Do you think that income inequality and capitalism may be some of the causes for mass shootings?

[msc545]

I was answering another question here on gag earlier and it occurred to me the things have really changed since I was younger. People could actually work and provide for their families and buy homes with one income. Capitalism was present but restrained an income inequality existed but not to nearly the extent it does today. I believe that because of these things, both of which have changed radically for the worse that many people may be exceedingly angry and not know what to do with that anger. I tentatively believe that these things may be causative relative to the rate of mass shootings, which are now greater than one per day statistically. What do you think? Does income inequality and predatory capitalism and the general state of the economy and make people so angry that they go out and kill others? Or is it something else?

Updates

+1 y

bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/.../s12889-019-7490-x

Updates

+1 y

Perhaps less expectation of fairness from the government? I'm just thinking out loud a little bit here is I'm very tired, but at least in the US there's always this expectation that people will be treated with fairness and equity and perhaps for a while to some extent in the 50s and 60s. That was true but then it began to go away and instead we got billionaires. Maybe disappointment is the missing ingredient in this equation?

[BoopBoopBeep]

I think the fact that we've massively widened our definition of "mass shooting" accounts for that. There isn't a legitimate mass shooting every day. Many of them are gang violence. According to CNN:

“The Gun Violence Archive, a non-profit based in Washington, DC and which CNN relies on for its reporting of mass shootings, defines a mass shooting as an incident leaving at least four people dead or injured, excluding the shooter, and does not differentiate victims based upon the circumstances in which they were shot,” the authors admit.

White males shooting up Walmart with an AR-patterned rifle does not account for 90% of these. If we're using this definition, I've been withing 100-200 feet of 5 different "mass shootings." Half of them were back in high school, but I guess those still count. Cars pulled up, sprayed their target, and the rest of us pretty much didn't care, because by the time you realize what's going on it's over.

Now are those bad? Yep. Pretty horrible, for sure, but it's a different pathology (of the perp AND of the event) to look at "Mass shootings" as having a root cause. That's like saying "Sickness" comes from vitamin deficiency. Well, there's scurvy and cancer. Can't use the same pill for both.

We can't have a serious discussion about curbing "gun violence" if we're afraid to open our eyes and actually look what all constitutes gun violence. Precisely.

[msc545]

I think that operational definitions are perhaps the Achilles heel of research in this area. However, if you have the time, please take a look at the research article attached to the link I posted in the update. I think this article does it fairly good job of distinguishing mass shootings for purposes of the research into discrete categories. However, you may not agree with this. In any event, I would like to hear your thinking about this.

[BoopBoopBeep]

I've been slowly making it through the abstract in between needy-kitten-time. I DO greatly like their DV/IV area. Definitions of "mass shooting" seems much better than the gang-inclusive ones. What I've not seen so far (and maybe I'll find it later) is if they are accounting for prevalence of firearms in the countries. That can go both ways. There are HUGE amounts of income inequality in Iraq. Everybody has an AK. Why aren't there more mass shootings? There's a pretty wide gap in Guatemala, too (when I was there for the riots at least, maybe they're better now) but they didn't have easy access to guns. Two completely opposite ends of the weapons availability spectrum with arguably more prevalent income inequality than the U. S., but fewer shootings in both.

Also, the income inequality angle only works at the bottom end of the scale. I make far less than Bill Gates. I also don't care because I make well above the household average income. If you're looking at net difference between Bill Gates and the hobo under the bridge, and compare that to net difference between Bill Gates and the me, the difference is a rounding error at best. The hobo and I are equally as poor, statistically speaking, when viewed as a percentage of Bill Gate's wealth. Now neither of us are likely to go be a mass shooter, for different reasons. He may be super angry or super chill, and just not want to, or just not have the ability to get a reliable gun. I'm not going to do it because my life is awesome and I have rescue kittens to play with.

[BoopBoopBeep]

f'ing too long...

Blaming it unilaterally on income inequality would place us equally (statistically speaking) likely of committing a mass shooting (which may be equally zero...), or otherwise we have to consider that, at best, income inequality is but a part in a larger equation. Were it the sole reason, there would have to be a) far more shootings since far more income inequality exists, or b) far fewer shooters who aren't exactly all that poor.

