There are some areas of your piece, Michael, that I wholeheartedly agree with. Unfortunately, even more that I don’t. I don’t like your appeal to partisanship. And you cite mental-health studies that are entirely flawed because they’re based on diagnoses. 1/
-
There are actually *many* countries with higher gun-homicide rates than ours. *All* of them own fewer guns than we do. And *all* of them have worse socioeconomic inequality than we do. And *all* countries with lower gun-homicide rates than us have better socioeconomic equality 2/
But for example, worldwide, men are less likely to seek mental-health help even if it’s available. Here, it’s not readily available. And men are many times more likely to be diagnosed with anti-social personality disorder. (Sociopaths) http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/genderwomen/en/ … 3/
-
-
So citing data that people with mental-health diagnoses (more likely to be women, less likely to be sociopaths) are more likely to be victims rather than perpetrators, as if to counter the claim that mass shooters are mentally ill, is just wrong. They’re *definitely* ill. 4/
-
The only useful data is to isolate the potentially violent mental illnesses, and combinations of mental illnesses, not lump everybody together. I have ADHD. I’m not dangerous as a result. And of course Republicans don’t want to fix things. Neither party does. 5/
- Pokaż odpowiedzi
Nowa rozmowa -
Wydaje się, że ładowanie zajmuje dużo czasu.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.