columbine happened my first thought was 'huh, what took so long that this is the first*?' Not being a Christian, not having caring parents, not having good fictional and non-fictional role models (Superman and Batman were still heroes back then) - take away any or all of those and I could totally see younger self resorting to this.

                          I think there's another, long term issue that relates, perhaps indirectly causally - desegregation. In the South, thousands of schools were closed as bigger schools were built to force desegregation - but the same warehousing effect occurred in the North with the emphasis on bigger and bigger schools. The teacher / student ratio wasn't ever supposed to be the same - but of course, it also worsened. With it, bullying became harder to really address - you could only intervene with what you saw - much easier at a lower ratio than at the modern 30:1 class (which is what, 120 to 150:1 in terms of teaching and grading?). Instead of putting a stop to it early it was allowed to persist. Now, I doubt every small school dealt with it perfectly - but in that environment, it's not going to be long before both sets of parents know what's going on - and so does the rest of the town. oddly, no one wants their kid to be the odd one - but they REALLY don't want their kid to be the bully.

                          Desegregation per se wasn't at fault - how it was done, however, likely set this problem in motion. With the internet age, why exactly do we need 30:1 ratios? Why do we need huge, expensive and potentially dangerous warehouses?





















                          *Yes, I know Columbine wasn't the first - it was just the first such major media event.
                          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                          My Personal Blog

                          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                          Quill Sword

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I was being facetious.


                            Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                              I was being facetious.
                              For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

                              Why don't we just get rid of all males. That would solve the problem once and for all.



                              It might help. In any case, it hides a good point. The (overwhelming?) majority of spree-killers are males.
                              "Down in the lowlands, where the water is deep,
                              Hear my cry, hear my shout,
                              Save me, save me"

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by whag, Yesterday, 05:11 PM
                              0 responses
                              18 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 11:25 AM
                              32 responses
                              192 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post oxmixmudd  
                              Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 01:48 PM
                              24 responses
                              104 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, 03-17-2024, 11:56 AM
                              52 responses
                              273 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seer
                              by seer
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-16-2024, 07:40 AM
                              77 responses
                              383 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X