I think more likely, what is going on in these countries that CAUSE the income inequality? I mean really causing it, not just "capitalism is bad" but is it lack of jobs/low pay (supply of dollars restricted to many) or high costs of goods/services (retention of dollars by the masses restricted) or some third option... And then look amongst THAT list for what is causing the shootings. Maybe it is a by product of capitalism, but it seems to me that this study is a case of "Ice cream sales and violent crime both peak in July, so ice cream causes violent crime."

[BoopBoopBeep]

Also, to put things in perspective without all the inflated numbers set to use fear-mongering to sell papers/ad time:

Read more: www.ammoland.com/.../#ixzz8HL8ozd60
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter Ammoland on Facebook

Here’s a breakdown of the FBI’s data for “active” shootings over the past five years:

2016: 20
2017: 31
2018: 30
2019: 30
2020: 40

That's hardly the 2 per day that CNN would have us believe.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Or for those who don't like that source, from Psychology Today (https://www. psychologytoday. com/us/blog/wicked-deeds/202206/the-real-reason-mass-shootings-are-the-rise):

An FBI study of “active shooter incidents” confirms that mass public shootings have increased in recent years (1). The FBI based its study on 192 so-called active shooter cases which occurred between 2017 and 2021. The FBI defined an active shooter as one who is "actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a public place,” regardless of the number of casualties that occur.

Please note that the FBI specifically excludes from its analysis family-related mass murders that occurred in private locations such as homes. The motive for murdering family members (familicides) in private is very different from the motive for murdering strangers in public.

For the period between 2017 and 2021, the FBI’s active shooter incident data reveals a dramatic upward trend. Specifically, the number of active shooter incidents identified in 2021 (61 incidents) represents a 52.5 percent increase from 2020 (40 incidents) and a 96.8 percent increase from 2017 (31 incidents).

[msc545]

So apropos of your very thorough analysis of this, I am beginning to think that it is certainly over determined in multiple ways. Perhaps it is the interaction of almost every variable you've discussed in concert. That leaves us with a task if it is possible of determining which of those variables are necessary but insufficient in which are insufficient and unnecessary, both. That is, can you take away one or more of the variables and still have increased mass shootings or is one or more of them? So critical that taking it away makes the mass shootings go away. I don't think guns are the answer here since people will always be able to make or obtain guns if they really want to. Ditto for ammunition. Although that is arguably more difficult. What would you consider to be a necessary and sufficient condition and what would you consider to being necessary and insufficient condition to create mass shootings. It is 5:00 a. m. here and I'm a little tired and in fact maybe too tired to think about this clearly right now. But we can come back to it. Sorry for keeping you awake with this mess.

[msc545]

Alistair, sends greetings to you and your kittens!

[msc545]

Yeek, I just realized that I posted my second reply to you as an update to the entire post, instead of just an update or response to you. My error as I mentioned before, I'm kind of sleepy. Anyway, in that update as you'll see, I mentioned expectation of fairness and equity as perhaps a uniquely American phenomenon in response to your commentary about Iraq and Guatemala. In other words, my point being that if you grow up with the expectation of fair economic treatment and at some point if your family has received that sort of treatment. All of the 1950s and 60s and then it is suddenly stolen from you or at least in your perception stolen from you. Then of course a rage response might occur at least in some people. Pure speculation but maybe worth talking about?

[BoopBoopBeep]

"All of the 1950s and 60s and then it is suddenly stolen from you or at least in your perception stolen from you. Then of course a rage response might occur at least in some people. Pure speculation but maybe worth talking about?"

I think there's a lot of value to exploring this, however it doesn't explain why most of the shooters weren't around for these periods.

Regarding guns and ammo... California and Florida lead the nation in mass shootings, and there's VERY different culture of guns there. I found that interesting.

I'm not sure I can get on board with the existence of billionaires somehow making things less fair for me or anyone else. I grew up in a very "unfair" neighborhood ;). We didn't think twice about Bill Gates or anyone else on that caliber of wealth. It was not a component of the mindset it was so foreign. Much like the "black people can't get ID" thing... nobody actually thinks that outside of white suburbia. We don't sit around the hood contemplating the wealth of the top 10% and getting angry about it. Now the people that live over by the golf course... THAT is a rich that affects our day to day cause THOSE are the people who are making changes in local governments affecting the schools/roads we drive on/police "protecting" us and the property taxes we pay.

