Solutions to Mass-Shootings (My professional mental health perspective)

[Jesus_is_LORD]

If you watch the whole thing and you are wondering where is the Christian application,
don't worry, it gets there eventually. I shared this primarily with a secular audience so
it doesn't inherently focused on Christianity but it eventually gets there as it all comes
together.

In the video I talk about many topics from different angles so please don't judge or think
you know where this is going until you watch the full video.

 

[Jesus_is_LORD]

My background (17 years of professional experience):----------------------

School based mental health therapist
Couples & family therapist
Coordinator of school based mental health
Clinical supervisor Baltimore City Social Services foster care
FBI mental health partner Baltimore City Social Services
Safe Harbor Christian Counseling employee
State of Maryland child-human sex trafficking task force participant
Baltimore City Foster Care supervisor Intensive Case Management
IOP, Intensive Outpatient youth coordinator mental health
Private Practice mental health therapist
-----------------------------------------------

 

[Christina2000]

Just get rid of guns.

 

[MedicBravo]

Just get rid of guns.

That's not the problem.
Given your response on getting all vaccinations asap no matter what is in them, the # of deaths, and permanent injuries from them no surprised you'd take this stance.
If you live in America, your life here is the result of "guns" being used against oppressors.
The result of not being taken over in our history and our awesome police, military, and law-abiding gun owners.
You seem to have failed American and World history when Stalin, Hilter, Mao, and Kahn killed so many people after disarming them.
The tool isn't the problem. The user is the problem.
When Cain killed Abel, God didn't ban all rocks. David used one to stop evil. God punished the user not the tool.

 

[Jesus_is_LORD]

That's not the problem.
Given your response on getting all vaccinations asap no matter what is in them, the # of deaths, and permanent injuries from them no surprised you'd take this stance.
If you live in America, your life here is the result of "guns" being used against oppressors.
The result of not being taken over in our history and our awesome police, military, and law-abiding gun owners.
You seem to have failed American and World history when Stalin, Hilter, Mao, and Kahn killed so many people after disarming them.
The tool isn't the problem. The user is the problem.
When Cain killed Abel, God didn't ban all rocks. David used one to stop evil. God punished the user not the tool.

Good discussion and I see both sides. @Christina2000 is correct that this tool does make it much easier
to kill people considering we live in a world where a large percentage of the "users" of guns have mental health
issues and others are even more prone to a mental break. So, no doubt, if we did get rid of all guns it would
make a difference. In Japan for example last year their gun deaths were under 10 vs over 40,000+ in the United States.
I'm aware that Japan is a smaller country but not that much. The culture is also different and they don't have a 2nd amendment
and very strict gun laws.

However @MedicBravo is also correct that eventually this problem at the root is the person,
and in America where already we have over 380 million guns out in the public, reasonably getting rid of all guns will be a hard task.
So he does have a point that if we really want to get at the heart of it we need to change the heart and only Jesus can do that.

But it reminds me in the end, that our mission is not to save the world from destruction.
The cancer of sin one it started will carry on in the world until the world is destroyed because of
the wickness of sin. This path cannot be stopped by us humans. Yes, we should love people and try
to fix problems indeed. But ultimately we are not here to save the world from destruction,
we are here to save people from a world that will be destroyed.

So you both have good points to consider but ultimately my focus is on loving people and getting them
to know Jesus because the gun violence will not be solved by us. And I'm not under the belief that
we will solve it. For those who believe in the Millennial Kingdom, then when Jesus comes He will for
a time end all Gun violence. For those who don't believe in the MK but believe in Heaven or the New Earth
and the New Heavens, then that will be win all gun violence will end.

 

[Jesus_is_LORD]

But in terms of daily living. To advocate @Christina2000 's point imagine you are a teacher
in a school and there are two classrooms. One classroom is the "good students" honors.
The 2nd classroom is the "bad" students, they fight, the are more prone to violence, etc.
Now the art teacher goes to both classes to do art projects. However, when the art teacher
goes to the "bad" class of students, she doesn't have them do any art projects that will
require scissors, why? Because she knows they will stab each other. Would you reply to the
art teacher @MedicBravo , "give them scissors, it is not the tool but the heart?" If so
she will respond, you are exactly correct, that is why I'm not giving them scissors because their
heart is "bad".