There's a point of diminishing returns on the income inequality element. Past a certain "richer than me" point there's no meaningful difference to me, and it's closer to 2x what I make than 200x what I make. "What I make" being... special to each person.

I do think you nailed it with it being an interaction of variables. I think if there are 5, no fewer than two would have to be addressed, because there's the issue of "throw a rock in the stream, the stream does not care, but enough stones will make a dam" and no silver bullet. That's why we haven't done anything to really effectively change it.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Honestly I think Main Character Syndrome and the rise of social media plays a big role in creating mass shooters. People are angsty and rage out because Trump/Biden won, Royals/49ers lost, black/white people suck, too much/not enough immigration, pick some angsty shite and they don't have the ability to deal with it. Look at violent incels. That's fairly new.

Not to sound heartless, but what would I do? Very little. It's 150 incidents over the past 5 years...30 a year.

27 people a year die in elevators.

Okay, but gunmen kill more people. Roger. 1000 people die in train accidents every year. Personally I'm not interested in taking any steps to address mass shooters beyond mental health expansion (vertical and horizontal expansion), because I don't consider it a problem worth addressing, and expansive mental health can be dual purposed and prevent/assist/treat/reduce/whatever a host of other mental issues that bring about shite outcomes in society at a much higher rate.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Give Alistair our love and face rubbies!

[RealMarek]

I assume we are talking about the minority of mass shootings, often by young men, that seem random and not drug-trade related. Given that this phenomenon is not generally seen in other countries with high income inequality and poor material conditions, I think there is a different cause. I tend to think an inculcation into a nihilistic way of thinking and looking at the world is necessary. A lot of the manifestos the shooters leave behind communicate as much.

Now, take a scenario in which the youth have largely been brought up in a system that fails to inculcate a sense of meaning, whether it is because of the scrupulous secularism that the elites require or because of sheer incompetence. Add to this severe economic dispossession and the breaking of one of the key American promises (hard work almost always pays off), and make the consequences of that economic repression fall most heavily on young men in order to hit DEI/ESG targets. We should not be shocked.

Hard economic times, even economic dispossession and discrimination, on their own would not result in random murders like this. Political instability, perhaps, but not what we see. To get what we see in America there must also be a profound sense of meaninglessness.

[msc545]

Well said! I certainly do not disagree with you although it might be that in other cultures were income inequality exists there's an absence of predatory capitalism and perhaps that is the mitigating factor. Even in countries where some capitalism exists, there is perhaps an acceptance of inherited wealth like there is in many European countries which is not nearly so enraging or activating among those who have less. I realize this is all very complicated and very speculative on my part. Thank you for your very thoughtful answer.

[RealMarek]

Thank you for your thoughtful approach to this question. These incidents are too often immediately politicized (is the shooter far right, trans, leftist?) and the debate devolves into whether we should ban guns or arm teachers, neither of which are practical given the fact there are more guns than people here and many teachers are not cut out for defense work.

[RealMarek]

Your point about the level of acceptance in other countries is well taken. You might notice that I often interpret history through the lens of cultural cycles and treat each great culture as unique. I believe that the particular culture and the stage a culture is in thoroughly shape the people of that culture and cannot be changed or easily adopted by outsiders. So let’s consider a place like Hyderabad India. There are a large number of billionaires there, perhaps larger than in many Western cities, but the vast majority of the population lives in ramshackle housing with daily blackouts and interruptions to water supply. Politicians get elected by promising hand-outs, free chickens, etc., but nothing ever changes. Yet, apart from occasional politically-motivated terrorism, one does not see random school shootings and such. Clearly, there is something different. What are those differences? Certainly culture is one. Indian culture went through its cycle of growth and decline long ago and has persisted as a stable, static culture for centuries. Materially, conditions are bad but arguably improving even if slowly. The religiousness, even if nominal or cultural, of the people is a factor that might prevent a sense of meaninglessness regardless of how difficult the conditions are, might be a factor. Then there is the promise the American elites (Clear them out!) made that if you study and work hard you will be rewarded, only to do the rug pull on that with mass immigration of labor and offshoring of industry for their personal gain. So yes, there are many differences between America and other places with similar or more extreme levels of inequality.

[msc545]

I am presently favoring the hypothesis of unmet expectations and promises in regard to the situation in the US, if for no other reason than that, my knowledge of other cultures is superficial despite having lived in some of them. I think your own words make a powerful case for favoring this at least in the US, where the "American Dream" has sort of become the "American Nightmare" for many people, along with the rise in visible corruption and the corporate and billionaire classes.

[RealMarek]

I do agree that it is definitely part of the problem. It adds hopelessness to whatever sense of meaninglessness these shooters have. That is a dangerous combination.

[msc545]

Agree it's very dangerous and almost impossible to recognize unless you are really looking for it. Even if you identify it, it's almost impossible to treat effectively or economically. And of course in the US nobody wants to spend money on mental health treatment. Not really.

[whirled_up_girl]

I think it probably could be a factor in some of these cases. I income inequality could easily lead to people have feelings of hopelessness and feeling that things will get better for them. If hopelessness is combined with feelings of anger, and loss of empathy for others I would imagine those emotions could be a dangerous combination.

[whirled_up_girl]

*that things will not get better*

[msc545]

Very dangerous. I'm surprised we don't have more mass shootings.

[Anonymous]

A generation of guys brainwashed into being weak and then not being able to get girls.

[msc545]

Women are important to men but not that important.

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

This could be a possibility, not so sure?

[Miristheiss]

No. It is the corruptness of the culture and the destruction of the family. So many kids brought up in broken homes.

Kids used to grow up raised by mom and dad and they played outside all day and dad's disciplined their kids.

Now tons of kids grow up in a broken home without a role model, TV, video games, screens raise kids. Guns have been around forever.

People keep looking at the gun as if something changed.

These shootings slowly started in the 80's and grew more prevalent in the 90's.

Guns didn't show up in the 70's. Guns didn't change. Society changed. Nuclear families started falling apart around that time.

If income problems were a factor the depression in the 30's should have been an apex for the mass murder of strangers.

[msc545]

You are certainly not wrong, but I think you might have left a few other factors out. The fact that people feel that they've been the victims of systemic theft that is allowed and promoted by the culture I believe has a lot to do with the chronic rage we see these days. The system appears to be rigged so that only a few people become very wealthy and the rest suffer to one degree or another but are never financially secure. The United States has become a nation of debtors and most of the money is owed either to the government or to the very wealthy in one fashion or another. I believe that these circumstances engender anger and feelings of unfairness in many men and in a few men they promote rage to the point of engaging in mass shootings of random people. I'm only speculating here of course and I might be very wrong, but I think it at least deserves some consideration from all of us.

[XingQi]

Eh, no.

Suppose we were a fully socialist or communist nation like the Native Americans that practiced proto-communism, there still would not be pure equality and peace in society. Everyone still works and holds jobs regardless of which environment you use.

While the Muisca held no starving people, they were an extremely primitive nation and their ways were not scalable to diverse cultures or large populations. Also, poverty is not necessarily preventable- people were generally poor in Mesoamerica.

America, Britain, Canada, and much of the west is very diverse in its ethnicity. This alone creates more conflicts because of different cultures.

[Anonymous]

How about this argument. It's the lack of capitalism. The U. S is less of a capitalist country now than it ever was. The reason there seems to be a problem with income inequality is because the government is now weighing in on who fails and who doesn't. There are a TON of countries that have a capitalist economy, even more so that the US, that doesn't have mass shootings. I guess what I'm saying, is I appreciate your argument and agree, mass shootings are a problem but your cause for them is very weak and really doesn't make any sense.

[exitseven]

It certainly has gotten worse in the last 3 years. I am not sure it is capitalism that is fueling this. there has been a big spike in suicides among middle aged men and a huge increase in fentanyl ODs in people aged 18-35, in fact it is now the leading cause of death, They call these "deaths of despair". Maybe there is something to it.

[msc545]

I don't think the exactly capitalism directly, but capitalism is the thing that begets income inequality because it is at least in the US, extremely poorly controlled and regulated, and therefore people with criminal or at least sociopathic tendencies tend to become very wealthy at the expensive people who are not particularly well off. There is also I believe an expectation of fair treatment among Americans. It doesn't seem to be forthcoming these days. Combine these things and I think at least in some people you're going to get a rage response and mass shootings seem to be committed by very enraged men.