And to argue @MedicBravo 's point , let us look at the United States of America and racism
and slavery. So @Christina2000 , when you look at the changes in the USA laws from
making slavery illegal and changing laws that stopped the White American's from legally
killing Blacks, will you say that these laws have solved the problem? Or Does America
still have much racial tension, tension which that laws have not fixed because the
issue at the core is the heart of people? We likely have more racial protest and tension now that there was in 1960s after MLK was shot. Meaning changing the laws didn't fix racial division, because ultimately the problem is at the heart.

So it is the heart @MedicBravo is correct, however as a result of that heart problem
it is often wise to therefore act accordingly and wisely, for which @Christina2000 is also
correct. I think you both are correct and just emphasizing different aspects of a complex
problem. You can approach this problem from both sides. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.


Do these illustrations make sense, and show how in both situations one point of focus is emphasized? Thus pointing to the complexity of it?

 

[MedicBravo]

@Jesus_is_LORD
No matter what you feel on either side or middle of the topic on this, you can NOT take away anyone's right to defend themself, especially from a tyrannical government. Our country was founded on Bible principles.
The 1A is only the start of our freedom. The 2A is for protecting ourselves and our rights.
I suggest some of you go back and re-learn World History.
The worst people who killed far more than any other: Hitler (of course), Stalin, Mao, Kahn.
All of them took away the people's methods to defend themself. Millions of millions killed.
No firearm has killed anyone without the actions of someone else.
The user is the problem.
One tactic, is paying people to use them in a "bad way" to further push for taking them away. It should horrify people at this.
Doing it slowly over time like that will work better than some dangerous "instant gun gun on all of the people" minus the police and military. That would mimic Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia.

 

[Jesus_is_LORD]

@Jesus_is_LORD
No matter what you feel on either side or middle of the topic on this, you can NOT take away anyone's right to defend themself, especially from a tyrannical government. Our country was founded on Bible principles.
The 1A is only the start of our freedom. The 2A is for protecting ourselves and our rights.
I suggest some of you go back and re-learn World History.
The worst people who killed far more than any other: Hitler (of course), Stalin, Mao, Kahn.
All of them took away the people's methods to defend themself. Millions of millions killed.
No firearm has killed anyone without the actions of someone else.
The user is the problem.
One tactic, is paying people to use them in a "bad way" to further push for taking them away. It should horrify people at this.
Doing it slowly over time like that will work better than some dangerous "instant gun gun on all of the people" minus the police and military. That would mimic Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia.

Greetings brother,

Thanks for sharing your perspective and opinion on the matter. Good to hear it.

What I understand the crux of your argument to be, is that " you can NOT take away anyone's right to defend themself".
(1) So would you say that societies such as Japan which has very restrictive gun laws are not operating as they should
because they have taken people's right to defend themselves away?
(2) Or would you say that since their society is not as violent as ours, those laws work well in their socieity and your
concern is more about taking away someone's guns "from a tyrannical government"?

Just seeking clarification on your point prior to approaching the discussion.

With that said, I believe self-defense is very important indeed and people should have the right to defend themselves.
Later I'll get into the Biblical perspective on self-defense.
(1) With that said, do you believe that the right to self-defense out weights the right for safety of the general community?
Or is it a balance, and if so, where do you think that appropriate balance lies?

For example, going too far to the extreme on gun restrictions may look like repealing the 2nd amendment,
perfect background checks before getting a gun, looking at people's mental health records, etc, etc.
That will obviously stop many people who can safely have a gun from having one, and also raise some privacy concerns.

On the other extreme, you would have no restrictions, no need for gun permits, lowering the age limit so even 16 year olds
could have AR-15s. No background checks for felons, or people on terror watch-list from getting guns, etc, etc. The obvious
issue with that is many many people should not have a gun will.

So most people will say it is some type of balance, as I highly doubt either extremes makes sense to most people.
So with it likely being a balance. How does that balance look like to you?

So [This] post is not yet making my argument but just asking questions to help you to clarify your position, after which I will respond.
So please don't respond as if you are responding to a position, [I haven't stated it yet]. Just respond with the intention of clarifying
your position and helping me better understand you by answering the questions I have listed.


Thanks for the reply I look forward to discussing this with you in detail to the glory of God
with hopes that we will both be blessed as a byproduct of our communication.

Love and God Bless.

Feel free to add to the discussion @Christina2000 as well.