[exitseven]

Nobody likes to be powerless and nobody likes to be marginalized. When the government takes away your voice it ends in frustration. Everyone is capable of violence if pushed enough. This guy was nuts to begin with it probably did not take much to push him off the cliff.

[msc545]

Nobody likes theft and broken promises and lies and disappointment.

[exitseven]

Exactly. I really don't know if this guy was angry of if he was just doing what the voices were telling him. Most of these shootings all the way back to Columbine can be attributed to somebody who was marginalized and just pushed too dar

[msc545]

What pushed him too far is what I have been talking about here.

[exitseven]

Yes, maybe. I hea3d that he just lost his job. I don't know why he would take it out on a bunch of locals trying to improve their bowling score

[msc545]

Anger is rarely a very specific thing.

[exitseven]

Not for me.

[msc545]

For many people, anger builds up in small increments to the point they no longer know who or what they are angry at when they do things like shooting up elementary schools with little children. Not really knowing how to express the anger and who to express it to appropriately.

[lightbulb27]

I don't think so. I think the root cause is guys becoming so lame they feel left out, can't get girls, and they go nuts. Basically... lack of success, self esteem, lack of hope. $ success could feed it via stress, but that wouldn't explain the school shootings at minimum

in essence... sadness in the male mind.

it's 9/10 dudes doing the shooting...

[MassiveDik]

If capitalism worked away it was supposed to be any inequality. It the people in power who are not satisfied with enough who keep wanting and wanting. Even government programs would be idea if they were ran the way they should be.

Here is an example: Amazon allow you to get things delivered to you. Good

Amazon charging you for return despite being a trillion dollar company. Bad

[Anonymous]

30 years ago my dad started what has become a multimillion dollar company. He did it with five thousand dollars. All he needed was proper insurance for his company and the two employees he had and proper licensing. Today, you'd need about 40,000 dollars and a team of lawyers to read all the regulations. Capitalism is disappearing in this country, so, if things seem bleak and times seem rough, don't blame capitalism.

[msc545]

Anecdotal evidence such as this is of interest but can't be generalized to anything but itself. It is probably not representative of the typical situation. I mentioned capitalism in this only because capitalism is the economic system that leads to wealth inequality and I am speculating that wealth inequality leads to feelings of unfairness and victimization among people who have less, which in turn at least in some people probably leads to rage. Historically, almost every mass shooting in the US has been perpetrated by a very angry man acting alone. So that leads me to the question of what makes these men so angry that they get to the point where they're willing to commit such a hideous crime? I'm struggling to find some answers to this. I don't think it's just capitalism, but I think capitalism might be the starting point. You don't hear of mass shootings in countries that employ democratic socialism and you also can read that these countries have the highest standards of living in the highest rates of happiness of any countries in the world. I think you can connect the dots here.

[msc545]

Okay. There is also the fact that capitalism seems to work fairly well in many other countries. Other than the US. The US has a particular brand of capitalism that involves corruption and graft, uninforced, antitrust laws and tremendous political power for corporations. None of this seems to be present in these other societies that also have capitalism but restrained it appropriately. The system in the US the way it is presently construed gives tremendous political and economic power to corporations and politicians and people in the economic sector in almost no power to people outside these areas. It is particularly harsh on an educated person and people in health care in other industries that are perceived to be costly rather than profitable.

[Opinion Owner]

I'll put it in simple terms. As the US became LESS capitalist, mass shootings increased. Your argument doesn't make sense.

[msc545]

How has the US become less capitalist?

[zagor]

Look at the mass killings since Columbine. I think you will find few if not none that can be traced to that. Most are not low income people; semi-automatic weapons are not cheap.

Most shootings by poor people are targeted, not mass shootings.

[msc545]

Income inequality has increased incrementally since Columbine. Your logic is flawed in this regard. Also, you don't need to be wealthy to buy a cheap rifle or shotgun. You don't need an expensive weapon to kill people.

[zagor]

Not many people are shot with cheap rifles and shotguns. Most shootings are with semi-automatic rifles or handguns.

[msc545]

Lots of guns used in mass shootings belong to someone else and are borrowed or stolen. Also, you act like a semi-automatic weapon automatically cost a fortune. You can probably get the cheap one for about 100 bucks. You don't need an expensive weapon to kill people.

[Still-alive]

i'd say indirectly and then they turn to their right wing media's and get the sudden urge to kill those who are being scapegoated whether that be jewish people, muslims, women... anyone...

[msc545]

Even children? I don't think anybody exactly scapegoats children and yet school shootings seems to be on the rise. How would you reconcile that with your views on this?

[Still-alive]

Yeah those ones are baffling... my guess is those types just wanna hurt anyone they know will be defenseless. pretty fucked up but yeah

[msc545]

Or perhaps they want to inflict emotional pain on people they perceive as rich parents. Do you think that's possible?

[msc545]

I don't know that that's necessarily true, but I'm just throwing out ideas here.

[Still-alive]

Could be sure. All i know is economic turmoil could most certainly play a factor as does right wing media telling them who to hate for their woes

[msc545]

Agreed if nothing else right. Wing media designates the targets of their anger for them

[msc545]

I think this is a very difficult question that I'm asking in and I appreciate your very thoughtful answers.

[Still-alive]

yes it deserves careful consideration and nuance too.

[RedInnocent68]

They absolutely are, at least partly. Content and satisfied people don’t go around shooting other people.

[Drewtate]

No antidepressants

[msc545]

Do you have any evidence or are you just making a bad joke?

[Drewtate]

You asked what I thought.

[msc545]

Do you have any reason to believe this is true?

[Drewtate]

Plenty

[msc545]

Okay great. How about you post some evidence for this?

[Drewtate]

Why not research it yourself? You got Google

[msc545]

You asserted it many times, so you support it.

[Drewtate]

I don't got to support it. You asked "Do you think that income inequality and capitalism may be some of the causes for mass shootings?"
Only what I thought, not what evidence I could produce the contrary.

[msc545]

So basically, this is just your opinion since I didn't ask for evidence to begin with, and If I had, you would have answered differently?

DO you know the phrase "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" ?

[Drewtate]

The question didn't ask for evidence only my opinion. Worth mentioning that over $2billion is spent on antidepressants in the us every year, 10% of Americans are on antidepressants

[msc545]

So you have no evidence - this is just your "professional" opinion, right?

Worth mentioning that Americans also spend billions on Coca-Cola, and Coca-Cola also doesn't cause mass shootings.

[Drewtate]

Coca-cola is a large cause of obesity, diabetes and tooth decay on Americans but because Coca-Cola has more money than most countries you rarely hear that.

[msc545]

Coca-cola doesn't cause diabetes.

[Drewtate]

Don't be stupid
www.nytimes.com/.../mexico-coca-cola-diabetes.html

[msc545]

So if people drink Coke, and people get diabetes, that means that Coke must cause diabetes. Are you seriously that hopelessly stupid? Do you know what extraneous and intervening variables are? Of course, you don't.

[Drewtate]

Americans drink buckets of Coca-Cola. The composition of dietary fat intake is linked to diabetes risk; decreasing consumption of saturated fats and trans fatty acids while replacing them with unsaturated fats may decrease the risk. Sugar sweetened drinks appear to increase the risk of type 2 diabetes both through their role in obesity and potentially through a direct effect. A higher proportion of ultra-processed food in the diet was associated with a higher risk of type 2 diabetes in a large ten-year study published in 2019.

[msc545]

I see you copied some verbiage from some article on the internet in an attempt to sound educated. Congratulations for making the effort. Sadly, in doing so, you didn't realize that you're still talking about correlational relationships rather than causation. A vague reference to direct effect is not going to cut it here. Sugar may make people gain weight and excess weight is again associated with diabetes. This doesn't mean it causes it. This is again a correlational relationship. I think you should probably pick a different career rather than trying to be a scientist.

[ItsALongWayToTheTop]

Only if you're crazy.

[Pterodon]

Nope

[msc545]

What do you think? The cause of mass shootings is then?

[Pterodon]

Sick criminals

[msc545]

Yes we can all agree on that. I think. However, that doesn't tell us anything about cause. What do you think causes this?

[Pterodon]

You’re overthinking. They’re born bad